Waterloo

by Christopher Hibbert

Waterloo (Wordsworth Military Library) Christopher Hibbert

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Military History, Military Fiction, War, Historical

280 pages, Paperback

First published January 1, 1960

About the author

Christopher Hibbert, MC, FRSL, FRGS (5 March 1924 - 21 December 2008) was an English writer, historian and biographer. He was a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature and the author of many books, including Disraeli, Edward VII, George IV, The Rise and Fall of the House of Medici, and Cavaliers and Roundheads.

Described by Professor Sir John Plumb as "a writer of the highest ability and in the New Statesman as "a pearl of biographers," he established himself as a leading popular historian/biographer whose works reflected meticulous scholarship.

Reviews

[Sebastian Palmer · Rating 4 out of 5]

With about 50 books to his name, mostly history or biography, Christopher Hibbert was a pretty prolific author, and highly regarded in his lifetime. But in this relatively small book on the battle of Waterloo, his own voice is a rather minor presence, because he acts more as a choreographer to the words of others than author in his own right.

Over approximately 250 pages Hibbert marshals a large selection of sources, most of which will be known to readers familiar with the era and his subject, to tell not just the story of the battle of Waterloo, but also give potted histories of Napoleon, Wellington, Blücher, the armies involved, the run up to and aftermath of the campaign, and the actions at Quatre Bras and Ligny, as well as the battle of 18th June 1815 itself. Pretty comprehensive for such a small book!

The comprehensive sweep is impressive, taking in everything from the Congress of Vienna to the post-Waterloo evolution of the legend of Bonaparte, and ranges from material describing the intrigues of French and European politics to gory mud and blood spattered episodes on the battlefields. Although Hibbert's own writing skills aren't on display that much, he shows himself a dab hand at organising the accounts of others into a compelling and informative read.

Originally published in 1967, Hibbert uses, by comparison with more contemporary methods, some really quite lengthy extracts from his sources. As with many such source-dependent books, the reader is often left desirous of reading these sources in full.

As a result books such as this have lead me to acquire a steadily growing collection of contemporary memoirs and histories, from Napoleon's own writings on St Helena, to Capt. Siborne's two-volume history of the Waterloo campaign. Which is, I think, a good thing.

One of the strengths of books like this is that they can cherry pick from the sources, synthesising a full account from the best bits of a whole array of writers.

There are, sadly, no maps at all, at least not in my 1993 edition. So unless you either have maps to hand, or know the battle and terrain very well already, this is going to make the geographical detail, whether it be the larger movements of the campaign, or the the more detailed descriptions of the battle itself, tough to follow.

I feel books of this sort really must have maps, so I have to dock a star for this omission. Even though I know the battle quite well - plus I have numerous helpful maps I can lay my hands on if need be - nevertheless, I always prefer to have maps in the book I’m reading.

Textually, however, I found this to be a very compelling telling of the Waterloo campaign - I read the whole thing over an Easter weekend - and I liked that Hibbert contextualises it all with both background and after the event perspectives.

Not an ideal intro to the subject, but good as a refresher, and (except that you may want some maps handy!) enjoyable as a standalone reading experience.

[Dave Parry · Rating 3 out of 5]

To begin with, this book wasn't easy to read. Hibbert's method of collecting various snippets from related texts and interspersing them with his own text made it a little hard to follow. The contrast in the writing style of Hibbert's historic selections also made it difficult to connect with. I found myself at times having to re-read a number of pages to understand exactly what was happening, while at other times I was fully engaged, eager to read more.

There were certainly moments which made this book worth reading, especially the different accounts which characterised Napoleon and Wellington, as well as the description of the battle itself and the aftermath. However, having finished the book, I am yet to grasp the qualitative aspects of the Battle of Waterloo and I will certainly be searching for another author to fill that void.

[Eoghan Fallon · Rating 3 out of 5]

Archaic? Maybe a little weak across every section but still more than the sum of its parts?

Good on painting the picture of Napoleon at his height pre-1814 but perhaps even better at showing the contrast with that of the 1815 Napoleon, still brilliant but something was missing. Nice introduction to the characters of Wellington and Blucher as well, the latter I knew very little about.

Mainly primary sources and a bit of analysis and that's good but the author's conclusion at the end seems out of place.

[Marina · Rating 3 out of 5]

Rather too sketchy! Bits and pieces quoted from other people's works do little for continuity and make a dull story.

[Ellen · Rating 2 out of 5]

The attack of D'Erlon's Corps and subsequent counterattack by Ponsonby and Summerset is described in 2 pages.

[John · Rating 3 out of 5]

Why write another book about Waterloo? is the famous question. Hibbert's answer would, perhaps, be that he hasn't. Instead, he has crafted a narrative from various first and second hand accounts of the campaign. It gains plenty in terms of colour from this approach, but loses some narrative coherence and puts the book at the mercy of other author's judgments; the penultimate chapter, which recycles the 'Perfidious Albion' charge as an explanation for the twenty years of warfare, is particularly misguided.