FREE BOOKS

Author's List




PREV.   NEXT  
|<   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72  
73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>   >|  
accomplish the same defensive object as fifty thousand men without these artificial means of security. 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'Arcon 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 discarded, as being utterly incompatible with the principles of the military art. A writer, however, of some pretensions in this country, recommends its adoption for the defence of Baltimore and the shores of the Chesapeake. The same author would dispense entirely with our present system of fortifications on the sea-coast, and substitute in their place wooden Martello towers! This would be very much like building 120 gun ships at Pittsburg and Memphis, for the defence of the Ohio and the Mississippi rivers, and sending out duck-boats to meet the enemy on the Atlantic! In the second system, the works on the extreme frontier are to be placed about thirty or forty miles apart, and those of the second and third lines respectively thirty or forty miles in rear of the first and second lines, and opposite the intervals. In the third system, first recommended by Vauban and more recently by Rogniat, the works are to be arranged in the same ma
PREV.   NEXT  
|<   48   49   50   51   52   53   54   55   56   57   58   59   60   61   62   63   64   65   66   67   68   69   70   71   72  
73   74   75   76   77   78   79   80   81   82   83   84   85   86   87   88   89   90   91   92   93   94   95   96   97   >>   >|  



Top keywords:

system

 

proposed

 
defence
 

systems

 

frontier

 
considerable
 

rivers

 

military

 

advocated

 

country


recommended
 

Rogniat

 
arranging
 

Vauban

 

thirty

 

notice

 

France

 
utterly
 

extreme

 

principles


incompatible

 
attracted
 

discarded

 

opposite

 

distances

 
intervals
 

arranged

 
recently
 
covering
 

intrenched


Atlantic
 

Mississippi

 

substitute

 

sending

 

fortifications

 

wooden

 
Martello
 

Memphis

 

towers

 

Pittsburg


present

 

recommends

 

pretensions

 
writer
 
adoption
 

dispense

 

author

 

Baltimore

 

shores

 

Chesapeake