Talk:Battle of the Taku Forts (1900)

CHAPTER II

THE BOMBARDMENT AND STORMING OF

       THE TAKU FORTS 

The Taku Forts are four in number, two being situated on each side of the mouth of the Pei-Ho river. To seaward of them stretch large expanses of treacherous mud, just covered by the sea at high water; stakes have been driven into the slime for several hundred yards from the bottom of the embankments, and landing is quite impracticable at any state of the tide. On the landward side stretches a large plain, intersected with small canals and irrigation works, and immediately to the rear of the forts are the villages of Tong-Ku and Ta-Ku respectively. The only other things to attract attention are the small naval yard at Taku, and the pilot village at the mouth of the river, which has been built on the right bank.

Tong-Ku is about 3 miles up the river, and here are the railway station, coal stores, and the necessary landing stages for lading or unlading the merchant steamers which in some cases ply as far as Tientsin. The forts are protected against men-of-war, of a size larger than gunboats, by the bar, which is eleven and a half miles to seaward, and on which the depth of water varies from two feet to seventeen feet, at different states of the wind and tide. The trade of the place, which is important, has to be taken from Tong-Ku out to the ships lying about fourteen miles away, and this is done by the fleet of tugs and lighters belonging to the 'Taku Tug and Lighter Company,' which at present enjoys the monopoly.

This company and the railway are both British concerns, and before the outbreak, were both in a flourishing condition.

The forts themselves, the N., N.W., S., and New forts—the first two on the right bank and the others on the left bank,—were immensely powerful. Strong as they were in 1860, modern ordnance had made them practically impregnable; and to the ordinary observer it seemed that any attempt to forcibly occupy them would involve enormous losses of ships and men, and might end in disaster.

Had the defence of these positions been entrusted to any but Chinese, the lives and property of Europeans in the whole of Northern China would at this date have been of no account. The walls and parapets were constructed of mud mixed with chopped straw, a mixture which seems impervious to shell fire; they were constructed by a German syndicate, and a covered road connected the N.W. and N. forts. The armament was composed of guns of all sorts, sizes, and dates, but with heavy, modern, quick-firing guns the Chinese were extremely well supplied, and although the ancient armament did but little damage, it interfered in no way with the general impregnability of the positions.

At the naval yard were four new Germanbuilt destroyers with an estimated speed of thirty-five knots; they mounted six 3-pr. Q.F. guns each, and were capable of doing great damage if handled by officers with any self-reliance or ability; there was also a gunboat in dock, but she was probably denuded of her crew, and took no part in the subsequent proceedings.

From this it will be seen that the forts and the destroyers together comprised a formidable force against which the Allies could only pit the following:—

H.M.S. "Algerine," a three-masted sloop, mounting six 4-in. Q.F. guns and several smaller Q.F. and machine guns, totally unprotected against gun fire, except her

can get within 10 miles of the forts. The Russian Capt. Dubrowolski, as senior officer, was in command of the allied fleet of gunboats. On June 17 Japanese and British sailors and Russian infantry took possession of the railroad station of Tongku and wharves 2 miles from the forts. In the river above the forts the gunboats and destroyers took their stations—the Russian Bohr, Koreetz, and Gilyak, the French Lion, the German litis, and the British Algerine, Whiting, and Fame. The American Monocacy was there also, and was utilized as a hospital ship. Outside, 10 miles off the forts, lay the British Centurion, Barfleur, Orlando, Aurora, and Endymion, the French D'Entrecasteaux, Jean Bart, Descartes, Pascal, and Surprise, the Russian Sissoi Veliky, Rossia, Demitri Donskoi, Makhimoff, Sivoutch, and Gremiaschky, the Italian Elba and Calabria, the German Hansa, Hertha, Gefion, and Kaiserin Augusta, the Japanese Yoshimo-Kan and MarkoKan, the Austrian Zenta, and the American Newark. The Chinese Hai-Tien and Hai-Chu were there, and when notified of the intended action the admiral agreed to put out his fires. The Monocacy had been ordered to observe a strict neutrality, and took no part in the affair. The Atago, besides sending landing parties ashore, was likewise inactive. An armored train with a searchlight, manned by 100 men, was sent off for Tientsin when night set in.

The engagement was begun after midnight by one of the Chinese forts firing on the Algerine, a third of a mile distant, which replied directly, and was promptly supported by the Russian gunboats moored in line a quarter of a mile beyond. The litis, which had cleared for action days before and was the only vessel in perfect fighting trim, sent in a few shells, and the Lion also. Most of the forts took up the fire. The litis left her moorings, and with all lights out steamed down the river to the aid of the British and Russian vessels. As soon as anchor could be lifted the Lion followed. The six gunboats were then under fire of all the forts at ranges averaging a mile, and working all their guns. With the machine guns in their tops they made it impossible for the Chinese to serve the new Krupp quick firers mounted in cavaliers over the high redoubts, but the guns in the angles and the parapets could not be seen, for the night was very dark. The Gilyak, moving close to Taku village, lost many men by rifle fire. When the battle began the British destroyers Fame and Whiting steamed up the river to the naval dockyard and captured the firstclass 32-knot German-built destroyers Hai-Lung, Hai-Nui, Hai-Ching, and Hai-Hoba. Thev were fully manned with Chinese crews, who jumped upon the wharf and ran without striking a blow or firing a shot. During the night the six gunboats, although their shells were well placed, could do no more than hold in check the fire from the forts, which was, however, ineffective. Many of their guns had to be fired with extreme depression from the high redoubts. The powder charges were too light to carry the projectile to its mark, or sometimes they were excessive. There were no well-trained gunners among them. Yet with all these disadvantages they might have won the battle by their valorous persistency if their shells had not been worthless, most of them having either no bursters, or fuses so defective that they failed to explode. If only a part of the shells had burst the six gunboats could not have stood up under the fire of two miles of fortifications for six hours. When daylight broke, the Chinese poured in a much more vigorous fire, and the gunboats got under way on the flood tide—all

except the Gilyak, which received a heavy projectile on the water line. Steaming closer to the forts and moving about rapidly to whatever point invited attack, or passing up and down to deliver their broadsides, the ships worked all their guns with desperate energy. The litis had to be beached, a heavy shot having pierced a boiler. An explosion of a magazine in the largest fort checked the Chinese fire for a time, but soon it was renewed more fiercely than before. The storming parties had reached the forts on the north bank of the river, the Russians from one side, the Japanese from the other. Yet it appeared that the attack had failed. The heavy guns of the south fort were brought to bear on the gunboats, and when the storm of projectiles, which exploded now better than before, was becoming too severe for the ships to live in, the main magazine of the fort blew up, sending a blast of fire, smoke, and dfbris a thousand feet into the air. The concussion was so terrible that forts and ships ceased firing, and as cheers arose from the allies the Chinese fire was renewed with little vigor, gradually slackened, and finally ceased. When the storming parties entered the north forts the garrison made no resistance, but was leaving as fast as possible, and when the south fort was reached, Chinese soldiers were seen fleeing across the plain. Many prisoners were taken, and employed in removing the dead, nearly one third of the garrison having been killed or wounded. The guns were in good order, and some of them had never been fired. The storming parties, consisting of 200 Russians in the van, 250 English and 130 Germans forming the main body, and 300 Japanese in the rear, had to advance 2 miles along a narrow road. The Russians were checked by a heavy fire, and the British and Germans marching through paddy fields made little progress in the mud. The Japanese, more accustomed to such ground, found a better path and passed the others on the double quick, entered the north fort first, and drove the Chinese out at the point of the bayonet. Their captain was killed outside the walls, and their losses were 5 killed and 4 wounded; the Russians, 18 killed and 39 wounded. In the river the litis was struck 8 times, the Gilyak received 4 shells, the Koreetz 4 and took fire, the Lion was struck once, and the Algerine 6nce. There were killed in the naval action 18 Russians, 10 Japanese, 7 Germans, 1 Englishman, and 1 Frenchman. About 100 wounded were conveyed to Japan for treatment. The allied naval commanders issued a proclamation from Chifu stating that the powers were not making war on the Chinese people, their only object being to rescue their countrymen and to suppress the Boxers.

Our Sailors; Gallant Deeds of the British Navy during Victoria's Reign

by William H. G. Kingston

http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:5MSKJ39yYuoJ:www.readbookonline.net/read/41512/85755/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

THE CAPTURE OF THE TAKU FORTS.

Soon after the admiral's departure it became clear to the commanders of the ships off Taku that the Chinese Government were preparing to bring down an army upon Tongku, the terminus of the railway, and that the communication with Tientsin was threatened, and that the Taku forts were being provisioned and manned. It was therefore decided to occupy the forts, and notice was given to the Chinese of the intention to do so at two a.m. of 17th June.

Taku is situate at the mouth of the Peiho river, which was until the railway was built, and, if this were interrupted, would become again the principal approach from the sea to Pekin, about 80 miles by river, and to Tientsin 44 miles. The entrance, which runs east and west, is strongly guarded by a series of forts on the north and south sides, the principal fort being the north, which is very strong and mounts some 50 guns of all sizes, and connected with this by a covered way is another on the same side but farther up the river with 30 guns. On the south side there is a series of strong forts and batteries for about a mile along the shore, mounting about 120 guns of various patterns, the greater part being quite modern. Some distance inland is another fort and the magazines. These forts, designed to protect the sea-front, are therefore very formidable, and well manned with competent gunners would constitute a real danger to any ships entering the river. The bar of the river is 5 miles off, and is so shoaly that vessels drawing 20 feet have to lie 5 miles off that, that is 10 miles from the forts, and it was at this point that the fleet of the various nations was at this time lying at anchor, the British being _Centurion_, flagship, _Barfleur, Orlando, Endymion, Aurora_.

The only vessels that could therefore enter the river and bombard the forts were gunboats and destroyers; of these the Russians had three, _Bobr, Koreelah_, and _Gilyak_; the French, the _Lion_; the British, the _Algerine_, steel despatch boat with six 4-inch guns, and two destroyers, the _Whiting_ and _Fame_. These two last captured four perfectly equipped modern destroyers, whose crews bolted; properly handled, they might have destroyed all the attacking ships, who without them found sufficient work to do in keeping down the fire of the forts.

The plan arranged by the others was that, after an effective bombardment, a landing party should attack the north-west and north forts and the other forts in succession.

The Chinese, however, had no intention of letting the Westerns have it all their own way, but at a quarter to one a.m. on the morning of the 17th opened the ball by firing upon the _Algerine_, who promptly replied, and the battle became general. A terrific bombardment on both sides roared through the night, the gunboats in addition to the fire of their big guns keeping up a continuous hail from their quick-firing guns in their tops. The Chinese were equally determined, and stuck to their guns through it all, but they were very poor gunners, and their shells did not burst, and so for six hours the gunboats' targets for two miles of forts and some 200 or more guns escaped serious injury.

As daylight came, however, the Chinese made better practice, and the position became more serious for the allies, and it seemed as though the attack was going to fail. The Russian ship _Gilyak_ was hit by a shell, and lost several men. She could not leave her moorings in consequence, and suffered severely from rifle fire from the shore, her losses during the action being the heaviest in the fleet, 2 officers and 10 men killed and 47 wounded.

The tide now rising, the ships boldly steamed amid a storm of shot and shell close under the forts. The German _Itlis_ was seen constantly in the post of danger, and the gallantry with which she was fought evoked the admiration of all.

HMS _Algerine_, commander R.H. Stewart, greatly contributed to the final success, which at one time was so doubtful. She was always in the thick of the fight, but escaped with only slight damage to cowls and rigging, and received no shot in her hull, largely owing to the fact that her commander put her so close into the forts that they could not be brought to bear on her, and the shot passed over. She had only 1 officer wounded and 3 men killed.

Still the battle continued, and the Chinese kept doggedly at it, and succeeded in bursting their shells. Fortunately about seven a.m. an awful explosion occurred, the chief magazine blew up, and the Chinese lost heart, and soon after all firing ceased. Meantime the storming-parties had seized the north-west fort.

The landing party consisted of British, 23 officers and 298 men, from the _Alacrity, Barfleur_, and _Endymion_; German, 3 officers and 130 men; Japanese, 4 officers and 240 men; Russian, 2 officers and 157 men; Italian, 1 officer and 24 men; Austrian, 2 officers and 20 men,--total, 904 officers and men. The command was confided to Commander Craddock, RN. These landed under heavy shell fire in the dark by 2:30 a.m. with no loss, and at 4:30, when the ships' guns had silenced those of the forts, advanced upon the north-west fort. In the firing line were men from the _Alacrity_ and _Endymion_ on the right, Russians on the left, and Italians on the right flank; the _Barfleur's_ men supported the charge, and the rest of the force were in support. The Japanese, however, were not to be restrained, and as soon as the charge sounded, raced with the British for the west gate, and both nations climbed the parapet together. Their commander was first in, and the English commander a good second, the former unfortunately being killed. The remaining forts were easily taken, and with small loss to the allies. The Chinese garrison was estimated at 3000, of whom one-third was killed.

Fighting between germans and russian garrisoning the fort

http://paperspast.natlib.govt.nz/cgi-bin/paperspast?a=d&d=EP19010508.2.34

Rajmaan (talk) 07:23, 1 December 2012 (UTC)

Jane Elliot's account of the Battle

Jane E. Elliott, Some Did It for Civilisation, Some Did It for Their Country : A Revised View of the Boxer War (Hong Kong: The Chinese University Press, 2002) makes the argument that western armies at the time and western historians have seriously neglected the Battle of the Dagu Forts, some even denying that it ever took place. Would someone more knowledgeable like to evaluate this claim and perhaps work it into this article? The Google book is at Jane Elliot Some Did it For Civilisation ch (talk) 03:34, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

the phrasing she used means that historians denied that chinese forces offered any resistance at dagu forts, not that they claim it didn't happen. That page seems to be criticing other scholars for laziness in details in their works.

and there does exist such lazy scholarship. I've seen some minor errors in some works like thesis such as one person claiming that Nie Shicheng's tenacious army attacked at langfang while it was dong fuxiang's gan army that did it. Lanxin xiang also managed to write about dong fuxiang's army and claim that they were used to brutally crush a muslim rebellion, without mentioning that the soldiers of Dong Fuxiang that crushed the muslim rebellion were muslim, Dungan revolt (1895–1896). Just by reading lanxin xiang's work without cross referencing it with any others, and you get the impression that Dong Fuxiang was an islamophobe. Rajmaan (talk) 05:08, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the clarification, Rajmaan. Elliott does say that "one eminent historian went so far as to say that the battle of Dagu never happened." (p. 397) But now that I look at the reference (p. 480 n. 57, which is to Esherick p. 302-303) I am not sure that she is exactly right. Esherick does not "say that the battle of Dagu never happened." He does indeed leave out mention of any Chinese resistance, which is almost but not quite the same. In any case, her point is well taken. ch (talk) 05:52, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the observation, Rajmaan. CWH has responded to you on Elliott. I admit to being puzzled about Dong Fuxiang and where he was and where he wasn't. Writers have claimed that he and his men participated in about every battle in Northern China during the Boxer Rebellion -- including some that were separated widely in distance. Was his army broken into several pieces? Or was he only in Peking carrying out the Siege of the International Legations? I don't know. Perhaps a competent Chinese scholar could clear this up. The English sources are vague, and probably unreliable, on Chinese commanders and armies. Smallchief 11:32, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

one contemporary source, i think appleton's, claimed that a part of the kansu braves broke off at langfang and followed seymour to tianjin where they participated in battles on the outskirts. I read a chinese language source that mentioned multiple "camps" of soldiers, from the same army as being stationed in various places along the shanhaiguan beijing route.

i'm not sure if the tenacious army or the kansu braves fired at seymour's force while he was retrating back to tianjin. The german/russian trained tenacious army was definitely manning the krupp guns at tianjin itself, and not the kansu braves. Both the expedition and the tianjin concessions came under heavy, accurate artillery fire by krupp guns and both modern and contemporary sources from 1900 say that the shells hit precisely where they were aimed and would have wiped out the concessions except they were filled with duds due to corruption in the chinese arms industry. The krupp guns in beijing were way off mark while the ones in tianjin were dead accurate. We need to create separate articles on the tenacious army and the other chinese armies.Rajmaan (talk) 02:08, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

OK, but to use a "contemporary source" would not be a good idea because: 1) Many reports published at the time, such as Appleton's, are not reliable sources (one newspaper editor at the time said that half of the articles he printed were completely fabricated). While some are good, we don't know which is which. 2) In any case, using contemporary sources for facts and events is Original Research, which is against Wikipedia policy precisely for this reason. Frustrating, to be sure. It would be like a judge listening to only one witness, without cross examination, or even putting the witness under oath. ch (talk) 07:08, 11 December 2012 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Battle of Taku Forts (1900). Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140525232930/http://www.emedals.com/collectors-gallery/great-britain/orders-decorations/order-of-the-indian-empire/the-most-eminent-order-of-the-indian-empire-to-rear-admiral-coli?vmcchk=1ref to http://www.emedals.com/collectors-gallery/great-britain/orders-decorations/order-of-the-indian-empire/the-most-eminent-order-of-the-indian-empire-to-rear-admiral-coli?vmcchk=1ref

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:26, 28 October 2016 (UTC)