rifle tales from J. J. Audubon

John James Audubon wrote a lot of very interesting descriptions of black powder shooting and hunting in the 19th century. Here are some examples from the book "Audubon and His Journals" Vol. II edited by his granddaughter, Maria Audubon.

Having resided some years in Kentucky and more than once been witness of rifle sport, I shall present you with the results of my observation, leaving you to judge how far rifle-shooting is understood in that State.
Several individuals who conceive themselves expert in the management of the gun are often seen to meet for the purpose of displaying their skill, and betting a sum, put up a target, in the centre of which a common-sized nail is hammered for about two thirds of its length. The marksmen make choice of what they consider a proper distance, which may be forty paces. Each man cleans the interior of his tube, which is called wiping it, places a ball in the palm of his hand, pouring as much powder from his horn upon it as will cover it. This quantity is supposed to be sufficient for any distance within a hundred yards. A shot which comes very close to the nail is considered as that of an indifferent marksman; the bending of the nail is, of course, somewhat better; but nothing less than hitting it right on the head is satisfactory. Well, kind reader, one out of three shots generally hits the nail, and should the shooters amount to half a dozen, two nails are frequently needed before each can have a shot. Those who drive the nail have a further trial amongst themselves, and the two best shots out of these generally settle the affair, when all the sportsmen adjourn to some house, and spend an hour or two in friendly intercourse, appointing, before they part, a day for another trial. This is technically termed driving the nail.

Click to expand...

The snuffing of a candle with a ball, I first had an opportunity of seeing near the banks of Green River, not far from a large Pigeon-roost to which I had previously made a visit. I heard many reports of guns during the early part of a dark night, and knowing them to be those of rifles, I went towards the spot to ascertain the cause. On reaching the place, I was welcomed by a dozen of tall stout men, who told me they were exercising, for the purpose of enabling them to shoot under night at the reflected light from the eyes of a Deer or Wolf, by torchlight of which I shall give you an account somewhere else. A fire was blazing near, the smoke of which rose curling among the thick foliage of the trees. At a distance which rendered it scarcely distinguishable, stood a burning candle, as if intended for an offering to the goddess of night, but which in reality was only fifty yards from the spot on which we all stood. One man was within a few yards of it, to watch the effects of the shots, as well as to light the candle should it chance to go out, or to replace it should the shot cut it across. Each marksman shot in his turn. Some never hit either the snuff or the candle, and were congratulated with a loud laugh; while others actually snuffed the candle without putting it out, and were recompensed for their dexterity by numerous hurrahs. One of them, who was particularly expert, was very fortunate, and snuffed the candle three times out of seven, whilst all the other shots either put out the candle or cut it immediately under the light.

Click to expand...

The hunter has returned to his camp or his house, has rested and eaten of his game. He waits impatiently for the return of night. He has procured a quantity of pine knots filled with resinous matter, and has an old frying-pan, that, for aught I know to the contrary, may have been used by his great-grandmother, in which the pine-knots are to be placed when lighted. The horses stand saddled at the door. The hunter comes forth, his rifle slung on his shoulder, and springs upon one of them, while his son, or a servant, mounts the other with the frying-pan and the pine knots. Thus accoutred, they proceed towards the interior of the forest. When they have arrived at the spot where the hunt is to begin, they strike fire with a flint and steel, and kindle the resinous wood. The person who carries the fire moves in the direction judged to be the best. The blaze illuminates the near objects, but the distant parts seem involved in deepest obscurity. The hunter who bears the gun keeps immediately in front, and after a while discovers before him two feeble lights, which are produced by the reflection of the pine-fire from the eyes of an animal of the Deer or Wolf kind. The animal stands quite still. To one unacquainted with this strange mode of hunting, the glare from its eyes might bring to his imagination some lost hobgoblin that had strayed from its usual haunts. The hunter, however, nowise intimidated, approaches the object, sometimes so near as to discern its form, when, raising the rifle to his shoulder, he fires and kills it on the spot. He then dismounts, secures the skin and such portions of the flesh as he may want, in the manner already described, and continues his search through the greater part of the night, sometimes until the dawn of day, shooting from five to ten Deer, should these animals be plentiful, This kind of hunting proves fatal, not to the Deer alone, but also sometimes to Wolves, and now and then to a horse or cow which may have straggled far into the woods.

Click to expand...

Spence

Spence, Thanks for bringing this to my attention. I wasn't aware of the Audubon Journals at all and these look interesting in general as well as for shooting references. For those who want them, both volumes are available for free on Kindle e-readers and probably elsewhere. I got the free versions last night and they look good so far, without the usual typos and formatting problems these versions often have. I may well end up with physical copies of the Journals, my preference for history books, but the e-versions are a good start.

Jeff

Here's a link to some interesting things about Audubon that some don't know.
https://www.mnn.com/earth-matters/...hings-you-didnt-know-about-john-james-audubon

I noticed something I thought is interesting in the third quote you posted.

"The hunter comes forth, his rifle slung on his shoulder,..."

Many of our members seem to feel that having a sling on their muzzleloading rifle is not historically correct. This quote would seem to support the idea that slings were indeed sometimes used on rifles in the early 1800's.

One has to be careful with historical quotes - "slung" might also be understood as "carried". "On his shoulder" could also be "over his shoulder" - so it is not completely clear if a sling was involved or just an over the shoulder carry like one would a pole. So many details are a bit fuzzy.

Can't speak to the early 19th century, but there are a number of surviving 18th century longrifles with sling swivels or holes indicating that they were fitted at one point with sling swivels, so slings are absolutely PC, just not all that common (maybe 5% going by surviving examples).

For anyone who isn't aware, Audubon also includes a fairly detailed description of the loading process that has been a staple of our occasional debates on this forum over period loading techniques. I wasn't familiar with any of the passages quoted here, though. I like that description of jack-lighting deer in particular. I'm going to have to get a copy of those journals myself, I think.

I totally agree but, if I was the hunter and my rifle did not have a sling, Audubon would have written, "The hunter comes forth, springs onto his horse and with his rifle laying across his thighs and saddle pommel waits, while his son, or a servant mounts the other..."

I think it is easier to ride while the rifle is supported in this manner rather than having it rest on ones shoulder while controlling the reins.

As to using slings on rifles when hunting from horseback and only 5 percent of long rifles having been fitted for sling swivels, I see no reason that both cannot be true. Temporary/non permanently mounted slings made from a length of rope or other material and tied to or attached with loops to put it on and take it off quick from a rifle only when needed, seems to offer the best explanation.

After all, permanently mounting sling swivels on a majority of rifles, is a relatively modern practice for hunters, though the Military was doing it on Muskets and Rifles quite commonly from at least the 18th century.

Gus

I don't recall anything I have on rifle slings, but Benjamin Franklin understood the problem of riding with a long arm.

The Pennsylvania Gazette
March 8, 1748
A Parcel of good Muskets, all well fitted with Bayonets, Belts and Cartouch Boxes, and Buff Slings to cast over the Shoulder , very useful to such as have Occasion to ride with their Arms; To be sold by B. FRANKLIN.

Spence

Excellent point. In the area of the Great Plains that I grew up in, I saw very few non military rifles with slings when I was a kid. That would be 60 years ago, but if someone looked at the rifles there at that time and they might say they weren't used. They were, but just weren't very common.

Personally, I tend to think that slings are more likely to indicate militia or military use in the infantry, which was the only time a man was likely to travel long distance on foot, rather than for use on horseback, which was the common mode of transportation along the frontier from about 1700 on. I think most civilians just balanced the rifle across the saddle when their arms got tired, whereas infantrymen did not have that option.

I should clarify that the 5% figure is a guess based on Shumway's Rifles of Colonial America and a couple minor sources, which include a large number of Revolutionary War pieces, and may not hold true for Golden Age or later rifles. Certainly the Plains rifles don't seem to have been fitted with slings, something I'd expect to see if slings were associated with horseback use.

Artificer said:

As to using slings on rifles when hunting from horseback and only 5 percent of long rifles having been fitted for sling swivels, I see no reason that both cannot be true. Temporary/non permanently mounted slings made from a length of rope or other material and tied to or attached with loops to put it on and take it off quick from a rifle only when needed, seems to offer the best explanation.

Click to expand...

I see this idea advanced a lot, but I think that there are some problems. First, coming up with a suitable piece of strapping or cordage out in the field isn't necessarily going to be all that easy - you could cut a "tug" out of rawhide or roll some cordage, but that takes time, energy, and the appropriate materials at hand. Second, doing so would likely render an original rifle inoperable until the sling was removed, as the very low sights found on originals would likely be obscured by anything tied around the barrel. That evidently isn't a problem with modern repros because of the higher sights commonly used today, but on an original with typically very fine, low sights I doubt you could aim the gun with a sling tied on.

So, it appears to me that the difficulty of coming up with a suitable sling on the fly precludes a tied-on sling being used as a quick field expedient without prior planning and preparation, whereas the fact that it would essentially render the gun inoperable would discourage anyone from planning to do so. Which isn't to say that it could have ever been done, but it seems to me that it would only be done under very specific conditions and very uncommonly.

The third article talked about going out on horseback at night and the hunter slung his rifle as he rode. Of course, “at night” had a wide range of just how much you could/can see.

Now since I spent a lot of nights hunting raccoons over a few years and we did not use our lanterns to walk/move around, go up and down some pretty steep bluffs, walk through swamps and woods with and without a lot of brush, as well as some corn fields and other fields, etc. and most of the time on unfamiliar land ”“ I know that some nights with a half to a full moon can be surprisingly easy to see much more than one would think. We used to joke that a clear/full moon night was as easy to see things as during the day, though of course that was an exaggeration to a degree. You even learn where there are holes or other footfalls in the shadows, though you can’t see if there are or not. It is more like you know because you “feel” it rather than seeing.

Yes, they often lay the gun over the saddle pommel during the day when they could see well and steer the horse away from branches, brush and getting too close to trees. However at night, I would rather sling the rifle over my back, muzzle pointing down, just so avoid the rifle hitting one of those obstacles that was a might too close. Now granted an Old Growth forest does not have a lot of low branches or shrubs, but they always have some. I imagine that is why the quote says the rifle was slung when “Thus accoutred, they proceed towards the interior of the forest.”

I mentioned earlier, “Temporary/non permanently mounted slings made from a length of rope or other material and tied to or attached with loops to put it on and take it off quick from a rifle only when needed.” Sorry if that wasn’t clear, but I meant they took the sling off before the tried to aim the rifle with those little original sights.”

It doesn’t mention it, but I have to assume the son or servant held the pan full of lit pine knots at least somewhere to the rear of the hunter when he fired from horseback, so the hunter could actually see those tiny/little original sights. Otherwise, the Hunter would never have been able to hit anything at night unless of course it was extremely close range and the hunter used some kind of Point and Shoot technique, like they teach “Quick Kill” in the Military where you mount the rifle/gun pretty much as normal, but look down over the barrel to shoot instead of using the sights. For those who have never practiced it, it doesn't take long to be able to hit rather small objects out to 25 yards.

As to a rope or something else to use as a temporary sling, it would have been just as easy back in the day to take some scrap leather and cut around the outside in ever smaller circles to make a pretty long strip. As I remember, the Old Herter’s Catalogue used to call that making “babiche,” which is where I learned of it when I was a lad. Three or four strips woven together and with enough pieces tied together to make a sling as long as needed and you have a plenty strong enough sling that can easily be rolled up and fit into a hunting pouch or tucked into a folded edge of a Rifleman’s Shirt, which they often used as a pocket to carry parched corn and other things. Also, Joseph Doddridge mentions hand weaving belts and ties for leggins and anyone who could do that on the frontier, could easily weave a sling that could also be easily folded up and tucked away, when not in use.

There was no need for the hunter to have come up with such a sling "on the fly," because he left from his home with the rifle slung.

Gus

Another passage on fire hunting that might elucidate things a bit, from William Elliot's Carolina Sports, published in 1867 but evidently written somewhat earlier:

(Kindling a flame)was soon done; the blazing chips of lightwood were placed in the frying pan, and the handle passed over the shoulder of the negro, who swayed it backwards and forwards, horizontally, with a knowing look, illuminating all objects far and near, except the space kept in shadow by the intervention of the head. It is in this shaded space, that the eyes of the deer become visible to the fire-hunter, appearing like globes of greenish flame...

"I'll hardly let you scare this one off, I tell you! I know the distance by the size of the eyes; and it took me fifty shots to know that, as I know it now. You'd be for sneaking up till you could see their horns; but an old buck ain't a-going to let you get that close, I tell you. He's the almightiest cunning creature to get around. But, be quiet now; for we are getting near. Don't speak a word, but follow me; for I'll keep in the shade made by your body--so throw the shadow right on me.

Slouch and Pompey, our two heroes, eventually shoot a stag at a range "within fifty yards," and later on a fine colt belonging to the owner of the plantation on whose deer they are poaching, plus later that night fire-hunters from the neighboring plantation manage to bag Pompey's brother. The author was not a fan of fire-hunting.

Re slings:

1) I think Coot is right - the passage cannot be conclusively taken to mean that the rifle had a sling, and could easily just indicate that the hunter carried his rifle out from the house on his shoulder.

The more I think about it, as a matter of fact, the more likely that interpretation seems. Audubon was not a native English speaker and elsewhere exhibits a slightly off-beat vocabulary combined with a flair for the poetic and picturesque description, like referring to the octagonal shape of a rifle muzzle as "honeycombed." I can easily believe that he would use "slung" to mean "carried across the shoulder" - the word has a nice ring to it indicating a breezy, carefree attitude on the part of the hunter.

Incidentally, one of the definitions of "sling" in Webster's 1828 dictionary is "to hang as though to swing; as, to sling a pack." It can also mean to hang with a rope, but both definitions were apparently in use.

2) I agree it would be simple enough to make a sling at home before setting out. My point was that the hunter would have to plan ahead to attach a sling that would render his gun inoperable while remained attached. That didn't seem like a sensible plan to me, but I admit that I was thinking in terms of an unsettled frontier setting rather than recreational hunting in settled farmland and that it would make more sense in the latter scenario.

3)Rather than untie and then re-tie a sling in near dark, it would be easier to just hold the gun in the hand, I would think.

4)While a tie-on sling seems like an obvious work-around to us, I haven't run across a period reference or any wear patterns on originals that would indicate that this was at all a common practice. Given that, plus the fact that they could easily have added sling swivels as a common feature had slings been found useful, I think the logical conclusion is that most people just didn't want them, improvised or formal.

I have to admit I don't understand how they illuminated the rifle sights when "fire hunting" and especially for shooting a stag at 50 yards, which would have required the use of the sights even on a clear, full moon night.

I am not entirely sure, but I don't think it would work for the person holding the blazing pine knots in front of the shooter because his rear sight would not be in focus enough to shoot at 50 yards.

I began Raccoon Hunting in the 1960's and some guys still used Carbide lanterns to illuminate sights. Carbide lanterns required one person to stand behind the shooter and illuminate the sights, this because of the open flame as the light source. We "young kids" bought the fairly new and fairly inexpensive plastic rectangular box shaped battery lanterns and used them like the Carbide lanterns or we could hold the lantern in the left hand around the rear of the head and shine it along the right arm that held the .22 pistol to illuminate the sights. With either Carbide or Battery Lanterns used these ways, we could see the sights and take the Raccoons as high as they climbed in trees with usually only one shot, if the person was any kind of a marksman.

RE: Slings

I am not sure you understand what I mean about using temporary slings.

I fully agree we don't see the wear patterns on original arms that would indicate the common/frequent use of temporary tied/looped on slings, but that is not what I mean anyway.

I agree that most people in the 18th through early/mid 19th century did not commonly use slings and they had no reason to do so. However, there would have been some times that slinging a rifle would have been very advantageous as in climbing up or down steep hills/bluffs where you often need both hands to move without falling or when you need to use both hands to pull game out of brush or up or down hill or up over the riverbank for a few examples. IOW, tie or loop a sling on the rifle/gun only when they had to and then untie it or take it off when they did not need it.

Now of course one could lay their rifle/gun down until they dragged the deer to a flatter spot of land where they then could drag the deer in one hand and hold the rifle/gun in the other, but I would not want to be that far away from my gun on the frontier where hostile humans could be watching or having been alerted to my presence by the gun shot.

I have mostly hunted deer here in the relatively flat Piedmont areas of Virginia and I'm not even talking about the hills going up to the mountains. There have been plenty of times where many of us had to lay down our guns to drag deer out of difficult terrain with both hands until we got them on flatter land areas to drag them with one hand. So this is not from speculation, but from actual hunting conditions.

Gus

Artificer said:

I am not entirely sure, but I don't think it would work for the person holding the blazing pine knots in front of the shooter because his rear sight would not be in focus enough to shoot at 50 yards.

Click to expand...

William Moseby, Kentucky frontier, late 18th century, described the light being in front of the shooter.

"Had fire hunts, the deer would come down at night to get the moss out of the bottom of the river, in the shoals, grew in the bottom and pointed up frequently, a little above water, if not they would reach their nose down and nip it off. A canoe was gotten ready, a piece of green bark was spread over with sand, and on this a fire made of dry Linn, which made a very bright light. The steersman sat in one end and the light was placed in the other, the gunner in between. The deer would gaze at it, till they would come up to it and shoot, and the canoe was then loaded."

But they didn't have to worry about the sights:

"First fire hunt at night went with my father and older brother, 4 large bucks were killed with the gun called Frank loaded with about 30 buckshot as large as our rifle balls now, and was taken by my father in the Revolution from a British soldier whom he overcome."

Spence

John Palliser, _Solitary Rambles and Adventures of a Hunter in the Prairies_, written 1847, published 1853

In Arkansas:

“One evening we determined to go out pan-hunting, a species of sport, which, for the edification of my brethren on this side of the Atlantic, I must endeavour to explain. It is a method of hunting deer at night. An iron pan attached to a long stick serving as a handle is carried in the left hand over the left shoulder; near where the left hand grasps the handle is a small projecting stick, forming a fork on which to rest the rifle in firing. The pan is filled with burning pine knots. which being saturated with turpentine. shed a brilliant and constant light all round. shining into the eyes of any deer that may come in that direction and making them look like two balls of fire. The effect is most curious to those unaccustomed to it. and surprised me very much the first time that a deer came and stared at my light. I drew up my rifle, aimed as well as I was able, for I could but imperfectly trace the line of my sight, although marked with chalk (a plan we adopt when shooting wild ducks by night in England) and fired, but my inquisitive buck bounded off unscathed, as did another at which I had a tolerably fair shot also that night.“

Obviously a learned skill.

Spence

Thank you Spence,

That makes it much more clear.

Gus

Forty-Four Years of The Life of a Hunter, 1859, Meshach Browning

"The following is the mode of shooting deer by firelight:
If the deer come to a lake or river to drink, and eat the moss which grows beneath the water, a canoe must be prepared, with a piece of bark peeled from a tree, bent in the middle till it forms a half-square, and secured in this position by a forked stick, the lower end of which is fastened to the bottom of the canoe. One side of bark thus forms a screen for the canoe, while the other side serves as a shed over the gunner sitting in the bottom of the vessel. A candle with a large wick, placed in the middle of the bark, will give sufficient light to render objects visible at the distance of thirty or forty steps.

"The canoe is started in search of game with a boy to pole it quietly along the stream. He must never raise his pole out of the water; for the dropping of the water would frighten the deer. As the canoe glides noiselessly along the stream, nothing but the candle can be seen by the deer; and they stand watching it in amazement, till the canoe comes within eight or ten steps. The reflection of the candle at a good distance make the eyes of the deer appear like balls of fire, and their bodies look white as those of sheep. They will not move till shot down, as they are unaware of the danger till the gun is fired; when perhaps a dozen will dash out of the water, making a great splashing, and rush through the bushes and weeds along the banks. ”¦.,"

And....

"Shooting deer at a lick differs but little from the mode just related, if the lick be a natural one. The plan is to climb a tree, to the distance of thirty or forty feet, and there make a nest of limbs to shade the hunter. Then either a few coals of fire and some fine splinters, or a large candle, is tied to a pole like those used in fishing, and a place is fixed to lay the pole on after the candle is lighted. When the deer come to the lick, the candle is laid as near over it as the length of the pole will admit, when the light will display the entire body of the deer and the sights of the gun as plain as they could be seen in daylight. The deer will sometimes stand until they receive a second and third shot; so perfectly astonished are they at the blaze of the candle and the thunder of the heavily-loaded rifle. They become confused, and seem to lose their senses for a time."

Spence

Even more "enlightening." :grin:

Thank you.

Gus