Fixed bayonets are not authorized for military color guards, so why would anyone else do it? We can speculate as to why color guards chose to do it, but that’s not necessary. What is necessary is to educate everyone as to why it’s not the right thing to do. We will explore the reasons why a color guard fixing bayonets is not appropriate.
The featured image at the top is Fight for the Banner (Mazurovsky, 1910-12) between French Line Infantry and Russian Guard Cuirassiers at the battle of Austerlitz (1805). Notice the historical color guard set up with the infantry soldiers surrounding the colors. The loss of the unit’s colors was and still is an immense disgrace.
Who is Authorized to Fix Bayonets?
The Army’s Exceptional Traditions Do Not Create General Authority
All US military squads, platoons, and companies that drill under arms are authorized to drill at fixed bayonets. The service honor guards in and around Washington DC march their platoons and companies at fixed bayonets at all times and there’s a very good reason for this. They never march a color guard at fixed bayonets. A great example is below (photo from 1991).
Here is an explanation of Unique recognition for certain units of the Army. In regard to marching with fixed bayonets, here is what is written at the website.
(b) The (3d Infantry) regiment traditionally marches in review with bayonets fixed. At the battle of Cerro Gordo during the Mexican War the 3d Infantry led a brilliant bayonet charge, and in 1922 the regiment requested permission to pass in review for ceremonies and parades with bayonets fixed. Although the regimental history reports the request was granted by the War Department, there is no record in our (US Army Center of Military History) files of the approval. It was the usual practice in the nineteenth century to have fixed bayonets at dress parades. (Emphasis mine)
US Army Center of Military History website
This is also interesting related to our topic.
14th Major Port. In recognition of the unit’s outstanding achievement between “D” Day and “V-E” Day, the port was granted the privilege of marching through the streets of the town and county of Southampton with bayonets fixed, drums beating, and colors flying. Nearly two million men had departed through Southampton, England. The port is perpetuated by the 374th Transportation Command.
US Army Center of Military History website
The Army does not fix bayonets for parades and ceremonies, but the Marine Corps can. We can see this in the parade sections of TC 3-21.5 and MCO 5060.20. The TC makes no mention of the commander of troops giving the command to fix bayonets while the MCO does. Apparently, special permission is required in the Army to pass-in-review with fixed bayonets, the 3rd Infantry Regiment, The Old Guard, has that permission. Here is a bit of reasoning behind that.
The Bayonet Also Creates a Safety Problem
Fixed bayonets place sharp blades immediately beside flag material, color bearers, other guards, and frequently, members of the public. Colors move with wind, turns, changes of position, and differences in staff height. A blade can catch or damage the material. It can also injure a team member or spectator during an unexpected movement, loss of balance, or spacing error. The safety concern alone should end the practice. The ceremonial meaning makes the case even stronger.
Why do it when Authorized? Look – Intimidation and Security
Intimidation. The service honor guards in DC need to have a certain look. Intimidation is part of that. Fixing bayonets for a pass-in-review is part of that as the platoons march by the visiting foreign national dignitary so that they have a certain powerful look. Bu the color guards never fix bayonets. This is the same reasoning why the color guard ceremonial element has the tallest members in the honor guard assigned to it. The color guard is usually the closest element to the dignitary.
Security. The public sees the same parade and feels secure in their military passing in front of them.
A Bit of History
Scott’s 1835 U.S. infantry tactics prescribed that the color-guard corporals carry their muskets with “bayonets always fixed.” It also required the guard to be selected from troops whose weapons had bayonets. But Hardee’s 1862 Confederate revision directed that bayonets be fixed only when required for attack or defense and that exercises and maneuvers be conducted without them. The color guard formed part of the color company, so it could fix bayonets with the fighting formation when ordered—but the earlier “always fixed” rule was no longer present. Fixed bayonets have authentic historical precedent in color guards, but the practice varied by period, manual, unit, and tactical situation.
During the Civil War, colors remained functional battlefield instruments. They marked a regiment’s position, helped maintain alignment, provided a rallying point, and embodied the unit’s identity. Their visibility also made the color bearers and guards conspicuous and vulnerable, but colors continued to be carried through the end of the war and, in some cases, through the end of the nineteenth century.
Civil War–era drill manuals prescribed a color guard consisting of eight corporals and a selected color-bearing sergeant. Two corporals stood beside the bearer, three formed the rear rank, and three remained in the file closers. Actual formations could vary because of field strength, unit practice, and the number of colors carried.
The transition away from battlefield colors came gradually as formations dispersed and modern command-and-control methods replaced the need for a large visible rallying point. By 1911, Army drill regulations directed a color guard accompanying a battalion in battle formation to join the regimental reserve and prohibited it from loading or firing. Modern colors retain their institutional and ceremonial significance but no longer serve as tactical markers carried into battle.
You can still see this type of color guard in military units of other counties like France. The color guard was spaced at normal interval and would march in military parades and fix bayonets for battle.
Ceremony as Language
| Civil War battlefield | Modern ceremony |
|---|---|
| Colors were tactical markers and rallying points | Colors represent institutional identity, honor, and continuity |
| The guard accompanied a fighting formation | The guard constitutes a purely ceremonial formation |
| Physical capture was an immediate battlefield possibility | “Protection” is expressed symbolically and procedurally |
| A fixed bayonet could describe an actual defensive function | A fixed bayonet imports close-combat language into a non-tactical setting |
The historical bayonet made sense because the formation might actually have to fight for the colors. The Civil War color guard and the modern ceremonial color guard share a name and lineage, but they do not perform the same sentence.
Reason 1 Why it’s Inappropriate
We look to military manuals for what they say, for what we are authorized to do. Just because a manual doesn’t have a list of “Don’t do that” doesn’t mean the floodgates are open to your ideas of how to make things #ceremonialer. We are to follow what is in the manual and, if necessary, create techniques to do the best job we can for a ceremony that may have an odd setup. We are not to use our imagination and add to the standards.
The Army’s TC 3-21.5 and the USAF AFPAM 34-1203 do not have bayonet and color guard guidance. They both do have information on what to do on a color guard. However, MCO 5060.20 does specifically state that guards for the color guard are forbidden from fixing bayonets.
1. m. Color guards do not fix bayonets.
5. h. The color guard does not execute to the rear march, about face, flanking movements or fix bayonets.
MCO 5060.20, 15 May 2019, Encl. 1, Chapter 7
98. c. The color guard is formed and marched in one rank at close interval, the color bearers in the center. The color
FM 22-5 Infantry Drill Regulations (1939, 1941) FM 22-5 Drill and Ceremonies (1950, 1953, 1956, 1958, 1964)
guard does not execute TO THE REAR MARCH, ABOUT FACE, or FIX BAYONETS.
The 1904 through 1932 editions had information for the color bearer and not the color guard. Color Guard information appeared in 1939 to today. Manuals through at least 1964 expressly stated that the color guard did not execute Fix Bayonets. That language disappeared during the mid-1960s revision of FM 22-5; the first later edition presently verified, dated August 1968, prohibits only Rear March and About Face. No corresponding language authorizing fixed bayonets was added, and no prescribed color-guard or ceremonial procedure requires them. The reason for the deletion has not yet been documented.
The sequence within FM 22-5 is:
- 1904–1932: instructions for the color bearer, but no comparable color-guard section.
- 1939: the color guard receives its own doctrinal treatment. The Army explicitly states that it does not execute TO THE REAR MARCH, ABOUT FACE, or FIX BAYONETS.
- 1941–1964: that three-part prohibition continues.
- 1968: the sentence becomes, “The color guard does not execute rear march, or about face.” However, the same section says that the guard marches at Right Shoulder Arms and “remains at order during execution of the manual of arms.” Because Fix Bayonets is itself part of the rifle manual of arms, the color guard remains excluded from executing it.
- Change 1 to the 1968 manual restructures the rule again: during ceremonies, the guards remain at Right Shoulder Arms—Sling Arms with the M16—except when presenting arms. That affirmative prescription leaves no doctrinal place for fixed bayonets.
- 1971, 1986, and subsequent Army manuals retain this structure: the prohibited turning movements are named, while the guards’ authorized weapon positions are prescribed separately. The current TC still states that the guards remain at Right Shoulder Arms during ceremonies except when executing Present Arms.
Reason 2 Why it’s Inappropriate
Sharp objects and flag material do not mix well at all. Even though you may have those cheapo telescoping metal staffs (not authorized for the military) raised to 9′ with 3’x5′ colors attached, there’s always a possibility of the material getting caught.
Reason 3 Why it’s Inappropriate
While colors were carried into battle at one time and protected by swords and rifles fixed with bayonets, the mid to late 1800s saw the removal of colors from battle and moved to solely a ceremonial application. The need for active defense of the colors no longer existed back then and the guards no longer fixed bayonets. That is our current situation today and into the future.
The modern color guard is a ceremonial element, not a fighting formation. It preserves the honor and lineage of the battlefield color guard, but it no longer performs that formation’s tactical function or requires weapons configured for close combat.
The act of fixing bayonets has been held to be primarily connected to morale, the making of a clear signal to friend and foe of a willingness to kill at close quarters.
Holmes, Richard (1987). Firing Line. Harmondsworth: Penguin. pp. 377–9
There is no such thing as a “ceremonial use” of a bayonet on a color guard and simply no reason why a law enforcement color guard should signal a willingness to kill at close quarters.
The Law-Enforcement Message Is Especially Inappropriate
The problem becomes more serious when a civilian law-enforcement color guard fixes bayonets. Law-enforcement officers may use force when legally necessary, but their institutional purpose is not to close with and destroy an enemy. They exercise civil authority among the population they serve.
An armed law-enforcement color guard can appropriately communicate protection, vigilance, and respect for the colors. Fixed bayonets communicate something else: preparation for close combat.
The intended message may be solemnity, strength, or enhanced ceremonial appearance. The actual message is far more aggressive: We are prepared to fight beneath these colors. That is not an appropriate ceremonial statement from civilian law enforcement to the public.
The Color Guard Is Not a Fighting Formation
Colors were once carried into battle. They helped troops identify their location, maintain alignment, and rally around their unit. Because capturing an enemy’s colors was a significant victory, armed guards protected the color bearer. As firearms became more accurate and effective during the nineteenth century, carrying colors on the battlefield became increasingly dangerous and tactically unnecessary. Colors gradually left the battlefield and assumed the ceremonial function they retain today.
The modern color guard preserves the dignity and symbolic importance of that history. It does not recreate the colors’ former battlefield function. The guards remain armed because they symbolically protect the colors. They are not preparing to defend them through close combat. Fixing bayonets introduces a battlefield message into a formation that is now ceremonial.
Random Military
Every once in a while, someone makes a mistake or thinks it’s a great idea to have everyone fix bayonets. The US Air Force Academy cadet honor guard made a bad decision that night. They realized it too late. The 82nd stillAirborne decided it would be a good thing at one point.
VMI and Citadel
Both Virginia Military Institute and the Citadel have similar histories. Both schools had cadets called up for battles in the Civil War. In honor of that, the corps of cadets marches in review with fixed bayonets. Both schools’ color guards also fix bayonets and when I bring it up, all that I receive in reply is “tradition!” even though I provide the reasoning behind why they should not fix bayonets for their guards.
- On May 15, 1864, the VMI Cadet Corps was engaged in pitched battle at New Market.
- On 9 January 1861 Citadel Cadets under the command of the college’s Superintendent, Col. Peter Stevens, manned a battery at Morris Island opening fire on the federal ship Star of the West (there is much more).
I do, however, understand that tradition is necessary to uphold. The companies fix bayonets, but the school color guards should not especially since the teams are always in the modern shoulder-to-shoulder line formation. If you still insist on the right and left rifle guards fixing bayonets, there is an alternative.
Start forming the Civil War era-ish color guard formation at normal interval. The formation, developed in the early 1800s, would consist of as many color bearers as you need (this would be a necessary modern alteration) with a guard on each side, and have a number of guards in the second rank. Traditionally, the first rank had one color bearer with a guard on each side and the second rank had three guards centered behind the three in front. You could then have more guards, one for each bearer, if you want. Here are a couple of suggestions.
In the graphic above, I provide the idea of either one guard in the rear rank per bearer (five), or having just three with the middle guard centered on the middle bearer.
In the graphic above, I provided an idea to use only three guards in the rear rank with the center guard in the “window” of the two center bearers as opposed to six guards.
Virginia Tech
VA Tech was founded shortly after the Civil War. Cadets volunteered to the Governor to serve in 1898 for the Spanish American War, but the cadets did not see service.
There is no historical reason for the color guard to fix bayonets like the Citadel and VMI push. Really, there’s no reason for a modern color guard to fix bayonets at all.
The Bayonet Changes the Sentence
Ceremonial objects carry meaning. The rifle, sword, flag, uniform, and formation are not interchangeable decorations. Each contributes to what the ceremony communicates.
A rifle carried by a color guard says that the colors are protected. A rifle with a fixed bayonet says that the weapon has been prepared for close combat. That is why the bayonet cannot be dismissed as a harmless visual enhancement. It changes the sentence being spoken by the formation.
Bottom Line
No general U.S. military doctrine authorizes a modern color guard to fix bayonets. Marine Corps doctrine expressly forbids it, while Army and Air Force color-guard doctrine does not prescribe it. Unique institutional privileges do not create authority for everyone else.
The modern color guard is a ceremonial element, not a fighting formation. Fixed bayonets assign combat meaning to that element, endanger personnel and flag material, and—when adopted by civilian law enforcement—communicate a warfighting posture wholly inappropriate to civil authority.
Fixed bayonets do not make a color guard more ceremonial. They make it say the wrong thing. Tradition does not override doctrine, and appearance does not override meaning.
Many thanks to Michael Kelley, DeVaughn Simper, Mark Schmitt, and Fire Chief Donald Butz for their input for this article.