does anyone know the cause of napoleons defeat at waterloo?
606731
Napoleon lost the battle for a number of reasons:\nan accident of weather. As before all of Wellington's battles, it rained heavily all the previous night so Napoleon could use neither his guns nor his cavalry to their best advantage. His guns sank up to their axles in the mud and his cavalry could not charge uphill in the soggy conditions. The start of the battle was delayed for about two hours, so that the ground could dry out a little.\nWellington's tactics were superb. He refused to move from the high ground into the boggy valley, so the French had to take the battle to him, uphill and through mud.\nWellington used the "thin red line" and hid his troops: this surprised Napoleon, who had never seen this method of fighting. Wellington had perfected them in Spain while Napoleon was occupied in fighting elsewhere.\nWellington's smaller force held the French to a stalemate from about 11 a.m. (when the battle started), until about 4 p.m. Wellington was about to give the order for a general retreat following Napoleon's order for a general advance, when Blucher arrived and tipped the balance in favour of the Allies.\nNapoleon said he lost Waterloo because of the "obstinate bravery of the English troops" - many of whom were Irish. [1]\nThere is an account that Napoleon was not functioning at his best because of a medical problem. It seems that he suffered terribly from haemorrhoids (piles); his physician used leeches to alleviate the pain but during the night of 16 June, the leeches were lost. The physician gave Napoleon laudanum to alleviate the pain but by accident administered an overdose; consequently, at Waterloo, Napoleon's abilities were imp
767468
The account by Darius is probably more accurate:\n\nhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cambyses_II_of_Persia#The_death_of_Cambyses
124330
Did Napoleon's troops shoot the nose off the Sphinx?\n\nBy Tom Holmberg\n\nAlthough popular legend blames Napoleon and his troops during the French campaign in Egypt (1798-1801) for having shot the nose off the Great Sphinx, in fact this story just isn't true. I have yet to locate an original source for this myth. The idea that Napoleon was to blame for the Sphinx's missing nose dates at least to the beginning of the twentieth century.\n\nOne traveler to Egypt around the time of World War One wrote the following: "To take our photos sitting in front of the Sphinx on a camel was the aim of another. ...And so, repulsing the hordes of robbers on all sides, we came to the wonderful, inscrutable, worth-millions-of-pounds-to-authors Sphinx. The great riddle of the mysterious East. How many reams of rubbish have been written about this misshapen block of stone. Napoleon, a practical man, fired a few cannon balls at its face. High explosive shells were not invented in those days." [From: Sommers, Cecil. Temporary Crusaders. (London: John Lane, 1919) Chapter VI. "19th April."] Another book from about the same time (In the Footsteps of Napoleon (1915) by James Morgan, p 85) states "There is a tradition among the Arabs of the Pyramids that all the scars of time and the wounds of a hundred wars, which the Sphinx carries, were inflicted by Napoleon's soldiers, who used its mystifying and majestic countenance as a target. That, however, is only a legend for the tourist. Long before the discovery of gunpowder, the Arabs had laid iconoclastic hands on the beard of this god of the desert..." Though the Arab guides may have spread this tale, this myth has been perpetuated over the years by countless teachers the world over who have passed this bit of "history" on to their students.\n\nA poll conducted on the Internet found that fully 21% of respondents believed Napoleon was responsible for the Sphinx's missing nose. One of the most recent examples of the persistence of this falsehood was Louis Farrakhan's "Million Man March" speech where he said: "White supremacy caused Napoleon to blow the nose off the Sphinx because it reminded you [sic] too much of the Black man's majesty." And the perpetuation of this myth in "Afrocentric" circles was even the subject of a segment of the U.S. television investigative journalism program "60 Minutes."\n\nThis error has persisted in spite of the fact that the truth can be readily found in such common reference sources as the Encyclopedia Americana> (Danbury, CT: Grolier, 1995). vol.25, p.492-3 under "Sphinx", which states: "Over the centuries the Great Sphinx has suffered severely from weathering...Man has been responsible for additional mutilation. In 1380 A.D. the Sphinx fell victim to the iconoclastic ardor of a fanatical Muslim ruler, who caused deplorable injuries to the head. Then the figure was used as a target for the guns of the Mamluks." In the book The Egyptian Pyramids: A Comprehensive Illustrated Reference (Jefferson, NC: McFarland, 1990), p.301, the author, J.P. Lepre, adds the fact that, in addition to the 14th century damage, "The face was further disfigured by the eighteenth century A.D. ruler of Egypt, the Marmalukes [Mamluks]."\n\nEuropean visitors to Egypt prior to Napoleon's expedition had already discovered the vandalism to the Sphinx. In 1546, for example, when Dr. Pierre Belon explored Egypt, he visited "the great colossus." "The Sphinx," writes Leslie Greener in The Discovery Of Egypt (London : Cassell, 1966), p.38, by this time "no longer [had] the stamp of grace and beauty so admired by Abdel Latif in 1200." Greener goes on to say: "this exonerates the artillerymen of Napoleon Bonaparte, who have the popular reputation of having used the nose of the Sphinx as a target." The charge against Napoleon is p
278449
Napoleon Bonaparte (1769-1821)(Napoleon I) was Emperor of the French (1804-1815) born in Corsica.  One of the greatest military leaders of modern times, he become a brigadier(1793) after driving the British out of Toulon.  In 1796 he married Josephine de Beauharnais and gained command in Italy, where he defeated the Austrians and Sardinians.  In 1798 on his way to Egypt he captured the island of Malta from the Order of Saint John.  In Egypt was defeated by Nelson at the Battle of Abukir bay.  In 1799 he returned to Paris where his coup of 18 Brumaire set up the Consulate.  As First Consul he enacted domestic reforms such the Code Napoleon while defeating the Austrians at Marengo(1800) and making peace with the British at Amiens(1802).  Efforts to extend French power led to the Napoleonic Wars(1803-1815).  After the Battle of Trafalgar(1805) Britain controlled the seas but Napoleon's Grand Army continued to score notable land victories at Austerlitz(1805) and Jena(1086).  The Continental System attempted to defeat Britain by a commercial blockde that led indirectly to the Peninsular War.  In 1810, after obtaining a divorce from Josephine, Napoleon married Maria Louise who bore him a son the future Napoleon II.  In 1812, Napoleon invaded Russia with a million man army.  Forced to retreat by hunger more than 400000 soldiers perished in the Russian winter.  In 1813, Napoleon was routed by a European coalition at Leipzig.  In March 1814, Paris was captured and he was exiled to Elba.  In March 1815, he escaped and returned to France, overthrowing the Bourbon King Louis XVIII.  The Hundred Days of his return to power ended with defeat at the battle of Waterloo(June 1815).  Napoleon was exiled to St. Helen where he died.
12089
The colonists kept pushing the natives westward while taking their land. The natives did not claim the land because they believed the land was for everybody to share. Unfortunately, the colonists won in the end because they had better weapons, and the natives knew this. :(
509883
Looking at the loss of life and property, that is a fair assessment, it was also very costly for the Confederates...in losing it, they lost the chance for international support they were trying to earn (look up England's role in the Civil War); Gettysburg became a turning point for the war.  The Confederates had won battles on their own soil, but could not win in the North -- that's what the British wanted to see before they'd support them.  Besides that, they needed the victory to gain ground and convince they Union it was losing, they were unable to do that.
291458
It was the battle of Guilford Courthouse (near Greensboro, NC).  While we lost that battle, Cornwallis (the English general) said that another such victory for the English and they shall lose the war.  \n\nThe "victory" at Guilford Courthouse cost so many British soldiers that Washington was able to win the next major battle -- and the war!  \n\n(FYI, this was the battle going on in the big scene at the end of Mel Gibson's movie, The Patriot.)
120423
Austria lost Lombardy in 1859.\nAustria lost Venetia in 1866.
677180
Piles of dead literally piles and piles. It was one of the bloodier battles of one of the bloodiest wars in history. 58,000 British soldiers were wounded or killed on the first day alone. \n\nSomme was the first place British tanks were used. \n\nThe biggest result was that German troops were diverted from Verdun where the French were in danger of breaking. By the end of the battle of the Somme the French were on the offensive and the German troops diverted to the Somme from Verdun were kept busy holding the Somme. \n\nPolitically Haig the British gemeral in charge was discredited by the reckless disreguard he showed while incurring over 400,000 British casualties in the battle of the Somme. It caused a sharp decrease in support for the war in Briton and political upheavals were fired up by the sheer and senseless casualties of the Somme. WW I in general meant casualties but the British during the battle of the Somme repeatedly sent troops to slaughter at the hands of German machine guns. Basically the stratigy amounted to attempting to run the Germans out of ammunition though that was not what the British had in mind as they sent troops over the top. The British honestly thought they were about to break the German lines.
693869
They beat the English in 1066 in the battle of Hastings but no i don't think they have won a war since,they are wimps and it's a well known fact because they left the British to fight on their own in both world wars.The only good leader the French have had is Napoleon who was the Emperor of France and they did hardly anything in the second world war compared to Britain and America.They also lost the 100 year war with England(and Wales because Wales was the first country England took over to make the UK)and it just goes to show that France are rubbish and are not brave at all.
720463
Yes he did \nThey beat him in an early battle near what is Pittsburgh\nThey, the French and Indian lost the war or else French might have been your native language
379093
napoleon seized power during the European Revolt, gathering up an army and declaring himself king of France, destroying anyone in his path and taking over
408628
This is the history behind the name Stamford Bridge:\n\n\n8th century maps show a 'Stanford Creek' running along the route of what is now a railway line at the back of the East Stand as a tributary of the Thames.\n\nThe stream had two local bridges: Sanford Bridge on the Fulham Road (also recorded as Little Chelsea Bridge) and Stanbridge on the King's Road. Stanford Creek, Sanford Bridge and Stanbridge no doubt all contributed in some uncertain way to the eventual name of Stamford Bridge, which must have been further suggested by the well known Battle of Stamford Bridge in Yorkshire, a famous victory by King Harold Godwinson against the Vikings in 1066 that took place shortly before his defeat by the Normans at the Battle of Hastings.
810504
The principal reasons were exhaustion and loss of discipline.\n\nThe armies were fairly evenly matched in terms of numbers. William had more cavalry but Harold had skilled infantry and the high ground (normally a key advantage) on Senlac Hill.\n\nHowever, Harold had had to march his army from Stamford Bridge in modern day East Yorkshire following his victory over the invading Vikings led by Harald Hardrada.\n\nThis meant his men (lots of infantry) were tired and not looking forward to consecutive major battles.\n\nHarold's infantry formed the renowned Shield Wall towards the top of the hill. This is a difficult formation to penetrate (even for cavalry). William's cavalry then made several false offensive moves (attacking then feigning retreat). Due to the tiredness of the Englishmen they soon lost their discipline and charged the cavalry in the centre of their lines. This created a significant rupture in the shield wall (rendering it useless) which the remaining cavalry exploited, rushing through to attack the English from the rear. The English infantry were driven down the hill into the advancing Norman infantry. They were trapped and massacred.\n\nContrary to popular belief, most historians agree that Harold II was killed by a sword thrust to the abdomen (not an arrow in the eye).
47057
According to a few websites I found, it was from June 1812 to the spring of 1815.\n\nHere's a good resource.\nhttp://www.gatewayno.com/history/War1812.html
334065
Now if I was an ordinary person I'd most probably be unable to write anyway, but I would try to show how well our side was doing.\nTry to show that revolution would occur in all countries like France, as others followed the example set.\nShow how Napoleon was gradually conquering the world, well it doesn't have to be true does it, and make sure that Napoleon had a copy of it. Then he would give you more information, and most probably a decent meal.\nMention what a great thing it was to drive on the right.\nEnclose a charter for all good citizens of the revolution to follow.
993641
Logically, a vast majority of the later casualties on both sides can be directly attributed to McClellan's reluctance to fight early on. He could have dealt a devastating, and potentially war ending, blow to the confederates when their army was stranded out on the peninsula, however he wanted to wait, and allowed them to escape. \n\nLee was the best man in the war, and if he had been a Union General, the war wouldn't have been much more than police action LOL.