Did France use pikes in the War of the Austrian Succession?

[Geronimo2006]

I know the conventional wisdom is that they were phased out by 1704 but I have read from the ETW pikeman descriptions and other sources that Maurice de Saxe, who conquered the Austrian Netherlands for France in the War of the Austrian Succession (before Louis XV surrendered it at the Peace Conference ), favoured a return to mass pike-formations in the 1740s. Were pikes used by armies under his command? At Fontenoy (1745) for example were pikes used?

[Loringthegreat]

It wouldn't surprise me if there were some generals who brought back the pikes as like a support position so that the actual line infantry wouldn't have to engage in melee combat and could continue shooting there guns. Any actual info I really don't know.

[JaM]

i would be surprised by that - France was a pioneer of bayonet usage,they adopted socket bayonet in second half of 17.century so using pikes would be strange in 1740 (almost 100 years after bayonet was used first) Probably the only way is to have some sort of militias armed with much shorter naval boarding pikes - giving those men guns would require a lot of money and boarding pikes were relativly cheap...

[Rebelyell]

Maybe as a support unit but they certainly weren't the real killers at that time.

[marcello]

For what is worth Lazare Carnot thought highly of the pike and wanted to raised mixed pikemen/musketeer formations in 1792; an half million of pikes were ordered by the convention. After they managed to secure enough musket production capability the idea was put to rest but as you can see pikes were still at least seriously considered by professionals even at such late dates.
Source: Engineering the Revolution: Arms and Enlightenment in France, 1763-1815

[Keyser]

De Saxe favoured it in its theorical book "mes rêveries" (my dreams), there never was any official regulations or ordinances regarding it.
He was a field commander but he didn't have the power to change the weapons of the french regiments even if he wanted to. He could have lobbied in favor of it though... With no success obviously.

[geala]

Never read about the use of pikes by regular units in the later wars. I would say, no, no use of pikes in the French army. Some generals till the middle of the century dreamed about the power of cold steel. Saxe was one of them, Frederic II. of Prussia another. He did not reinvent the pike (other than Saxe he would have had the power to do) but favoured the bajonet for a long time. Some attacks were performed with empty musket. For some NCO very long spontons, nearly pikes, were introduced to make them more capable for hand to hand combat. But this all was mainly an illusion, at least from the early days of the Seven Years War fire fights were the necessary and preferred style of infantry combat. Veterans of the campaigns of the war later told
newcomers, that they had never come nearer to the enemy than 100 paces.

[Prince of Essling]

Pikes were certainly issued (and probably used in anger) during the Napoleonic Wars due to a lack of firearms at times e.g. Russian opolchelnie in 1812; French national guard in 1814, Prussian landwehr in 1813....

[legate]

Most armies in Europe had fully phased out the use of the pike by 1708. I have seen documents that seem to suggest that at the Battle of Blenheim pikes were carried by some regiments in the British army in the ratio of 1/2 but this seems unrealistic. However that said The Duke of Marlborough himself wrote that he had to rely on Dutch and German troops armed with muskets for sieges which may suggest British troops were still carrying a large number of pikes which were useless in storming a fortress.

The British drill manual of 1708 is the first drill manual that does not mention the use of pikes.

The French were among the first to get rid of the pike from their army, sometime around 1702.

Marshal Saxe was a beleiver in shock attacks rather than firepower.

Marshal Saxe’s theory (which, however, must have been much modified if the rifle had then been in use) is that musketry is of very little service, unless at such close quarters...

Marshal Saxe supports his theory by various facts; one of which was, the total and rapid destruction of two battalions of German infantry by a body of Turks: cavalry, it would seem; though that point is not quite clear in the Marshal’s account; but, either way, the sabre was the weapon of destruction. He thus describes the action: “At the battle of Belgrade I saw two battalions cut in pieces in an instant: it happened thus. Two battalions, one of Lorraine, and one of Neuperg, were on a height which we called the battery; and at the moment when a blast of wind dispersed a fog which prevented us from distinguishing anything, I saw these troops on the crest of the height separated from the rest of our army.

Prince Eugene asked me if I had a good sight; and what was that troop of horsemen which was making the circuit of the mountain. I replied, that it was thirty or forty Turks. He said to me, ‘Those men are destroyed,’ meaning the two battalions. I did not, however, see that they were attacked, or were likely to be, because I could not see what was on the other side of the mountain. I proceeded thither as fast as I could.

At the moment I arrived behind the colours of Neuperg, I saw the two battalions present arms, take aim, and fire a general volley at thirty paces on a body of Turks who were advancing upon them. The fire and the melee were simultaneous; and the two battalions had no time for flight; for they were all instantly sabred on the spot where they stood. There escaped only M. de Neuperg, who, luckily for him, was on horseback ; an ensign, with his colours, who threw himself on my horse’s mane, and hampered me very much; together with two or three soldiers. At this moment Prince Eugene rode up almost alone; that is to say, with only his staff; and the Turks retired, I don’t know why.

It was there that he received a shot through the sleeve. Some troops of cavalry and some infantry now came up, and M. de Neuperg asked for a detachment to secure the clothes. Sentinels were posted on the ground occupied by those dead battalions; and piles of coats, hats, shoes, &c. were collected. While this was going on, I amused myself with counting the dead, and I found only thirty-two Turks killed by the volley of those two battalions; which has not raised my opinion of the value of fire-arms.”

[Gen.jamesWolfe]

Maurice never issued them to the army (and nobody in his right mind would by 1745 in Flanders*); the only ones who carried pole-arms were sergeants (who carried partizans) and Company officers (specifically Captains-they had spontoons, which was defined as a "half-pike" length). Though oddly by that point, the Company officers weren't supposed to have any (muskets were prescribed as early as 1710 IIRC). the officers didn't actually abandon them until the middle of the Seven Years war (1758).

*though some people were sufficiently dense to issue a regulation in 1759 (well after the war in this topic) to form fusiliers up into squares (6 by 6 fusiliers-there were 36 per company officially)-just like pike squares. though they were armed with muskets

[KaiserDale]

Yes, they did. However, pikes were mostly at that time a psychological aid to create confidence in the soldier more than an actual defense. Given this as a matter of fact, it was as if the pikes were useless other than that.

Yet at the same time, let me give you some education in the French way of war at that time.

1. You still had an impressive artillery tradition dating back to Louis XI in the 1400s, as the French invented the cannonade tactic.

2. The French often used la petit guerre as they invented it. La Petit Guerre is sometimes referred to as partisan warfare and is essentially the old term for two things: war in detachment, and guerrila warfare.

3 The French restored the march by cadence used by the Romans which gave them rhythm. You can actually use this to your advantage in Napoleon or Empire Total War because you can allow your enemy to fire an ineffective salvos(as most people do not turn off fire at will) before you rush and have your men shoot and weaken the enemy for a charge.

4. They fought in checkerboard formation often because it is superior to line. In total war, you can test this yourself first against NPCs then against real people. You can more quickly switch to columns when needed than in the line, and have all your men protecting each other which makes rushers think twice. You can also put artillery within the intervals to have a well protected cannonade to sustain your counter attack. Also, it allows for rapid march back and forth. Maurice De Saxe often also charged in this formation.

5. On french legionary formation, Maurice De Saxe had this to say, " I would for my body of infantry into legions, each composed of four regiments, and every regiment of four centuries; each century would have a half century of light armed foot and a half century of cavalry.

What does this tell us?

The regiment is 400 strong as a century is 100 men. each of these centuries would have 50 light armed and 50 cavalry. You can somewhat mimic this in Total War by having two line, one cavalry,one skirmisher and build your army that way except maybe having 3 artillery if you wished to employ all the arms of war.

6. They would get as close as possible to the enemy and then fire. Maurice De Saxe mentioned this and probably from his experience fighting against the Swedes, who were the Caroleans at the time he served Peter I before he joined the Frnech army. The Swedes would get as close as possible and fire a single salvos at an effective range and then finish them off with bayonet tactics. The Reveries, being an attempt to capture the principles of Gustav Adolf, he actually captures also the legion of the Romans and the tactics both his contemporary Russians,Turks,Swedes and