Protestant Exiles from France/Book Second - Chapter 3 - Section III
Sec. 3. — The Irish Campaign of 1691.
After anxious deliberation as to the Irish campaign of 1691, the chief command was given to one who had come over with William from Holland, at his “descent upon England,” and who had served in England and in the late campaign in Ireland. This was Lieutenant-General Godart, Baron De Ghinkel, now promoted to the rank of General. He had remained with the army in their winter quarters, and assumed the chief command at the camp at Mullingar on the 1 8th of May. Here the general officers rendezvoused. Ruvigny came from England, and appeared on the 24th; Major-General Hugh Mackay from Scotland on the 28th; Major-General Talmash arrived about the same time. These four officers, Ghinkel, Ruvigny, Mackay, and Talmash, most conspicuously distinguished themselves throughout the campaign, and the intimate friends of each have claimed the greatest honour for each of them. But the gallant individuals themselves do not seem to have been disturbed or trammelled by any unpatriotic and reckless jealousies. Mackay’s biographer says — “In councils of war, the general officers had occasional differences of opinion, which they supported sometimes even with warmth; but (to their honour be it recorded) these never interrupted the public service, nor disturbed the harmony of their private meetings.”
The first operation was the capture of Ballymore, in county Westmeath. Here Ruvigny is not mentioned; the Major-Generals commanded each for one day in regular rotation, and so the honour of conducting great operations fell to one or the other in a kind of lottery. On May 31st, Ruvigny, with a detachment of cavalry, was sent to possess himself of a Pass between Ballymore and Athlone, a frontier town situated in the provinces of Leinster and Connaught, and the counties of Westmeath and Roscommon.
The first great event of the campaign was the taking of Athlone. It was Mackay’s lot to conduct the fording of the Shannon, which he did most gallantly and successfully, though he had argued against the project in the council of war. The pleas urged in favour of it were highly characteristic of Ruvigny — “That no brave action could be performed without hazard, and the attempt would very likely be successful.” Mackay, on the other hand, urged, “We are sure to fail unless the enemy, through their own misconduct, are the victims of a surprise.” Success prevented adverse criticisms. The war had again assumed the aspect of a war of religions. The commander of the enemy was a conspicuous leader of the dragonnades against the Huguenots, Monsieur St. Ruth. The impression in the English army was that no quarter would be given to the French heretics, as the refugee soldiers were styled by the Popish Marshal.
Ghinkel proceeded to fortify Athlone. St. Ruth withdrew his army of 25,000 to a strong post, with great natural advantages, near the old castle of Aughrim, in county Galway. William’s army numbered 18,000 only, but eagerly accepted the challenge given by the retreating enemy on Sunday, July 12. The result of the battle during the day was doubtful, but by the evening it was favourable to the British, through the execution done by their artillery. It was almost resolved to desist till next morning; but Ghinkel, fearing that the enemy would retreat during the night, gave orders to renew the engagement. All the British and foreign officers of the allies eminently distinguished themselves. The greatest military genius was Mackay, and the main ideas and grand theory of the action were his suggestion. The enemy were almost impregnable on the left of the castle; but the plan was by skirmishing and manoeuvring to draw off towards the right so much of their force, that they might be driven from the left by assaults which should be successful, because quite unexpected, as well as most impetuous. Ruvigny’s Regiment of Horse were among the first that got at the enemy’s left, and “did very good service” (says Mr. Story). Ruvigny himself was not in command of his own regiment, but was at the head of a brigade of cavalry. St. Ruth was full of admiration of their daring, as they advanced over ground that seemed impassable; the first party of horse that made their way two a-breast through a pass, and secured a good position on the left, were under the command of Lieutenant-General Schravemor and Major-General Talmash. Our centre at that time was repulsed, and Marshal St. Ruth took the resolution to come forward with his reserves, saying that he would drive our army back to the gates of Dublin. Talmash, however, came to the succour of our centre, and rallied the troops. Mackay charged the left of the enemy with another good body of cavalry, and (says Story) “Major-General Ruvigny went along the side of the bog with another party of Horse, who did extraordinary service, bearing down all before them.” The turning of the enemy’s flank by the brigade under Ruvigny is reckoned by the majority of historians to have been the crisis of success. Smollett, a historian who carefully studied military details, says:— “Major-General Ruvigny, who had behaved with great gallantry during the whole action, advanced with five regiments of cavalry to support the centre, when St. Ruth, perceiving his design, resolved to fall upon him in a dangerous hollow way which he was obliged to pass. For this purpose he began to descent Kilcommodan Hill with his whole reserve of Horse, but in his way was killed by a cannon ball. His troops immediately halted, and his guards retreated with his corpse. His fate dispirited the troops. . . . Ruvigny, having passed the hollow way without opposition, charged the enemy’s flank, and bore down all before him with surprising impetuosity. The centre redoubled their efforts, and pushed the Irish to the top of the hill; and then the enemy’s whole line gave way from right to left, and threw down their arms.” “Victory was scarcely doubtful,” says Macfarlane in the Pictorial History of England, “when St. Ruth was killed.” And the Duke of Berwick admits that St. Ruth’s death was not the cause of the defeat of the Jacobites. “After the battle,” says Dumont, “Ghinkel embraced Ruvigny and declared how much he was satisfied with his bravery and conduct.” In his despatches he ascribed the victory principally to the Marquis De Ruvigny, to Ruvigny’s regiment of Horse, and the Earl of Oxford’s regiment of Horse.
In the onward march to the town of Galway, Ruvigny was on the 19th July left at Athenry with Lieutenant-General Schravemor and 3000 horse, as a corps of observation, and to maintain a close communication with Athlone. Galway capitulated on the 21st, and on the 28th the whole army rendezvoused at Athenry and marched to Xenagh. On the 15th August, Ruvigny, with 1500 horse, and the Prince of Hesse, with 1000 foot and six field-pieces, were ordered to Limerick, the Commander-in-Chief and his staff accompanying them. The weather was unfavourable for the siege of Limerick for the next week. But on the 25th August the whole forces commenced operations in earnest. The contest was vigorously conducted on both sides till September 22d, when, the garrison being hard pressed and also out-manoeuvred, Colonel VVachup sang out for a parley with Lieutenant-General Schravemor, and for a similar conference between Colonel Sarsfield (the gallant Jacobite Irishman who, by patent from King James, was Earl of Lucan) and Major-General Ruvigny, with a view to the surrender of the town.
Macaulay says:— “On the evening of the day which followed the fight at the Thomond gate the drums of Limerick beat a parley; and YVauchop from one of the towers hailed the besiegers, and requested Ruvigny to grant Sarsfield an interview. The brave Frenchman who was an exile on account of his attachment to one religion, and the brave Irishman who was about to become an exile on account of his attachment to another, met and conferred, doubtless with mutual sympathy and respect. Ghinkel, to whom Ruvigny reported what had passed, willingly consented to an armistice.”
This negotiation led to the Treaty of Limerick and the submission of all Ireland. The conspicuous part taken by the Marquis De Ruvigny in this campaign justifies the character which has been accorded to him by a modern French historian, Professor Weiss, “Alternately a military leader and a diplomatic negotiator, he evinced a rare capacity for business, and a valour which nothing could daunt.”