Hardee's Bayonet Drill

[nc69th]

I have been doing a little research on Hardee's 1855 Manuel Bayonet Drill and I have one question on Guard Against Cavalry. Has it ever been used before in battle in the ACW and if so does anybody no where I can get a defenite account of it being used etc etc etc.

[Tom Ezell]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Have you read the School of the Skirmisher, and paid attention to the instructions on the various means to Rally?

[sauguszouave]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Chadd,

I'm currently working on a project to compile every reference to the use of the bayonet in combat in the ACW. At the moment I'm plowing through the OR. Unfortunately for you I won't be home to look through my material until this weekend. If I get a chance then, I'll post the references I have. In the mean time I'd be interested in any references that others on this forum have.

One thing that I've noticed in period references is that they often don't make fine distinctions in commands and positions when describing combat. For example, the only difference between Charge Bayonet and Guard Against Cavalry in "Hardee's" is the position of the feet; the postion of the body, musket, and arms are identical. It is often difficult to tell from an account whether the men preparing to receive a cavalry attack adopted the text book positions or not. More often than not the term "Charge Bayonet" is used to cover any and all uses of the bayonet regardless of whether or not the men were in the position of Guard Against Infantry, Guard Against Cavalry, Charge Bayonet, or Port Arms with bayonets fixed.

Add to that the fact that standing up against a cavalry charge is one of the most terrifying things that an infantry man can be asked to do. While spreading the feet out according to the text book definition results in a much stronger, stable position, it might be hard for even the best-drilled men to remember that detail while the ground is shaking under the pounding of 1,000 thundering hooves.

Best Regards,

Paul Kenworthy

[ThehosGendar]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

From the March 18, 1865 Army and Navy Journal:

"A single infantry soldier, even if not particularly skillful in the use of the bayonet, can nevertheless make fight with it against any but the most accomplished trooper, if he remember to keep as much as possible on the left side of his adversary, and that a blow on the horse’s nose will make the animal so far his friend that it will see to the rider’s keeping at long distance ever after. A thrust of the bayonet in a horse’s breast is to be avoided, for the animal always presses forward upon it. A thrust below the tail will cause it to rear, and perhaps fall over backward. Should both his shot be gone and his bayonet be broken, the infantry soldier has still the resource of seizing his musket with both hands near the muzzle, and with the arms extended above the head, swinging it rapidly around so that the butt describes a circle about his body at the height of the knee. The circle thus formed will render it impossible for even a lancer to reach him. With a little practice the motion, by occasionally changing its direction, may be kept up for a long time, and the butt moved with such force that it will break a horse’s leg. If forced to it, the infantry soldier may curl himself up on his knees and elbows so as to give small chance to the sabre, at any vital part, and rise as the horse shoots past him to take a fair aim at the rider."

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

As a very general statement, sometimes what happened in the field and in actual practice differed from the drill manual. You need both the "official source" (manuals) and first-person accounts to know what "really" happened.

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

I'd love to see a first person account of it's useage.

Whenever I've seen it portrayed at a reenactment I think the bayonets are held at too high an angle, like the attempt is to stab the rider not the horse.

Prior to the CW the purpose of the drill was to train infantry to use their bayonets to dissuade the horse from crashing into and breaking up the formation. It wasn't a defense against the rider.

I don't see why that would have changed for the CW.

Your average horse's head starts at about 5 feet off the ground and basically you want the bright shiney pointy thing in the horse's face causing it to sheer off. I've seen people holding the point 7 feet in the air.

[markj]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

From the March 18, 1865 Army and Navy Journal:

"A single infantry soldier, even if not particularly skillful in the use of the bayonet, can nevertheless make fight with it against any but the most accomplished trooper, if he remember to keep as much as possible on the left side of his adversary, and that a blow on the horse’s nose will make the animal so far his friend that it will see to the rider’s keeping at long distance ever after. A thrust of the bayonet in a horse’s breast is to be avoided, for the animal always presses forward upon it. A thrust below the tail will cause it to rear, and perhaps fall over backward. Should both his shot be gone and his bayonet be broken, the infantry soldier has still the resource of seizing his musket with both hands near the muzzle, and with the arms extended above the head, swinging it rapidly around so that the butt describes a circle about his body at the height of the knee. The circle thus formed will render it impossible for even a lancer to reach him. With a little practice the motion, by occasionally changing its direction, may be kept up for a long time, and the butt moved with such force that it will break a horse’s leg. If forced to it, the infantry soldier may curl himself up on his knees and elbows so as to give small chance to the sabre, at any vital part, and rise as the horse shoots past him to take a fair aim at the rider."

Gee, did the editors finally give me credit for all my work in transcribing and footnoting the entire seven-part series from which the above extract is drawn?

Inquiring minds want to know,

Mark Jaeger

[markj]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

From the March 18, 1865 Army and Navy Journal:

"A single infantry soldier, even if not particularly skillful in the use of the bayonet, can nevertheless make fight with it against any but the most accomplished trooper, if he remember to keep as much as possible on the left side of his adversary, and that a blow on the horse’s nose will make the animal so far his friend that it will see to the rider’s keeping at long distance ever after. A thrust of the bayonet in a horse’s breast is to be avoided, for the animal always presses forward upon it. A thrust below the tail will cause it to rear, and perhaps fall over backward. Should both his shot be gone and his bayonet be broken, the infantry soldier has still the resource of seizing his musket with both hands near the muzzle, and with the arms extended above the head, swinging it rapidly around so that the butt describes a circle about his body at the height of the knee. The circle thus formed will render it impossible for even a lancer to reach him. With a little practice the motion, by occasionally changing its direction, may be kept up for a long time, and the butt moved with such force that it will break a horse’s leg. If forced to it, the infantry soldier may curl himself up on his knees and elbows so as to give small chance to the sabre, at any vital part, and rise as the horse shoots past him to take a fair aim at the rider."

Gee, did the editors of CWH finally give me appropriate credit for all my work in transcribing and footnoting the entire seven-part series from which the above extract is drawn?

Inquiring minds want to know,

Mark Jaeger

[markj]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

From the March 18, 1865 Army and Navy Journal:

"A single infantry soldier, even if not particularly skillful in the use of the bayonet, can nevertheless make fight with it against any but the most accomplished trooper, if he remember to keep as much as possible on the left side of his adversary, and that a blow on the horse’s nose will make the animal so far his friend that it will see to the rider’s keeping at long distance ever after. A thrust of the bayonet in a horse’s breast is to be avoided, for the animal always presses forward upon it. A thrust below the tail will cause it to rear, and perhaps fall over backward. Should both his shot be gone and his bayonet be broken, the infantry soldier has still the resource of seizing his musket with both hands near the muzzle, and with the arms extended above the head, swinging it rapidly around so that the butt describes a circle about his body at the height of the knee. The circle thus formed will render it impossible for even a lancer to reach him. With a little practice the motion, by occasionally changing its direction, may be kept up for a long time, and the butt moved with such force that it will break a horse’s leg. If forced to it, the infantry soldier may curl himself up on his knees and elbows so as to give small chance to the sabre, at any vital part, and rise as the horse shoots past him to take a fair aim at the rider."

Gee, did the editors of CWH finally give me appropriate credit for my transcribing and footnoting the entire seven-part series from which the above extract is drawn?

Inquiring minds want to know,

Mark Jaeger

[markj]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Chadd,

One thing that I've noticed in period references is that they often don't make fine distinctions in commands and positions when describing combat.

Yup. Viz: the following extract from the courts-martial proceedings of Lieutenant Colonel William C. Kise, 10th Indiana Volunteer Infantry, at Pittsburg Landing TN, April 1862 (NARA RG 135):

Corporal Solomon W. Stafford, Comp ‘C’ 10th Indiana Regt a witness for the defense, was duly sworn.

Question by accused. Were you in the battle of Mill Spring Kentucky [on January 19th, 1862]. If so in what capacity?

Answer. I was there, and a corporal in Comp. ‘C’ 10th Indiana Regt.

Question by accused. State whether the 10th Indiana regiment at any time during that battle charged bayonets upon the enemy?

Answer. Yes Sir – they did.

Question by accused. State whether in executing that charge you got into a fight with any of the enemy. If so what happened between you and him.

Answer. Yes Sir. I got in a little kind of a combat with them. When we were charging forward I was in the front rank and running forward at a trail arms. As I passed a tree I found a man behind it who was a Rebel with his bayonet sticking out some distance beyond the tree. I turned my musket over and knocked him down with the butt of the musket and finding that I had not killed him, I stuck my bayonet in him, he cried “for God’s sake, dont kill me.” I said “God damn you it is too late to talk now,” He would have killed me if I had not killed him. This rebel remained behind when the others run away.

Question by accused. How many, if any of the Rebels remained behind besides the one you bayonetted?

Answer. This was the only one I noticed as we passed that place. I saw a great many others, some fifty yards off. They were laying by the fence and firing through. I think our men killed them all. There may have been a few that put their guns down and surrendered.

Question by accused. When you say “our men” killed those of the rebels in the fence corners who do you mean by “our men.”

Answer. I mean by “our men” the men of the 10th Indiana regiment.

Question by Judge Advocate. Were the men that you say were killed by being bayonetted or shot?

Answer. By being shot – I did not see any other man bayonetted except the one I killed myself. There may have been others but I did not see them.

[END]

Yours, &c.,

Mark Jaeger

[nc69th]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Thanks for the information you guys have provided me.

[sauguszouave]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Regarding the height of the bayonet point in Guard Against Cavalry: it is common for poor fencers to carry the point too high. They do that because it moves the center of balance of the piece closer to the body which makes it easier to bear the weight. It is bad practice because it takes the point out of line making your parries and attacks slower and less accurate.

The correct height is at the level of the eyes. When you look at your opponent, you should see the point of your bayonet in line with your target. That means that when your opponent looks at you, it should appear that your bayonet point is directed right between his eyes. Shock weapons are as much about intimidation as anything else. In the case of guarding against cavalry, the height of the eyes of a 5' 8" soldier in a guard position is a little less than 5', or between 14 and 15 hands in cavalry speak. This is about saddle height, so in this case you are guarding about halfway between the rider and the mount.

The height is not necessarily about whether you plan to attack the horse or the rider. This is a guard position and you should be equally prepared to attack or parry from it. For example, it does you no good to successfully attack the horse if the rider splits your skull at the same time. A smart cavalry trooper will not attempt to ride down a lone infantry man standing his ground. A smart cavalry man will circle the infantry man in a clockwise direction. It is much more difficult for the infantry man to maintain his guard while volting and it keeps the nose and rear of the horse out of range.

The theory and practice of bayonet combat is not explained in the infantry tactics manuals. You have to read Gomard, Chapitre, and Chatin in French, or McClellan, Milton Cary, John C. Kelton, and Alfred Hutton in English. The most detailed material on fighting cavalry is in Chapitre, Kelton, and Hutton.

Regarding the use of the clubbed musket, see Prince Kraft zu Hohenlohe-Ingelfingen's "Letters on Infantry." (The prince was Chief of the Prussian Guards Artillery against Denmark in 1864, Austria in 1866, and France in 1870. He was one of the leading practitioner/theorists of the second half of the 19th century and anything he wrote is worth reading.) Clubbing the rifle is the normal reflex in the heat of close combat, but it has two problems. The first is that it doesn't work against a trained opponent. A trained fencer will make a stop thrust into your wind up. The thrust is much faster and more deadly than a blow. Note in Mark's quote how the blow with the butt didn't finish off the enemy soldier.

Secondly, and more importantly, it is easy to snap the butt off at the small of the stock, thereby disarming yourself. The Prussians studied this problem extensively and counted up the number of broken rifles in the area of close combats. Most of them had the butts snapped off at the wrist. Note in the quote from the Army and Navy Journal that the technique described is only to be used when the bayonet is broken and the soldier is out of ammunition.

In line, the principle is to present a solid hedge of spikes to the horses. A horse can not be trained to run against a wall of spikes. They will turn away regardless of what their riders do. It is actually dangerous to fire into cavalry when they are close because wounded horses can fall into the infantry line opening gaps in the line. The best time to fire at a cavalry man is as he is riding away. Kelton's drill for the man caught in the open is to side-step, parry the cut or thrust, volt to the rear, and shoot at the trooper.

Best Regards,

Paul Kenworthy

[Bob 125th NYSVI]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

Having fenced myself, I am aware of the tendency of poor fencers to keep the point too high. Due to my height I had to constantly remind myself to lower my point otherwise my opponent would get underneath my guard.

Generally I thought that the 'defense against cavalry' stance was group activity, thus the hedge of points would be effective in discouraging a horse (no 200 pound man is going to stop a 1000 pound horse/rider combination by himself).

I don't think (despite Hollywood) a foot soldier going mano-o-mano with a cavalryman is going to work out well for the foot soldier unless he is able to shoot.

Which is why cavalry's objective was to break up the infantry formation and the infantry's was to stay cohesive.

[nc69th]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

I agree, honestly I can't see a foot soldier go head to head with cavalry unless like in the Middle Ages you had the 18 foot Phaylnx then hell yeah I say go for it.

[sauguszouave]

Re: Hardee's Bayonet Drill

"I don't think (despite Hollywood) a foot soldier going mano-o-mano with a cavalryman is going to work out well for the foot soldier unless he is able to shoot."


19th-century authorities are unanimous in their opinion that the well-trained infantryman has the advantage of a single horseman. While the combined weight of a horse and rider far exceed that of an infantryman, that is irrelevant because the object is to bayonet the rider, not bench press him. It is simply not possible to train a horse to trample a man if the horse can see the bayonet. The horse will balk or veer to one side or the other regardless of what the rider does.

“A foot-soldier who has been engaged in or witnessed a fight with a horseman, is soon convinced of the superiority of his means, and cannot be scared by the impetuous charge of his adversary.”

(R. Milton Cary, Lt. Col., Prov. Army of Va., “Skirmishers’ Drill and Bayonet Exercise with Suggestions for the Soldier in Actual Conflict. Compiled and Translated for the Use of the Volunteers of the State of Virginia and the South.” Richmond, Va: West & Johnson, 1861.)

See the attached file for a scan of the three pages on fighting cavalry in Cary.

In the original French, it reads:

“Le fantassin qui a pris part ou qui assisté à un engagement avec un cavalier est bientôt convaincu de la supériorité de ses moyens, et ne se laisse nullement intimider par la charge impétueuse de son adversaire.”

(Le Capitaine Chatin, “Escrime a la Bayonnette.” Paris: Librairie Militaire de Blot, 1854. p. 29.)

I scanned a Confederate translation of Chatin just to show how ubiquitous this material was. The same manual was translated in the North without attributing a translator as “Zouave Drill Book.” (Philadelphia: King & Baird, 1861.)

Col. John C. Kelton wrote: “An infantry soldier, instructed in firing and fencing with the bayonet, has nothing to apprehend from a single horseman.”

(“A New Manual of the Bayonet, for the Army and Militia of the United States.” New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1862. p. 47.)

Col. Francis J. Lippitt wrote in his Rules for Individual Skirmishers: “Neither should a skirmisher have much to fear from a single horseman. [emphasis in original] With his bayonet fixed, he would usually be able to defend himself successfully against the trooper, whose saber is the shorter weapon of the two; more especially, if he will take care to keep on the trooper’s left, which is his exposed side.”

(“A Treatise on the Tactical Use of the Three Arms: Infantry, Artillery, and Cavalry.” New York: D. Van Nostrand, 1865. Reprint by Brandy Station Bookshelf, Harrah, OK, 1994. p. 57.)

Note that every single one of these works is talking about the single skirmisher against a single horseman. The position of Guard Against Cavalry is the position used in all the rallies in all the skirmish drills from Scott’s through Upton’s. These manuals are all on-line, so I won’t bother to quote from them.

Regards,

Paul Kenworthy