From your comments on here, from how you've written in your books, it's very clear you admire The Duke of Wellington as a General/CO.
I am perhaps in a serious minority here that would say he was actually a better General/Tactician than Napoleon. I appreciate how strange that statement seems. I realise it makes me look completely foolish............however.............
When I think of the columns attacking, it puts me in mind of cannon fodder. A tactic based on the front ranks effectively 'committing suicide' for a man they absolutely loved. And whilst I accept it was effective and it was how battles were fought in that era, I'm really sorry it does strike me that Napoleon almost had a "life is cheap" attitude. But also, a General like Wellington quickly realised that as long as his men stood, platoon fire would see off those massive columns, Of course Napoleon was a massive advocate for Artillery and he used that effectively.
But if I were told now I was going to be placed back in time as a new recruit (I have a French surname) and I was told I had to choose between fighting for Wellington or Napoleon. Regardless of the outcome of the battle, I'd feel more confident of living if I chose fighting for Wellington.
Taking away your knowledge of the outcomes of each battle. From your comments on here, from how you've written in your books, it's very clear you admire The Duke of Wellington as a General/CO.
I am perhaps in a serious minority here that would say he was actually a better General/Tactician than Napoleon. I appreciate how strange that statement seems. I realise it makes me look completely foolish............however.............
When I think of the columns attacking, it puts me in mind of cannon fodder. A tactic based on the front ranks effectively 'committing suicide' for a man they absolutely loved. And whilst I accept it was effective and it was how battles were fought in that era, I'm really sorry it does strike me that Napoleon almost had a "life is cheap" attitude. But also, a General like Wellington quickly realised that as long as his men stood, platoon fire would see off those massive columns, Of course Napoleon was a massive advocate for Artillery and he used that effectively.
But if I were told now I was going to be placed back in time as a new recruit (I have a French surname) and I was told I had to choose between fighting for Wellington or Napoleon. Regardless of the outcome of the battle, I'd feel more confident of living if I chose fighting for Wellington.
Which one would you choose? Taking away your knowledge of the outcomes of each battle.
Lee
I do admire him very much and, like you, I’d rather serve the Duke than the Emperor! That said remember that Wellington never fought campaigns on the sheer scale of Napoleon. That isn’t to diminish him; his handling of the Peninsular Campaign was masterly, but he was not running an empire at the same time, nor was he faced with a multiplicity of enemies on different fronts. Perhaps the major difference is that Napoleon was, without doubt, addicted to war. He loved it. The Duke did not. War, for him, was a means to secure a peace (though only on terms advantageous to the British). He also had fewer men than the Emperor, and knew replacements were scarce, so he fought (on the whole) more cautiously. Comparisons, as we’re often told, are odious, but they were both great soldiers, yet I think the Duke was probably the better one.