HistWar
HistWar (English zone) => History & Tactics => Discussion démarrée par: General_Chasse le 12 avril 2010, 16:12:18 pm
-
At Waterloo, the Allies occupied Hougoumont during their deployment, and the French army kept going at it, to conquer it, losing quite a lot in the process.
Why? Hougoumont was appearantly a chateau with an exit to the rear, not an easy attack base - I'd say, just keep those Brits in there and focus on annihilating the rest of the Allied army. Once you stay out of shooting range from Hougoumont, how useful is it then? So why conquer it?
-
Maybe to control it and use as a strong point to turn out the British right flank.
However, another point should be, attack the castle to let Wellington move reserves to his right and then smash the left to let Wellington flee far away from Blucher turning Welly's left. (In HistWar terms a diversion to make a deploy elsewhere ;))
When we talk about Waterloo, in my opinion, we must take in count that Napoleon did not see all the British Army, for it was deploied just behind the hills.
-
Wasn't it sitting almost directly in the way of the French left flank?
-
Yes it's true Hougoumont was on the left flank.
But why was it important? There were hundreds of men inside; why couldn't the French just keep them inside? Soldiers inside the chateau are not soldiers on the battlefield. Just stay out of musket range when near Hougoumont?
Also, I understood there were no significant batteries at the Hougoumont position striking the battlefield. There was 1 main gate, so allied soldiers entering or leaving Hougoumont could be checked. So why spend all the effort of conquering it?
-
As far as I know Napoleons main battle plan was to crush the British center. The attack against Hougoumont should have been a diversion, forcing Wellington to send more and more troops from his center in support of his right wing, thereby weakening his center. Wellington however didn't respond this way.
-
So Napoleon/Reille/Jerome kept sending in troops to lure Wellington away from the center?
But he didn't, so the diversion unintentionally became a main action?
-
So Napoleon/Reille/Jerome kept sending in troops to lure Wellington away from the center?
I think so.
But he didn't, so the diversion unintentionally became a main action?
The reason for the serious fighting for Hougoumont was mainly the topography of this area. A mere diversion was difficult, because it was not possible for the French to just stand in front of the walls without trying to storm them.
-
As far as I know Napoleons main battle plan was to crush the British center. The attack against Hougoumont should have been a diversion, forcing Wellington to send more and more troops from his center in support of his right wing, thereby weakening his center. Wellington however didn't respond this way.
You are totally correct Orendel! - a diversion was his idea - to make Wellington weaken his centre - but Napoleon and his subordinates never antisipated that the fight would be consuming so many troops for the French side - and as we all know Wellington refused quite early in the battle to send further reinforcememts to Hougoumont, because he knew about the weakness of his centre! - but the actions of Hougoumont can only be explained by the big picture - i.e. the late start of the battle - the bad terrain, the bad condition of the field - and of course the Scottish/English stubborness :mrgreen:
For years - decades, maybe even centuries historians have asked themselves exactly the same question:
the diversion unintentionally became a main action?
and the answers are sometimes very different, sometimes quite the same!
If anyone suggests a flanking maneuver to the left of Hougoumont, he should always keep in mind that Wellington had a detachment stationed there further to the rear-left! (watched from the French side!)
CvC
-
Sorry for my bad english.
Hello.
Napoleon dunno Hougoumont was a position so hardly to be taken.*
Thats why he sent our better corps with the better french brigade(light brigade Baudouin) in this attack of "diversion".
This error was fatal and france lost the battle cuz this corps(I) stay fighting here all the day.
Drouet d'erlon or jerome bonaparte were really awesome in this battle.
*Before the battle a captain of the french guard make a reconnaissance in Hougoumont for see was that.
He said to napoleon : "only a farm and some little woods..."
Pathetic.
Salutations.
-
So again, understanding correctly:
Wellington protected his right with Hougoumont, and instructed his men to keep it at all costs.
Napoleon didn't know Hougoumont was hard to take, and he sent one of his best corps to try and take it, with the hope that Wellington would weaken his center.
Wellington didn't take the bait, so the French kept on going at Hougoumont.
About the latter, Jerome declared that his bro instructed him to capture Hougoumont at all costs. Didn't Jerome know he was working as a diversion? Did Napoleon inform him of this?
Was fighting for Hougoumont the actual diversion, or capturing Hougoumont? Would Wellington have responded if Hougoumont was captured, since he wanted it protected at all cost?
Aah all those questions...
-
Ill try precise.
Yea, was really the orders to Jerome:
"Attack of diversion against Hougoumont, dont use all yur division, dont risk heavy lots".
Why Jerome and D'Erlon dont said anything to Napoleon? Cuz thy were afraid? maybee.
How said to the Imperor :
"Our attack failed totaly, thats a disaster, our losses are phenomenals".........................
So thy said nothing to Napoleon during the battle.
But its important consider this fact:
For Napoleon the diversion wasnt ONLY take Hougoumont.
For him Hougoumont wasnt so hard to take. The orders were to attack Hougoumont and AFTER Hougoumont, and so fix lots of regiments of the english troops in this sector.
Thats why Jerome try take Hougoumont as a crazy man.Cuz the attack of Hougoumont was just the beginning of the attack of diversion and not the ended!!!!!
So Jerome was afraid to said to tell to Napoleon: "I take nothing and the english army hold me with so little troops"
............................;
Well Byng and the english guard need help Hougoumont but wasnt so hard for Wellington.
He can uses 10% of this army for hold 30 % of the french army.....................
What a so nice "attack of diversion"..............
Salutations (and sorry again Shakespeare! ;))
-
Villeneuve, I appreciate your marvelous attempt at English, you got your point over well. I think it's pretty well acknowledged that from a tactical standpoint Hougoumont was a French disaster, Wellington must not have believed his luck. Here is Wellington for the first time in his life facing the Emperor himself, watching a very second rate French tactical battle plan.
One Brigade could have pinned down the defenders there, so releasing 12,000 men sorely needed by the Corps.
Maybe this topic belongs in with the "Waterloo who was to blame"
-
Definitely. Jerome got way out of hand. But then maybe that was a good thing for Napoleon. Stuff him up and kept him occupied for a while. I heard a comment from someone a week or so ago that strongpoints and villages filled with the enemy were simply attacked because they "that is where the enemy is". Modern warfare theory is to block and bypass such threat or danger zones. I have replayed Waterloo where I allocated a few batteries to shoot the farm and bypassed it. I won that battle. If I was forced to use at least 2 divisions on the farm, it may have been different.
-
War depot David, I've done the same thing too, numerous times. I've done it in the Talonsoft & FOW series and it turns the flank every time. However hindsight and Monday morning quarterbacking, don't win battles on the day. What mistakes would we have made if present on the field that day?
-
Of course, hindsight doesn't mean anything.
I wasn't thinking about, what if Hougoumont was pinned down by just a few soldiers - but I am more interested in: why did they decide to take it? What was the reasoning? What made the Emperor think: we gotta have the chateau?
Similarly, why was Wellington so keen on keeping it?
Villeneuve implies it's for the diversion - and that might imply that Wellington kept his soldiers there to keep Hougoumont as a bait?
-
General, I agree with you, it's the only thing that makes any sense.
-
It would also be an explanation on why Wellington didn't send in more troops to the Chateau, even when requested.
-
I guess Jerome and D'Erlon should of used there initiative.
Nap wants us to take that building so we can do the div attacks he wants us to do
So as far as i can tell they go all out for cause they want to follow there orders and do those div attacks
rather than coming up with an alternative way to do deal with the Houg and still be able to do those attacks instead of wasting there reserves and most of all time
-
First of all, great thoughts, Villeneuve. Thanks for writing in my native language and, I regret that I don't read or speak French.
I salute you.
Second, a possible theory with regard to why Hougemont was not by-passed instead of attacked: under the doctrines of that period of war, it was very bad to allow an enemy force in good order to get behind your own front lines. So, if Hougemont were by-passed, that would leave a good number of enemy troops behind French lines.
I realize that Hougemont could have been sealed off and besieged and by-passed at the same time, so, my theory is only speculation, because it is not an obvious reason why the direct attack occurred.
-
I am reading Castiglione (1796) battle and noting very similar to Waterloo.
Massena a Augerau (front attack) at Waterloo Reille and d'Erlon.
At Castiglione Massena a Augerau make a false attack (maneuver go back) , to attract enemy from original defence,at Waterloo perhaps attack to Hougomont for to have the same effect...
But at Waterloo i do not see flank forces (to surround the enemy ..strange) usual for Napo,only Rellie and d'Erlon,why?
At Castiglione Despinois flank attack on the left and Fiorella on the right.
-
The Emperor did many strange things that day. However he stated to Soult that the attack on Hougoumont was to be a Diversion to draw forces from the Allied Center, as we now know Wellington refused to reinforce his beleaguered Right Flank, in short he didn't fall for the ruse. Then somehow the Diversion developed into an all day bitter battle. Who knows, but there is no battle in history that has come under as much scrutiny and "What ifs" :mrgreen:
Some time ago we had a fascinating debate on Waterloo here http://www.histwar.org/forum/index.php/topic,4521.0.html
-
Yes,very interesting,thank.
I have to translate and read for a day or two.
-
There is an interesting discussion of the battle for Hougoumont chateaux which contains many contemporary illustrations, old photographs of Hougoumont 1880s-1900s, present day photos, 1795 maps and first person witness accounts from the French side of the battle:
Hougoumont. Waterloo 1815. Les carnet de la Campagne No 1.
Editions de la Belle alliance1999 .Coppens. B. Courcelle. P. 87pgs (A4 size) colour illustrations.
(The book is in French). From the evidence the authors argue persuasively the following points:
1) From Napoleon’s positions on the battlefield the combination of the wood and the topography completely hid the chateaux and farm of Hougoumont from view.
2) The contemporary maps did not show the chateaux but indicated a small hamlet at Hougoumonts position.
3) The generals who were sent out to reconnoitre the British position on the morning of the battle to see if there were any redoubts or fortified positions failed to report that behind the wood was a complex of fortified buildings: General Haxo of the engineers reported he had seen no trace of fortification; he missed the barricade thrown across the road at la haie saint and he had not seen what was behind the wood at Hougoumont. Lavaasseaur (Ney’s aide de camp charged with reconnoitring) also failed to check out what was behind the wood.
The authors conclude on p21 “It seems, in the light of the documents gathered here, that neither Napoleon nor his generals had any knowledge of the terrible obstacle which was hidden behind the Hougoumont wood” (my translation).
They go on : “If one accepts the idea that Napoleon was ignorant of the existence of a fortified Hougoumont one has to agree that he hadn’t ordered a diversionary attack on this chateaux. Then his plan of battle becomes more clear”…
They go on to argue persuasively that it is a myth that a diversionary attack was ordered on Hougoumont as part of a plan to force Wellington to reinforce his flank and deplete his centre where the decisive blow would be struck. They argue that the plan was to follow a massive bombardment of the centre from the grand battery with a crushing central attack led by 1st corps D’erlon on the right of the Brussels road (with left echelon advanced) supported by 2nd corps Reille on the left of the Brussels road (with his right echelon advanced). Jerome on the far left of the French line was to move to cover the woods in front of him and protect the flank from any attack. The orders from Soult to Ney and thence via Lavavasseaur to Reille and Jerome caused confusion by the way they were written and partly by the personal animosities between Soult and Ney. Lavasseaur communicated the orders to Jerome first and then along the line. Jerome misunderstood and attacked through the wood only to be surprised by what was on the other side. (this also explains why the French were so slow to bring up artillery against Hougoumont chateaux). Once committed, Jerome refused to give up and more and more troops were sucked into the futile firefight.
-
Thanks Nix, that sheds more light on a very curious day :!: :!: :!:
-
Thank Nix.
A good idea was great battery that day,but with english in reverse slope with few result.
-
There are not great ideas for Napo at Waterloo,many errors etc.
But the true point of question for me is "only agaist Wellington , Napo would win,or not?"
Because if yes "Napo anyway fight a right battle and should be acquitted"
if not errors very big.
Prussians,for me, were only a random event of fate.(the faults are only of Grouchy)
-
Wellington would not have fought at Waterloo if he had thought the prussians would not arrive: He asked Blucher on the 17th if he could send at least 1 prussian corps which could arrive to support him and Blucher said he guarenteed they would arrive. So Wellington decided to stand in defence at Mont St Jean...Even so, as Wellington said "it was a near run thing".... If Wellington had not been on the battlefield would the Allies have lost? Wellington himself thought so and said as much after the battle and he was probably correct. He was more actively involved with organising the defense than Napoleon was in organising the attack on the day....and that told.