Prince Hohenlohe says that in the entire campaign “the Prussian
artillery, which numbered as many pieces as its adversary, had only
once been able to obtain the numerical superiority. It had, on all
occasions, fought against forces two, three, or even four times
superior in number.” At Königgrätz the Prussian artillery was handled
with surprising feebleness. The Crown Prince finally succeeded in
bringing to bear on the Austrian right a force of artillery superior
in numbers to that opposed to him; but, even in this case, his guns
accomplished but little. As to the artillery of Frederick Charles,
it practically accomplished nothing at all; and it was scarcely of
more use on the Bistritz than it would have been in Berlin. From the
beginning to the end of the battle, the Austrians had everywhere a
decided superiority of artillery fire, except only in the one case on
their right.
The Prussian Staff History says, in regard to the engagement south of
the Sadowa wood: “A want of unity in the direction of the artillery
was painfully evident on this part of the field. Two commandants of
regiments were on the spot, but the eleven batteries then present
belonged to five different artillery divisions, some of them to the
divisional artillery and some to the reserve. This accounts for the
want of unity of action at this spot; some batteries advanced perfectly
isolated, whilst others retired behind the Bistritz at the same time.”
To this Colonel Home adds: “A great deal of this was due to the fact
that the guns came into action on one side of a small, muddy, stream,
over which there were very few bridges, and across which bridges might
have been thrown with ease, while the wagons remained on the other.” It
may be further added, that the Prussian artillery seems to have been
unduly afraid of encountering infantry fire, and to have had a bad
habit of withdrawing to refit and to renew its ammunition. It is said
of the Prussian artillery, that “they planted themselves here and there
among the reserves, and never found places anywhere to engage.”[22]
On the march the artillery was kept too far to the rear, and, owing
to its inefficient action, the infantry, long before the close of the
campaign, generally showed a disposition to despise its help, and to
hurry into action without it, crowding the roads, and refusing to
let the guns pass. Much had been expected of their artillery by the
Prussians, and its feeble action was a severe disappointment to them.
It is to the glory of the Prussians that they were quick to fathom
the causes of the inefficiency of their artillery, and that they were
able, in four years, to replace the impotence of Königgrätz with the
annihilating “circle of fire” of Sedan.
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