Was the Battle of Berlin more significant than Kursk or Stalingrad? I don't think anybody bothers asking that question - it's obvious that Kursk was more important in deciding the war. Similarly, Waterloo's significance has gotten a little out of hand. By the time it happened, Napoloeon's project was completely doomed.
You don't have to be a historian to know 1815 is an almighty milestone
- Thread starter Blackleaf
- Start date
Waterloo was very significant. Boney's defeat at the hands of the British ended French dominance over continental Europe; led to Boney standing down as French Emperor; and led to his exile on the British island of St Helena, where he died.
Not even close.
We actually had a long and lively discussion about that exact question awhile back.
And the brits took way more credit than deserved.
The arrival of Blucher and the Prussians on the French right flank finished the matter that day.
In fact, the OPPOSITE is true.
The British don't get ENOUGH credit nowadays. Most of the wallies who talk about the Battle of Waterloo side with the French and Napoleon and think he was a top bloke who could do no wrong and they ignore the teachings of the most respected historians who say that the British had Waterloo won before the Prussians - who, when they didn't have the British fighting alongside them, were defeated by the French just two days before - turned up, thanks to their constant ability to keep repelling wave after wave of French attacks and standing their ground. Away from left-wing dominated discussion forums (as most are, for some reason) and left-wing media, respected historians who have actually spent many years studying the Battle of Waterloo will say that the British had Waterloo won just as the Prussians belatedly arrived on the field.
These wallies who see Boney as some sort of hero who was only defeated by the evil, baby-eating Brits, who thwarted Napoleon's attempts to impose freedom and democracy and goodwill on the peoples of Europe, thanks to the Prussians are the same wallies who swallow the Blackadder narrative of WWI history hook, line and sinker, and believe that Serbia, or even Britain, was responsible for starting WWI and that Germany was entirely blameless.
That'll be the same Prussians who were defeated by the Frogs just two days before, when they didn't have the British fighting alongside them. On the same day as that Prussian defeat, the British defeated the French in another battle elsewhere.
The Brits... on that same day fought a battle at Quatre Bras. The Brits left the field of battle to the French and retreated north to Waterloo.
LMAO... brits are such dullards.
Blucher and the Prussians were the true victors of Waterloo. Heck, a large portion of the British forces were made up of other nations... as usual.
"Give me night... or give me Blucher"- The Duke of Wellington at Waterloo
LMAO... brits are such dullards.
Blucher and the Prussians were the true victors of Waterloo. Heck, a large portion of the British forces were made up of other nations... as usual.
"Give me night... or give me Blucher"- The Duke of Wellington at Waterloo
Which the British won.
No, they didn't.
The British won the Battle of Quatre Bras and then they wanted to go to the aid of the Prussians at the Battle of Ligny. The French prevented this from happening and so, without British help, the Prussians lost the battle.
After learning of that defeat, the British then had to retreat further away from the Prussian forces, who themselves were on the run from the French. Napoleon then followed the British to Waterloo, where the British held firm for hours before the Prussians turned up, repelling wave after wave of French attacks. Napoleon's forces were probably on the brink of defeat just as Blucher and his men arrived.
Wellington didn't say that. I've already pointed out that that's a myth.
Give me night...or give me Blucher- The Duke of Wellington at Waterloo
As I said.... the Prussians won the Battle of Waterloo.
As I said.... the Prussians won the Battle of Waterloo.