What do you think?
Rate this book
Waterloo New Perspectives
Critical acclaim for Waterloo: New Perspectives The Great Battle Reappraised . "[T]he most important study of the Waterloo Campaign to have appeared in print for 150 years." — The Napoleonic Society of America . "A meticulously detailed account of the Battle of Waterloo that sets right some of the errors and omissions of facts committed by earlier contemporary authors —recommended." — Library Journal . "A superior account of the campaign—free of nationalist bias, thoroughly researched, and clearly written."— Booklist "A thoughtful and dispassionate examination of the battle that brought Napoleon's power to an end ...a valuable addition to anyone's Napoleonic shelf." — The Washington Times .
484 pages, Paperback
First published October 20, 1994
2 people are currently reading
57 people want to read
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews
December 13, 2011
I am a keen reader of all things Waterloo and David Hamilton-Williams has truly brought a fresh perspective. He debunks the Sibold model with very plausable explanations of Sibold's motives and then gets into the background that made the Waterloo campaign a necessity for Napoleon.
The author brings a certain balance in terms of national contribution by highlighting the essential contribution of the Dutch-Belgian forces and the superb rearguard actions of the Prussians as the main army congregated.
His style can be dry in places but then again, it must be very difficult when providing well-researched detail essential to the reader's understanding of the possible moods and context of the combatant's decision-making. I was sometimes left wondering why Marshall Ney even bothered to lead the last few charges the way he appears to have been treated by Napoleon.
Other than a wonderful blow-by-blow description of the battles of Ligny, Quatre Bras, and Waterloo, the reader is given the opportunity to almost see inside the minds of the marshals and generals and their dilemmas as fact clashed with plan.
A great read.
The author brings a certain balance in terms of national contribution by highlighting the essential contribution of the Dutch-Belgian forces and the superb rearguard actions of the Prussians as the main army congregated.
His style can be dry in places but then again, it must be very difficult when providing well-researched detail essential to the reader's understanding of the possible moods and context of the combatant's decision-making. I was sometimes left wondering why Marshall Ney even bothered to lead the last few charges the way he appears to have been treated by Napoleon.
Other than a wonderful blow-by-blow description of the battles of Ligny, Quatre Bras, and Waterloo, the reader is given the opportunity to almost see inside the minds of the marshals and generals and their dilemmas as fact clashed with plan.
A great read.
September 10, 2007
I didn't know too much about Waterloo so I picked this book up at my local library. I learned a tremendous amount, not only about the battle but about Napoleon, Wellington, and the Prussian army. I also learned that Wellington had surprisingly little to do with the outcome of the fight; Blucher and Gnieseneau and some of their enterprising Prussian commanders won that battle. I was astounded to discover how much of an army Napoleon could have raised afterward; if he hadn't been betrayed by Fouche' I dont think the Allied armies could have defeated him a second time. Then again, he wasn't the Napoleon of Austerlitz by then so perhaps he would not have come out the victor in the end. I wish we could know how a second Waterloo would have gone.
January 5, 2015
As this is the first book I have read on Waterloo, bear in mind that I do not know a tremendous amount on the battle, or its controversies.
Williams' book is considered by some, still, to be a very controversial book on the final great battle of the Napoleonic Wars. Despite that, as a warning going into it, I found it to be not all that controversial, as the 20 odd years since its publication, as well as the works of Peter Hofschroer, have essentially combined to ensure that his own view is roughly the dominant view, at least it is in general works on the wars or Napoleon.
The controversy stems from a Captain William Siborne, His majesty's Royal Army, who purposefully distorted, slightly, the deployment of Wellington's forces at the battle and downplayed, dramatically, the contributions of the German, Belgian and Dutch soldiers who fought side by side the British that day as well all but ignored the Prussian arrival on Napoleon's right flank at the end of the battle. Throughout the course of the introduction, and the rest of the narrative, I feel it safe to say that Williams has done a credible job of dismantling Siborne's accounting.
The book does focus a tremendous deal of space on Napoleon's return, his bloodless re-conquest of France (the people, living under a restored Bourbon rule for only less than a year, were grateful to have him back)and Napoleon's rewriting of France's laws to bring back much of the freedoms of the Revolution as well as his rebuilding of the French armed forces. Although this takes up a whole third of the book, it is essential reading to someone, like myself, who knew little of the time period prior to Waterloo.
When the campaign progresses and we get to the military centric narrative I only had one quibble: Far more space is devoted to the Battle of Quatre bras than is devoted to Ligny. The Prussian battle at Ligny was not only larger, and bloodier, than Wellington's fight at Quatre bras, but Ligny was the event around which the campaign hinged. Had Napoleon been able to crush the Prussian Army, as opposed to merely defeating it and compelling it to withdraw, in good order, he would have been able to unite his main force (as opposed to detaching Marshall Grouchy to screen and prod the Prussian withdrawal) and used overwhelming mass, if nothing else, to smash Wellington and the Allied forces at Mont St. jean (which was the field that would later be called Waterloo). Blucher, the redoubtable Prussian Field Marshall and Napoleon's greatest opponent outside of Tsar Alexander I, had he not been rescued from capture by his own men at the end of the Battle of Ligny would have been a horrendous blow to the Prussians, one they might not have recovered from as it was, largely, Blucher's iron will that propelled the Prussian Army forward despite exhaustion and privation. Aside from all of that, I felt that the books focus on Waterloo and the campaign leading up to it was excellent.
Napoleon's main failing, here at the end of his amazing and, dare I say it, glorious career was his inability to reform his own forces following evidence of his opponents improvements.
The Grande Armee had changed little at all since 1805 while all of his enemies, especially the Prussians and British had either enacted organizational and structural changes (Prussians) or tactical revolutions (the British) that essentially balanced out the French military revolution of the 1790's. Also, while Prussia had a forward looking General Staff system (which might have carried the army forward even with the loss of Blucher now that I consider it), Napoleon's chief of staff, Berthier, had been captured and murdered by allies of the Royalists before he could come to Napoleon's assistance, forcing Napoleon to utilize a less than reliable turncoat, Marshall Soult, to be his Chief of Staff.
During the Battle of Waterloo itself, and where some of the controversy still endures, Williams, while not downplaying the British contribution to victory, does focus more on the both the French side of the battle as well as the Dutch-German-Belgian men who served under Wellington and who made up more than half of his overall force. All three main allied contingents, the United Netherlands-Nassau troops, Belgians and Brunswickers-Hanoverians would all cover themselves with glory purchased at a steep blood price during the battle. And Williams does showcase that the decisive element of the battle was the Prussian assault on Napoleon's right flank. The Prussian assault ensured Napoleon's downfall.
All in all this is an excellent book. It has certainly inspired me to study this battle further. I recommend it.
Williams' book is considered by some, still, to be a very controversial book on the final great battle of the Napoleonic Wars. Despite that, as a warning going into it, I found it to be not all that controversial, as the 20 odd years since its publication, as well as the works of Peter Hofschroer, have essentially combined to ensure that his own view is roughly the dominant view, at least it is in general works on the wars or Napoleon.
The controversy stems from a Captain William Siborne, His majesty's Royal Army, who purposefully distorted, slightly, the deployment of Wellington's forces at the battle and downplayed, dramatically, the contributions of the German, Belgian and Dutch soldiers who fought side by side the British that day as well all but ignored the Prussian arrival on Napoleon's right flank at the end of the battle. Throughout the course of the introduction, and the rest of the narrative, I feel it safe to say that Williams has done a credible job of dismantling Siborne's accounting.
The book does focus a tremendous deal of space on Napoleon's return, his bloodless re-conquest of France (the people, living under a restored Bourbon rule for only less than a year, were grateful to have him back)and Napoleon's rewriting of France's laws to bring back much of the freedoms of the Revolution as well as his rebuilding of the French armed forces. Although this takes up a whole third of the book, it is essential reading to someone, like myself, who knew little of the time period prior to Waterloo.
When the campaign progresses and we get to the military centric narrative I only had one quibble: Far more space is devoted to the Battle of Quatre bras than is devoted to Ligny. The Prussian battle at Ligny was not only larger, and bloodier, than Wellington's fight at Quatre bras, but Ligny was the event around which the campaign hinged. Had Napoleon been able to crush the Prussian Army, as opposed to merely defeating it and compelling it to withdraw, in good order, he would have been able to unite his main force (as opposed to detaching Marshall Grouchy to screen and prod the Prussian withdrawal) and used overwhelming mass, if nothing else, to smash Wellington and the Allied forces at Mont St. jean (which was the field that would later be called Waterloo). Blucher, the redoubtable Prussian Field Marshall and Napoleon's greatest opponent outside of Tsar Alexander I, had he not been rescued from capture by his own men at the end of the Battle of Ligny would have been a horrendous blow to the Prussians, one they might not have recovered from as it was, largely, Blucher's iron will that propelled the Prussian Army forward despite exhaustion and privation. Aside from all of that, I felt that the books focus on Waterloo and the campaign leading up to it was excellent.
Napoleon's main failing, here at the end of his amazing and, dare I say it, glorious career was his inability to reform his own forces following evidence of his opponents improvements.
The Grande Armee had changed little at all since 1805 while all of his enemies, especially the Prussians and British had either enacted organizational and structural changes (Prussians) or tactical revolutions (the British) that essentially balanced out the French military revolution of the 1790's. Also, while Prussia had a forward looking General Staff system (which might have carried the army forward even with the loss of Blucher now that I consider it), Napoleon's chief of staff, Berthier, had been captured and murdered by allies of the Royalists before he could come to Napoleon's assistance, forcing Napoleon to utilize a less than reliable turncoat, Marshall Soult, to be his Chief of Staff.
During the Battle of Waterloo itself, and where some of the controversy still endures, Williams, while not downplaying the British contribution to victory, does focus more on the both the French side of the battle as well as the Dutch-German-Belgian men who served under Wellington and who made up more than half of his overall force. All three main allied contingents, the United Netherlands-Nassau troops, Belgians and Brunswickers-Hanoverians would all cover themselves with glory purchased at a steep blood price during the battle. And Williams does showcase that the decisive element of the battle was the Prussian assault on Napoleon's right flank. The Prussian assault ensured Napoleon's downfall.
All in all this is an excellent book. It has certainly inspired me to study this battle further. I recommend it.
February 5, 2017
A very good account of the campaign of Waterloo. It quotes extensively from letters and diaries of those who were there and - as the title promises - brings new perspectives to the campaign. It achieves this large by giving space to the smaller nationalities in Wellington's army - Nassau, Brunswick, Hanoverian, KGL, Dutch etc - who so often get overlooked. My only gripe, and it is a small one, is that the author is clearly a total fan of Napoleon. For him the Emperor can do no wrong and any mistakes made were made by his underlings. Overall, very good
February 26, 2010
I read this book with the warnings that much of this information was questionable. I am not the scholar that some are and cannot dispute that facts presented. I found this alternate report interesting and fresh. The world of Napoleonic books is filled with established authors who vie for that position as the authority on the matter. I guess this guy hasn't paid his dues but I still read with an open mind.
February 7, 2016
"Waterloo: New Perspectives: was very good. Though sometimes a little dry (as with most battle books, particularly one as in depth as this one, the minutiae of an in depth study like this one might leave some a little lost), the author succeeds in giving a blow by blow account of Napoleon's 1815 campaign from Elba to the end of the Battle at Waterloo. Early on, the book covers the return of Napoleon to Franch, the travails of Marshall Ney (how his wife was snubbed by the court of Louis XVIII driving him back into the arms of Napoleon) and of how Napoleon assembled his force and marched into Belgium planning to seize Brussels. Something I did not know was that Ney, upon joining Napoleon, was again snubbed and left to find his own way to the army where he was left out of the command loop costing Napoleon an early chance to defeat the British and Prussian forces aligned against him. The entire Waterloo campaign is detailed, Ligny, Quatre Bras, Wavre and La Belle Alliance. At La Belle Alliance, the Battle of Watterloo, Wellington showed none of the genius he showed in Spain and opted for a set piece defense, ceding the initiative to Napoleon, something one did not usually live to talk about. Early in the battle Napoleon's infantry came very near to breaking Wellington's lines, attaining a quick French victory, but for the precipitate attack of two British heavy cavalry brigades ordered to charge by the Earl of Uxbridge. The French attack was crushed as were the two British brigades in the ensuing French counterattack. The heroism of the British horsemen is fully detailed by the author. Later, with the Prussians attacking his right, Napoleon ordered Ney to make a last ditch attack on the left. Desperate fighting was the result, both sides suffered greatly and Ney finally failed. The author gives the Prussians their full due as turning the tide for the Allies and winning the battle. Everything is covered, from logistics to intelligence, as the author leaves no stone unturned in explaining what happened and why (leading to the dryness I mentioned earlier but fully necessary to properly cover the subject). It is a good book and well worth a read.
May 11, 2014
A surprisingly engaging read given the amount of material covered and the apparent dryness. The author does have the unfortunate tendency to make rather controversial statements such as Metternich ordered the Leipzig bridge left unblocked, and Berthier was murdered by being thrown from a window ... supporting such statements with footnote references to another of his books which has never been published. However, his central premise that the British view of the events of June 1815 is terribly biased is easy to believe.
June 8, 2014
An interesting read. Very well written though there are concerns about the validity of some of Hamilton-William's research that render some of the more interesting and fresh "perspectives" questionable.
May 2, 2008
More detailed and involved than I was expecting or anticipating. Thorough, complete and very verbose.
October 30, 2007
If you can read just one book on Waterloo, make it this one.
Displaying 1 - 10 of 10 reviews