Chapter LXXXVIII: Section 3

“May 17, 1811. I reconnoitred the ground in front of Cristoval, and was pressed, by Colonel Fletcher, who was on the other side of the Guadiana, to commence our operations that evening. The soil was hard and rocky, and our tools infamous. I made, however, no difficulties, and we began our battery on the night of the 8th, the moon being at the full: our work was barely four hundred yards from Cristoval. In spite, however, of a most destructive fire of musketry, and shot, and shells, from various parts of the body of the place, we succeeded in completing our battery on the night of the 10th; and, on the morning of the 11th, at four, a. m. its fire was opened. The enemy’s fire was, however, very superior to our own; and, before sunset, the three guns and one howitzer were disabled, for against our little attack was the whole attention of the enemy directed. On the other side of the river the intended attack had not yet been begun, and we sustained the almost undivided fire of Badajos! I told the marshal, when I saw him on the 11th, that to continue to fight our battery was a positive sacrifice; he did not, however, order us to desist until our guns were silenced. If doubt and indecision had not governed all our operations, and had we begun even on the night of the 9th, I am satisfied that our plan of attack was excellent, and that we should have entered the place on the 15th. It is true that two distant batteries were erected, on the left bank of the river, against the place, but they scarcely excited the enemy’s attention; our little corps bore the brunt of the enemy’s exertions, which were great and spirited. Including those who fell in the sortie, our loss has been from six to seven hundred men. Both officers and men were exhausted, mind and body; they felt and saw that they were absurdly sacrificed.”

* * * * *

No. XI.

EXTRACT OF A LETTER FROM GENERAL CAMPBELL TO LORD LIVERPOOL.

“_Gibraltar, October 23, 1810._

“The troops at Malaga, with the exception of three hundred men, moved upon Fuengirola, of which lord Blayney was apprised; but, in place of his lordship taking advantage of this fortunate event, he wasted two days in a fruitless attack on the fort of Fuengirola, cannonading it from twelve-pounders, although he perceived that no impression had been made on it by the fire of the shipping and gun-boats, the artillery of which were double the calibre. In this situation he was surprised by an inferior force, and, whilst he was on board of a gun-boat, his guns taken and the whole thrown into confusion; at this moment he was informed of the disaster, and, so far to his credit, he retook his guns, but, immediately after, conceiving a body of French cavalry to be Spaniards, he ordered the firing to cease, when he was surrounded and made prisoner; his men, losing confidence, gave way, and, hurrying to the beach, relinquished their honour and the field.”

END OF VOL. III.

LONDON:

PRINTED BY W. MARCHANT, INGRAM-COURT, FENCHURCH-STREET.

FOOTNOTES:

[1] Lord Stuart de Rothesay.

[2] First aide-de-camp to marshal Massena.

[3] Admiral sir Edward Codrington.

[4] Lord Lynedoch.

[5] Lieut.-gov. of Gibraltar.

[6] Governor of Almeida.

[7] Dupont’s proceedings at Cordoba, as related in my first volume, have been commented upon in a recent publication, entitled “_Annals of the Peninsular Campaigns_.”

Upon the authority of general Foy, the author asserts that Cordoba was sacked, calls it “_a gratuitous atrocity_,” and “_an inhuman butchery_” and no doubt, taking for fiction the stories of Agathocles, Marius, Sylla, and a thousand others, gravely affirms, that, _capacity and cruelty are rarely united_; that _Dupont was a fool_, and that _Napoleon did not poison him in a dungeon_, but that he must have “_dragged on a miserable existence exposed to universal scorn and hatred_.”

Unfortunately for the application of this nursery philosophy, Dupont, although a bad officer, was a man of acknowledged talents, and became minister of war at the restoration of the Bourbons, a period fixed by the author of “_the Annals_,” _as the era of good government in France_. But I rejected Foy’s authority, 1st, because his work, unfinished and posthumous, discovered more of the orator than the impartial historian, and he was politically opposed to Dupont. Secondly, because he was not an eye witness, and his relation at variance with the “_official journal of Dupont’s operations_” was also contradicted by the testimony of a _British general of known talents and accuracy, who obtained his information on the spot a few months subsequent to the event_.

“Some time after the victory, _order was restored, pillage was forbidden under pain of death, and the chosen companies maintained the police_.”--Journal of Operations.

_Cordoba was not pillaged_, being one of the few places where the _French were well received_.--Letters from a British general to colonel Napier.

On this point, therefore, I am clear; but the author of the “_Annals_,” after contrasting my account with Foy’s, thus proceeds, “It is only necessary to add, that the preceding statement is given by colonel Napier _without any quotation of authority_.”

A less concise writer might have thought it right to add that, _six months_ previous to the publication of the _Annals_, colonel Napier, hearing that some of his statements appeared inconclusive to the author of that work, _because there was no quotation of authority_, transmitted through a mutual friend, an assurance that he had authority for every _statement_, and that he would willingly _furnish the author with any or all of them_: no notice was taken of this offer!

[8] An interesting account of this noble-minded woman, is to be found in a small volume, entitled, “_Sketches of a Soldier’s Life, in Ireland_,” by the author of “_The Eventful Life of a Soldier_.” This last work was erroneously designated, in my first volume, as “_The Life of a Sergeant_.”

[9] [Note in Napoleon’s own hand.] On ne doit pas oublier qu’en approchant de France tout favourise la desertion.

TRANSCRIBER’S NOTE

Footnote [9] is referenced twice from page 563.

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.

To save space in the wide tables in Note I of the Appendix, the
headings ‘Hospital.’ and ‘Cavalry.’ have been abbreviated to
‘Hosp.’ and ‘Cav.’.

The original table in Note I, section 7, was quite wide and has been
split into two parts. The original table in Note IX, section 4, was
very wide and has been split into three parts.

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 grammar and spelling has been left unchanged.

Except for those changes noted below, all misspellings in the text,
and inconsistent or archaic usage, have been retained.

Table of Contents:
Pg v: ‘Captain Hollowell’ replaced by ‘Captain Hallowell’.
Pg x: ‘maratime operations’ replaced by ‘maritime operations’.
Pg xii: ‘retreats to Lerena’ replaced by ‘retreats to Llerena’.

Main text:
Pg 3: ‘Pyrennean vallies’ replaced by ‘Pyrennean valleys’.
Pg 3: ‘into the vallies’ replaced by ‘into the valleys’.
Pg 5: ‘Nuesta Senora’ replaced by ‘Nuestra Senora’.
Pg 11: ‘the commucations of’ replaced by ‘the communications of’.
Pg 13: ‘being unqual to’ replaced by ‘being unequal to’.
Pg 14: ‘very essense of’ replaced by ‘very essence of’.
Pg 18: ‘on the ocsion’ replaced by ‘on the occasion’.
Pg 21: ‘occupied by Coupigny’ replaced by ‘occupied by Conpigny’.
Pg 33: ‘calamity befal’ replaced by ‘calamity befall’.
Pg 47: ‘was betowed with’ replaced by ‘was bestowed with’.
Pg 54: ‘and carelesssly’ replaced by ‘and carelessly’.
Pg 61 (Sidenote): ‘Wellesly’ replaced by ‘Wellesley’.
Pg 63: ‘the Portugese’ replaced by ‘the Portuguese’.
Pg 64 (Sidenote): ‘Wellesly’ replaced by ‘Wellesley’.
Pg 73: ‘subborn resistance’ replaced by ‘stubborn resistance’.
Pg 86: ‘from Aranjues to’ replaced by ‘from Aranjuez to’.
Pg 92: ‘whose procedings’ replaced by ‘whose proceedings’.
Pg 96: ‘at Yevenes and’ replaced by ‘at Yebenes and’.
Pg 125: ‘war of invavasion’ replaced by ‘war of invasion’.
Pg 138: ‘evacuted the town’ replaced by ‘evacuated the town’.
Pg 139: ‘to recal them’ replaced by ‘to recall them’.
Pg 143 (Sidenote): ‘des Française’ replaced by ‘des Français’.
Pg 174: ‘Toccadero creek’ replaced by ‘Troccadero creek’.
Pg 179: ‘soldiers, and and a’ replaced by ‘soldiers, and a’.
Pg 197: ‘from about Lerena’ replaced by ‘from about Llerena’.
Pg 237: ‘required extrordinary’ replaced by ‘required extraordinary’.
Pg 237: ‘merely a a conqueror’ replaced by ‘merely a conqueror’.
Pg 242: ‘dictinct lines’ replaced by ‘distinct lines’.
Pg 243: ‘Gallicia and Asturia’ replaced by ‘Gallicia and Asturias’.
Pg 247: ‘in misrepresentions’ replaced by ‘in misrepresentations’.
Pg 261: ‘having Silviera and’ replaced by ‘having Silveira and’.
Pg 280: ‘secorrer esta plaza’ replaced by ‘socorrer esta plaza’.
Pg 304 (Sidenote): ‘Cox’s Narative’ replaced by ‘Cox’s Narrative’.
Pg 307: ‘lost a quadron’ replaced by ‘lost a squadron’.
Pg 331: ‘Portuguese caçadore’ replaced by ‘Portuguese caçadores’.
Pg 356: ‘3º. From Bucellas’ replaced by ‘4º. From Bucellas’.
Pg 359: ‘Massena, suprised’ replaced by ‘Massena, surprised’.
Pg 366: ‘own governmennt’ replaced by ‘own government’.
Pg 380: ‘Frenchmen run to’ replaced by ‘Frenchmen ran to’.
Pg 380: ‘with the assistace’ replaced by ‘with the assistance’.
Pg 396: ‘when Bacellar brought’ replaced by ‘when Baccellar brought’.
Pg 414: ‘Moguer and Heulva’ replaced by ‘Moguer and Huelva’.
Pg 454: ‘the posisition of’ replaced by ‘the position of’.
Pg 464: ‘the abler tactitian’ replaced by ‘the abler tactician’.
Pg 473: ‘from distruction’ replaced by ‘from destruction’.
Pg 485: ‘immediately run out’ replaced by ‘immediately ran out’.
Pg 514: ‘seventh divison’ replaced by ‘seventh division’.
Pg 583: ‘de St. Fernado’ replaced by ‘de St. Fernando’.
Pg 588: ‘wish to emove’ replaced by ‘wish to remove’.

Appendix:
Pg 608 Note VII: missing heading ‘SECTION 2.’ inserted before
‘Extrait du Journal du C. de B. Pelet’.
Pg 615 Note VII: ‘SECTION IX’ replaced by ‘SECTION 9’.
Pg 621 Note VII: ‘SECTION XVIII’ replaced by ‘SECTION 18’.
Pg 621 Note VII: ‘SECTION XIX’ replaced by ‘SECTION 19’.
Pg 622 Note VII: ‘SECTION XX’ replaced by ‘SECTION 20’.
Pg 628 Note IX: ‘SECTION II’ replaced by ‘SECTION 2’.
Pg 628 Note IX: ‘Brigadier-gen. Dilkes’ replaced by
‘Brigadier-gen. Dilke’.
Pg 629 Note IX: ‘SECTION III’ replaced by ‘SECTION 3’.
Pg 635 Note IX: ‘SECTION 7’ replaced by ‘SECTION 8’.