SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Napoleon's Defeat at Waterloo Caused in Part by Indonesian Volcanic Eruption:
Electrically charged volcanic ash short-circuited Earth's atmosphere in 1815, causing global poor weather and Napoleon's defeat, says new research.
Historians know that rainy and muddy conditions helped the Allied army defeat the French Emperor Napoleon Bonaparte at the Battle of Waterloo. The June 1815 event changed the course of European history.
Two months prior, a volcano named Mount Tambora erupted on the Indonesian island of Sumbawa, killing 100,000 people and plunging the Earth into a 'year without a summer' in 1816.
Now, Dr Matthew Genge from Imperial College London has discovered that electrified volcanic ash from eruptions can 'short-circuit' the electrical current of the ionosphere -- the upper level of the atmosphere that is responsible for cloud formation.
The findings, published today in Geology, could confirm the suggested link between the eruption and Napoleon's defeat.
Dr Genge, from Imperial's Department of Earth Science and Engineering, suggests that the Tambora eruption short-circuited the ionosphere, ultimately leading to a pulse of cloud formation. This brought heavy rain across Europe that contributed to Napoleon Bonaparte's defeat.
The paper shows that eruptions can hurl ash much higher than previously thought into the atmosphere -- up to 100 kilometres above ground.
Dr Genge said: "Previously, geologists thought that volcanic ash gets trapped in the lower atmosphere, because volcanic plumes rise buoyantly. My research, however, shows that ash can be shot into the upper atmosphere by electrical forces."
NB: Compare the height reached by the ash to the The Kármán line, or Karman line, which lies at an altitude of 100 km (62 mi; 330,000 ft) above Earth's sea level and commonly represents the boundary between Earth's atmosphere and outer space.
Journal Reference:
Matthew J. Genge. Electrostatic levitation of volcanic ash into the ionosphere and its abrupt effect on climate. Geology, 2018; DOI: 10.1130/G45092.1
(Score: 2, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 30 2018, @12:18PM (2 children)
The same weather affected both sides... If an army & it's generals are not prepared to fight in conditions that they will face they deserve to lose. To state the loss was due to a volcano is weak
Sure the volcane probably influenced the weather BUT the weather is not responsible for the loss...
It's like the French constantly blaming the weather for their loss at
Agincourt rather than their inability to fight in the rain. Fair weather fighters and history supports this
(Score: 2, Insightful) by engblom on Thursday August 30 2018, @01:00PM (1 child)
When I read the summery I was thinking exactly the same. However then I thought that weather might still influence. The one more far away from home will be more affected if the climate suddenly change. You do not carry too much extra bulk with you just in case the climate would be completely abnormal from what it has been years after years. The ones closer to home will easier get the needed clothes/equipment for something abnormal.
(Score: 5, Interesting) by richtopia on Thursday August 30 2018, @02:42PM
Well, Waterloo is in Belgium, so if we are thinking logistics the French should have had an advantage over the English/Prussians.
Waterloo is one of history's most important battles and multiple factors contributed to the French defeat. Yes, the weather is cited as one of them however I doubt dry soil would have saved the French army.
If you are interested in the sources of defeat Wikipedia has a quick section discussing it:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Waterloo#Views_on_the_reasons_for_Napoleon's_defeat [wikipedia.org]