DISTRIBUTION:
| 2035/6025/6200/6300/6500/6800/7215/ | (2) |
| 7506/7525-01 | (2) |
| 7255/7352/7508/7600 (less 7636)/7857 | (3) |
| 2010/2088/3510/4000 (less 4125)/5000 | (5) |
| (less 5537-09 and 5612)/6600 | (5) |
| 7373/7800-03,-04,-05/8145 | (5) |
| 1025/3000/3520/3530/6900/6903/6905/ | (10) |
| 6910/6965/7000-48 | (10) |
| 7530 (less 7539)/7800-14,-15/7950/ | (10) |
| 7970/8506/8511-02 | (10) |
| 2020/2060/3540/7380/7539 | (15) |
| 2030/3550/4125/5612/7636/7800-01, | (20) |
| -02,-06,-09 | (20) |
| 2100 | (25) |
| 7230-01 | (30) |
| 7385/7391/7800-11 | (50) |
| 3700 | (75) |
| 7800-12,-13 | (100) |
| 5537-09 | (150) |
| 7315 | (200) |
| 7230-04 | (4200) |
| 7000-02 | (50) |
MARINE BAYONET TRAINING
TABLE OF CONTENTS
| SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION | ||
| Paragraph | Page | |
| General | 101 | [1] |
| Principles of Bayonet Fighting | 102 | [10] |
SECTION 2: POSITION AND MOVEMENTS | ||
General | 201 | [13] |
| The Guard Position | 202 | [14] |
| Change of Direction | 203 | [18] |
| Foot Movements | 204 | [18] |
SECTION 3: INDIVIDUAL ATTACK | ||
General | 301 | [23] |
| The Slash | 302 | [23] |
| The Vertical Butt Stroke | 303 | [27] |
| The Smash | 304 | [31] |
| The Horizontal Butt Stroke | 305 | [34] |
| The Jab | 306 | [38] |
SECTION 4: INDIVIDUAL DEFENSE | ||
General | 401 | [43] |
| Parry Right | 402 | [43] |
| Parry Left | 403 | [44] |
| Block Against Slash | 404 | [46] |
| Block Against Vertical Butt Stroke | 405 | [48] |
SECTION 5: COMBINATION MOVEMENTS | ||
General | 501 | [51] |
| List of Movements | 502 | [52] |
SECTION 6: GROUP ATTACK AND DEFENSE | ||
General | 601 | [53] |
| Group Attack | 602 | [53] |
| Group Defense | 603 | [54] |
SECTION 7: TRAINING | ||
General | 701 | [59] |
| Demonstration and Application of the Basic Fundamentals | 702 | [60] |
| The Assault Course | 703 | [62] |
| The Pugil Stick | 704 | [73] |
INDEX | [83] |
SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION
101. GENERAL
a. Evolution of the Bayonet.—The bayonet is the infantry weapon which has changed the least during the development and refinement of weapons of war during the last three hundred years. There are several suggested origins of the bayonet. Some sources suggest that it derives from the Baioniers, crossbowmen of the middle ages, who carried a large knife or dagger to supplement their crossbows. Other sources credit the smugglers of Basque with using a bayonet-type weapon as a last ditch defense. Most English literature sources give the credit to Seigneur Marecal de Puysegur who, in 1647, at Ypres, France, ordered his troops to insert their daggers into the muzzles of their muskets after firing. De Puysegur and his unit were from Bayonne, France, a town known for dagger manufacture, hence the term bayonet.
(1) Early infantry commanders employed a warrior known as a pikeman, armed with a knife attached to the end of a quarterstaff, to defend the musketeers from an enemy charge while the musket was reloaded. Reloading was a time consuming operation and the musketeer was vulnerable during the time his weapon was empty. The pikeman stationed himself in front of the musketeer and warded off any enemy assault with his pike until the musketeer was again ready to fire. De Puysegur’s development thus enabled the musketeer to assume both functions of the “medieval fire team.” This so called plug bayonet was used for a period of forty to fifty years. It consisted of a long dagger with a tapered shaft which was inserted into the muzzle of the musket. The taper was necessary since muzzle diameters were not standardized. The plug bayonet fitted snugly into the muzzle of the musket and was difficult to remove. This was necessary in order to prevent it being withdrawn by the enemy. The musket could not be fired with the bayonet inserted, a significant disadvantage. The plug bayonet lost favor when it contributed to the defeat of the English at the hands of the Scots at Killiecrankie, Scotland, in 1689. The English were ordered to fix bayonets after firing a volley at the Scots. The British commander then discovered that his troops were further from the Scots than he had originally thought. He ordered bayonets detached and muskets reloaded. Before loading could be accomplished the Scots closed with the English and thoroughly routed them. The English commander, Hugh MacKay, having noted the disadvantages of the plug bayonet, developed a modification which came to be known as the ring bayonet. The ring bayonet was similar to the plug bayonet, but the tapered shaft was inserted between two rings fastened to the muzzle, allowing the musket to be fired with the bayonet attached. There is some evidence that a similar device was being used in France ten years prior to the engagement at Killiecrankie, indicating that the ring bayonet was not an English invention.
(2) The ring bayonet still left much to be desired. The lack of standardization made a secure fit difficult, and the rings had a tendency to stretch out of shape with use, rendering the bayonet useless. This led to the next development of a new bayonet, known as the socket bayonet. The socket bayonet was introduced in the early 1690’s. The lower part of the bayonet was shaped like an elbow, leaving the blade well out of the line of fire and seating the bayonet firmly on the barrel. Again, lack of standardization made it impossible to produce a single model which would fit even a small number of the weapons of one unit. Also, a sudden tug by an enemy would dislodge the bayonet from the barrel. These difficulties led to further advancements in bayonet design, in an attempt to find a rapidly attachable bayonet which could be held securely to the barrel. One development made the bayonet part of the musket itself. This was accomplished by splitting the socket sleeve of the ring lengthwise permitting a wider opening which could be hammered closed to obtain a snug fit. Experiments with slots, rings, catches, clasps, springs, and other assorted devices were made in an attempt to develop a more satisfactory bayonet.