FOOTNOTES
1 John Shipp’s is the only book from the ranks which has been reprinted within the last ten years, I believe. Mr. Fitchett reproduced a few chapters of Anton and others in his rather disappointing Wellington’s Men.
2 Kincaid, Random Shots from a Rifleman, p. 8.
3 This was Woodberry of the 18th Hussars.
4 Sir William Gomm’s Life, p. 31.
5 See his curious dispatch from Cartaxo dated February 6th, 1811, concerning preaching officers.
6 He describes himself as “rolling on the floor like one distracted, with the pains of hell getting hold, and hope seeming to be for ever shut out of my mind.”—Surtees, p. 172.
7 He calls his little book Memoir of a Sergeant late of the 43rd Light Infantry, previously to and during the Peninsular War, including an account of his Conversion from Popery to the Protestant Religion.
8 John Stevenson of the Scots Fusilier Guards.
9 Life of Sir W. Napier, i. 235, 236.
10 Dispatches, vii. p. 559.
11 Ibid. vi. p. 485.
12 This preposterous remark may be found on p. 28 of vol. vi.
13 Only printed in 1894.
14 Edited by Col. Willoughby Verner.
15 Published 1881. Invaluable as a private record for the staff.
16 Edited by his kinsman, the present Provost of Eton.
17 Larpent was a lawyer who acted as Wellington’s Judge Advocate.
18 It is hardly necessary to mention Jones’s slight Sketch (1818) or Goddard’s mass of undigested contemporary material (1814).
19 Journal in Girod de l’Ain, p. 98.
20 His well-written two volumes (issued 1829) are said to have been very largely the work of his aide-de-camp, St. Cyr-Nugues.
21 Vacani’s Italian general history of the war is very slight on the English side, being mainly devoted to the doings of the Italians in Catalonia.
22 Published under the rather romantic title of A Boy in the Peninsular War (which suggests a work of fiction), by Julian Corbett, in 1899.
23 Published in the Revue Hispanique in 1907.
25 Published 1831. A first-rate authority for Rifle Brigade and Light Division matters.
26 Of the 29th Regt. Published only in 1887.
27 Published 1867.
28 Not to be confused with Sir George Bell.
29 See for a dissection and disproof of this story Ropes’s Waterloo, pp. 238–242, 3rd edition. Mr. Horsburgh (p. 138) and others accept the story. But despite Lady Shelley’s note it is really incredible.
30 For a dissection of Marbot’s blunders see the essay on his methods in Holland Rose’s Pitt and Napoleon, pp. 156–166.
31 Blakeney wrote about 1835, at Paxos in the Ionian Isles; Smith in 1844, in India; Kincaid in 1847.
32 His extraordinarily vivid narrative of the fortunes of Browne’s provisional battalion at Barrosa conflicts in detail with contemporary evidence which there is no reason to doubt, e.g. as to the numbers of the battalion, and as to the exact behaviour of General Whittingham.
33 A strong case is that of the sergeant of the 43rd, mentioned above, on p. 7, who lets in scraps of Napier into his patchwork with the most unhappy effect.
34 But only published by Constable & Co. in 1828. For more of his story, see the chapter on “The Rank and File.”
35 Sergeant Lawrence’s Autobiography was not published till 1886. Cooper’s Seven Campaigns in Portugal, etc., came out in 1869.
36 Only printed quite lately in the Revue Hispanique for 1907.
37 Hanover, 1907, 2 vols.
38 Published at Lisbon in 4 vols., 1862–80.
39 His book is called Reminiscences of a Veteran, and was published so late as 1861.
40 Twelve Years of Military Adventure, published 1829.
41 Published in 1880.
42 Published 1835, 2 vols.
43 Published 1845.
44 Two vols., published 1856.
45 By D. Beresford-Pack, 1905.
46 By Hon. Claud Vivian, 1897.
47 Two vols., 1904.
48 E.g. the cavalry general Long, who was writing in the spring of 1810 that “the next campaign in the Peninsula will close the eventful scene in the Peninsula, as far as we are concerned. I am strongly of opinion that neither ‘Marshal’ Wellington nor ‘Marshal’ Beresford will prevent the approaching subjugation of Portugal.” And, again, “Wellington, I suspect, feels himself tottering on his throne, and wishes to conciliate at any sacrifice.”
49 Kincaid, chap. v., May, 1811.
50 Cooke’s Narrative of events in the South of France, pp. 47, 48.
51 Stanhope’s Conversations with the Duke of Wellington, p. 14.
52 For a curious instance of this sort in the 92nd, see Hope’s Military Memoirs of an Infantry Officer, pp. 449–451. Cf. Sir George Napier’s Autobiography, pp. 125–128.
53 Gronow’s Recollections, p. 66.
54 McGrigor’s Autobiography, pp. 304, 305.
55 When sending him to command in India.
56 These two letters are in the Rice-Jones Correspondence (this R.E. officer is not to be confounded with Sir John Jones, the historian), lent to me by Hon. Henry Shore of Mount Elton, Clevedon.
57 See Colborne’s Life and Letters, ed. Moore Smith, pp. 126, 127; 235, 236.
58 Napier, vi. p. 175.
59 Grattan, p. 332.
60 The memorandum is on pp. 261–263 of vol. iv. of Wellington’s Dispatches.
61 Dispatches, vol. v. pp. 123, 124.
62 For an interesting chapter on the adventures of Colquhoun Grant see the autobiography of his brother-in-law, Sir J. McGrigor.
63 Stanhope’s Conversations with the Duke of Wellington, p. 19.
64 Foy’s diary in Girod de l’Ain, p. 178.
65 For an analysis of the controversy, see Dumolin’s preface to his Précis des Guerres de la Révolution, and compare Colin’s Education Militaire de Napoleon.
66 See especially the record of the great English and Austrian charges against French infantry at Villers-en-Cauchies, Beaumont, and Willems (Fortescue’s British Army, lv. 240–56).
67 The French battalion then comprising nine companies, of which one, the Voltigeur company, would not be in the column.
68 From an essay entitled Character of the Armies of the various European Powers, in a collection called Essays on the Theory and Practice of the Art of War. 3 vols. London: Philips & Co.
69 Though Marshal Broglie had used something like an approach to permanent divisions in the Seven Years’ War: see Colin’s Transformations de la Guerre, p. 97.
70 Colin quotes as bad examples of French armies coming on the field dispersedly, without the proper timing and co-operation, Wattignies, Neresheim (1796), and all Moreau’s operations beyond the Rhine in that year from Rastadt to Ettlingen (Transformations de la Guerre, p. 99).
71 See Dumolin’s Précis d’Histoire Militaire, x. p. 263, and Colin’s Tactique et Discipline, p. lxxxv.
72 At Arcola Augereau’s division attacked the bridge over a raised road passing over a dyke only 30 feet broad, with marshes on each side. There were three regiments, one behind the other. Cohorn’s column at Ebersburg was not so deep, only a brigade. But it had to defile over a bridge 200 yards long.
73 E.g.: this was the formation of the 3rd corps at Lützen, see Fabry, Journal des 3me et 5me Corps en 1813, p. 7.
74 Foy’s Vie Militaire, ed. Girod de l’Ain, p. 107.
75 Habitually but not invariably: e.g. for a use of eight skirmishing companies from five battalions at Villamuriel in Oct. 12, by Maucune, see Béchaud’s Journal, pp. 406–7, in Études Napoléoniemes I.
76 Sir James Sinclair in his Observations on the Military System of Great Britain, so far as respects the formation of Infantry, deals with this idea at great length, and proposes to have 160 skirmishers to each battalion of 640 men.
77 See Fortescue, British Army, iv. p. 921.
78 See the anecdote of the 28th regiment at Alexandria, whose rear rank faced about, and fought back-to-back with the front rank, when unexpectedly assailed from behind by French cavalry which had passed through a gap in the line. Hence the grant of the double shako-plate, before and behind, made to the regiment.
79 Till lately I had supposed that Reynier had at least his left wing, or striking échelon, in columns of battalions, but evidence shown me by Col. James proves that, despite of the fact that the French narratives do not show it, the majority at least of Reynier’s men were deployed. This is borne out by Bunbury’s narrative, p. 244, where it is definitely stated, as well as by Boothby’s, p. 78.
80 Those of Reynier. See my Peninsular War, Bussaco chapter.
81 See Stanhope’s Conversations with the Duke of Wellington, p. 109.
82 The phrase comes from the De Ros Manuscript, quoted in Maxwell’s Life of Wellington, ii. p. 20.
83 Foy’s Vie Militaire, ed. Girod de l’Ain, pp. 270, 271.
84 Donkin’s Brigade, Wellington’s last reserve, which was never engaged with infantry all day, lost 195 men without firing a shot—save by its skirmishers.
85 See Fortescue, iv. p. 841.
86 The interesting circular to Brigadiers conveying this information runs, “The Commander of the Forces recommends the companies of the 5/60th regiment to the particular care of the officers commanding the brigades to which they are attached: they will find them to be most useful, active, and brave troops in the field, and they will add essentially to the strength of their brigades.”—General Orders, p. 262.
87 These “independent rifle companies” of the K.G.L., which appear in so many “morning states,” were isolated men left behind (mainly, no doubt, in hospital) by the two “Light Battalions” of the K.G.L. when they left Portugal in company with Sir John Moore.
88 To descend into detail, in May, 1811, the 5/60th supplied light companies to Stopford’s, Nightingale’s, Mackinnon’s (3 companies), Myers’, Hulse’s, Colborne’s, Hoghton’s, and Abercrombie’s brigades. The Brunswick Oels Jägers supplied the extra company to Hay’s and Dunlop’s brigades, while the rest of the battalion was in Sontag’s brigade. The 3/95th gave a company to Howard’s brigade, while the other battalions of this famous rifle corps were in the two brigades of the Light Division. The German brigade of Löwe had its own “independent light companies.” Only Colville’s and Burne’s brigades had no such provision in the whole army.
89 Save in Hamilton’s Portuguese division, which did not get its Caçador battalions till 1812.
90 In 1811 of the armies opposed to Wellington (Soult’s and Marmont’s) there was one division of 6 battalions, one of 9, two of 10, one of 11, seven of 12, one of 13. The battalions varied from 400 apiece in the 5th corps to over 600 in the 1st corps. The average was about 500, not including men detached or in hospital. A voltigeur company would have varied between 80 and 110 men.
91 Note especially Vigo-Roussillon’s account of Barrosa, where he speaks of his regiment having pierced the first British line, when all that it really did was to thrust back four companies of the 95th rifles, and two of the 20th Portuguese. Similarly Reynier’s report on Bussaco says that Merle’s division broke the front line of Picton, and only failed before his second. But the “front line” was only five light companies.
92 Wellington to Beresford, Dispatches, vii. p. 427.
93 If the ordre mixte was formed by a regiment of three battalions of 600 men each, only 634 men out of 1800 were in the front two ranks. If by a regiment of four battalions (two deployed, two in column in the flanks), the slightly better result of 1034 men out of 2400 able to use their muskets would be produced.
94 This I have from a document in the archives of the Ministry of War at Paris, which says that “the line of attack was formed by a brigade in column of attack. To its right and left the front line was in a mixed formation; that is to say, on each side of the central column was a battalion deployed in line, and on each of the outer sides of the deployed battalions was a battalion or regiment in column, so that at each end the line was composed of a column ready to form square, in case hostile cavalry should attempt to fall upon one of our flanks.”
95 A phrase used by a French marshal at Bussaco!
96 Reprinted by General Trochu in his Armée française en 1867, pp. 239, 240.
99 Though a few depleted regiments also went home, so that the total strength never was over 18 regiments, 9000 horse or under, to 70,000 men in all. See pages 192–3.
100 See Dispatches, vol. viii. p. 112.
101 General Orders (collected volume), pp. 481, 482.
102 See Chapter XVIII., “A note on Sieges.”
103 See the Diary of Major Brooke, in Blackwood for 1908, p. 448, which I edited.
104 Memoirs of Sergeant Donaldson (94th), ii. p. 217, and cf. for a similar story, Rifleman Harris, pp. 30, 31.
105 See Sidney’s Life of Lord Hill, p. 228.
106 He wanted, he wrote, “to have a place of meeting where they can enjoy social intercourse combined with economy, and cultivate old acquaintance formed on service.” Hitherto “officers coming to town for a short period were driven into expensive and bad taverns and coffee-houses, without a chance of meeting their friends or any good society.”
107 Twenty-five Years in the Rifle Brigade, by Surtees of the 95th.
108 Caddell of the 28th, p. 99.
109 Especially Bunbury, Dallas, and Blakeney.
110 “Le général était de haute stature,” says Vigo-Roussillon: “il avait les cheveux tous blancs, et était encore alerte et très vif, quoiqu’il avait soixante ans. Sa physionomie noble et ouverte m’avait inspiré le respect, même sur le champ de bataille.”—Revue des deux Mondes, August, 1891.
111 Stanhope’s Conversations with Wellington, p. 69.
112 Kincaid, p. 116.
113 That he made the request is definitely stated in Stanhope’s Conversations, p. 69.
114 Grattan’s Adventures with the Connaught Rangers, p. 16.
115 Grattan, pp. 116, 117.
116 See McCarthy’s Siege of Badajoz, p. 35, and Robinson’s Life of Picton, ii. p. 170.
117 McCarthy’s Siege of Badajoz, p. 41.
118 Robinson’s Life of Picton, ii. p. 390.
119 See especially McCarthy, quoted above, and Macpherson (notes in Robinson, ii. pp. 394–397).
120 Cole’s Peninsular Generals, ii. p. 84.
121 His brother, Sir Charles Craufurd, had married the Dowager Duchess of Newcastle, and as the duke was a minor, his mother and her husband disposed of the Pelham pocket-boroughs and other patronage.
122 He was absent on leave from the winter of 1810 till May 1811, and only just rejoined in time for the battle of Fuentes de Oñoro.
123 All this comes from Shaw-Kennedy’s Diary, which is printed at length in a most unlikely place,—the Appendix to Lord F. Fitzclarence’s Manual of Outpost Duties, a book of the 1840’s.
124 See Larpent’s Journal, p. 85, and Alex. Craufurd’s Life of General Robert Craufurd, pp. 184, 185.
125 William Napier refused to subscribe to a testimonial to Alten at the end of the war, openly saying that he saw no sufficient merit in him.
126 For a bitter story of how his brigadiers, Barclay and Beckwith, spoke of him, see Moore-Smith’s Life of Colborne, p. 174. Cf. too p. 35 of Hay’s Reminiscences of 1808–15, for an anecdote of Craufurd’s occasional snubbing of his officers. Cf. also George Simmond’s British Rifleman, pp. 26, 27.
127 Jan. 20, 1912, in a letter from Colonel Willoughby Verner.
128 See Hay’s Peninsular Reminiscences, 1808–15.
129 See Rifleman Harris, p. 206.
130 Hardinge advised the advance, but it was Cole who, being in responsible command, ordered and executed it. He it is who should have the credit both for the resolve and for the tactics.
131 See Wellington to Torrens (the patronage secretary at the Horse Guards), August 4, 1810.
132 See, e.g., Wellington, Dispatches, vi., under Oct. 4, 1810. Among the generals whose departure he viewed (for various reasons) with equanimity, were Sir Robert Wilson, Lightburne, Tilson, and Nightingale.
133 Minute on p. 572 of the Collected General Orders.
134 Stewart chafed at his checks, and wrote bitterly to Castlereagh about the insignificance of his position.
136 For special note as to the functions of the “Staff Corps of Cavalry” raised in March, 1813, see the General Order of that date. This body must be carefully distinguished from the Staff Corps, concerning which see Fortescue’s British Army, iv. p. 881: it was a kind of subsidiary corps of military artificers, independent of the Ordnance Office to which “Royal Military Artificers” belonged. This was a vicious duplication of parallel organizations.
137 General Order, Freneda, Nov. 1, 1811.
138 Private Journal of Judge-Advocate Larpent, 1812–14, published London, 1853.
139 Names may suffice to show the class from which they were drawn: Marquis of Worcester, Lord March, Bathurst, Bouverie, Burghersh, Canning, Manners, Stanhope, Fremantle, Gordon, de Burgh, Cadogan, Fitzroy Somerset.
141 See General Order of May 4, 1809.