"Marching with Bayonets?" Topic

My box of Perry Civil War Infantry arrived with a few broken Bayonets on the marching troops. Did soldiers on both sides exclusively March with Bayonets attached? Can I have a couple soldiers within the ranks without Bayonets?

Any help is appreciated. If it helps the Union soldiers I'm putting together will be 20th maine troops.

Did soldiers on both sides exclusively march with bayonets attached?

I doubt it.

Can I have a couple soldiers within the ranks without Bayonets?

It is a simple matter to remove the bayonets if you don't want your figures to have them.

No. In fact, bayonets were rarely used at all. You certainly don't want to ram a charge home in a muzzle-loader if it has a fixed bayonet if you can help it. In the ACW, the order to fix bayonets was typically only given when melee combat was imminent.

With regards to marching, especially at right shoulder shift, a fixed bayonet makes the weapon a bit barrel heavy, which could cause it to droop, making it a danger to the man following. Bayonets were never fixed on the march.

They did make excellent candle holders tho, and spits for cooking food. With a bit of a bend on the end, they can be used to hold a coffee pot over a fire.

Cheers for the replies, I just assumed it was commonplace because all of the Perry marching troops have bayonet's attached.

It looks good marching through towns, where the people can see you.

Gamers like bayonets so sculptors put them on. In reality, for the ACW, you should probably clip them all off as they would only be fixed a small percentage of the time if at all.

But I like 'em and leave mine on. Go figure.

Gamers like bayonets so sculptors put them on.

Actualy, I think sculptors put them on so that you can remove them if you wish. It's a lot harder to ADD a bayonet to a figure that hasn't got one!

Just as a curiosity note the Russians in 1877 had permanently fixed bayonets. I think I have read of one more 19th century army that had such a policy but cannot remember.

They do look good on the models, I might clip a couple more off and have a mixed unit of Bayonets/non Bayonets

I'd choose all one, or all the other – unless you want to model an (extremely) ill-equipped unit. The order comes from above, and is not left to the preference of the rank-and-file.

Makes sense, I'll clip them all off.

extrabio 1947 wrote:

q>No. In fact, bayonets were rarely used at all. You certainly don't want to ram a charge home in a muzzle-loader if it has a fixed bayonet if you can help it. In the ACW, the order to fix bayonets was typically only given when melee combat was imminent.

With regards to marching, especially at right shoulder shift, a fixed bayonet makes the weapon a bit barrel heavy, which could cause it to droop, making it a danger to the man following. Bayonets were never fixed on the march.

They did make excellent candle holders tho, and spits for cooking food. With a bit of a bend on the end, they can be used to hold a coffee pot over a fire./q>

This is based upon a myth continued by lazy historians and researchers. Bayonets were used significantly during the war, and the loading procedure was designed to allow for easy loading with the bayonet fixed.

Cooking with it and using it fr a candlestick could cause discoloration, staining and potential loss of the metal's temperature when used as a spit, and were grounds for punishment if the soldier was caught.

As to marching with it fixed, yes it was done, but usually only when the regiment was leaving or entering camp, or passing through a town, etc.

There is a lot of stories out there, but a careful reading of period accounts, coupled with a review of the manuals used, would show that bayonets were often used, and often carried fixed while under arms, upon the march.

V/R

We have to agree to disagree on this, TK. My statements aren't based on historic myth, but letters, diaries and unit histories – primary sources written by the participants.

The most famous un-posed photo I know of troops marching (and through a town), is the one of Confederate infantry in Frederick, Maryland. The weapons are at right shoulder shift, and the bayonets are in their scabbards.

I don't know about marching, but I agree with TK on his other points about bayonets. There are many, many personal accounts and unit histories that describe extensive use of the bayonet. Even the old myth that opposing lines with fixed bayonets would rarely make contact (as one side would break) doesn't stand up to the written record.

In a bayonet charge the second rank is at right shoulder shift, the first rank is at charge bayonet, I think that's what the perrys were trying to envision

When ACW infantry fixed bayonets it was by command. Usually for a specific maneuver such as advancing in battle, but mostly to stack arms, guard mount, or drill.
On the march, bayonets would not have been fixed as a general rule. Infantry moving long distances on roads used "route step" This is a casual move in column of fours, in the manuals, if bayonets are fixed, then it is removed at this command to allow the soldiers to carry weapons in trail or right shoulder shift. BTW, the color Sgt. in Rout step would roll the flag and carry it loosely over the shoulder.
When in battle, bayonets are only fixed to charge bayonets. At this command, depending on what manual being used, Gillam's, Hardees, Scott's etc., the front rank lays the rifle level to the waist and lock plate slightly turned up. The rear rank places musket ether at Right shoulder shift or Porte arms. The charge is delivered at a walk with colors flanked by cpls placed 6 ft. to the front

Hack12 has it right. The bayonets were fixed for dress parade, guard mount and when ordered for a charge. The carry at the charge varied by manual.

To answer the question, it is probably best to clip off the bayonets for authenticity. That said, figures do look cool with those pig stickers attached.

As a strange side note, the Paraguayans typically had their bayonets fixed at all times because few of them were issued scabbards.

Having been on drill teams both in High School and in the service, a bayonet throws the balance off. The center of gravity is off.

I drilled with the 1903 Springfield in both HS and the service. In HS we did not attach bayonets, it was a very balanced weapon. Where as in the service we drilled with a bayonet attached. Which threw the balance off.

I never did find a good center of gravity with the bayonet attached. I also felt like the weapon was going to slide right off my shoulder. Doing fancy drill, it is a wonder we didn't kill anyone.

It is certainly possible to do drill with fixed bayonets.

YouTube link

Yup John the Greater, those are the other bayonet always on people after the Russians that I remembered.

Thanks for all of the replies, the discussion has been very interesting!

Well yes it is possible to drill with the bayonet attached. I didn't say it wasn't. I did it. The Marine Corps Drill Team does it and so does many, many others. It just takes a ton of practice everyday.

Clays Russians: I'm afraid that is incorrect. In a charge both the front and rear ranks are at charge bayonets. This issue crops up periodically in the reenactment community, but the documentation is undeniably in favor of both ranks having the bayonets lowered.

The question of what the second rank does when ordered to go to "Charge Bayonet" was dealt with by Dom Dal Bello in his 1998 article "Notes on Charge – BAYONET". It can be read at PDF link

Dal Bello set out that both the front and rear rank move forward at Port-Arms and only at the last moment was the front rank to go to a Charge Bayonet position. The rear rank remains at Port-Arms unless it needs to assist the front rank in a melee.

However, Mark Tackitt has posted a copy of a letter from a soldier in the 1st Florida Infantry that seems to suggest that the rear rank indeed would remain at Right Shoulder Shift. In part the letter writer stated: "We started in common time but didn't get far before he gave us the command 'Charge Bayonets, Double Quick, March' when the front rank came to a charge and the rear rank to 'right shoulder shift arms' we made the charge and yelled with as much spirit as if the Yanks had been there sure enough."

The entire letter and Tackitt's brief comments can be seen at: link

"Having been on drill teams both in High School and in the service, a bayonet throws the balance off. The center of gravity is off.
I drilled with the 1903 Springfield in both HS and the service. In HS we did not attach bayonets, it was a very balanced weapon. Where as in the service we drilled with a bayonet attached. Which threw the balance off.
I never did find a good center of gravity with the bayonet attached. I also felt like the weapon was going to slide
right off my shoulder. Doing fancy drill, it is a wonder we didn't kill anyone."

That is with a modern rifle. The balance or loading is not negatively affected with a Napoleonic/ Civil War era weapon. Your only issue might be snagging tree branches because of the added length. The 2 banded rifles actually have a slightly better shooting balance with the bayonet attached.

"With regards to marching, especially at right shoulder shift, a fixed bayonet makes the weapon a bit barrel heavy, which could cause it to droop, making it a danger to the man following. Bayonets were never fixed on the march."

This is only an issue if the man is improperly doing the maneuver. Most re-enactors are a bit lazy about how they do the right shoulder shift or other march carries. They are not doing it every day like the real guy, nor necessarily are in the same physical shape (being fat makes it hard to carry the weapon properly) nor getting yelled at as much. It seems many units and events just forgo the bayonet rather than risk the lazy/ill trained guy who does something dangerous.

as far as the actual purpose, the bayonet is really designed for intimidation. You don't need it on the long march, then why bother putting it on. However, if the enemy can see you from a distance, the extra metal glint lets the opposing force know you mean business and makes your force seem larger, physically and even numerically. It also has the effect of strengthening the resolve and morale of the soldier. The soldier may not have a loaded weapon, but he can protect himself in a pinch. A good officer will keep this in mind at all times.

However, if the enemy can see you from a distance, the extra metal glint lets the opposing force know you mean business

If the enemy can see you from a distance you have lost the element of surprise…

Ryan T. I'm familiar with Dom Del Ballo's opinion of the subject and I have great respect for the man. But in this case he's dead wrong. He bases his case on some obscure manual written for the militia while ignoring the fact that Winfield Scott's standard manual used by the regulars and most militias prior to the war clearly states (and shows with illustrations) that both ranks go to charge bayonets.

In addition, in all the commonly used manuals during the war in the few rare cases where the rear rank does something different than the front rank (such as during loading and firing) it is clearly spelled out. But there is not one word suggesting that the rear rank do something different during a charge.

Hello Scott,

You are correct. It has been many years since I first encountered this issue and I should have gone back to my paper notes instead of relying on a hazy memory and what I had in my computer. Thanks for setting me right.

Casey's and Hardee's manuals are pretty clear on the subject.

Hardee's, School of the Soldier paragraph 51:

"The sabre bayonet should only be fixed when required to be used, either for attack or defence; the exercises and manoeuvers will be executed without the bayonet."

Casey's School of the Soldier paragraph 58:

"The bayonet should only be fixed when required to be used, either for attack or defence; the exercises and manoeuvers will be executed without the bayonet."