A history of the Peninsular War, Vol. 1, 1807-1809 : $b From the treaty of Fontainbleau to the battle of CorunnaOman, Charles
History
A history of the Peninsular War, Vol. 1, 1807-1809 : $b From the treaty of Fontainbleau to the battle of Corunna
Oman, Charles
Peninsular War, 1807-1814
moral support, and to impress the enemy with a sense of the solidity
and inexorable strength of the approaching mass. Sometimes a whole
regiment or brigade formed one dense column. Now if the enemy, as was
always the case with the British, refused to be impressed, but stood
firm in line, held their ground, and blazed into the head of the mass,
the attack was certain to fail. For 800 men in the two-deep line,
which Wellington loved, could all use their muskets, and thus poured
800 bullets per volley into a French battalion of the same strength,
which only could return 160. The nine-deep, or eighteen-deep, column
was a target which it was impossible to miss. Hence the front ranks
went down in rows and the whole came to a standstill. If, as was often
the case, the French battalion tried to deploy in front of the English
line, so as to bring more muskets to bear, it seldom or never succeeded
in accomplishing the manœuvre, for each company, as it straggled out
from the mass, got shot down so quickly that the formation could never
be completed. No wonder that Foy in his private journal felt himself
constrained to confess that, for a set battle with equal numbers on a
limited front, the English infantry was superior. ‘I keep this opinion
to myself,’ he adds, ‘and have never divulged it; for it is necessary
that the soldier in the ranks should not only hate the enemy, but also
despise him[88].’ Foy kept his opinion so closely to himself that he
did not put it in his formal history of the Peninsular War: it has only
become public property since his journals were published in 1900.
[88] Diary of Foy, in Girod de l’Ain’s _Vie Militaire du Général
Foy_, p. 98.
But the fact that with anything like equal numbers the line must beat
the column was demonstrated over and over again during the war. It had
first been seen at Maida in 1806, but that obscure Calabrian battle
was hardly known, even by name, save to those who had been present.
It was at Talavera, and still more at Busaco and Albuera, that it
became patent to everybody that the attack in battalion column, even
if preceded by a vigorous swarm of skirmishers, could never succeed
against the English. At the two former fights the French attacked
uphill, and laid the blame of their defeat upon the unfavourable
ground. But when at Albuera three English brigades drove double their
own numbers from the commanding ridge on which Soult had ranged them,
simply by the superiority of their musketry fire, there was no longer
any possibility of disguising the moral. Yet to the end of the war,
down to Waterloo itself, the French stuck to their old formation: at
the great battle in 1815, as Wellington tersely said, ‘The French came
on once more in the old style, and we beat them in the old style.’
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account