[559] Diary of the 43rd officer, in Maxwell, ii. p. 40.
[560] There is a good account of the heroic death of Cadogan, a much-loved colonel of the 71st, in the diary of his quarter-master, William Gavin, of the same regiment. When aware that he was mortally hit, Cadogan refused to be moved from the field, and had himself propped up against two knapsacks, on a point from which his dying eyes could survey the whole field, and watched the fight to the bitter end.
[561] From Gazan’s report in the French Archives, written at St. Jean-Pied-du-Port in July—very much ex post facto. It was lent me by Mr. Fortescue, along with several other Vittorian documents.
[562] Diary of Cooke of the 43rd in Maxwell’s Peninsular Sketches, ii. 42.
[563] Graham’s Report, Wellington Supplementary Dispatches, viii. 7-8.
[564] Cooke, the 43rd officer in Maxwell’s Peninsular Sketches, ii. 44. The guns were undoubtedly the Horse Artillery battery on the high-road in front of Gazan’s centre.
[565] Of course, Cooke is understating the distance, which was about a quarter of a mile.
[566] This interesting narrative of Captain Cooke of the 43rd must have been in Napier’s hands before it was printed by Maxwell, as several phrases from it are repeated in Napier, vol. v, p. 121. Sir William himself was in England that day.
[567] He was, along with Stewart and Oswald, one of the three divisional generals who committed the gross breach of orders during the Burgos retreat mentioned above, p. 152.
[568] Cf. Burgoyne, Life and Letters, i. 263 (June 23, 1813), with Picton’s letters in Wellington Supplementary Dispatches, xiv. 225, about ‘the 3rd Division being kept in the background, for Sir T. P. is by no means a favourite with Lord W.’ Cairnes (in Dickson, ed. Leslie) puts the change down as ‘most mortifying to Picton’.
[569] See Dalhousie to Wellington, in Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 6, which leaves much unsaid.
[570] Narrative of one of Picton’s staff in Robinson’s Life of Picton, ii. 195-6.
[571] The third battery originally at Ariñez was Villatte’s divisional battery, which had gone off with him to the Puebla heights. Neither P. Soult nor Treillard had guns with them.
[572] Such turning might have been done either by the two belated brigades of the 7th Division or by troops detached by Graham, who had several brigades to spare, which he never used, but might have sent to pass the Zadorra at the bridge of Yurre or the fords west of it, both well behind the new French line.
[573] Who was this officer? Not Brevet Lieut.-Colonel Cother of the 71st nor Brevet Lieut.-Colonel Harrison of the 50th. Hope of the 92nd, in his rather detailed narrative of this fight, calls him ‘Colonel R——.’ I cannot identify him. Conceivably, it may have been Colonel Rooke, the senior officer of Hill’s staff who may have been sent up the heights, and may have taken over command on Cadogan’s being mortally wounded.
[574] So says the anonymous but invaluable ‘T. S.’ of the 71st. Leith Hay, a prisoner with the French in this campaign, remarks that they were all in their summer wear of long linen overcoats, with the cross-belts put on above.
[575] They were released at Pampeluna on the surrender of that fortress three months later, in a state of semi-starvation, having been carried on with Villatte’s division during the French retreat. They described to Gavin of the 71st, who happened to be present at the surrender, their unhappy fortunes. See his diary, p. 25.
[576] Gazan’s most unconvincing account of all this engagement is that ‘General Villatte attacked the enemy with his usual vigour: nothing could resist the shock of his division. The position, whose recapture ought to have assured us the victory, was retaken, as well as the height in front of Subijana. The enemy was routed at every point. Such was the position of the Army of the South, when news came to the King that our troops by the Zadorra were attacked, and could not maintain themselves. I was told to break off my attack and retire to a position further back.’
[577] The 71st lost, beside their well-loved colonel—the only man mentioned in Wellington’s private letter of next morning to his brother Henry (Dispatches, x. p. 454)—44 killed, 272 wounded, and nearly 40 prisoners: half the battalion. The 50th lost only 7 officers and 97 men; the 92nd no more than 20 men. If Villatte gave correct figures, his total loss was only 2 officers and 289 men—including 22 prisoners. Of these the 63rd, obviously the leading regiment, was responsible for 135 casualties, the 95th for 94. The other two regiments had practically no losses. These figures are very low, but seem to be corroborated by Martinien.
[578] Its heavy loss of 33 officers and 515 men out of about 2,200 present was nearly all, I believe, suffered at this point. The 2/87th with 244 casualties out of about 600 present lost 40 per cent. of its strength. Chassé’s French brigade, the immediate opponents, had 800 casualties, nearly all at this moment.
[579] Why did not Dalhousie support Colville more promptly? He had a bridge to cross, and some way to go, but was evidently late.
[580] These details come mainly out of the Mémoire sur la Retraite des Armées françaises in the French Archives, lent me by Mr. Fortescue. Internal evidence shows it written by some member of D’Erlon’s staff. Tirlet’s report is also useful.
[581] Captured by skirmishers of the 1/95th, as it was retreating up the high road and was nearing Ariñez. The French infantry recovered it for a moment by a counter-stroke, but as the Riflemen had cut the traces and shot or removed the horses, they could not get the gun away. Tirlet says the battery lost only one gun, which is corroborated by Costello of the 95th, present on the spot. Kincaid and other Riflemen say three.
[582] There is a curious problem connected with a correspondence (Dispatches, x. pp. 329-31) between Picton and Wellington on July 16—three weeks after the battle. Wellington apparently thought that Picton blamed the 88th for losing Ariñez in the first assault, while it was really only two companies of the 1/95th which had entered that village and been driven out. He says that he had seen the 88th coming into action in a very ragged line, and had himself halted them and dressed their front, before he let them go on: after this he did not notice what became of them, but saw them again after the fighting formed on the other side of the village.
What Wellington did not witness is chronicled by Costello of the 1/95th: after describing the repulse of the Riflemen, he notes their pleasure at seeing ‘our favourite third division’ coming down the road. Ariñez was promptly retaken and the advance recommenced. ‘I noticed a regiment, which by its yellow facings was the Connaught Rangers, marching in close column of companies to attack a French regiment drawn up in line on the verge of the hill, with a small village [Gomecha?] in its rear. The 88th, although under a heavy cannonade from the enemy’s artillery, continued advancing gallantly, while we skirmishers took ground to the left, close to the road, in order to allow them to oppose this line in front. Though we were hotly engaged I watched their movements. The 88th next deployed into line, advancing all the time towards their opponents, who seemed to wait very coolly for them. When they had approached within 300 yards the French poured in a volley, or I should rather say a running fire from right to left. As soon as the British regiment recovered the first shock, and closed their files on the gap that had been made, they commenced advancing at double time till within fifty yards nearer to the enemy, when they halted and in turn gave a running fire from the whole line, and then without a moment’s pause, cheered and charged up the hill against them. The French meanwhile were attempting to reload. But they were hard pressed by the British, who gave them no time for a second volley. They went immediately to the right about, making the best of their way to the village behind.’
From this it is clear that the 88th fought on open ground, to the right of Ariñez and the high road. It was the centre regiment of the brigade: the 45th, therefore, must have been more to the right and well south of the road; the 74th on the high road were the actual takers of Ariñez. We have unluckily no description of Power’s Portuguese at the moment—but they lost heavily—the casualties being 25 officers and 386 men. They must have been engaged with Leval’s 2nd Brigade, which had been stationed about and to the north of Gomecha, while the 1st Brigade held the village of Ariñez and the hill behind.
[583] The amusing story told of this storm by Harry Smith in his autobiography (i. pp. 97-8) is too good to be omitted. ‘My brigade was sent to support the 7th Division, which was hotly engaged. I was sent forward to report to Lord Dalhousie, who commanded. I found his lordship and his Q.M.G. Drake in deep conversation. I reported pretty quick, and asked for orders (the head of the brigade was just getting under fire). I repeated the question, “What orders, my lord?” Drake became somewhat animated, and I heard his lordship say, “Better take the village.” I roared out, “Certainly, my lord,” and off I galloped, both calling to me to come back, but “none are so deaf as those who won’t hear.” I told General Vandeleur we were immediately to take the village. The 52nd deployed into line, our Riflemen were sent out in every direction, keeping up a fire nothing could resist.... The 52nd in line and the swarm of Riflemen rushed at the village, and though the ground was intersected by gardens and ditches nothing ever checked us, until we reached the rear of it. There was never a more impetuous onset—nothing could resist such a burst of determination.’ Smith’s addition that the brigade took twelve guns in this charge seems (as Mr. Fortescue remarks) to be of more doubtful value.
Naturally there is nothing of this in Dalhousie’s dispatch—a most disappointing paper. It is mostly in a self-exculpatory tone, to justify his lateness and the absence of his two rear brigades. He says that they came up at the same time as Vandeleur, which is certainly untrue, as neither of them had a single casualty all day. And they could not have failed to catch a shell or two if they had been anywhere near the fighting-line during the subsequent capture of Crispijana and Zuazo. Mr. Fortescue’s note that Captain Cairnes’s letter in the Dickson Papers, p. 916, proves that Barnes’s brigade had arrived by this time, is a misdeduction from Cairnes’s carelessness in talking of Grant’s brigade as ‘our first brigade,’ meaning thereby our leading brigade, not the brigade officially numbered 1. When Cairnes says that the ‘first brigade’ and the guns were ‘in their place,’ while the rest arrived very late in the action, we need only contrast the casualty lists—1st Brigade nil, 2nd Brigade 330 casualties, 3rd Brigade nil, to see what he means.
[584] It will be noticed that I put La Hermandad as the village where the heavy fighting took place, and which Vandeleur’s brigade stormed. All historians up to now have followed Napier in making Margarita the important place. A glance at the map will show that the latter village is too far forward to have been held for any time, after Leval had evacuated his original position on the great knoll facing Tres Puentes and Villodas.
I have to point out that neither Wellington nor Lord Dalhousie in the two contemporary dispatches (Dispatches, x. p. 451, and Supplementary Dispatches, viii. pp. 4-6) mention either place by name—only speaking of ‘a village.’ D’Erlon’s staff-officer in the report of the Army of the Centre says that Margarita was held for some time but was rendered untenable by Leval’s retreat—so that Darmagnac had to go back to the heights behind. Gazan’s report says that the British were masters of Margarita before he took up his position on the heights above Ariñez, and that the heights behind Margarita were the fighting position of D’Erlon. Of the diarists or chroniclers who issued their books before the fifth volume of Napier came out, and who were present on this part of the field, Green (68th), Wheeler (51st), Captain Wood (82nd), mention no village names, nor do Lord Gough’s and Captain Cairnes’s contemporary letters, nor Geo. Simmons’ contemporary diary. Nor does Sir Harry Smith’s amusing account of his dealings with Lord Dalhousie before ‘the village’ which Vandeleur took (Autobiography, i. pp. 97-8) quoted in the preceding note.
After Napier’s book stated that the Light Division battalions took Margarita, and Gough with the 2/87th La Hermandad (a reversal of the real time and facts as I think), most later writers accepted these statements as gospel. But the report of Kruse, commanding the Nassau regiment, absolutely proves that Napier is wrong. Moreover, the rough map, annexed to D’Erlon’s original report of the battle in the French Archives, gives Hermandad as the position of Darmagnac, with his march thither from Gomecha and to Zuazo indicated by arrows. Kruse’s report may be found at length in the Nassau volume of Saussez’s Les Allemands sous les Aigles, pp. 340-1.
[585] This British claim is corroborated by the narrative of the French surgeon Fée, present at Abechuco that day.
[586] Though he had lost several when La Martinière was driven out of Gamarra Mayor (see above, p. 425) and Abechuco.
[587] The other regiments of Hay’s brigade were evidently kept in reserve, for the casualties of the 1/38th were eight only, and those of the 1/9th 25. The 8th Caçadores of Spry’s brigade lost 40 men, the Portuguese Line battalions only 41 between the four of them.
[588] Sergeant James Hale of the 1/9th, who has left us the only good detailed account of the fighting at Gamarra with which I am acquainted (pp. 105-6).
[589] Numbers impossible to determine, as they are never borne in the muster rolls of the Army of the Centre. But as they were 2,019 strong on July 16, when Soult reorganized the whole Army of Spain, they were probably 2,500 strong before the battle.
[590] So Tirlet, making allowances for the lost pieces.
[591] Viz. the divisional batteries of the 2nd Division (one British, one Portuguese), 3rd, 4th, 7th, Light, and Silveira’s Divisions, two H. A. batteries attached to the cavalry, two British and one Portuguese batteries of the reserve, and three Spanish guns belonging to Morillo.
[592] These notes are partly from Tirlet’s very interesting artillery report, partly from the narrative of the staff-officer of the Army of the Centre, already often quoted above.
[594] Memoirs, p. 479.
[595] Diary of Wachholz, attached with a Brunswick light company to the 4th Division, pp. 315-16.
[596] Thirty guns according to Garbé’s report—40 according to that of D’Erlon’s staff-officer, quoted above.
[597] Blaze, p. 244.
[598] What regiment was this? Obviously one of Colville’s or Grant’s—as obviously not the 51st, 68th, 82nd, 87th, 94th, from all of which we have narratives of the battle, which do not mention their being charged by cavalry or forming square. There remain the Chasseurs Britanniques, 1/5th, 2/83rd—it may have been any of these.
[599] Tomkinson of the 16th, fighting not far off, says that these squadrons ‘got into a scrape’ by charging about 2,000 French cavalry (p. 249). They lost 2 officers and 57 men. This was obviously the affair of which Digeon speaks. His 12th Dragoons, which charged the square, lost 22 casualties.
[600] One each of the 12th and 16th.
[601] The best account of all this is in the invaluable Tomkinson’s Diary (pp. 250-1). There is also an interesting narrative by Dallas, who took part in the charge, though he had no business there (pp. 92-3). The French cavalry were the 15th Dragoons and 3rd Hussars. They suffered heavily—the former regiment losing 4 officers and 53 men, the latter 4 officers and 30 men. The British dragoons got off lightly, all things considered, with 1 officer and 11 men hit in the 12th, and 1 officer and 20 men in the 10th. Tomkinson much praises the French infantry. ‘I never saw men more steady and exact to the word of command. I rode within a yard of them, they had their arms at the port, and not a man attempted to fire till we began to retire.’
[602] Cf. the reports of the Army of Portugal, Tomkinson, Hale of the 1/9th, and Graham’s very sketchy dispatch, which says that the infantry was much delayed at the bridges, but that ‘the greatest eagerness was manifested by all the corps. The Caçador battalions of both Portuguese brigades followed with the cavalry.... The enemy’s flight, however, was so rapid that no material impression could be made on them, though more than once charged by squadrons of General Anson’s brigade.’ (Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 9.)
[603] Gazan says in his report that he only abandoned the guns because he found the roads south of Vittoria blocked by fugitive vehicles from Vittoria.
[604] L’Estrange of the 31st says that some of the French, moving almost in the middle of advancing British brigades, were mistaken for Spaniards, and allowed to get off unharmed. Surtees of the 2/95th tells a similar story.
[605] The lancers are shown in Martinien’s lists to have lost six officers, the hussars four. The casualties of the 18th Hussars (3 officers and 37 men) and of the 10th (16 men) were certainly got in this affair, which was evidently hot while it lasted. The best account of Joseph’s last half-hour on the battlefield is in the Mémoires of Miot de Melito (iii. pp. 280-1), who was at the King’s side and shared his wild ride.
[606] Of the artillery Tirlet’s report shows that 104 were field guns actually used in the battle. The remaining 47 were partly the reserve guns of the Army of the North, left stacked at Vittoria when Clausel took his divisions to hunt for Mina, and partly guns of position from the garrisons of Burgos, Vittoria, Miranda, &c.
[607] There is a report of the regiment in the Archives Nationales setting forth that it did not lose its eagle, but the flag of the battalion reduced by Imperial orders in the spring, which was in the regimental fourgon.
[608] It inspired him with the idea of designing a British marshal’s baton on which lions were substituted for eagles. Wellington naturally got the first ever made.
[609] All this from Leith Hay (always an interesting narrator), vol. ii. pp. 203 and 208.
[610] Oddly enough, two contemporary diaries mention Mr. D.’s luck. He got by no means the biggest haul. Sergeant Costello of the 1/95th says that he got over £1,000. A private of the 23rd carried off 1,000 dollars in silver—a vast load! Green of the 68th records that two of his comrades got respectively 180 doubloons, and nearly 1,000 dollars (p. 165).
[611] Tomkinson, p. 254.
[612] Miot de Melito, iii. p. 279.
[613] There are amusing accounts of the conversation of this lively lady in the narratives of Leith Hay and Dr. McGrigor, who took care of her.
[614] But Lecor had a straggler or two out of one of his line-battalions—no doubt men who had gone off marauding, like most of the missing in the British list.
[615] Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 8.
[616] See e. g. Swabey’s note on his dangerous ride with Graham along the Esla, at the end of May, ‘whether the General is blind or mad I have not decided—he must have been one or the other to ride in cold blood over those rocks and precipices.’ Swabey’s Diary, p. 595.
[617] Cairnes’s Diary, p. 926.
[618] Fée, Souvenirs de la guerre d’Espagne, pp. 249-50.
[619] He is thinking of the nights after the storms of Rodrigo and Badajoz.
[620] Dispatches, xii. p. 473. The regiment named is a newly arrived cavalry unit, which attracted the Commander-in-Chief’s special notice by its prominence in plundering.
[621] Wellington to Bathurst, Dispatches, xii. p. 496.
[622] Personal diaries seem to show that this was the case with Cadogan’s brigade on the right, and the whole 5th Division on the left.
[623] This interesting fact is recorded in a conversation of Wellington with Croker, which contains some curious notes on the battle (Croker, ii. p. 232).
[624] Thinking that he had only his own two divisions of the Army of the North, and Taupin’s of the Army of Portugal, while really Barbot’s division was also with him.
[625] The former going by El Burgo and Alegria, the latter by Arzubiaga and Audicana.
[626] Murray to Wellington, Supplementary Dispatches, viii. pp. 3-4.
[627] See his dispatch to Wellington dated from Tolosa on June 26th.
[628] See vol. iv. p. 327.
[629] See Colonel Frazer’s account in his Peninsular Letters, p. 186.
[630] See, for this statement of the Duke’s, Fortescue’s British Army, vol. ix. p. 199.
[631] See Duncan’s History of the Royal Artillery, vol. ii. pp. 356-60, an indictment of Wellington’s whole policy to the corps, and especially of his famous Waterloo letter on their conduct in 1815.
[632] Reille reported that the straggling was so portentous that only 4,200 infantry were with the eagles on July 24th. See Vidal de la Blache, i. p. 79.
[633] Which had relieved Cassagne’s division, the rearguard on the 23rd.
[634] The regiment of Nassau alone returned 76 casualties that day.
[635] And took over command on the night of the 22nd; see Pakenham Letters, June 26, 1813.
[636] Whose riotous and undisciplined conduct so irritated Wellington that he directed that all the officers in charge should miss their next step in regimental promotion, by being passed over by their juniors.
[637] I have only mentioned the movement of the 6th Division and R. Hill’s cavalry above: there is no doubt as to what they did, and on the 30th they are both at Lerin, according to the location given by Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 39. But there is a puzzle about Oswald’s 5th Division on the 26th-30th, which I was long unable to solve. Wellington in his dispatch to Bathurst of July 3 (Dispatches, x. p. 501) says that he moved not only Clinton from Vittoria but Oswald from Salvatierra towards Logroño, on the march to intercept Clausel. He ought to have known if any one did! But I was not able to find any trace of the 5th Division having actually gone to Logroño: to march back from Salvatierra to Vittoria, and thence to follow Clinton to Logroño and Lerin would have been a very long business. Now regimental diaries of the 3/1st and 1/9th prove that the division was at Salvatierra on the 25th, and marched back to Vittoria on the 26th. But the best of them (Hale of the 1/9th) says that from Vittoria the division was turned back towards Pampeluna, and reached a spot within two leagues of it on the third day. At this point it was turned off northward and marched by Tolosa to join Graham’s column and assist at the siege of St. Sebastian. All accounts agree that it reached the neighbourhood of that fortress on July 5th-6th. Allowing six days for the march Vittoria-St. Sebastian, we have only the 27th, 28th, 29th, 30th June for the supposed march Salvatierra-Vittoria-Logroño, and return. The solution at last came to hand in General Shadwell’s Life of Colin Campbell of the 1/9th (Lord Clyde). Here it is mentioned, apparently on some record of Campbell’s, that his brigade only got to La Guardia, one march beyond Trevino, and was then turned back and sent north (Life of Campbell, i. p. 18). This is no doubt correct.
[638] Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 33.
[639] Wellington’s letters to Hill, Copons, and Castaños in Dispatches, x. pp. 470-1, all state very shortly that he hopes to cut off Clausel if he tries to get back into France by Jaca. All that is said is, ‘I do not think we shall be able to do much against Clausel. He has passed Tudela on the way to Saragossa. I propose to try for him on the road to Jaca’ (to Hill). The letters to the Spanish generals do not speak of Clausel’s going through Saragossa, but of his marching across Aragon to Jaca.
[640] See ‘Dispositions for the 28th June,’ Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 33.
[641] Wellington to Castaños, Monreal, June 30, Dispatches, x. p. 477, and to Bathurst, x. p. 496 and ibid. 501.
[642] Elaborate dispositions for their distribution round the fortress are given in the Order dated June 30 (Supplementary Dispatches, viii. pp. 34-6).
[643] See above, p. 378. For all the narrative which follows Foy’s well-written dispatches, printed in full in his life by Girod de l’Ain, are a primary authority. But I think that historians have given him a little more credit than he deserves—he is a very engaging witness. As to his own strength, that of his enemies, and the losses on both sides, he is no more trustworthy than Soult or Masséna. It may suffice to say that he makes the British 4th and 5th Divisions present at Tolosa, and gives Longa 6,000 men.
[644] Foy to Jourdan, 20 June, in Girod de l’Ain’s appendix, pp. 393-4.
[645] Batteries of Smith and Arriaga. Julius Hartmann, commanding Artillery Reserve, accompanied them; see Dickson Papers, June 22.
[646] From the journal of operations of General Giron’s Army, lent me by Colonel Arzadun.
[647] In his Diary (Girod de l’Ain, p. 210) Foy says that he had only one battalion of the 6th Léger, in his formal dispatch to Clarke (ibid. 395) he says that he had two.
[648] In reporting to Giron Longa mentions his 53 prisoners, and says that his own losses were ‘inconsiderable.’ Journal of the Army of Galicia, June 22.
[649] Journal of the Army of Galicia, June 23.
[650] Maucune reported 200 casualties (Foy, ed. Girod de l’Ain, p. 333), Graham 93, mostly in the 5th Caçadores. St. Pol’s Italians had beaten off Longa without losing more than 100 men—Giron does not give Longa’s loss, which was probably a little more.
[651] 1st Division about 4,500 bayonets, Pack and Bradford 4,500, Anson’s cavalry 650.
[652] Giron’s two Galician divisions 11,000, Porlier 2,500, Longa 3,000.
[653] His own division and Maucune’s about 3,000 each, St. Pol’s Italians 1,500, garrisons from Bilbao, Durango, and other western places about 3,000, De Conchy’s brigade of Army of the North [64th (2 battalions), 22nd (1 battalion), 1st Line (2 companies), and 34th (4 companies)] 2,000, garrisons of Tolosa and other places in Guipuzcoa about 2,500.
[654] Girod de l’Ain, p. 400.
[655] This was merely the noise of the rearguard action of Cassagne with Wellington’s advance, near Yrurzun, on the afternoon of that day.
[657] The column was led—for reasons which are not given—not by its own Caçador battalion, but by three companies of the 4th Caçadores and two of the 1st Line, borrowed from the neighbouring brigade of Pack. Graham praises the conduct of this detachment.
[658] Foy (Girod de l’Ain, p. 400) says that if his orders had been obeyed there would have been a battalion and not a detachment holding the access to the hill. Graham (Wellington Supplementary Dispatches, viii. p. 44) declares that though many of Bradford’s men fought well, ‘the officers did not seem to understand what they were about, or how to keep their men in the proper place,’ and a good many hung back.
[659] Very different figures from those of Foy’s dispatch, which stated that eight minutes of terrible fire laid low 500 of the assailants! (Girod de l’Ain, p. 402).
[660] There is one paragraph of Foy’s dispatch which I cannot make out. He says that two British regiments tried to storm the hill of Jagoz, and were repulsed by the voltigeur companies alone of the brigade which held it. I cannot fit this in to any British narrative—the only red-coated battalions in that part of the field were the line battalions of the K.G.L., and they had certainly been engaged against Bonté and the Italians, and afterwards tried to storm the Pampeluna Gate. Longa’s men only were opposite the Jagoz position, as far as I can make out.