Brown Bess Carbine...

[Russ T Frizzen]

For a lengthy time period, British military arms did follow a similar pattern--I guess you could term it the "Bess" pattern for lack of a better term. But the true Bess was an Infantry arm, not a Dragoon arm. And, in any case, none of these arms were ever made specifically as a very short barrelled trade musket. I think that's where the confusion comes in. There were shorter and lighter versions of the Bess and there were carbines, but there weren't any Bess trade guns.

 

[chuckpa]

Rusty
Do You happen to have Howard L. Blackmore's book. I would like your opinion on the page I referenced.

 

[Many Klatch]

Chuck, the Frazier Museum in Louisville has a display of Besses on the upper floor. Darned if they don't have a Bess Carbine right alongside of the Infantry Besses. The Besses are part of the display that came from the Tower of London.

Many KLatch

 

[tmdreb]

Most nations in the late 18th and early 19th Centuries were making carbines based on their current pattern of musket. One of the main differences was the scale. It wasn't just a shorter barrel, the locks, stocks and furniture were smaller as well. This might not be noticeable in a photograph.

 

[chuckpa]

Thanks Many
Can you tell us if the carbines used the same locks and furniture as the full size Bess?
Thanks
Chuck

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

No I don't have a copy. Can you post a copy of the page?

 

[Mike Brooks]

Can you tell us if the carbines used the same locks and furniture as the full size Bess?

No they didn't. They were also of carbine bore which was .65 caliber if I recall correctly.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Mike is correct.

 

[tmdreb]

Can you tell us if the carbines used the same locks and furniture as the full size Bess?

No they didn't. They were also of carbine bore which was .65 caliber if I recall correctly.

Some were indeed musket bore (.75 caliber) but they still used different locks and furniture.

 

[chuckpa]

Rusty
I will try to get a copy of a few pages showing carbines from the book.
The 1796 Pattern carbines were of musket bore.
Also in "Borders Away" on page 188 there is a Carbine which sure looks like a Bess with a short Barrel. The carbine is in it's original arms chest in the Smithsonian.

 

[gizamo]

Good Friend of mine, suggested that to find the answer to the heart of my question (in the OP) ~ suggested that I go to the Maine State Museum in Augusta, and look over the collection of Smoothbore's. He has done so, and suggested that a few examples of trade guns are in that collection, similiar to the gun that I originally asked about...

Looks like I need to take a road trip next week :grin:

Giz

 

[chuckpa]

Thanks Fellows for your patience with me on this one. I just pulled out a copy(1st edition) of George C Neumann"s The History of the Weapons of the American Revolution.
On page 116 illustration M.94 He states "prior to the 1750's the British carbine was usually a cut-down infantry musket." This example was originally an early long land pattern"etc.

Illustration M.95 English Light-Dragoon Carbine
" A British warrant in 1756 established new light-dragoon troops and specified their first standard carbine pattern." He then further states that, "The furniture is a scaled down version of the long-land pattern, etc."

on page 120
Illustration M.100 English Carbine
"This is one of several known carbine types which do not comply with official specifications. They may have predated the first regulation light-dragoon model (1756), been created for independent units, or hastily fashioned during wartime shortages. The arm is a heavy naval musket of the 1750 period, with the .77-caliber barrel shortened to 261/2". It includes a side bar and ring of the type used by horse troops. The original Navel-style furniture(m.23) and stock proofs remain. but the only markings in the metal is "MG" on the barrel.
Length 423/8"
Barrel 261/2" .77

I also noticed that on page 64
Illustration M.17 English Trade Musket
"Other shoulder arms in early America were ones for trading with the Indians. At first shortened infantry muskets were used" etc.

I will let you men with more knowledge then me on that subject discuss what those infantry models could have been.

Thanks again for for sharing all your information.

 

[J.D.]

Those short Naval muskets were pretty much an anomaly. However, the question was ask, were they used as trade guns. The answer is no

I don't know of any documentation suggesting that any Brit military guns were sold as surplus in the Colonies. Brit troops who mustered out of the service to remain in the Colonies, after the french war, were required to turn in all of their military equipment prior to mustering out.

IF those short guns did exist, how would they have gotten into civilian hands unless they were sold surplus? Documentation suggests that Brit military musket surplus sales to civilians in the Colonies did not occur.

If anyone can provide documentation suggesting that surplus Brit military muskets did occur in the Colonies, I would like to see it.

 

[paulvallandigham]

J.D. A lot of British soldiers were killed on the battlefield, and the guns picked up by colonials, or by Indians. That is how they got into civilian hands. And, not every British officer or soldier was as honest as might be required by regulation. If you had the unenviable job of sitting on a warehouse full of guns, and powder, and other supplies, and someone offered you a lot of money to look the other way while some of those guns got put to better use, you might just make a few bucks. "Inventory shortage, or losses" were experienced by the British forces just as they have in every army in the history of mankind. Whther the officers every benefitted from these losses does not matter. Once munitions reached the field, anything could happen. Do you think, for instance, that every gun from every fallen British or Colonial soldier killed with Braddock was recovered and returned to Virginia??? :nono: :surrender: :thumbsup:

 

[chuckpa]

JD
I did get off the subject of trade guns if you look at my post on page 4 of this thread. I stated that I didn't know if the carbines were ever used as trade guns. I was then asking questions about carbines and there dimensions. It appears that prior to the 1750's the carbines were cut down versions of the infantry musket.
Sorry for the confusion JD

 

[Mike Brooks]

Illustration M.17 English Trade Musket
"Other shoulder arms in early America were ones for trading with the Indians. At first shortened infantry muskets were used" etc.

Pure bull hockey here, although I hate to say Neuman doesn't know what he is talking about. The British were trading specific patterns of guns specifically for the indian trade as early as the 1670's. The British hadn't even invented the brown bess until 1720 or so.

 

[Mike Brooks]

J.D. A lot of British soldiers were killed on the battlefield, and the guns picked up by colonials, or by Indians. That is how they got into civilian hands. And, not every British officer or soldier was as honest as might be required by regulation. If you had the unenviable job of sitting on a warehouse full of guns, and powder, and other supplies, and someone offered you a lot of money to look the other way while some of those guns got put to better use, you might just make a few bucks. "Inventory shortage, or losses" were experienced by the British forces just as they have in every army in the history of mankind. Whther the officers every benefitted from these losses does not matter. Once munitions reached the field, anything could happen. Do you think, for instance, that every gun from every fallen British or Colonial soldier killed with Braddock was recovered and returned to Virginia??? :nono: :surrender: :thumbsup:

Pure speculation..... :nono: Before the Rev War all bess's found by the british colonials were turned into the crown. You'd stick out like a sore thumb as a civilian carrying around the King's property unless you were in a company that was issued a bess.
The Indians hated these big heavy old clunkers and would have been highly unlikely to pick them up for any use. They tended to favor guns at least 5 lbs lighter than a bess that shot a ball at least 1/3rd smaller.

 

[Mike Brooks]

It appears that prior to the 1750's the carbines were cut down versions of the infantry musket.

Uh Oh..... :hmm: I think I'm going to have to get my Dewitt Bailey book out..... :haha:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

"I just pulled out a copy(1st edition) of George C Neumann"s The History of the Weapons of the American Revolution."

And so on and so forth......

Chuck, Neumann is a wonderful author and probably has more knowledge on the subject than many other authors in the field, BUT.... The work you are quoting is well over 30 years old and has been shown to be wrong in MANY instances, good in its day but flawed now. He even shows examples of British India Pattern Besses and Dutch weapons purchased by the US government in the 1790s as Rev War weapons! This is documented with recently uncovered sources, see Mohler. We, including Neumann have come a long way. Inaccuracies include the items that you are using to back up the argument. Read Neumann's more recent works and you will find the corrections. As far as British military arms, carbines in particular, read Bailey as Mike suggests, he is almost flawless in his information, his sources are impeccable.

 

[paulvallandigham]

Just who would these guns " Stick out to", west of the Appalachians, and who was going to do anything about taking these guns away from Indians or settlers? And aren't you speculating on how the Indians felt about the guns? I know you are not old enough to have interviewed the Indians yourself. :rotf: :hmm: :thumbsup:

Its nice of you to come to the defense of J.D., but I was Not Attacking him. He posed a proposition that I believe was, and is full of holes based on other known histories, and even recent history. For instance, the two full-auto AK47s used back in 1999 in the Hollywood Bank Robbery, insescently shown on TV, were " taken " from a warehouse in Panama, and smuggled into the USA. You won't hear that truth on TV, but it is the truth. I also was told that the warehouse was being controlled by U.S. armed forces, and not Panamanian forces. At the time, the MSM was in a dither to " Prove " that the source of the guns came from somewhere in the USA, to support further gun bans. When the investigation by L.A. Police, and the FBI learned the truth, NO mention was ever made on TV by any of the anti-gunners. The facts didn't fit their agenda.

I am suggesting that much the same thing has happened when it comes to guns since they were invented and produced in enough quantities to be stored somewhere. And we know that part of the spoils of war, dating back to Biblical accounts, was to recover the arms and armor from the fallen enemy soldiers. Some Indians might not have liked the heavy Brown Bess guns, but any musket was bettern than NO musket.

And, they could always shorten those barrels to lighten the guns.