We have selected these examples because every one will admit, that two
such generals would never have adopted any systematic mode of
proceeding without some good reason. Upon the whole, there has been a
general improvement in the use of advanced guards and outposts in
modern wars; not that every one acted as Frederick, even in the
Silesian wars, for at that time the Austrians had a system of strong
outposts, and frequently sent forward a corps as advanced guard, for
which they had sufficient reason from the situation in which they were
placed. Just in the same way we find differences enough in the mode of
carrying on war in more modern times. Even the French Marshals
Macdonald in Silesia, Oudinot and Ney in the Mark (Brandenburg),
advanced with armies of sixty or seventy thousand men, without our
reading of their having had any advanced guard.—We have hitherto been
discussing advanced guards and outposts in relation to their numerical
strength; but there is another difference which we must settle. It is
that, when an army advances or retires on a certain breadth of ground,
it may have a van and rear guard in common for all the columns which
are marching side by side, or each column may have one for itself. In
order to form a clear idea on this subject, we must look at it in this
way.
The fundamental conception of an advanced guard, when a corps is so
specially designated, is that its mission is the security of the main
body or centre of the army. If this main body is marching upon several
contiguous roads so close together that they can also easily serve for
the advanced guard, and therefore be covered by it, then the flank
columns naturally require no special covering.
But those corps which are moving at great distances, in reality as
detached corps, must provide their own van-guards. The same applies
also to any of those corps which belong to the central mass, and owing
to the direction that the roads may happen to take, are too far from
the centre column. Therefore there will be as many advanced guards, as
there are columns virtually separated from each other; if each of these
advanced guards is much weaker than one general one would be, then they
fall more into the class of other tactical dispositions, and there is
no advanced guard in the strategic tableau. But if the main body or
centre has a much larger corps for its advanced guard, then that corps
will appear as the advanced guard of the whole, and will be so in many
respects.
But what can be the reason for giving the centre a van-guard so much
stronger than the wings? The following three reasons.
1. Because the mass of troops composing the centre is usually much more
considerable.
2. Because plainly the central point of a strip of country along which
the front of an army is extended must always be the most important
point, as all the combinations of the campaign relate mostly to it, and
therefore the field of battle is also usually nearer to it than to the
wings.
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