Читать книгу The Battle of Waterloo - John Codman Ropes - Страница 6

The view given above of Napoleon’s plan has been by no means universally accepted. It is often stated that he intended to separate the two armies and attack them in detail, but if this expression is to be understood as meaning that the former operation was to precede the latter in point of time, it is not in our judgment a correct statement. There never was, we believe, any expectation on Napoleon’s part that he could, by throwing his army between those of Wellington and Blücher, or by merely occupying strategic points, separate the allied armies definitely from one another. What he did expect, was, as we have seen,8 to encounter one of these armies, that commanded by Marshal Blücher, alone and unsupported by its ally. If it should decline an engagement, or should fight and be beaten, he calculated on its retiring towards its own base of operations, and so separating itself by every march taken in that direction from its ally.

But several writers on the campaign present us with quite other ideas of Napoleon’s intended operations. And as it is obviously of the first importance that we should start with a correct idea of Napoleon’s plan, if we would follow the events of the campaign intelligently, we will examine these other theories somewhat in detail.

Take first the view that Napoleon’s intention was to throw his army between those of Wellington and Blücher. This is Alison’s view. We cite him, not because his name carries any weight as a military authority, but because his error has been so clearly pointed out by no less a person than the Duke of Wellington, in a criticism9 of Alison’s History of Europe written by the Earl of Ellesmere, who wrote, as is well known, under the Duke’s inspiration. In the following passage a quotation is made from the work of the famous German military critic, Clausewitz:—

“Mr. Alison (Hist. of Europe,10 etc., vol. x, p. 991) speaks of ‘Buonaparte’s favorite military manœuvre of interposing between his adversaries, and striking with a superior force first on the right hand and then on the left,’ as having been attempted by him and baffled in this campaign. We doubt whether the expression of interposing between two adversaries can be correctly applied to any of Buonaparte’s successful campaigns, and we almost suspect that, if he had in contemplation a manœuvre of so much hazard on this occasion, it was the first on which he can be said to have attempted it. Hear Clausewitz on this matter:—

“All writers who have treated of this campaign set out by saying that Buonaparte threw himself between the two armies, in order to separate them. This expression, however, which has become a terminus technicus in military phraseology, has no clear idea for its foundation. The space intervening between two armies cannot be an object of operation.11 It would have been very unfortunate if a commander like Buonaparte, having to deal with an enemy of twice his force, instead of falling on the one half with his united strength, had lighted on the empty interval, and thus made a blow in the air, losing his time, whilst he can only double his own force by the strictest economy of that commodity.

Even the fighting the one army in a direction by which it will be pressed away from the other, even if it can be effected without loss of time, incurs the great danger of being attacked in the rear by the other. If the latter, therefore, be not far enough removed to put this risk out of the question, a commander will scarcely venture on such a line of attack. Buonaparte, therefore, chose the direction between the two armies, not in order to separate them by wedging himself between,12 but because he expected to find and fall on Blücher’s force in this direction, either united or in separate bodies [corps].” Feldzug von 1815, &c., p. 54:13

* * * * * * * *

His main object was evidently to find the Prussian army, and beat it.”

Nevertheless we find Hooper,14 who wrote long after Clausewitz, making the very statement which Clausewitz thought so objectionable:—

“He (Napoleon) calculated that if he struck at the centre of the two armies he should be able to wedge himself in between them, crushing any divisions which attempted to obstruct his progress, and, having won a position of vantage, he imagined that it would be in his power to manœuvre with rapidity from side to side and defeat each army in succession.”

To the same effect writes Quinet:—

“He (Napoleon) will place himself between the two armies, at the centre of the line, that is to say, at the extreme right of the Prussian cantonments. By this move, the Duke of Wellington and Marshal Blücher will be separated from the first hour. The occasion, the moment, will decide on which of the two armies it will be best to strike the first blow.”15

It is unnecessary to repeat what has been so well said above in opposition to this view. It is plain that these writers have misconceived Napoleon’s plan. But we must consider this more fully.

This conception of the campaign is practically identical with the theory first put forth by Rogniat in his “Considérations de l’Art de la Guerre,” and repeated in his “Réponse aux Notes critiques de Napoléon,” in the form of a criticism of Napoleon’s operations. He maintains that Napoleon should have aimed first at seizing the two points of Quatre Bras and Sombreffe on the Nivelles-Namur road, over which the allied armies communicated with each other.

“If, instead of six leagues, he had made eight or nine (and he had time enough, inasmuch as the Sambre was crossed at two o’clock), in pushing his left to Frasnes and his advance-guard to Quatre Bras, the centre and right to Sombreffe, with the reserves at Fleurus, he would have obtained the precious advantage he ought to have aimed at, that of separating the two opposing armies, of retarding the union of their corps, of taking a central position and of attacking them one at a time. In fact, Quatre Bras and Sombreffe are on the high-road from Namur to Brussels; master of these points, he could then have opposed the junction of the English on one side, of the Prussians on the other.”16

This view has also received the endorsement of Jomini,17 who evidently thinks that Napoleon must have entertained it.

“Napoleon perceived that their (the Prussian) army sought to assemble between Namur and the causeway leading from Charleroi to Brussels, as it was by this route that the English would come to their assistance: now, under this supposition, the Emperor had but one wise course to follow; the most simple glance at the map would sufficiently indicate that it was essential to seize upon Sombreffe on the one side, and the central point of Quatre Bras on the other. * * * Because, once master of these two points, he was in position to act at will on either of the opposing armies, and prevent their junction.”

To the same effect is the sketch of Napoleon’s plan put forth by his advocate, the Prince de la Tour d’Auvergne in his “Waterloo”:

“The Sambre crossed, he (Napoleon) would seize the line of communication of the Anglo-Dutch and Prussians. Two columns would be charged to establish themselves, one at Quatre Bras, the other at Sombreffe.

“The separation consummated, he would easily make an end of both the Prussians and the Anglo-Dutch. For this would only be to renew a manœuvre familiar to him, and which had so often given him the victory.”18

Charras, one of the Emperor’s hostile critics, takes the same view of his intentions:

“It requires only a glance at the map to indicate with certainty the point which it was his intention to reach in dictating his order of movement. * * *

“The French army, occupying these places [Quatre Bras and Sombreffe] in force, would find itself placed between the Anglo-Dutch and the Prussians, thenceforward really capable,—to borrow from Napoleon his own expression,—of attacking them in detail, leaving to them, if they would escape from this misfortune,—the greatest that could befall them,—only the alternative of yielding ground and of uniting their forces at Brussels or beyond it.”19

Against this array of authority we oppose with confidence that of Napoleon himself, of Wellington, and of Clausewitz. It was Napoleon’s expectation, as we have seen above, that the Prussian army would be the first to be concentrated, that it would offer battle at or near Fleurus, and that he would be able to attack and overcome it before it could be joined by the Anglo-Dutch forces.20 If Blücher fought at all at that stage in the campaign, it stood to reason that he would fight to the south of Sombreffe, for the preservation of his line of communication with Wellington,—the Namur-Nivelles road. Hence, the intention of occupying Sombreffe, as a preliminary to a battle with the Prussians, could not, as we venture to think, have entered Napoleon’s mind. On the contrary, he believed that the seizure of Sombreffe would inevitably necessitate the retreat of the Prussians to some point further north, as Wavre, or even to the neighborhood of Brussels, where their junction with the English could be effected without molestation.21

But the last thing which Napoleon wanted was that the allied armies should retire to Wavre, or to the neighborhood of Brussels, and there unite. He needed a battle, and a decisive success,22 and he needed it at once. A war of manœuvres was not the game for him to play at this crisis. It was of vital importance for him to rout, if possible, in succession, the armies of Blücher and Wellington; a battle, therefore, was what he sought, and he expected that Blücher would fight him, and fight him alone. It was only by routing Blüchers army, or forcing it to retreat, that he expected to separate it from that of Wellington.

It must also be borne in mind, that the mere occupation of two points on the line of communication between two allied armies does not in any way prevent the unimpeded concentration of each army, and its being moved, when concentrated, in any direction that its commander may decide on. The “line of communication” seized is not to be confounded with the line of supplies or the line of retreat of either army. No doubt, the occupation of any point or points on the line by which two allied armies communicate with each other tends to embarrass them, to hinder any combined movements, and to delay their union; but to direct the march of an invading army merely to compass this end, when it is possible to defeat one of these opposing armies by engaging it where it cannot be supported by its ally, is to miss the opportunity of the campaign.