Historically Incorrect, or (A Story of Thread Counting and Delrin Rods)

[Rod Man]

It’s The Kool-Aid.

 

[Woody Morgan]

To be honest, I was a little nervous about joining this forum. I know with many, historical accuracy is very important. Others, not so much. I'm a shooter. Period. Long-time RSO, Range Master, competitor...the whole shooteree.
Muzzleloaders fascinate me but not necessarily the history (for now). As my signature alludes, I want to continue to shoot when/if the primers run out. I keep "Be Prepared" close to my heart and life.
With that in mind, I own a Traditions Flintlock Hunter .50 and a Pedersoli 20 gauge SxS flintlock is on the way. Right now, my concern is being able to shoot regardless of primer supply, be good at it and to have fun doing it. My wife approves of my purchases and I'm looking forward to learning this new/old shooting technology. I know these statements may make some want to choke but those that know me know that I tend to "whole hog" a new interest. Who knows where it will lead.
Thanks for having me.

wm

 

[Rod Man]

To be honest, I was a little nervous about joining this forum. I know with many, historical accuracy is very important. Others, not so much. I'm a shooter. Period. Long-time RSO, Range Master, competitor...the whole shooteree.
Muzzleloaders fascinate me but not necessarily the history (for now). As my signature alludes, I want to continue to shoot when/if the primers run out. I keep "Be Prepared" close to my heart and life.
With that in mind, I own a Traditions Flintlock Hunter .50 and a Pedersoli 20 gauge SxS flintlock is on the way. Right now, my concern is being able to shoot regardless of primer supply, be good at it and to have fun doing it. My wife approves of my purchases and I'm looking forward to learning this new/old shooting technology. I know these statements may make some want to choke but those that know me know that I tend to "whole hog" a new interest. Who knows where it will lead.
Thanks for having me.

wm

Welcome!

This is a fun site, these people got their stuff together when it comes to the old ways.

RM

 

[kje54]

To be honest, I was a little nervous about joining this forum. I know with many, historical accuracy is very important. Others, not so much. I'm a shooter. Period. Long-time RSO, Range Master, competitor...the whole shooteree.
Muzzleloaders fascinate me but not necessarily the history (for now). As my signature alludes, I want to continue to shoot when/if the primers run out. I keep "Be Prepared" close to my heart and life.
With that in mind, I own a Traditions Flintlock Hunter .50 and a Pedersoli 20 gauge SxS flintlock is on the way. Right now, my concern is being able to shoot regardless of primer supply, be good at it and to have fun doing it. My wife approves of my purchases and I'm looking forward to learning this new/old shooting technology. I know these statements may make some want to choke but those that know me know that I tend to "whole hog" a new interest. Who knows where it will lead.
Thanks for having me.

wm

I don't care if you're wearing a hula skirt and coconut bras when you go shooting. Might look a little weird but whatever floats your boat.

 

[herbpagel]

Tenngun: I believe I read that Jedediah Smith was sewn back together using his own hair for stitching. Supposedly, that and the fact that they were a long way from the filth of civilization kept him from developing sepsis. Your linen thread would be acceptable if anybody cares to criticize.

 

[confederatemule]

Snuff

Snuff or chewing tobacco is o k, as long as it is not spit at my feet or where I am going to be hunkering.
Smoking, I refuse to be around. I don't care if it is hc/pc or not!! If I can't avoid breathing and/or smelling it any other way I will go back to the house.

Now that I have stepped in this mud puddle I'll go ahead and just walk in it.

In my opinion very very few, if anyone, is hc/pc completely.

I was a paying member of "Sons of Confederate Veterans" for about three years. I constantly heard "period correct". No part of that organization was period correct. It was all reproduction, had a certain brand name, bought at a certain place (local), all of the clothing was "dress". None of them wanted to dress like the man off the farm who had no uniform and was still out there dying for what he thought was right and doing his best to protect his family. Course they wore uniforms only when they were doing a memorial service, and did the color guard firing of rifle and cannon salute. Sons of Confederate Veterans is not about reenactment. It is about honoring our ancesters who fought for our rights, freedom, and way of life here in the Southern U.S..

What it amounts to, in my opinion, is bragging rights. "See mine, it is better than yours." My response to that is "I am so proud for you.", in a sarcastic tone, and then try to avoid that person.

I never did like bosses or people who flaunted their money. Y'all might say I am a jealous type person. i do what I can do to the best of my ability.

I do love restored to original condition U.S. cars and trucks or farm equipment.

Mule

 

[Beaver Trapper]

I once had the great pleasure to visit the firearms collection at the Canadian War Museum. There I handled a 19th C. French nobleman's gun that looked it was made yesterday as well as other flintlock and percussion firearms that were of exceptional workmanship.

The curator brought up an interesting point - most of the flintlock firearms that survived to the present day were NOT the guns of the working man; these were the firearms of the gentry that used them for the occasional hunt or shoot.

Reproduction firearms we see today are not based on guns of the actual Poor Boys used for the farm or on the frontier - those guns rusted out, were broken, lost or discarded centuries ago. The ornate, brass inlayed carved guns we think of as accurate reproductions available today are based on the firearms owned by the well-to-do. Although works of outstanding craftsmanship (to the point of being art) they do not represent the gun that was in use by the common man at the time when a firearm meant eating or starving or protecting oneself, family or farm.

Something to keep in mind for the ‘button-counters’ that demand authenticity for reenacting.

 

[confederatemule]

I once had the great pleasure to visit the firearms collection at the Canadian War Museum. There I handled a 19th C. French nobleman's gun that looked it was made yesterday as well as other flintlock and percussion firearms that were of exceptional workmanship.

The curator brought up an interesting point - most of the flintlock firearms that survived to the present day were NOT the guns of the working man; these were the firearms of the gentry that used them for the occasional hunt or shoot.

Reproduction firearms we see today are not based on guns of the actual Poor Boys used for the farm or on the frontier - those guns rusted out, were broken, lost or discarded centuries ago. The ornate, brass inlayed carved guns we think of as accurate reproductions available today are based on the firearms owned by the well-to-do. Although works of outstanding craftsmanship (to the point of being art) they do not represent the gun that was in use by the common man at the time when a firearm meant eating or starving or protecting oneself, family or farm.

Something to keep in mind for the ‘button-counters’ that demand authenticity for reenacting.

Exactly. Very well said, sir.

 

[Bob McBride]

I once had the great pleasure to visit the firearms collection at the Canadian War Museum. There I handled a 19th C. French nobleman's gun that looked it was made yesterday as well as other flintlock and percussion firearms that were of exceptional workmanship.

The curator brought up an interesting point - most of the flintlock firearms that survived to the present day were NOT the guns of the working man; these were the firearms of the gentry that used them for the occasional hunt or shoot.

Reproduction firearms we see today are not based on guns of the actual Poor Boys used for the farm or on the frontier - those guns rusted out, were broken, lost or discarded centuries ago. The ornate, brass inlayed carved guns we think of as accurate reproductions available today are based on the firearms owned by the well-to-do. Although works of outstanding craftsmanship (to the point of being art) they do not represent the gun that was in use by the common man at the time when a firearm meant eating or starving or protecting oneself, family or farm.

Something to keep in mind for the ‘button-counters’ that demand authenticity for reenacting.

That's generally true I believe, though some very solid arguments have been made to the contrary. That said, here in Tennessee we are absolutely flush with original 'poor boy' types. The ones that survived and pop up at local auctions, having been found in the barn or attic, are most often found completely worn out from use but perfectly good for understanding their architecture.

To me, the argument that say, Daniel Boone, a relatively poor guy had a fancy rifle, and therefore that was what was available, is better understood by looking at the new $60k Tahoes driven by folks who should've bought a $15k one off the used car lot. A thing that expresses status will always be reached for but the truly poor, but thrifty, would have carried a poor boy. IMO. I think ol Dan'l was 'flamboyant'.

 

[appalichian hunter]

Some times it is nice to step in the circle with a lookie what I got, But mostly I try to stay outside of the circle, Fancy rifles are nice to look at plain ones are also nice to look at as long as they get the job done who really cares. I like the poor boys they have a unique history all their own. Now if we could only get Kibler to make a kit in left hand say 40 cal. flinter poor boy I would be a happy hunter.

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

Does anyone have an HC/PC remedy for diarrhea? I sometimes am prone to it and wonder how our ancestors would deal with “the runnin’ off” as they called it back home.

 

[tenngun]

I once had the great pleasure to visit the firearms collection at the Canadian War Museum. There I handled a 19th C. French nobleman's gun that looked it was made yesterday as well as other flintlock and percussion firearms that were of exceptional workmanship.

The curator brought up an interesting point - most of the flintlock firearms that survived to the present day were NOT the guns of the working man; these were the firearms of the gentry that used them for the occasional hunt or shoot.

Reproduction firearms we see today are not based on guns of the actual Poor Boys used for the farm or on the frontier - those guns rusted out, were broken, lost or discarded centuries ago. The ornate, brass inlayed carved guns we think of as accurate reproductions available today are based on the firearms owned by the well-to-do. Although works of outstanding craftsmanship (to the point of being art) they do not represent the gun that was in use by the common man at the time when a firearm meant eating or starving or protecting oneself, family or farm.

Something to keep in mind for the ‘button-counters’ that demand authenticity for reenacting.

I went to an 1812 event. The guy running it was a little hesitant to let me in. I was coming as a civilian gathering under the protection of the fort at the start of the war.
My working mans coat is a burgundy wool with short upright collar and hip length it sports revolutionary period buttons. The collar is about the only difference between it and a revolutionary working coat, and for that matter coats seen thirty years later.
‘Your buttons are wrong’ I’m told. I said back. I’m near sixty, I fought in the revolution, I ain’t rich. Missis is passed and I had to make my coat. Damned and go to hell for I would throw out good button cause their forty years old.
They let me in the event

 

[Brokennock]

The curator brought up an interesting point - most of the flintlock firearms that survived to the present day were NOT the guns of the working man; these were the firearms of the gentry that used them for the occasional hunt or shoot.

This has been argued about extensively.
The statement is too much of an absolute to hold true.
A lot of trade gun repro's out there. Certainly not the guns of the nobility. Lot of muskets too.....
Even with rifles it has been often pointed out that embellishment coat little extra at the time, and was a good way for the gunmaker to be competitive in the market. Of it didn't cost much extra to do (again at that time) and helped you sell guns you would add some carving, some engraving, maybe some inlays. Folks liked fancy stuff, at all income levels. Look at the clothing of all but the very poor, whom wouldn't be buying a new rifle anyway, pretty fancy duds to go ahunting by our standards today. And, even now, even the most working class hunter and shooter takes pride in a nice gun or knife, and his/her friends all like to admire it.

 

[Tanglefoot]

Just adding to the remarks about doctoring your self when it's needful, especially responding to Tenngun and Walk. Sometimes you just have to do what's needed yourself.
My son and I were at a national rendezvous when he was about 12, and I got a 2 inch splinter jammed out of sight into the palm of one hand while breaking up some dry limbs for firewood. The durn thing was shaped like a skinny golf tee and it's a blessing that it didn't go straight in or it would have gone plumb through. It went in at a shallow angle but was completely embedded with nothing sticking out that I could get ahold of to remove it. It was early evening just before sunset and the light was fading. My son went in our lodge and hunted up a small, honed-to-a-needle knife I keep in our first-aid pack but reported that the little bottle of antiseptic was empty -- dried up. A friend from a nearby camp said he had some whiskey and brought it over. Sterilized the knife blade and cut the splinter out myself, then poured a little whiskey into the cut, wrapped it in clean cotton cloth, and then took a small medicinal swallow of the "Oh Be Joyful" -- to prevent infection, don't ye know. I reckon it worked `cause the surgical site healed enough in two-three days that I forgot about it. The other choices were to let somebody else do the doctorin' or go to town and hunt up a sawbones. For reasons I don't understand we didn't have doc or a trained EMT in camp. Most times there are some. My son watched the whole procedure carefully and
(I found out later) learned from it.

 

[Nameless Hunter]

I went to an 1812 event. The guy running it was a little hesitant to let me in. I was coming as a civilian gathering under the protection of the fort at the start of the war.
My working mans coat is a burgundy wool with short upright collar and hip length it sports revolutionary period buttons. The collar is about the only difference between it and a revolutionary working coat, and for that matter coats seen thirty years later.
‘Your buttons are wrong’ I’m told. I said back. I’m near sixty, I fought in the revolution, I ain’t rich. Missis is passed and I had to make my coat. Damned and go to hell for I would throw out good button cause their forty years old.
They let me in the event

The argument that your attire was "too old" was just being plain argumentative. I think it's VERY plausible that a 60+ year old male might still wear clothes he purchased when he was in his 30's (and especially 40's).

 

[appalichian hunter]

My wife says I still have under ware and socks I owned when we got married that was 46 years ago. I also have blue jeans that hippies (old ones) would pay a fortune for.

 

[Grenadier1758]

I still have and wear my combat boots, fatigue shirts and field jacket that I was issued in 1969. The pants are a bit tight.

 

[Coot]

I still have and wear my combat boots, fatigue shirts and field jacket that I was issued in 1969. The pants are a bit tight.

I still have and wear my combat boots, fatigue shirts and field jacket that I was issued in 1969. The pants are a bit tight.

Cotton is known to shrink.

 

[Grenadier1758]

I've used that observation in the past. If I wear them for a day there is some stretch.

 

[tenngun]

The argument that your attire was "too old" was just being plain argumentative. I think it's VERY plausible that a 60+ year old male might still wear clothes he purchased when he was in his 30's (and especially 40's).

In this case the cut of the coat was correct, the buttons were wrong. That would be a big no no for military, but.....
IMHO folks were ‘thrifty.’ My mother kept a button box. And often repaired my clothes growing up with near match, and when something wore out she saved the buttons.
People tried to stay in style, and often old clothing might be recut to look in style. But I think sometimes we look for a uniformity that didn’t exist...... or we go out the other way and do to much individually.
When Amazon offers its first home use time machine I’m getting it.