The author, Andrew Field, has written an immensely interesting book compiling and editing eye witness accounts of the Battle of Waterloo- from the French perspective. The amount of research that the author has undertaken is astonishing and needs to be highly commended.
The first part of the book describes his editing and selection process, deciding what sections of various French memoirs should be included and the reasons behind his thought processes. Field wanted to avoid hearsay accounts of individuals that were not actually present at the point of the various skirmishes.
Clearly the defeated Generals tried to blame others for the British victory, also to make their part in the battle more heroic and well-executed than it really was. Napolean's account, in particular, was somewhat self-aggrandising and didn't closely align with the true events of the battle, or that of his Generals.
I loved the author's introductions to each of the eyewitnesses, giving details of their individual careers, battles, and their respective lives after Waterloo. From a military perspective, I am impressed that many of the senior officers were rapidly promoted through the ranks following their impressive exploits on various European battlefields.
The accounts of the more junior ranks are a lot more reliable, honest, and gritty than those of the senior officers. Particularly startling were the descriptions of what it was like to physically participate in one of Napolean's powerful Old-Guard columns being raked by canister, cannon balls, musket fire and subjected to mass British cavalry attacks.
I have read many books on Waterloo, but all from the British perspective. It was refreshing and fascinating to read about the French participant's experiences during the battle and the subsequent rout.