I posted some questions about touring Waterloo and got a variety of answers....some saying there was not much to see while others said the battlefield had been upgraded considerably in the past 10 or so years, in readiness for the 200 year anniversary of the battle in 2015. As I have a special interest in Waterloo, I opted to take a private tour. Although I have taken many tours, some like a RS tour with local guides etc., and other day tours when seeing a country on my own, this was my first private tour. I must say that Alan did a stellar job. I took the tour alone but with 4 people the costs, per person, would be pretty reasonable for what he offers. Before I talk about the tour, he does offer other tours, but they generally involve several days and he does specialize in Waterloo. Finally, you cannot see all of the 3 day battle fields in one day. We concentrated on the events of June 18th, 1815 and left the first 2 days for another time. Alan brings some good materials, specifically a series of hourly maps showing what was going on, a large area map and some drawings/paintings of some of the events. We basically started just to the left of the British Center, which was attacked by d'Erlon's forces. Alan described the differences between the battlefield then and now. He also took me to the point of the furthest advance of the French forces. We basically drove around the entire battlefield in a clockwise manner. Along the way we saw where the British Heavy Cavalry attacked, where they met the French Lancers, the roads used by the Prussians, Plancenoit, the site of the French Grand Battery, Hougoumont, Napoleon's spot for observing the battle and other sites. Alan was very knowledgeable and we talked quite a bit about both specifics of the 18th and the overall impact of Waterloo. To me, it was well worth the cost and I feel I have an excellent (amateur) grasp of the battle at this point. Alan is retired and doesn't work every day so can be hard to book, but it would be enjoyable for me to return and get a tour of some of the sites from June 16th and 17th.
Posted by
San Francisco
14507 posts
" cannot see all of the 3 day battle fields in one day." How true! The British historian David Chandler suggests two days by car covering the battle field sites.
Good that you found the tour more than worth it as regards to "both specifics of the 18th and the over impact of Waterloo."
Posted by
Tresana, Highlands Ranch, CO, USA
23267 posts
I would love to take the tour. I just finished Bernard Cornwell's WATERLOO. It is a well written minute, by minute, account of the battle. Another hundred Frenchmen, or if the Hussians had turn left instead of right, or the battle started a day later, probably a different outcome. I am always amazed in these epic battles how thin the margin of victory is.
Posted by
OP
Tigard, OR, USA
1068 posts
It was a great tour and that was a great book. Yes, the margin of Waterloo was a razor's edge.
Posted by
San Francisco
14507 posts
Or to paraphrase Victor Hugo..."If only it had not rained the night before."
I am familiar with B Cornwell's WATERLOO, read it too. It is a recent publication.
Posted by
OP
Tigard, OR, USA
1068 posts
Yes, certainly a lot of "ifs" about Waterloo.
Posted by
San Francisco
14507 posts
Very true on "iffy history" as it pertains to Waterloo. One could list a ton of "ifs," eg, if Napoleon had not been absent from the battle for two hours; if Napoleon had picked Murat, which he admitted at St Helena, if the Guard had not taken the wrong road that led it into a cross-fire; if Napoleon had not delayed in ordering the pursuit of the Prussians after Ligny, ie crucial hours wasted, and the one I like best; if Napoleon had brought Davout on the campaign and a host of other "ifs"
Posted by
OP
Tigard, OR, USA
1068 posts
One of my favs, if Napoleon had not berated Ney the night before. Was Ney's cavalry charge really because he thought the British line had broken, or because he was out to prove Napoleon wrong?
Posted by
San Francisco
14507 posts
Ney could not operate independently, Bautzen is evidence of that. If Davout had confronted the Prussians, who was the one French commander whom the Prussians feared/hated the most? When the Prussians got to Paris in July (when Napoleon was basically out of the picture and gone ), Davout offered them battle, and of course, Blücher with his hatred of les français accepted, who was worsted?
Posted by
OP
Tigard, OR, USA
1068 posts
No disagreement about Ney's competence in leading so large a portion of the army and functioning well doing it. But (delays at QB aside) the cavalry charge was certainly a piece of work.
Posted by
San Francisco
14507 posts
"...certainly a piece of work." Eloquent!
More "iffy" history: what "if" it had been Murat instead? I prefer Murat's "piece of work" at Eylau, had better results but then the Russians didn't form squares.