Well would it? Their both ranged weapon, of course a formation with muskets would be better due to greater range and power but it would have been functional with crossbowmen at least right?

Afaik the tercios didn't primarily rely on musketeers anyway. That wasn't how they won their battles.

So yes, I think it would have worked without musketeers. In fact, I think it did, in the sense that solid pikeformations were around well before the famous Spanish tercios. The 16th c. Swiss, the 12th c. French "routier" mercenaries etc. In some sense, I would think it goes all the way back to the Macedonian phalanx.

In early 13th century flemish cities defeated the french knights using tight formation of pikemen. So it's quite possible.

In early 13th century flemish cities defeated the french knights using tight formation of pikemen. So it's quite possible.

Gonna correct you no that one.

The main reason the flemish won was that the French trampled over their own infantry in the rush and got stuck in the deep mud.

The Flemish then killed them (normally the procedure is let live and get ransom , but the Flemish said: "screw that") and mostly they used Goedendags. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goedendag_(wapen)

Well, in the Middle Ages the English successfully used an early mixed arm formation with longbowmen and billmen, so I don't see why pre-gunpowder mixed arms shouldn't be possible with other weapons.

Gonna correct you no that one.

The main reason the flemish won was that the French trampled over their own infantry in the rush and got stuck in the deep mud.

The Flemish then killed them (normally the procedure is let live and get ransom , but the Flemish said: "screw that") and mostly they used Goedendags. http://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goedendag_(wapen)
Thanks. I stand corrected.
BTW.
Quite a badass weapon!