"Napoleon Victorious! An Alternative History of the ..." Topic
9 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Napoleonic Media Message Board
Areas of InterestNapoleonic
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Top-Rated Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench ArticleVolunteer shares his techniques for painting, rigging and basing Age of Sail warships.
Featured Profile Article
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tango01 | 25 Dec 2017 11:29 a.m. PST |
…Battle of Waterloo. "It is June 1815 and an Anglo-led Allied army under the Duke of Wellington s command and Gebhard Leberecht von Bl cher is set to face Napoleon Boneparte near Waterloo in present-day Belgium. What happens next is well known to any student of history: the two armies of the Seventh Coalition defeated Bonaparte in a battle that resulted in the end of his reign and of the First French Empire. But the outcome could have been very different, as Peter Tsouras demonstrates in this thought-provoking and highly readable alternate history of the fateful battle. By introducing minor but realistic adjustments, Tsouras presents a scenario in which the course of the battle runs quite differently, which in turn sets in motion new and unexpected possibilities. Cleverly conceived and expertly executed, this is alternate history at its best…" Main page link Amicalement Armand
|
deadhead | 25 Dec 2017 11:52 a.m. PST |
I do love a bit of nostalgia….this is a real blast from the past…I am sure a few seconds would tell me date of first publication, but mine is here covered in dust. Tango01, sometimes you are a little late….sometimes out by a decade, but do keep up the good work (Grin) |
Brian Smaller | 25 Dec 2017 12:10 p.m. PST |
Who hasn't run a club campaign on the premise that the Prussians retreated back across the Rhine and Wellington was left on his own at Waterloo? |
Robert Burke | 25 Dec 2017 2:14 p.m. PST |
Even if Napoleon had won Waterloo, he would still have had to face the approaching Russian and Austrian armies as well as the Prussian Guard. |
deadhead | 25 Dec 2017 2:43 p.m. PST |
I do wonder about that. Just tell the Austrians that an Austrian prince one day will inherit the French throne and also remember the rivalry in Europe from the Congress of Vienna. The Prussian Guard would have been fairly useless in isolation and you have to question why, politically, they were not involved in the 1815 campaign. There was a good reason to keep them at home. The Russians were far from fully mobilised and no European country wanted to see them march westwards once more. The opposition to Napoleon would not have withstood a disaster at Waterloo. A retreat north of Brussels yes…..with both armies intact…but not a rout. Britain's politics were far from stable too. No, I am convinced Boney was not as daft as is now suggested. A Netherlands commander that does what he is told and moves from QB to Nivelles, a gate that is not shut, an old bloke under his horse that is killed by a cuirassier….history could have been very different. But then Boney still dies anyway a few years later of gastric Adenocarcinoma….or was it arsenic…?? |
Frederick | 26 Dec 2017 7:31 p.m. PST |
I think Deadhad raises great points – the Austrians were if nothing else pragmatic, there were lots of small German states who liked Napoleon a lot more than the Prussians and British finances were stretched to the limit. If Napoleon had been a tiny bit reasonable, he could have negotiated a peace, I suspect, if he had managed to smash the Allies at Waterloo |
von Winterfeldt | 26 Dec 2017 11:55 p.m. PST |
You underestimate that the Allies were hell bent to cage Boney again, they fought hard in the previous years to do that, should they give up because of a lost battle? They lost battles in 1813 and 1814 but swept away Boney form the throne. It was not just only the Prussian Guards, it were corps and as said the Russians were already well on the march in Germany. I cannot see any different outcome as in 1813 and 1814. It was also not only the Austrians on the advance – but at lot of German "minor" states did have already mobilized again and came even into action in 1815. |
deadhead | 27 Dec 2017 1:17 p.m. PST |
I do admit one can underestimate the willingness of any country to go to war. For me the best example must be the USA in WWII against Japan. The Imperial leaders were not daft, but they just "knew" that the US was too soft to allow the sort of losses involved in the likes of Tarawa or Iwo Jima….after Pearl Harbour the US would concentrate on the greater European threat….surely. 1940. Britain simply would not fight on alone, with no Allies outside the Commonwealth, a crippled army, a weakened air force and…OK.. a powerful surface navy, but largely made up of WWI veterans. Not when reasonable terms had been offered too. But both examples are of nations not already exhausted by years of war. I think Napoleon's return was less like Tet 68 and more like the NVA offensives in the early 70s. Suddenly it dawns that, whether right or wrong, we are backing the losing side. We do not want to get back into this and it is probably too late anyway. The Allies were at serious loggerheads with each other. Look at those secret treaties in Vienna! Austria feared Prussian domination of Europe. No one wanted the Russians back. Britain was broke…..and filled with Bonapartists too. The Netherlands was spoiling for a fight, but only in-house. The Saxons just loved their Prussian masters. Spain was just working up to another civil war. I agree the crowned heads of Europe wanted Boney back in an iron cage. I am less sure that the diplomats in Vienna were 100% convinced. All my comments do however apply to a decisive defeat south of Brussels….not two armies in being, even if separated. Waterloo solved all doubts overnight….. |
Tango01 | 28 Dec 2017 11:59 a.m. PST |
Years ago… I translate a very good "What if" relationed with this thread… By memory… upon in Brusseles ….Napoleón rise with the Netherland Army and they took arms against the British under his orders… Upon the British sailed to their country… he march to the South… It was a very good "What if"….
Amicalement Armand |
|