ARmy Rumour SErvice

**Werewolf** · 29-12-2011, 19:03

Originally Posted by Tremaine

Just watched this tonight , 1970 film with 25 million dollar budget to depict 23,000 British troops with 44,000 allied troops and 160 guns against 74,000 French troops and 250 guns.
Having lost against the Russians which probably started his downfall, and escaped from Elba, Boney siezes power, takes up the French Empire and returns war against opposing coalitions: Anglo Allied and Prussians. Boney ultimately loses to the allies at Waterloo.
The Imperial French Army and French power in Europe is dissolved. The Germans become nationalistic, and the German and British Empires (and the industrial revolution) begin. Bit simplistic but let's say concise ;) The Coalition Wars are well documented.

There must be several on here associated with those forty odd units of the British Army.

A subject for discussion if only for the close shave, and the Prussians saving the day while Wellington faced defeat (incoming expected). Boney was certainly an able General and powerful figure, as illustrated by the French Revolution and Napoleonic Wars.

A few things from the film, there are inaccuracies , agreed, but in the film an umbrella can be seen in the British lines. And apparently Wellington did order umbrellas banned.

The offer to accept the French surrender (in the film) but answered with "merde" before the remnants of Boney's army are blown away may or may not have happened.

But the ground on the morning of the battle is recorded as soft, so Napoleon waits til noon. Were the ground conditions that day, significant to the outcome? Granted ,there are several reasons for the coalition's victory.

In a nutshell, who was the best General and tactician, Bonaparte or Wellington? And why.

What would have happened do you think if France had won this battle?
,

I believe Wellington himself was quoted as saying the battle was, "A damn close-run thing" and admitting he probably would have lost were it not for Bluecher. Speaking of whom, my two favourite quotes from a very quotable fim were:

French Officer, "Sire - the Prussians are in the woods!"

Napoleon, "I made one mistake in my life; I should have burned Berlin."

Bluecher, "Raise the Black Flags, my children! No pity - no prisoners! I'll shoot any man I see with pity in him!"

**Chef** · 29-12-2011, 19:12

An interesting aside is that one of the military advisors on the film (Keegan?) said that when manoeuvering the troops, it was much easier to fight them in columns as the French did, rather than in line as the allies did.

This meant the French could move easier but were unable to bring much firepower to bear, as only the front rank could fire. Whereas the British could bring large amounts of firepower to bear.

This is an approximation of the article, which went on to say that once they started to use the extras like a Napoleonic army, the problems of moving them about the battlefield became clear at once.

Napoleon was persuaded to delay the start of the battle to let the ground dry out so that arty fire would be more effective, the roundshot would skip and kill/injure many rather than digging into the soft ground.

If you get a chance see the Sibourne model at the National Army Museum in Chelsea, next to the Royal Hospital. Well worth a visit, and it is free.

**ugly** · 29-12-2011, 19:56

Originally Posted by oldnotbold

Not an expert, and the pyrotechnics seem to have been done with an eye on how good they look on the screen, but I thought shrapnel had come into service by then?

Exploding shells were available but almost solely in Howitzers and mortars due to unreliability of fuzing until about 20 years later I believe.
It has been discussed on here before and I have looked this up and the story about delaying the start to allow the ground to dry out is oft quoted. Also reliable fuses were still hit and miss during the american civil war!
Shrfapnel was used at Waterloo but by British artillery and wouldnt have had the HE type effects that the film showed!

**kimmi851** · 29-12-2011, 20:31

Originally Posted by ugly

Exploding shells were available but almost solely in Howitzers and mortars due to unreliability of fuzing until about 20 years later I believe.
It has been discussed on here before and I have looked this up and the story about delaying the start to allow the ground to dry out is oft quoted. Also reliable fuses were still hit and miss during the american civil war!
Shrfapnel was used at Waterloo but by British artillery and wouldnt have had the HE type effects that the film showed!

I remember someone describing exploding shells from Howitzers in use during the Peninsula wars - saying that they had been seen turning 180 and their firers having to run away from them themselves (I think it was John Kincaid, but possibility it may have been Rifleman Harris)

**oldnotbold** · 29-12-2011, 21:04

Originally Posted by kimmi851

I remember someone describing exploding shells from Howitzers in use during the Peninsula wars - saying that they had been seen turning 180 and their firers having to run away from them themselves (I think it was John Kincaid, but possibility it may have been Rifleman Harris)

Happy to bow to Ugly's research on shrapnel. It was the only plausible explanation I could think of for cannon shot going bang.

I suspect that the projectiles turning back on their firers refers to Congreve's rockets. The rockets were used at Waterloo, even though Wellington ordered them left behind and for the RHA troop to take its guns instead. Research from dissertation by a Congreve's rocket anorak I was at university with. As an aside he was the only person I know to have ordered up a bound volume of Mayfair from the British Library because it contained an article on the rockets - and to have got away with citing it in the bibliography.

**joey_deacons_lad** · 29-12-2011, 21:05

Originally Posted by kimmi851

I remember someone describing exploding shells from Howitzers in use during the Peninsula wars - saying that they had been seen turning 180 and their firers having to run away from them themselves (I think it was John Kincaid, but possibility it may have been Rifleman Harris)

You might be thinking of Rocket artillery there
HISTORY OF THE ROCKET 1804 TO 1815

Aleegee1698 · 29-12-2011, 21:19

16 (Sandhams Coy) Bty RA have got the T-shirt.

I know this because once a year (18th June) we had a day off and spent it getting truely shit-faced, playing silly games, and re-decorating the block the day after.

**kimmi851** · 29-12-2011, 21:24

My apologies - happy to be corrected. In my defence I am remembering something I read about 20 years ago - but I should have re-checked sources.

**ugly** · 29-12-2011, 21:33

Shrapnel existed as did ordinary exploding shells but not in the manner that we are led to believe by the film makers, the majority of artillery up to the 1860's fired solid ball and needed dry ground to maximise effects.

**likelylad** · 07-01-2012, 21:28

Waterloo, easily my favourite film!! Saw it dozens of times, especially when i was a kid. As for who was better, both were aged 46, but Napoleon had been in decline for years whereas Old Nosey was at his peak physically and mentally. Napoleon was truly physically wretched that day, and indeed in the whole campaign - he practically delegated battle control to Ney, who was a bull in a china shop.