How did infantry warfare in the late 17th century in Europe exactly play out? Think of the Nine Years War (1688 to 1697), the Northern War of 1655–1660 or the Austro-Turkish War of 1663–1664. I know that it is still nominally considered to be pike & shot warfare but I've also read that the number of pikemen decreased significantly in the late 17th century. So how did assaults work when the musketeers had no bayonet and there were only a few pikemen around? As far as I've read plug bayonets became common only in the late 1660s and socket bayonets began to arise in the late 1680s. So did the musketeers just use their swords or their muskets as clubs? And how did they defend themselves from cavalry when there were fewer pikemen around?
Bump
One thing you will see a lot of in illustrations of musketeer of the period are bandoliers of small wooden bottles across the body - the twelve apostles - each with a ball and a measured charge of powder for the matchlock.
>>18391839That's not at all related to what I've asked.
>>18391864> And how did they defend themselves
>>18391891I'm pretty sure you can read more than the six first words of the sentence I've wrote. Regardless, the powder flasks aren't defensive arms and they didn't hold the ball - just the charge.
They just started fielding more guys with guns/swords and less guys with pikes. The guns did most of the killing anyways so the likes really only existed to defend against horses.
>>18392003Well since infantry squares, at least those of the later 18th century, primarily relied on their firepower to thwart cavalry assaults it seems very plausible. But the socket bayonet at least made a musket into a bad spear and probably more important gave the musketeer the impression that he had a bladed weapon against cavalry. I can't imagine that infantry squares like at Waterloo would have worked without socket bayonets.
muskets can be used as clubs alongside rapiers, sabers and cavarlymind you, most of the casualties happened during a routso what happened most of the times, regiments crubled under artillery fire, musket fire or during a chargeprolonged melee was not usualmost of the training focused on marching, firing in files but not to become the 145 epic martial artist musketeers
>>18392284I know all of that. But classical pike and shot formations and later 18th century line infantry had dedicated defensive formations against cavalry. The latter part of the 17th century just seems to be in this weird in between spot in that regard.
>>18392175Well disciplined infantry lines held off cavalry assaults at Munden and Blenheim.
