When attempting to understand the concept of operations and how great bodies of troops manoeuvred, you cannot mix current military terminology with past military terminology.
You mention that Broussier referred to his division as being formed "en carre" or "en carre simple", and he is correct. Just as a colonne par division serree was also considered "en carre" with a simple evolution. Whilst MacDonald’s great body of troops was also called a Colonne d’attaque, which is correct as well.
May I suggest that you get a copy of the British Rules and Regulations of 1792, and a copy of the American Regulations of 1813 to start off with. As boring as you may find them, they are a great learning tool in understanding both the general principles, and why a body of troops or great body of troops manoeuvre as they did on the field of battle.
It’s like American small unit tactics, and having the Soldiers doing Battle Drills, or SOP Rehearsals, they are collective actions that are rapidly executed without applying a deliberate decision making process. Everyone has to be on the same sheet of music, you just cannot make it up as you go along. Look what happened to D'Erlon at Waterloo...
Take Cordon and Search, without being there, I know that the isolation element (inner and outer cordon) establishes blocking positions that effectively cordoned off the immediate area to prevent personnel and vehicles and/or departing the area during the search operation.
What about MOUT SOPs, I know which member of the team stacks on and their role, I also know what each member will be doing in the hallway or while entering/clearing a piece without being there. It is the same with the system of 1805. I know as an example that if I read of a great body of troops executing a passage of lines in 1809, they would be executing a passage of line from the Reglement du 1776 and not that of the Reglement de 1791.
Just as I know that prior to Macdonald giving instructions to assault the Austrians, that in both divisions of Broussier and Lamarque’s, that their second lines did not have their battalions en bataille, but they were ployed. Nor were the battalions formed in colonnes d'attaque.
Therefore it is not the frustration of not knowing the whole picture, but identifying who is correct in their portion of the observation. The 92e could not have been en bataille in the second line of the Colonne Vuide( the second line of a Colonne Vuide are the two flanking columns), while following the 84e that was ployed.
Therefore if the 9e was deployed with one battalion of the 84e, while two battalions of the 84e were ployed, along with 92e, this means the entire regiment had reunited, otherwise the math is wrong for the right column. Which also means that what Colonel Penne actual saw was the 9e deployed and not the 92e deployed.
Again pick up the British Rules and Regulations of 1792, then go on to read the Reglement de 1791, follow that up with general instructions of great body of troops. If you like I can email you a few manuals that will help you get started. I shall be more than happy to answer any questions you may have as well.