I have a few points that I would like to bring up if I may.
First off, in regards to your statement:
Post-Wagram: Lamarque did not give up any units other than the two battalions of 92e Ligne that returned to Broussier. Lamarque gained several as Seras's division was broken up and split among other divisions of the Army of Italy as below.
As I mentioned in my posting, according to Prince Eugene on the 10th of July, Lamarque detached six battalions and six pieces and positioned them on the enemy side of a bridge (this is called a tete de pont). While both Broussier and Lamarque were posted further north on the March.
According to your sources the 92e bis returned back to Broussier on the 10th of July –which I am not disputing. Whether these six battalions were assigned this mission for a day or more than a day, they were still detached on the 10th of July.
The French have written instructions on how to set up for a tete de pont and how to establish an encampment in the locality of a river. Therefore one gets a very good idea of what it must have looked like, and what sort of general orders must have been given to set up the encampment.
To justify colonel Penne’s observation you feel that it was possible for the last two battalions of the Colonne Vuide, to have been from the 92e from either Lamarque or Broussier divison, that they may were possibly “en bataille” (which also means display or deployed) while manoeuvring, and then to execute a compound evolution and ploy?
If we take just Broussier’s division, the leading battalion from the 84e would have been the regulating battalion; to validate your assumption, the 84e while manoevring would have had to have been en bataille as well, since all other battalions mirrored the action of the regulating battalion.
A great body of troops such as a Colonne Vuide, are considered un “manoeuvre de principles”, meaning its acts as one body, they do not just execute a simple or compound evolution without the regulating battalion.
Being prior military you understand that battle drills just cannot be invented on the spot. Could you please explain how in l’ordonnance this was possibly executed?
It is for that reason, years later when Lamarque was asked about Wagram, he stated that he received orders to form en "colonnes par bataillons deployes”, which obviously he did not execute, and as I have already mentioned in another posting, there is always cause and effect from using such vague terms.
As for "Broussiers journal" that is found in the Mémoires of Massena on page 415. It is more of a narrative of General Koch, and there is no indication that it belongs to Broussiers journal. That is why I was hoping you had Broussier’s divisional report of 7 July 1809.