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”: