The Campaign of Waterloo: A Military History: Third EditionRopes, John Codman
History
The Campaign of Waterloo: A Military History: Third Edition
Ropes, John Codman
Napoleon I, Emperor of the French, 1769-1821 -- Elba and the Hundred Days, 1814-1815; Waterloo, Battle of, Waterloo, Belgium, 1815
His attack was to be made in four columns, marching in _échelon_, the
left in advance. The formation of these columns was so extraordinary,
and so ill-suited for the work to be done, that it has always excited
the comment of military men. We owe to Charras[706] a clear explanation
of this formation. The first, or left, column consisted of the
brigade of Bourgeois of the division of Allix,—the other brigade of
this division, that of Quiot, being assigned to the special task of
capturing La Haye Sainte. This brigade of Bourgeois contained four
battalions, one behind another; each battalion stood in three ranks,
one behind the other; and there was a distance of five paces between
the battalions. The front of this column, therefore, consisted of
one-third of the number of men in the leading battalion; and there
being four battalions in the brigade, there were of course twelve ranks
in the column. It was the same, _mutatis mutandis_, with the other
columns. Donzelot’s division, which contained nine battalions, had,
therefore, twenty-seven ranks in its column; the divisions of Marcognet
and Durutte, which had only eight battalions each, had each twenty-four
ranks. This formation was quite an exceptional one. A column very
generally in use at that day consisted of a battalion in the centre, in
line,—that is, in three ranks,—flanked on either side, by battalions in
column of divisions, capable of promptly forming line or square. And
then there were other convenient formations in frequent use. But these
formations of d’Erlon’s divisions were unwieldy,—they lacked mobility.
Why Ney and d’Erlon should have departed from the usual practice on
this occasion, no one knows.[707]
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