Dr. Alexander S. Burns
@kabinettskriege.bsky.social
Historian of the eighteenth-century Atlantic World, American Continental Army, and Military Europe. PhD WVU.
Agreed, especially if it continued to be a problem.
November 19, 2025 at 4:13 AM
Agreed, especially if it continued to be a problem.
You might think so, but this is a problem endemic in almost all European armies in the eighteenth century. The enlisted men don't like closing into close range, they prefer firing from a distance, from battles in the 1730s to the 1780s.
November 19, 2025 at 4:13 AM
You might think so, but this is a problem endemic in almost all European armies in the eighteenth century. The enlisted men don't like closing into close range, they prefer firing from a distance, from battles in the 1730s to the 1780s.
I appreciate this, but this is a quote that he gives almost every time he discusses his revolution trilogy in interviews.
November 19, 2025 at 4:11 AM
I appreciate this, but this is a quote that he gives almost every time he discusses his revolution trilogy in interviews.
And that for years, the men were resistant to doing so, leading to increasing frustration on Washington's part.
November 19, 2025 at 4:06 AM
And that for years, the men were resistant to doing so, leading to increasing frustration on Washington's part.
Atkinson is arguing that because muskets were inaccurate, soldiers closed to close range and fought with the bayonet. The evidence indicates that American soldiers REALLY didn't like getting into close range with the enemy.
November 19, 2025 at 4:05 AM
Atkinson is arguing that because muskets were inaccurate, soldiers closed to close range and fought with the bayonet. The evidence indicates that American soldiers REALLY didn't like getting into close range with the enemy.
Many soldiers recovered from bayonet wounds, and many soldiers reported seeing comrades killed by fire. I don't think that all of the deaths from the AWI were bayonet wounds. Like wars today, wounded outnumber dead in almost all major engagements.
November 19, 2025 at 3:04 AM
Many soldiers recovered from bayonet wounds, and many soldiers reported seeing comrades killed by fire. I don't think that all of the deaths from the AWI were bayonet wounds. Like wars today, wounded outnumber dead in almost all major engagements.
There is no comparable percentage for the AWI. I think if you made a full archival study, it would likely look similar to the other wars. The British charge more with bayonets, if there is an increased percentage, that is likely the reason.
November 19, 2025 at 12:47 AM
There is no comparable percentage for the AWI. I think if you made a full archival study, it would likely look similar to the other wars. The British charge more with bayonets, if there is an increased percentage, that is likely the reason.
I'll leave it up to you whether this qualifies as a "a lot of killing" being done with the bayonet, but, we need to be clear, if "a lot" of killing is done with the bayonet, even more is done with firearms. The fighting was not always eyeball to eyeball, nose to nose. 16/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
I'll leave it up to you whether this qualifies as a "a lot of killing" being done with the bayonet, but, we need to be clear, if "a lot" of killing is done with the bayonet, even more is done with firearms. The fighting was not always eyeball to eyeball, nose to nose. 16/16
This needs to be read in conjunction with evidence from other 18th century wars and the Napoleonic Wars, where hospital returns indicate that the number of men wounded by bayonet fighting is usually under 5% compared to fire. 15/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
This needs to be read in conjunction with evidence from other 18th century wars and the Napoleonic Wars, where hospital returns indicate that the number of men wounded by bayonet fighting is usually under 5% compared to fire. 15/16
...there are ~85 references to bayonet wounds, and ~425 references to wounds from gunshots. Thus, at least conversationally, this sample size of American veterans (who were often on the receiving end of bayonet charges) were 4 times more likely to be shot than stabbed. 14/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
...there are ~85 references to bayonet wounds, and ~425 references to wounds from gunshots. Thus, at least conversationally, this sample size of American veterans (who were often on the receiving end of bayonet charges) were 4 times more likely to be shot than stabbed. 14/16
It is impossible to accurately quantify, in a fully scientific way, the number of gunshot wounds vs the number of bayonet wounds in the Revolutionary War. However, searching the currently transcribed pension applications of revolutionary war veterans... 13/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
It is impossible to accurately quantify, in a fully scientific way, the number of gunshot wounds vs the number of bayonet wounds in the Revolutionary War. However, searching the currently transcribed pension applications of revolutionary war veterans... 13/16
Only by September 1781 did Washington order his men to match the British with bayonets, saying "the General particularly enjoins the troops to place their principle relyance on the Bayonet." 12/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
Only by September 1781 did Washington order his men to match the British with bayonets, saying "the General particularly enjoins the troops to place their principle relyance on the Bayonet." 12/16
Thus, we can see that contrary to fighting "eyeball to eyeball", American soldiers frequently engaged the enemy at longer ranges than Washington preferred, to the extent that he had to address this potential problem again and again in his writings. 11/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
Thus, we can see that contrary to fighting "eyeball to eyeball", American soldiers frequently engaged the enemy at longer ranges than Washington preferred, to the extent that he had to address this potential problem again and again in his writings. 11/16
12th June 1779
"It is expected that the Troops will advance boldly upon the enemy—and by no means, nor under any pretence whatsoever throw away their ammunition at long shot—A Musquet had better never be discharged than fired in so wasteful, shameful, & cowardly a manner." 10/16
"It is expected that the Troops will advance boldly upon the enemy—and by no means, nor under any pretence whatsoever throw away their ammunition at long shot—A Musquet had better never be discharged than fired in so wasteful, shameful, & cowardly a manner." 10/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
12th June 1779
"It is expected that the Troops will advance boldly upon the enemy—and by no means, nor under any pretence whatsoever throw away their ammunition at long shot—A Musquet had better never be discharged than fired in so wasteful, shameful, & cowardly a manner." 10/16
"It is expected that the Troops will advance boldly upon the enemy—and by no means, nor under any pretence whatsoever throw away their ammunition at long shot—A Musquet had better never be discharged than fired in so wasteful, shameful, & cowardly a manner." 10/16
To Gen. Varnum November 11th, 1777:
“It is greatly to be wished that all firing could be prevented, except where there is a real necessity and the distance such as might promise a good effect.” 9/16
“It is greatly to be wished that all firing could be prevented, except where there is a real necessity and the distance such as might promise a good effect.” 9/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
To Gen. Varnum November 11th, 1777:
“It is greatly to be wished that all firing could be prevented, except where there is a real necessity and the distance such as might promise a good effect.” 9/16
“It is greatly to be wished that all firing could be prevented, except where there is a real necessity and the distance such as might promise a good effect.” 9/16
General Orders, 23 August 1776:
"Be cool, but determined; do not fire at a distance." 8/16
"Be cool, but determined; do not fire at a distance." 8/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
General Orders, 23 August 1776:
"Be cool, but determined; do not fire at a distance." 8/16
"Be cool, but determined; do not fire at a distance." 8/16
Letter to General Livingston 8 July 1776:
"caution the Officers & Soldiers against firing at great Distances, an Error to which young Troops are much exposed, & which occasions a great Waste of Ammunition." 7/16
"caution the Officers & Soldiers against firing at great Distances, an Error to which young Troops are much exposed, & which occasions a great Waste of Ammunition." 7/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
Letter to General Livingston 8 July 1776:
"caution the Officers & Soldiers against firing at great Distances, an Error to which young Troops are much exposed, & which occasions a great Waste of Ammunition." 7/16
"caution the Officers & Soldiers against firing at great Distances, an Error to which young Troops are much exposed, & which occasions a great Waste of Ammunition." 7/16
Letter to John Hancock 28 May 1776:
"there was some firing at long shot, but without any great damage" 6/16
"there was some firing at long shot, but without any great damage" 6/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
Letter to John Hancock 28 May 1776:
"there was some firing at long shot, but without any great damage" 6/16
"there was some firing at long shot, but without any great damage" 6/16
General Orders, March 3rd 1776:
"particular care is to be taken to prevent their firing at too great a distance, as one Fire well aim’d does more execution than a dozen at long-shot." 5/16
"particular care is to be taken to prevent their firing at too great a distance, as one Fire well aim’d does more execution than a dozen at long-shot." 5/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
General Orders, March 3rd 1776:
"particular care is to be taken to prevent their firing at too great a distance, as one Fire well aim’d does more execution than a dozen at long-shot." 5/16
"particular care is to be taken to prevent their firing at too great a distance, as one Fire well aim’d does more execution than a dozen at long-shot." 5/16
The trouble is, we have a huge number of sources from Washington saying the opposite. American soldiers preferred firing at longer ranges: you can see this in Washington's wartime writings: 4/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
The trouble is, we have a huge number of sources from Washington saying the opposite. American soldiers preferred firing at longer ranges: you can see this in Washington's wartime writings: 4/16
I want to talk about Atkinson's claim that fighting "a lot of the killing is done with a bayonet" and that the fighting was "eyeball to eyeball...it's very intimate." 3/16
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
I want to talk about Atkinson's claim that fighting "a lot of the killing is done with a bayonet" and that the fighting was "eyeball to eyeball...it's very intimate." 3/16
First of all, I don't really want to talk about accurate musket range.
Firefights actually occurred over 120 yards, but that isn't the point of the thread. You can see a chart below of descriptions of 25 firefight ranges in the Revolutionary War.
Firefights actually occurred over 120 yards, but that isn't the point of the thread. You can see a chart below of descriptions of 25 firefight ranges in the Revolutionary War.
November 19, 2025 at 12:40 AM
First of all, I don't really want to talk about accurate musket range.
Firefights actually occurred over 120 yards, but that isn't the point of the thread. You can see a chart below of descriptions of 25 firefight ranges in the Revolutionary War.
Firefights actually occurred over 120 yards, but that isn't the point of the thread. You can see a chart below of descriptions of 25 firefight ranges in the Revolutionary War.