The lithofracteur was the blasting explosive used by the Dutch mineurs (engineers) in the Atjeh-oorlog — a nitroglycerin-based compound employed to destroy enemy cannon, bentengs and fortified works that could not be reduced by artillery fire alone. Borel mentions lithofracteur in connection with Romswinckel’s column on 16 April 1874 — when Romswinckel was given lithofracteur “om te vernielen” (to destroy) — and in connection with the mineur detachment that accompanied van der Meer’s column to Longbatta on 31 December 1874.
Description and Use
The lithofracteur was, in Borel’s account, the blasting explosive used by the Dutch mineurs in Atjeh. The compound — a nitroglycerin-based explosive, similar in properties to dynamite — was used to destroy enemy cannon, bentengs and fortified works that could not be reduced by artillery fire alone. The mineurs would place the explosive charge against or under the target, set the fuze, and retire to a safe distance before detonation. The lithofracteur was a serviceable compound — more powerful than gunpowder, and more convenient to handle than liquid nitroglycerin — and was the standard Dutch military explosive for demolition work in the 1870s. The use of lithofracteur required trained mineurs (military engineers), and the mineur detachment that accompanied Dutch columns on demolition missions was a small but specialised element of the expeditionary force.
The Use at Lampoe Oek
Borel mentions lithofracteur in connection with Romswinckel’s column on 16 April 1874. On 15 April 1874 kapitein van Aerssen had conquered a benteng on which an iron cannon was in batterij; the next day Romswinckel was given lithofracteur “om te vernielen” — to destroy — proof that the Dutch expected to find more versterkingen in the course of the operation. The expectation was fulfilled: Romswinckel’s column discovered a strongly fortified enemy stelling near Longbatta — later known as Lampoe Oek — of which the Dutch had known nothing. The battle of Lampoe Oek that followed ended in “eene geweldig échec”; the lithofracteur was not used, and the stelling that the Dutch had intended to destroy was only destroyed by artillery on 18 September 1874. The lithofracteur in Romswinckel’s column was, in Borel’s account, a small but instructive detail: the Dutch had expected to encounter versterkingen and had prepared the means to destroy them, but the échec of the operation prevented the use of the means.
The Use at Longbatta
Borel also mentions the mineur detachment in connection with van der Meer’s column to Longbatta on 31 December 1874. The left column — the 10th battalion under van der Meer, with a 4-gun battery and a mineur detachment — was to march from Pakan Atjeh along the left bank directly on Longbatta. The mineur detachment was presumably equipped with lithofracteur for the demolition of enemy works. The Longbatta disaster that followed — in which van der Meer’s column was surrounded on the open sawah and cut to pieces — prevented the use of the lithofracteur; one mineur sergeant was among the missing “probably killed on spot by furious Atjehneezen.” The lithofracteur was thus, in Borel’s account, a small but regular feature of Dutch demolition missions — a serviceable compound whose use was repeatedly prevented by the échecs and disasters that the afwachtende houding and the poor tactical conduct of the campaign produced. The lesson Borel draws is implicit: the Dutch had the means to destroy enemy works, but the means could only be used if the tactical situation allowed — and the tactical situation was, in Borel’s account, repeatedly squandered by the errors of command.
See Also
- Benteng
- Achterlaadkanonnen van 12 c.M.
- Battle of Lampoe Oek (16 April 1874)
- Destruction of the Lampoe Oek fortification (18 September 1874)
- Battle of Longbatta (31 December 1874)
- Majoor Romswinckel
- Majoor van der Meer
- Kapitein van Aerssen
- 1874
Source
Onze vestiging in Atjeh, critisch beschreven, by G. F. W. Borel, Kapitein der Artillerie. ‘s-Gravenhage: D. A. Thieme, 1878. pp. 57, 67, 73, 78–80, 189, 226–237.