"Colonne par regiment - Diagram" Topic

Good Day,

I'm looking for diagrams or plates showing specifically a "Colonne par regiment"

does anybody have that item ?!

thanks in advance for any help on that subject.

"M. le maréchal Bernadotte, avec ses deux divisions d'infanterie, se portera, à sept heures du matin, sur la même position qu'occupe, la division du général Caffarelli, hormis que sa gauche sera à hauteur derrière le Santon, et y restera en colonne par régiment"

1 – colonne par regiment (division)

________ ________. . . .________ ________. . . .________ ________
________ ________. . . .________ ________. . . .________ ________
________ ________. . . .________ ________. . . .________ ________

2 – colonne par regiment (Peloton)

________. . . .________. . . .________
________. . . .________. . . .________
________. . . .________. . . .________
________. . . .________. . . .________
________. . . .________. . . .________
________. . . .________. . . .________

?

I've never seen the term used, when what you show are divisions or company attributes.
Given the compressed nature of Austerlitz, the frequent defiles to be passed etc, I'd say 'par regiment' would be no more than company width, deep columns on such a narrow front.

There was considerable dead ground that B* occupied in the rear of the position, once the Allies had denuded the Pratzen heights of troops (i.e. artillery).
d

i'm looking more at the general principle behind that specific column. especially in the context of the parent formation (brigade).

it's tactical purpose … is it a waiting formation (body of troops under reserve status or in soutien) ? is it used mainly or only in second line ?

iirc the interval between the battalions is 8 toises, the equivalent of a peloton frontage. if the colonne par regiment has the battalions with division frontage, you would need to reduce that frontage in order to maneuver more easily.

on the other hand, the commander has an easy formation to direct.and command ("dans sa main") if facing a new threat or to renew an attack.

"Par regiment" in Bardin : quite elusive ..
- see colonne par regiment
- see echelon par regiment
- see regiment
- see regiment d' infanterie Francaise
- see rompre par regiment

then see "to ploy" vs "to break" etc ..

'Le general Girard, a la tete du 5e corps, serre en masse par regiment, avait passe le ruisseau d'Albuera'.

The diagram I have accompanying this shows eight lines of battalions each of a single regiment of two or three battalions similar to your diagram 1.

Have you looked in the 'Tableaux Synoptiques des Manoeuvres d'Infanterie' (1810)?

Good day Allan,

not sure if "serré en masse, par régiment" is the same thing than "colonne par regiment" .. Girard was about to attack and his (small bodies of troops) were in closed columns (see Bardin : Les ASSAUTS MÉTHODIQUES doivent se donner en Colonnes serrées en masse.) can you post your own diagram here ? i tried to include the pic of Girard formation at albuera at the bottom (from dempsey)

there is nothing specific in The Tableaux about that column, i suspect it would belong more to a school of the brigade or the division.

for a good laugh, we could talk about the merits of *colonne par regiment, serrée en masse* versus a *colonne serrée en masse, par regiment*
eventually two different animals ! : )

COLONNE SERRÉE EN MASSE.
V. COLONNE SERRÉE.
V. EN MASSE.
V. SERRÉ EN MASSE.

Allan,

looked again in the Tableaux, were you thinking about les colonne serrées et lignes en bataille ? or close column of contiguous battalions on the line ..
using your quote, the next paragraph talk about passage of line … so curious to see your diagram showing the whole V corps (?)

some elements in the entry " Masse Tactique"

Les Masses sur la seconde ligne répondent a un alignement de profondeur aux dispositions de la premiere ligne. (…)

I- Dans les grandes evolutions, Le pluriel Masses n' a pas le meme sens que Masse au singulier

- un bataillon, une colonne : sont en masse
- une brigade est "En Masses" ou "par Masses"

II-Une troupe serrée en masse diffère d' une ligne rangée en masses

- une troupe serrée en masse > masse = un minimum de distance
- une ligne rangée en masses > masses = moyen intermédiaire de déploiement et de grande formation en bataille

You are right, the Tableaux will not help us as it skips from battalion directly to brigade :-(.

Dempsey's diagram is similar to my own (I will post it when I have a little more time). It differs from Dempsey only by showing each regiment as a pair of contiguous battalions.

I have the following notes from a discussion with Art Pendragon dating from about 2014 that I have used as an aide-memoire:

***

en masse = Battalion formed in close column, troupe serre en masse/troop in close order
en masse = Brigade en mass (one Brigade)
par masses = Brigade par masses (two or more)
a battle line arranged en masse = the masse (close columns) is a minimum of distance
a battle line arranged par masses = (un moyen intermediaire de deploiement et de grande formation en bataille) / an average transition distance to deploy a great body of troops en bataille.

colonne par bataillon = size Regiment or Brigade
colonne serree par bataillon = size Regiment or Brigade
colonne d'attaque par bataillon = size Regiment or Brigade
colonne d'attaque serree par bataillon = size Regiment or Brigade
colonne par regiment = size Regiment
bataillons deployes et en colonne serree = size Regiment, Brigade or Division (what wargamers call a mixed order)
colonne vide = size Regiment, Brigade, Division (also it's possible for a French Battlion prior to 1791, and Russian Battalion post 1812)
carre de regiment = size Regiment

***

It must be remembered that each of D'Erlons divisions at Waterloo were formed differently. As an example; I have two sources for the 1er division; Duhilt from the 1er Leger states that each regiment was formed en colonne d'attaque par bataillon, whereas Cpl. Canler States that they were formed en colonne serree par bataillon. – I go with Cpl. Canler because he was actually in the 28e.

According to Duhilt…they were not expecting the Allied Cavalry, and were formed en colonne serred par bataillon due to their objective.

As for French formations that were actually documented, and were formed as a single grand body of troops:

colonne par bataillon
colonne serree par bataillon
colonne d'attaque par bataillon
colonne d'attaque serree par bataillon
colonne par regiment
bataillons deployes et en colonne serree – both as a regiment or brigade. (what wargamers call a mixed order)
colonne vide
carre de regiment

Also it is possible that when you read of a division en; dispositive de la division par brigades accolees…they could be formed as one grand body of troops, such as the colonne vide at Wagram…I also know that the Russians also formed a colonne vide just as large. Most of these formations also apply to the Russians, except for the colonne par bataillon after 1812, and as for the colonne serree par bataillon…more than likely the Russians never used it…unless as a disposition for enemy cavalry…

There is a difference between en masse and par masses.

***

From Commandant Gérôme's Essai historique sur la tactique de l'infanterie (1903), p.214:

He shows in the diagram three division which "deploy by battalions in mass and the reserve will form in the rear of the center in close column by regiment.

It shows reserve regiments in close column one battalion behind the other with battalion [mass] frontage.

Hi Bill,

I searched in Gerome before asking. what is the croquis number in your edition/copy please ? in my pdf copy from Gallica, there is no diagram p 214. and that part is for 1866 +

link

also looked in Renard

link

Well spotted Bill!
It is Croquis 69 on page 213. The text is on page 214.

It is in Gerome second edition, that one on Gallica is first edition, second edition is 466 pages and there you will find on page 213 the diagram.

Unfortunately this second edition is available only by Hathi Trust and you must have a US IP to be able to see it.

Good Day HK,

and thank you very much or the reference to the second edition. the 1st ed is only 272 pages. As i live in France, no way to use a US IP !

by any chance, does one of you can send me a copy of that second edition ?
it seems there more to it than just diagram sixty nine about the colonne par regiment. an alternative would be to post a pic of the diagram here, if someone can of course.

Good Day Bill,

With my gratitude for your help and pointing us to croquis #69.
one question : What is the exact meaning of "battalion [mass] frontage" ?
Frontage sems to refer to X axis (horizontal) and Mass seems to refer to Y axis (vertical) with minimum distance as noted in Bardin.

as a side note, we could try to do home made diagrams of all french columns
for the 1795-1815 period (once and for all).

colonne par demi-bataillons
colonne par bataillon
colonne par bataillons
colonne serree par bataillon
colonne d'attaque par bataillon
colonne d'attaque serree par bataillon
colonne par regiment
colonne d' attaque
colonne par compagnie
etc

I am waiting till Art is chipping in, he would know best.

A friend sent me some pages – including the famous page 213, let me know your e mail address and I will send you a pdf of that page.

HK,

please, send the pages on : cdtluppo(at)protonmail.com

thanks a lot

Eric
I have just read this and sent you Parts 1 and 2 of Gerome. Part 3 deals with post-Napoleonic matters.
Regards
Allan

@Cdr Luppo

I just sent those pages I copied page by page, about 5 MB; let me know it they arrived successfully.

In case the mail is not in the mail box, maybe check spam

Courtesy of HK and Allan,

croquis # 69 from Gerome. the text is explaining (page 214) that the reserve will form in the center rear, in closed column by regiment. > colonne serrée par regiment

so it is really a column of deployment not to be engaged for the combat zone?

it seems 1er regt de reserve ready to act on the right flank and the 2e regt ready for the left flank, or so. no precision if they are en colonne directe or colonne renversée. each lead battalion is likely to be the regulating sub element for each column. the dispositif is also more likely to be "in the hand" of the commander (dans la main du commandant) for a quick action or reaction. Beyond that i can't see anything really special. perhaps less spaced than what you have in the third division on the leftmost part of the Line. potentially More sensitive to artillery fire ? less able to deploy ? (except if regt #2 is direct and regt #1 is renversé)

so is 'colonne serrée par regiment' the same thing than 'colonne par regiment' ?

Croquis # 69 show the deployment of an army corps ( from General Meunier study), but focused only on infantry. Dispositif des divisions : Each brigade is on one line (not brigades accolées).

i cleaned up the croquis and added my version with plausible distances and intervals : the 3 divs are occupying something like 1500 meters of frontage

link

can't get the pic to be seen !

That corps illustration is really interesting:

1er division moves left-in-front – deploys to right flank
2e and 3e divisions move right-in-front – deploy to left flank

Each of the above is a brigade of four battalions. (3 div x 2 bde x 4 bn= 24 bns)

There is a reserve brigade – of two regiments – each of two battalions. (2 x 2 = 4 bns)

The French grand-tactical "Secret" is the commpressed "serre" columns – they don't take up too much space on the approach.

That corps illustration is really interesting:

1er division moves left-in-front – deploys to right flank
2e and 3e divisions move right-in-front – deploy to left flank.

That shows how much planning goes into setting up the approach, anticipating the deployment.

I am not sure that 'serre' columns was either a secret or the magic of the French grand-tactical operations.

It is similar to the deployieren of Frederick the Great. The tactical secret of the french was columns of waiting and maneuvre which facilited late deployment into line.

it is a combination od en eventail coupled with en tiroir.

What is interesting is, maybe I am mistaken it, is that that the second division forming the center, is not deploying from the center but also to the left, maybe making it easier to keep alignment with the first division.

Or to place an artillery battery between them

Where is the brigade de reserve drawn from? Is it the corps light cavalry? Converged grenadiers? a battalion drawn from each division?

As noted by Gerome, the croquis # 69 is inspired by General Meunier works, who was an advocate of inversion and its advantages at grand manoeuvre level.
the diagram is voluntary showing only infantry deployment.
herafter, the original from Meunier "Evolutions (1814), plate #15
a bit more detailed than in Gerome ..

and a reworked diagram with *possible position* of generaux de brigade within each division (on 1st and 2nd line).

so back to colonne par regiment : what are the plausible (a) intervals and (b) distances between sub-units for that column ?

as HK said :

"so it is really a column of deployment not to be engaged for the combat zone?"

Perhaps Art can give his point of view on that specific column ?

so far i was not able to find an exact period definition or exact purpose for the elusive colonne par regiment …

The references i have found is the guard moving up at the ready at Ligny – specifically stated at ½ distance – but also the attack of the young guard at Borodino apparently was in this formation.

It is a very common formation in the late SYW. Almost the standard formation for the Austrians. When we read that approached and attacked in columns at Hochkirch it was actually colonne par regiment with all batallions lined up behind each other in several batallion en ligne.

Good Day Sparta,

Thank you for your input. But for the French army, do you mean that "Colonne par regiment " has its sub elements (Bns) one behind the other ? ie the opposite being the regiment in a continuous line of Bns in columns , side by side ..

if what you shared is correct, so what is the difference between "colonne par regiment" and "colonne par bataillon" ???!!!

those elements make sense when we look at "the Line" (brigade -division) but i is very difficult to find any "official" reference for it.

again, thank you Sparta, for sharing those elements.

I always understood that the formal/official(?)French wording for these deployments was along the lines of 'column of unit by frontage' so 'colonne de batallion par division' was a battalion in column with a divisional (ie two company) frontage. Therefore, following this definition, a 'colonne par regiment' had a regimental frontage. This suggests the battalions side by side rather than one in front of the other. Obviously, the number of battalions in the regiment had a significant impact on the way the formation looked; either two battalions one behind the other, or three or four; or two battalions side by side, or three or four. Presumably, therefore, the battalions could be in line or column???? d'Erlon's divisional columns at Waterloo is described as 'colonne de division par bataillon', ie a division with each of its battalions, deployed (ie in line), one behind the other. Interestingly, in the 1st Corps War Diary (see Stephen Beckett's volumes), it was Napoleon who ordered his (d'Erlon's) corps to advance in 'colonne par bataillon'.

There's a danger I'm going to confuse myself here!

Cdr Luppo. Sorry I think I mistyped I meant colonne de regiment par batallion. My intention was to descripe that the formation with several batallions in line as used by D´erlon was not that unique and had roots going back to the orgination of the french and austrian new operational system from the SYW.

Good Day Sparta,

"wording for these deployments was along the lines of 'column of unit by frontage"

well, i believe those are "colonnes sub divisionnaires" : par section, par peloton, par division. which are some kind of sub category of columns. perhaps more related to minor tactics, for the lack of a better term.

colonne par regiment, par bataillons, etc seems to refer more to grand tactics or grand manoeuvres (the Line level – brigade and Division dispositions).

semantics play also their part, like with "colonne par compagnie" for example, which has nothing to do with peloton frontage.. smaller than line but larger than colonne par division..

we might have some light at the end of the week ! but at the moment i see it more as you said as Bns side by side for colonne par regiment, which is contrary to the diagram from Gerome, where the two regiments in reserve, have clearly their Bns one behind the other ..

Good Day,

I have found this week end the book "RASSEMBLEMENT, CAMPEMENT ET GRANDES MANOEUVRES, DES TROUPES RUSSES ET PRUSSIENNES, Réunies à KALISCH PENDANT L'ÉTÉ DE 1835" by Carl Von Decker (see page 51 et 52 pour le descriptif de la colonne par regiment, comme noté dans Bardin)
Battalions are organized side by side …

if someone has a link to a German copy of this book .. ?

"A ce premier acte succéda un second doublement intéressant par sa nouveauté: le défilé de l'infanterie, en colonne, par régiment (1). Dans ce but on forma les régiments de la manière suivante:
- Les bataillons se mirent en colonne serrée par pelotons à droite, les uns à côté des autres, de manière à former une masse sans intervalle, de huit pelotons de profondeur, et comme les pelotons des ailes sont composés de grenadiers ou de chasseurs, les uns portant sur leur schako des aigrettes, les autres des pompons jaunes, cette formation offrait un coup-d'œil symétrique, tout-à-fait particulier.
Les drapeaux réunis et escortés de deux officiers, se portèrent devant le milieu du régiment; ils furent précédés du colonel, à cheval, sans adjudants, et devant lui se placèrent les tambours et la musique; les officiers d'état-major et les adjudants à cheval, ouvraient la marche.
Les quatre régiments d'infanterie de la garde et les douze régiments d'infanterie de ligne rangés de cette manière, suivis de l'artillerie à pied, en ligne par batterie, défilèrent en 23 minutes. . – La cavalerie défila ensuite pour la seconde fois par escadrons, en colonne par régiment; les escadrons à distance de peloton; puis l'artillerie à cheval par batterie; le trot des chevaux fut plus allongé qu'au premier défilé, on mit 15 minutes. – Je ne sache pas que l'infanterie prussienne ait jamais eu antérieurement l'occasion de défiler ainsi en colonne par régiment; cependant elle s'en acquitta honorablement. La parade entière avec les diverses formations, dura environ 3 heures 1/2. Nous avons déjà parlé de l'expression de la musique

(1) La formation en colonne par régiment, pour défiler, n'est dit-on usitée dans l'armée russe, que depuis quelques années et sur l'ordre exprès de l'empereur."

link

Good Day Gents,

here's the traduction in English of Von Decker description of the column by regiment,
reduced to relevant parts.

"This first act was followed by a second doubly interesting by its novelty: the parade of the infantry, in column, by regiment (1). For this purpose the regiments were formed as follows:
- The battalions were put in a tight column by platoons on the right, one beside the other, so as to form a mass without interval, eight platoons in depth, and as the wing platoons are composed of grenadiers or chasseurs, the some wearing egrets on their schako, others yellow pompoms, this formation offered a symmetrical look, quite particular. (..)
The four guard infantry regiments and the twelve line infantry regiments ranged in this manner, followed by foot artillery, in line by battery, marched in 23 minutes. . (..) – I do not know that the Prussian infantry ever had the opportunity to march thus in column by regiment; however, she acquitted herself honorably.

(1) The formation in column by regiment, to parade, it is said to be used in the Russian army, only for a few years and on the express order of the emperor. "

In ACW tactics a Column of Regiments was generally a brigade formation with each regiment deployed in line stacked up one behind the other. It was usually used by units standing in reserve.

SW:

I suspect that adding ACW terns to this discussion may complicate it, since ACW 'Regiments' normally amounted to single Battalions. For Continental European armies in the Napoleonic era, Regiments had two, three or more Battalions.

Intended as a gentle reminder. Please let this pass if it is consideree unnecessary.

Gerome book:

Google book – GEROME Essai Historique sur la Tacticq de L'infanterie. 2ed

Good Day Stoppage,

Which page specifically in Gérome ?! i'm afraid there is nothing specific in it about that pesky "colonne par regiment" …

thank you nevertheless for the link
; )

page 244 :

"On peut citer, au nombre des habitudes les plus dangereuses, celles de combattre en colonne (1) avec des colonnes trop profondes et de déployer ces colonnes trop près de l'ennemi.
J'ai vu une division entière en colonne par régiment commencer son déploiement à portée de fusil de l'ennemi : la déroute arriva avant l'achèvement de la manœuvre."

My understanding is that, back in the heady days of 1805-07, French battalions would advance in col of divisions or even column of companies, for speed, then redeploy into line, for firepower, when close in to the enemy.

Later, when troops had less training and experience, the formation change was considered dangerous. Battalions could become disordered by the shift, and destroyed if attacked in that state. So they just attacked in column of divisions, since it was an easy formation to maintain, provided at least two company frontage for firing.

i believe column by division is just a sub element of the column by regiment.

Von Decker provided a description in his book about Kalisch camp maneuvers :

"This first act was followed by a second doubly interesting by its novelty: the parade of the infantry, in column, by regiment (1). For this purpose the regiments were formed as follows:
- The battalions were put in a tight column by platoons on the right, one next to the other, so as to form a mass without interval, eight platoons in depth, and as the wing platoons are composed of grenadiers or chasseurs, the some wearing egrets on their schako, others yellow pompoms, this formation offered a symmetrical look, quite particular.
The flags, assembled and escorted by two officers, were raised in front of the midst of the regiment; they were preceded by the colonel, on horseback, without adjutants, and before him were placed the drums and the music; staff officers and adjutants on horseback led the way.

The four guard infantry regiments and the twelve line infantry regiments ranged in this manner, followed by foot artillery, lined up by battery, marched in 23 minutes."

best regards