Elements of Military Art and Science - Or, Course Of Instruction In Strategy, Fortification, Tactics Of Battles, &C.; Embracing The Duties Of Staff, Infantry, Cavalry, Artillery, And Engineers; Adapted To The Use Of Volunteers And Militia; Third Edition; by Henry Wager Halleck
page 69 of 499 (13%)
page 69 of 499 (13%)
![]() | ![]() |
|
But let us enter a little more into the details of frontier defences, and examine the character of the several systems which have been successively proposed or adopted. Frontiers are divided into four distinct classes, according as the state may be open on one or more sides, or bounded by mountains, large rivers and lakes, or by the sea. An open frontier is the most difficult of defence; and while there exists a perfect uniformity among military men upon the vast importance of fortifying such a frontier, there is an equal diversity of opinion respecting the best manner of arranging these works. We shall here mention three general systems of arranging forts for the defence of an open country, each of which has been advocated at different times, and afterwards received various modifications and additions. These three systems comprise the main features of all others worthy of much consideration. They are:-- 1st. The system of continuous lines, proposed by Montalembert. 2d. A system of three lines of detached works, strongly recommended by D'Arçon and others. 3d. A system proposed by Vauban, and advocated by Rogniat, consisting of lines of very strong works, placed at considerable distances from each other and covering large _intrenched camps_. The first of these systems was proposed in 1790, and for a time attracted considerable notice in France, but has long since been |
|