Is this possible?

[NthBelisarius]

An idea I had - attaching pikes to the side of arquebus' so that arquebusiers could also be pikemen. Would this be remotely possible and more importantly would it be effective? I imagine it would be tricky to switch in battle as well.

Actually, were pike charges more effective than bayonets?

 

[Lycaon pictus]

I think a pike would be a little too heavy for that. You'd need to detach it if you wanted to aim the rifle, and then you'd need to hang on to the pike and fire the arquebus at the same time.

 

[NthBelisarius]

I suppose I didn't describe what I was thinking of well enough . Basically, I was thinking that someone invents volley fire with guns and combines it with this. The army would do the volley fire for a while but at a certain point the troops moving to the back to reload would instead attach the pike and then when the last rank is ready they would all charge. A well trained and drilled army could do this while marching forward. Would that work?

 

[Captain Jack]

I suppose I didn't describe what I was thinking of well enough . Basically, I was thinking that someone invents volley fire with guns and combines it with this. The army would do the volley fire for a while but at a certain point the troops moving to the back to reload would instead attach the pike and then when the last rank is ready they would all charge. A well trained and drilled army could do this while marching forward. Would that work?

I don't think you could attach a pike to an arquebus a be left with a useful weapon. Additionally with this method you give up all of your arquebus when you need to use the pikes, for say hand to hand combat when a volley into the enemy right before contact could be decisive. It seems like a formation of troops that had to switch between pikes ad arquebus would be less flexible than one made of specialized forces. Finally, the fact that OTL no one tried this tells us that it wouldn't work with the technology of the time.

 

[Elfwine]

I suppose I didn't describe what I was thinking of well enough . Basically, I was thinking that someone invents volley fire with guns and combines it with this. The army would do the volley fire for a while but at a certain point the troops moving to the back to reload would instead attach the pike and then when the last rank is ready they would all charge. A well trained and drilled army could do this while marching forward. Would that work?

That really doesn't sound all that effective. Unwieldy is the word coming to mind - especially doing it while moving.

Not to mention that pikes by and large make terrible weapons to charge with.

 

[NthBelisarius]

Ok then . I suppose it would work with bayonets though?

 

[Elfwine]

Ok then . I suppose it would work with bayonets though?

I think so. Might take some intense drilling to do it on the move (any individual doing it is one thing, but we're talking a formation having to perform it smoothly), but having those rotated to the rear fix bayonets even as those currently in the front rank fire? I think it would work.

 

[Brady Kj]

Wouldn't it be more efficient to have a group of pikemen in the rear and have the arquebusiers run behind them when they want to reload? Pikes are heavy.

 

[Captain Jack]

Wouldn't it be more efficient to have a group of pikemen in the rear and have the arquebusiers run behind them when they want to reload? Pikes are heavy.

OTL people certainly thought so. Hence the arrangement of forces in the classic tercio.

Ok then . I suppose it would work with bayonets though?

Don't see why not. Really it's just having the soldiers fix bayonets gradually instead of all at once. Also the bayonet is much more of a close combat weapon than the pike. Pikes were mostly used to defend against enemy cavalry. Men at arms were equipped with swords and halberds for hand to hand combat and IIRC the pikemen would drop their pikes and use short swords for a charge.

 

[Jurgen Wullenwever]

That really doesn't sound all that effective. Unwieldy is the word coming to mind - especially doing it while moving.

Not to mention that pikes by and large make terrible weapons to charge with.

The pike is primarily an offensive weapon, not a defensive one, and it was used very successfully for attacking enemies, up until the early 1700s.

 

[Elfwine]

The pike is primarily an offensive weapon, not a defensive one, and it was used very successfully for attacking enemies, up until the early 1700s.

This is the first time I've heard anyone describe the pike as "primarily an offensive weapon".

 

[Hrvatskiwi]

The pike is a primarily defensive weapon, but I've heard that in certain cases(i.e. the Swiss pikemen), pikes have been used offensively with a high degree of success.

 

[NthBelisarius]

The pike can be used for both defensive and offensive manoeuvres, but it was generally only useful defensively against enemy cavalry when the enemy obligingly charged straight onto the damn things - chivalry at its finest . The Swiss and the Landsknechts used it mainly offensively - well disciplined and trained pike charges could roll right over enemy infantry.

The main difficulty with cavalry was that the enemy cavalry frequently out-ranged the pikemen and so wouldn't attack the pikes - and pike squares had serious problems turning. Unless there were friendly cavalry protecting their flanks they tended to get hit from the side. They could be used defensively but not on their own, and they were much more useful during the period of their dominance attacking and rolling over the enemy.

Also, don't mistake me for some weapons expert , I have access to Wikipedia and I'm not afraid to use it .

 

[Elfwine]

The Swiss and landknechts were good infantry, that has more to do with their successes versus other infantry than their pikes.

And the issue with the flanks is why I think the pike on its own is a terrible weapon - the terico or pike and shot are much, much better than "pikemen, more pikemen, and yet more pikemen" by a mile - offensively or defensively.