Napoleon's Battle at Waterloo: The Impact of a Battalion of Troops

Napoleon Bonaparte is often praised for his tactical genius, but even the greatest of commanders can be plagued by oversight. At the pivotal Battle of Waterloo in 1815, Napoleon had an army of 70,000 men, but his lack of additional forces, such as an extra battalion of troops, likely decided the outcome. This essay delves into the strategic implications of such a simple yet crucial military asset and why its absence could have altered the course of history.

The Strategic Importance of a Battalion

A battalion, on average, comprises approximately 500-700 soldiers. While this may seem like a sizeable unit, it is often insufficient to make a significant impact in major battles. Infantry regiments, whether light infantry or grenadiers, were the backbone of Napoleon's army.

On the day of Waterloo, Napoleon needed a larger force to bolster his army. His Chief of Staff, Marshal Louis-Nicolas Davout, and later Marshal Marc Antoine émile de Soult, proposed recalling part of Marshal Grouchy's forces to reinforce the main army. Soult specifically suggested that Napoleon could have bolstered his force with an additional 10,000 infantrymen, thus gaining a 20-battalion advantage. Unfortunately, Napoleon rejected this advice, citing the strategic tasks assigned to Grouchy. This decision proved critical, as it would have significantly altered the outcome of the battle.

The Battle of Waterloo: A Tactical Overview

The Battle of Waterloo was a grueling and challenging encounter. Despite Wellington's valiant defense, the French forces struggled to penetrate the British and allied lines. The terrain assisted the defensive efforts, creating a formidable challenge for any attacker.

As the French forces made progress, they encountered unexpected reinforcements from the Prussians, led by Field Marshal Blücher. This event allowed Wellington to shorten his defensive line, effectively neutralizing the last infantry attack by the French. The Guard, once invincible, faltered in their final assault, leading to a monumental collapse of the French army.

By the end of the battle, Napoleon found himself with a minimal presence in his own defensive units. The Old Guard, which had been his elite force, was reduced to a single battalion of light infantry as a protection unit, and two battalions as reserves. Neither were committed to the fray. The defeat was total, with the French army abandoning their weapons and fleeing in disarray, right through the British gun lines and the Old Guard.

Myth vs. Reality: The Legend of MOT DE CHAMBORD

Historical accounts often romanticize the events leading to Napoleon's defeat. The myth of the MOT DE CHAMBORD, the last stand of the Old Guard led by General Lauren de Grouchy, has been widely depicted in literature and films, but it is far from the truth.

The Old Guard’s soldiers, under relentless artillery fire and overwhelming numbers, would have been unable to resist for long. The term "MOT DE CHAMBORD" is a legend that fails to reflect the true nature of the battle's end. In reality, the Old Guard, as well as the remaining French troops, disintegrated and fled the battlefield in disorder. The belief in a last stand of heroes is simply a romanticized narrative that overlooks the harsh realities of battlefield conditions.

In conclusion, the absence of an additional battalion of troops at Waterloo likely played a pivotal role in Napoleon's defeat. Had Napoleon accepted the strategic advice from Soult and Davout, the course of the battle and, potentially, history itself might have been vastly different.