There's been an interesting suggestion on social media that the French have been written out of the Waterloo narrative. Personally, and this is just my opinion, I find it difficult to see the rationale for this claim, though I think the idea is that Anglo-centricism has downplayed the French narrative. (Even so such an argument completely ignores a wide array of books on the French perspective, most notably those of Andrew Field). Nonetheless, there are no doubt key elements of the French experience that ARE all too often forgotten, so: what are they, and how do they rewrite our understanding of the Waterloo campaign?
top of page
bottom of page
At the risk of blowing my own trumpet, might I suggest that people have a look at my 2016 book, Napoleon, France and Waterloo: the Eagle Rejected? So far as I am aware, this is the only work in English that looks at the crucial issue of the French home front in 1815, this last being a subject that, so far as I can see, has also gone pretty much undiscussed in France. That it can be bettered, I am quite sure, but until someone sits down and produces something else, it is all there is. Yet it is precisely the reaction of the French people and army to the return of Napoleon that is the element of the French perspective on Waterloo that is most in need of discussion: whether it is in the pages of Mauduit, Houssaye or Lachouque, it is all too easy to read up on their perspective on the battle.