During the Napoleonic Wars, infantry soldiers fought in what was called ‘close order,’ meaning they stood tightly packed together, shoulder to shoulder. At first glance, this might seem like an easy target for the enemy, but there were several strategic reasons for this formation.
In the days before radios, communication on the battlefield was a challenge. Orders had to be given through shouted commands, drums, or bugles. This was already difficult amidst the chaos of battle and nearly impossible if soldiers were spread out. Staying close together made it easier to relay orders.
The muskets used during this time were not very accurate beyond about 80 yards. To maximize their effectiveness, soldiers fired in volleys, or large groups, to create a powerful impact both physically and psychologically on the enemy.
Soldiers felt more confident and willing to face danger when they were part of a unified group. The presence of comrades provided encouragement and support, boosting their willingness to advance or hold their ground.
Infantry scattered across the battlefield were easy targets for cavalry. By staying together, they could better defend themselves against mounted attacks.
The basic unit of infantry was the battalion. A typical French line battalion was supposed to have 840 men, but in reality, it often had between 500 and 600 soldiers. For example, a battalion might consist of 605 men, divided into six companies: four fusilier companies and two flank companies. The flank companies included grenadiers, the tallest and strongest men, and voltigeurs, who were light infantry used for skirmishing.
Skirmishers operated independently, using cover and firing at will to disrupt the enemy. They also prevented enemy skirmishers from doing the same. Many armies had specialized light infantry units for this role, such as the British 95th Rifles and French chasseurs à pied.
The traditional formation was the line, where companies stood side by side, three ranks deep. This allowed the maximum number of soldiers to fire their muskets and minimized casualties from artillery. However, it was vulnerable to cavalry attacks, especially if outflanked, and difficult to maintain on uneven terrain.
For movement and attacks, battalions often used a ‘column of divisions’ formation. This was more flexible and allowed for quicker advancement, but it made them a larger target for enemy artillery. Fewer soldiers could fire their muskets in this formation.
To defend against cavalry, battalions could quickly form a square, with bayonets fixed for an all-around defense. This formation made it difficult for cavalry to penetrate but was vulnerable to artillery and moved slowly.
Switching between formations under fire required extensive training and experience. In 1809, the Austrian army introduced the ‘battalion mass’ formation, which was simpler and suited for less-trained soldiers. It was a dense column that could repel cavalry but was vulnerable to cannon fire. Despite its limitations, it was more maneuverable than other formations.
Understanding these tactics provides insight into the strategic thinking of Napoleonic warfare. Each formation had its strengths and weaknesses, and the ability to adapt quickly was crucial for success on the battlefield.
Gather your classmates and organize a reenactment of the different battlefield formations discussed in the article. Assign roles such as commanders, infantry, and cavalry. Practice switching between line, column, and square formations. This will help you understand the strategic advantages and challenges of each formation.
Simulate a battlefield communication scenario where you must relay orders using only drums, bugles, or shouted commands. Divide into teams and see who can effectively communicate a series of commands across a distance. This activity will demonstrate the importance of close order for command and control.
Create a simulation of musket volleys using safe props like foam balls or paper wads. Form groups to represent battalions and practice firing in volleys. Discuss how firing in unison could maximize impact and how this tactic was used to compensate for the inaccuracy of muskets.
Engage in a role-playing game where you act as skirmishers. Use the school grounds to find cover and simulate disrupting an enemy formation. This activity will help you understand the role of skirmishers in Napoleonic tactics and their importance in battlefield strategy.
Participate in a debate about the effectiveness of different formations. Divide into groups, each advocating for a specific formation (line, column, square, or battalion mass). Use historical examples and strategic reasoning to argue why your chosen formation was superior under certain conditions.
In the Napoleonic Wars, infantry fought in ‘close order’—packed together, standing shoulder to shoulder. But why present such an easy target for the enemy?
First, command and control. Before radios, orders had to be relayed by shouted commands, drums, or bugles—difficult enough in the smoke and din of battle, almost impossible if troops were scattered.
Second, firepower. Smoothbore muskets were inaccurate beyond about 80 yards, so volley fire—firing en masse—was the best way to inflict physical and psychological damage on the enemy.
Third, morale. Soldiers were much more willing to advance into danger or hold the line if they did so together as a unit, urging each other on.
Fourth, defense against cavalry. Scattered infantry were easy targets for horsemen—only by sticking together could they fight them off.
The basic tactical unit of infantry was the battalion. A French line battalion had, in theory, 840 men, but in practice, it was closer to five to six hundred. Our example here has 605 men, a typical strength for a battalion on campaign. The men were divided into six companies: four fusilier companies and two flank companies—on the right, the grenadiers, made up of the tallest, strongest men, often detached to form elite all-grenadier units; and on the left, the voltigeurs, specialist light infantry used for skirmishing in front of the battalion.
Skirmishers moved independently, used cover, and fired at will to harass and unsettle the enemy while preventing enemy skirmishers from carrying out the same task. Most armies also had specialist light infantry units for this role, such as the British 95th Rifles, French chasseurs à pied, and Austrian and Prussian jäger battalions.
The traditional battlefield formation was the line: all companies formed up alongside each other, three ranks deep. Line formation maximized the number of men who could fire their muskets at the enemy and limited casualties from artillery fire. However, it was extremely vulnerable to cavalry if it could be outflanked, and even for well-drilled troops, it was difficult to keep the line straight while advancing across broken ground.
For maneuver and attack, battalions usually formed a ‘column of divisions.’ This was a more flexible formation that allowed the battalion to advance quickly, though it presented a larger target to enemy guns, firing solid roundshot that could tear through several ranks. Far fewer men could fire their muskets at the enemy in this formation.
Theoretically, the battalion would deploy into line before reaching the enemy, but carrying out this slow maneuver under fire wasn’t always possible or sensible. Some commanders kept their men in column, relying on momentum to break the enemy line. This was a risky tactic that often worked against raw troops but led to high casualties when facing better-trained infantry, like British redcoats.
A column could be closed up quickly to provide protection from cavalry, or if there was time, could form a square. With bayonets fixed, the battalion formed an all-round defense that often resembled more of a rectangle. Enemy cavalry could surround the battalion but not break in, as horses wouldn’t charge a solid wall of men and steel. However, an infantry square was extremely vulnerable to artillery fire and could only move very slowly.
Changing quickly and smoothly from one formation to another, especially under fire, required training, practice, and experience. In 1809, the Austrian army began to use the ‘battalion mass’ formation, which was crude but more suited to hastily-trained conscripts. This was a dense column with limited firepower and huge vulnerability to enemy cannon. However, it could quickly close up to repel cavalry, using the same principle as the square but without the complex drill, and was much more maneuverable.
Tactics – The art or skill of employing available means to accomplish an end, particularly in military operations. – During the battle, the general’s tactics involved a surprise flank attack that caught the enemy off guard.
Infantry – Soldiers who fight on foot, typically with rifles, and form the main land-based military force. – The infantry advanced steadily across the battlefield, supported by artillery fire from the rear.
Formation – An arrangement or positioning of troops or equipment in a specific pattern for strategic purposes. – The Roman legion’s testudo formation provided excellent protection against incoming arrows.
Battalion – A large body of troops ready for battle, typically consisting of several companies. – The battalion was deployed to the front lines to reinforce the defense against the advancing enemy forces.
Skirmishers – Lightly armed troops deployed ahead of the main force to engage the enemy in preliminary combat. – The skirmishers moved swiftly through the forest, harassing the enemy’s flanks and gathering intelligence.
Morale – The confidence, enthusiasm, and discipline of a person or group at a particular time, especially in a military context. – The victory in the previous battle significantly boosted the morale of the troops, preparing them for the challenges ahead.
Firepower – The capacity of a military unit to deliver effective fire on a target, often measured by the number and caliber of weapons available. – The artillery’s superior firepower was crucial in breaking through the enemy’s fortified positions.
Cavalry – Soldiers who fought on horseback, historically used for reconnaissance, charge attacks, and flanking maneuvers. – The cavalry charged across the open field, aiming to disrupt the enemy’s supply lines.
Training – The process of preparing soldiers through exercises and instruction to improve their skills and effectiveness in combat. – Rigorous training ensured that the soldiers were well-prepared for the complexities of modern warfare.
Strategy – A plan of action designed to achieve a long-term or overall aim, especially in military operations. – The general’s strategy involved a series of coordinated attacks to weaken the enemy’s defenses before launching a full-scale assault.
