Unusual Civil War Weapon in the SCCRRMM Collection

[hastur1234]

Small for a pike more like a spear.

[CitizenJohnSmith]

I think I'd have a better chance killing someone with a Springfield 1863 at what...600 yards they were sighted for...than 10 feet with a pike.

[Iowahorse]

Not an uncommon weapon, (The pike itself) during the early stages of the civil war, but quickly proved to be one of the most useless. Just goes to show how many elected men of the era really had no concept of the fighting times, as it were. His Ideas on the pike were by far not the only one. And BTW, thank you for showing this style. It's the first I've seen, demonstrated or otherwise. A great idea, just outdated even then. Thank again, I learned a few things, I like that.

[HipposHateWater]

Medieval pikes had switchblade mechanisms?

If you're short on iron, then just make crude spear points. Doesn't even take a pound of iron to make, and stabs just as well as a heavy and elaborate pike with an expensive switchblade mechanism to sheathe the blade. I see no advantages for this fancy design aside from impressing/"courting" one's Confederate cousin.

[xmorg]

it could be used to defend artillery against cavalry, but agreed the "Springing" would be useless, and it would need to be longer. And you obviously wouldn't want to go against infantry with guns.

[KayBeeEee1983]

The North had 20-shot Spencer repeating rifles...the South had pikes...

[suckmycod]

@KayBeeEee1983 yeah bitch, and the SOUTH killed almost 100,000 more men than the fucking yankee invaders. Do your homework before you open that smart mouth.

[KayBeeEee1983]

@suckmycod You kiss your sister with that mouth?

The Union had to conquer the south. The Union had to attack up hills, through fortifications, over entrenchments, and across rivers. Thanks to the rifled musket, defenders held an extreme advantage in the civil war like no American war before it.

Do your homework.

[MerlinsJester]

@KayBeeEee1983 The South also had the support of numerous foreign nations, many men with practical experience as hunters and outdoorsmen, and superior commanders in battle. Not to mention a strong reason to fight.

The North basically had conscripts with a rifle thrust into their hands right off the boat, cheap training regiments, and ridiculously cocksure generals. Their reason for fighting was for money and personal survival really.

The reason the North won was because of gentlemen.

[KayBeeEee1983]

@MerlinsJester The South didn't have the support of any foreign nations, and none recognized the Confederacy.

"superior commanders in battle"

Only in the east. The west was dominated by the Union.

"Not to mention a strong reason to fight."

To protect the wealth of the elites? To expand slavery into the territories?

The Confederacy began conscription before the Union did (CSA in April 1862, USA in July 1863). 6% of Union soldiers were conscripts, compared to about 10% of Confederate soldiers.

[KayBeeEee1983]

@MerlinsJester "Their reason for fighting was for money and personal survival really."

You really couldn't be more wrong about that. Union privates were paid $13 a month and they rarely got paid on time. Like I said before, most Union soldiers weren't conscripts, they were volunteers, so they weren't just fighting for survival. They were fighting for their country.

"The reason the North won was because of gentlemen."

What does that mean?

[UnitedKorean]

Why not just use one of the medieval spears and pikes without all that mechanism bullshit which seems totally unnecessary.

[1968userrgb]

give them a bowl for christ sake........

[donttouchmecreep]

@1968userrgb try to make some sense for christ sake

[atjnAdfhhjea]

@1968userrgb In addition to arming 10,000 troops with bows, you would need to devise a new training regimen for them in addition to everything else, which would be expensive and impractical. The pike could be taught with the training used for the bayonets, which saves time and money. Given the long reload times of many rifles used in the American Civil War, the bayonets were often used when combat became more close quarters anyway.

[erererer2]

so they pretty much used them like a banzia rush

[rod3067]

i think that spear has enough iron on it as for making a carbine

[tina6581]

This just goes to show that the mad are always with us. Sadly often incoming to.

[newtubetubetube]

Why not equip the soldiers with bows? Did he thought of that before choosing the pike?

[atjnAdfhhjea]

@newtubetubetube Because in addition to arming 10,000 troops with bows, you would need to devise a new training regimen for them in addition to everything else, which would be expensive and impractical. The pike could be taught with the training used for the bayonets, which saves time and money. Given the long reload times of many rifles used in the American Civil War, the bayonets were often used when combat became more close quarters anyway.

[newtubetubetube]

@atjnAdfhhjea Agreed that the pike training is easier, but only because they had no intention of wining. On the other hand, taking to account that rifle were slow to reload and that gunpowder made steel plate armor obsolete, training them to use bows would have give them a significant fire power.

[atjnAdfhhjea]

@newtubetubetube Still cheaper and easier to train them like its a bayonet than it is to use bows.

[suckmycod]

@newtubetubetube I have thought of using bows many times. Damn I think it could have been VERY effective!

[TFNz009]

And whts is this weapon called?

[Sean2112bd]

wouldn't a bayonet work just as well?

[TheCommunistColin]

@Sean2112bd A Pike is much longer than a bayonnetted musket. This could give it an advantage in melee should the other side charged bayonets.

[Sean2112bd]

@TheCommunistColin makes sense. Actually the one thing I always wondered about the Civil War was whether or not African-Americans fought in the Confederacy. I tried looking for information on it but I got mixed results.

[TheCommunistColin]

@Sean2112bd I'm not entirely sure about that either, I have heard that Lee had planned enlisting men of color in return for their freedom, but I'm not sure if he ever did it.

[hyuugaamida]

@Sean2112bd They did. They had the desire to fight for their home just as much as the whites, and if you're a General, would you turn down anyone who is willing to fight for you? Not if you plan on winning.

[helmuthoorn]

For crying out loud.

Just hand out axes and pitchforks why don't you?

Meanwhile Union troops were equipped with Spencer rapid firing rifles.

[TheCommunistColin]

@helmuthoorn SOME Union troops were armed with Spencers. To be fair. :P

[GOBRAGH2]

Did the Confederate army ever use archers in any of their regiments?

[TheCommunistColin]

@GOBRAGH2 *facepalm*

[GOBRAGH2]

@TheCommunistColin I found out that the Rebels did use Native American warriors including archers in Missouri and other Southern states as guerilla fighters.

Thank you Neshaminy Park Civil War Reenactment group!

This is a difficult topic to inform and expand on for my history paper.

Have a good weekend.

[kit40]

Death by anachronism!

[XplosiveProductZ]

Lol without the spring this is a useless piece of junk

if men were to charge with this weapons it would truly be a waste of life

[acerb45666555]

what posessed them to design such a tiny weapon? a true Pike is 10 feet or even longer!! a scary device in massed ranks! but useless against mass rifled musket fire!!

[SageofHistory]

@acerb45666555 These weapons were designed to approximate rifle size of the time. These were only about a foot-2 feet longer than an enfield tipped with a bayonet. This allowed the drill, training and maneuvering and tactics to be identicle to rifle drill. They could also be mistaken by the enemy for rifles at a distance, perhaps deterring an attack at all. Those are a few of the ideas behind fighting with a pike of this size. Whether brilliant or not, that was the logic.

[Piotrio]

wow !!!

[ElijahJohnSanders]

I would love to see that with the spring : )

[acerb45666555]

@ElijahJohnSanders .....it is nice, but i think it would have been better as a trench defence weapon. trenches can be like a maze! many hiddden corners. lots of cubby holes and bunkers. good ambush spots! these pikes are made perfectly for that type of sneaky fighting.

[Obediah17]

troops armed with them would be perfect in a flanking manouver :)

[strazzy3]

@Obediah17 What is a "FLANKING MANOUVER" ?

[Obediah17]

@strazzy3 i just mean as in an enemy is pinned from the front and these flank them, in the side or rear, just thinking properly trained theyd be lethal in hand to hand combat but on an open battlefield against muskets theyd be sh**te.

[strazzy3]

@Obediah17 Thanks.

[MrMonkeybat]

If it was supposed to be a cheap temporary weapon why bother with the unnecessary and elaborate switch blade mechanism.

[AlienZygote010]

@MrMonkeybat - because historically know it all psuedo tactical genius morons who have no experience with soldiering are always quick to decide what a soldier needs to do his job best. Rumsfeld is a perfect modern example.

[Loki95531]

@MrMonkeybat My guess is to make it safer and easier to carry when not in use. And the spring idea would have been rather intimidating in a trench . but yeah I wouldn't have wanted that as a weapon when the union guys were flinging lead at me either.

[MerlinsJester]

@MrMonkeybat Elaborate? it's painfully simple!

Also, it has to do with efficiency in extension, as well as a more effective means to attack cavalry

[KayBeeEee1983]

@MerlinsJester In the Civil War, cavalry was almost useless as a fighting force. Too big of a target and it only took 1 shot to take them down. They were much better utilized as scouts.

[MerlinsJester]

@KayBeeEee1983 One shot? Do you know anything about fighting cavalry?

It's fast moving, the rider is always moving around in the saddle and getting at bead on him in the middle of a battle is frustrating, and the horse is the biggest target by far, and that can't be killed by one little fricking musket ball or early rifle round unless you peg the damn thing in the eyeball or something.

Pikemen are still a relevant enough counter to cavalry, even in that day. It was a logical alternative.

[KayBeeEee1983]

@MerlinsJester One "little" musket ball? The minie ball was .58 caliber. It would shatter a man's bone. I know that horse bones aren't human bones, but you act like they were shooting BB guns out there. You don't need to get a "bead" on a line of cavalry charging at you. You point your gun at the line and shoot.

[MerlinsJester]

@KayBeeEee1983 Yes, I know about the damn calibur of the damn ball.

Regardless, musketballs are shot out of what is basically a pea shooter on steroids, and because of this has incredibly shitty accuracy and power. Sure, it could shatter a man's bone, but that's only if it hit.

Do you seriously think that cavalry tactics during those times involved a head on charge? Cavalry was then more often used for flanking an enemy's weak point and breaking a stalemate.

[KayBeeEee1983]

@MerlinsJester I think you need to do some research on civil war weapons and tactics. The rifled musket was much more accurate and had a much longer range than smooth bore muskets. Before the rifled musket, charges were how cavalry was best utilized on the battlefield. Smooth bore muskets had no range or accuracy, so cavalry would charge, retreat, charge retreat, over and over. The rifled musket put an end to that tactic. Albert SIdney Johnston was killed in a cavalry charge early in the war.

[MerlinsJester]

@KayBeeEee1983 This is what I get for not joining the Military Enthusiasts club back in high school...

[supressorgrid]

The civil war,for the most part, was fought with primitive weapons most which werent much above the english Brown Bess which after it was fired was used as a pike in close quarters when it couldnt be loaded. This thing would have stopped a charge most handily.

[mwillblade]

@supressorgrid Civil war is known as the first modern war .

[supressorgrid]

@mwillblade Except for some breech loader rifle and cannon, most soldiers had flintlock and percussion cap muzzle loaders. Many were smooth bore muskets that had been used in war of 1812 pressed into service. most cannon were napoleons from 1820's and 30's.

[kit40]

Nothing says determination like being willing to fight with a bolt action pike!

[aguystudio]

Would make a teensy, short chiltron, I suppose. Hedgehogged Scots are here! Beware!

[Zardoz215]

Bottom line here is... Its a bayonet with no gun attached,

[SamPD2]

@Zardoz215 More like a fragile spear.

[phillitupp]

Well I guess Brown forgot that the spanish had less accurate smooth bore muskets in 1808. Unlike the Rifled Springfield or Enfield rifles used in 1862.

Which brings me to the conclusion.

Pikemen VS Rifled Musket = shot to pieces.

[Blue387]

Very interesting.

[starsnbars3]

Talk about bringing a knife to a gun fight!!!

[MQnoob]

Bah, more like bringing a butter knife to a shotgun fight.

[crazycuntryboy2]

Well here is the thing, what happened was they could have waited until the Yankees fired their complete volley then charged forward in a bayonet charge.

[40AcreMule]

Volley fire was rarely used on the battlefields of the Civil War. The problem with it is that once you fire every man of the regiment then had an empty musket and has reload. Firing by files was more common which kept a steady amount of gun fire issueing from the unit at all times until ordered to cease fire.

[rbrown3rd]

Fascinating stuff Joe. Keep the videos coming. I am really glad that you chose to use YouTube as a medium for sharing your knowledge and great collection.

[michaeleffmeredith]

He might have actually been on to something. The Mexican lancers of less than thirty years before that time were able to kill Texans armed with firearms with depressing regularity. I've seen old fixed pikes from that time made into large fighting knives so they didn't all go to waste. If he'd only kept with the spring loaded idea but made it like a ballistic knife instead of a switchblade, you might have to have a passport to get from Indiana to Kentucky today.

[shotgun4567]

vs guns pikemen would have been shot to pieces.

[Gurgle103]

would have played hell with Calvary though.

[Dragging1Canoe]

cavalry

[1889sportingman]

Thank goodness gov Brown was not a general,, fasinating,,thank you