WIEN Napoleon proposed the institution of the Legion of Honour, he was met by the assertion, that “Crosses and Ribbons were the pillars of an hereditary throne, and that they were unknown to the Romans who conquered the world.” In his reply, it was shewn that the above nation rewarded the achievements of her citizens by all kinds of distinctions; and in arguments which must be considered unanswerable, he added that, "for the soldier, as for all men in active life, you must have glory and distinction; recompenses are the food which nourish military virtue."

For many years a similar antagonistic feeling to the grant of medals to all ranks prevailed in this country, though an hereditary monarchy, to that which opposed Napoleon. It was left to OUR Queen to follow out the foregoing maxim of a great military commander, for, with the exception of the Waterloo Medal, the soldiers (even the veterans of the Peninsular war) remained undecorated; in Her Majesty's reign not only were the Peninsular war medal and others granted, but more recently the VICTORIA CROSS was instituted.

Since the several orders of knighthood have had their historians, it occurred to me that as no general account of the “Medals of the British Army" had been attempted, a work which should afford a clear insight into the circumstances under which these honours were conferred, would be likely to be received with favour by the public, when accompanied by coloured fac-similes of the several medals and ribbons, and interspersed with regimental and individual acts of heroism, together with military statistics of an interesting character.

It has been my aim, therefore, in selecting the accounts of the several campaigns from the official despatches, to relieve the broad

[ocr errors]

sketch, as it were, with accidental lights from regimental records —from communications afforded by participators in the scenes described, and from other authentic sources; so that, as far as the capabilities of the artist will admit, a picture as complete as possible should be produced, in which the prominent services of particular corps might be distinguished.

The several engravings have been made from the medals themselves, and whilst their accuracy is undoubted, it is hoped that the accounts of “How THEY WERE WON,” will not be deemed less truthful.

How far that success may be attained must be left to an indulgent public, and to the press, whose favourable verdict on the “Curiosities of War, and Military Studies,” has emboldened me to attempt a record of unsurpassed military prowess, and to endeavour to perpetuate the memory of the brave, by bringing together, in a compact form, the gallant deeds of officers and men, which their countrymen must always remember with gratitude, whilst their examples of daring, self-denial, and humanity, will be ever held up as models for imitation by the British Army.

T. C,





In December, 1854, THE QUEEN was pleased to command that a medal, bearing the word "CRIMEA,” with an appropriate device, should be conferred upon all the officers, non-commissioned officers, and private soldiers of Her Majesty's Army, who had been engaged in the arduous and brilliant campaign in the Crimea; and that clasps, with the words "Alma" or “INKERMANN” thereon, were to be also awarded to such as were present in either of those battles. In February, 1855, Her Majesty granted a clasp for the action at BALAKLAVA, and in October following, a clasp inscribed “SEBASTOPOL” was added to the Crimean Medal, and was awarded to all present between the first of October, 1854, the day on which the Army sat down before the place, and the ninth of September, 1855, when the town was taken. Alma, Balaklava, Inkermann, and Sebastopol, are, therefore, the services to be most promi. nently described, as they are commemorated not only by the clasps before referred to, but likewise by inscriptions authorized by Royal Authority to be borne on the Regimental Colours of


« ElőzőTovább »