By the right of companies to the rear into column - question

[johnduffer]

Do you double when performing By the right of companies to the rear into column ? The snap response is yes, you always double when you right face, but, (if you’re not using CASEY’S) do you need to in this case ? SCOTT’S predates doubling and breaks three files for three ranks, two for two ranks. HARDEE’S, et al, break two files and mention two ranks. Their illustrations are the same as SCOTT’S. CASEY’S goes to the trouble to change the illustration, breaks three files and mentions four ranks. Is he modifying the command or the first one to catch an error ? And do you go literally by whichever manual you’re using ?

SCOTT ‘S
“ 856. At the second command, the battalion will face to the right; each captain will hasten to the right of his company, break three or two files (according as the formation may be in three or two ranks) to the rear; the first file will break the whole depth of the ranks; the second file less; the third, if three, will only advance the left shoulder; which being executed ……….”

HARDEE’S (GILHAM’S / US TACTICS)
“ 89. At the second command, the battalion will face to the right; each captain will hasten to the right of his company, and break two files to the rear; the first file will break the whole depth of the two ranks, the second file less; which being executed ……..”

CASEY’S
“ 111. At the second command, the battalion will face to the right; each captain will hasten to the right of his company, and break three files to the rear; the first file will break the whole depth of the four ranks, and face to the rear, the breasts of the men on a line with the right shoulders of the rear rank of the battalion; the second file half-way of the first, and the third file less, which being executed ……….”

[RJSamp]

when we used Scott's (2nd WVI impression at G135 for example) we didn't double...2 ranks face to the right and follow the leader....we used this for successive retreat 'bounds'.

this was for continuing the march, not forming a column of companies but rather for passing a battery\trees.

when we used Casey's we doubled into a column of 4's\marching by the right flank.....
and then front to form the column of companies\undouble. We work on this at literally every event.....and of course companies into line and then forming battalion battle line on the move.

Don't have my PIE handy.....

[billwatson2]

Doubling in Casey's is more efficient; it maintains the company front length. When you march undoubled the men don't stay 13 inches apart, they open up to keep from stepping on each other, and the result is a delay to dress when the halt is called, people straggling up. Done correctly, the doubled-up formation (fours) is the same length as the company front and when halted it takes about a second to call "front" and be ready for whatever comes next.

It helps when teaching this move to explain to the men that all the maneuver consists of, when all is said and done, is a right face followed by a by file right in which there's an extra prepatory move that allows each company to turn to the right within its own existing footprint in the formation. Without an explanation, it's a baffling piece of nonsense, people being shoved into position for no reason they understand.

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Back in my ossifer days, we had this very debate several times. My battalion tried it both ways, doubling and two ranks, and I was pleased with the results of staying in two ranks. I'm an old Scott's student as a Seminole/Mex War reenactor, so I'm biased, but I found less confusion and a quicker ability to return to facing the front in battleline if needed. By taking the right of companies to the rear into column and keeping them in two ranks, all you have to do to quickly return to the same front is call by the left flank, left wheel, march. I have no historical basis or documented account of this practice, but for the sake of our drills or implementation in a battle scenario, it worked quite well.