A history of the Peninsular War, Vol. 6, September 1, 1812-August 5, 1813 : $b The siege of Burgos, the retreat from Burgos, the campaign of Vittoria, the battles of the PyreneesOman, Charles
History
A history of the Peninsular War, Vol. 6, September 1, 1812-August 5, 1813 : $b The siege of Burgos, the retreat from Burgos, the campaign of Vittoria, the battles of the Pyrenees
Oman, Charles
Peninsular War, 1807-1814
(1) Burgos would not have been a strong fortress against an army
provided with a proper battering-train, such as that which dealt with
Ciudad Rodrigo or Badajoz. But Wellington--by his own fault as it
turned out in the end--had practically no such train at all: three
18-pound heavy guns were an absurd provision for the siege of a place
of even third-rate strength. If Wellington had realized on September 20
that the siege was to last till October 21, he might have had almost as
many guns as he pleased. But the strength of Burgos was underrated at
the first; and by the time that it was realized, Wellington considered
(wrongly, as it turned out) that it was too late to get the necessary
ordnance from the distant places where it lay.
(2) Encouraged by the experience of Badajoz and Almaraz, Wellington and
his staff considered that an imperfect fortification like the Castle of
Burgos might be dealt with by escalade without artillery preparation.
The Hornwork of San Miguel was taken on this irregular system; but the
attempts against the _enceintes_ of the Castle failed. Burgoyne is
probably right in maintaining that the repeated failures were largely
due to the general’s reluctance to put in large masses of men at once,
owing to his wish to spare the lives in units already worked down to a
low strength by long campaigning. The principle ‘if we fail we can’t
lose many men’ was ruinous. On October 18 the place _must_ have fallen
if 3,000 instead of 600 men had been told off for the assault.
(3) Notwithstanding the lack of artillery, Burgos might have been
taken if Wellington had owned a large and efficient body of engineers.
But (as at Badajoz, where he had made bitter complaints on this
subject[61]) the provision of trained men was ludicrously small--there
were just five officers of Royal Engineers[62] with the army, and
eight ‘Royal Military Artificers’. The volunteers from the Line, both
officers and men, used as auxiliaries, were not up to the work required
of them. It was a misfortune that none of the divisions before Burgos
had experience of siege-work, like that which the Light, 3rd, and 4th
Divisions (all left at Madrid) had been through.
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account