This is just a supposition of mine, and very probably has been said before. When so much is written on a subject you have to think everything has been said. In fact I believe the exact account, with the correct answer to every debated point exsists. Unfortunately its scattered accross 1000 books.
If you look at the maps of the two battles, they have a very similiar topography, including some similiarity of where buildings/strongpoints where. Waterloo is just on a larger scale. The pattern of attacks and defense were also similiar, sometimes involving the identical troops, in the same roles. It was also often Ney vs Wellington as far as battlefield tactics went.
Some examples are:
- The woods on the right, being the right limit of fighting and being fought over incessently. The combattants were very much the same, being British Guards, Nassauers vs Reilles troops again. The Bossu wood fight at Quatre Bras becomes the Hougemont wood fight at Waterloo.
- A structure stood a few hundrend yds forward of the British center and divided ther battle in halves & was taken by the french in time; A two storied house at Quatre bras & La Haye Saint Farm at Waterloo.
- To the right of this structure the french assaulted mainly with cavalry, unsupported. Some identical troops replaying their roles here were some French Cuirassiers, Hawkett's British brigade, the Brunswickers. Hawketts Brigade had some temporary retreats in both battles.
- To the left the french mainly used mass infantry assaults altered with artillery barrages. Some repeat troops here were Packs and Kempts Brigades, and Bylant's Dutch Belgians.
- The left terminated in villages or farm groups and saw only secondary fighting.
- In both battles the Prussians & more french were 'out there' beyond the left flank.
My supposition is that the french were practically doomed to defeat before they even started the Battle of Waterloo. If you use the same unsuccessful tactics against the same troops, just two days later, most soldiers will be demoralized and fight much more conservatively. It explains the tendency of the French to break up into skirmishing groups (and taking more cover) after first attempts failed. They didn't think they could break those British lines. Conversely, the victors of the first battle, will even have more confidence in their leaders and tactics. It explains some of the tenacity, in a horrendous killing ground, of the British and allies. The results of the fighting on the British front were much the same. The arrival of the Prussians and the utter collaspe of the French was different of course.
If you look at the maps of the two battles, they have a very similiar topography, including some similiarity of where buildings/strongpoints where. Waterloo is just on a larger scale. The pattern of attacks and defense were also similiar, sometimes involving the identical troops, in the same roles. It was also often Ney vs Wellington as far as battlefield tactics went.
Some examples are:
- The woods on the right, being the right limit of fighting and being fought over incessently. The combattants were very much the same, being British Guards, Nassauers vs Reilles troops again. The Bossu wood fight at Quatre Bras becomes the Hougemont wood fight at Waterloo.
- A structure stood a few hundrend yds forward of the British center and divided ther battle in halves & was taken by the french in time; A two storied house at Quatre bras & La Haye Saint Farm at Waterloo.
- To the right of this structure the french assaulted mainly with cavalry, unsupported. Some identical troops replaying their roles here were some French Cuirassiers, Hawkett's British brigade, the Brunswickers. Hawketts Brigade had some temporary retreats in both battles.
- To the left the french mainly used mass infantry assaults altered with artillery barrages. Some repeat troops here were Packs and Kempts Brigades, and Bylant's Dutch Belgians.
- The left terminated in villages or farm groups and saw only secondary fighting.
- In both battles the Prussians & more french were 'out there' beyond the left flank.
My supposition is that the french were practically doomed to defeat before they even started the Battle of Waterloo. If you use the same unsuccessful tactics against the same troops, just two days later, most soldiers will be demoralized and fight much more conservatively. It explains the tendency of the French to break up into skirmishing groups (and taking more cover) after first attempts failed. They didn't think they could break those British lines. Conversely, the victors of the first battle, will even have more confidence in their leaders and tactics. It explains some of the tenacity, in a horrendous killing ground, of the British and allies. The results of the fighting on the British front were much the same. The arrival of the Prussians and the utter collaspe of the French was different of course.
