Difficult People: Dealing with the Bad

Behavior of Difficult People Rebecca

Ray
Visit to download the full and correct content document:
https://ebookmass.com/product/difficult-people-dealing-with-the-bad-behavior-of-diffic
ult-people-rebecca-ray/
More products digital (pdf, epub, mobi) instant
download maybe you interests ...

Dealing with Difficult People: 24 lessons for Bringing

Out the Best in Everyone (The McGraw-Hill Professional
Education Series) 1st Edition Brinkman

https://ebookmass.com/product/dealing-with-difficult-
people-24-lessons-for-bringing-out-the-best-in-everyone-the-
mcgraw-hill-professional-education-series-1st-edition-brinkman/

Toxic People Survival Guide: How to Deal with

Difficult, Negative, or Manipulative People, Handle
Narcissists and Disarm Sociopaths — Even If They Are
Your Family, Parents, or Friends Chase Hill
https://ebookmass.com/product/toxic-people-survival-guide-how-to-
deal-with-difficult-negative-or-manipulative-people-handle-
narcissists-and-disarm-sociopaths-even-if-they-are-your-family-
parents-or-friends-chase-hi/

The Domestic Dog: Its Evolution, Behavior and

Interactions with People 2nd

https://ebookmass.com/product/the-domestic-dog-its-evolution-
behavior-and-interactions-with-people-2nd/

Making Meaning of Difficult Experiences Sheila A. M.

Rauch

https://ebookmass.com/product/making-meaning-of-difficult-
experiences-sheila-a-m-rauch/
Organizational Behavior: Managing People and
Organizations 12th Edition

https://ebookmass.com/product/organizational-behavior-managing-
people-and-organizations-12th-edition/

Difficult (The Neighbor from Hell Chronicles Book 2)

R.L. Mathewson

https://ebookmass.com/product/difficult-the-neighbor-from-hell-
chronicles-book-2-r-l-mathewson/

Bad Beliefs: Why They Happen to Good People Neil Levy

https://ebookmass.com/product/bad-beliefs-why-they-happen-to-
good-people-neil-levy/

Hung’s Difficult and Failed Airway Management 3rd

Edition Edition Orlando Hung

https://ebookmass.com/product/hungs-difficult-and-failed-airway-
management-3rd-edition-edition-orlando-hung/

Assistive Technology for People with Disabilities (2nd

Edition)

https://ebookmass.com/product/assistive-technology-for-people-
with-disabilities-2nd-edition/
 About Difficult People

An explosive boss, a controlling boyfriend, a gaslighting colleague,

an interfering mother-in-law, a friend who talks only about herself –
we all know them, but how do we deal with them?

Difficult people take over our lives. They live rent-free in our heads.
We steel ourselves before we meet them. We can’t relax when we
are with them. We ruminate on their behaviour after they’ve gone.
They harvest our empathy and operate without regard for our
feelings.

In Difficult People, Dr Rebecca Ray shows us how to recognise (and

understand) difficult people and provides us with practical strategies
for self-preservation. From learning when to say no, limiting contact
and managing our reactions, to knowing when to walk away for
good.

With her expertise, insight and guidance, we learn to understand

how and when another person’s behaviour puts our psychological
safety at risk and what steps we can take to restore our boundaries.

Compassionate, honest and authoritative, this is your complete

guide to getting your life back from the grip of a difficult
relationship, and learning how to avoid them in the future.
 Also by Dr Rebecca Ray

Be Happy
The Universe Listens to Brave
The Art of Self-Kindness
Breakthrough
Setting Boundaries
Believe
Small Habits for a Big Life
Good, Great, Perfect
To the people I have been difficult for: thank you for your grace and
guidance upon realising the pain behind my actions and for staying
by my side as I did the work of healing. And thank you to those who
showed me the door in the days before I took responsibility for the
way I carried my wounds. Your boundaries helped me learn about
who I want to be.
To the people who have been difficult for me: thank you for
helping me understand what I will and won’t accept in my
relationships and interactions. Thank you for testing me to ensure I
am committed to my circles of preservation and empowerment. And
thank you for teaching me that my inner peace is both priceless and
my responsibility. I hope peace finds you also.
 acknowledgement of country

This book was written on the lands of the Jinibara and Kabi Kabi
(Gubbi Gubbi) peoples. I pay my deepest respects to their Elders,
past, present and emerging and honour the ancient wisdom and
connection to First Nations peoples that this land holds. Sovereignty
was never ceded.
 Contents
Cover
About Difficult People
Also by Dr Rebecca Ray
Title Page
Dedication
Acknowledgement of Country
Preface
Introduction
PART 1 BEING HUMAN IS COMPLEX
1 Understanding difficult people
2 Who is a difficult person?
3 Are they actually difficult?
PART 2 DIFFICULT BEHAVIOURS
4 Preoccupied behaviours
5 Avoidant behaviours
6 Fearful behaviours
PART 3 BOUNDARY BASICS
7 How you react
8 How you feel
9 How you self-regulate
10 How to set boundaries
PART 4 MOVING GENTLY AND BRAVELY FORWARD
11 Be gentle with yourself
12 Be brave and empowered
Acknowledgements
References
About the author
End Ads
Learn more about Dr. Rebecca Ray
Imprint page
Newsletter
 Preface

Dear reader, hello! If we’re meeting for the first time, I’m Dr
Rebecca Ray, but please call me Beck. I’ll be by your side in text
form throughout these pages. And if we’ve met before because we
shared therapy space during my time in clinical work, or through my
earlier books and audio content, an audience I’ve presented to, my
social media presence, or my courses, hello again! It’s my privilege
to continue alongside you for this part of your journey.
However you’ve found you’re way here, I’m betting that you are
not here because boundaries are brand new to you. No, you are
here because you’ve realised that boundaries are the most powerful
gift you can offer another person when you are interacting with
them. If you’ve read my book Setting Boundaries, I don’t need to
convince you of the positive influence of boundaries on your
psychological well-being. The reader response I received to the book
was stunning. Yet, there was a question asked frequently enough
that it was clear that we needed to continue the conversation: ‘What
do I do when my boundaries don’t work with a challenging person in
my life?’
The book you have in your hands now exists in reply to that
question, because real life is more nuanced than simply identifying
your boundaries and learning to say no.
It is destabilising and distressing when someone repeatedly fails to
respect your circles of empowerment and perseveration. You know
this person, don’t you? The person who doesn’t seem to care about
your boundaries. The one who unsettles you, dismisses your
attempts to communicate your expectations, and confuses you into
thinking it’s you who is the problem. This person violates your
psychological safety. They fail to manage their feelings effectively
and leave a trail of emotional baggage for you and everyone else
around them to trip over. While they don’t quite fit into the league of
dangerous people, their behaviour is problematic enough that it
knocks you off centre. And it makes you question whether
something is wrong with you.
Dear reader, there is nothing wrong with you. Yes, we must
acknowledge that we are all difficult people sometimes (we’ll explore
this throughout the book). I’m not about to pander to you by
absolving your personal responsibility when we both know that
relationships are a two-way street. However, it’s just as important
that you understand that difficult people can compromise your
perception of what you know about yourself, what you can trust in
others, and whether or not you have agency in your own life to set
boundaries around what you need and want to live bravely and
meaningfully.

Mentor, not master

I am here as your mentor, not your master. I’m not here to tell you
what to do. I am here to shine a light on the boundary areas that
aren’t working for you and to equip you with the tools you need to
make decisions about the direction you’ll take with the difficult
people in your life. I’m not a master at boundaries, because no one
is or can be, given the ever-evolving nature of relationship dynamics.
And I’m not your master, because the foundation of all my work is to
empower you to design your own life, rather than give away that
power to someone else.
I do, however, know quite a bit about boundaries given my two
decades of work and practice as a clinical psychologist. I have a
couple of additional decades of experience at being human (which
possibly count more than my academic qualifications). I am an ex-
pilot (you probably didn’t see that coming), who subsequently had
her clinical career cut short by severe burnout. Now, I’m an author
(obviously, Beck), a speaker, and mentor to people like your
incredible self.
I once dated men until I met a woman who is the life partner of
my dreams. You could say I’m an expert in pivoting, but I promise
you that it’s never felt like I knew what I was doing when I was in
the thick of changing direction. That woman is Nyssa, now my wife,
co-creator and constant inspiration. She puts up with me cherry-
picking stories from hers and our lives for my books (with consent),
and she is the epitome of someone for whom love matters most. We
are parents to our spectacular 5-year-old son, Bennett, who likes to
randomly introduce himself to strangers while we’re grocery
shopping and for whom a show-and-tell schedule was developed at
day care to avoid him commandeering the spotlight on a daily basis.
I loathe cooking and love mowing the lawn. One day, I’ll have
miniature highland cows and donkeys. Right now, we are Ray’s
Retirement Village for Senior Supermodels, and our call sheet
includes 13-year-old Henry, a Weimaraner I’ve had since he was 9
weeks old, and two rescue Irish Setters with special needs, Jetfire
(aged 9) and Jackie (aged 11), adopted during lockdown in 2021.
Yes, we vacuum a lot, and I’m sure I’ve earned an honorary degree
in vet nursing thanks to the dogs’ medical schedules.
I am here as someone who is committed to reminding you of the
authority that you hold over yourself, despite what others may do or
say. There’s no one who knows you better than you. However, I’ll
bring a metaphorical spotlight and whiteboard to assist you to
identify patterns keeping you in relationship cycles that hurt you.
Once we’ve uncovered the patterns, I’ll show you how to break
those cycles in favour of a more workable approach. Together, we
can change your life. And we will, assuming you want to (wink).

Privilege
I am an able-bodied, cisgendered, neurotypical white woman. I was
born in Australia, a first-world, democratic country with free
healthcare and (relatively) equal rights for women, raised in a
middle-class family with parents who remain married and who loved
and provided for me as a child. As an adult, I have multiple levels of
tertiary education under my belt, and a career that’s afforded me an
income that has never had me questioning where I will sleep at
night or how I will access my next meal. The amount of privilege in
these sentences is significant and this privilege must be
acknowledged because it shapes my life experience. It means that
my life has not seen the barriers that people of colour,
underrepresented identities, low-resourced settings, and countries
with fewer rights and greater threats to safety face. As Kerry
Washington’s character in Little Fires Everywhere articulated, ‘I didn’t
make good choices. I had good choices.’
You don’t get to choose your parents. You don’t get to choose your
personality. No one chooses to be traumatised. You don’t get to
choose your race. Your sexuality. Your gender. The country, culture
and socio-economic status you were born into, and the
opportunities, education, healthcare and citizen freedoms therefore
offered you. You don’t get to choose the generational history laid out
before you arrived, or the choices the adults in your life make that
change the course of your childhood for better or worse. Every
single one of these circumstances not of your choosing shapes the
load you carry and its relative weight. You don’t get to choose the
load. You don’t get to choose the weight. But you do get to choose
how you carry it.
I am a complex trauma survivor who consciously manages my
mental wellness and residual psychological scars on a daily basis. I
am in a same-sex relationship and was only legally able to marry my
partner just a few years ago. I am a woman and know what it’s like
to navigate the world in a plus-sized body. These things also shape
my perspective, but they don’t negate my inherent privilege due to
my race, access to resources, and capacity to set boundaries
because my culture allows me to.
I have no right to speak on your lived experience. What I can offer
you is transparency about my perspective and privilege, as a white
Australian clinical psychologist whose training and clinical experience
has existed largely in settings where people can access healthcare
and the benefit of creating change in their lives without the
significant weight of oppression on their shoulders. Please know that
I understand your interpretation of this book can only ever be
through your own lens. I acknowledge the limits of what I can write
and thank you in advance for recognising those limits as you read
this book.

Behaviours vs people
When we speak of difficult people, we are actually talking about
behaviours they exhibit that are abrasive to receive. It gives us
greater scope for change if we focus our perspective on difficult
behaviours rather than tarring people as wholly difficult, and
therefore unworthy, and likely ‘defective’.
 Most people are capable of changing. However, whether they have
insight, motivation and willingness to make those changes is another
matter entirely. As such, when I refer to difficult people in this book,
I am using this phrase to refer to difficult behaviours of people who
have developed coping strategies that cause problems for others, or
who struggle to have insight into their behaviours and have low
motivation to change those behaviours, or who don’t have the skills
(or willingness to learn the skills) to do things differently in their
interpersonal world.

Blurred lines
Forensic, violent and clinically diagnosable disorders of personality
don’t belong in this book. However, because many things can exist
at once in the complexity of human behaviour, difficult people can
often straddle a blurred line on the spectrum of psychologically
unsafe behaviours that escalate to dangerous behaviours. I’ve
attempted to include as much nuance as possible to help you make
decisions about what has been ‘normal’ for you and more
importantly, what you’ll define as acceptable in your relationships
moving forward.

Changing them
I don’t blame you if you’re impatient to arrive at the part of the book
where I teach you the magic words that allow you to confront the
difficult person in your life, force them to take responsibility for their
actions and, ultimately, change their ways. If changing others was
possible, then relationships wouldn’t be the source of discomfort that
they often are, and this book wouldn’t be necessary! You already
know this at your core, though. The good news is that we are going
to work on something far more effective: taking control of yourself
to decide who and what you allow into your space.

Discombobulation before integration

You are more than capable of making the changes you desire in your
relationships. But at the outset it may not feel like that. You are not
doing it incorrectly if it gets harder before it gets easier. There is
always a time when the learning is bigger than the knowing and
when you feel entirely discombobulated before integration occurs.
You are not alone through this. I’m right here with you, and I’m
going to walk beside you as you learn to trust yourself to create the
life you want to live. For now, all I need you to do is repeat after
me: ‘I relentlessly believe in my own potential.’ Say it again: ‘I
relentlessly believe in my own potential.’ With that commitment, take
my hand and let’s walk forward together.
 Introduction

Difficult People is your DIY guide to building better boundaries with

the people in your life who have a habit of ignoring, dismissing or
outright dismantling the boundaries you’ve attempted with them to
date. Our map looks like this:
Part 1. Being human is complex. In the first section of the
book, we’re going to explore how people arrive at using difficult
behaviours as their primary methods of connecting. We’ll look at
how children are shaped to land in adulthood with behavioural
patterns that are uncomfortable and/or damaging for others –
behaviours that create chaos rather than connection, that violate
psychological safety rather than encourage it, and that confuse and
disrespect your boundaries rather than recognise and honour them.
We’ll traverse attachment patterns and interpersonal coping
strategies and how these contribute to the development of the nine
archetypes of difficult people. We’ll break down poor behaviour with
a process for deciding whether you are actually dealing with a
difficult person, or a person who is struggling just in that moment.
Part 2. Difficult behaviours. The second section of the book is
your glossary of difficult behaviours: how to know what they look
like in the difficult people in your life, and the impact they have on
you and others, supported by real-life examples and boundary
scripts to help you respond effectively.
The difficult behaviours are categorised according to attachment
and interpersonal coping style followed by archetype, to help you
navigate straight to the issues specific to your difficult person.
‘But wait, Beck! I need more than just scripts!’ I’ve got you. The
foundations of Parts 1 and 2 allow us to scaffold your boundary-
setting skills in Part 3.
Part 3. Boundary basics. The third section of the book is a
pocket guide of reminders for the essential knowledge and skills you
need to identify, set and reinforce your boundaries. We can talk
about boundaries in an abstract way forever, but it will be a vacuous
discussion without an understanding of your body when it’s
overwhelmed, how to regulate your responses to the world, and
honing the skills of creating connection. Please note that this book
assumes you are proficient (not perfect, because no one is) when it
comes to the basics of boundary setting. If you feel like a refresher
on those basics would be helpful, head to my book, Setting
Boundaries, for the unabridged handbook on boundaries for
everyday living.
Part 4. Moving gently and bravely forward. The final section
of the book positions you on your own path: the one where you
retain control over how you live your life, who you allow by your side
along the way, and who you choose to let go to maintain your inner
peace. You’ll move forward from a place of conscious and authentic
inner authority to set empowered boundaries for empowered
relationships. We’ll put the finishing touches on your boundaried
being, leaving you with the power squarely in your hands about
what you will and won’t accept in your world from here onwards.

How to use this book

I encourage you to initially read this book from cover to cover, in the
chapter order offered, because each topic builds upon the
information covered in the prior chapter. Then give yourself some
time for the information to digest, and only when you feel ready,
come back to the sections you want to re-read. And don’t be afraid
to mark up these pages with highlighting and margin notes. You’ll be
doing your future self a favour when you want return to the sections
that resonate for you most.
Permanent change occurs via action. The reflection exercises
throughout the book translate words on a page into the shifts you
seek in your daily life. If nothing changes, nothing changes. If you
are serious about rebuilding your boundaries with this difficult
person, then please be serious about completing the exercises. They
will transform your experience.
Difficult People has been written in reply to your challenges.
Although we don’t know each other personally, I am deeply
committed to your freedom around the difficult person in your life.
As such, this is not a book where rainbows and unicorns and false
promises and platitudes are used to gloss over your pain. Life with
difficult people is complex, and the depth of this book reflects that.
Parts may feel confronting. Parts may feel like they will break you
open emotionally. Parts may hold up a mirror. Parts may ask you to
see more expansively than before. Stay with me and with yourself
through it. You’re not doing it wrong if you feel. Feeling it leads to
healing it. Allow the feelings to be there, and hold yourself gently as
you move with them.
With that said, we need to begin by speaking the same language.

The language of difficult behaviours

Humans use language to make meaning of and share our
experience. If you don’t have the words to articulate what’s
happening, it’s tough to describe your experience, let alone make
sense of it.
The language we use matters. Some words can act like bombs in a
conversation, without actually articulating the behaviour that is
problematic. While they may elicit nods of sympathy or an empathic
scoff of disgust from whoever is listening, their use in this way is
ableist and obscures where they are helpful descriptors versus
emotionally charged barbs.
I want you to have the benefit of using language that helps you
describe your experience, rather than falling prey to buzzwords that
diminish your experience because those words are casualties of
concept bracket creep, and now so overused that they’ve lost their
power.
Further, there’s a tendency for mental health diagnoses to be flung
around in the name of humour or insult. This is particularly
concerning, given that the reality for individuals who meet criteria
for these diagnoses is no laughing matter (and even where humour
can be found, it’s up to these individuals to lead the jokes). To
ensure we share the same understanding, here are some definitions
for how we’ll be using the language of boundary setting with difficult
people.

Boundaries
Boundaries can be statements or instructions to others about your
preferences and needs or they can be values that you hold within
that don’t need to be said out loud. Boundaries enable you to set
and communicate your choices about how you want to distribute
your personal resources to live in alignment with your values. They
are lines of connection that form your own personal operation
manual to show others how to love and respect you while ensuring
you do the same for yourself. They are not combat weapons
designed to defeat others so that your needs can ‘win’; nor are they
selfish, unkind or unreasonable. It can feel that way if you habitually
ignore your own needs, though. If you tend to dismiss your own
needs, here’s a quick example of how honouring your needs using
boundaries is kind to both the person asking something of you, and
yourself. A friend wants to catch up this week because she’s going
through a tough time and would value your support. However, you
are exhausted. There’s very little left in your tank for supporting
yourself, let alone holding space for a friend. A healthy boundary
would sound like: ‘I’d love to see you, but my energy levels are low.
I can meet you next week instead, so that I can give you my full self
and undivided attention.’
Boundaries underpin the safety of our relationships. They help you
to reflect on not just why this person is behaving the way they are,
but why you are allowing them to. They help you acknowledge
where your (lack of) boundaries may be giving permission for others
to continue with unhealthy behaviours that are negatively affecting
you.

Locus of control
Locus of control is the extent to which you feel like your actions
determine the events and outcomes in your life. It’s how much you
lean towards participating in the conscious creation of the life you
want to live (internal locus of control), as opposed to believing that
life happens to you and much of it is outside of your control
(external locus of control). Trusting that you can shape your life is an
essential ingredient to setting boundaries that protect you with the
difficult person in your life, rather than giving away that power.
 As a trained professional, I will always encourage you to utilise
your agency and take responsibility for what’s not working in your
life, and to do what you need to do to improve it. As a living human,
I love a little woo-woo and like to believe that there is something
bigger out there that might be supporting us.

Our journey as humans is a combination of both, but rests heavily

on us knowing that we can control what we do, what we believe,
how we interact with others and the world, and how we regulate
ourselves, while understanding that we can’t control the same for
others.
For healing to begin, we must focus on where our responsibility
starts and ends, and accept that it cannot depend on someone else
deciding to change.

‘Normal’
One of the most common phrases I uttered in my time in clinical
practice was, ‘It’s normal to feel this way’. Normalising feelings (and
behaviour) is part of the task of validation and helping a client feel
seen, heard and understood. Our inherent need to belong creates a
strong desire to know that we are ‘normal’; not defective, and not so
different as to be excluded. In this sense though, normal doesn’t
necessarily mean ‘right’. It means commonplace, or typical within the
realm of similar circumstances.
If you were raised by difficult people, you don’t know any
different. When your first long-term relationship is with a difficult
person, you don’t know any different. When your first job is working
for a difficult person, you don’t know any different. When the
significant people in your life have allowed difficult people to get
away with their behaviour without setting boundaries, you don’t
know any different. When the significant people in your childhood
allowed difficult people to have access to you, you don’t know any
different.
Difficult is, or becomes, your ‘normal’.
You expect that loving and being loved will be fraught with
emotional landmines. And when it is, while you don’t find it easy, it
is familiar, which can be confusing because the brain interprets what
we know as safer than what we don’t know. ‘Normal’ feels safer than
anything outside it.
Clara’s normal was difficult. When I met her for her first therapy
session, she was 21 and working as an erotic dancer to pay for her
studies in occupational therapy. She was in an ‘on/off’ relationship
with Josh, whose style of relating to Clara is best described as one of
convenience. Clara’s reason for seeking therapy was short and
simple: ‘I feel anxious all the time and I want those feelings to go
away.’ At first glance, a full-time study load combined with 10-hour
overnight shifts multiple times a week, and a dissatisfying
relationship, could easily be a load to overwhelm most people’s
personal resources. However, the very nature of psychological
treatment is to explore beyond first glance. Sure, Clara had a lot on
her plate, but it’s not always the load that’s the problem. The way
we cope with that load can exacerbate its weight.
Clara’s coping style was complex, because her childhood was
complex. Raised in a family of four sisters, her parents modelled
conflict management via yelling at each other and threatening
divorce, or turning their emotional pain into the fault of their children
and playing the siblings against each other as a form of manipulation
to bring them into line. Clara learned to expect love to be conditional
and that her needs would only be met through constant games of
emotional push and pull.
She grew into an adult determined to ‘make something of myself’,
but who believed that doing so was unlikely because ‘I’m not good
enough’. Her sense of inadequacy was reinforced by her significant
relationships lacking unconditional love and acceptance. She
believed it was entirely normal to be in conflict with at least one
sibling and/or one parent at any given time, while chasing
breadcrumbs of attention from her boyfriend. For Clara, ‘boundaries’
looked like starting fights instead of expressing her needs and
constantly being on guard instead of relaxing into love. She thought
the problem was anxiety. But anxiety was the manifestation of
relationship patterns that are perpetually difficult.
Psychological mindedness
Your presence here indicates that there is something about you not
often present in people who are difficult: psychological mindedness.
This broadly refers to having an awareness and understanding of
psychological processes including thoughts, feelings and behaviours.
It involves self-awareness, insight, a willingness and capacity for
self-reflection, and the resultant desire for change based on that
insight and reflection. A person’s capacity for psychological
mindedness helps them to make connections between their internal
world and its behavioural expression for themselves and others.
A friend of mine recently spoke to me about feelings of wanting to
give up on her business because she had received a nasty review
and refund request from a disgruntled customer. Despite the
intensity of her feelings, she was able to note that her default
response to feelings of failure is to ‘run and hide’. She also made
links between the urge to give up and hide away and the feelings of
inadequacy that had arisen when her father suggested she ‘Just go
and get a job’. Her psychological mindedness allowed her to observe
these feelings, thoughts and urges, and process them, rather than
reacting unconsciously in negative ways (closing her business is not
what my friend truly wanted).
Psychological mindedness allows you to reflect on your own
reactions to others, and the motivations of others’ behaviours, and
then use your understanding of how those behaviours came to be.
You can then consciously choose healthy methods of coping.

Psychological safety
Psychological safety was first defined in 1999 by Amy Edmondson, a
professor in leadership and management at Harvard University.
Edmondson defined psychological safety as a concept applicable to
work settings as, ‘A belief that one will not be punished, or
humiliated, for speaking up with ideas, questions, concerns or
mistakes and that the team is safe for interpersonal risk-taking’.
I once treated a primary school teacher who I’ll call Hayden.
Hayden was dedicated to his students but feeling increasingly
anxious at the demands placed upon him outside of the task of
teaching. He said to me, ‘We have so little time to actually teach
thanks to the administrative demands on us’.
Part way through our time together, Hayden mentioned that the
principal of his school was leaving. Hayden thought this changing of
the guard could be a good time to raise his concerns about
administration tasks eating into teaching time.
It was halfway through the new principal’s first term at the school
when Hayden spoke up in a whole-school staff meeting to suggest
the possibility of a role being created for a communications manager
to help reduce the inbox stress experienced by parents and teachers
alike. He reasoned that a communications manager could centralise
communications, increasing seamless contact between all
stakeholders in each student’s life, and improving productivity for
teachers who gain freedom from email overwhelm. His suggestion
was met with a scoff from the principal, who asked Hayden who he
thought he was to be making managerial suggestions and then
laughed facetiously to the remaining staff that: ‘Hayden thinks he
can do a better job than the principal, it seems, when he clearly has
no idea why we have to do things a certain way!’ Some of his fellow
teachers joined in the laughter, humiliating Hayden further. Not only
did this lead to feelings of hopelessness, but Hayden was now
averse to speaking up about any issues that needed addressing for
fear of further embarrassment. This workplace was not
psychologically safe.
 Placing this concept in family and relational systems, it becomes
the interpersonal environment where an individual is accepted and
valued as they are, without fear of being punished or humiliated for
recognising and speaking up for their own needs, expressing their
feelings and making mistakes on the path of personal growth.
Throughout Difficult People we are focused on the status of your
psychological safety in your relationships.
Difficult people tend to violate others’ psychological safety. Let’s
return to Clara for a moment. She was raised by difficult parents
who created patterns of loving conditionally in their family and
projected their dysregulation onto their children. Clara then repeated
these patterns in her intimate relationship, settling for a partner who
only occasionally met her needs as a form of manipulation to keep
her feeling inadequate and therefore grateful for any attention she
received. Consequently, Clara had become frustrated. She would
simmer until she reached boiling point, at which time she would
erupt at her partner Josh, repeating the pattern of projecting her
own emotional dysregulation rather than managing it and setting
healthy boundaries. Difficult people model difficult behaviours. Clara
had learned that the way to cope with not being psychologically safe
was to violate others’ psychological safety in retaliation.

Self-regulation
Human beings don’t walk around feeling happy all the time
(unfortunately). We respond emotionally to our outer and inner
worlds, giving us valuable information about ourselves and others.
Self-regulation is the ability to know when your emotions are
approaching (or breaching) the outer limits of your zone of comfort,
and to take action to temper them accordingly. Without knowing it,
you are regulating yourself all the time by responding to the stimuli
around you and your internal environment, including thoughts,
memories, feelings and body sensations.
The process of self-regulation is like reacting to your emotional
temperature, akin to your inherent ability to know when you are too
hot and to respond by going for a swim to cool down.
When you are unable to moderate your responses effectively,
psychologists refer to this as emotional dysregulation. One of the
most common difficult behaviours we face in others is a lack of skills
or willingness to regulate themselves appropriately.
I opened a news site this morning only to read a story of a
McDonald’s customer becoming so frustrated at the wait time in
drive-thru that they verbally abused a crew member who requested
they park in the waiting bay. The driver then punched another crew
member who delivered the order to their car window. Both crew
members were terrified and left in tears after the experience.
Emotional dysregulation hurts others and can be not just difficult,
but dangerous.

Trauma and triggers

According to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental
Disorders, Fifth Edition (DSM-V), a trauma is defined as exposure to
actual or threatened death, serious injury or sexual violence. The
recollection of that trauma is persistently re-experienced through
unwanted and intrusive thoughts and images, distressing memories,
flashbacks and nightmares that affect the person’s ability to stay
connected to the present moment, and can create extreme
overwhelm and/or stress.
Re-experiencing symptoms are usually involuntary and occur in
response to triggers – internal or external stimuli in the individual’s
environment. Triggers, and responses to triggers, vary significantly
between individuals, and among the experiences that those triggers
are psychologically linked to within the individual. They are often
sensory, including sights, sounds, sensations and smells, and less
commonly, tastes. They can be overtly linked – for example, you’re
strolling through the airport when you walk past the person who
abused you as a child – or covertly linked – for example, your
trauma occurred in December and the smell of the pine tree your
family brings home for Christmas brings up painful memories.
Mental health professionals use these criteria for diagnostic
information. But as with all things human, there are continuums of
experience. One such concept that allows for gradation outside of
rigid criteria is the distinction between ‘capital T trauma’ and ‘little t
trauma’. Capital T trauma refers to life-altering events, the negative
intensity of which is accounted for in the DSM-V criteria and can
result in the development of posttraumatic stress disorder. This
includes exposure to war, sexual abuse, physical assault, natural
disasters, domestic violence and the like. People who perpetrate
capital T trauma are dangerous.
Little t trauma refers to experiences that overwhelm our capacity
to cope and result in a disruption of our emotional functioning.
Events might include infidelity, legal challenges, divorce, being
displaced or needing to relocate, financial hardship and interpersonal
conflict. Little t trauma is not a clinical diagnosis, but it’s helpful as a
conceptual indicator for something that caused immense hurt and
turmoil that needs to be processed to help you move forward.
People who contribute to little t trauma in your life are difficult, but
not necessarily dangerous.
Your experience of past trauma can influence how you perceive
and interact with the people in your world. You may swing towards
interpersonal sensitivity and mistrust in such a way that comfortable
people can be misinterpreted as difficult and difficult people can be
misinterpreted as being dangerous. Or you may swing towards
boundaryless subservience where you accept difficult – and even
dangerous – people as ‘normal’ in your world, allowing them to
behave in ways that are intolerable for others who approach the
world with healthy boundaries.

Defining ‘difficult’
State vs trait vs disorder
A state is a temporary emotional response, like the anxiety about
what your mother will say about your recent weight gain when you
return home for Christmas. It is a temporary state of behaving in
difficult ways due to abnormal or intensely stressful situations (e.g.
arguing with a friend over the way she announced her pregnancy
because the pressure of fertility treatment has you hanging by a
thread).
A trait is an ongoing way of behaving or relating to others and the
world, for example a generally pessimistic outlook. This might be a
long-term and predictable way of being (e.g. acting out when feeling
vulnerable by verbally attacking and blaming others).
A personality trait is a pattern of perception, thinking, reacting and
relating to yourself, others and the world that is relatively stable and
enduring over time. A personality disorder is diagnosed when a
collection of personality traits and behaviours become so fixed,
pronounced and maladaptive that they cause dysfunction across
many life areas, including work and interpersonal relationships.
To summarise, a state is a temporary response to internal or
external stimuli – we all experience daily changes in our state. A trait
is a long-term way of being or pattern of behaviour. It can be
positive or negative and we all have a combination of both that
shapes who we are. The intensity of someone’s negative personality
traits and their resultant impact on you when you are interacting
with them, point to features of a difficult person.

Difficult vs dangerous
This book is about difficult people, but we can’t talk about difficult
people unless we acknowledge the continuum of interpersonal
safety.

Healing people are your people; the ones you adore so much
because of who they are, and who they are to you and for you. You
think about these people because they add so much beauty to your
life, and it would be heartbreaking to not have them by your side.
My wife, Nyssa, and two friends I consider close enough to be
family, Jen and Bec, are profoundly healing in my world. For me,
these women are the epitome of excellent humans. I am lucky to
love and be loved by them and that looks like unconditional and
non-judgemental acceptance for who I am and who I am not, and
unwavering support for who I am becoming. The idea of my inner
circle missing one of these women is unthinkable.
Comfortable people are the ones you don’t second-guess. You
don’t feel unsettled around them or doubt yourself when they’re with
you. In fact, you probably haven’t thought too much about how they
are because we don’t usually question comfort or psychological
safety. These people may exist in any and all areas of your life. In
fact, I would argue that it would be lovely if everyone outside your
inner circle was, at least, comfortable! People on this side of the
continuum are safe.
A difficult person is someone who violates your psychological
safety and/or is unable or unwilling to regulate their emotions and
their responses to their environment, but who stops short of
threatening or acting out violence. Difficult People is about precisely
these people.
A dangerous person is usually someone who has started out as
difficult and escalated to be someone who violates your
psychological and/or physical safety, and shows no empathy,
remorse or willingness to change their behaviour, or acknowledge
the harm they have caused you. People on this side of the
continuum are unsafe.
A friend of mine told me about her experience with a couple living
up the street from her. These people were the neighbours you hope
to never have. The wife was apparently rude, nasty and abusive
towards anyone who parked in front of their property, while the
husband was physically intimidating, vandalised their immediate
next-door neighbour’s car and threatened them with physical
violence. It’s fair to characterise the wife in this situation as difficult,
and the husband as dangerous.
Dealing with a dangerous person requires a more complex and
supported approach than simply setting boundaries. I encourage you
to assess your life for anyone who causes harm with violent and
abusive (and, therefore, criminal) behaviour. This person is not just
difficult; they are dangerous. Please seek help quickly to take action
that restores your safety.

Misuse of mental health terms

Humans love labels. They help us categorise the gargantuan amount
of information we are presented with on a daily basis, especially
when that information is unpleasant or painful in some way. When
your boss asks you to work late again on Friday, but then
undermines your extra efforts during Monday’s meeting, it’s easier to
call him toxic rather than address it. When your mother-in-law
spends the day complimenting your parenting style but then
complains about you behind your back to your husband, it’s easier to
snark that she’s ‘bipolar’ rather than address it. The thing is, we
need to define something correctly to understand where boundaries
are necessary, where behaviour is problematic, and where we have
control (or not) for effecting change. If we rely on the commonplace
misrepresentation of mental health terms and resort to name-calling
in response, our capacity to remove ourselves from patterns of
interpersonal difficulty will always be limited. The terms I’m referring
to are:

Bipolar
This term is commonly – and incorrectly – used to describe someone
whose emotions or behaviour seem unpredictable. Its vintage cousin
is ‘manic-depressive’, popularised by fictional representations like Dr
Jekyll and Mr Hyde.
Bipolar disorder is a collective term for a set of mental health
diagnoses around extreme mood changes that coexist within a long-
term pattern of symptoms that are much more complex than lack of
predictability alone.
If your father-in-law popped over to jovially help you tidy the yard
last week, and this week he’s back to criticising you and your
husband’s level of debt and telling your husband that you are a
‘liability’ to the family, that’s not grounds for labelling him ‘bipolar’. It
is, however, a red flag.

Depression
Depression is probably a term that you are familiar with, even if
you’ve never experienced it. However, it’s not a term that just means
‘sad’. It’s part of a much broader set of symptomatology that affects
thoughts, feelings, behaviours and physiology. I remember treating a
man who I’ll call Chung. Chung was in his thirties and struggled to
maintain long-term intimate relationships. His interpersonal
sensitivity, high expectations of others, and inability to identify and
communicate his feelings accurately, often led him to be easily
disappointed by partners. He would then accuse his partner of
‘making me depressed’. Chung wasn’t depressed. He was frustrated
with the need to compromise and would externalise his feelings as
being the fault of his partner. His partners often left as a result.

Gaslighting
This refers to a legitimate form of manipulation that leads you to
question your own reality. For a full definition, see Chapter 5.
Gaslighting can occur when someone causes you to doubt your
memory of an event or question your feelings, or turn the narrative
on its head to make conflict appear to be your fault. But not every
uncomfortable interaction is gaslighting. Just because someone
disagrees with or questions you doesn’t mean they are gaslighting
you. Gaslighting usually occurs repeatedly and in tandem with other
indicators of your relationship or interactions with this person being
psychologically unsafe. Your partner stating that they don’t
understand why the dishes being left in the sink is such a problem is
not them gaslighting you. However, if they continually tell you that
‘you’re crazy’ for doubting their trustworthiness after seeing
suggestive messages from a co-worker of theirs, followed by
needing to ‘work late’, then gaslighting may very well be present.

Narcissist
Labelling someone as a narcissist has become more common in
response to a person who is manipulative and generally abusive, but
there is a difference between narcissistic behaviour (infrequent or
random state-based behaviours) and narcissistic personality disorder,
or NPD, (a psychiatric disorder that offers a full diagnostic picture).
Narcissistic behaviour occurs when a person elevates themselves
and their needs above other people (see Chapter 5). They may use
this sense of superiority to believe they are always right or to make
you believe that you are incompetent. Narcissistic behaviour is
common in difficult people, but it doesn’t necessarily mean that they
meet criteria for NPD. Similarly, your boss’s habit of always needing
to be right doesn’t make her narcissistic, or even difficult (annoying,
maybe!), unless that behaviour occurs in conjunction with other red
flags.

PTSD
Posttraumatic stress disorder (PTSD) is a trauma-related condition
encompassing a range of triggers, symptoms and associated life
problems. As discussed earlier in the Introduction, there is a big
difference between capital T trauma (which can lead to the
development of PTSD) and small t trauma which, while painful and
destabilising, is not diagnostically or clinically appropriate to be
referred to as PTSD. Divorce is tough, but it’s not in the same
category of trauma created by sexual abuse.

Toxic
This is not a recognised clinical term, but can refer to any relational,
situational or behavioural pattern that is unhealthy. Perhaps you
know a person for whom life seems to be overly dramatic. There’s
always a problem following them that would fit well in the storyline
of a soap opera. And occasionally, they project their problems onto
you. It’s toxic. Toxic is a great descriptor, but unfortunately, it now
tends to be casually overused, and has become something of a go-to
word for any interaction someone doesn’t like.

To help you find your footing when it comes to the language of

difficult behaviours, reflect on the following questions:

What role do boundaries play in your life right now? Where

are they working? Where are they not working? Where are
they absent, but necessary?
Who are the people in your life with whom you feel
psychologically safe? Who are the people who feel unsafe to
you?
Who in your life (if anyone) is down the difficult/dangerous
end of the continuum of interpersonal safety? Who is so
restorative in your life that you feel their presence is
healing?
Note the formal definition of trauma and triggers. How does
this apply to the events of your past that have caused you
 deep pain?
Do you lean towards having an internal or external locus of
control?
Where have you confused your state-based reactions to
flaws in your character?
What have you experienced that you thought was ‘normal’,
which you might already be questioning as deeply
unacceptable?
Are you throwing around a label out of frustration in a
moment when your feelings are overwhelming, and you
need something catchy to help others see and understand
your experience? Is there a way you can slow down and
describe exactly what it is that the person is doing that feels
psychologically unsafe for you?

Don’t worry if you’re not sure of all your answers. By the end of the
book, you’ll have much more clarity, coupled with the actions you
need to take to move forward bravely and meaningfully.
So, now that we’re speaking the same language, curl up in your
favourite spot with a cuppa and maybe a snack, and let’s do some
truth-telling.
 PART 1

BEING HUMAN IS COMPLEX

 1
Understanding difficult people

Difficult childhoods
Dear reader, you and I had a childhood. We must start here,
because we all start here. An adult who had a difficult childhood
frequently still holds something from that childhood that continues to
hurt in some way. This statement usually elicits a chorus of older
generations of parents saying: ‘Well, they turned out fine!’ And I
have to ask – did they?
They’re the children that are unsettled in peaceful environments
because they were raised in chaos. Their bodies are in perpetual
fight/flight mode, seeking out drama because it’s what they know
how to navigate. Worse still, they’re so accustomed to abrasive
environments that receiving compassion feels not just foreign, but
cloying, smothering even. It feels like, if they were to relax into
being loved, they’d be risking everything that has kept them safe.
Their psyches are anxious, depressed, traumatised. Their sleep is
non-existent, they can’t regulate their emotions, they are reliant on
others for validation, and respectful conflict resolution and
relationship repair are terms that belong to weird people who know
how to say sorry without thinking that person will now hate you
forever.
They are difficult people.
 A difficult person is not necessarily a ‘bad’ person; sometimes, a
difficult person is an emotionally unskilled person, or a person who is
in survival mode. A person who is doing what was done to them,
and doesn’t know better.

Parenting 101: Creating psychological safety

It is the responsibility of parents and/or primary caregivers to
provide a psychologically safe environment for their children. That
includes unconditional love (bearing in mind that unconditional love
doesn’t mean unconditional tolerance).
Families and relationships of any type are psychologically safe if
each person is able to:

Speak up for their needs and rights freely.

Be valued for who they are.
Have their boundaries, needs and rights recognised and
honoured.
Feel comfortable in raising issues that need to be addressed.
Feel comfortable in working with others in the relationship
or family system to solve problems.
Trust that each person takes responsibility for regulating
their feelings and behaviours.
Trust that each person plays a role in the relationship
system that works in alliance with the other person or
people.

Families and relationships of any type are psychologically unsafe if:

Needs are not able to be expressed without fear of attack,

dismissal or punishment.
 Rights are disrespected or disregarded.
Each person is only valued when they acquiesce to someone
else’s needs or for what they can do to place the other
person in control or at an advantage.
Raising issues or problems is met with boundary violations
such as (but not limited to) gaslighting, humiliation,
undermining or blame.
One person holds power and control over the other(s).
Self-regulation is absent, with the effects of dysregulation
felt by everyone else.

Many parents were never taught what healthy emotional

expression, self-regulation and connection with others looks like. No
one is perfect before they have a child, and I’m not suggesting that
you need to be. The majority of adults who have children plan to
love them deeply and give them a better life than they themselves
experienced, especially when their own childhood was peppered with
unmet needs and resulted in emotional scarring. However, if we fail
to hold people responsible for their actions, even when we love
them, then we give up our power to heal.
The challenge is that childhood emotional scars don’t just
disappear. When someone irrevocably changes their lifestyle and
routines by becoming a parent, such a seismic shift can cause the
load that they’ve learned to balance, pre-parenthood, to collapse
when there’s a little person who suddenly needs much of what they
have available to give. And it doesn’t end when they adjust to having
a child in their life, because children develop and transition as they
grow. Every new developmental phase brings challenges for the
parent whose emotional scarring may be triggered by things that
happened to them at the same age. A parent can’t necessarily know
when a trigger will occur, or stop the switch from being flicked.
Problems occur when parents:

a. Don’t have the psychological mindedness and insight to

know that they have emotional scars from their own
upbringing, let alone have the awareness of when those
scars are triggered;
b. Use ineffective coping strategies when they are in emotional
pain, which result in other people (especially their children)
weathering the brunt of their pain thanks to emotional
dysregulation;
c. Misinterpret the source of the pain as coming from outside
themselves, decide that the pain must be from the child in
front of them rather than the scars within them, and then
punish that child as a result;
d. Decide that if only their child behaved better, then they
would parent better, and therefore, their parenting style is
the child’s fault;
e. Claim that they are unharmed from their own childhood,
and therefore repeat the same authoritarian parenting style
that they received on their own child because it’s ‘for their
own good’, rather than acknowledging that when we know
better, we can do better;
f. Attempt to ‘break the cycle’ for their own child, but wind up
going too far in the opposite direction, usually resulting in
the creation of a permissive environment that completely
lacks boundaried leadership that a child requires to feel
safe.

These behaviours imprint on a child to create a pattern that

influences all the relationships they go on to experience as an adult.
Think of it like a relational template that is unique to the child and
their grown-ups that sets the tone for lifelong interpersonal
functioning. This template is called an attachment style.

Attachment styles
An attachment style represents the bond between primary caregiver
and child, which creates a relational template known as an internal
working model for how relationships will go throughout the lifespan.
Defined by John Bowlby, it influences a child’s expectations and
responses in relationships, based on whether or not their primary
caregivers provided a stable, nurturing environment where needs
and feelings were met and respected.
Children need a circle of security. Parents are responsible for giving
a child the freedom to explore their world with boundaries for safety
and learning, while being attentive, interested and supportive during
that exploration and offering comfort and protection when the child
returns from exploration – think of it as refilling the child’s emotional
cup. Providing this circle of security creates a secure attachment for
the child.
Our attachment style is intimately connected to our sense of
psychological safety in that it is predicated on three fundamental
assumptions about ourselves, other people and the world, as
identified by Ronnie Janoff-Bulman. Children who are raised in an
environment where psychological safety and self-regulation are
present grow to assume that:

1. The world is generally a safe and predictable place.

2. They are generally a good person and other people are
 inherently good.
3. Good things generally happen to good people and bad
things generally happen to bad people.

Our attachment style shapes how we view ourselves, and the

assumptions and expectations we hold about how others see us,
too. Parents who fail to meet the needs of their child, or who do so
inconsistently, and/or who lead with a heavy hand (or not at all),
create an environment that is psychologically unsafe for their child.
The experience of a psychologically (and physically) unsafe
childhood creates an insecure attachment founded upon violated
assumptions of predictability and safety. An insecurely attached
individual views the world as no longer safe and predictable, doubts
their sense of worthiness and struggles to trust others to have good
intentions.
Attachment styles extend beyond childhood and shape how we
relate and connect with others as adults. There are four adult
attachment styles.
Secure
A secure adult attachment style is characterised by low avoidance of
closeness with others and highly positive internal working models of
others. Adults who are securely attached generally view others and
themselves positively. They are willing to connect and experience
low (or no) anxiety in doing so. Securely attached adults believe
they are worthy of receiving love and feel safe to offer love to
others. They form and maintain relationships and friendships easily
and uphold standards for being respected and respecting others,
Another random document with
no related content on Scribd:
Somebody suggested the possibility that peasants or franctireurs
might fire at the King. “Certainly,” added the Chief, “and what makes
it so important a point is that the personage in question, if he is ill or
wounded or otherwise out of sorts, has only to say ‘Go back!’ and we
must all of us go back.”
We left Commercy next day at noon, passing several military
detachments and a number of encampments on our way. The
measures of precaution mentioned by the Chief had been adopted.
We were preceded by a squadron of uhlans and escorted by the
Stabswache, which formed a bright picture of many colours, being
recruited from the various cavalry regiments, such as green, red, and
blue hussars, Saxon and Prussian dragoons, &c. The carriages of
the Chancellor’s party followed close behind those of the King’s. For
a long time we did not come across any villages. Then we passed
through St. Aubin, and soon after came to a milestone by the
roadside with the words “Paris 241 kilometres,” so that we were only
a distance of some thirty-two German miles from Babel. We
afterwards passed a long line of transport carts belonging to the
regiments of King John of Saxony, the Grand Duke of Hesse, &c.,
which showed that we were now in the district occupied by the
Crown Prince’s army.
Shortly afterwards we entered the small town of Ligny, which was
thronged with Bavarian and other soldiers. We waited for about
three-quarters of an hour in the market-place, which was crowded
with all sorts of conveyances, while the Chief paid a visit to the
Crown Prince. On our starting once more we met further masses of
blue Bavarian infantry, some light horse collected round their camp
fires, then a second squadron with a herd of cattle guarded by
soldiers, and finally a third larger encampment within a circle of
baggage waggons.
Bar le Duc, the largest town in which we have stayed up to the
present, may have a population of some 15,000. The streets and
squares presented a lively picture as we drove through, and we
caught glimpses of curious female faces watching us through the
blinds. On the arrival of the King the Bavarian band played “Heil dir
im Siegerkranz.” He took up his quarters in the house occupied by
the local branch of the Bank of France, in the Rue de la Banque. The
Chancellor and his party lodged on the other side of the street, in the
house of a M. Pernay, who had gone off leaving an old woman in
charge.
Dr. Lauer, the King’s physician, dined with the Minister that
evening. The Chief was very communicative as usual, and appeared
to be in particularly good humour. He renewed his complaints as to
the “short commons” at the royal table, evidently intending the doctor
to repeat them to Count Puckler or Perponcher. During his visit at
Ligny he had to take breakfast, which he said was excellent, with the
Crown Prince and the Princes and chief officers of his suite. He had
a seat near the fire, however, which was not quite to his taste, and
otherwise it was in many ways less comfortable than in his own
quarters. “There were too many Princes there for an ordinary mortal
to be able to find a place. Amongst them was Frederick the Gentle
(Friedrich der Sachte—Frederick VIII. of Schleswig-Holstein). He
wore a Bavarian uniform, so that I hardly knew him at first. He looked
somewhat embarrassed when he recognised me.” We also gathered
from what the Chief said that Count Hatzfeldt was to act as a kind of
Prefect while we remained here, a position for which probably his
thorough knowledge of French and of the habits of the country had
recommended him. We also heard that the headquarters might
remain here for several days,—“as at Capua,” added the Count,
laughing.
Before tea some articles were despatched to Germany, including
one on the part played by the Saxons at Gravelotte, which the
Chancellor praised repeatedly.
By way of change I will here again quote from my diary:—
 Thursday, August 25th.—Took a walk early this morning in the
upper, and evidently the older, part of the town. The shops are
almost all open. The people answer politely when we ask to be
shown the way. Not far from our quarters there is an old stone bridge
over the river which was unquestionably built before Lorraine and the
Duchy of Bar belonged to France. Towards 9 o’clock the Bavarians
began their march through the town, passing in front of the King’s
quarters. More French spectators had collected on both sides of the
street than was quite comfortable for us. For hours together light
horse with green uniforms and red facings, dark blue cuirassiers,
lancers, artillery and infantry, regiment after regiment marched
before the Commander-in-Chief of the German forces. As they
passed the King the troops cheered lustily, the cavalry swinging their
sabres, and the foot soldiers lifting up their right hands. The colours
were lowered before the Sovereign, the cavalry trumpets blew an
ear-splitting fanfare, while the infantry bands played stirring airs, one
of them giving the beautiful Hohenfriedberg march. First came
General von Hartmann’s Army Corps, followed by that of Von der
Tann, who afterwards took breakfast with us. Who could have
thought, immediately after the war of 1866, or even three months
ago, of the possibility of such a scene?
Wrote several articles for post and others for the wire. Our people
are pressing forward rapidly. The vanguards of the German columns
are already between Châlons and Epernay. The formation of three
reserve armies in Germany, which has been already mentioned,
began a few days ago. The neutral Powers raise some objections to
our intended annexation of French territory for the purpose of
securing an advantageous western frontier, especially England, who
up to the present has shown a disposition to tie our hands. The
reports from St. Petersburg appear to be more favourable, the Tsar
being well disposed to us, although he by no means unreservedly
accepts the proposed measures, while we are assured of the active
sympathy of the Grand Duchess Hélène. We hold fast to our
intention to enforce the cession of territory, that intention being
based upon the necessity of at length securing South Germany from
French attack and thus rendering it independent of French policy.
When our intentions are made public they will certainly be
energetically endorsed by the national sentiment, which it will be
difficult to oppose.
It is reported that a variety of revolting acts have been committed
by the bands of franctireurs that are now being formed. Their uniform
is such that they can hardly be recognised as soldiers, and the
badges by which they are distinguished can be easily laid aside. One
of these young fellows lies in a ditch near a wood, apparently
sunning himself, while a troop of cavalry rides by. When they have
passed he takes a rifle which has been concealed in a bush, fires at
them and runs into the wood. Knowing the way he again appears a
little further on as a harmless peasant. I am inclined to think that
these are not defenders of their country but rather assassins who
should be strung up without ceremony whenever they are caught.
Count Seckendorf, of the Crown Prince’s staff, was the Chief’s
guest at dinner. The Augustenburger (Frederick VIII. of Schleswig-
Holstein), who has joined the Bavarians, was spoken of, and not to
his advantage.... (The opinions expressed were practically identical
with those given in a letter which I received a few months later from
a patriotic friend, Herr Noeldeke, who lived in Kiel at that time as a
professor. He wrote: “We all know that he was not born for heroic
deeds. He cannot help that. If he waits persistently for his inheritance
to be restored to him by some miraculous means, that is a family
trait. But he might at least have made an effort to appear heroic.
Instead of loafing around with the army he might have led a
company or a battalion of the soldiers whom at one time he was
nearly calling his own,—or for my part he might have led Bavarians.
In all probability the result would not have been very remarkable, but
at any rate he would have shown his good will.”)
Reference was made to the rumour that the Bavarian battalions
did not appear particularly anxious to advance at the battle of Wörth
(or was it Weissenburg?), and that Major von Freiberg called upon
them to show themselves equal to “those gallant Prussians.”
Seckendorf, if I am not mistaken, confirmed this report. On the other
hand, he denied that the Crown Prince had ordered treacherous
French peasants to be shot. He had, on the contrary, acted with
great leniency and forbearance, especially towards unmannerly
French officers.
Count Bohlen, who is always ready with amusing anecdotes and
flashes of fun, said: “On the 18th von Breintz’s battery was subjected
to such a heavy fire that in a short time nearly all his horses and
most of his men lay dead or wounded. As he was mustering the
survivors, the captain remarked, ‘A very fine fight, is it not?’”
The Chief said: “Last night I asked the sentry at the door how he
was off for food, and I found that the man had had nothing to eat for
twenty-four hours. I went to the kitchen and brought him a good
chunk of bread, at which he seemed highly pleased.”
Hatzfeldt’s appointment as Prefect led to the mention of other
Prefects and Commissaries in spe. Doubt having been expressed as
to the capacity of some of them, the Minister remarked: “Our officials
in France may commit a few blunders, but they will be soon forgotten
if the administration in general is conducted energetically.”
The conversation having turned on the telegraph lines which
were being so rapidly erected in our rear, somebody told the
following story. The workmen who found that their poles were stolen
and their wires cut, asked the peasants to keep guard over them
during the night. The latter, however, refused to do this, although
they were offered payment for it. At length they were promised that
the name of each watchman should be painted upon every pole.
This speculation on French vanity succeeded. After that the fellows
in the long nightcaps kept faithful watch, and no further damage was
done.
Friday, August 26th.—We are to move forward to Saint
Ménehould, where our troops have captured 800 mobile guards.
Early in the day I wrote an article about the franctireurs, dealing in
detail with the false view which they take of what is permissible in
war.
We moved forward on the 26th, not to Saint Ménehould,
however, which was still unsafe, being infested by franctireurs and
mobile guards, but to Clermont en Argonne, where we arrived at 7
o’clock in the evening. On our way we passed through several rather
large villages with handsome old churches. For the last couple of
hours military policemen were stationed along the road at intervals of
about 200 paces. The houses, which were built of grey sandstone
and not whitewashed, stood close together. The whole population
shuffled about in clumsy wooden shoes, and the features of the men
and women, of whom we saw great numbers standing before the
doors, were, so far as I could observe in a passing glance, almost
invariably ugly. Probably the people thought it necessary to remove
the prettier girls to a place of safety out of the way of the German
birds of prey.
We met some Bavarian troops with a line of transport waggons.
The troops loudly cheered the King, and afterwards the Chancellor.
Later on we overtook three regiments of infantry, some hussars,
uhlans, and a Saxon commissariat detachment. Near a village,
which was called Triaucourt if I am not mistaken, we met a cartful of
franctireurs who had been captured by our people. Most of these
young fellows hung their heads, and one of them was weeping. The
Chief stopped and spoke to them. What he said did not appear to
please them particularly. An officer of higher rank who came over to
the carriage of the Councillors and was treated to a friendly glass of
cognac told us that these fellows or comrades of theirs had on the
previous day treacherously shot a captain or major of the uhlans,
named Von Fries or Friesen. On being taken prisoners they had not
behaved themselves like soldiers, but had run away from their
escort. The cavalry and rifles, however, arranged a kind of battue in
the vineyards, so that some of them were again seized, while others
were shot or cut down. It was evident that the war was becoming
barbarous and inhuman, owing to these guerilla bands. Our soldiers
were prejudiced against them from the beginning, even apart from
the possibility of their lying treacherously in ambush, as they looked
upon them as busybodies who were interfering in what was not their
business, and as bunglers who did not understand their work.
We took up our residence at Clermont in the town schoolhouse in
the main street, the King’s quarters being over the way. On our
arrival, the Grande Rue was full of carts and carriages, and one saw
here and there a few Saxon rifles. While Abeken and I were visiting
the church we could hear in the stillness the steady tramp of the
troops and their hurrahs as they marched past the King’s quarters.
On our return we were told that the Minister had left word that we
were to dine with him in the Hôtel des Voyageurs. We found a place
at the Chief’s table in a back room of the hotel, which was full of
noise and tobacco smoke. Amongst the guests was an officer with a
long black beard, who wore the Geneva cross on his arm. This was
Prince Pless. He said that the captured French officers at Pont à
Mousson had behaved in an insolent manner, and had spent the
whole night drinking and playing cards. A general had insisted that
he was entitled to have a separate carriage, and been very
obstreperous when his demand was naturally rejected. We then
went on to speak of the franctireurs and their odious modes of
warfare. The Minister confirmed what I had already heard from
Abeken, namely, that he had spoken very sharply to the prisoners
we had met in the afternoon. “I told them, ‘Vous serez tous pendus,
—vous n’êtes pas des soldats, vous êtes des assassins!’ On my
saying this one of them began to howl.” We have already seen that
the Chancellor is anything but unfeeling, and further proof of this will
be given later on.
In our quarters the Chief’s chamber was on the first floor,
Abeken, I believe, having a back room on the same landing. The
remainder of us were lodged on the second floor in a dormitory or
kind of hall which at first only contained two chairs and two
bedsteads with mattresses but without quilts. The night was bitterly
cold, and I only with my waterproof to cover me. Still it was quite
endurable, especially when one fell asleep thinking of the poor
soldiers who have to lie outside in the muddy fields.
In the morning we were busy rearranging our apartment to suit
our needs. Without depriving it of its original character we turned it
into an office and dining-room. Theiss’s cleverness conjured up a
magnificent table out of a sawing bench and a baker’s trough, a
barrel, a small box and a door which we took off its hinges. This work
of art served as breakfast and dining table for the Chancellor of the
Confederation and ourselves, and in the intervals between those
meals was used as a desk by the Councillors and Secretaries, who
neatly committed to paper and reproduced in the form of
despatches, instructions, telegrams, and newspaper articles the
pregnant ideas which the Count thought out in our midst. The
scarcity of chairs was to a certain extent overcome by requisitioning
a bench from the kitchen, while some of the party contented
themselves with boxes as seats. Wine bottles that had been emptied
by the Minister served as candlesticks—experience proved that
champagne bottles were the fittest for this purpose and as a matter
of fact good wax candles burned as brightly in these as in a silver
chandelier. It was more difficult to secure the necessary supply of
water for washing, and sometimes it was hard even to get enough
for drinking purposes, the soldiers having during the last two days
almost drained the wells for themselves and their horses. Only one
of our party lamented his lot and grumbled at these and other slight
discomforts. The rest of us, including the far-travelled Abeken,
accepted them all with good humour, as welcome and characteristic
features of our expedition.
The office of the Minister of War, or rather of the general staff,
was on the ground floor, where Fouriere and a number of soldiers
sat at the desks and rostrums in the two schoolrooms. The walls
were covered with maps, &c., and with mottoes, one of which was
particularly applicable to the present bad times: “Faites-vous une
étude de la patience, et sachez céder par raison.”
The Chief came in while we were taking our coffee. He was in a
bad temper, and asked why the proclamation threatening to punish
with death a number of offences by the population against the laws
of war had not been posted up. On his instructions I inquired of
Stieber, who told me that Abeken had handed over the proclamation
to the general staff, and that he (Stieber), as director of the military
police, could only put up such notices when they came from his
Majesty.
On going to the Chancellor’s room to inform him of the result of
my inquiries, I found that he was little better off than myself in the
way of sleeping accommodation. He had passed the night on a
mattress on the floor with his revolver by his side, and he was
working at a little table which was hardly large enough to rest his two
elbows on. The apartment was almost bare of furniture and there
was not a sofa or armchair, &c. He, who for years past had so largely
influenced the history of the world, and in whose mind all the great
movements of our time were concentrated and being shaped anew,
had hardly a place on which to lay his head; while stupid Court
parasites rested from their busy idleness in luxurious beds, and even
Monsieur Stieber managed to provide for himself a more comfortable
resting-place than our Master.
On this occasion I saw a letter that had fallen into our hands. It
came from Paris, and was addressed to a French officer of high
rank. From this communication it appeared that little hope was
entertained of further successful resistance, and just as little of the
maintenance of the dynasty. The writer did not know what to expect
or desire for the immediate future. The choice seemed to lie between
a Republic without republicans, and a Monarchy without
monarchists. The republicans were a feeble set and the monarchists
were too selfish. There was great enthusiasm about the army, but
nobody was in a hurry to join it and assist in repelling the enemy.
The Chief again said that attention should be called to the
services of the Saxons at Gravelotte. “The small black fellows should
in particular be praised. Their own newspapers have expressed
themselves very modestly, and yet the Saxons were exceptionally
gallant. Try to get some details of the excellent work they did on the
18th.”
They were very busy in the office in the meantime. Councillors
and Secretaries were writing and deciphering at full pressure,
sealing despatches at the lights stuck into the champagne-bottle-
candlesticks, and all around portfolios and documents, waterproofs
and shoe-brushes, torn papers and empty envelopes, were strewn
about in picturesque confusion. Orderlies, couriers and attendants
came and went. Every one was talking at the same time, and was
too occupied to pay the least attention to his neighbours. Abeken
was particularly active in rushing about between the improvised table
and the messengers, and his voice was louder than ever. I believe
that this morning his ready hand turned out a fresh document every
half hour; at least, one heard him constantly pushing back his chair
and calling a messenger. In addition to all this noise came the
incessant tramp, tramp, tramp of the soldiers, the rolling of the drums
and the rattle of the carts over the pavement. In this confusion it was
no light task to collect one’s thoughts and to carry out properly the
instructions received, but with plenty of good will it could be done.
After dinner, at which the Chancellor and some of the Councillors
were not present, as they dined with the King, I took a walk with
Willisch to the chapel of St. Anne on the top of the hill. There we
found a number of our countrymen, soldiers belonging to the
Freiberg Rifle Battalion, at supper under a tree. They have been
engaged in the battle of the 18th. I tried to obtain some particulars of
the fight, but could not get much more out of them than that they had
given it with a will to the Frenchmen.
By the side of the chapel a pathway led between a row of trees to
a delightful prospect, whence we could see at our feet the little town,
and beyond it to the north and east an extensive plain, with stubble
fields, villages, steeples, groups of trees and stretches of wood, and
to the south and west a forest that spread out to the horizon,
changing from dark green to the misty blue of the far distance. This
plain is intersected by three roads, one of which goes direct to
Varennes. On this road not far from the town a Bavarian regiment
was stationed, whose camp fires added a picturesque note to the
scene. In the distance to the right was a wooded hill with the village
of Faucoix, while the small town of Montfaucon was visible further
off. The second road, more towards the east, leads to Verdun. Still
further to the right, not far from a camp of Saxon troops, was the
road to Bar le Duc, on which we noticed a detachment of soldiers.
We caught the glint of their bayonets in the evening sunshine and
heard the sound of their drums softened by the distance.
Here we remained a good while gazing at this pleasing picture,
which in the west was glowing with the light of the setting sun, and
watching the shadows of the mountain spread slowly over the fields
until all was dark. On our way back we again looked in at the church
of St. Didier, in which some Hessians were now quartered. They lay
on straw in the choir and before the altar, and lit their pipes at the
lamps which burned before the sanctuary—without, however,
intending any disrespect, as they were decent, harmless fellows.
On Sunday, August 28th, we were greeted with a dull grey sky
and a soft steady rain that reminded one of the weather experienced
by Goethe not far from here in September, 1792, during the days
preceding and following the artillery engagement at Valmy. At the
Chief’s request I took General Sheridan a copy of the Pall Mall
Gazette, and afterwards tried to hunt up some Saxons who could
give me particulars of the battle of the 18th. At length I found an
officer of the Landwehr, a landed proprietor named Fuchs-Nordhof,
from Moeckern, near Leipzig. He was not able to add much to what I
knew. The Saxons had fought principally at Sainte Marie aux Chênes
and Saint Privat, and protected the retreat of the guards, who had
fallen into some disorder. The Freiberg Rifles took the position held
by the French at the point of the bayonet without firing a shot. The
Leipzig Regiment (the 107th) in particular had lost a great many men
and nearly all its officers. That was all he could tell me, except that
he confirmed the news as to Krausshaar’s death.
When the Minister got up we were again provided with plenty of
work. Our cause was making excellent progress. I was in a position
to telegraph that the Saxon cavalry had routed the 12th Chasseurs
at Voussières and Beaumont. I was informed (and was at liberty to
state) that we held to our determination to compel France to a
cession of territory, and that we should conclude peace on no other
conditions.
The arguments in support of this decision were given in the
following article which was sanctioned by the Chief:—
“Since the victories of Mars la Tour and Gravelotte the German
forces have been constantly pressing forward. The time would,
therefore, appear to have come for considering the conditions on
which Germany can conclude peace with France. In this matter we
must be guided neither by a passion for glory or conquest, nor by
that generosity which is frequently recommended to us by the foreign
press. Our sole object must be to guarantee the security of South
Germany from fresh attacks on the part of France such as have
been renewed more than a dozen times from the reign of Louis XIV.
to our own days, and which will be repeated as often as France feels
strong enough. The enormous sacrifices, in blood and treasure
which the German people have made in this war, together with all
our present victories, would be in vain if the power of the French
were not weakened for attack and the defensive strength of
Germany were not increased. Our people have a right to demand
that this shall be done. Were we to content ourselves with a change
of dynasty and an indemnity the position of affairs would not be
improved, and there would be nothing to prevent this war leading to
a number of others, especially as the present defeat would spur on
the French to revenge. France with her comparatively great wealth
would soon forget the indemnity, and any new dynasty would, in
order to fortify its own position, endeavour to secure a victory over us
and thus compensate for the present misfortunes of the country.
Generosity is a highly respectable virtue, but as a rule in politics it
secures no gratitude. In 1866 we did not take a single inch of ground
from the Austrians, but have we received any thanks in Vienna for
this self-restraint? Do they not feel a bitter longing for revenge simply
because they have been defeated? Besides the French already bore
us a grudge for our victory at Sadowa, though it was not won over
them but over another foreign Power. Whether we now generously
forego a cession of territory or not, how will they feel towards us after
the victories of Wörth and Metz, and how will they seek revenge for
their own defeat?
“The consequences of the other course adopted in 1814 and
1815, when France was treated with great consideration, prove it to
have been bad policy. If at that time the French had been weakened
to the extent which the interests of general peace required, the
present war would not have been necessary.
“The danger does not lie in Bonapartism, although the latter must
rely chiefly upon Chauvinist sentiment. It consists in the incurable
arrogance of that portion of the French people which gives the tone
to the whole country. This trait in the French national character,
which will guide the policy of every dynasty, whatever name it may
bear, and even of a Republic, will constantly lead to encroachments
upon peaceful neighbours. Our victories, to bear fruit, must lead to
an actual improvement of our frontier defences against this restless
neighbour. Whoever wishes to see the diminution of military burdens
in Europe, or desires such a peace as would permit thereof, must
look not to moral but to material guarantees as a solid and
permanent barrier against the French lust of conquest; in other
words, it should in future be made as difficult as possible for France
to invade South Germany with a comparatively small force, and even
in peace to compel the South Germans, through the apprehension of
such attack, to be always reckoning with the French Government.
Our present task is to secure South Germany by providing it with a
defensible frontier. To fulfil that task is to liberate Germany, that is to
complete the work of the War of Liberation in 1813 and 1814.
“The least, therefore, that we can demand and that the German
people, and particularly our comrades across the Main, can accept
is, the cession of the French gateways into Germany, namely
Strassburg and Metz. It would be just as short-sighted to expect any
permanent peace from the mere demolition of these fortresses as to
trust in the possibility of winning over the French by considerate
treatment. Besides, it must not be forgotten that this territory which
we now demand was originally German and in great part still
remains German, and that its inhabitants will perhaps in time learn to
feel that they belong to one race with ourselves.
 “We may regard a change of dynasty with indifference. An
indemnity will only temporarily weaken France financially. What we
require is increased security for our frontiers. This is only attainable,
however, by changing the two fortresses that threaten us into
bulwarks for our protection. Strassburg and Metz must cease to be
points of support for French attacks and be transformed into German
defences.
“Whoever sincerely desires a general European peace and
disarmament, and wants to see the ploughshare replace the sword,
must first wish to see the eastern neighbours of France secure
peace for themselves, as France is the sole disturber of public
tranquillity and will so remain as long as she has the power.”
 CHAPTER V
WE TURN TOWARDS THE NORTH—THE CHANCELLOR OF THE
CONFEDERATION AT REZONVILLE—THE BATTLE AND BATTLEFIELD
OF BEAUMONT

Sunday, August 28th.—At tea we receive an important piece of

news. We ourselves and the whole army (with the exception of that
portion which remains behind for the investment of Metz) are to alter
our line of march, and instead of going westwards in the direction of
Châlons, we are to turn northwards, following the edge of the
Argonne forest towards the Ardennes and the Meuse district. Our
next halt will, it is believed, be at Grand Pré. This move is made for
the purpose of intercepting Marshal MacMahon, who has collected a
large force and is marching towards Metz for the relief of Bazaine.
We start at 10 o’clock on the 29th, passing through several
villages and occasionally by handsome châteaux and parks, a camp
of Bavarian soldiers, some line regiments, rifles, light horse and
cuirassiers. In driving through the small town of Varennes we notice
the house where Louis XVI. was arrested by the postman of Saint
Ménehould. It is now occupied by a firm of scythe manufacturers.
The whole place is full of soldiers, horse and foot, with waggons and
artillery. After extricating ourselves from this crowd of vehicles and
men, we push rapidly forward through villages and past other camps,
until we reach Grand Pré. Here the Chancellor takes up his quarters
in the Grande Rue, a little way from the market, the King lodging at
an apothecary’s not far off. The second section of the King’s suite,
including Prince Charles, Prince Luitpold of Bavaria, and the
Hereditary Grand Duke of Mecklenburg-Schwerin, was quartered in
the neighbouring village of Juvin. I am billeted at a milliner’s opposite
the Chief’s quarters. I have a nice clean room, but my landlady is
invisible. We saw a number of French prisoners in the market-place
on our arrival. I am informed that an encounter with MacMahon’s
army is expected to-morrow morning.
At Grande Pré the Chief again showed that he never thought of
the possibility of an attempt being made to assassinate him. He
walked about in the twilight alone and without any constraint, going
even through narrow and lonely streets that offered special
opportunities for attack. I say this from personal experience, because
I followed him with my revolver at a little distance. It seemed to me
possible that an occasion might arise when I might be of assistance
to him.
On my hearing next morning that the King and the Chancellor
were going off together in order to be present at the great battue of
the second French army I thought of a favourite proverb of the
Chief’s which he repeated to me on his return from Rezonville:
—“Wer sich grün macht, den fressen die Ziegen,” and plucking up
heart I begged him to take me with him. He answered, “But if we
remain there for the night what will you do?” I replied, “That doesn’t
matter, Excellency; I shall know how to take care of myself.” “Well,
then, come along!” said he, laughing. The Minister took a walk in the
market-place while I, in high good humour, fetched my travelling bag,
waterproof and faithful diary. On his return he entered his carriage
and motioned to me to join him, when I took my place at his side.
One must have luck to secure such a piece of good fortune, and one
must also follow it up.
We started shortly after 9 o’clock. At first we retraced our steps
along yesterday’s road. Then to the left through vineyards and past
several villages in a hilly district. We met some parks of artillery and
troops on the march or resting by the way. About 11 o’clock we
reached the little town of Busancy, where we stopped in the market-
place to wait for the King.
 The Chief was very communicative. He complained that he was
frequently disturbed at his work by persons talking outside his door,
“particularly as some of the gentlemen have such loud voices. An
ordinary inarticulate noise does not annoy me. I am not put out by
music or the rattle of waggons, but what irritates me is a
conversation in which I can distinguish the words. I then want to
know what it is about, and so I lose the thread of my own ideas.”
He then pointed out to me that when officers saluted our carriage,
it was not for me to return the salute. He himself was not saluted as
Minister or Chancellor, but solely as a general officer, and soldiers
might feel offended if a civilian seemed to think that the salute was
also intended for him.
He was afraid that nothing in particular would occur that day, an
opinion which was shared by some Prussian artillery officers who
were standing by their guns immediately opposite Busancy, and with
whom he spoke. “It will be just as it was occasionally when I was out
wolf shooting in the Ardennes. After wandering about for days in the
snow, we used to hear that a track had been discovered, but when
we followed it up the wolf had disappeared. It will be the same with
the French to-day.”
After expressing a hope that he might meet his second son,
respecting whom he repeatedly inquired of officers along the route,
the Minister added:—“You can see from his case how little nepotism
there is in our army. He has already served twelve months and has
obtained no promotion, while others are recommended for the rank
of ensign in little more than a month.” I took the liberty to ask how
that was possible. “I do not know,” he answered. “I have made close
inquiries as to whether he had been guilty of any slight breaches of
discipline; but no, his conduct has been quite satisfactory, and in the
engagement at Mars la Tour he charged as gallantly on the French
square as any of his comrades. On the return ride he dragged with
him out of the fight two dragoons who had been unhorsed, grasping
one of them in each hand.[5] It is certainly well to avoid favouritism,
but it is bitter to be slighted.”
A few weeks later both his sons were promoted to the rank of
officers.
Subsequently, amongst many other things, the Chief once more
gave me an account of his experiences on the evening of the 18th of
August. They had sent their horses to water, and were standing near
a battery which had opened fire. This was not returned by the
French, but, he continued, “while we thought their cannon had been
dismounted, they were for the last hour concentrating their guns and
mitrailleuses for a last great effort. Suddenly they began a fearful fire
with shells and smaller projectiles, filling the whole air with an
incessant crashing and roaring, howling and whistling. We were cut
off from the King, whom Roon had sent to the rear. I remained by the
battery, and thought that if we had to retire I could jump on to the
next ammunition cart. We expected that this attack would be
supported by French infantry, who might take me prisoner, even if I
were to treat them to a steady revolver fire. I had six bullets ready for
them, and another half-dozen in reserve. At length our horses
returned, and I started off to join the King. That, however, was
jumping from the frying pan into the fire. The shells that passed over
our heads fell exactly in the space across which we had to ride. Next
morning we saw the pits which they dug in the ground. It was
therefore necessary for the King to retire still further to the rear. I told
him this after the officers had mentioned it to me. It was now night.
The King said he was hungry, and wished to have something to eat.
Drink was to be had from one of the sutlers, wine and bad rum, but
there was nothing to eat except dry bread. At last they managed to
hunt up a couple of cutlets in the village, just enough for the King,
but nothing for his companions, so that I was obliged to look out for
something else. His Majesty wished to sleep in the carriage between
dead horses and severely wounded soldiers. Later on he found