Part I
Experiencing martial masculinities
1
Burying Lord Uxbridgeâs leg: the body of the hero in the early nineteenth century
Julia Banister
A year after the Battle of Waterloo (1815), the battle that brought to a close the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, a marble column paid for by public subscription was erected on the Welsh island of Anglesey to celebrate the commander of the allied cavalry, Henry William Paget, Earl of Uxbridge and Marquess of Anglesey.1 William Thomas Fitzgerald, a clerk in the navy pay office and minor poet of patriotic verse, had predicted that the soldiers whose deaths had secured Britainâs âhigh renown! And EUROPE her repose!â would be commemorated by the grateful nation with everlasting monuments: on âlofty COLUMNS of eternal Fame / Shall BRITISH GRATITUDE record each nameâ.2 Given that the two most conspicuous British heroes of the wars, Admiral Lord Nelson and Arthur Wellesley, Duke of Wellington, only one of whom died in action, were honoured in this way, the fact that Paget was also celebrated in this manner attests to his standing as a hero figure in the early nineteenth century. That said, a comparison between the figures atop Nelsonâs column in Trafalgar Square, completed in 1843, and Pagetâs column, completed in 1860, reveals a difference in the representation of the body of the hero. Whereas Nelsonâs column is topped by a statue of the naval hero wearing the empty left sleeve of his jacket pinned across his chest, the figure atop Pagetâs column gives no indication that, as a result of an injury sustained during the battle, his right leg had been amputated above the knee.3
Teresa Michals has argued that eighteenth-century artists struggled to combine heroism and amputation, and often resorted to eliding physical disability â what she terms âinvisible amputationâ â so as to create an âideal formâ of âheroic masculinityâ.4 However, the fact that Paget had lost his leg at Waterloo was widely known in the nineteenth century, not least because the leg had been buried in a marked grave near the battlefield and the site of the burial visited by innumerable tourists.5 Such attention to (part of) a military body was unusual. True, Nelsonâs corpse had been immersed in a barrel of brandy in the aftermath of the Battle of Trafalgar (1805), but only so that it might be transported to England; the hero was honoured with a grand state funeral two months after his death.6 It might be thought that the burial of Pagetâs leg served likewise to mark a noble corporeal sacrifice, albeit on a smaller scale. In fact, it proved to be controversial for reasons that, I argue, reveal the complexity of the heroâs body as an âideal formâ. The military services of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries required intense physical activity â whether marching or engaging with the enemy, hauling sails or loading cannon â and this, coupled with the requirement that those involved pledge their lives and limbs to the service, made the military life appear to be one that required essentially, in the sense of physically, âmasculineâ attributes and capacities. In other words, military heroes could serve as models of and for masculinity because they seemed to have excelled at being, in a bodily sense, âmenâ. Of course, this works only if the cultural construction of the physical relationship between gender ideals and the matter of the body is artfully obscured. As this chapter will show, responses to the burial of Pagetâs leg suggest that, rather than solemnising his heroism, the burial of the body part exposed the artificiality of the connection between âmasculinityâ and the matter of the âmaleâ body. Much as the burial of the amputated leg courted those inclined to hero-worship, elevating a limb in such a way also reduced it to the level of common corporeal matter and thereby undermined the military hero as a model of and for essential masculinity.
Henry Paget had embarked on a military career soon after the outbreak of war with Revolutionary France.7 His first position was commander of the 80th Regiment of Foot, a volunteer regiment with whom he saw active service in France. He moved through the ranks of army command with paper promotions, and by 1801 had become full colonel of the 7th Light Dragoons. In 1808, Paget joined General Sir John Moore as commander of the cavalry for the Peninsular War. Paget was instrumental in Mooreâs attempts to harry French forces in the northwest of Spain, and he cemented his reputation for bravery by covering Mooreâs retreat, at one point staving off thirteen regiments of French cavalry with only five of British.8 This period of military success was soon to be overshadowed by incidents in his private life, however. Paget had married Lady Caroline Villiers in 1795, but shortly before leaving to join Moore he became involved romantically with Lady Charlotte Wellesley (nĂ©e Cardogan), the Duke of Wellingtonâs sister-in-law. The affair became a scandal when, on Pagetâs return from Spain, Charlotte eloped to be with him. As a result, Charlotteâs brother challenged Paget to a duel, and her husband sued him for criminal conversation. Pagetâs lawyer, Mr Dallas, attempted to defend his client by stressing that Paget had sought to extricate himself from the affair by throwing himself into military action with Moore: âcareless of his safety, prodigal of his life, he seemed to search for danger wheresoever it was to be found; and to hunt after death in whatever shape it might appearâ. Following Dallasâs argument, Pagetâs good fortune not to be killed in battle became his misfortune at home. âFallen from a situation the most exalted, and the most enviableâ, Dallas argued, âhe has forfeited private esteem and public regard; and the hero who so lately glittered the brightest in the dazzling ranks of glory, and was the light and star of every professional scene in which he moved, is now reduced to have no other wish than that of complete solitude and seclusionâ.9
Paget won the respite from heroism that he, apparently, so desired. After a brief reconciliation, he and Caroline divorced, and although he married Charlotte, the whole affair seems to have contributed to the stalling of his career. Paget participated in the Walcheren expedition in 1809, but did not see further active service in Wellingtonâs wars until the summer of 1815. Wellington had not wanted Paget to join the Waterloo campaign, but the Prince Regent and Duke of York insisted. In the end, Wellington and Paget came to a working accord, and Paget acquitted himself so well that he secured his place in the pantheon of the nationâs heroes. Pagetâs numerous contributions to the battle of Waterloo included marshalling and leading the cavalry into action to prevent Lieutenant-General Thomas Pictonâs infantry from being engulfed by three times the number of French soldiers at what was a crucial position for the allies, La Haye Sainte. Five days after the battle, The Times reported that Paget had been âthroughout the day foremost in danger and gloryâ.10 According to a âMemoir of the Most Noble Henry William Pagetâ printed in the European Magazine, and London Review (1821), ânext to the illustrious Commander-in-Chief, the Duke of Wellington, the success of the battle of Waterloo was, perhaps, more indebted to the âfirst Cavalry Officer in the worldâ, as the gallant Marquess is justly entitled, than to any other of that band of heroes, who immortalized themselves on that eventful dayâ.11 The Gentlemanâs Magazine (1854) repeated this sentiment in its obituary for Paget: ânext to the great leader of the host, the victory of Waterloo was more indebted to the Earl of Uxbridge than any other of the numerous warriors of that memorable dayâ. His âgallantryâ and âdashâ had inspired the men; his actions were âprodigies of valourâ.12 Some fifteen years after the battle, the Scottish journalist and man of letters William Jerdan defended Pagetâs lieutenancy of Ireland on the basis that he had been âone of the brightest military heroes of our ageâ.13 In his life as a politician â a life that saw him come under attack for his sympathy for, among other things, Catholic emancipation â Paget acted, so the Gentlemanâs Magazine obituary asserts, âwith a moral courage not inferior to his brilliant physical bravery in the fieldâ.14
Linda Colley has argued that the final battle of the Napoleonic Wars popularised âa cult of military heroism and of a particular brand of âmanlinessââ.15 According to Colley, this served the interests of the aristocracy by lending new glamour to old power, but I want to suggest that this was also a âcultâ that idealised the physicality of the male body. The dandy soldiers of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars, dressed in form-fitting breeches and high-waisted jackets, sought to create a masculine identity based on bodily brilliance, âhowever inadequate [they and their bodies] might in fact beâ, as Colley puts it.16 Though encouraged by the Prince Regentâs love of military uniform, the dandy soldiers were ridiculed by the satirists of the age in images which imply that the cut of a well-made coat created an illusion of, rather than made manifest, an impressive physique.17 In comparison to the dandily dressed military body, the injured or wounded body could be more easily represented as authentic and so admirable, as Philip Shaw has shown. In Waterloo and the Romantic Imagination and, more fully, in Suffering and Sentiment in Romantic Military Art, Shaw argues that literary and visual texts which acknowledged the human cost of war did not necessarily undermine attempts to celebrate victory, as bodily sacrifice could be co-opted so as to neutralise the âfelt contradiction between the waste and the wonderâ, that is the âwasteâ of soldiers and the âwonderâ of the ideals to which they or their bodies had been sacrificed.18 Just as Michals argues that Nelson could be represented as an amputee because his missing arm could be pinned in ways that echoed existing conventions for elite portraiture, so Shaw highlights a painting of Paget â Constantin Fidele Coeneâs Imaginary Meeting of Sir Arthur Welle...