History of the war in France and Belgium, in 1815: containing minute details of the battles of Quatre-Bras, Ligny, Wavre, and Waterloo

Front matter

Informazioni su questo libro

Ha sopravvissuto abbastanza per non essere piu protetto dai diritti di copyright e diventare di pubblico dominio. Un libro di pubblico dominio e un libro che non e mai stato protetto dal copyright o i cui termini legali di copyright sono scaduti. La classificazione di un libro come di pubblico dominio pud variare da paese a paese. I libri di pubblico dominio sono l’anello di congiunzione con il passato, rappresentano un patrimonio storico, culturale e di conoscenza spesso difficile da scoprire.

Linee guide per Putilizzo

Preface

V

The Editor of an article in “ The Quarterly Review, No. CLI.,” entitled Ci Marmont, Siborne, and Alison,” having, in his comments upon this work, denied the accuracy of one or two important facts therein stated, I have, in notes at pages 57 and 152, entered into more minute details, which explain the grounds that warrant me in adhering to the original statements.

The observations made in the Preface of a volume of “ Murray^s Home and Colonial Library,” entitled “ The Story of Waterloo,” and the palpable embodyment of the present work into the pages of the latter, have been such as could scarcely fail to attract attention, and I have accordingly appended to this edition, in a separate form, some remarks upon that publication. Public opinion (if I may judge by the unanimous consent of the press) having so distinctly pro¬ nounced its acknowledgment of the value of my work, as one of history, I could not disregard the conduct of a writer, who, in the first place endeavours to depreciate that value, and then unblushingly makes the most ample and unlicensed use of it for his own purposes.

IBM June , 1848.

W. SIBORNE.

TO THE SECOND EDITION.

The circumstance of the first edition having been sold off within a very few days, combined with the highly favourable notices taken of the work by professional as well as other critics, and, I may be permitted to add, the very flattering encomiums which have been pronounced upon it by so many who, from their position, are the most competent to form an opinion on its merits, cannot fail to afford proofs, the most satisfactory to the Public, and, at the same time, the most gratifying to the Author, that, in the production of these volumes, upon a subject of such stirring national interest, neither the expectations of the former have been altogether disappointed, nor the labours of the latter bestowed in vain.

The present edition contains corrections on one or two points of trivial importance, to which my attention has been directed, and I shall be happy to receive further information from surviving eye-witnesses who may discover any instances in which the facts related appear either inaccurately or insufficiently explained.

W. SIBORNE.

PREFACE.

Some years ago, when constructing a Model of the Field of Waterloo, at a particular period of the battle, I found it necessary to make great exertions to procure that detailed information for which I had sought in vain in the already numerous published accounts of the military transactions of 1815. Anxious to ensure the rigorous accuracy of my work, I ventured to apply for information to nearly all the surviving eye-witnesses of the incidents which my model was intended to represent. In every quarter, and among officers of all ranks, from the general to the subaltern, my applications were responded to in a most liberal and generous spirit; and the result did indeed surprise me, so greatly at variance was this historical evidence with the general notions which had previously prevailed on the subject. Thus was suggested the present work. I was induced by the success of this experi¬ ment to embrace a wider field, and to extend my enquiries over the entire battle, and, ultimately, throughout the cam¬ paign itself, from its commencement to its close.

Having become the depository of such valuable materials, I felt it a duty to the honourable profession of which I am an humble member, to submit to it, and to the world, a true and faithful account of this memorable epoch in the history of Britain’s military greatness.

Though not so presumptuous as to imagine that I have fully supplied so absolute a desideratum, yet I consider myself fortunate in being the instrument of withdrawing so far the veil from Truth. One of my Waterloo correspondents has humorously remarked, that “ if ever truth lies at the bottom of a well, she does so immediately after a great battle, and it takes an amazingly long time before she can be lugged out.” The time of her emerging appears to have at length arrived, but, while I feel that I have brought to light much that was involved in obscurity, I cannot but be sensible that I may have fallen into errors. Should such be the case, I shall be most ready, hereafter, to make any

VUl

PREFACE.

corrections that may appear requisite, on my being favoured, by eye-witnesses, with further well authenticated information.

I take this opportunity of returning my sincere thanks to the numerous officers of the British Army, who have so kindly committed to my keeping their recollections of the events which I have attempted to describe. Similar thanks are likewise due to the officers of the King’s German legion and Hanoverian subsidiary corps; as also to the General Officers who respectively furnished me with such information as related to the troops of Brunswick and Nassau.

I beg also to express my obligations to the Prussian Minister of War, and the officers of the Prussian general staff in Berlin, for the readiness and liberality with which they have supplied me with such details concerning the dispositions and movements of the troops of their sove¬ reign, as were essential to me in prosecuting the task I had undertaken.

Having briefly explained the circumstances that led to the construction of the work which I thus venture to place before the Public, I have now only to express a hope that my labours may be crowned with usefulness. Should such a result occur, I shall then have obtained the only fame I seek.

W. SIBORNE.

REMARKS

UPON

“THE STORY OF WATERLOO,”

BY THE REV. G. R. GLEIG s

FORMING A VOLUME OF THE “ HOME AND COLONIAL LIBRARY.*’

The great demand for cheap literature by the middle and lower classes of society, is a healthy sign of the times, a manifest token of the vast increase of education, and the consequent thirst for knowledge, which, by the joint exertions of the Government, of public bodies, and of private indivi¬ duals, have started into existence within, comparatively, a very brief period. To meet this demand, those useful literary caterers for the public taste, authors and publishers, have been industrious and painstaking. Several well-conducted serial publications have been, and continue to be, issued from the press, containing new editions, or re-prints, of various stan¬ dard works, on subjects of general information or unfailing interest. Among the more prominent of these are the “ Home and Colonial Library,” “ Chambers’s Journal,” &c. With a view to procure the best materials for these publications, works of a high character, but the copyrights of which have expired, are re-edited, and liberal purchases are made of copyrights still extant. In this manner, vested rights are respected, and the interests of both authors and publishers satisfactorily adjusted. Such is the general rule, which, however, like numerous other general rules, appears to be subject to exceptions; and it is in consequence of such an exception, involving the spoliation of literary property, that the publishers of the “ History of the War in France and Belgium in 1815 99 have been seriously injured.

X

In last June, a volume of the “ Home and Colonial Li¬ brary” was published, entitled, “ The Story of Waterloo / 1 by the Rev. G. R. Gleig. Into this volume nearly the entire of the present work has been embodied, the arrangement of the military operations, in all their details, copied in the same consecutive order, to deduce which cost me so much labour and research in the collection of evidence from eye-witnesses: paragraph after paragraph has been transferred to his pages, not containing the same words , but presenting the same facts and incidents in another dress—in short, to use a literary ex¬ pression, " re-written ;” and parallel passages innumerable appear throughout the book. “ The Story ” commences with a view of the state of Europe previously to the opening of the campaign, but without conveying any more necessary information on this point than what I have thought proper to furnish, in a different style, in my own introduction of the general subject: it also contains two or three chapters de¬ scriptive of the “ state of feeling ” at Brussels before, during, and after the battle, for all of which ample materials are af¬ forded in the numerous publications of that time, such as Mudford’s and Boothes accounts, 66 Paul's Letters to his Kinsfolk,” &c. With these and some other exceptions of minor import, the “ Story ” appears to be “ got up as book¬ sellers say, from the History of the Campaign of 1815 which I have constructed, not with materials furnished by previous publications, but with the diligently collated, and well au¬ thenticated, evidence of eye-witnesses of all ranks. In the Preface, after a few complimentary remarks, a broad insinu¬ ation is made by Mr. Gleig, that, in my History, I have represented battles as won by “feats of individual heroism.” I quote the following paragraph.

“ I have not applied to many of the minor actors in the “ great game for information respecting its details. Captain “ Siborae, in his valuable work, has saved all who may be " curious in those matters, a great deal of trouble 5 and if I “ shall seem somewhat to have overlooked the advantages “ which he offers to me, I trust that he will not on that ac- “ count consider that I think lightly of what he has done. “ His History will always stand upon its own merits; I am “glad to acknowledge my many obligations to it; and his “plans I have found, while studying my subject, to be inva- “ luable. But I confess that my recollections of war lead me iC somewhat to undervalue—perhaps in a measure to distrust “ —the stories told in perfect rood faith by parties who happen “ to be the heroes of them. Modern battles are not won by

STORY OF WATERLOO.

XI c< n

“ feats of individual heroism ; indeed, many gallant deeds “ achieved embarrass more than they facilitate the accom¬ plishment of the General’s plans. I have, therefore, endea- “ voured as much as possible to avoid entering into minute “ narrations of these things, except where simple facts were to “ be stated; and I hope that this course will prove satisfac- “ tory to my readers/'

Now if my work be of that character which Mr. Gleig here assigns to it, and if he alone have described the means and motives of action which constitute the highest branch of the art of war, better known by the term “ strategy/’ we have assuredly confounded the titles of our respective works, for, in that case, his should be the “ History of the War in France and Belgium in 1815,” and mine , “ The Story of Waterloo.” But I make no such admission, and 1 indignantly repudiate the insinuation which he has thus publicly put forth; and I do so, not only from a firm conviction of its utter groundless¬ ness, but from the fact that the main object which I had in view, when undertaking the work, was particularly to eluci¬ date the strategy of the campaign, as will be seen by the following extract from the Prospectus previously issued by my Publishers.

“ Numerous as are the accounts already published of this “ great conflict, the information which they convey is generally “ of too vague and indistinct a nature to satisfy either the mili- “ tary man who seeks for professional instruction, or the “ general reader who desires to comprehend more clearly, in “ all its details, that gorgeous machinery, if it may be so “ termed, which was put in motion, regulated, and controlled, “ by the greatest masters of their art, who, in modem times, “ have been summoned forth to wield the mighty engines of “ destruction wherewith nation wars against nation. How “just is the observation of Jomini, one of the most ta¬ lented military writers of the day—‘Jamais bataille ne fut “plus confinement decrite que celle de Waterloo/ On con- “ suiting these accounts the public glean little beyond the “fact that at Waterloo the Allied army stood its ground “ the whole day, in defiance of the reiterated attacks by the “ French, until the Duke of Wellington led it forward to crown “its exertions with the most splendid victory. They afford “ us but a faint idea of those strategical movements and com- “ binations upon which the grand design of the campaign “ was based by the one party, and with which it was assailed “ by the other; and we seek in vain for the development of “those tactical dispositions by which the skill of the com-*

c

Xii REMARKS UPON MR. GLEIG’S

“ manders and the valour of the combatants were fairly “ tested. From the want of due consecutive arrangements in “ the details, and the tendency too frequently manifested to “ compensate for this deficiency by mere anecdotic narration, “ the motives by which, in the great game of war, the illus- “ trious players are actuated, are left out of view, while cir- (i cumstances which especially call forth the skill of subordi- “ nate officers in command, as also the courage, the discipline, Ct and the prowess, of particular brigades, regiments, or even “ minor divisions of the contending masses, are either imper- “ fectly elucidated, or, as is often the case, unhesitatingly set “aside to make way for the exploits of a few individuals whose “ deeds, however heroic they may he deemed , constitute hut lc isolated fractional parts of that great sum of moral energy “and physical force combined , requisite to give full effect to “ the application of the mental powers of the chieftains under “ whose guidance the armies are respectively placed. These “ remarks have reference, more or less, not only to the “ generality of the accounts of the Battle of Waterloo, with “ which the public have hitherto been furnished, but also fi1 to those of Quatre-Bras, Ligny, and Wavre; the first of " which, brilliant as was the reflection which it cast upon the " glory of the victors, became eclipsed solely by the more “ dazzling splendour of the greater, because more important, " triumph of Waterloo. To endeavour to remedy these de- “ ficiencies, through the medium of the evidence of eye- “ witnesses most willingly and liberally supplied, as well as “ carefully collated, examined, and, at the same time, proved, " wherever practicable, by corroborative testimony—every “ component piece of information being made to dovetail, as "it were, into its adjacent and corresponding parts—is the “ chief object of the present publication.”

The above extract, whilst it affords a most explicit declara¬ tion of the great object which I had in view in publishing my "History of the War in France and Belgium in 1815, w indicates with sufficient clearness, by the lines which are printed in Italics , my views of the value to be attached, in military historical composition, to " feats of individual heroism/* I have not the presumption to imagine that I have completely acted up to the spirit, and literally fulfilled the promise, of this portion of the Prospectus of my publica¬ tion ; but I have the resolution to affirm that such has been the object of my humble and strenuous endeavours. My critics have been most numerous, and it is with pride and satisfaction that I refer to their opinions, so freely and exten-

<f STORY OF WATERLOO.” xiii

sively pronounced through both the professional and the public press; and, until the promulgation of Mr. Gleig’s remarks in his Preface to the “ Story of Waterloo/* I have never, in a single instance, been represented as deficient in those qualifications which are so essentially requisite in the author of a military History. Even the writer of the article in the Quarterly Review for June 1845, to which Mr. Gleig deems it necessary to adhere in one or two points of some importance,* does not hesitate to view the work f< as a his¬ tory, and not as a collection of anecdotes.” In constructing a complete history of the campaign, the introduction of “ feats of individual heroism” in connexion with the military operations is unavoidable; and Mr. Gleig has found it very convenient to copy nearly all those feats which I have de¬ scribed, as well as numerous incidents detailed in my work, into his Story,” merely taking care not to employ precisely the same words, for this would be rather too glaring an act of literary piracy. I could never have anticipated that this would be made a pretext for detracting from the character of my “ History,” whatever may be its demerits in other respects. With due deference, I would venture to hint that it would have been more candid on the part of that Gentle-

* In a casual conversation which I had with Mr. Gleig, respecting the above article

in the “ Quarterly/' I mentioned that-(naming the writer) had fallen into a

great error in stating that the Duke of Wellington could, from the field of Quatre- Bras, distinctly see that of Ligny. I adverted to the line of argument I intended to adopt for the purpose of refuting the error; and, on my instancing the inter¬ vening heights of Marbais, Mr. Gleig remarked, ‘‘ Ah ! you have him there !" At that time he was preparing his “ Story of Waterloo” for the press, but I was wholly ignorant of the fact, and he did not think proper to disclose it to me. When his book was published, I became curious to see what he had written upon this particular point, and I was not a little amused to find that in his desire to follow in the wake of the writer in the “ Quarterly,” and, at the same time, to overcome the difficulty which I had pointed out, he had represented’ that “the fields of action were near enough the one to the other to permit his” (the Duke's) “seeing, from each height as he ascended it, the smoke of the battle of Ligny rise in thick volumes over the intervening woods.” This is the first time we have heard of the Duke having ascended each height on his own field, to see what Bliicher was about at Ligny. However, in the third sentence beyond the one above quoted, Mr. Gleig forgets the woods which, as if with a magic wand, he has caused to spring up between the two fields of action, and, borrowing that extraordinary telescope which the writer in the “ Quarterly” puts into the Duke's hands, and which at once levels both woods and heights, and clean away smoke, mist, and even darkness, t he actually enables the Duke to see “ the failure of that cavalry-charge which led to Bliicher's misfortune, and immediately preceded the general retreat of his army,”—which charge, be it recollected, took place at a distance of seven miles, and after darkness had set in !

* “ Story of Waterloo,” page 106.

t See my remarks in the note at page 154 of the present edition.

c 2 xiv man; to have openly stated that he had been engaged by Mr. Murray to edit such a cheap account of the battle as would be suitable for a volume of his “ Home and Colonial Libraryand, at all events, he ought so far to have re¬ spected the existing copyright of an author as to have acknowledged the authority for his several facts and inci¬ dents, however inconvenient it might have proved to have had that author’s name figuring as such authority on almost every page of his book.*

If, with the courtesy usually observable in such matters, Mr. Gleig had previously communicated with me, or Mr. Murray with my Publishers, either of those gentlemen would have ascertained that it was the intention of the latter to put forth a cheaper edition of my work as soon as arrangements could be made for that purpose. The withholding of any such communication looks very like “ stealing a march” upon both author and publishers, and tends to the inference that a work which was sold for two guineas a copy, and the popu¬ larity of which was so strikingly evinced by the fact that its first edition was exhausted within a few weeks of its publi¬ cation, presented a temptation not easily resisted by indi¬ viduals who would not scruple to “get up” the identical subject, embodying all the contents of that work, with perhaps a new head and tail, as well as a new title, and at a low price—in short, with a book at six shillings to drive one at two guineas out of the market.

I shall perhaps be reminded that Waterloo is a subject on which so much has been written, that sufficiently numerous materials were at hand to render any particular recourse to mine inexpedient: but I challenge Mr. Gleig to name any work, or set of works, published previously to mine, in which he could have found precisely the same facts, the same occur¬ rences, the same incidents, the same details, arranged in the same consecutive order, and so perfectly connected, so closely dovetailed into one another as to present a minutely tac¬ tical elucidation of the great battle, as are contained in my “ History.” Could Mr. Gleig have furnished the public with his “ Story” in the shape in which we find it, without having made the most unscrupulous use of my work? Let

* In one instance only, throughout his whole “ Story,” does Mr. Gleig allude to me j and then he does so t solely for the purpose of endeavouring to convict me of error, as regards a comparatively trivial incident, mentioned by me in a note,$ namely, the death of Corporal Shaw of the Life Guards. My reply to this imputation of inaccuracy will be found in the “ United Service Magazine” for August 1847, and my original statement remains unaltered.

t “ Story of Waterloo,” page 191.

X See page 260 of the present edition.

XV

“ STORY OF WATERLOO.**

him set apart all that he has taken from the latter, and what will then remain ? The shadow in place of the substance.

An enumeration of parallel passages in the two works would extend to an inordinate length the few remarks I have felt myself called upon to make injustice to my Publishers. I shall therefore content myself with requesting such persons as may be curious in these matters to compare the two accounts of any prominent or leading feature of the great battle. Let them select, for instance, the attack and defence of Hougomont, from the commencement to the close, and they will find in Mr. Gleig*s book all the occurrences and incidents related by him, not in the same words , for that would have been actionable, but in the same consecutive order in which they are arranged in my work. Only one little ex¬ ception occurs, and that consists in his making the fire break out at Hougomont much earlier, to which he is apparently induced by a desire, while adverting to the conduct of Ser¬ jeant Graham of the Coldstream Guards, to introduce at the same place an incident which I have related respecting him; but, when subsequently following up my narrative, as if forgetful of having thus anticipated the circumstance, he makes the fire break out at a much later period !* These remarks apply equally to the description of the grand attack made by d’Erlon^s corps and Kellermann*s cuirassiers against the British centre and left wing, and of its repulse; also to the attack and defence of La Haye Sainte, the French grand cavalry-attack of the British right wing and centre; and to the several dispositions and movements connected with the final attack by the French imperial guard. In a similar, if not a still more glaring manner, has Mr. Gleig copied the arrangement of dispositions and movements of the various troops engaged at the battle of Quatre-Bras, with all the occurrences and incidents in the same consecutive order in which they appear in my “ History.** These arrangements of the details of the military operations, the result of a mass of most valuable evidence, I should observe, are original, and not to be found in any previous work on the subject. In so unscrupulously adopting them Mr. Gleig was bound at least to quote, as he proceeded in his u Story,** the authority whence he had derived his information.

A comparison of the two works will fully attest the correctness of my remarks. As regards parallel passages, how¬ ever, I shall select two at random—the following, for instance, from our respective accounts of the contest at Hougomont;

* “ Story of Waterloo,” page 204.

XVI premising that mine is deduced from the positive evidence of eye witnesses, and Mr. Gleig*s (with some variation, which however slight, leads to error and confusion) from the result of that evidence as given in my own work, and which he could not have obtained from any other source.

Mr. Gleig,page 176.

“ Scarcely was this feat of nobleness* performed, when the enemy, having collected in denser masses, made a new rush against the gate. They failed in bursting it open ; but presently upon the top of the wall appeared a French gre¬ nadier, who had led the way for the purpose of removing the defences from the interior, and whose bold bearing shewed that he would not be deterred by a trifle. It hap¬ pened that Seijeant Graham

Captain Sibome , page 240.f “ During this advance of the French skirmishers against the extreme right of the Al¬ lied front line, the troops which formed their support attempted again to force open the rear gate of Hougomont.

The individuals before men¬ tioned as having closed the gate, were at the time occu¬ pied in rendering it more secure by placing against it some pieces of ash timber that lay in the yard. The French, failing in their endeavours to

• The following extracts contain Mr. Gleig s description of this ‘ 4 feat, and the parallel passage in my 44 History ”—the latter written down from the account given to me personally by Seijeant Graham.

Mr. Gleig, page 175.

44 At this moment Seij. Graham, who stood upon the banquette, and bore himself with unrivalled bravery, begged permission of Colonel Macdonnell to retire fora moment. Col. Macdonnell, who knew the nature of the man, merely said, * By all means, Graham, but I wonder you should ask leave now.* 4 1 would not, Sir,* was the answer; 4 only my brother is wounded, and he is in that outbuilding there, which has just caught fire. Give me leave to carry him out; I will be back in a mo¬ ment.* The leave was granted, of course, with eagerness, and Graham, laying down his musket, ran off, lifted his brother in his arms, and placed him in a ditch. He was back at his post be¬ fore his absence could well have been noticed, &c.”

Captain Sibome , 'Note, page 238-9.f

44 This individual deserves honourable mention, having greatly distinguished himself during the memorable defence of Hougomont. At a later period of the day, when in the ranks along the garden-wall facing the wood, and when the struggle was most severe in that quarter, he asked Lieut. Colonel Macdonnell’s permission to fall out. The Colonel, knowing the character of the man, expressed his surprise at the re¬ quest made at such a moment. Gra¬ ham explained that his brother lay wounded in one of the buildings then on fire, that he wished to remove him to a place of safety, and that he would then lose no time in rejoining the ranks.

The request was granted: Graham suc¬ ceeded in snatching his brother from the horrible fate which menaced him ; laid him in a ditch in rear of the inclo¬ sures, and, true to his word, was again at his post, &c.”

t Present edition.

66 STORY OF

had given his musket to Captain Wyndham, and was in the act of piling some heavy substance against the gate. ( Do you see that fellow, Gra¬ ham/ cried the Captain. * Yes, Sir/ was the laconic answer; whereupon a log of wood which he carried was dropped, and resuming his weapon, he took aim at the grenadier, and shot him dead.

None dared to follow where this brave man died, and the enemy forthwith abandoned their attempt on the gate and turned elsewhere,

“Away they now rushed along the inner edge of the orchard, there they found a gap communicating from the wood with the interior of the latter inclosure, and they sprang through it in great numbers, confident that they should have the edifice in re¬ verse. But Lord Saltoun with his gallant band was here.

He did not stop to skirmish —he formed his men in line, and with a shout rushed upon the head of the column. A brief but desperate struggle ensued, in which the guards abated nothing of their accus¬ tomed daring, and backwards by sheer force the intruders were borne, leaving many be¬ hind who there struck their last blow and fired their last shot. Nevertheless the weight of numbers was overpowering.