We shall conclude here also by establishing our ideas in the form of a
result, such as is usual under ordinary circumstances. If the distance
at which the advanced guard is detached is the same as the radius of
the cantonments, and the point of assembly is fixed in the centre of
the cantonments, the time which is gained by checking the enemy’s
advance would be available for the transmission of intelligence and
getting under arms, and would in most cases be sufficient, even
although the communication is not made by means of signals,
cannon-shots, etc., but simply by relays of orderlies, the only really
sure method.
With an advanced guard pushed forward three miles in front, our
cantonments might therefore cover a space of thirty square miles. In a
moderately-peopled country there would be 10,000 houses in this space,
which for an army of 50,000, after deducting the advanced guard, would
be four men to a billet, therefore very comfortable quarters; and for
an army of twice the strength nine men to a billet, therefore still not
very close quarters. On the other hand, if the advanced guard is only
one mile in front, we could only occupy a space of four square miles;
for although the time gained does not diminish exactly in proportion as
the distance of the advanced guard diminishes, and even with a distance
of one mile we may still calculate on a gain of six hours, yet the
necessity for caution increases when the enemy is so close. But in such
a space an army of 50,000 men could only find partial accommodation,
even in a very thickly populated country.
From all this we see what an important part is played here by great or
at least considerable towns, which afford convenience for sheltering
10,000 or even 20,000 men almost at one point.
From this result it follows that, if we are not very close to the
enemy, and have a suitable advanced guard we might remain in
cantonments, even if the enemy is concentrated, as Frederick the Great
did at Breslau in the beginning of the year 1762, and Buonaparte at
Witebsk in 1812. But although by preserving a right distance and by
suitable arrangements we have no reason to fear not being able to
assemble in time, even opposite an enemy who is concentrated, yet we
must not forget that an army engaged in assembling itself in all haste
can do nothing else in that time; that it is therefore, for a time at
least, not in a condition to avail itself in an instant of fortuitous
opportunities, which deprives it of the greater part of its really
efficient power. The consequence of this is, that an army should only
break itself up completely in cantonments under some one or other of
the three following cases:
1. If the enemy does the same.
2. If the condition of the troops makes it unavoidable.
3. If the more immediate object with the army is completely limited to
the maintenance of a strong position, and therefore the only point of
importance is concentrating the troops at that point in good time.
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