The pictures are magnificent, but raise a question to me...
It is said that the regiments of Swiss pikers and Landsknetches could use their long pikes to stop cavalry (in ways similar to those used by the sarissa-armed Macedonian phalanxes), but were vulnerable to harquebusiers. Then, it was introduced by Spain the "Tercios", mixing some arquebusiers with the pikers to defend themselves from fire. Then, it is told that the bayonet united both necessities in one.
Seeing the picture where infantry waits for cavalry with their bayonets as if they were pikes makes me think they are being used as pikes, and the history told in the above paragraph makes one think the bayonet replaced the functions of the pike.
But... don't you think that a bayonet is a very short weapon to replace the cavalry-impaling pikes or sarissas? Indeed, the Greek hoplites had a much longer weapon in their spear to defend from the Macedonian cavalry, and even then the Macedonian cavalry (also ussing sarissas) almost always defeated them (although it can be said that the cavalry attacking the bayonets do not use long spears here).
It seems that the bayonet is a good weapon to combat infantry, but not so good as the pike to deter cavalry, or at least inferior to a spear.
