Another point is the march off of columns from the right flank or left.
In parallel marches (marches to a flank) the thing is plain in itself.
No one would march off from the right to make a movement to the left
flank. In a march to the front or rear, the order of march should
properly be chosen according to the direction of the lines of roads in
respect to the future line of deployment. This may also be done
frequently in tactics, as its spaces are smaller, and therefore a
survey of the geometrical relations can be more easily taken. In
strategy it is quite impossible, and therefore although we have seen
here and there a certain analogy brought over into strategy from
tactics, it was mere pedantry. Formerly the whole order of march was a
purely tactical affair, because the army on a march remained always an
indivisible whole, and looked to nothing but a combat of the whole; yet
nevertheless Schwerin, for example, when he marched off from his
position near Brandeis, on the 5th of May, could not tell whether his
future field of battle would be on his right or left, and on this
account he was obliged to make his famous countermarch.
If an army in the old order of battle advanced against the enemy in
four columns, the cavalry in the first and second lines on each wing
formed the two exterior columns, the two lines of infantry composing
the wings formed the two central columns. Now these columns could march
off all from the right or all from the left, or the right wing from the
right, the left wing from the left, or the left from the right, and the
right from the left. In the latter case it would have been called
“double column from the centre.” But all these forms, although they
ought to have had a relation directly to the future deployment, were
really all quite indifferent in that respect. When Frederick the Great
entered on the battle of Leuthen, his army had been marched off by
wings from the right in four columns, therefore the wonderful
transition to a march off in order of battle, as described by all
writers of history, was done with the greatest ease, because it
happened that the king chose to attack the left wing of the Austrians;
had he wanted to turn their right, he must have countermarched his
army, as he did at Prague.
If these forms did not meet that object in those days, they would be
mere trifling as regards it now. We know now just as little as formerly
the situation of the future battle-field in reference to the road we
take; and the little loss of time occasioned by marching off in
inverted order is now infinitely less important than formerly. The new
order of battle has further a beneficial influence in this respect,
that it is now immaterial which division arrives first or which brigade
is brought under fire first.
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