FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501  
502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   >>  
me square, thought they were Donzelot's men, who certainly attacked there. Siborne, seemingly on the strength of Macready's statement, says that part of the Guards' column diverged thither: but this is unlikely. Is it credible that the Guards, less than 4,000 strong, should have spread their attacks over a quarter of a mile of front? Was not the column the usual method of attack? I submit, then, that my explanation of the Guard attacking in hollow oblongs, formed in two chief columns, harmonizes the known facts. See Petit's "Relation" in "Eng. Hist. Rev.," April, 1903.] [Footnote 524: Janin, p. 45.] [Footnote 525: Bertrand at St. Helena said he _heard_ Michel utter these words (Montholon, vol. iii., ch. iv.).] [Footnote 526: Maitland's "Narrative," p. 222. Basil Jackson, who knew Gourgaud well at St. Helena, learnt from him that he could not finish his account of Waterloo, "as Napoleon could never decide on the best way of ending the great battle: that he (Gourgaud) had suggested no less than six different ways, but none were satisfactory" ("Waterloo and St. Helena," p, 102). Gourgaud's "Journal" shows that Napoleon blamed in turn the rain, Ney, Grouchy, Vandamme, Guyot, and Soult; but he ends--"it was a fatality; for in spite of all, I should have won that battle."] [Footnote 527: "Lettres inedites de Napoleon."] [Footnote 528: Gourgaud, "Journal inedit de Ste. Helene," vol. ii., p. 321, small edit.] [Footnote 529: Lucien, "Mems.," vol. iii., p. 327.] [Footnote 530: Stuart's despatch of June 28th, "F.O.," France, No. 117; Gneisenau to Mueffling, June 27th, "Passages," App.] [Footnote 531: Croker ("Papers," vol. iii., p. 67) had this account from Jaucourt, who had it from Becker.] [Footnote 532: Ollech, pp. 350-360. The French cavalry success near Versailles was due to exceptional circumstances.] [Footnote 533: Maitland's "Narrative," pp. 23-39, disproves Thiers' assertion that Napoleon was not expected there. Maitland's letter of July 10th to Hotham ("F.O.," France, No. 126, not in the "Narrative") ends: "It appears to me from the anxiety the bearers express to get away, that they are very hard pressed by the Government at Paris." Hotham's instructions of July 8th to Maitland were most stringent. See my Essay in "Napoleonic Studies" (1904).] [Footnote 534: The date of the letter disproves Las Cases' statement that it was written _after_ his second interview with Maitland, and _in consequence of
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   477   478   479   480   481   482   483   484   485   486   487   488   489   490   491   492   493   494   495   496   497   498   499   500   501  
502   503   504   505   506   507   508   509   510   511   512   >>  



Top keywords:
Footnote
 

Maitland

 

Gourgaud

 

Napoleon

 
Narrative
 

Helena

 
letter
 

Hotham

 
account
 
disproves

Waterloo

 

France

 

statement

 

Journal

 

column

 
Guards
 
battle
 

Helene

 

Passages

 
Croker

despatch

 

Stuart

 

Mueffling

 

inedit

 

Lucien

 

Lettres

 

Gneisenau

 

Papers

 
inedites
 
Versailles

instructions

 
stringent
 

Government

 

pressed

 

Napoleonic

 

interview

 

consequence

 
written
 

Studies

 
express

success

 

cavalry

 

fatality

 
French
 
Becker
 

Jaucourt

 

Ollech

 

exceptional

 

circumstances

 

appears