How much bayonet training did Civil War soldiers get?

major bill

Brev. Brig. Gen'l
Forum Host
Joined
Aug 25, 2012
It was said that the bayonet was still considered an important weapon during the the Civil War. If so, it would seem like both the Union Army and the Confederate Army would have trained their soldiers in bayonet drill.

So in your opinion were Civil War soldiers properly trained in the use of the bayonet?
 
George B. McClellan wrote the most widely used manual for bayonet training in 1862:
1550686687307.png
 
It seems that lack of training wouldn't be all that much of a factor. It's pretty clear that one uses a bayonet by poking it. (Consider ole' Capt. Brown, who had figured out that if he enlisted untrained escaped slaves in his uprising he'd supply them with a blade on the end of a six-foot pole, essentially a bayonet without the gun).

Bottom line, isn't attitude the primary requirement needed to be effective with a bayonet?
 
Last edited:
McClelland wrote the section in the manual of arms for the bayonet drill. I feel comfortable extrapolating that (at least) the AoP performed those "exercises" regularly while he was the general calling the shots.
 
I recall that the 5th New York "Duryee Zouaves" was particularly well trained in bayonet drill. Some regiments probably received more training than others.

The bayonet was rarely used in combat, however; usually one side broke and ran or surrendered en masse before the two lines met hand-to-hand for long, if at all. Regardless of how well the men were trained in their use, I think the psychological impact of seeing a wall of glistening bayonets in front of you would be the main factor in their effectiveness.... But then I guess the argument could be made that if the men were better trained maybe they would be more willing to engage in melee combat before breaking.
 
Most Zouave units seemed to be well versed and drilled in some sort of bayonet drill just like their Old World counterparts. In fact, the 8th Missouri (The American Zouaves) took pride in their bayonet abilities, and would perform bayonet drill during reviews.
 
It should also be noted that there were actually special “fencing bayonets” available, which were old bayonets cut down and fitted with replaceable blade simulators made of baleen. I think they saw use at military academies like VMI & West Point with Cadets... I kinda wish that someone made reproductions of these training bayonets as I think it would be a interesting skill to train people in. Bayonet drill is complex and owes a lot to both spear and thrusting sword based martial systems and being able to do fencing demonstrations for the public’s Benitez and sport would be interesting in my opinion.
 
It seems that lack of training wouldn't be all that much of a factor. It's pretty clear that one uses a bayonet by poking it. (Consider ole' Capt. Brown, who had figured out that if he enlisted untrained escaped slaves in his uprising he'd supply them with a blade on the end of a six-foot pole, essentially a bayonet without the gun).

Bottom line, isn't attitude the primary requirement needed to be effective with a bayonet?
The primary requirement to being effective with the bayonet is unit cohesion, and the unit using the bayonet to be properly trained and disciplined.

You may be very frightening with your bayonet, But if you don't know how to use it beyond just poking it will show, and your opprnent will pick up on it and take advantage of it.
 
The primary requirement to being effective with the bayonet is unit cohesion, and the unit using the bayonet to be properly trained and disciplined. ...You may be very frightening with your bayonet, But if you don't know how to use it beyond just poking it will show, and your opprnent will pick up on it and take advantage of it.

That's true for a bayonet on a long gun, thanks for putting things back in perspective.

I was attempting to bring up use of a John Brown pike in particular, which on second thought is not "a bayonet without the gun." I was too flip about that and was going a bit off-topic.*




- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
* A pike is more dangerous than a bayonet in one-on-one range. With a pike you lose the issue of the overhung heavy weight of the gun attached to the bayonet. You are more quickly able to stab a cavalryman or his horse as they pass. You can spear an infantryman before they can reload their musket. A bayonet on a long gun isn't balanced enough to use as a spear. To John Brown at least, this wasn't Napoleanic tactic, but a knife fight on a pole. And Brown may have considered spears (pikes) a legacy weapon of Africans to boot. Simple rage and a pike would be effective enough until the issuing and training of firearms could take place. After all even today, with the element of surprise, a lone pikeman with attitude is plenty dangerous.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top