Battle of Waterloo: A History From Beginning to End

by Hourly History

Waterloo The Battle of Waterloo has become synonymous with the word “defeat” but who lost, and why was it important? In 1815, Napoleon Bonaparte left the island of Elba, and in a space of 100 days took power, and challenged the entire world to meet him on his terms. When that failed, he offered them a fight, one that would end at Waterloo, and left repercussions which can still be felt, even now, centuries later. Inside you will read about... ✓ Beginnings ✓ Discord and Discontent ✓ The World Rearranged ✓ The Prisoner ✓ The Journey to Waterloo Begins ✓ One Hundred Days ✓ Quatre Bras & Ligny And much more! Who was this man, and what happened on the battlefield that made this fight in particular, so important? What was the lesson of Waterloo?

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Military History, Ebooks, Historical, Military Fiction, War

115 pages, Kindle Edition

Published September 12, 2016

About the author

At Hourly History, we focus on publishing history books that are concise, straightforward and take no longer than one hour to read.

Receive our new eBooks for free every Friday.
Sign up at: www.hourlyhistory.com/free

Reviews

[Murray · Rating 3 out of 5]

Only about half the book is about the battle. The other half is introductory information. This is helpful but I feel it ought to have been trimmed and more battle anecdotes included, such as Wellington remarking that Waterloo had been “a near run thing” (he wasn’t as cocky as this author makes him out to be). Or this:

Lord Uxbridge in the thick of it: “By god, sir, I’ve lost my leg.”

Wellington: (looking) “By god, sir, so you have.”

Also I feel there is a decidedly pro-British attitude in the essay that is dismissive of Napoleon on occasion as if he is always the “bad guy” and the Brits and their allies constantly squeaky clean. Were Nelson and Wellington without flaws?

[Anil Swarup · Rating 3 out of 5]

Perhaps only hourly history can accomplish what they have consistently done while describing various historical events. They are precise, unbiased and fairly riveting. On this occasion it is about the battle that changed the future of the world, the battle of Waterloo.

[Young Kim · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Hourly History Books Company sells the American, French and Russian Revolutions as one collection (or series), but that would be better if they collected the “French Revolution”, “Napoleon”, “Battle of Waterloo” and “Horatio Nelson” as one.

Separately the books miss real important points, but interestingly those points missing in one book are explained in another book among the four as I've pointed out several times in this and previous reviews of Henry Freeman's "French Revolution" and "Napoleon.”

(Kindle Ed., p. 13)
He’d arrived on Elba on May 3, 1814. Only days before, the citizenry had been burning him in effigy for being a dictator, responsible for the deaths of thousands. But the thought that he might be bringing his millions to spend on the island served well to change people’s opinions overnight. They welcomed him with open arms and great celebrations. They certainly had reason to think he was going to be a one-man boost to their economy. He’d felt strongly that the image makes the man, and so, of course, he showed up with all the pomp and majesty of a king surveying his kingdom. This meant all the guards, servants, horses and carriages as would befit his station.

So THERE WAS the French people’s sentiment against Napoleon’s failure of 1812 in Russia. Again, the author put the point he missed in the previous book here. All together, his entire series would make up one great history book. Still the importance of the period between his Russian campaign in 1812 and his abdication in 1814 hasn’t really been explained enough.

The explanation's not enough: So how bad was the French people’s sentiment? Why not openly talking about it? If he still had enough support from the people who were willing to fight for him against the foreign powers, why did he have to leave his throne leaving the country to the mercy of the British-led Congress of Vienna?

(Kindle Ed., p. 6)
...This, Napoleon could not recover from. On March 30, 1814, Napoleon surrendered to the allied forces that faced him. His only option was to go into exile on the island of Elba...

Clearly the book, again, skips far from Russia to Elba without enough explanation. It is only covered by one line: This, [his failure in Russia,] Napoleon could not recover from.

Then how were his grand forces of Waterloo possibly gathered just in a month after his return? The book specifically mentions about the "300,000-massive" troops gathered for Napoleon as soon as he came back from his exile.

Nonetheless, this book, though it is really short, at least talks about the French people’s sentiment towards Napoleon's failure in Russia unlike the previous ones, and above all, it describes the main topic, the Battle of Waterloo, quite well.

(Kindle Ed., pp. 36-37)
This mistake would prove to be a deadly one. Napoleon gave no orders for what happened next. In fact, there’s some thought that he’d left the field at this time, which was highly likely given his physical health. He might have gone back to take a break; he might have just been somewhere else. The point is, somehow Ney took the initiative to lead a cavalry charge right around the back of the ridge and into the thick of Wellington’s men. The whole thing calls into question the character of Ney. He was said to have a violent temper; had he finally had enough? He had been in difficult and stressful situations for a long time, so was he suffering battle fatigue? Was he just a poor tactician from the start? Whatever the case, he left behind the one thing that would have made this a successful attack: his guns. The allied forces responded to the threat on horseback in the way they’d been trained to – they formed up in squares. Men with bayonets would face out from all sides of the square and fire, then retreat to the center of the square to reload, then move forward to fire again. In this formation, they were nearly impregnable. The horses were not going to throw themselves into the bayonets, the men with spent rifles were well protected while they reloaded, and the sides of the squares were always solid, a mass of men firing over and over again...The guns that Ney so desperately needed were right behind him, in exactly the wrong position to be of any help. The French cannons were forced to cease fire to avoid hitting their own men...Typically, there should have been two lines of cavalry, one to protect the guns, and one to attack while the guns fired into the squares. With no guns, the charge lost its effectiveness completely...

They were just like the huge spikes and the longbow archers against the charging cavalry in Agincourt (1415), a battle between France and England, which changed the world forever: The same old tactics France failed with 4 centuries before was re-employed by the French, and they failed due to that very tactics once again.

Funny that the French gunners under Napoleon used the same British tactics of Waterloo against the Ottoman and Mamlouk riders in Egypt back in 1798, and the victory was theirs. Why this mistake in Waterloo 16 years later?

Napoleon was genius with artillery. His expertise in munitions was to dominate Europe with the century-old hegemon France’s advanced military hardware.

So I wonder what would have happened to the world, despite his physical illness and miscommunication with his field officers, if it hadn't rained, so he could at least mobilize his overwhelming French artillery more flexibly as he planned.

This hi-story teaches us that weather could be an important factor after all, a game changer indeed. And what I like best about this book is it makes clear that the Battle of Waterloo, along with the Napoleonic War, was one of those world wars that changed our world the way it is today.

(Kindle Ed., p. 1)
To others, he was seen as a dictator, a brilliant strategist creating wars to stroke his own ego. Those wars would result in the deaths of nearly 5 million people, leaving a certain anger and resentment that can be felt even now, 200 years later...More than that, we will discover a battle that changed the world.

(Kindle Ed., p. 6)
When Napoleon Bonaparte rose to Emperor Napoleon, his military tactics took a sudden shift. He moved from a defense of France to an offensive takeover of much of Europe. Several other European and Prussian powers joined forces to mitigate the threat they saw coming from France.

When he decided to become the Emperor, he had already wanted to conquer the world; despite his defeat in the ocean by Lord-Admiral Horatio Nelson in 1805 he just didn't give up, but sought another passage to reach all the way to the other side of the world, through the old Eurasian Continent. And he knew if any country could do that it was France, the century-old hegemon of Europe since the Peace of Westphalia.

(Kindle Ed., p. 8)
After Napoleon had abdicated, he was subsequently exiled to the small island of Elba on April of 1814. Finally, Louis XVIII could come home and claim his title as King. Since 1795, the dispossessed monarch had wandered throughout Europe looking for both a safe haven and the opportunity to take back (what he felt to be) his rightful throne. He’d gone from Germany to Russia, from Russia to Poland, from Poland back to Russia, then finally off to England. Finally, it was his turn to take the throne...

It sounds a lot like a civil war-like inner conflict in France, which played the key role helping Great Britain rise by destroying the French hegemony after all.

(Kindle Ed., p. 8)
The church wanted the power it had enjoyed back before the Revolution, and the King seemed inclined to give it to them. Suddenly there was an enforced Sabbath, with stores not allowed to open. Religious freedom wasn’t to even be imagined, with actual danger to those who weren’t Catholic. What’s more, the church wanted back the property they’d lost in the last fifteen years – regardless of the fact that by this point this was owned by individual Frenchmen who were expected to give up everything they had – with no compensation whatsoever.

And this works perfectly for my claim that the First Global War of Global Hegemony and Powershift, a.k.a. the Thirty Years' War, wasn't about the French fighting for the Protestant cause, but for sheer secular power that Catholic-Bourbon wanted to take away from the old hegemon Catholic-Habsburg (Spain).

After more than a century under the French-led European order of Peace of Westphalia, now it was British turn.

(Kindle Ed., p. 45)
At the same time, there was a specific impact on other nations of the world, and their position regarding being a world power. England came out on top, ending the rivalry with France, which had marked the 18th century. Truly the age of the colonial empire was well-founded from this point onward, an effect that would be felt all the way into the 20th century.

We’ve just read the Conclusion where the author explained who'd lead a new order replacing the old Peace of Westphalia, led by French Bourbon Dynasty. For all that new world with leadership and power in its hands, Great Britain first had to overcome its predecessor that had been holding the power as the last global hegemon: France.

(Kindle Ed., p.9)
...the economy was still suffering as the country was opened up to the importation of British goods so that even those of the merchant class were suffering under the new regime.

Great Britain was the winner of the conflict in 1814, so it was the British economy to take advantage of the French defeat. Ironically for the British, this was the reason for the French countrymen’s sentiment against the new government in Paris, which brought Napoleon back in the throne.

(Kindle Ed., p. 10)
The Congress of Vienna met in September of 1814...

(Kindle Ed., p. 12)
At this point, the delegates went home, though they would not declare the Congress completed until June 19th, one day after Napoleon’s defeat at Waterloo.

France in March 1815 had two separate substances: 1) one was the restored dynasty that would accept the new order of Vienna Congress with Great Britain as its leader to keep the old balance of power in Europe; 2) the other was French Empire, the one-century old European hegemon whose full power, accumulated since the Peace of Westphalia, was finally unleashed by the ambitious leader Napoleon.

The British-led new order was designed in 1814, but with Napoleon back in power in Paris, the new order of Vienna Congress wasn’t to be final yet; no matter what official conclusion they had reached by March 1815, the Congress and the new order weren't to be real until Napoleon and his French Empire was taken care of.

It had to wait until the Battle of Waterloo ended, and that’s how significant this great battle really was.

(Kindle Ed., p. 15)
FRENCHMAN: I have heard, in my exile, your lamentations and your prayers: you long for the government that you chose, and which alone is lawful. I have crossed the sea, and am coming to reclaim my rights which are yours. To the Army: your possessions, your rank, your glory, the property, rank and glory of your children, have no greater enemies than those princes whom foreigners have imposed upon you….Victory will march at full speed; the eagle, with the national colors, will fly from steeple to steeple, even to the towers of Notre-Dame. You will be the liberators of your country. —Proclamation written by Napoleon, en route to France

This is why the idea of Revolution spread throughout Europe and elsewhere by Napoleon; it was for his own power after all.

Anyway because of this idea, all other European powers gathered together to stop Napoleon’s French Empire, and the newly-born United States of America was the only nation at the time where the idea was welcome.

The biggest mistake the historians make in their interpretation is that the rise of the revolutionary idea and the rise of Napoleon meant the rise of French power. However, it was the decline of French power because the French hegemony started to decay with the decline of Bourbon Dynasty by the Revolution.

(Kindle Ed., p. 22)
The next step was to create the army he would need for the coming war. The former King had left this in disarray (remember he’d dismantled a good portion of it). By June he was able to pull together 300,000 troops, an impressive feat given that not everyone was interested in getting involved in another of Napoleon’s campaigns...

It was only possible because of then-old hegemon France's great population number with the newly-born citizen-forces recruit system. Austria and even Great Britain couldn't gather that many men as fast as France could at the time; although they were inter-national coalition forces, they were outnumbered throughout the Napoleonic War because they didn't have the citizen-forces yet like France had since the Revolution.

(Kindle Ed., p. 39)
In the meantime, Ney did the best with what he had to work with. The allied forces were still in squares; the French artillery and muskets did some serious damage. What was left of the Allied cavalry tried to regroup, but everyone was just too tired and had nothing left to give. Wellington rode up and down, encouraging the troops, with the solid belief that the Prussians were coming...

Without the allied reinforcement, Great Britain would have certainly lost the Battle of Waterloo despite the mistakes of French General Ney with his cavalry charge. French grand armée was definitely prevailing over the British-led coalition forces.

(Kindle Ed., p. 42)
Aftermath: “Waterloo is not a battle; it is the changing face of the universe.” —Victor Hugo

Victor Hugo was a French writer. For the French people the French dominion and the world order under it has just ended; A new power, France's long-year challenger and rival, rose to take it over and establish a new world with new rules different than the old ones under their lead.

For the French, it wasn’t easy to accept the change at once since they were the losers, and it is quite understandable.

Seriously, still today many French people think France is the center of the world. She really was the center of the world a couple of centuries ago like the United States today or Great Britain a century ago.

Lastly, I found some typos for editing:

(Kindle Ed., p. 3)
...wars ready to right…

“…wars ready to fight…”

(Kindle Ed., p. 21)
...there were very clear that...

"…they were very clear that…"

(Kindle Ed., pp. 32-33)
...Napoleon’s brother, Jerome, instead attempted to capture the farms were Wellington’s troops were dug in...

“…Napoleon’s brother, Jerome, instead attempted to capture the farms where Wellington’s troops were dug in…”

(Kindle Ed., p. 45)
...The French were had not been happy under the current rule.

Either “…The French were not happy under the current rule…” or “…The French had not been happy under the current rule…”

[Aaditya · Rating 3 out of 5]

The average heighted corsican who changed the course of history, spreading the ideas of liberty while being a military dictator himself.

Napoleon is revered as one of the greatest military general if not 'the greatest' bringing most of europe to its knees, being responsible for dissolution of the Holy Roman Empire an entity that existed for a thousand years, a man whose return to power in France irked the entire Europe so much so that they declared war not on france per se but on Napoleon himself.

The book however shows the brilliance somewhat eluding the once great tactician and blunders that led towards the end of his reign for the last time from those made at the battlefield to those made at home.

Though for someone unaware of military tactics and jargon let alone that of 19th century it took a couple of reads to understand the chapters pertaining to battle itself though I won't say i got the complete grasp of it but one can get the gist of it, and idk what else should one expect from a book meant to be read in an hour.

[Bettye McKee · Rating 5 out of 5]

History in a nutshell

This is an interesting brief history of the Battle of Waterloo. I now understand more about not only the battle but events surrounding the battle. It is hard to contemplate the loss of 48,000 human lives in one day.

It was particularly important that the outcome could have gone in either direction because of a minor detail or mistake and that both sides fought desperately for the victory. The outcome of this battle was of major importance to the history of our planet and the way civilization would advance or fall.

[Ed Barton · Rating 4 out of 5]

Quick Read on Waterloo

This is a good overview of the background, battle, and aftermath of the Battle of Waterloo. You get a flavor for Napoleon the man in particular. An interesting book that you can read in one sitting.

[Thom Swennes · Rating 3 out of 5]

The Battle of Waterloo, though only lasting a single day, is by far the most remembered single battle in history. Napoleon Bonaparte returned to France, after being deported and imprisoned on the Island of Elba, on March 1, 1815. Napoleon was, once again, the usurper of France and the next one hundred days would decide the immediate fate of Europe.
Napoleon wasted no time in reforming, reequipping, and reorganizing the French army. It was made up of men that had followed the eagle in a multitude of battles throughout Europe and Egypt and were reinvigorated by the bloodless return, from exile, of the Emperor. This daunting task couldn’t have been performed by anyone else. Napoleon Bonaparte was a military and diplomatic genius like the world had never seen before. He possessed that “je ne sais quoi” that separated him from other men of his time.
As armies approach each other for battle, it is common that skirmishes erupt by the first contact. Before Waterloo, these skirmishes (which in fact were actual battles) took place in Quatre Bras, Ligny, and Wavre. The Battle of Waterloo has been fought and refought by historians and history enthusiasts thousands of times. Armed with 20/20 hindsight, a single move or natural circumstance could have produced a vastly different result. Napoleon, Wellington, and Blucher, however, were not blessed with these attributes. The battle was fought and circumstances nipped possible victory from Napoleon’s grasp in the 13th hour. Napoleon was defeated, banished to St Helena, and Europe was left to lick its wounds.
If Napoleon’s ultimate defeat is explainable in contemporary terms, it would be this: Take a champion grade team in the NFL. After a long and brutal season, they are appearing in the Super Bowl. Injuries and general fatigue have taken their toll, making the team, though still of championship quality, not the same as they were at the start of the season.
This book provides the reader with a summary view of a very intricate time in world history. It can hardly support the title of a reference book but is more of an inspiration to learn more.

[Jan · Rating 5 out of 5]

An interesting brief (51pp or 56min), insight into the factors most important to the conclusion of the Napoleonic Wars. It begins with a brief summary of Napoleon's military education and rise to power culminating in exile, followed by release and formation of a new fighting force and allies. Then comes a gathering of negative influences such as the weather, poor communication, false information, exhaustion of the troops on both sides, poor decisions by others, and the physical problems of Napoleon himself. It's a good review for military students and historians without being of text book length.
Jimmy Kieffer is excellent as narrator!
I am pleased that I bought both the ebook and Audio on sale

[Beckie Treble · Rating 5 out of 5]

Always wondered about The Battle of Waterloo...

and the downfall of Napoleon Bonaparte.
I loved the Hornblower series on ITV and it was set during these times. It's great to know what actually happened. All those lives lost. Still don't understand why Bonaparte did what he did and we will never really know why but this book does she'd some light into it. Really well written and easy to understand.

[Guillermo Muñoz · Rating 4 out of 5]

Liderazgo en tiempos turbulentos

Esta breve historia, nos muestra esencialmente al Napoleón ambicioso y sediento de poder que eventualmente sucumbe ante su propia ambición.
Es el retrato de algunos líderes ambiciosos y corruptos. Organizan, engañan y asesinan, en su búsqueda y afán de mantenerse en el poder. No hay mayor diferencia más allá de la escala de a cuánta gente engañan y causan daño. En cuánto al móvil del daño, es por mucho, muy similar.

[EvilWebBoy · Rating 4 out of 5]

Battle of Waterloo: A History From Beginning to End
I've been meaning to read more about Napoleon Bonaparte.
I was reading The Room in the Dragon Volant by J. Sheridan Lefanu and this takes place after the battle of Waterloo, so I wanted to brush up on French / British relations which is a theme in the book.
Very well organized like all the books in the "From Beginning to End" series.

[mark leyshon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Battle of Waterloo : A history from beginning to end

A very brief history indeed, but a good introduction to this famous battle. It gives readers a taste of the story and hopefully will encourage others to read deeper into this interesting period of history.

[Stefan Mitchell-Lauridsen · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the more interesting books about battle of Waterloo

This book was quick and easy to read and very interesting to read.
I highly recommend anyone that is interested in history or want to know quickly with good insight about the battle of Waterloo to read this book.

[Bob Cantrell · Rating 4 out of 5]

Waterloo or Napoleon

I felt that this book spend too much time on Napoleon and not enough on the Battle of Waterloo. Now Napoleon is big part of the Battle of Waterloo, but so too is Wellington. To include so much about Napoleon is to not do justice to the Battle. I felt more time was needed for the Battle than Napoleon. The fighting at the farms makes for an interesting story, but presented as just oh yeah moment.

[Mike Briley · Rating 3 out of 5]

The inclusion of one or two maps or schemes would have helped make some of the manoeuvres clearer.

[Bruce · Rating 4 out of 5]

Another example of how little control we have over the important matters of our lives.

[Aubrey Smith · Rating 1 out of 5]

Hope.

The author skipped around too easily too quickly with too many errors. Too many questions that was left hanging in the air.

[Gian Andrea · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Day that changed History.

A few days have had such a massive impact on the History of the World.
Here is a quick account of the background and forces in motion that led to that moment.

[Paul Devall · Rating 3 out of 5]

A slightly different way of telling the story than some other books I have read.

[Leo Blanes · Rating 5 out of 5]

A good read. This was a short review of the battle that covered the major points and the aftermath. Very well written.

[Centurion Dave · Rating 4 out of 5]

Short and informative.

A short but enjoyable book with good facts and details on a battle known by all.
Thoroughly enjoyed reading and look forward to more.

[Nihal · Rating 5 out of 5]

Interesting, entertaining, informative.

[Charles Gebhardt · Rating 5 out of 5]

Short history of Waterloo

The book is a good short history of Waterloo. It covers the causes and the players. It also covers the major failures that caused Napoleon’s defeat.

[Rob Gornowicz · Rating 5 out of 5]

Great history book

I am a younger reader but this book is very good and tells you about 1800-1815 or the downfall of Napoleon very well.

[coli james campbell · Rating 5 out of 5]

Welington

This wa Avery good book I did enjoy reading 🐱 this man did his homework and turned it into a good boowell donek

[Faith Cummings · Rating 5 out of 5]

Waterloo: A turning point in History

Although I have raead about Napoleon and Wellington, and this historic confrontation, I did not know the logistics until now. I am surprised to read that it was such a combination of poor planning and poor execution on the part of the Napoleonic forces. As is said in this book, it could have happened for many reasons, but that it happened this way at all suprises me. It is no wonder that Wellington won. This book may lead me to read more on the subject, to explore what other historians are saying about the reasons for the disorganization and lack of structure on the part of the French. This is not to say that I doubt what is written here. I have come to expect a great summation of events in these books. I was not disappointed this time. The fact that I want to know more is also something I have come to expect. This series provides those who love history with a taste of the events surrounding a historical person or event such as the battle of Waterloo. I'm sure I'm not the only one who is spurrred on to do more reading and more study. This is why these books continue to be read and enjoyed. They act as a springboard for those who love history to delve deeper and learn more.

[Jack · Rating 3 out of 5]

Audible Audiobook: First listening September 2019; second listening July 2020