Grouchys Waterloo

One of the enduring controversies of the Waterloo campaign is the conduct of Marshal Grouchy. Given command of a third of Napoleons army and told to keep the Prussians from joining forces with Wellington, he failed to keep Wellington and Blcher apart with the result that Napoleon was overwhelmed at Waterloo. Grouchy, though, was not defeated. He kept his force together and retreated in good order back to France.Many have accused Grouchy of intentionally holding back his men and not marching to join Napoleon when the sound of the gunfire at Waterloo could clearly be heard, and he has been widely blamed for Napoleons defeat.Now, for the first time, Grouchys conduct during the Waterloo campaign is analyzed in fine detail, drawing principally on French sources not previously available in English. The author, for example, answers questions such as whether key orders did actually exist in 1815 or were they later fabrications to make Grouchy the scapegoat for Napoleons failures? Did General Grard really tell Grouchy to march to the sound of the guns? Why did Grouchy appear to move so slowly when speed was essential?This is a subject which is generally overlooked by British historians, who tend to concentrate on the actions of Wellington and Napoleon, and which French historians choose not to look at too closely for fear that it might reflect badly upon their hero Napoleon.Despite the mass of books written on Waterloo, this is a genuinely unique contribution to this most famous campaign. This book is certain to fuel debate and prompt historians to reconsider the events of June 1815.

“An interesting approach to this part of the Waterloo campaign . . . a picture of a capable officer who was perhaps slightly out of his depth.”—HistoryOfWar In this concluding volume of his highly praised study exploring the French perspective of the Waterloo campaign, Andrew Field concentrates on an often-neglected aspect of Napoleon’s final offensive—the French victory over the Prussians at Ligny, Marshal Grouchy’s pursuit of the Prussians, and the battle at Wavre. The story of this side of the campaign is as full of controversy and interest as the battles of Quatre Bras and Waterloo which he has examined in such a penetrating and original way in his previous studies. Napoleon in his memoirs accused Grouchy, like Marshal Ney, of a series of failures in command that led to the French defeat, and many subsequent historians have taken the same line. This is one of the long-standing controversies that Andrew Field explores in fascinating detail. Grouchy’s extensive description of his operations forms the backbone of the narrative, supplemented by other French sources and those of Prussian eyewitnesses. “This book, when taken by itself, is a great addition to the history of the campaign. When looked at in conjunction as the third volume of four on the campaign, these books are a treasure trove of information from the French perspective.”—A Wargamers Needful Things “The research has been thorough, the style of writing clear and lucid with many maps and illustrations. A book not to be put down until it is finished. Very highly recommended.”—Clash of Steel

Excerpt from Marshal Grouchy's Own Account of the Battle of Waterloo The four days' campaign which ended the military career of Napoleon opened on the 15th day of June, 1815. The French army, men strong, crossed the Sambre at Charleroy and engaged with a body Of Prussians which had taken position behind that City in order to retard the Emperor's ad vance. Some troops of the enemy which 0c Cupied Charleroy havrng retired toward Brux elles by Quatra Bras, Marshal Ney was de spatched by this route with men. Im W m't xii. About the Publisher Forgotten Books publishes hundreds of thousands of rare and classic books. Find more at www.forgottenbooks.com This book is a reproduction of an important historical work. Forgotten Books uses state-of-the-art technology to digitally reconstruct the work, preserving the original format whilst repairing imperfections present in the aged copy. In rare cases, an imperfection in the original, such as a blemish or missing page, may be replicated in our edition. We do, however, repair the vast majority of imperfections successfully; any imperfections that remain are intentionally left to preserve the state of such historical works."