FOOTNOTES:
[1] For a description of this organization, the reader is referred to the “Precis des Evénemens Militaires, par Mathieu Dumas;” a work of infinite labour and research, in which the military story of ten years is told with unrivalled simplicity and elegance.
| Viz.:— about | 30,000 | Cavalry, |
| 6,000 | Foot Guards, | |
| 170,000 | Infantry of the line, | |
| 14,000 | Artillery. | |
| ——— | ||
| Total, | 220,000 |
Of these, between 50 and 60,000 were employed in the Colonies and in India; the remainder were disposable, because from 80 to 100,000 militia, differing from the regular troops in nothing but the name, were sufficient for the home duties. If to this force we add 30,000 marines, the military power of England must be considered prodigious.
[3] The anagram of Llorente.
[4] I think it necessary to state, in addition to the authorities quoted in the margin, that I have derived my information from officers, some French, some Italian, who were present in the tumult of the 2d of May. On the veracity of my informants I have the firmest reliance; their accounts agreed well, and the principal facts were confirmed by the result of my personal inquiries at Madrid in the year 1812.
[5] Five sail of the line and one frigate.
[6] Forty-two thousand dollars.
[7] Tio Jorge and Tio Marin, which may be rendered goodman Jorge, and goodman Marin, were two of the real chiefs whose energy saved Zaragoza in the first siege.
[8] The late Lord Melville.
[9] This transaction furnishes an example of the imprudence of being precipitate in granting public honours. Lord Strangford’s despatch relative to the emigration was written (as it is confidently asserted) not at Lisbon, but at Salt Hill, in the presence of sir James Yeo. His lordship (unintentionally of course) impressed the ministers with an idea that to his personal exertions the emigration should be attributed; whereas the prince regent of Portugal, yielding to the vigorous negotiations of sir Sydney Smith, not only embarked on the 27th, before lord Strangford arrived at Lisbon, but actually sailed without his lordship’s having had any official interview with his royal highness, and consequently without having had any opportunity to advance or retard the emigration. The English ministers, eager to testify their satisfaction at that event, conferred the red riband, not upon sir Sydney Smith, who had succeeded, but upon lord Strangford, who had failed! a result that his lordship could not have anticipated, or he would undoubtedly have written his despatch at Lisbon when the facts were fresh on his mind, and when he could have more forcibly described the admiral’s share in the transaction.
[10] The coast of Portugal.
[11] This is a remarkable instance of ministerial confusion; the despatch from sir Hew Dalrymple referred to as giving this “assurance,” not only made no mention of a promise to the junta of Seville, but the junta itself was not in existence at the time his despatch was written.
[12] The occupation of Cadiz was a favourite project with the English government at this period. They were not discouraged by Spencer’s unsuccessful efforts to gain admittance, nor by the representations of sir Hew Dalrymple, who had grounds for believing that any attempt to introduce British troops there, would bring down the greater part of Castaños’ army to oppose it by force; nor by the consideration that in a political view such a measure would give a subject for misrepresentation to the enemy’s emissaries, and that, in a military view, the burthen of Cadiz would clog all general operations in Portugal.
[13] The ministers were so intent upon occupying Cadiz, and so little acquainted with the state of public feeling in Andalusia, that one of those generals carried with him his appointment as governor of that city.
[14] Yet lord Byron has gravely asserted in prose and verse that the convention was signed at the marquis of Marialva’s house at Cintra; and the author of “The Diary of an Invalid,” improving upon the poet’s discovery, detected the stains of the ink spilt by Junot upon the occasion.
[15] There is good reason to believe, that a silly intrigue carried on through the medium of the princess of Tour and Taxis with Talleyrand, and some others, who were even then ready to betray Napoleon, was the real cause of the negotiation having been broken off by Mr. Canning.
[16] Sir Walter Scott, in his Life of Napoleon, inaccurately asserts, that sir John Moore, “sent ten thousand men, under sir David Baird, by sea, to Coruña,” and that “the general science of war, upon the most extended scale, seems to have been so little understood or practised by the English generals at this time, that instead of the country being carefully reconnoitred by officers of skill, the march of the army was arranged by such hasty and inaccurate information as could be collected from the peasants. By their reports general Moore was induced to divide his army”——What “the general science of war upon an extended scale” may mean, I cannot pretend to say; but that sir David Baird was sent by the government from England direct to Coruña, and that sir John Moore was not induced by the reports of the peasants to divide his army, may be ascertained by a reference to the [Appendix, No. 13], section 2.
[17] Navarre and Biscay being within the French line of defence, the inhabitants were, according to the civilians, de facto French subjects.
[18] In the winter of 1812, captain Hill, of the royal navy, was sent to Cronstadt to receive Spanish prisoners who had been taken by the Russians. Of five thousand Spaniards that were delivered to him, above four thousand were men who had escaped with Romana from the Danish isles in 1808. Captives at Espinosa, they had entered the French ranks, served in Napoleon’s continental wars, and being made prisoners by the Russians in the retreat from Moscow, were once more brought back to Spain in English vessels. This is a curious commentary upon the silly stories that have been promulgated relative to the desperate fighting of Blake’s army, and the devoted courage with which, Spartan-like, Romana’s soldiers died to a man upon the field of battle.
| MEN. | ||
| Landed at Gihon, 9th October, 1808 | 9,404 | |
| Deduct cavalry, which never joined Blake’s army | 1,404 | |
| —— | ||
| 8,000 | ||
| Prisoners delivered to captain Hill | 4,500 | |
| —— | ||
| 3,500 |
Now, if we make allowance, 1º. For natural and violent deaths during four years of service under Napoleon, 2º. For those who might not have been taken by the Russians, and if we believe that some might possibly have escaped from Espinosa alive, the number of Spartans will probably be thought not to have exceeded the classical number of 300.
[19] Dukes of Infantado, of Hijar, Medina Celi, and Ossuna; marquis Santa Cruz; counts Fernan, Miñez, and Altamira; prince of Castello Franco, Pedro Cevallos, and the bishop of St. Ander, were proscribed, body and goods, as traitors to France and Spain.
[20] The following remarkable instance of courage and discipline deserves to be recorded. John Walton, a native of the south of Ireland, and Richard Jackson, an Englishman, were posted in a hollow road on the plain beyond the bridge, and at a distance from their piquet. If the enemy approached, one was to fire, run back to the brow of the hill, and give notice if there were many or few; the other was to maintain his ground. A party of cavalry following a hay cart stole up close to these men, and suddenly galloped in, with a view to kill them and surprise the post. Jackson fired, but was overtaken, and received twelve or fourteen severe wounds in an instant; he came staggering on, notwithstanding his mangled state, and gave the signal. Walton, with equal resolution and more fortune, defended himself with his bayonet, and wounded several of the assailants, who retreated, leaving him unhurt; but his cap, his knapsack, his belts, and his musquet were cut in above twenty places, and his bayonet was bent double, his musquet covered with blood, and notched like a saw from the muzzle to the lock. Jackson escaped death during the retreat, and finally recovered of his wounds.
[21] Several thousand infantry slept in the long galleries of an immense convent built round a square; the lower corridors were filled with the horses of the cavalry and artillery, so thickly stowed that it was scarcely possible for a single man to pass them, and there was but one entrance. Two officers returning from the bridge, being desirous to find shelter for their men, entered the convent, and with horror perceived that a large window shutter being on fire, and the flame spreading to the rafters above, in a few moments the straw under the horses would ignite, and six thousand men and animals would inevitably perish in the flames. One of the officers, (captain Lloyd, of the forty-third,) a man of great activity, strength, and presence of mind, made a sign to his companions to keep silence, and springing on to the nearest horse, run along the backs of the others until he reached the flaming shutter, which he tore off its hinges and cast out of the window; then returning quietly, awakened some of the soldiers, and cleared the passage without creating any alarm, which in such a case would have been as destructive as the flames. Captain Lloyd was a man of more than ordinary talents; his character has been forcibly and justly depicted in that excellent little work called the “Life of a Sergeant.”
| Lorges’s dragoons | 1,400 | |
| La Houpaye’s ditto | 1,450 | |
| Franceschi’s light cavalry | 1,350 | |
| —— | ||
| Total | 4,200 |
[23] Ninety-fifth regiment.
[24] I am aware that the returns laid before Parliament in 1809 make the sum 60,000l., and the whole loss during the campaign nearly 77,000l.; but it is easier to make an entry of one sum for a treasury return, than to state the details accurately. The money agents were, like the military agents, acting independently, and all losses went down under the head of abandoned treasure. My information is derived from officers actually present, and who all agree that the only treasure abandoned was that at Nogales, and that the sum was 25,000l. When it was ordered to be rolled over the brink of the hill, two guns, and a battalion of infantry, were actually engaged with the enemy to protect it, and some person in whose charge the treasure was, exclaiming, “it is money!” the general replied, “so are shot and shells.” The following anecdote will show how such accidents may happen in war. An officer had charge of the cars that drew this treasure; in passing a village, a lieutenant of the fourth regiment observing that the bullocks were exhausted, took the pains to point out where fresh and strong animals were to be found, and advised that the tired ones should be exchanged for others more vigorous, which were close at hand; but the escorting officer, either ignorant of, or indifferent to his duty, took no notice of this recommendation, and continued his march with the exhausted cattle.
[25] The author’s eldest brother. He was returned amongst the killed. When the French renewed the attack at Elvina he was, with a few men, somewhat in advance of the village, for the troops were broken into small parties by the vineyard walls and narrow lanes. Being hurt, he endeavoured to return, but the enemy coming down, he was stabbed, and thrown to the ground with five wounds; and death appeared inevitable, when a French drummer rescued him from his assailants, and placed him behind a wall. A soldier with whom he had been struggling, irritated to ferocity, returned to kill him, but was prevented by the drummer. The morning after the battle the duke of Dalmatia being apprised of major Napier’s situation, had him conveyed to good quarters, and with a kindness and consideration very uncommon, wrote to Napoleon, desiring that his prisoner might not be sent to France, which (from the system of refusing exchanges) would have been destruction to his professional prospects. The marshal also obtained for the drummer the decoration of the legion of honour. The events of the war obliged Soult to depart in a few days from Coruña, but he recommended major Napier to the attention of marshal Ney; and that marshal also treated his prisoner with the kindness of a friend rather than the rigour of an enemy, for he quartered him with the French consul, supplied him with money, gave him a general invitation to his house on all public occasions, and refrained from sending him to France. Nor did marshal Ney’s kindness stop there; for when the flag of truce arrived, and that he became acquainted with the situation of major Napier’s family, he suddenly waved all forms, and instead of answering the inquiry by a cold intimation of his captive’s existence, sent him, and with him the few English prisoners taken in the battle, at once to England, merely demanding that none should serve until regularly exchanged. I should not have dwelt thus long upon the private adventures of an officer, but that gratitude demands a public acknowledgment of such generosity, and the demand is rendered imperative by the after misfortunes of marshal Ney. The fate of that brave and noble-minded man is well known. He who had fought five hundred battles for France, not one against her, was shot as a traitor!
[26] The loss of the English army was never officially returned, but was estimated by sir John Hope at about eight hundred. The French loss I have no accurate account of. I have heard from French officers that it was above three thousand men; this number, I confess, appears to me exaggerated; but that it was very great I can readily believe. The arms of the British were all new, the ammunition quite fresh, and it is well known that, whether from the peculiarity of our musquets, the physical strength and coolness of the men, or both combined, the fire of an English line is at all times the most destructive known. The nature of the ground also prevented any movement of the artillery on either side; hence the French columns in their attacks were exposed to a fire of grape which they could not return, because of the distance of their batteries.
[27] Sir John Moore’s sentiments upon this occasion are expressed in the following letter, which displays the pure and elevated patriotism that distinguished him through life, and rendered his death heroic.
“Portsmouth, 23d July, 1808.
“MY LORD,
“I am this instant honoured with your lordship’s letter (by messenger) of yesterday’s date. As I have already had the honour to express my sentiments to your lordship fully at my last interview, it is, I think, unnecessary to trouble you with a repetition of them now.
“I am about to proceed on the service on which I have been ordered, and it shall be my endeavour to acquit myself with the same zeal by which I have ever been actuated when employed in the service of my country. The communication which it has been thought proper to make to his majesty cannot fail to give me pleasure; I have the most perfect reliance on his majesty’s justice, and shall never feel greater security than when my conduct, my character, and my honour, are under his majesty’s protection.
“I have the honour to be, &c. &c.
(Signed) “JOHN MOORE.
“To the Right Honourable Viscount Castlereagh.”
[28] Note.—These two words are added in Napoleon’s own hand-writing.
[29] Note by the author.—This calculation was made under the supposition that general Avril had joined Dupont.
[30] On ne comprend pas dans ces celculs les garnisons de Pampelune, St. Sebastien, Vittoria, Tolosa, Bilbao, &c.: il n’est pas question non plus de l’armée de Catalogne.
[31] The extract which follows this letter furnishes a curious comment on this passage.
TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE
In [Note No. XXV] in the Appendix, horizontal parentheses have been replaced by a vertical bar |.
Obvious typographical errors and punctuation errors have been corrected after careful comparison with other occurrences within the text and consultation of external sources.
Some hyphens in words have been silently removed, some added, when a predominant preference was found in the original book.
In those sections of the Appendix that are French documents, some corrections to accents have been made silently; primarily é for e, and e for é. Incorrect spelling has been left unchanged.
The city of Logroña is mentioned 35 times; the city of Logroño 17 times. They are undoubtably the same city; the text has not been changed. Castille is mentioned 43 times; Castile 15 times. They are undoubtably the same region; the text has not been changed.
Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text, and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.
Corrigenda:
‘the first class’ replaced by ‘of the first class’.
page number ‘436’ replaced by ‘426’.
Main text:
[Pg 34]: ‘at the instance’ replaced by ‘at the insistence’.
[Pg 78]: ‘were also dedefeated’ replaced by ‘were also defeated’.
[Pg 151]: ‘Genaral Thiebault’ replaced by ‘General Thiebault’.
[Pg 162]: ‘give birth too’ replaced by ‘give birth to’.
[Pg 163]: ‘Guarda, Attalaya’ replaced by ‘Guarda, Atalaya’.
[Pg 165]: ‘into the towu’ replaced by ‘into the town’.
[Pg 189]: ‘Wellelley decided’ replaced by ‘Wellesley decided’.
[Pg 200]: ‘the 5th batallion’ replaced by ‘the 5th battalion’.
[Pg 294]: ‘force under Cataños’ replaced by ‘force under Castaños’.
[Pg 315]: ‘to develope all’ replaced by ‘to develop all’.
[Pg 344]: ‘to recal the’ replaced by ‘to recall the’.
[Pg 346]: ‘to another æra’ replaced by ‘to another era’.
[Pg 356]: ‘or Albazan; united’ replaced by ‘or Almazan; united’.
[Pg 361]: ‘Pyrennes opening’ replaced by ‘Pyrenees opening’.
[Pg 363]: ‘being desseminated’ replaced by ‘being disseminated’.
[Pg 367]: ‘and Giupuscoa. With’ replaced by ‘and Guipuscoa. With’.
[Pg 400]: ‘at Calahora on’ replaced by ‘at Calahorra on’.
[Pg 484]: ‘or, in secresy’ replaced by ‘or, in secrecy’.
[Pg 506]: ‘to envelope and’ replaced by ‘to envelop and’.
[Pg 517]: ‘If to Valladodid’ replaced by ‘If to Valladolid’.
[Pg 519]: ‘the Somosierrra had’ replaced by ‘the Somosierra had’.
Appendix:
[Pg ix]: Missing word ‘Et’ inserted into ‘Et les communications ...’.
[Pg xl]: ‘route of Maffra’ replaced by ‘route of Mafra’.
[Pg lxiii]: ‘my last last letter’ replaced by ‘my last letter’.
[Pg lxix]: ‘barricadoed their’ replaced by ‘barricaded their’.
[Pg lxxxii], in Note XXV: ‘batns’ replaced by ‘batts.’.
[Pg lxxxv]: ‘by Galluzo behind’ replaced by ‘by Galluzzo behind’.
[Pg lxxxix]: ‘general Kellermann’ replaced by ‘general Kellerman’.