79

77

the flank will bring nine ships' fire upon them; but, inasmuch as so long a line will be exposed to be broken through, if the enemy wheels, either by successive divisions or all ships together, a better arrangement to AB would be a double column; at any rate at the head. [diagram] Supposing CD to have changed from [fron] as in the figure, AB being in two columns is more manageable. His six leading ships readily meet the front CD, C'D' and the new flank (old front) DD'D" is met both in front and in flank by the three rear ships of AB.

The question naturally arises here, though it will not here be discussed, whether three lines deep have such an advantage over two lines as to justify the narrowing of the front.

The general truth may here be pointed out that, as you narrow your front, you lengthen and expose your flanks, while strengthening your centre.

My impression seems to have been, and now is, that if an enemy approach to attack in a single or double column, concentration should take place upon the head which being narrow is weaker, while the flanks being long are stronger; but:

If the enemy approach in treble column, or column of divisions, it will be better to pass his flank in single or double column because in such formation the head is stronger and the flank weaker, therefore concentration should be upon the latter.

Without claiming to have discussed all, or even the greater