Rich Knapton: "This is part of an article that I did for The Reiter (the publication of the US Pike and Shot Federation and The Arquebusier the publication of the UK Pike and Shot Society). Pike Fighting So, how was the pike used? (In this discussion I will concentrate on its role as an infantry to infantry weapon) To begin with, let'sl look at an account of a battle mentioned in my last article: Ceresole. Monluc and his arquebusiers had just beaten back the Spanish shot and uncovered the Imperial Landsknechts. He told his arquebusiers to fall back and let the pikes fight. He then gathered his pike and took his place toward the front of the French pikes. Just prior to the attack he reminded his pikemen how to take on the Landsknechts. "Gentlemen, it may be there are not many here who have ever been in a battle before, and therefore let me tell you that if we take our pikes by the hinder end and fight at the length of the pike, we shall be defeated; for the Germans are more dexterous at this kind of fight than we are. But you must take your pikes by the middle as the Swiss do and run headlong to forces and penetrate into the midst of them, and you shall see how confounded they will be." In his address to his men, Monluc points out two different styles of pike fighting: one used by the Landsknechts and one used by the Swiss. The Swiss fought holding the middle of pike and forcing themselves into their opponent's formation. The Landsknechts fought holding the pike at the end and using it in a dexterous manner. Sir John Smythe (towards the end of the century) also recognized two basic approaches to pike fighting. He describes them in terms of close order fighting (Swiss?) and open order fighting (Landsknecht?). Open order fighting seems to follow the system where the front ranks stand away and "thrusts and foins" [lunges]. "[Some] men believed that only the first rank of a squadron of pikemen should fight with their adversaries, the remaining ranks waiting until the first had ought their bellies full, or until they can fight no longer." When the men in the front ranks fell, men in the rear ranks stepped forward to fill the void. Smythe didn't think much of this manner of fighting. In order to perform this type of pike fighting, the ranks and files had to be spread apart enough to allow the thrust and foins. Smythe thought this weakened the front of the unit. What he proposed was that units close files as they approached the enemy with the men in the first four ranks presenting their weapons over the shoulder of the men in front all pushing as a unit. The pikes to their rear would be held upright. In fact, Smythe advocated replacing these rear rank pikes with halberds. "all those four ranks marching or moving forward together pace with pace and step with step, carrying their pikes firmly with ... points full in their enemies' faces," would "altogether give a puissant thrust ... " According to Garrard, it was possible for the soldiers in the rear ranks to keep hard-pressed soldiers in the front rank from falling to the ground. Smythe felt the more open order method, needed to thrust and foin, would subsequently be run over. It would seem that what he described was the method used also by the Scots. William Patten discribed the Scottish pike thusly: "They cling and thrust so near in the fore rank shoulder to shoulder, with their pikes in both hands straight before them and their followers in that order so hard at their backs, laying their pikes over their foregoers' shoulders, that if they do assail undivided no force can with stand them." Patten may also be describing the Swiss method. After all, the Swiss taught the French and the French taught the Scots. Now let's go back to Monluc's statement about the manner of Landsknecht pike fighting. He said that: "Gentlemen, it may be there are not many here who have ever been in a battle before, and therefore let me tell you that if we take our pikes by the hinder end and fight at the length of the pike, we shall be defeated; for the Germans are more dexterous at this kind of fight than we are." What did Monluc mean by the word dexterous? We are given a clue in that he uses the word in juxtaposition to the Swiss method. As we've seen, the Swiss forced themselves in to the their opponents formation. Holding the pike in the middle allows them to thrust into small areas such as the middle of the opponent's formation. After piercing the formation, the pike, it would seem, (since it was held in the middle) becomes a short-handle weapon for close order fighting. This makes sense since the earlier Swiss method, in the 15th century, was to use the pike to pierce enemies units then finish them off with the shorter handled halberd. This was the power use of the pike. Monluc is clear that this was not the way Landskneckts fought. They held the pike at the end thus making it difficult to come to close quarters like the Swiss. Holding the pike in this manner was better used to hold off an opponent and injure your opponent through the use of 'dexterity' rather than power. This method seems to be much more in line with the "thrusting and foining" Smythe described and which required a more open formation to allow for this type of man to man thrusting and lunging. This use of the pike by the Landsknecht seems to be confirmed in a document attributed to no less a person than George Frunsdberg, the famous Landsknecht general. In the document written in 1522 Frunsdberg clearly disapproved of the tight formation. He points out that: "for the foremost men, who are supposed to do the work, do not wish to be too closely pressed; they must be left room for freely jabbing," otherwise they would be pushed in "as one pushes people into a ditch." It would seem that the 'dexterity' mentioned by Monluc is a term he used to describe a more open approach where man faced man along the front ranks jabbing, thrusting, and lunging at one another. As a man went down or became exhausted, men from the rear ranks would step in and take his place. In order for this type of fighting to take place the rear ranks, as Frunsberg stated, must stand back and not press upon the fighters. Thus a pike fight would start with one or both units marching towards one another. As they neared the order would go out to redouble their pace. Montecuccoli describes it thusly: "Then, one redoubles the pace, pushing forward bodly with well-serried pikes while the musketry fires continually on the wings and the shields (a formation of shot) cover the line of battle, causing confusion among the enemy pikemen." There was danger in advancing. Montecuccoli: "There can be little doubt that advancing in tight order is difficult, especially if the countryside is not uniformly even or level, if the terrain is frozen and the men slip, or if the battalions are to big and massive or else made up of recruits unaccustomed to keeping in line." An additional danger was that the unit might lose its spacing between ranks and each succeeding ranks pushing on the ones in front of them. This happened at Bioccoca with horrible results for the Swiss. The very thing Frunsdberg warned against. If the pikes avoided these dangers, face to face fighting began with the first few ranks exchanging blows to the head or lower body (where armor was thinest), jabbing, thrusting, and lunging at each other. During the fighting pikes would break. (One broke off in Bayard's thigh during a one of his fights against the Swiss) Or they would slip or be torn from the pikemen's hands.( This is why notches for better gripping were craved into the wood of the pikes.) Men would be wounded, killed, or become too tired to continue. The front ranks would yell for support or relief. The rear ranks yelled out support as did the sergeants operating from the center of the formation and from the flanks as reported by Monluc. (One of the interesting changes Prince Maurice of Holland instituted was the silencing of speaking between ranks and files during a fight so that central commands could be heard.) The front ranks still had to be open enough to allow the halberds or swordsmen to move forward and engage similarly armed opponents beneath the pikes, even with Smythe's close order pikes. For this kind of work, John Smythe recommends halberds with short points and long edges. Of course, the use of such weapons supposes enough room between pike opponents for men to use these weapons. He writes: "Halberds of the Italian fashion, with long points, short edges, and long staves, to be placed within a squadron of pikes, they do better allow of than the halberds or battle-axes with short points, long edges, and short staves. In the which they show that they do very little consider or know that when two squadrons do encounter, the first thrust of pikes being past, they do presently come to join with short weapons, as with sword, battle-axes, and daggers, and that then weapons that are with long points, long staves, and short edges do work no effect, by reason that the ranks being so close, and nearby front and flanks in their distances, and the press on both sides so great as in such actions it is, they can have no room to stand thrusting and foining with long halberds nor pikes as our such men of war do imagine. But then is the time that the ranks of short halberds or battle-axes of five foot and a half long, with strong, short points, short staves, and long edges, in the hands of lusty soldiers that do follow the first ranks of pikers at the heels, both with blow at the head and thrust at the face, do with puissant and mighty hand work wonderful effect and carry all to the ground. And of the great and excellent executions of such short halberds and battle-axes in battles our most worthy ancestors and divers other warlike nations had experience many years past, when they did use to fight many great battles." During the fight, the pikes could get so intertwined that they become almost useless. At this point, Montecucolli, writiing in the 17th century, recommends that the pikemen drop their pikes, fall to their knees and with their short swords slash at the opponent legs. Or to move up the sword and buckler men and open up the opposing pike's formation. John Smythe agrees. When pikes get intertwined one drops the pike and move in with the sword but swords which are not too long. "Wherein they do little consider, or not understand, that a squadron of armed men in the field, being ready to encounter with another squadron, their enemies, ought to straighten and close themselves by front and flanks; and that after they have given their first thrust with their pikes and being come to join with their enemies front to front and face to face, and therefore the use and execution of the pikes of the foremost ranks being past, they must presently betake themselves the use of their swords and daggers, which they cannot with any celerity draw if the blades of their swords be so long." Thus, when things got so involved that pikes got intertwined, rather than degenerating into a pushing match, the pikemen were instructed to drop their pikes and move in with sword or have halberdiers move in. Even the proponent of close order pike fighting, Sir John Smythe, supposed enough space between opposing pike units for halberds or swordsmen to work. Undoubtedly some pike fights did degenerated into a pushing match but it was probably at point that pikes would disengage, reorganize, and then charge back into the 'push of pike'.( After all, a pushing match is a manifestation of a break-down of unit order.) This disengagement, reorganization, and resumption of fighting of opposing pike units is well documented (Roger Williams describes just such an occurrence in his "Actions in the Low Countries). In the final analysis it would seem that the Landsknecht method won out. Montecuccoli, writing in the mid-seventeenth century, wrote what was common practice by that time. The pike would be held at the end of the shaft, in the old Landsknecht method. "However, square battalions of men and terrain rectangles have been found to be weak frontally. Because their flanks are so deep it is impossible to take full advantage of their numbers. A battalion can never fight effectively if it has more than six or seven ranks. This is because the pikes are eighteen feet long. The hands occupy three feet of the shaft, and thus the remaining part extends fifteen feet beyond the first rank."
