"March to contact"

[Jon Wood]

My re-enactment group is working on an "Hours of Service" document to schedule and post for our events. I was just wondering if "March to Contact" is an appropriate term to announce a Sham Fight skirmish to entertain the Public. It was proposed by an older cavalryman with some experience. I never heard it before. Is there a more appropriate term? Thanks.

[J. Donaldson]

Re: "March to contact"

I have seen the term "brigade maneuvers" used at a mainstream battalion event I frequent.

[Doughboy]

Re: "March to contact"

So you want to make up a term for something that didn't exist in the period? Am I reading that right?

[Jon Wood]

Re: "March to contact"

Doughboy. That is exactly what I am trying to avoid. I have researched the term and cannot find it myself. I need ammo to change this crusty 70 year old army veteran and veteran re-enactor's mind. Personally I think it is wrong, but politics rears it's ugly head. Any suggestions? Thanks.
Jon Wood

[Doughboy]

Re: "March to contact"

Ha! None.. If it didn't happen then whatever is made up has as much value as anything else.

[Jon Wood]

Re: "March to contact"

Doughboy. Thanks. I found some references for "march to contact". It appears to be a potentially dangerous tactic leading up to a skirmish or engagement, but is not a "skirmish" per se. Since this gentleman is also a friend I will try diplomacy.
Cheers,
Jon Wood

[erik]

Re: "March to contact"

By quick reference to Captain Grafton's "Camp and March" 1854 and Francis J. Lippitt Special Operations of War" 1868 and Butterfield's "Camp and Outpost Duty" 1862, I can find no reference to March to contact or Advance to contact or even meeting engagement.
All of these resources stress Advance guard instructions to prevent surprises or ambuscades.
Perhaps that is more the language of the times.
Chapter and verse upon request and I have not even gone into Casey's yet.

Erik Simundson

[Jon Wood]

Re: "March to contact"

Erik. Your input is awesome. Much obliged! It appears the term is a modern one used to describe old tactics. I am wondering if Casey's has it, but I doubt it. Cheers!
Jon Wood

[erik]

Re: "March to contact"

After perusing Casey's, I find no reference to that term.
It may have been spoken of but did not enter the professional lexicon during the war or in the immediate post war by the references. I also checked the British manuals and did not find a reference.
I understand the reference but cannot find a period equivalent.
Iwish that I could provide a more seamless terminology. I cannot.

Erik Simundson

[Jon Wood]

Re: "March to contact"

Erik,you have done more than enough. Thanks for confirming my similar efforts. My friend conceded that he was not sure if it was used, but that it "must have been used at least once."
I have entered my .02 and hope for the best solution.
Again. much obliged.

Jon Wood

[IowaYank]

Re: "March to contact"

Sounds very modern military. In the Corps we use "Movement to Contact" for how we make and stay in contact with the enemy.

[10TnVI]

Re: "March to contact"

march to contact not an actual period or even modern term for a specific action-as the last poster referenced, the modern phrasing of movement to contact means the same thing. it is merely a term used by writers on strategy and tactics to reference the act of moving to engage an opposing force. What you are planning is nowadays called a tactical exercise or demonstration. Surprising enough, I have seen period references to practice during the war. When I can access my notes later I'll provide a citation from a period source essentially describing one taking place during the war involving his whole division.

PS-I would suggest a perusal of Mahan's 'Outpost' for a discussion of methods used in period practice for moving to contact.

[erik]

Re: "March to contact"

I looked through Mahon's "Outpost" for a reference to a movement, march or advance to contact and found only references to Advances, to the front or flank with admonishments to prepare for surprises.
A reference to Jomini "The Art of War", which most graduates and students of Military affairs relied upon, gives limited instructions for suddenly meeting the enemy other than the previous stated references. The central theme and terminology seems to have been preparing for "Surprises".
I believe that March, Advance to contact or Meeting Engagement are post ACW or modern terms and should be modified to suggest an advance or prevention of surprises.
I have yet to reference Clauswitz.
In keeping with the love of French authors, I have scanned "The Military Maxims of Napoleon" and found the same terminology of Surprises.

Erik Simundson

[faabala]

Re: "March to contact"

I'd just add that period units often held "Sham Battles" for the public or visiting dignitaries.

[Jon Wood]

Re: "March to contact"

David, that is what I proposed. They weren't convinced and wanted to go with the made-up term for some reason. I think the Public would go for a "Sham Battle" over a "March to Contact". I am still working on diplomacy. Cheers !
Jon Wood