Dear AH'ers,
In the battle of Friedland in the War of the Fourth Coalition, one of the definitive moments of the battle was a massive bombardment of the Russian center by French Artillery general Senartmont who pushed his cannons up and basically blew the center out of the Russian line with case/grapeshot, causing it to collapse.
My question is this, how did this happen? All the descriptions of this I've heard imply he advanced his guns up pretty far into the field to fire case shot at relatively close range, so they'd be quite vulnerable to cavalry attack, and then actually were attacked by cavalry, but fended it off. How did they do this? I was under the impression that due to the relative speed and loose formation of cavalry, they were excellent at cutting down unsupported artillery batteries, but I've seen Senartmont's batteries described as blasting the Russian cavalry offensive to bits. What happened here? Am I wrong in my description of the battle? Were Senarmont and his gunners just that good? Am I wrong about the relative effectiveness of cavalry charges on exposed artillery? Was this just luck? Please help, this always bothered me as this move of advancing a relatively unsupported mass of artillery always seemed insanely risky to me.
An important development in the early 18th century was the creation and effective standardization of the division as a tactical command unit. A division would have a couple of brigades of infantry with a regiment or two of cavalry and a small attachment of artillery. This would somewhat become enlarged as a corps by Napoleon in 1804 with the establishment of the corps system. Divisional artillery would still be attached to the division but also there would be corps level guns to support the corps as a whole. These would be six pound guns for the division and eight or twelve pound guns for the corps. The usage would vary on the commander and situation.
So first we will disect a few things about the tactics behind walking artillery up. First, I will state that I do not study battles for information as they are short events that provide little for a larger understanding of the era. However being versed on the tactical theory and "doctrine" of the time period is something that can apply here.
We must look at several things to understand Napoleonic artillery; the ease of movement, how it is protected by the army, and the focus on bravery of the troops and commanders.
First the movement. In the mid 18th century, France was failing to live up to the army of Louis XIV, One problem it had was its aging artillery. The Vallière System of artillery was large, heavy, expensive, and ornate; it was not a system for the quick firing lines of the mid 18th century. As a result, Gribeauval, a Frenchmen that was assigned to the Austrian army as an attaché, learned about contemporary casting techniques that would make the artillery lighter and more accurate. He introduced the Gribeauval system in 1763 as the Seven Years War was ending, but it wouldn't be until 1776 when he was able to convince Louis XVI to introduce the new system. This artillery would be the guns used by Napoleon and France until the 1820s. As a result of the lighter gun, artillery would be able to be physically moved on the battlefield, allowing artillery to move with infantry. You can see this several times in the Revolutionary and Napoleonic Eras but it is most apparent at the Battle of Valmey where General Kellerman moved his artillery to take advantage of a hill that allowed better shots against the Prussians.
Next is the position of artillery in respect to troops and how it can be defended from cavalry. As this is being deployed with the main infantry, it would be protected by the infantry bear it. Just as at Waterloo, it would be very easy to have artillery at the front as long as infantry is near to allow artillery crews from a cavalry charge.
Finally, why this would be effective. The most important aspect of Napoleons army is its skill and bravery. Bravery was the quickest way to promotion, it was required for membership in the Imperial Guard and effectively required for even being mentioned for promotion. Such an action as moving artillery up for canister shot is exactly what Napoleon wanted in his army, brave men not just willing but eager to put their life on the line for just a touch of glory. As a result, every battle would have massive casualties in the senior ranks of Brigadier general when compared to Lieutenants and Corps commanders.
Is it risky, yes. Is it foolish, perhaps. This is the Napoleonic Commander, brave and skilled, all for glory.