- Joined
- May 6, 2014
- Messages
- 17,420
- Reaction score
- 16,403
Gus back to my original argument with the angry fellas statement was that you MUST not call it a bayonet lug, this is just not logical.
Its not that the stud isn’t used as a front sight, or isn’t a front sight, at some point the ordnance department found the improvement of the socket bayonet to allow for a greater augmentation of the musket uses when piked, as our West Point fella said which is probably the only accurate thing he said too.
With the advent of the socket bayonet as early as the George the first and Queen Ann Muskets (Dutch Versions Outfitted with socket bayonets, not the dog locks). This allowed musket builders to take that stud and give it a dual purpose. It was a purse cost saving opportunity the British ordinance department took full advantage of for the next 200 years. No front sight and lug mounted beneath the muzzle, no extra brass or steel, no casting or forging cost, no brazing cost. This probably equates to the same cost of mounting, brazing or dovetailing a barrel tenon.
The stud at the end of the barrel serves a dual purpose with its primary as a bayonet lug.
And in that primary statement i make, let me be clear in the 1764 manual of arms, fitting the socket bayonet came before any presentation to fire, primary.
I’m not argument the stud isn’t also a front sight, I just don’t see how anyone can logically say it is one or the other which is why writers such as Bailey denote it as a sight / stud or lug / and sight.
Now I will question its effectiveness in combat as a front sight, we can debate the effectiveness all day about how its shape down range can be used to aim, what you can’t really debate is the talent of the shooter to make good use of that sight, especially with that bayonet on there when fitting.
In a situation where the present to fire command is given without bayonets fixed, I absolutely agree its a front sight in that circumstance.
The one or the other argument…. serves a dual purpose and can be called a bayonet lug or a sight or a stud.
I'm not entirely sure I follow your complete post, but that's OK.
In early posts today, I've shown indisputable evidence that front sights were used for a long time on British Muskets before they ever used a socket bayonet.
There would have been no need for a front sight, if they weren't using it to aim and they did volley firing in the 17th century with those muskets.
What has been demonstrated is the sight was then ALSO used as a bayonet lug after the socket bayonet was invented and came into general use in the British Army.
Both British Ordnance and the British Army continued to call that part the "sight" long after the socket bayonet was used.
This and personal experience using it as a sight with bayonets fixed, is why I have been writing it was a (front) sight that then did double duty as a bayonet lug after the socket bayonet was invented and used.
Gus