Questions on the Column Formations allowed in the French Infantry by Marco Gioannini We have received a very interesting letter from our Italian contributor Mr. Marco Gioannini with the following comments: "The first group of questions concerns some aspects of French formations and drill. It has notable consequences for the Napoleonic wargamer and was raised by an article by Mr. Cook published in First Empire #16 and #17. As you know, the French column of divisions and, more specifically, the attack column are very 'popular' tactical formations among wargamers and their use is regulated, if not encouraged, by most sets of rules. No doubt, there are sound historical grounds for this, although we all know that the old statement 'tine French Napoleonic army usually fought in columns of divisions' is highly controversial, if not false. "Anyway, it often happens on the wargame table that French battalions are formed in column of divisions screened by their voltigeur company in skirmish order. Well, in his article, Mr. Cook claims that, according to the Reglement of 1791, battalions with an uneven number of formed companies were not allowed to form a column of divisions of any type. This implies that a voltigeur company screening its parent unit formed in division column was after 1808 an action forbidden by the Reglement of 1791. The same applies to battalions between 1804 and 1808, if the voltigeur company is out for skirmishing and the grenadier company is detached elsewhere. "I received a critical response from George Nafziger, which I enclose. George simply states that Mr. Cook's argument has no ground whatsoever in the Reglement of 1791. "I went to my EE&L collection to see if the topic had been covered in the past. I hadn't time to make a careful survey. I only found a short note on page 50 of issue #93, where you say: 'In the French 6-company infantry battalion, when the elite companies were awayfrom the battalions, the battalion did not operate by divisions but only by platoons, i.e., it could onlyform columns of platoons (or of company; in this case platoons and companies are interchangeable).' "I am not quite sure that I understand what you exactly mean. Do you mean that only when both the elite companies were away (the battalion being reduced to four companies), the battalion couldn't form in division column? It sounds strange. Or do you mean that this occurred when the battalion was reduced to an uneven number of companies (the voltigeur company being in skirmish order and screening its parent unit or one of the elite companies being detached elsewhere)? If you mean the latter, then it seems that you support Mr. Cook's point of view, at least in so far as French infantry organization after 1808 is concerned. I would be happy to receive clarification on this point." An Answer from J. Lochet Let us see what was in Mr. Cook's statement: "Furthermore, it is also the case when the Voltigeur company is detached, colonne par division, of any type, is impossible because the battalion is reduced to an uneven number of pelotons. When a company was detached, the Reglement of 1791 prescribed colonne par pelotons. The logical upshot of this must be that either entire battalions were earmarked for skirmishing whilst others remained formed, or that columns par pelotons were used much more than is realized." George Nafziger and this writer were unable to find anything of the sort in the Reglement. There is nothing in the regulations about the column of divisions or the column of attack stating that either type of column could not be formed if one or more companies were detached, or if there were an unever number of companies. Let us consider what we said in EE&I #93 which was a summary of what we said in EE&L #73, p. 17: "...When the 6 companies were present, they deployed from right to left in the following order: grenadiers, 3rd, 1st, 4th, 2nd, voltigeurs and the battalion maneuvered always by divisions. When the elite companies were detached, the companies deployed in the following order: 1st 3rd, 4th, 2nd and the battalion maneuvered by platoons." [1] and [2] This quotation is the translation of French text (see French text in footnote 2) taken from Belhomme Histoire d l'infanterie en France, Volume IV, p. 399. Belhomme's work is based on French archival documents. The source of his statement is the decree (or an extended version of the decree) of 18 February 1808, establishing the six-company, battalion in the French army. On pp. 394 to 395, Belhomme enumerates all the details on how this changes from a nine-company battalion to a six-company battalion were to be made Granted, Belhomme's text does not overtly state that when both the elite companies were away from the battalion, it never formed column of divisions or column of attack. Granted, it is my personal interpretation of Belhomme's text the influenced my statement found in EE&L #93 and quoted above, i.e., that when only the four fusilier companies were present in the battalion, the battalion only formed a column of companies. Of course, if my source is wrong, then I am wrong. Anyhow, Belhomme (and my translation) clearly state that only when both elite companies were away, i.e., reduced to four fusili er companies, the battalion operated in platoons. Thus, I believe we can dismiss Cook's claims in First Empire #16 and #17. I side with George Nafziger statement that there is nothing in the Reglement of 1791 mentioning that columns of divisions could not be formed when the battalion was reduced to an uneven number of companies and what follows uses George Nafziger's data in addition to some of mine. I don't know the sources of Mr. Cook's interpretation of the Reglement and hope he can provide it for us. However, to fully answer Mr. Gioannini's questions, we cannot ignore some further parts of Mr. Cook's article. The portion of the Reglement of 1791 pertinent to the school of the battalion deals with the maneuvers of a nine-company battalion: eight fusilier companies and one grenadier company. It is true that the Reglement illustrates all the battalion maneuvers with an eight-company [3] battalion which excludes the grenadier company. Should we conclude that the grenadier companies did not maneuver with their battalion? Certainly not. There is a statement in the Reglement that addresses the grenadier company's role: "371. The grenadier platoon follows the movement of the half battalion of which it is part, and conforms to that which was prescribed above; with the single difference that it shall place itself behind the interior sections of that last subdivision of the column in such a manner as to be flanked on the left and right by the two exterior sections of this subdivision." So, why limit maneuvering to columns of companies (or platoons) when the grenadiers were operating with the battalion's other eight companies? To be complete, let us mention that the Reglement does not sanction the use of skirmishers or detached grenadiers. Yet, it was common practice in the French army during the Wars of the French Revolution and the early Empire (up to 1806-07) to form battalions of converged elite companies. Since the introduction of the permanent Division system, it had been customary already in the Royal army to brigade together the grenadier companies to form a so called battalion of "elites". That practice was common in the armies of the German states The same was often done in the armies of the Revolution and of the early Empire. [4] Then, with the introduction of the six- company battalion, the practice ceased, at least on the Western front. [5] Since the Reglement was not revised (see footnote 1) after the introduction of the voltigeur company in the line battalion [6] by the Imperial Decree of 22 Ventose (12 March 1804) and 25 Thermidor Year XII (13 August 1804), it is not surprising that the Reglement does not make any reference to them since they did not exist when the regulations were written, which does not mean that skirmishers were not used! However, another document was published in 1813. It is the Manuel d'infanterie, which is an official 1813 compilation of all the changes made to the Reglement but not an official replacement for the Reglement. This manual shows the formation of a column of attack, and does not mention any restriction in forming the columns with an uneven number of companies. Conclusion From the above, there are no grounds to support Mr. Cook's statement. In addition, there is much more in Mr. Cook's article that we don't agree with, but we will be covering those questions in another issue of EE&L after we correspond with Mr. Cook. Footnotes [1] The Reglement of 1791 was not updated to reflect the changes that took place after the introduction of the sixcompany battalion into the French army. The edition of 1811 provides the following footnote on page 1: "Various changes have occurred since 1791, which necessitated the modifications of some dispositions in this title. These modifications have been added in notes and were extracted from the Manual d'infanterie..." [2] French text: "Dans les manoeuvres les compagnies formaient un peloton de deux sections. Lorsque les seize compagnies etaient presentes, elles se rangeaient de la droite a gauche dans l'ordre suivant: grenadiers, 3e, 1er, 4e, 2e, voltigeurs et le bataillon manoeuvrait toujours par division. Lorsque les compagnies d'elite etaient detachees, les compagnies se rangeaient dans l'ordre suivant: ler, 3e, 4e, 2e et le bataillon manoeuvrait par peloton. " [3] The voltigeur company was not created until 1804 by the conversion of one of the fusilier companies into a voltigeur company. Some sources comment that the decree was initiated to more or less ratify what had been a common practice for sometime. [4]When the voltigeur companies were introduced, they were often pulled out with the grenadiers to form so-called "elite battalions". The extreme example was Oudinot's Grenadiers, a small Corps made up of the elite companies from certain depot battalions. [5]. We find some instances of French elite battalions in the Peninsula. [6] There were battalions of chasseurs in the Royal army as well as in the very early Revolutionary armies which soon were changed to demi-brigade legeres. Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 2 No. 14 Back to EEL List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1995 by Emperor's Headquarters This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com