Battle of Seneffe

Both France and the Dutch Republic viewed the Spanish Netherlands as essential for their security and trade, making it a contested area throughout the 17th century. France had occupied much of the region in the 1667-68 War of Devolution, before being forced by the Dutch-led Triple Alliance to return most of their gains in the 1668 Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle.[12] After this, Louis XIV decided the best way to force concessions from the Dutch was by defeating them first.[13]

When the Franco-Dutch War began in May 1672, French troops quickly overran large parts of the Netherlands, but by July the Dutch position had stabilised. The unexpected success of his offensive had encouraged Louis to make excessive demands, while concern at French gains brought the Dutch support from Brandenburg-Prussia, Emperor Leopold, and Charles II of Spain. In August 1673, an Imperial army entered the Rhineland; facing war on multiple fronts, Louis withdrew most of his forces from the Netherlands, retaining only Grave and Maastricht.[14]

In January 1674, Denmark joined the anti-French coalition. This was followed by the February Treaty of Westminster, which ended the Third Anglo-Dutch War and deprived France of a key ally against the Dutch.[15] In May, the French took the offensive in the Spanish territory of the Franche-Comté, while Condé remained on the defensive in the Spanish Netherlands. A combined Dutch-Spanish force under William of Orange and Count Monterrey, Governor of the Spanish Netherlands, spent June and July attempting to bring Condé to battle. When this proved unsuccessful, William proposed invading French Flanders, which would threaten Condé's rear and force him to fight; Monterrey agreed since it also provided an opportunity to recapture the key Spanish border town of Charleroi.[16]

On 23 July, William was joined near Nivelles by an Imperial force under de Souches, a French Huguenot exile; along with 5,000 Spanish infantry and cavalry, this brought his numbers up to about 65,000. At the same time, the French completed their occupation of the Franche-Comté which allowed Louis to send Condé substantial reinforcements, including his son the duc d'Enghien. By early August, Condé had 45,000 men entrenched along the line of the Piéton river which joined the Sambre at Charleroi.[17]

Mons

Maastricht

Seneffe

Nivelles

Liège

Brussels

Charleroi

Grave

The Seneffe campaign, 1674; key locations in the Low Countries

Concluding these positions were too strong for a frontal assault, on 9 August the Allied army left Nivelles and established a line running from the villages of Arquennes to Roux, on the French left. By doing so, they hoped to tempt Condé into an attack, but he simply shifted his troops to face the threat; as a result, William proposed moving around Seneffe, and into the French rear.[17] This was supported by the Spanish, since it would cut Condé's supply lines and isolate the French garrison in Charleroi (see Map).[18]

At 4:00 am on 11 August, the Allies set out in three columns, each marching parallel to the French positions, a formation dictated by the poor roads. The left column was commanded by de Souches, the right by the Marqués de Assentar, commander of the Spanish Army of Flanders, with the bulk of the infantry and artillery in the centre under William. A vanguard of 2,000 cavalry covered the gaps between the columns, with another 5,200 bringing up the rear led by Prince Vaudémont.[19]

A Dutch musketeer from the regiment of Schwartzenberg.

Hearing the Allies were on the move, at 5:30 am Condé rode out to observe their dispositions, and quickly perceived their intentions. The terrain they were crossing was marshy and broken up by numerous hedges, walls and woods, with limited exit points; gambling these factors would negate their superior numbers, Condé decided to attack. He sent 400 light cavalry under Saint Clar to skirmish with the Allied rearguard and slow down their march, while also despatching a cavalry brigade under the Marquis de Rannes to seize the high ground north of Seneffe.[20]

Around 10:00 am, de Rannes came into contact with Vaudémont, who asked William for infantry support; he was sent three battalions under William Maurice of Nassau-Siegen, which he placed near the bridge over the Zenne or Senne river that flowed through Seneffe, with his cavalry just behind.[19][21] Despite gout so severe he was unable to wear riding boots, Condé himself led the elite Maison du Roi cavalry across the Zenne above Seneffe, and scattered Vaudémont's cavalry, whose headlong flight temporarily disrupted the Spanish troops immediately behind them.[5]

The duc d'Enghien rescues his father Condé at Seneffe

Simultaneous assaults by de Rannes and the duc de Luxembourg eventually overwhelmed the Allied infantry in Seneffe, who were either killed or taken prisoner.[22] By midday, Condé had inflicted significant losses on the Allies and gained a clear, if minor victory. He then persisted with a series of frontal assaults against the advice of his subordinates, and the battle degenerated into a number of confused and costly firefights.[16]

William halted his march and established a defensive line, mainly composed of Dutch infantry, centred on the nearby Priory of St Nicolas;[23] On the plain north of S. Nicolas, Assentar rallied his Spanish horsemen and the horsemen who had fled from Seneffe. In two engagagements the Allied cavalry was beaten back, but several French assaults on the priory were repulsed with heavy losses.[24] However, after Assentar was mortally wounded in a third cavalry engagement, his men fell back, this time scattering their own infantry and allowing the French to capture the priory[23] in a charge led by Condé himself. During this charge he was unhorsed and had to be rescued by his son.

However, the struggle around St Nicolas gave William, John Maurice of Nassau-Siegen and Hans Willem van Aylva time to complete a new defensive line at Fayt, composed of 23 Dutch battalions, while de Souches deployed his Imperial troops on their left. Condé, who mistakenly assumed the Allies were retreating towards Mons, now planned to roll up them up from behind.[25] William however turned Fayt into a strong defensive position, placing cannons along the access roads and hedges.[8] The ground in front of his position was unsuitable for the French cavalry, while the Allied cavalry were stationed behind their infantry, ready to repulse any French breakthrough. At the same time, the French lacked artillery support, since their heavy guns had been left behind during the advance.[25]

Condé ordered his deputies, Luxembourg and Navailles, to assault the Allied flanks, while he himself stormed the village with the French and Swiss Guards. The attackers suffered heavy casualties but managed to capture six Dutch guns, before they were recaptured by a successful counterattack of Imperial cavalry and Dutch infantry.[26] Around 21:00, Condé halted his assault, while Luxembourg had also been forced to break off his attack on the left flank; although Navailles gained ground on the right, the Dutch regrouped and he was unable to make further progress.[27]

William of Orange at Seneffe.

However, de Souches had been given secret instructions from Vienna to minimise casualties and late in the afternoon ordered the Imperial troops to withdraw, which allowed Luxembourg to capture much of the Allied baggage train.[28] Isolated firefights continued for another two hours, after which many soldiers fell asleep on the battlefield. Condé, intending to resume the battle the next day, had ordered his troops to remain on the battlefield, resting with weapons in hand amidst the dying and wounded. The Allies too had remained in their positions; and both armies now rested there, unmoving and silent, when suddenly, around midnight, a loud gunfire was heard and number of men were killed on both sides.[29] A panic broke out in the French army, after which Condé ordered the retreat to Charleroi.[27] William, only deterred from a pursuit by the objection of other commanders, most notably de Souches,[30] ordered his troops to fire a triple salvo to claim victory[8] and then withdrew to Mons.[16]

Condé's formal reception by Louis XIV at Versailles following Seneffe

Although both sides claimed victory on the basis of "holding their ground" at the end of the fighting, neither gained a clear advantage, although some historians argue the battle was a French victory,[6][31][11] while others claim it was a victory for the Allied forces.[32] The result could have been far more decisive had Condé taken advantage of his initial success,[33] but his mistakes, combined with the courage and discipline of the Dutch and Spanish infantry, rescued William from a serious defeat.[34] Despite capturing over 100 colours and standards, as well as most of the Allied baggage train, Condé failed to inflict a crushing defeat on the Allies.[35] Since the battle failed to significantly change the overall strategic situation, other historians suggest it was essentially inconclusive.[36][37][5][38][24]

Casualties on both sides were enormous, with estimates of Allied losses ranging from 10,000 [7] to 15,000, including prisoners.[9][10][6] [lower-alpha 2] The dead included Sir Walter Vane, deputy commander of the elite Scots Brigade, François Palm, Colonel of the Dutch Marines, [41] and Assentar, whose body was later returned by Condé for burial. French casualties were between 7,000[7] to 10,000 dead or wounded,[9][10] with particularly heavy losses among the officer corps.[38][42] These shocked the French court, one contemporary writing "We have lost so much by this victory that without the Te Deum and captured flags at Notre Dame, we would believe we had lost the battle".[43] French military engineer and strategist Sébastien Le Prestre de Vauban argued Seneffe showed siege warfare was a better way to achieve victory than costly battles, and Louis ordered Condé to avoid a repeat.[11]

The Imperial troops escaped relatively untouched from the carnage at Seneffe, as William claimed that they had deliberately ignored his requests for support. Although Allied casualties were higher than those of the French, they were quickly replaced by troops from nearby garrisons.[11] In addition, a large convoy arrived in the Allied camp outside Mons on 31 August, bringing supplies, a month's pay in advance for the survivors and five new Dutch regiments. Combined with the losses suffered by Condé, the Allied army was now stronger relative to the French than before Seneffe, and William proposed another invasion attempt.[35]

However, one less appreciated advantage held by the French over their opponents in this period was the benefit of an undivided command and unified strategy. For different reasons, neither Monterrey or de Souches were willing to risk another battle and William was forced to compromise by besieging Oudenarde. Operations commenced on 16 September, and Condé began marching to its relief three days later. The Dutch and Spanish redoubled efforts to breach the walls before his arrival, but without advising his colleagues, de Souches sent the Imperial artillery off to Ghent. On 20 September, Condé took up position on the left bank of the Scheldt river and began bombarding the Allied positions on 21st.[44] Since the Imperial troops would not fight without their guns, and the Dutch and Spanish could not face the French on their own, the Allies were forced to abandon the siege,[45] along with most of their remaining equipment.[44]

The thanksgiving service of William III's army in Grave after its capture

After strong protests from the Dutch States General, de Souches was relieved of his command, but this did little to solve the reality of diverging objectives. Emperor Leopold preferred to focus Imperial resources on the Upper Rhine, the Spanish wanted to recoup their losses in the Spanish Netherlands, while the Dutch prioritised the recapture of Grave and Maastricht.[46] The Spanish returned to their garrisons, the Imperial troops recrossed the Meuse, [44] while William assumed command of operations at Grave, which had been besieged since 28 June and surrendered on 29 October.[45] Condé received an elaborate state reception at Versailles for Seneffe, but his health was failing and the casualties diminished Louis' trust in his abilities. He temporarily assumed command of French troops in the Rhineland following Turenne's death at Salzbach in July 1675, but retired before the end of the year. In the longer term, Seneffe confirmed Louis' preference for positional warfare, ushering in a period where siege and manoeuvre dominated military tactics.[47]

The battles of Seneffe and Grave were illustrative of the stage the war had reached. Two years after the French lightning attack, the war had turned into one of attrition. As armies expanded and the battlefield was relocated, casualties had increased. The Allies and France were of similar strength, but the parties were not yet tired enough of the war to agree to a peace.[48]

• Anonymous (1744). The History of England, During the Reigns of K. William, Q. Anne and K George I, with an Introductory Review of the Reigns of the Royal Brothers Charles and James, Volume 1. Daniel Brown.
• Bodart, Gaston (1908). Militar-Historisches Kreigs-Lexikon V1: 1618-1905 (in German) (2010 ed.). Kessinger Publishing. ISBN 978-1167991554.
• Clodfelter, Micheal (2002). Warfare and Armed Conflicts: A Statistical Reference to Casualty and Other Figures 1500-1999. McFarland & Co. ISBN 978-0786412044.
• De Hooge, Romeyn (1680). The Netherland-Historian Containing a True and Exact Relation of What Hath Passed in the Late Warrs (2018 ed.). Forgotten Books. ISBN 978-0484752152.
• De Périni, Hardÿ (1896). Batailles françaises, Volume V (in French). Ernest Flammarion.
• De Sévigné, Marie Rabutin-Chantal (1822). De St-Germain, Pierre Marie Gault (ed.). Letters of Madame De Sévigné, Volume III; to the Count de Bussy, 5 September 1674 (in French).
• Dupuy, R. Ernest; Dupuy, Trevor, eds. (1970). The Collins Encyclopedia of Military History: From 3500 B.C. to the Present (2007 ed.). BCA.
• Holmes, Richard (2009). Marlborough; England's Fragile Genius. Harper Press. ISBN 978-0007225729.
• Hutton, Ronald (1989). Charles II King of England, Scotland and Ireland. Clarendon Press. ISBN 978-0198229117.
• Jacques, Tony (2007). Dictionary of Battles and Sieges: A Guide to 8,500 Battles from Antiquity through the Twenty-first Century, Volume 3, P-Z. Greenwood. ISBN 978-0313335389.
• Luscombe, Stephen. "Sir Walter Vane". BritishEmpire.co.uk. Retrieved 27 October 2021.
• Lynn, John A. (1999). The Wars of Louis XIV, 1667–1714. Addison Wesley Longman. ISBN 978-0582056299.
• Macintosh, Claude Truman (1973). French Diplomacy during the War of Devolution, the Triple Alliance and the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle (PhD). Ohio State University.
• Nolan, Cathal (2008). Wars of the Age of Louis XIV, 1650–1715: An Encyclopedia of Global Warfare and Civilization. Greenwood. ISBN 978-0313330469.
• Serrano, Juan Miguel. "Pedro de Acuña y Meneses". Real Academia de la Historia (in Spanish). Retrieved 26 October 2021.
• Troost, Wouter (2004). William III the Stadholder-king; A Political Biography. Ashgate. ISBN 978-0754650713.
• Tucker, Spencer C (2009). "August 11, 1674". A Global Chronology of Conflict: From the Ancient World to the Modern Middle East. Vol. Two: 1500-1774. ABC-CLIO. ISBN 978-1851096671.
• Van Nimwegen, Olaf (2010). The Dutch Army and the Military Revolutions, 1588–1688. Boydell Press. ISBN 978-1843835752.
• Van Nimwegen, Olaf (2020). De Veertigjarige Oorlog 1672–1712: de strijd van de Nederlanders tegen de Zonnekoning [The 40 Years' War 1672–1712: the Dutch struggle against the Sun King] (in Dutch). Prometheus. ISBN 978-90-446-3871-4.
• Panhuysen, Luc (2009). Rampjaar 1672: Hoe de Republiek aan de ondergang ontsnapte [Rampjaar 1672: How the Republic escaped its downfall] (in Dutch). Uitgeverij Atlas. ISBN 9789045013282.
• Grant, RG, ed. (2011). 1001 Battles That Changed the Course of History. Universe Publishing. ISBN 978-0789322333.
• Knoop, Willem Jan (1856). "Séneffe (1674): Krijgskundige beschouwingen over den oorlog van 1672-1678 in de Nederlanden" [Seneffe (1674) Military reflections on the war of 1672-1678 in the Netherlands]. Nieuwe Spectator (in Dutch).
• Algra, Hendrik; Algra, Ale (1956). Dispereert niet: Twintig eeuwen historie van de Nederlanden [Despair not: Twenty centuries of the history of the Netherlands] (in Dutch). T. Wever.