Linear tactics
As linear tactics (rare line tactics ) or battle line is typical of the 18th century battle refer to operations of the infantry was placed in elongated thin lines or rows.
Emergence
The forerunner of the linear tactics was the general heap tactic of the 13th to 17th centuries, in which the fighters were lined up in so-called quarter heaps . The change brought about by linear tactics was closely related to the changes in weapon technology towards the end of the 17th century. The flintlock rifle, as well as the use of paper cartridges, increased the effectiveness of the infantry rifles considerably. The introduction of the bayonet also made the pike superfluous. In the early 18th century, the pikemen were therefore completely replaced by the fusiliers . Since the accuracy and range of flintlock rifles without a rifled barrel was relatively low, it was important in the battle to use as many rifles as possible at the same time. For this reason, the formerly more deeply structured formations of the infantry (see meeting tactics ) were replaced by less deep, but broader combat orders. In addition, the formation of the entire infantry in long, connected lines served to prevent the desertion of soldiers pressed for service. To make desertion more difficult, the line was kept tight and unbroken: in close ranks, i.e. shoulder to shoulder. In order to keep the line closed in the event of a failure, the wingmen had the task of pushing inwards. In some cases this task was carried out by lieutenants : they had to keep the line closed.
The opposite of linear tactics is column tactics .
functionality
The infantry was initially, and later in lines to four generally to three members set up and was in close formation, a mass fire from. A second such formation followed shortly afterwards, the “Second Meeting”. Advancing in lockstep and in aligned lines, as well as fast loading and simultaneous firing on command, were achieved through constant exercise . Initially, it was common to fire limb-by-limb, that is, the first limb fired a volley and then kneeled to clear the path of fire for the second limb, and so on. This made it possible to compensate for the slow rate of fire of the muzzle loaders . The disadvantage of this method was that the smoke from the previous volley blocked the view. That is why one later went over to the so-called “general volley” of the first three members (the term later also referred to the simultaneous volley of an entire battalion). The fourth link could only serve as a reserve and was soon abolished. The side that could fire more volleys than the other in a given time now had the advantage. At the peloton fire , first all the odd pelotons, then the even pelotons, at the command of the peloton leader, quickly took three large steps forward and each fired a volley. To do this, the first limb fell to its knees, the second opened, and the third moved into the gaps on the right. In this way the battalion advanced about 10 to 12 meters per minute. The fire opened at a distance of about 200 meters from the enemy. The high losses as a result of the relatively high concentration of fire in a limited space ultimately almost inevitably led to the bayonet attack, as the soldiers saw it as a better chance of staying alive.
Advantages and disadvantages
The advantages of setting up in lines were that half of all rifles could be used at the same time and that there was no great depth in the event of enemy artillery fire. The weaknesses of the linear tactics consisted in their rigidity and their vulnerability on the flanks, which is why cavalry was usually used for wing cover.
Panning
In order to adapt to the changed conditions in the battle, it was sometimes necessary to move the entire line in a different direction. This was done by pivoting (which was only possible with well-trained troops.) This pivoting was the change of the front of a troop in line, with the inner wing forming the pivot around which the other wing (the outer) one Circle describes.
A distinction is made between pivoting on the spot with a fixed pivot point and pivoting in motion with a movable pivot point. The panning can be:
- a quarter turn (by 90 °)
- an eighth turn (45 °)
- a sixteenth of a turn (by about 22.5 °)
In general, there are swings at any angle when the direction of march changes.
Climax and end
Linear tactics reached its peak during the Seven Years' War (1756 to 1763). Here the Prussian King Friedrich II applied the so-called crooked order of battle , in which the opposing wing was embraced and struck with a reinforced attack wing. The Battle of Leuthen (1757), in which the Prussians defeated the Austrians with a power ratio of 29,000 to 66,000 men, is a prime example of the crooked order of battle . In the battles of Kolin (1757) and Kunersdorf (1759), on the other hand, the Prussians were defeated because the enemy recognized the deployment to the crooked order of battle and in time reinforced the threatened wing and in these cases had significantly more troops.
The French revolutionary armies used a more flexible tactic in which troops maneuvered in columns and attacks were carried out in both massed columns and lines. This mixture of linear and column tactics was also used by Napoleon. In the course of the Prussian reforms , it also became the standard in the Prussian army.
The rigid formations of linear and column tactics became disadvantageous due to technological changes in the 19th century. Rifled rifles with Minié projectiles and breech- loaders as well as improved artillery pieces increased the accuracy, range and rate of fire of the armies. Nevertheless, the linear and column formations often remained the tactical standard for the time being, for example in the Civil War and also in the Franco-German War. In Prussia, the rigid formations were not replaced until 1888 by looser swarms of riflemen.
See also
Web links
Individual evidence
- ↑ "tenir le lieu" literally means "hold the place". The lieutenant is the placeholder, the captain's deputy. "En premier lieu" means "primarily". So the connotation came up: The lieutenant holds the line together.
- ↑ James R. Arnold. 2004. A Reappraisal of Column Versus Line in the Peninsular War, Journal of Military History 68: 535-552.
- ↑ Martin Rink and Marcus von Salisch: On the change in German armed forces from the Prussian army reforms to the transformation of the Bundeswehr. In Karl-Heinz Lutz, Martin Rink and Marcus von Salisch (eds.). Reform-reorganization-transformation. On the change in the German armed forces from the Prussian army reforms to the transformation of the Bundeswehr. Munich: Oldenburg, pp. 1–28, here p. 16
- ↑ Paddy Griffith. 1987. Battle Tactics of the Civil War . Yale University Press, p. 152
- ^ Dierk Walter: Roon reform or military revolution? Process of change in the Prussian army before the Wars of Unification. In Karl-Heinz Lutz, Martin Rink and Marcus von Salisch (eds.). Reform-reorganization-transformation. On the change in the German armed forces from the Prussian army reforms to the transformation of the Bundeswehr. Munich: Oldenburg, pp. 181–198, here pp. 194–196.