Napoleon’s ULTIMATE Gamble at Waterloo Explained in 58 Minutes

Play War Thunder for FREE on PC, Xbox and PlayStation. Use my link wtplay.link/historylegends to download the game and get your exclusive bonus: multiple Premium Vehicles, Premium Account, Boosters and more! See you on the battlefield!
Napoleon's defeat at the Battle of Waterloo on 18 June 1815 is remembered as a turning point of European history. The Emperor fought enemy forces twice more numerous, but odds were stacked against him, and he lost his final gamble. However, Napoleon was much closer to victory than what most historians want to admit, and one question remains, who is to blame?
Support HistoryLegends
► Patreon ✔ / thehistorylegends
► PayPal ✔ www.paypal.me/historylegends
► Book ✔ www.thehistorylegends.com
► INSTAGRAM: / historylegends2
► TWITTER: / historylegends_
► TIKTOK: www.tiktok.com/@thehistoryleg...
#historylegends

[@historylegends]

Play War Thunder for FREE on PC, Xbox and PlayStation. Use my link wtplay.link/historylegends to download the game and get your exclusive bonus: multiple Premium Vehicles, Premium Account, Boosters and more! See you on the battlefield!

[@TheRdamterror]

its very simpele marshal NEE fuckt it al up

[@Arminiuswolfspeer]

Technically IF you count the Dutch as a Brother-Nation of the Germans (It's in their nation Anthem "Wilhelmus van Nassouwe Ben ick van Duytschen Bloedt /translation: William of Nassau, I am of German Blood".. You could diminish the British contribution even further, and even claim "Stolen Valor" (Which is a bit of a British tick, like calling the Conquest of Britain by the Dutch the "glorious revolution" ignoring the 20.00 troops and a fleet 3.5 times the size of the Spanish Armada). But if you go far enough back in time, the British are basically evicted German tribes that got Francofied after William the Conqueror went on a field trip to Angle and Saxon lands. Brits. Love the lore, but their history needs a lot of factchecking (No do not call Zuckerbot for that).

[@ETALAL]

Here is the real reason the French lost KZbin 1:10 mins "Blackadder - The French.mp4"

[@death-istic9586]

Love your videos!💚

[@arnijulian6241]

Mikhail Kutuzov is potentially undefeated except the inconclusive Battle of Krems/Drurenstein as well the battles of Maloyaroslavets & later Berezina being split as strategical & tactical victories between the French-Russo conflicts. Duke of Wellington undefeated! Horatio Nelson, 1st Viscount Nelson, 1st Duke of Bronte would be undefeated if not for musket round hitting him in the right arm while already with 3 limb as in missing a leg refusing assistance while he struggled up onto a jetty, Horatio nelson would be a undefeated general if not for a lucky Spanish shot & his pride not wanting to be picked up by his men. I would have let them straddle me like a baby for all I care. Admiral Sir William Sidney Smith was a thorn in Napoleon's Aris & who Napoleon said & wrote “That man made me miss my destiny”. These are just 4 Generals & admirals that defeated Napoleon Bonaparte & more can be included but these are the notable ones that come to mind! Napoleon Bonaparte is overrated though capable as a general defeated by multiple generals & not unavoidable circumstances like musket round making you bleed out etcetera. The fact people put Napoleon in the same camp as Alexander the Great or Caesar infuriates me not only for the time difference but multiple times defeated general compared to undefeated historic greats is only something a Frog or yank would dare do! I would sooner flay my own flesh as student as someone versed in matters of polemology. In history their a 100's of undefeated Generals & admirals which Napoleon is not among their ranks!

[@danielrose7566]

Can we get more videos like this?? I'm gonna be honest, these history documentary style videos are spectacular

[@historylegends]

Very happy to hear this! 🔥🙏

[@user-es5gx2di7h]

The accompanying commentary is excellent

[@cathere9631]

@danielrose7566 ONLY when History Legends does them

[@danielpalai156]

9:12 It's kinda ironic, that Napóleon, who was very mad about families with royal routs or families getting better positions in the military, then skilled officers like him, does the very same thing.

[@historylegends]

The same nepotism, and that's why people stopped supporting him eventually.

[@markgrehan3726]

Most if not all of his Marshals' earned their ranks.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

Humans. As you get older you'll realise that's what we're like.

[@JC-yc2sz]

It's the same thing with all the gullible people. it's why democracy is a joke. total scam. might as well say "if you elect me I will outlaw flooding after heavy rainfall." and all the idiot voters go ahead and vote for him because of this. look what europe has become since they forced us away from rule by monarchs to rule by democracy (in reality, bankers)

[@ayrnovem9028]

It is political logic vs military logic. Many people will not like this idea, but sometimes prioritizing loyalty over ability IS the right call to make from a ruler's point of view. Unfortunately, Napoleon's judgement of loyalty was at times pretty flawed, as the example with that Bourmont guy clearly shows.

[@Lucky-mo2jm]

Leaving Davout in charge of Paris instead of having him on the battlefield was his biggest mistake

[@rohitnautiyal7090]

He needed someone who not gonna try to overthrow him and cut a deal with the allies. I believe that is why he left Him there because he was ferociously loyal to Napoleon from everything I have seen and read.

[@khaledfaiz491]

Also Murat would have been most useful there

[@Lucky-mo2jm]

@@khaledfaiz491 At this point Napoleon doubted Murat loyalty

[@Lucky-mo2jm]

@@rohitnautiyal7090 Lucien Bonaparte would had been perfect in charge domestically he was a capable politician and would had never betrayed his brother

[@strongest32]

@@rohitnautiyal7090 if you win waterloo it doesn't matter if they overthrow you, you will comeback to paris in force.

[@LordFirefly]

It just makes you wonder if Riddley Scott actually read one of "the hundreds of books" he mentions when addressing criticism... Imagine the battle of Eylau being portrayed in the movie with a whole french division being wiped out in half an hour or the giant cavalry charge in snowy fields that saved the french line from collapsing! So many epic moments that could've been shown and what we got was Napoleon being a furry in front of his wife :/

[@Marshmobilise]

He is worse than a furry. He is. God forgive me for saying this, a clopper.

[@adyensp]

It was such a disappointment. British propaganda at its finest

[@milospetkovic8713]

That's why the battle of Borodino is perfectly portrayed in the movie War and Peace (russian movie from 1966 directed by Sergei Bondarchuk for which he won the Oscar for best foreign move)

[@paveldimitrov2830]

​@@milospetkovic8713I could never imagine that Многая Лета can be used as battle music but yes indeed, Mnogaya Leta to Russia

[@Deuslovult1990]

Its clear from the movie that at best, Ridley read one of those pseudohistorical romantic hovels for housewives

[@yolobuck2553]

If Napoleon won at Waterloo he would then have to win several more must win battles. Napoleons campaign for the defense of Paris was his magnificent last stand that no one talks about

[@teddypicker8799]

Yep honestly he had no chance against the undefeated Wellington who clapped all the best French marshalls already. Should've abdicated after Leipzig

[@victoryover1156]

Yeah. It was brilliant. A feint and then throwing into retreat 3x his number. The problem is that he was in an impossible situation.

[@vivelesourspolaires334]

@@teddypicker8799 Even as a french i have lot of respects for Welligton, but he did not defeated the best maréchaux of Napoleon, Massena was at his worse in 1810 and Soult had taken over the army of Spain to late to reverse the situation. Marmont, is not even worth mentioning as he was maréchal only because he was Napoleon's friend. The true best Maréchaux were Davout, Lannes, Suchet and maybe Bessière but he was not fit for an independant command. But all the others were as good or better than Welligton, and even between the allies, he was not the best, i would put before him Blücher, Archidke Charles, Kutuzov. Bagration would be after Welligton but still close. But of course i am not saying he's a noob (who am i to say it ?) he's still really great and more than most of generals in history, and even most of the french Maréchaux.

[@teddypicker8799]

​@@vivelesourspolaires334 Wouldn't say Davout was any better he just didn't ever have to face British Infantry. Wasn't Davout in charge of organizing Russia too? Probably should've remembered to bring food lol Anyways out of the " big 6" Marshals of Davout, Lannes, Berthier, Soult, Massena and Suchet Wellington beat 3 of them so I think my comment was fair

[@9315asdf]

​@@teddypicker8799 regarding the food. As far as I know the scorched earth tactic by the russians in this scale was never done in history before. It was probably unimaginable that russia burns everything right up to their capital. So yeah we can LOL now. But back then the the russian soldiers and civilians probably didn't LOL when they burned their own land. And to keep in mind back these days they didn't deliver all goods, it was kind of normal to take whatever they wanted by force from the nearby farms and villages, in enemy teritory for sure but even in their own teritory.

[@michaelsmith8028]

If Napoleon won at Waterloo the Abba song would have a different name.

[@user-rc2yo1dt5v]

And sung in french.

[@c0nstantin86]

​@@user-rc2yo1dt5v😂😂😂

[@travisgray8376]

Honey Pie it would of been called. That's the original title before they changed it to Waterloo

[@bjorn301]

Yeah, Strasbourg dosent have the same ring to it

[@michaelsmith8028]

@@user-rc2yo1dt5v No. Napoleon was outnumbered. So even if he won at Waterloo he'd have been defeated somewhere else by the Austrians and Russians.

[@thoronirgros188]

I really enjoyed reading an old newspaper (Le journal des débats) concerning Bonaparte march on the capital. As Napoleon approached Paris they'd grow more and more frantic in support of the king and calling for his arrest and execution. Then, the second he entered Paris they instantly changed sides and started praising him. Gave me a good laugh.

[@kurvitaschthedictator]

french people amirite

[@sddsds768]

@@kurvitaschthedictator more like journalists. What can you expect from them? Bringing fake news to you since the oldest of time

[@janvarga4023]

@@kurvitaschthedictatorJust media honestly.

[@blackcatdungeonmastersfami5311]

So much like the media on the Ukraine war now :P

[@tonnuz87]

That's the Press everywhere

[@rhysnichols8608]

What is often not understood is that Ney correctly sensed weakness in the British centre, which was redeploying due to horrific casualties from cannon fire. He launched a hasty cavalry charge to pin the British centre in squares, and prevent their line from fully reforming. Normally the semi elite young guard would have then followed and swept away the vulnerable British squares, as squares are east targets for volley fire and cannon. Ney requested infantry support, but the CRUCIAL a thing was at this time, Von Beulaus Prussian corps was arriving at the village of Plancenmois on the right rear flank, the young guard and ALL available infantry reserves had to be hurriedly directed to face the Prussians, meaning no support was available for Neys cavalry and thus the British centre wasn’t subject to the likely devastating attack. Ney kept charging to buy time hoping Infantry units would become available, after 2hrs he had to give up. The old guard was also sent to Plancenmois to drive the Prussians out, which they did in a 20 min bayonet charge, but then the Prussians once again retook the village. Fighting here was unusually brutal, Prussian and French soldiers routinely bayoneted wounded, threw prisoners off the roofs, and often didn’t take prisoners. The fighting between French and Prussians was more savage and hate filled than the other nations.

[@linming5610]

This commentary helps humanizing both sides of the war. The Victors aren't really omnipotent and the losers aren't actually that stupid.

[@satiresaturn8783]

I believe that, at least at one point, the centre was purposely weakened in order to draw the cavalry into the squares

[@rhysnichols8608]

@@satiresaturn8783 There’s no evidence for that, and that is a ridiculous claim. The British had no way of knowing the French infantry reserves would be drained by the Prussians, and it was very risky. You are just coping to try and make the British look better

[@jonshive5482]

It is suggested that Ney believed the Anglo-Allies were retreating. Yet Andrew Roberts says that both Ney and Napoleon later denied ordering the cavalry charges. Weird.

[@zarelli7831]

@@rhysnichols8608either way the British won the day.

[@ktg8030]

1) French lost most of their experience troops over the years well before Waterloo, as well as some of his best Marshalls. 2) Talleyrand-Périgord and others who were against Napoleon were passing military secrets to the allies even before he left French territory. 3) Napoleon was losing his timing and relied on more of his subordinates, who were not up to the task. 4) Even if he won Waterloo he would have lost the war.

[@historylegends]

Exactly, there were many factors

[@SantomPh]

Bernadotte would become the King of Sweden later and opposed Napoleon at Leipzig.

[@EM-tx3ly]

There’s a conspiracy to engineer Napoleon’s downfall by letting him escape Conspiracy theories perhaps

[@DarrelX-im2hb]

That is a big IF. But if Napi could crush Wellington and prussians, he would've made a peace deal with austrians via Maria-Louise and dismantle the coalition. Russians would never breach France on their own. Nah, i think Waterloo was the end of golden age of France in the world.

[@raka522]

@@DarrelX-im2hb It would have been a real miracle if Napoleon had won at Waterloo! The numbers alone spoke against him, and neither he nor his army had the same quality as in 1812. If he had defeated Wellington before the Prussians appeared, he would have lost too, because the Prussian army would have been superior to the French army at that point, and while the French were running low on ammunition, the Prussians still had enough supplies on hand. Why should the Austrians have agreed to peace? The Russians were already marching against France and there were still 150,000 soldiers in Prussia ready to move to France as well.

[@patricklioneljonson2747]

finally someone that explains the WHOLE story. Not just the stupid over-analyzed waterloo battle, (mostly british peeps). i love Napoleon, the time period, the history the battles. But the fact is, Napoleon already lost the war, as soon as he took Davout off the field and placed him in a admin role. Also, Napoleon was very ill the whole week prior to the campaign, with him have stomach cancer, and being off the field for hours at a time, ill.

[@iratespartan13]

They really missed Davout

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

I'm confused. You like the whole story but don't like analysis. I get that, as a lover of Napoleon, that you like the fact that he pokes a finger in the eye of the British, but really this is no more the whole story than any other video or movie. The format of a one hour video just doesn't have the time to go into greater depth. There are a lot of things left out and a number of things that are not put into context. I agree that many documentaries on Waterloo concentrate on the battle itself, but most of the ones I've seen do cover the run up to it, because you can't not do that. The ones that don't do that tend to do it because the scope is deliberately more limited. Also, the fact is, documentaries are commercial products so you have to give the consumer what they want. A TV documentary about the preceding battles will get a tiny proportion of the viewers that one with Waterloo in the title will get, because non-history buffs won't watch. You are not going to get funding to do that. Similarly with clicks for youtube videos. just look at the title of this video. If it had not had a few key 'button' words and Waterloo in the title would you have watched? In that sense, these things are self-selecting. As for the British doing more of the videos/documentaries, i think there are several reasons for this. Partly because Britain didn't have the misfortune of being invaded in the last few wars and had the fortune of being on the winning side (I'm not saying why, just what) it's been a little less unfomfortable for the British (of a certain age) to have an interest in history. Secondly, Waterloo was perceived as a British victory in the same sense as the world wars were (i.e. Britain happened to be on the winning side in what were wars fought by huge coalitions, again I'm not saying why, just what) so it's a pleasant myth rather than unpleasant. In France I'm sure you'll find more books about Napoleon's victories than you will about Waterloo. History is selective, no matter where you are born. So in Britain Dunkirk is viewed as a 'heroic defeat' (even Churchill acknowledged it as a defeat) just as 'The Alamo' is in the USA or countless similar events around the globe.

[@urmum3773]

Anglo seethers outing themselves

[@alkazarjkdghjd]

​@@littlefluffybushbaby7256 Most "analysis" of Waterloo is literaly just brit propaganda, that's why most people dont like it. Actualy, most war involving the brit are literaly just propaganda with barely any fact. Like how the brit studies the 100 year war in a way that portray them as the winner...

[@CAM8689]

@@urmum3773 anglo liars mad the truth is getting out british overrated during the napoleonic wars as if they did the bulk of the fighting.....if they were that powerful why would they need coalitions.....and they needed 7

[@freman75]

Not gonna lie, this was more informative and entertaining than the Risdey scott garbage.

[@bobmills2371]

The French army lost many of its best and experienced units in the Russian winter. I think this was a factor too.

[@ethernalclassic3076]

Most of the losses were before winter actually

[@freddiemedley5580]

Russian summer* most of them never even made it to autumn

[@liljojo8813]

Stop repeating false narratives

[@mainframe9374]

that's also true, that the most experienced units were lost in war against Russia. In the next century a "You know who" invaded and it's happened again - most experienced units were lost. I think it's kinda european thing to invade Russia once in a hundred years and get their ass kicked :D

[@kevinyoung9557]

​@@mainframe9374I would say dysentery was the main culprit with the retreat from Moscow.

[@Cachoeira1986]

Of all Waterloo documentaries I've seen, yours brought me many more insights I had no idea they existed! That's why I watch your well researched history sessions time and time again - thank you!

[@keerf255]

As the Dutch of those times would say "No Wellington's Waterloo, without Our Quatre-Bas." The British proved their mastery of one art of war above all and it was their excellence at propaganda. They'd show themselves to be undisputed masters at it again in the world wars nearly a century later, and let's not forget the undoubtedly massive propaganda efforts to mobilize so much of the nation again for the second boer war, especially after the fiasco of the first.

[@angloirishcad]

Waterloo was a stunning British victory...its lucky for the French that Wellington's best troops, the Peninsular Army, who had beaten French armies time and again, were in America.

[@adelaidesngan604]

​@@angloirishcadThe English would have lost without the Prussians... even Wellington said

[@angloirishcad]

Either that or a bloody draw...however Wellington arranged for the Prussians to be on the field by mid-morning, this was his plan. They didn't arrive till afternoon, either way he'd trapped Napoleon. And on a field he had handpicked a year earlier...yes, Wellington had Belgium mapped for battlefield sites in 1814 and Napoleon never knew he was fighting on ground picked by the British. The British won all the major engagements that day...they were just becoming exhausted.@@adelaidesngan604

[@hgkghkhgkgh8378]

The first and foremost British war goal is to take the moral high ground.

[@angloirishcad]

'Take it'? We don't have to...that's our god given right as Englishmen😉 @@hgkghkhgkgh8378

[@Derna1804]

Here's what everyone gets wrong about Waterloo, and especially Borodino. By 1812 it was no longer possible to simply shatter an army with one weird trick. The troops were much better trained than they had been in 1805, there were many more junior officers and NCOs, the size of the forces and distances involved had increased and the commanders kept too many reserves. If one position collapsed, it would not spark a general panic down the line. By the time the forces assaulting that position overcame local reserves, the rest of the troops in that sector would rally and return to combat. Battles were now more about mechanical slaughter than breaking the enemy morale than they had been in the past, and maneuvers changed to reflect that.

[@linming5610]

It was still possible but it boils down to who has the more skilled officers. But yeah, we could see that by how blucher could repeatedly rally his men after the french scattered them. There's a lot of skilled officers in their ranks that could reorganize them, preventing a massed rout.

[@Derna1804]

@@linming5610 The fact that men now trained daily and constantly had NCOs and junior officers within earshot to encourage them cannot be understated. If a force was routed locally, the boys could get the band back together and return to the fight, or if they saw a neighboring unit collapsing they could just worry about their own position instead of joining in the retreat. That would give retreating men time to regroup. In terms of organization and mobilization, the later Napoleonic Wars were the first modern wars. The portion of Napoleon's army that had to be killed, wounded or captured for it to stop existing as a fighting force by the end of Waterloo is truly astounding.

[@maxburns9278]

Another thing people don't ever link together is Naopleon studied the greats. Many of his battles replicate Alexander. Napoleon tried to replicate the battles of Chaeronea and Gaugamela many times. Especially when you look at the battles that were frontal assaults, but only on one half of the enemy, Austerlitz, Borodino(here he only attacked Bagration and not de Tolly. Eugene failed to flank the Great Redoudt.), Montmirail, even Waterloo. Napoleon had to know the allied left was weaker, the Waterloo movie even suggests this. I would love to see a serious study comparing Napoleon's battles to those of the other great captains of history.

[@malibelizec2543]

Napoleon is discussing his battles with Alexander, Caesar, Hannibal, Suvorov, Pyrus and few more on the other side.

[@tudorflorea7349]

Please do more battle analasys of the late napoleonic campaign. Would like to find out more about Borodino, the first major blow that would eventually kill the "dragon", as Tolstoi put it.

[@historylegends]

Perhaps a video on the entire Campaign of Russia because there are a lot of myths to debunk about that as well

[@abrahamoyevaar2226]

Or the 1813 campaign !?Leipzig, Dresden Bautzen etc....?

[@parlyramyar]

"My enemies are many, my equals are none. In the shade of olive trees, they said Italy could never be conquered. In the land of Pharaohs and kings, they said Egypt could never be humbled. In the realm of forest and snow, they said Russia could never be tamed. Now they say nothing. They fear me, like a force of nature, a dealer in thunder and death. I say, I am Napoleon, I am Emperor."

[@teddypicker8799]

Yeah Wellington was his superior, not equal. He never lost a battle.

[@Matt-Kin]

By letting the germans do all the dirty work x) @@teddypicker8799

[@Erfanbahrami]

Loved this opening clip in that game

[@hectorzero8545]

@@teddypicker8799 the fact wellington needed a coalition with allies to do anything to napolean says otherwise

[@teddypicker8799]

@@hectorzero8545 Britain was rich mate they paid a lot of money to the coalition armies. Britain was a naval/trade power

[@daimyokupopoo9500]

Yes I won as Napoleon in the simulator Scourge of War: Waterloo. It took 15 hours.

[@js70371]

I’m a simple man; I see History Legends post, I drop my life, I watch, and I learn. ☮️❤️🙏

[@robertoldach2560]

Great job! I'm just writing a book about the war of 1815 from the perspective of a silesian Jäger-Sergeant, who wrote a diary. His bataillon (Silesian jägers) where a part of the I. Corps, that slowed down Nappi on the 15th, stod on the prussian right wing at Ligny an saved Wellingtons left wing at Waterloo (as a German, I prefer to call that battle "La Belle Alliance"). Furthermore the prussians chased the french to Paris, flanked them and attacked the capital of France from the west. That led to the two days battle of Jssy, another victory for the I. Corps. I suppose you mean the skirmish outside of Versailles as a victory of the defenders of Paris, when two regiments of prussian cavallery where trapped. Your summary about the campaign of 1815 in this Video is very helpful.

[@stephenbeckett2067]

If you are really writing a book, let me know. This video is horribly flawed; there are much better sources. Look for Pierre de Wit's books.

[@raka522]

Above all, British propaganda and self-aggrandizement are finally being made public.

[@raka522]

@@stephenbeckett2067 But this video is still better than almost all the others on the subject on KZbin...

[@stephenbeckett2067]

@@raka522 There are at least 2 that are far better. Did you find them? Most videos continue to repeat the 1850s mythology. How is this one better than those? Be specific. The author remains hidden under a rock - and if his work is so weak on this event, what does that say about the rest of his material?

[@raka522]

@@stephenbeckett2067 Please tell me these 2 other videos so that I can form my own opinion about them. What's better about this video than most others, in my opinion, is that the author reproduces exactly what I myself had discovered in my own research over many years. My advantage was certainly that I also had access to many sources written in German and could then compare them with the English ones.

[@carfran53]

Excellent video. Enjoyed this video from start to finish.

[@ReverendPrice]

My God man. This video deserves over 1 million views. How is it hanging at 100k? This is gold right here! Anyone intetested in Napoleon would enjoy this over the drivel we usually get! Bravo mate! I look forward to more!

[@Marguerite-tv4tq]

Brilliant professional job! RESPECT for the Author of this channel ❤️

[@linming5610]

Watched the entire video... You're awesome man!!!

[@stormblessed8877]

What a fantastic video. Would love to see you analyze some other historical battles in the future. Your channel is one of the best on KZbin! Keep up the amazing work!

[@SuperDaxos]

These type of breakdowns are absolutely amazing. Please make more of these

[@meddy833]

Great video boss! A lot of interesting facts I did not know or did know, but didn't connect the dots. Good point about the french formations being exactly the same formations that Napoleon had success with just previously and had been proven to work before, probably around a 80% rate I would guess. I think your in depth background into major issues no one ever mentions because it is inconvenient to the popular narrative of the history or never previously known. Salute!

[@historylegends]

Thank you for the feedback 🙏🙏 Means a lot coming from you!

[@michaelporzio7384]

Impressive pronunciation of the French and German names! (great analysis of the battle as well) . I saw what you did with Van Damme ...LOL

[@historylegends]

😏😏 You noticed hehehe

[@michaelporzio7384]

@@historylegends bien sur, mon ami!😁

[@abrahamoyevaar2226]

Loved it when he jumped up and kicked two Prussians either side of him in the face from a standing position whilst screaming "Vive Le France!!!". Classic move.

[@anthonychambers2397]

Great insight and a thoroughly enjoyable commentary ,,,well done!!!

[@ubusubu-fc8tb]

W video as always if ima be honest I just love it when you upload whether it’s about modern wars or ancient wars your channel is just awesome I also really love it when you do collabs with other KZbinrs!

[@universalflamethrower6342]

The Chances that Napoleon rises from the grave, raises an Army and wins Waterloo after 200+ years are bigger than Ukraine winning the War.

[@RPGryphus]

Hahaha love this!

[@jorgebarriosmur]

To be fair, neither the british nor the germans have actually trops in the region, so he would have just to present himself in the battlefield and declare victory!

[@chaptermasterpedrokantor1623]

I would not be surprised if every true Frenchman has a red, white and blue uniform and musket ready for this in a closet somewhere. Like how the USSR rose again by pressing a button in the Simpsons.

[@thexperimenter88]

Keep dreaming then

[@toad2117]

Kyiv in 3 days 😂

[@mikeforester3963]

Nice to see you including scenes from the Waterloo monumental film. I recently watched again and can only ... again ... issue post-mortem gratulations to Dino De Laurentiis for taking on such a task.

[@alek1766]

This is one of the best videos on KZbin, you’re such an effect story teller and academic

[@petermeter9890]

I really enjoyed this and learnt a lot! Good work thank you

[@alkubbo1291]

Hello HistoryLegends! Thank you for the detailed analysis and history lesson. Keep safe 👍❤

[@rainmaker9300]

There is one key-factor to keep in mind. Napoleon (and bless his heart, he was mostly a very effective leader) came out of the mess that was the French revoluion and the coalitions soon after. So we have a British Empire with nigh on infinent cash to bribe coalitions against Napoleon (how many coalitions did they throw at him again?) while he fought against them time and time again and won. True, no man is without his faults and the Moscow campaign showed that...

[@itsmebatman]

The Moscow campaign showed, that he didn't really understand politics. The Russians didn't want to fight him in a war. They just wanted to trade freely with the British Empire. If Napolean was a better politician he could have offered the Russians better trade deals. But instead he tried to subdue them with military force and failed horribly. I understand most of Europe's monarchies were not very interested to make deals with France at the time, because they hated this revolution stuff. But I'm pretty sure he could have talked to the Russians if he wanted.

[@herzog1857]

​@@itsmebatmanActually, at one point, Napoleon and the Russian emperor had a very good relationship. I think he understood politics to some extent, but he did not understand the economy because the continental system did not work, and at the same time it was harming the French economy also.

[@tobago3679]

​​@herzog1857 I tend to agree with the good sir above you, I would point to the generalement strategy and management of the Iberian Penisula... almost worst than the Russian campaign by some accounts.

[@angloirishcad]

France was by far the largest European nation...its population dwarfed Britain's, so coalitions were necessary. And besides, most of the European autocracies were fragile and vulnerable. The British always beat the French when they met, either at land or sea.

[@rainmaker9300]

@@angloirishcad Well, there was that. Napoleon certainly placed quite many family members and friends on different thrones (nepotism much?). In a certain way understandable of course, makes it easier to keep a pan-European domain together when you have a bunch of client kingdoms. But yeah, also made their legitimacy as rulers bit dicey.

[@Sebastian_JP.]

Very good quality content as always, i hope to see more videos like this in the future

[@Yazolight]

Incroyable documentaire! Merci, et fais en d’autres stp!

[@adiborza4131]

The vandamme touch wass a genius mowe 😂😂

[@VladSharangovich]

History legends one of favourites KZbins!!!

[@EmperorDionx]

I bet you want him to fill your insides with his hot.....history knowledge

[@arielmichel4688]

Excelent analisis of this EPIC battle!!!!

[@peepothefrog]

Your Video are such High Quality with intense backround information you made me addicted to History not gonna lie !

[@CookieArcher]

Love it. Please do more of battle analyses like this! The battle of Königgratz for example, how it was a great showing of Austrian military incompetence.

[@timsilver777]

Wow thanks man, your passion for history saves us tons of time and educates us on history . Really really good work I should donate to you a lil just gotta go figure out how

[@SquareNoggin]

I gave straight to his paypal after his first video about the Hamas attack on Israel. It was of such a higher quality than anything anyone in the institutional media was producing at that time...

[@Scottx125Productions]

Don't just watch one guys videos and accept it as fact. Do your own research.

[@jamesgornall5731]

​@@Scottx125Productionsnormally id agree but been watching Alex since he started and he's very good. I have an MA in military history and hes better than most of my university lecturers ever were

[@historylegends]

Thank you! Your generosity helps the channel a lot @@SquareNoggin

[@TheSpritz0]

MY FRIEND- I JUST subscribed, you now ABSOLUTELY OWN the BEST description anywhere (better than the best books!!!) on the BATTLE OF QUATRE BRAS!!! There is NOTHING on KZbin as good as your video right here... BRAVO, you are to be congratulated- and I am a Veteran of 2 wars! 👏💯🎂🎊🎊🎊

[@Kajak80]

Excelent work! Many thanks

[@brandonloaiza7585]

U gotta post more bro. Once every two weeks ain’t enough. 👍👍

[@Smert_Vorogam12]

My grandfathers grandfathers grandfather fought at Waterloo and Quatre Bras as an Hussar in the 6th Hussars Dutch regiment 😀 very proud at him.

[@markbarnes9311]

Thankyou for another great history lesson, love these vids

[@wieczornepogawedki5720]

Excellent video. Pure facts.

[@coochykilla]

“If Berthier had been there, I would not have met this misfortune.”

[@psycho8927]

History legends son your not worthy of licking "wellys" boots.

[@sizif717]

Excellent video again, mate!

[@ilikechopin8112]

Great video, impressive passion and amount of information! 👏👏👏👏👏

[@G1Arduo]

This vid is such an eye-opener for me. Until now, I've always regarded Wellington to be the main guy who defeated Napoleon. It really sounds more like Bloucher and his tenacity to get back into the fight despite being let down by the British previously.

[@littlefluffybushbaby7256]

I think maybe you are bouncing from one particular 'spin' to another. It's more complicated than a movie or hour long video can show. We also bring a lot of our modern baggage with us when we look back on events. For instance, we are very used to the concept of nation states, but that's a relatively recent thing. At the time of Waterloo terms like France, Germany etc. didn't quite mean what they mean now. Some of these countries were still half a century away from being unified. For instance, French only became the official language of France in 1992 (although it's official use for documents goes way further back). Blucher was a Prussian. Napoleon was Corsican. Wellington was born in Dublin. talking about the Dutch or Belgians in 1815 wouldn't have quite meant what it does today. Many of the Germans at Waterloo had allegiance to the British crown. Ireland was part of Great Britain at the time, so Irish troops would have been considered British even if they'd come from Dublin. It's much more complicated than I'm saying, but what I'm trying to say is that it is complicated. It was a different era. The forces opposing Napoleon were a coallition, so in a sense Wellington was more like Eisenhower than Montgomery. Some of the troops in that coallition had previously fought for Napoleon. This was the period of transition from who you were was becoming defined by where you were living. rather than the reigning monarch or duke. Since britain had a lot of influence fgrom being invaded by the Normans (themselves decended from Vikings) and a lot of the English language is French, could we say Napoleon was defeated by the French? Ha ha. I also think anyone who has an interest in the battle is fully aware that it wasn't just Wellington and a few plucky Brits who defeated Napoleon. I think it's only people who haven't read about it that think that. Unfortunately, when people had an incorrect view of the battle and then realise the international nature of the battle they then swing to the opposite extreme and want to paint Wellington out of the picture, which is just as eroneous. Sometimes, no, most of the time, these things are viewed as strategy games and with a degree of fatalism, if X had only did this or Z made a fatal blunder here, when really it's hundereds of thousands of individuals with different motivations and leaders with incomplete knowledge of what's going on and their own flaws and agendas. Most things in life are random 'butterfy effects' that we rationalise afterwards into a narative. Sometimes you might get troops from an area cut and run, but in other circumstances they fight to the death, and it's rarely because of where they happened to have been born. Because we now have nation states people think what others (that happened to be born in the same place) did hundreds of years ago reflects on them so we get national heros and brave handlefuls of men who turned the tide. This is good for national myth building but usually it's a very shallow view of what actually happened. It's kind of why courts have defense and prosecution presenting views of the truth and a jury or judge basically guessing what really happened based on the evidence they've seen and heard. Sorry for the rant.

[@geoff3ry]

Waterloo explained , short version, every time Wellingtons subordinates took initiative, it b-benefited him ,as when Chase decided to ignore the order to uncover Quatre Bras , and every time Napoleon's subordinates took initiative it was a disaster , Like Guyot's promise to support Milhaud,that lead Ney to think Napoleon must have ordered the Guard cavalry to join the assault on Mont St Jean ridge ,

[@coling3957]

commanders picking the RIGHT subordinates... the French were heavily reliant on Napoleon.. without him they would be nothing.

[@teddypicker8799]

@@coling3957 Napoleon was the reason they lost so many wars, he didn't know when to pick his battles. The little corporal would have achieved nothing without being the only European major power to conscript and then "live off the land" rather than feed these conscripts

[@TheBranchez]

Awesome video mate! Although I very much like your videos on current topics I would very much like to see more of these kinds of videos. Especially set in Napoleonic Era. Cheers.

[@iratespartan13]

A fresh look at the Waterloo campaign, with thoughts on French options at each stage of the campaign. I have been critical of your analysis in the past, but this is outstanding stuff! Bravo!

[@varelion]

Thank you for this more hlolistic view of events around Napoleons last battles. The preludes of the Waterloo battle are often overlooked. Napoleon even planned to fool the Allies about his main direction. But due to a misunderstanding and treason this plan failed and the element of surprise was gone. Also I like you mentioning the many skirmishes and small battles that were fought between the Prussians and the French on the way to the north. Slomeone here on youtube made a video of it and I thought it was kind of fantasy. So many fights of spread Prussian batallions and corps on so many locations only to slow the French down. This reveals the real struggle of war the soldiers and commanders had to face.

[@teddypicker8799]

Waterloo was planned by Wellington for MONTHS. Napoleon was outfoxed by Wellington same as all the Marshalls sent to Spain

[@kaletovhangar]

Could you link up that about Skirmishes? I really am interested in rear guard actions of history. For example, battle of Shoengrabern by Bagration few weeks before Austerlitz where his 7,000 blunted the assault by up to 28,000 soldiers of Murat. Edit: Also Russian retreat during the 1812 campaign was not some cowardly run in front of Grande arme, but constant desperate fighting to buy time for main army to assemble. Many of those were even tactical Russian victories.

[@varelion]

@@kaletovhangar Sorry, I should have stored the video in my bookmarks and I can't find it even after 1 hour of searching. I only found the video of the failed deception of the route that the French army was about to take: Here, on youtube: "Waterloo, 1815 ⚔ The Truth behind Napoleon's final defeat" I keep on searching..I think it is not older than 3 years.

[@danny208YT]

I really like this series you're putting out. Everybody loves history

[@TheConfederate1863]

Really loved this video! Thank you ! ❤👍

[@gcoffey223]

Hell yes!! 58 mins of great information!!

[@edhage727]

Merveilleux mon vieux! Ça me fait pleurer de savoir que mes ancêtres se sont battu inutilement.

[@user-vf7en9uj5o]

Вероятно твоя бабушка сражалась с немцами в постели 🛌, за что позже ей сбрили волосы 🤣

[@jonshive5482]

Why did Napoleon lose at Waterloo? Let us count the ways: 1) His best staff officer, Marshal Alexandre Berthier, had either committed suicide, accidentally fallen from a window, or been pushed out by assassins in Bamberg, Bavaria on June 15. Apparently he'd had difficulty making up his mind about choosing to join Napoleon or stay loyal to Louis XVIII. 2) His best independent field commander, Marshal Louis Davout, who almost certainly would have done better than Ney at Quatre Bras on June 16, was instead assigned to the War Ministry. 3) Marshal D'Erlon's corps of 20,000 men was given conflicting orders by Soult, Ney and Napoleon on June 16 so never arrived at either Quatre Bras or Ligny, thus losing any chance of decisively beating Wellington's Anglo-Allied forces or Blucher's Prussians. 4) Napoleon didn't give Marshal Grouchy orders to pursue Blucher after Ligny until late on the morning ofJune 17. This order also had the effect of detaching Grouchy's huge corps of 33,000 men from his main army on the eve of battle at Waterloo. In the event Grouchy failed to prevent Blucher from assisting (or saving) Wellington at Waterloo and didn't rejoin Napoleon until it was too late. 5) The "diversionary" attack on Hougoumont atarting at 11 AM turned into a major engagement which sucked in the better part of a French corps while Wellington committed somewhat less. (Roberts and Uffindell don't give any figures for total Anglo-Allied troops committed. Wiki uses Alessandro Barbero's The Battle: A New History of Waterloo [2006] to come up with 14,000 and 12,000 respectively, the figures also given by HL in this presentation. Dunno what primary sources give for this info. Meanwhile Breakaway Games' manual for its rts wargame Waterloo: Napoleon's Last Battle [2001] has a battle description by Ben Knight which gives 13,000 French against 6,000 Anglo-Allies in total. Go figure. ) 6) D'Erlon's infantry assault on Wellington's center at 1 PM was inadequately supported by cavalry or artillery and got routed, thus failing to fix the enemy center for followup flank attacks. 7) Ney's rash cavalry assaults at 4 PM were unsupported by infantry and failed to dislodge or break any Anglo-Allied squares formed up to receive them. Most casualties inflicted on them were caused by French horse artillery which fired on the packed squares in between waves of ineffectual French cavalry charges. So by the time Old Boney launched his Last Hurrah with his Guard battalions at 7 PM he only had about one-third of them remaining; the rest being committed elsewhere, mainly to staunch Blucher's assaults on Plancenoit from the east. Poor staff work, belatedly splitting his army to vainly chase Prussians and failure to use combined arms at critical junctures wold seem to be the main errors that doomed L'Empereur at Waterloo. Dommage. C'est la vie...

[@teddypicker8799]

Main reason was the ineptitude of Napoleon and sending all his best marshals to get schooled by Wellington in portugal/spain

[@aachoocrony5754]

Good round up. Seems you did your homework. 👍

[@garymoore2535]

Going for a nap in the middle of a major battle probably didn't help either or set a particularly good example. 🥱💤💤💤

[@steveoc64]

All that, and some really bad dice rolls on the day. The French were doing well winning all their initiative rolls early in the game, and took control of the table during grand tactical move phases as expected. Then Blucher rolled a pair of sixes on turn 5 to complete his flank March early in the game, and Grouchy rolled a double one on the pursuit. Ney did well to put in an opportunity charge at the right moment in turn 7. .. but the supporting manoevre elements failed their activation rolls for 3 straight moves, leaving Ney running out of activation points, and needing increasingly higher scores to pass his morale checks. The bad dice rolls continued to get worse as the game went on, and got to the point where even a +10 modifier for OldGuard vs Dutch regulars wasnt enough to offset the mounting negative situation modifiers. It was a memorable game, and everyone involved said they would be up for a replay next summer break.

[@jonshive5482]

@@aachoocrony5754 Thanks. Of course we're all dependent on sources and I've got several, especially Andrew Roberts' Napoleon: A Life and Andrew Uffindell's The Eagle's Last Triumph: Napoleon's Victory at Ligny, June 1815. Well worth reading to say the least. Cheers!

[@andyhoefsmit2082]

The best and most truthfull account of the battle I have seen.

[@thehturt5480]

Exquisite work. Since I have an age and passion for History, many of these details of this battles were no stranger to me. And yet You manage to get new details and blend everything so harmoniously that in the end all I can say is - EXQUISITE 💯 YOU really have talent for this bcz You have passion for History. Many CONGRATULATIONS and hope You shall continue on this path. ☘️

[@desertshadowrevenge357]

Germans kicking french ass since always.

[@grouloulle]

50:08 On your map we can clearly see how the English are defending the R0 motorway. It looks like the French were trying to reach McDonald's and Mediamarkt.

[@Janonymusz]

Amazing video about the Waterloo campaing from the strategic perspective. I hope you will make furether videos about Napoleon's other campaigns! (Greetings from Hungary!)

[@marekspacek1211]

This was an absolute treat. 👍

[@louisarildkarv2787]

1:45 Of the british troops If I don't remember wrong. About 60% where Scottish.

[@historylegends]

According to the Order of Battle, 1/3 Irish, 1/3 Scottish and 1/3 English

[@snacks1184]

More Redcoats spoke German than English. The advantage of a Hanovarian King.

[@louisarildkarv2787]

​@@historylegends👍👍

[@youtubebane7036]

You're not a history nerd you're just and all around dork. Just kidding. I actually admire you and respect you for your honesty and your knowledge. God bless you my friend please keep up the good work. Thank you.

[@jimmydahand]

Great work bro

[@matriputra2624]

Brilliant! And brilliantly narrated!

[@Bomber_Fish]

Shout out to my man Devout for being the only one keeping it real.

[@samuelbarrett9403]

Just a jealous Frency!

[@Freedom2111]

Napoleon was sick that day. He never really made any mistakes, but his marshals and generals did. Grouchy would have made a big difference if he pursued the Prussians like he was supposed to. With Napoleon sick in his tent, Marshal Ney, who had been a great Marshal but was suffering from post-traumatic stress since the retreat from Moscow in 1812, charged the British squares without first breaking them up with cannon, a very basic mistake. And Napoleon wanted Maréchal de Camp to create a feint at Hougoumont so Wellington would send some of his forces over there, instead the French tried to take a well-defended wall for hours and lost many men in the attempt.

[@donaldduck4888]

Oh dear, the Napoleon was never wrong team out in force. He was in charge at Waterloo and he fought an utterly incompetent battle against a feeble Dutch / Hanoverian / Brunswick / Belgian army / second rate British army. And utterly screwed it up on the Prussian front.

[@fryertuck6496]

Ney didn't intentionally charge the British squares, he crested a hill that had the British squares on the other side and was caught out.

[@The_Ballo]

My God, all these centuries later and the Napoleon nuthugger battalion is still coping this hard.

[@jonshive5482]

@@donaldduck4888 No doubt at least partially true. He seems to have deferred to Marshal Ney, although both of them denied ordering the cavalry charges starting at 4 PM. His behavior beginning on the morning of June 17 does suggest he was considerably off form. For whatever reason(s) there's plenty of speculation but little hard evidence.

[@jonshive5482]

@@fryertuck6496 Yet the cavalry retreated, regrouped, and charged again several times. Apparently nobody at HQ was minding the store.

[@dansmith4077]

Great video thanks

[@folker44]

Nice video, thanks !

[@shadowbanned247]

Yesterday a guy asked me if I had seen the Prussians...I said no. I asked him for his name...Grouchy, he answered.

[@rudaventil7299]

I look out the window and see the entire battlefield where the Battle of Kulm 1813 took place. Napoleon was here not far from my house😀

[@johncutt8501]

Great video, hope to see same for other battles soon

[@cristiangeorge6039]

Broooo🎉🎉🎉 excited for this!!! Having popcorn tonight!!!

[@rubenlopezusa]

Lots of mistakes made by Napoleon at Waterloo, some of them started several days prior, changing orders constantly, attacking the British frontally, instead from the plain West of the current battle, logistics, organization, etc. His mind was elsewhere.

[@andrewpriestleyxyz]

I reckon the entire hundred days campaign was a mistake. He had no shot at winning the war, even if he had managed to defeat the British and Prussians at Waterloo.

[@rubenlopezusa]

@@andrewpriestleyxyz True. I think he acted the way he did based on desperation. And that's a bad advisor.

[@Some.cases.]

@@andrewpriestleyxyzwrong. The hundred days were a show of his genius. What are talking about? It was gourchy’s fault for not having a brain for initiation and independent thinking.

[@bigoodis]

He left his brain in Moscow. Don’t blame 😅

[@teddypicker8799]

He made mistakes constantly tbh, severely overrated compared to the undefeated Wellington who went on to be Prime Minister of the British empire. He was far too aggressive. He literally left Paris undefended and lost it the first time he got lost his empire

[@marclacey2263]

An hour of French sore-losership Your salt enhanced my enjoyment.

[@csk4j]

You have a talent for retelling history in an entertaining way..that is what makes rhe difference.

[@joshuaryan1946]

Simply brilliant!

[@Pole-vn2hn]

Can you do something similar for the battle of Poltava?

[@TOMCATnbr]

England have done at waterloo what they've done the entire Napoleonic era: fought battle with others blood, and in case of success, took all the credit and glory for it. Vive l'Empereur 🦅 vive la France 🇫🇷

[@MarieFirst]

They still do that today.

[@Byzantine-Revolt]

Nah the battle was decided before the Prussian entrance we won seethe Frenchie

[@fatpig8989]

​@@Byzantine-RevoltNapoleon was way more of a buck than the eternal anglos

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

Like Trafalgar and the Nile? Oh wait Britain was clever and always played to its strengths for the entire war and its main fighting force was the Royal Navy. Why throw away lives fighting on land when you can use the navy to blockade them, bleed their economy, and fund all their enemies. They weren't going to jeopardise their OP position in the world by 'playing fair' against the French.

[@Anakin_Sandy_High_Ground]

for example?@@MarieFirst

[@kashual]

Great video, would love to see more napoleonic content

[@landfish8039]

I love the detail in this video

[@lesniper4048]

Thx. For putting it in the right way. It still puzzles me how on earth you can leave out the story of the Prussians, units from other German states and from the Dutch/Belgian units. Amazing that even the movie Napoleon in 2023 did that. I have come to the same conclusion. The mastermind of the campaign against Napoleon was Blücher. History has presented the perfect script for a movie. But he also gets mostly ignored. If you look at the movies about Waterloo and then look at the loss numbers. One is surprised that the Prussians nearly had the same amount of losses than true British soldiers. Thx for putting it right that the heat of the battle was actually when the Prussians arrived. And also pointing out the important role of the Dutch, German legion and Hannoveranians... I also agree that Waterloo is actually not such an important battle. Others were more important. It just meant the end. But other battles like the Battle of Nations were much more important

[@lieutenantjp5252]

Bon je pense que tu es français, car je te suis depuis le début de la guerre en Ukraine ! Et je voulais juste te dire que tu fais un super taff vraiment, tu maitrises tes sujets et étant en fac d'histoire j'admire ton travail de recherche ! Voila continue ainsi et merci encore !

[@stone1er371]

Si je me trompe pas , notre hôte est Canadien Francophone

[@raymondnoel6053]

Un Québécois d'origine Européenne

[@grahamgoldie1577]

Majik stuff Alexandre. 👌

[@Henry_Jones]

500k+! Congtats!

[@ungeimpfterrusslandtroll7155]

Bet the Highlanders knew exactly they were shooting Belgians and not French. It's not often you get such an opportunity.

[@garymoore2535]

Outstanding, truly outstanding 😂😂😂🤣🤣🤣

[@teddypicker8799]

Waterloo was a tactical masterclass by Wellington. He'd been planning the little corporals demise here for weeks

[@kaletovhangar]

Eh, it was skillful delaying action, but it's no overstatement that it was "fighting the war by sitting on his ass". Yes, most of his army was 2nd rate troops, and with those you can hardly doo much else, but so were Napoleon's ones. Also, without Gneizenau's initiative, there wouldn't have been Prussian army joining him at Waterloo.

[@teddypicker8799]

​@@kaletovhangar The whole point was for Prussia to fight too though so idk why people make out they just happened to be nearby walking their dogs or something. Wellington chose the battlefield weeks before and still got the better of 80,000 french troops and 250 guns with only 50,000 (20,000 kept far back in reserve in case Prussia didn't come in time) and 150 guns.

[@kaletovhangar]

@teddypicker8799 Point is that Velington fought good delaying action at Vaterloo, but without Prussians coming to his aid, he would have been trampled over by 7pm. Also, it was still dubious if the Prussians will reach him or will they be able to come to his aid. That means that his entire plan hang somewhat upon the shoestring. Don't get me wrong, I do consider Velington quite a skillful general, but he wasn't really that brilliant as he is made to be.

[@teddypicker8799]

​@@kaletovhangar The prussians arrived at 19:00 dude. They were near enough by 5pm to make their presence felt. In another 2 hours it would be dark and ended inconclusively.

[@teddypicker8799]

@@kaletovhangar Also hate to repeat but Prussia was part of Wellingtons plans. They weren't there by accident going for evening stroll

[@mikei7498]

You are a true gem on the tubes

[@LUCASJACOTHEAWSOMEkinda]

This is a good video thank you brother!