|
|
|
|
|
Fallen Eagles: a Story of French Military Dissent in IberiaBy Roberto A. Scattolin, ItalyIntroduction Becoming fed up with life under arms – this premise is one of the many motives against protracted warfare in the Iberian Peninsula by a seasoned French non-commissioned officer giving up on that condition. The impact of the Napoleonic wars and the ideals to bring about a centralized empire proved challenging as well as a shocking experience to countless conscripts and veteran soldiers who, hurled into the erupting volcano of vainglory, indentified their civic faith more as social participants and political dissidents of local civil societies in their native homeland. It was a period of anxieties and consequential events, when French society and the plot of political power were dictated by the rapacious appetites of Napoleon I, a 19th Century military autocrat who unsuccessfully tried to consolidate his ambitious despotism by largely aggressive military campaigns throughout Europe. The following documentary describes the conditions of the social aspect of military life in the Empire of Napoleon; it indicates that gallantry under arms did not always bring honneur (i.e. honour) in French military service. It further emphasises the overwhelming difficulties the troops faced being promptly supplied while on campaign in a foreign country (Portugal), a sad circumstance which prevented the soldiers to keep to conformed standards of daily life. These inevitable differences of opinion occurred for many years, due to the many difficult hardships endured by the regiments, the impasse in the military operations, and the shortage of provisions. This narration equally sheds further light on the difficult problems of logistics in promptly supplying food and arms and by protecting the supply lines that were subjected to constant harassment by Spanish guerrillas. These factors led to further discontent in the army units in spite of Napoleon’s claiming propaganda. Life became difficult, unsure and frightening. There is unquestionable evidence that in truth, the primary cause and effect of military banditry was the effort on the part of some of the troops to try and survive in a foreign land – keeping up a forced choice for new conveniences of organized life. However, departing from the regular ranks infringed on the military code, and that action was to be sanctioned by tough disciplinary dispositions. The reverse of the coin was instead that the course taken by the independents for liberty from military law had exceedingly pejorative effects at the meeting with Portuguese social realities. The failure to respect others’ liberty and family ties, and to impose their arbitrary will and untold predatory incursions, proved to be a fatal mistake. This kind of social war, and the ensuing string of misdeeds, lowered the moral conduct of every former soldier: the dogs of war were now at ease.
Comment: Just a couple of phrases to start with our critical analysis on this detailed and enthralling memorial text, and, for proper literary definition, a sixty words narrative introduction. The first piece of information we are pointed out is about the clearly stated and defined nationality (French extraction) of an unnamed soldier; a further detail of specification is instead confirmative about the military position this fellow covered in the army ranks. A sergent[1] (i.e. sergeant), serving through active service[2] modalities and employed under extreme circumstances in the Iberian theatre. And shoulder to shoulder through friendship and sharing the unpleasant bread of everyday suffering in Portugal of this era, he had acquired a deserved reputation for esprit de sacrifice (i.e. spirit of sacrifice). Grinding poverty and untold restrictions[3] were then hardy conditioning factors for survival within the French regular troops – employed in campaigning in the rough step territories of continental Spain. Living conditions under arms were burdensome; protracted marches sapped their strength; no joy or happiness prevailed due to their military duties. Uncontained in his mood, and reacting to the tactical passiveness of his superior command, the sergent had instigated his own plan to remove himself out of this morass of hopelessness. The plan he envisaged had a basic efficacy; in this way he tried to ameliorate the living conditions through his determined resolve and the influences which gave some boost to his persona.[4] < The need for comfort and the urge for self-preservation were appealing, and both of them were like a breath of fresh air, for the personal benefits of many discontented members. They especially indulged in tasty food, palatable drinking water. Comfortable lodging was perceived as a seductive challenge to deal with. To search for proper shelter and personal well-being admirably conveyed the emotional rejection against conscription into the regular army, and the wretchedness which was much often the fatal lot of deserters alike. In a time of convenience, le sergent (i.e. the sergeant) successfully forged together the grumblers giving them cohesive life and unified intent, and finally managed to persuade the many voices of dissent which marched in the ranks of his fellow-soldiers to take independent armed action. Aware of the many difficulties and complications which his adventurous enterprise was to cause, the indomitable sous-officier (i.e. NCO) had a combat-manpower well organized under his compelling authority; its duty was to protect and support the march movements thus averting hostile parties from sudden attacks. His tactics were to decamp.[5] Seemingly a dysfunctional and multifaceted unit (infantry, plus cavalry), the hundred-man combat force had a timely move to the rear of the French deployment. Not without some difficulties the independent combatants reached the vicinity of a strongly built and wall-enclosed monastery.To quarter such a large number of men plus the animals required effective instructions, in primis to keep all the mobile group compacted on the spot. Emphasis must be given to details of sort: the monks had been informed about the advancing host, and to avoid major troubles and savage pillaging resolved to hastily leave the building of consecrated life. This motivation for safety does represent the only explanation to the fact that abundant provisions were discovered, and furniture as well (this element is important; it corroborates that the goods could not be moved away on account of the immediacy of the French threat). Ingenious as the sergent’s organizational capabilities were, his versatile strategic understanding is even more indicative of his real aptitude of command and responsibility. The monastery was the only building fitted to face any major kind of strategic contingency; and it became a strongpoint, compared to a local headquarters for this autonomous assemblage (i.e. gathering) of malcontents – the forgotten dogs of war – who had abandoned the ranks of their army for unheroic rules of conduct, and opting for new choices of political and military order. Observation "[…] worst […]"; observing strictly the whole statement, a more precise usage – grammatically rendered through an absolute superlative – is thus doubtful. This assertion would have implied that the narrator personally knew all the soldiers under the arms during that eventful time of military experience and service (i.e. service). Almost paradoxically, and because of the abovementioned implication, this misleading expression must be discarded. There is a fairly recognizable intention: that the focus of this argument was that a new radical choice had been granted necessary for material existence and survival.
Comment: The practical organization of an independent troop faced many unexpected difficulties. After carefully reading this narrative, it seems that establishing a permanent service de cuisine (i.e. kitchen service) was a sensible move in order to grant the combatants the appearance of a cohesive organization. It was a convenient solution to the urgencies for solid nourishment, to keep up the welfare of the enterprise and the general on-going support of the independents. But the monastery was devoid of adequate means of providing for so many voracious mouths. It was necessary to search elsewhere for the goods and the materials with which to continue providing assistance to the men serving in this mobile combat unit. This policy – a deviated course of military action against defenceless women and children – generated many contradictory events, forcing ungenerous acts of violence, tyranny and oppression to the local Portuguese residents in the nearby neighbourhood.[6] Cuisine activities were so to become the main attraction for the troop and a point of shared joviality which freed the men from the clutches of hunger and cold. This detail tells much, especially the fact that the cuisine was continuously kept warm – due to the cold weather. A point of not negligible interest. So beneficial and improving was the sergent’s solicitous caring of the troop, that in due time he rapidly ascended the ladder of leadership, eventually gaining promotion to the rank of Marshal. The honorific rank Maréchal Stockpot with which he was entitled was a most significant and quite symbolic nickname, due to the fact that his main concern and manoeuvring dealt with the culinary arts of fine food and drink. There is trusty evidence that he had a consummate and discriminating taste (about quality, and freshness), and was not merely knowledgeable in the art of food preparation. However, an exceedingly good promotion in the art culinaire (i.e. culinary art) did not mean per excess that he did not fight “valorously” in long enduring gourmetary campaigns. Remark "[…] contemptuous name of […]"; this assertion represents a lack of objectivity - and quite a formal opinion conceived by the author. “Stockpot” was not quite so base and reckless a man who only was interested in a self-established independent military career and taking the most elusive title of Maréchal (i.e. Marshal) as well. This would have implied sharing an esprit de grandeur (i.e. spirit of greatness) when instead, dealing with the difficulties of providing the daily necessities was quite pressing upon him. Under the circumstances, that marginal “title” cannot be considered a trait of haughtiness and ambiguous extolling. The attributed nickname was unrelated to any martial responsibility and “standing army” command; on the contrary, it was assimilated to the leader’s indefatigable striving to appease his men’s hunger.
Comment: Because severe infringements to the disciplinary code had occurred after leaving the military jurisdiction, a major level of permissiveness and moral slackening thus ensued. Virtue, the virtue of continence, became a forced compromise, and honour lost its appeal after the brutal actions taken against the Portuguese civilians. And when the time had restored the forces and vitality to the independent troop, tedium vitae became a much heavier weight to bear than before. After having abandoned the stern military discipline, the independents try to create their own social reality, conformed to their sense of existence – and established rules of coercion, pillaging, and flowering seeds of lust.[7] Worst of all, a growing flux of new-comers – more British and Portuguese deserters – conferred an international character to la partida de los indipendentes (i.e. the band of the independents). Joining the ranks was detrimentally implemented with an additional 200% increase – of dissatisfaction and pride. And it may be a point of contention that no longer having to care for military actions, their major interest turned to women chasing, and to imposing their licentious attitudes of intemperance and unchaste demeanour. Remark The scoundrel […]"; changing of character, and loosening the military attitudes of resignation and respect, signalled the beginning of the end. Morality took a beating, and the former troop’s discipline turned into an effectual promiscuous lascivité (i.e. lasciviousness). Under the pretensions of the literary text, it appeared that the height of débauche (i.e. dissipation) had reached its ultimate zenith. However, the presence of some hembras de vida libre (i.e. women of free life and customs) cannot be excluded.
Comment: Banditry-like activities (aka unmilitary and deviated action) seem to have been the main spring for sheer survival à la campagne (i.e. in the country), engendering heavily suffered consequences of pillage and the complete violation of human rights – to the local civilians. The continued threat to the country’s constituted peaceful living conditions strained the social interactions of the economic order as well. Flocks, a greatly appreciated source of living, were raided and brought to the convent’s pastures, where their presence and benefits would have been of material importance to appease the troop’s hunger. However unprecedented the meeting with the regular French foraging detachment was, it represented a point of maximum tension especially to the independents of French extraction. This episode has an especially significant interest because it presents a confirmation that the values of honour and devotion to arms had not been completely erased in many of the discontents and hot heads. A further point of remark is that the passing of time had not altered the innermost affection of their military roots – and this might be regarded as proof of the remaining spark of goodness and patriotism in their hearts.
Comment: Showing inspired wisdom, André Massena’s shrewd choice – and flexibility criteria – of pardoning some of the rebellious regiments (where the seeds of discontent had spread) was subtle; it helped restore the dignity of the repentant soldats (i.e. soldiers) who had not been shot by firing squads and were to be granted a pardon. However, as soldiers, they were reinstated in the ranks, the first ranks, to carry on active duty in the line of fire. And, of necessity, they would lead their fellow-comrades against the former frères d’ armes (i.e. brothers in arms; the French who did not come back) and compagnons d’ aventure (i.e. companions of adventure; British and Portuguese armed parties). This choice, dictated by the economy of warfare operations would have “nobly” minimized the losses in action (to the disadvantage of the condemned deserters), and assisted the proficiency of the regular French troop battalions. No additional specifications are presented about the battle engagement which ensued and invested the convent location and the area mostly controlled by the independent Anglo-Lusitanian forces – but its severity is indubitable. After carefully pondering on the narrative matter, a last peculiarity cannot pass unmentioned; and it is to consider that the “dean” (a severely attributed epithet for the dishonoured behaviourism and frustrated sexual permissivism he stained his independent command) was the only one “General-commander” to be shot under the French “Marshallate” – serving the anti-Napoleonic cause. Once more the meadows of bravery were greened by the probity and promptitude of those who had denied serving with “Stockpot”; in a renewed horizon of life any kind of licentiousness disappeared under the veil of misery and mercy. That adventurous although lamentable story was over. Bibliography and further reading 1. English works: Esdaile, Charles. The Peninsular War. A New History. New York 2002. Esdaile, Charles. The Wars of Napoleon. London / New York 1995. Marbot, (Baron de). The Memoirs of Baron De Marbot, late Lieutenant-General in the French Army. Translated from the French by Arthur John Butler late fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. London, Longmans, Green, and Co.; and New-York: 1892. Marbot, (Baron de). Adventures of General Marbot. Edited and illustrated by John W. Thomason Jr.. Charles Scribner’s Sons, New York, London, 1935. 2. French works: Chartrand, René. Spanish Guerrillas in the Peninsular War 1808-14. Osprey Publishing (Elite), 2004. Forrest, Alan. Déserteurs et insoumis sous la Révolution et l’ Empire. Paris, Perrin, 1988. Marbot, Jean-Baptiste-Antoine-Marcellin, (Baron de). Mémoires du Général Baron de Marbot. Paris, Editions E. Plon, Nourrit & Cie, 1891 /1892. Notes: [1] Sergent, a word originated from the ancient Latin etymology; it is derived from the term serviens, correctly translated as the one who serves. However, this linguistic specification is quite limited by the fact that the N.C.O. rank corresponded to the functional and subservient role of the optĭo. [2] One would assume this man had been enrolled in the infantry arm. Although his unit and chain of command (regiment-bataillon-compagnie; i.e. regiment, battalion, company) is not specifically mentioned, to probe deeper into his military status and participation, his role in the ranks was one of responsibility; a distinguished figure, interacting in a key position between his comrades under arms and the hierarchical superiors. [3] It is undeniably recognizable that requisitioning by both the contending parties (French, anti-French) equally aggravated the conditions. It was the act of surviving by one’s wits that oppressed the soldiers’ perilous lives and renewed the assaults on their psychological defences. [4] Worth mentioning is that the sous-officier behaved by his own personal initiative, and not on imparted superior dispositions. His determined efforts were a notable mark of self-denial, which permitted the possibility of survival for his troops during a difficult and treacherous time. [5] A largely significant verbal form. The change in location for establishing a new military position meant quietly detaching his companions in adventure from the main corps and to avoid the security strong-points on ground, an action which could only be carried out in stealth (and not during daylight). One question could be easily posed: what distance was established the position and the assumed camp-area of the independents? Indicative evidence appears it was not so distant from Massena’s headquarters.
[6] Requisitions were achieved by force of arms and not through negotiated sales and legitimate payments. [7] The women which were the prey of desire were then targeted by the troop, with no consideration for the status or sacred tie: single, fiancée, or married. The small villages and country towns had no defence against the marauding troops in order to protect the feminine gender. The post-modern researcher could consider that the independent group had an inner organizational structure – and it cannot be excluded that it was in three partidas (i.e. bands, groups of action), by hundred, and by nationality (English, French, Portuguese), most probably acting on the orders of their own chosen leaders (English, Portuguese). This was to prove a severe test and a tactical impasse because to aptly control the moves, responsibilities, and connivances of so many impetuous men created an ever growing burden of responsibility. “Stockpot” seemed not to have had that martial charisma with which to handle all the matters and dysfunctional “operatives”; at any rate, he succeeded in amalgamating the troop and gained major authority by controlling the source of nourishment and the provisions – that was indeed an intelligent strategy quite different from the savagery and butchery which devastated the land. However, in acquiescing to the string of arbitrarily armed impositions on the country villagers was indeed a severe fault as well as a most shameful negligence, causing damage and harm to his authority and command. Thus being the case, his responsibilities were clear and manifest.
Placed on the Napoleon Series: November 2008
|
|
|
|
|
© Copyright 1995-2008, The Napoleon Series, All Rights Reserved. |
