|
Waterloo
Pete & Neil.
Most people who have pretentions to greatness are vain - as you know you you hear with Patton, Monty even Rommel. Pete I can't agree the view collated by Siborn is twisted - but I would agree it panders to British sensiblities. One of my pet interests in Waterloo is the period between the end of the Cavalry attacks and that of the Imperial Guard - I still don't think modern historians have got it right. This was the real moment of crisis -this is when there was a moment of disorder in Halkett's brigade and not is as is so often claimed: the result of the attack of the Imperial Guard (I know for the purists the Middle Guard). In my view, this notion panders to French sensibilities, that the Old Imortals could not be turned back so easily. A sort of consolation prize.
On matters WW1, being an ex-Tank soldiers, I always feel that Bean and those who seized his legacy, rather unfairly blame the tanks for the disaster of the First Bullecourt. Bean would have it that the Aussie's broke into the Hindenberg line in spite of the tanks, but I once read the full German divisional history reference the attack - which Bean only selectively quotes - and this was of the opinion that it was the tanks that caused the break in.
Must rush as always
Russ
|