Comments on bag or reaction to article?

[David Rase]

[/quote]

Someone needs to try loading from horse back in this manner.
How you going to hold it if you need a hand for the horse, a hand for the horn etc etc when the muzzle is well below waist level while on the 56" horse? Just curious.
I see it as a wreck in the making.

Dan

[/quote]

You have to remember that horses back then were used on a daily basis, making them a much more disciplined animal then the horses we ride for pleasure occasionally today.  I would not want to try this on one of my trail horses due to the limited amount of time I spend on them but I have friends who ride almost daily and they could pull this off no problem.
DMR 

[David Rase]

I know this is off topic but let me throw out another curve ball to loading on horseback.  It is my understanding that the screw barrel pistol/rifle was designed for horseback.  By unscrewing the barrel, adding powder and ball one used the barrel and wrench to seat the load thus eliminating the need to get powder down the barrel, align patch and ball and the need to pull out and return the ramrod.
DMR

[Artificer]

Gary and Andy,

Thank you for the information on 18th century double buttons.  That is something I've never heard about before and found that most interesting.

As to the I=I solid studs Gary mentioned, I also wasn't aware these went back commonly into the 18th century.  I have seen them on early 19th century sword slings and European gun slings as Gary mentioned, but I wasn't sure they went back to the 18th century.   Were they possibly used on rapier scabbard slings?

The modern two piece threaded ones Gary mentioned are commonly known as screw posts in leatherworking and in paper binding.  They are also used on Marine Corps Officer's sword slings - even though the originals were solid.   

[Dphariss]

Someone needs to try loading from horse back in this manner.
How you going to hold it if you need a hand for the horse, a hand for the horn etc etc when the muzzle is well below waist level while on the 56" horse? Just curious.
I see it as a wreck in the making.

Dan

[/quote]

You have to remember that horses back then were used on a daily basis, making them a much more disciplined animal then the horses we ride for pleasure occasionally today.  I would not want to try this on one of my trail horses due to the limited amount of time I spend on them but I have friends who ride almost daily and they could pull this off no problem.
DMR 
[/quote]


I used to ride horses that were ridden about 9 months of the year just about everyday several hours a day. No way in heck would I try loading a rifle this way while seated on one. I suppose its been tried and perhaps done but I would not do it.
My mother bred horses for DECADES.
Lets see now, reins in teeth, one hand to hold the gun so if the horse moves or shifts its weight is does not fall, then pour powder, then the patch and ball, sure be easier with 2 hands but I gotta hang onto the gun. All this with the muzzle below waist level so the rider is bent over to some extent.  Read this as covering your body with the muzzle.
Piece of cake right?   
There are several other problems with this.
For example;
Why did the plains rifle get shorter? Were they all riding even shorter horses, Shetland Ponies perhaps? Perhaps the western trappers were all riding in wagons and it never got mentioned until the Whitman party. But the journals seem to indicate otherwise.
Why were all military cavalry arms shorter than the infantry arms?
Also unless the horse has a lot of experience shooting off them its a really bad idea. This assuming the horse will stand rock solid so you can place the shot. Some horses won't stand for it anyway since they look for excuses to pitch the rider or in some other way show displeasure.



Dan

[SPG]

Gentlemen,

I have spent a goodly portion of my life on horseback and not just for pleasure. My horses were used as much as they could stand...as much as any horses could have been, in this time period or other. I have also loaded a muzzle loader from horseback (more than just once) and can tell you that you DON"T set the buttstock on the ground. This would be a good way to end up with yourself and the gun on the ground. I rested the buttstock on my left foot, keeping my foot in the stirrup and holding the rifle muzzle and reins with my left hand. You want a rifle with a short barrel for this. Also, understand that this technique was used only when there wasn't a choice...I did it when being horseback was much preferable to being afoot, given the particular situation.

I know that C.M. Russell's work is not generally accepted as documentation, but his painting "When Guns Were Slow" shows this technique pretty well. A short rifle is definitely handier on horseback than a long barreled gun.

Just my practical experience on the topic...

Steve

[The other DWS]

shooting and loading from horseback?  Based on my reading of military history over the years most of the fighting was done dismounted except by cavalry, who used preloaded pistols or slung musketoon/carbines.  Technique was to shoot first then rely on the sword.  they spent WAAAY more time on mounted sword practice than fire arms use.

a battle or skirmish/ambuscade is way too chaotic to attempt to reload while on horseback.  And that would be with smoothbores with a lot of windage.  To consider reloading a rifle with patched round ball while on horseback under combat conditions smacks of historical novels to me.
I'd suggest (very respectfully since I'm a newbie here) that firing AND RELOADING from horseback in the 18th century is at best misunderstanding or speculative interpretation of documentary evidence.  

The later trans-mississippi and western usage seems to have led to the evolution of a shorter larger bore muzzle loader for convenience but that was in an entirely different environment with different needs and requirements

Re Buttons.  At one time I owned and wore a very high grade museum quality reproduction 1740/50-ish gentlemans outfit that had belonged to Kit Ravenshear when he was on staff at Fortress Louisburg.  Kneebreeches, long many-buttoned weskit, and surcoat.  he had "outgrown" it and passed it on to me.  All of the buttons were linked pairs.  In most cases the outer visible buttons were larger and more ornate than the smaller inner ones.  the hand made button holes were tight and barely large enough to force the smaller inner buttons through.

BTW  I'm absolutely LOVING this site,  incredible information, I'm systematically trying to read through ALL of the forums, threads, and posts.

DWS

[flintriflesmith]

...Concerning the idea that an attached powder horn is far more practical, I'd say it depends on the application.  If you are in New England or New York, serving in a colonial regiment during the F & I War, the reason your horn would be on a separate strap is so one or two soldiers could carry all the horns from your company to be filled at the powder magazine. 
...Lee

Lee,
When you get back from your Texas holiday trip could you post some of your period documentation referring to the procedure you have described of having one or two men take the horns from a group (company or squad) to the magazine to be filled? I have been unable to document that procedure in any of the period sources I have access to.
Gary

Lee,
Is there any documentation available?
Gary