And this being the case, all such expressions as
“storming” are quite inapplicable.
It is evident that, if an army superior in numbers wishes to bring its
superiority to bear, it must outflank the enemy on one or both sides.
Which flank, then, would it have been best in the present case to turn?
The French turned the left. There was the natural temptation of
advancing over ground where the turning columns were protected by the
fire of the fleet. But they moved against an imaginary foe, and a large
part of the force might have been as well on board ship for all the
effect it had on the action. Moreover, though the turning movement was
completed, yet it had none of its legitimate effects, for the Russians
left only two guns and no prisoners. It is clear then that none of the
advantages to be expected from a successful attack in flank followed
here.
Now suppose—as there are but two flanks to an enemy, and no great things
had been done by turning one—that the manœuvre had been effected against
the other. The Allies would have moved away from the sea up the river.
The road next the sea was closed to the Russians by the ships’
broadsides. Opposite the next road, that by which Bosquet led his second
brigade, the Turks might have been left. The right of the French would
then have been where the right of the English really was, that is, in
the village of Bourliouk. And the English would have stretched so far
beyond the enemy’s right, that at least three divisions would have been
available for turning that flank. To the Russians, seeing this, only
certain alternatives would be possible: either to try to thrust
themselves between us and the sea—in which case the cliff would have
restricted them to the one road guarded by the Turks, and where any part
of their force that made the attempt would be lost if it should fail, as
it certainly would fail; or, secondly, an extension of their already
sufficiently extended line till its length corresponded with that of the
Allies, by which extension it would be fatally weakened; or, thirdly, a
movement of the entire army to the right, which would have uncovered the
Sebastopol road, and was therefore not to be thought of. Therefore the
Russians must have stood to fight on the ground they occupied, throwing
back their right wing to meet the threatened attack on their flank. The
Allied artillery should then have been massed—one portion to oppose the
great battery, one to pour a storm of shot on the right wing, the object
of attack; and the horse-artillery and one or two batteries, after
flanking the advance from their own side of the river, should have been
held ready to follow the flanking columns of attack as soon as they
should be established on the other bank. The advance, instead of being
in echelon from the right, would be in echelon from the left—the Light
Division, followed by the First and Fourth, would make the turning
movement and attack the right wing—the remaining English divisions would
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account