Customer Reviews

History of the Waterloo Campaign (Napoleonic Library)

5 star:		(0)
4 star:		(2)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

Siborne's History, first published in the 1840's, has stood the test of time and remains a standard text on the 1815 Campaign, and with good reason.

His work was controversial from the day of its publication and still attracts controversy today. Despite claims to the contrary made by some on its publication and others in recent books, Siborne conducted very careful research into the subject, consulted not only all the published authorities available, but conducted correspondence with many leading survivors of the battle and campaign. This correspondence has been preserved and can be viewed in the British Library today.

Siborne based his research on Dutch and German authorities. There are clear indications that he referred to the works by Löben-Sels, Damitz, Plotho, etc. He conducted correspondence with the Prussian General Staff and made every effort to write a balanced History.

A number of letters from participating British officers appeared in the "United Services Journal". These were often complaints about Siborne's description of their unit's participation in the Battle of Waterloo. Reference to Siborne's unpublished "Correspondence" shows that he made every effort to establish the credibility of his witnesses' statements and that his version was generally the more likely. He did not make many friends here.

The Prussian General Staff however took a more positive approach to his History, writing an extensive review of it in the "Militair-Wochenblatt".

Certain members of the British establishment, notably the Duke of Wellington, took a dislike to Siborne, whom they regarded as "too pro-Prussian" for their liking. Certain of Wellington's associates, particularly the Earl of Ellesmere, using false information provided by the Duke, conducted a smear campaign against Siborne. The full story of this denigration has yet to be told.

In short, Siborne's work is a classic for very good reasons.

Siborne's history provides one of the most detailed accounts of Waterloo from the English perspective, and is the must-read book for anyone with a serious interest in the battle and campaign. I emphasize campaign, because the book also describes the often ignored aftermath of Waterloo, when the French tried to hold off the invading Prussian and and Anglo-Allied armies.

This book contains a wealth of information not found in the general Waterloo histories, including an analysis of Napoleon's actions that lead you to believe his campaign was lost on the first day. It also describes in fascinating detail the repulse of the final Old Guard assault, and the ensuing retreat of the French. While most histories lead you to believe that the repulse turned into an instant rout, Siborne instead paints the action after the Guard's defeat as a series of continual Allied attacks and French defensive actions.

Having said that, this is not the book for first-time Waterlooeans. Siborne's writing style is 18th-century florid at its worst. The prose is truly difficult to dig through at times. Also, the wealth of detail may be too much for readers not terribly familar with the battle. Readers not familiar with Waterloo should start with one of the more accessible histories, such as David Howarth's "Waterloo: A Near Run Thing," David Chandler's "Waterloo: The Hundred Days," or the Osprey series book on the battle. Siborne's work then provides an excellent next step for those wishing to delve further into this ever intriguing battle.