The meaning of "Traditional"

[Tumblernotch]

OK...based on the fact that no one can or has even answered the simplest question of the powder horn example, the conclusion is there is no concrete guideline / answer, therefore, the door is wide open for "anything goes".

I think you may be introducing confusion to your own topic. The above quote would seem to suggest that you seek rules to be applied to the usage of the term "traditional". We are bouncing back and forth from the concept of rules for defining appropriate "traditional" items and the "philosophical" aspects of the usage of the term.

My view of the use of the term "traditional" is that it deserves no place in our sport (hobby? Insert word of choice). It is reactive terminology. When did the word come into use regarding the things that we employ in our hobby? I contend that it was back when things like in-lines and plastic stocks, etc., began to appear.

We see the same reactive use of the word in the archery world. When I was a kid there was no such thing as "traditional" archery. The term came into use as a reaction to the introduction of the compound bow along with other associated things used with them.

Same with muzzle loading. When I got started in the early '70's nobody talked about "traditional" muzzle loading. Just muzzle loading and muzzle loaders. Then as now there were those like myself that were clueless as to historical accuracy of what we used but OTOH we have always had true students of the history of muzzle loaders among us who could explain the difference to anyone who care(d)(s) to listen.

The real experts are students of history, not "tradition" as we seem to use the term.

Not only do we use the term "traditional" to exclude ourselves from the modern ML practicioners, but we use it to exclude ourselves from ourselves. So many of the "rendevous" in my area are exclusive to the 1800 to 1840 rocky mountain fur trade period. I have never understood why those who re-enact or develop a personna have to be in accord with a certain period being re-enacted at a get together. Seems like it would be far more educational for all in attendance if personas and periods were irrelevant and we all sought to broaden our knowledge of history through our associations with others who try to carry a true historically correct and period correct (to their own chosen period) representation of the life of that period in time. (wonder if anybody would show up with a stainless in-line, mossy oak cammo, etc to represent the early 21st century!! :shocked2: :haha: )

So, if there was an in-line flintlock and some hapless diverted soul chose to research it and the man who invented it and then accurately re-create the rifle and personna, would that be of historical interest and value? Or, would we apply "traditional" rules and eject this re-enactor. Maybe he/she could be allowed to stay but made to wear a scarlett letter "C" for "cheater". That way we could make a fine bad example of him/her. :rotf:

I therefore am going to resolve to never use the word "traditional" again to describe the equipment used in the muzzle loading "sport". That may make it harder to talk to some members of the forum, but everything worthwhile requires effort!

One question stands out in my mind. Why was the concept limited right of to "civilian" practices?

Sorry for the long rambling reply, but it was requested that the thread be "philisophical". :blah:

I like the way you said that. The term "traditional" would not be necessary if not for the new styles of muzzleloaders. Besides, the word best describes a rite or belief that has been passed from generation to generation in an unchanged form. I don't think I explained what I thought in a clear manner. Heck, it was late and I was sleepy.

 

[longcruise]

Knowing these kinds of discussions usually wander, I tried to sharpen the focus / frame the discussion some by at least keeping the military aspects out of it due to some of their unique aspects...to really try to get some precision in the dialogue about what constituted traditional during that era.

Ok, I see what you are saying.

It's hard for me to separate the two. Civilian and military firearms and their usage in history are very deeply entwined. Seems the farther back one looks at our own history on this continent the more entwined they become.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

There is no consensus.
Chances are if there was a consensus it would be wrong anyway. :grin:

 

[hoochiepapa]

I have read this discussion, and the only thing that comes to mind is that this is the reason i^&^$#%@ were allowed in the ml season in CO. Because they shoot black powder. It started out as a "primitive" season, and the quacks that shoot zip guns wanted to be included. :surrender:

 

[Mike Brooks]

Traditional. I don't think it's a good word to describe guns. take a TC for example. Traditional? Most folks would say so. But, it has coilsprings, definately not traditional. I think the term should be avoided, and stick to HC/PC to describe physical items, elimates a large area of confusion.

 

[Tumblernotch]

Traditional. I don't think it's a good word to describe guns. take a TC for example. Traditional? Most folks would say so. But, it has coilsprings, definately not traditional. I think the term should be avoided, and stick to HC/PC to describe physical items, elimates a large area of confusion.

Even using HC/PC can cause confusion with certain guns. The Hall breechloader was made from 1819 to 1844 and some were converted during the CW to (gasp) inline muzzleloaders. While not necessarily period correct (not a regularly made type since so few were converted), they are historically correct as they did exist and were used. (as muzzleloaders). I've seen this used as an argument that inlines are correct although they are nothing like the Hall/Barrett rifle.

 

[Maestro]

Wow! Sounds like there's more than a couple of lawyers on this site! :rotf: All this discussion on the meaning of "traditional"!
Good thing it's not a discussion of what the word "is" is! :wink:

 

[rawhide]

I find this to be interesting... well I MYSELF feel and I think theres others to would say and what time would it be constiterd tradtional? pre 1840? pre 1900 or ? thats what I'm tring to find out. some will say 1840 some 1900. so? why the dogfight?! and YES there was some inlines one I know was form beretta in I (think) was in 1700's and also durning the fur trade the was I (think) a scout rifle. looked like a mod 94 winchester. may have ben later. and same thing with the civil war late in the war there was henrys... so? well at any rate I like the club I'm with. we use guns that or replics of pre 1840. and yes you can use a patterson revolver it is of that time frame. oh sorry on this as for the inlines it is pre 1900 I think they should be aloud. now the knights tc encore bla bla bla are to me modern fire arms. my 2 cents.

 

[longcruise]

I have read this discussion, and the only thing that comes to mind is that this is the reason i^&^$#%@ were allowed in the ml season in CO. Because they shoot black powder. It started out as a "primitive" season, and the quacks that shoot zip guns wanted to be included.

Hey mike, it was worse than that! It wasn't the guys who shoot them that wanted them included, it was the guys who manufacture them. :shocked2: Even so, we manage to keep our season more primitive than most states. I meet non res hunters regularly who P&M about not being allowed to use their scopes or sabots.

 

[hoochiepapa]

Oh, man, I feel so sorry for them!
I was at one of the meetings in Canon City when they (?) tried to get the smokeless inlines legalized.
I would like a "primitive" season.

 

[longcruise]

I would like a "primitive" season.

Me Too!

:thumbsup:

 

[pmwest]

To my way of thinking, the word “Traditional” when used to describe firearms and accoutrements is a general description meaning of the style and technique of a past time. In more simple terms; the way it used to be done. It does not carry the same meaning as “Historically Accurate” or “Period Correct”. These terms add qualification to the general category of “Traditional”. In other words; what type of traditional firearm it is. To use the word “Traditional” to try to qualify a certain time frame or location would be a misuse of the word.

 

[hanshi]

You're correct. I've read many times how the (wonderful) Savage M99 was the traditional rifle for deer hunting in New England and how the Win M94 was the traditional eastern deer rifle. Bolts supplanted the lever in much of it's range as did the #%&?@ did in ML. One tradition dies nad another is born. :idunno:

 

[smo]

Let me take my poke at this hornets nest :grin: Traditional to me would be Original,not a repoduction. Traditional Style- would be anything copied in an Original style or a close resemblance there of. But what do i know :idunno:

 

[longbow1]

I believe that traditional means to us is preserving a piece of the past . By the only way we can . We as M/L shooters have a fond interest in the past and we want to preserve it.

So traditional is preserving the past out of respect to those who lived it :hatsoff:

 

[Tumblernotch]

Wow! Sounds like there's more than a couple of lawyers on this site! :rotf: All this discussion on the meaning of "traditional"!
Good thing it's not a discussion of what the word "is" is! :wink:

This is gettin' nuts ain't it? There are too many distinct periods of ML history for us to nail it down. Maybe we ought to just say traditional is the period before smokeless powder and weapons using it were available to civilians. You would still have HC/PC subdivisions within it for reenacting/historical presentations, but there's not much you can do about that.

BTW, my present occupation is bus driver, but sometimes you have to have a little lawyer in you to get that job done! :grin:

 

[Twice boom]

America’s guns back then were as diversified as its people. I do not believe you can hang traditional on any make gun or era anymore than you can deny that it took all of America’s people to make this nation what it is. And just because you have a look a like and stuff it from the front it does not make you part of any tradition unless you walk the walk and talk the talk as they walked it by those you are trying to imitate.. IMO..
Twice.

 

[Tumblernotch]

Which takes us back to what I said earlier, or rather what the dictionary definition says. These are physical objects. Tradition is a continuation of a lifestyle or ritual passed down in unwritten form. Oh well, it'll still be called traditional. That word is too deeply rooted in our vocabulary now. Besides, it's easier than any of the others. I think we've done about all we can do with this, don't you?

:surrender:

 

[Twice boom]

Yea I agree, But then you said we should call anything prior to smokeless powder as traditional.

With this statement I do not mean to imply all should be of one mind and action .But the matter is no matter how it is explained and how often, some will hold out true to that old saying ,“You can lead the horse to water but you can’t make him drink“.

Until the next time. :thumbsup:
Twice.

 

[Tumblernotch]

Yeah, I did. But I had given up by that time and figured at least there ought to be a cut-off somewhere. And I know I'll still have to say traditional when discussing the type of guns I shoot to people who think that inlines are the only kind of muzzleloader. As long as we know what we're doing, that's all that matters I reckon. I don't know why I even got involved with this. I've even confused myself a few times along the way!
:grin: :hatsoff: