FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   905   906   907   908   909   910   911   912   913   914   915   916   917   918   919   920   921   922   923   924   925   926   927   928   929  
930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   >>  
rthrow infantry. I cannot accept Houssaye's statement (p. 393) that the French squares attacked our front at four different places, from the 52nd regiment on our right to the Brunswickers in our centre, a quarter of a mile to the east. The only evidence that favours this is Macready's ("Waterloo Letters," p. 330); he says that the men who attacked his square (30th and 73rd regiments) were of the Middle Guard; for their wounded said so; but Kelly, of the same square, thought they were Donzelot's men, who certainly attacked there. Siborne, seemingly on the strength of Macready's statement, says that part of the Guards' column diverged thither: but this is unlikely. Is it credible that the Guards, less than 4,000 strong, should have spread their attacks over a quarter of a mile of front? Was not the column the usual method of attack? I submit, then, that my explanation of the Guard attacking in hollow oblongs, formed in two chief columns, harmonizes the known facts. See Petit's "Relation" in "Eng. Hist. Rev.," April, 1903.] [Footnote 524: Janin, p. 45.] [Footnote 525: Bertrand at St. Helena said he _heard_ Michel utter these words (Montholon, vol. iii., ch. iv.).] [Footnote 526: Maitland's "Narrative," p. 222. Basil Jackson, who knew Gourgaud well at St. Helena, learnt from him that he could not finish his account of Waterloo, "as Napoleon could never decide on the best way of ending the great battle: that he (Gourgaud) had suggested no less than six different ways, but none were satisfactory" ("Waterloo and St. Helena," p, 102). Gourgaud's "Journal" shows that Napoleon blamed in turn the rain, Ney, Grouchy, Vandamme, Guyot, and Soult; but he ends--"it was a fatality; for in spite of all, I should have won that battle."] [Footnote 527: "Lettres inedites de Napoleon."] [Footnote 528: Gourgaud, "Journal inedit de Ste. Helene," vol. ii., p. 321, small edit.] [Footnote 529: Lucien, "Mems.," vol. iii., p. 327.] [Footnote 530: Stuart's despatch of June 28th, "F.O.," France, No. 117; Gneisenau to Mueffling, June 27th, "Passages," App.] [Footnote 531: Croker ("Papers," vol. iii., p. 67) had this account from Jaucourt, who had it from Becker.] [Footnote 532: Ollech, pp. 350-360. The French cavalry success near Versailles was due to exceptional circumstances.] [Footnote 533: Maitland's "Narrative," pp. 23-39, disproves Thiers' assertion that Napoleon was not expected there. Maitland's letter of July 10th to
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   905   906   907   908   909   910   911   912   913   914   915   916   917   918   919   920   921   922   923   924   925   926   927   928   929  
930   931   932   933   934   935   936   937   938   939   940   >>  



Top keywords:

Footnote

 

Napoleon

 

Gourgaud

 

Waterloo

 

attacked

 

Maitland

 
Helena
 

account

 
Journal
 

battle


Narrative

 
Guards
 
column
 
Macready
 

quarter

 
French
 

statement

 
square
 

blamed

 

fatality


Vandamme
 

Grouchy

 

decide

 

letter

 

expected

 

finish

 

ending

 

Lettres

 
disproves
 

suggested


assertion

 

Thiers

 

satisfactory

 

Helene

 

Mueffling

 

cavalry

 

Passages

 

Gneisenau

 
France
 
success

Becker
 

Ollech

 
Jaucourt
 
Croker
 

Papers

 
circumstances
 

inedit

 

Lucien

 

despatch

 
Versailles