Questions on wood/s used for Powder Horns

[Artificer]

Is there a native wood that is “best” for use to plug the large end of a powder horn?  I have read original horns were often plugged with pine, but other woods were used.  

1.    Was this because pine was comparatively softer and easier to turn OR initially easier to saw?  

2.   Was lower cost a reason?

3.    Was the fact pine was softer and would crush a bit easier, might lead to less damage when forcing the plugs in place of a heated horn?  

4.   Was water absorption property of the wood/s used a factor in determining the best wood for the large end plugs?

5.   Pine was available all over the 13 colonies, but was there a preference for another wood for this use by individual regions or colonies?  

What is the best wood to use to plug the spout end of the horn?  I could be completely wrong, but for this use it seems a hard or harder wood is necessary to resist wear.  In the past, I have used walnut, but is there a better choice for a spout plug?   Is Maple a better wood?  What about fruit woods?
 
Any information would be appreciated.

Gus

[Habu]

I've got a lot of data collected on original horns, but most of them were used (or at least collected) west of the Mississippi so it probably wouldn't apply to what you are looking at.  More importantly, it wouldn't answer your questions!

Any answers to #1-#4 would be pure speculation at this point.  I don't think there have been any records preserved that discuss this.  From what I've seen--at least for non-commercial horns--weight of the wood may have been a factor, as well as ease of working.  If forced to speculate, I'd guess that cost of the wood probably wasn't a factor; an end plug can be made from a piece of firewood, with most of the remaining wood still suited to burning. 

Determining the wood used for original spout plugs is a guessing game; plugs are easily lost and replacements may not be of the same materials.  Today there seem to be two camps: "use a hardwood" (to stand up to wear, for appearance, etc), and "use a softwood" (so it is easy to remove, doesn't damage the horn, etc). 

Personally, I've gone with the approach of regarding the spout plug as a "consumable."  I don't expect them to last, so I make them of whatever wood is conveniently available: willow branches, cottonwood or poplar, or scraps from ramrod blanks. 

[Shreckmeister]

Ive made them out of oak, walnut, cherry and pine and like to work with
cherry the best.  I've seen originals made of these 4 also.

[Artificer]

Habu,

Thank you for your thoughts and information. 

I have also wondered if pine might have been used as it was a common wood for ship building in that period and perhaps the thinking that the resin in it would better seal the horn?   Or perhaps they used pine resin or pitch to seal them and thought it best to use that wood as it was a “natural” byproduct of that wood?   Of course, the reason pine was often used MAY have been as simple as it was an easy wood to carve with a common “penny knife?” 

I’m glad you brought up reference to commercial horns in the 18th century.   That leads to another question.  Was there a common wood used for the large end plugs on them for at least perhaps the least expensive horns?  Of course, I guess that might or would have been different types of woods used had the least expensive kind of completed commercial horns been made in England or here in the colonies? 


To everyone,

This inquiry leads me to another question, the more I think about it.  There are accounts from at least the Revolutionary War Period where what sounds like raw horns were issued to American troops and they were expected to make their own powder horns from them.  In an age when most boys began learning to hand make things very young, that sounds credible or even possible, but WAS it possible and if so, how did they do it?

Would the average 18th century soldier or militiaman have had the tools with him, while on campaign, to turn a raw horn into a powder horn?   Many of them would most likely would have had a “penny knife” or some kind of “jack” or pocket knife or belt knife, but it is doubtful they had other tools with them and “that’s the rub.”  Of course I’m not talking about a high quality powder horn, but there are basic tools one needs to make a powder horn.

The first question comes about how they sawed off the large end and tip end?  I IMAGINE the Artificers assigned (and especially the blacksmiths) may have had a hack saw to perform that task.  Though a Surgeon’s Bone Saw would also work, I can’t imagine one allowing their saw to be used for that purpose, though I may be mistaken.  That’s the first hurdle.

The second hurdle is a lot tougher, though, and that’s drilling the spout hole and the holes for pegs or brads to hold the end plugs on.  I don’t know a lot about the period tools a horner used, but I imagine they used one or more sizes of gimlets to drill the spout hole and possibly a tapered reamer afterwards?   What I don’t know is if they MAY have used a heated iron rod to burn the spout hole through?   Since there is little record of fine spade drill bits outside what clock makers or active gunsmiths used, did they use a heated wire to burn/drill the horn for small plugs or nails for the large end plugs? 

On campaign, a blacksmith could have made a “burning wire” to make the small holes and larger ones to make the spout holes, but I doubt that small gimlets were readily available.   Has anyone ever read they used heated wires to burn/drill the small holes or the spout holes in horns?  (Sounds like something I might like to do to experiment with.) 

I realize that a serviceable powder horn does not have to be pretty.  Though it would have been time consuming, they could have scraped off the scale with their penny knives and scraped the spout end to form a shoulder for the carrying thong.   They could also have scraped the inside of the butt end of the horn with the penny knife and carved/whittled a plug using that knife.  I’m not sure they could have gotten a tight friction fit for the end plug, but I assume they used tar or pitch to seal the end plugs and that also could have come from the Artillery or Artificers, if they were available.

Of course I may be way off base and it is possible they contracted for civilians to drill and do some of the work on the horns with tools that would normally not be found with an Army in the field.   

Gus

[Artificer]

Ive made them out of oak, walnut, cherry and pine and like to work with
cherry the best.  I've seen originals made of these 4 also.

Cherry can be gorgeous wood.  My Grandfather's dictum for furniture was "Walnut was the only wood for good furniture,"  BUT even he really liked cherry when it could be obtained in large enough sizes.  My cousin provided him with large enough cherry to make a colonial style baby rocker when she was pregnant with her first child and it turned out to be a stunning instant family heirloom. 

With the few horns I've made, walnut or pine were the only woods I had easily available, so that's what I used.  However, I have a few unfinished horns I need to make butt end plugs for and that's why I'm asking if there was a "best" wood or most historically correct wood to use.

Gus

[HAWKEN]

Interesting questions.  While I can not answer the historical aspects, I have used walnut, cherry and mahogany, because that is what I have on hand.  On the mahogany one, I used two different sizes of hole saws, glued together.  I have used the cut off horn tip, fitted with a 1/4" dowel, and violin keys for hole plugs......Robin

[gizamo]

Cedar...

Giz

[Habu]

To some extent, pine may have been used simply because it was available.  It was used in shipbuilding, but also other construction--and to some extent as firewood, or gathered to distill out pine tar, or just burned to get rid of it.  I doubt it was used in the belief that the inherent resin would seal the wood better.  Folks then were probably aware that oak (white oak) was used for barrels that held liquids, so the resin wasn't necessary.  Pine (white pine, not long-leaf pine) is easy to carve with a knife; poplar, cottonwood, willow, and basswood are all more-easily carved with the same tool. 

Pine pitch or pine tar was used, in at least some instances, for sealing horns in the west, and to seal maritime horns such as those used on-board ships or by seal hunters.   I don't know if it was commonly used to seal horns made commercially, or by private citizens, etc but it certainly could have been as it was widely available. 

At a minimum, to do the horn work you need a knife and an awl (to drill holes).  (Now that I think about it, I think I see a way to drill the spout with a bow drill.  I may have to try that.)   Additional tools make the job go faster, or the outcome likely to be better, but they aren't absolutely necessary. 

The spout end can be removed just like cutting a sapling with the same knife--make a cut around the spout, remove shavings down to the bottom of the cut, then repeat til you are through.  The large end of the horn can be cut in a similar manner.  The spout can be drilled with an awl, or heated wire.  I've seen native-made horns done in just this fashion, as well as some I'm sure were made the same way by farm kids. 

Scale removal can be done quickly with a knife by splitting off the scaled layers (works better if you boil the horn first, and work while it is hot).  When thinking about shaping the horn, remember that scraping is a finish operation: carve the horn in order to shape it, then scrape. 

[okieboy]

 One of the reason to use pine in preference to other woods for the large plug is that it is lighter weight, and when you have to carry stuff, lighter is better.

[Artificer]

Habu,

Thank you for your further thoughts.

Good point about being the preferred wood for barrels that held “wet” goods as well as dry goods.    I just think that in the period, they may have considered oak too hard (and maybe too expensive) to easily work for end plugs.  Though if a number of commercial horns that came from England (or even America) had them, then it seems that would not be true. 

Yep, I should have thought about using awls to make holes in the horns for peg/pins/nails to hold the end plug in place.  The Artillery most likely had some available to repair horse tack even if they did not have Artificers with them.  Not sure if they even might have had bow drills available with Artificer’s, though, to bore the larger spout holes.  A blacksmith with the Artificer’s could have made a crude spade drill or even square auger with the corners sharpened and affixed a wooden “T” handle. though,   

I also don’t know if pine pitch or tar was commonly used to seal powder horns – even by commercial horners.  I agree that the use of such sealants would have been considered optional IF individuals made the horns.  Commercial concerns in England or Holland/Netherlands would have made the horns the way they best sold to those who ordered them in bulk.  Pine pitch and tar were readily available in all the seaports and larger cities on our Eastern Seaboard and would not have been difficult to obtain in Holland or England.  I’m wondering if commercial concerns in Europe may have been more likely to seal the end plugs with pitch, tar or glue; as the humidity of the sea air on the voyage to the colonies may have caused damage or even looseness with the finished horns if not? 

Gus

[Artificer]

One of the reason to use pine in preference to other woods for the large plug is that it is lighter weight, and when you have to carry stuff, lighter is better.

Yes indeed on long marches, lighter is better.  However, do you really think the slight difference in weight between pine and a hardwood may have mattered that much, especially when they often hollowed out a part of the end plug to allow a little more space for powder?

Gus

[Artificer]

Cedar...

Giz

Really?  Never thought about using Cedar.
Gus

[The Original Griz]

I use maple, pine and mahogany. Maybe once walnut, but only once. I use the pine for horns that are too far out of shape to be rounded and the pine makes it easier to file to fit.
I do know that the originals I looked at, maple, pine walnut and fruit woods like apple and pear wood were used. I always hand my hands in wood all my life from owning a sawmill with 18 employees to building custom furniture and it is my thoughts that tight grained wood that turns good would be the most desired woods. Oak is OK, doesn't turn the best, but, if you cut a hunk of oak 3/4" square and about 6" long, put it in your mouth and the other end in a glass of water and blow, you will make bubbles. So, if air can get through, water can get in. Just my ramblings....

[JBJ]

Only red oak will allow the bubbles. True white oaks as a group have plugged pores (with tyloses)- hence their use for tight cooperage. Would be a true pity for good whiskey to leak out of the barrel!
J.B.

[Artificer]

I use maple, pine and mahogany. Maybe once walnut, but only once. I use the pine for horns that are too far out of shape to be rounded and the pine makes it easier to file to fit.
I do know that the originals I looked at, maple, pine walnut and fruit woods like apple and pear wood were used. I always hand my hands in wood all my life from owning a sawmill with 18 employees to building custom furniture and it is my thoughts that tight grained wood that turns good would be the most desired woods. Oak is OK, doesn't turn the best, but, if you cut a hunk of oak 3/4" square and about 6" long, put it in your mouth and the other end in a glass of water and blow, you will make bubbles. So, if air can get through, water can get in. Just my ramblings....

Griz,

With your background running a saw mill and making furniture, I especially appreciate your thoughts.  Good point on using pine when the end of the horn makes it difficult to form it round.

You really raised my interest when you mentioned you only used walnut one time for an end plug.  Is this because walnut is harder to get in modern times in your part of Pennsylvania or was there a problem with the wood you ran into or maybe something else?

Thanks for your thoughts.
Gus

PS  While I was looking up woods that were commonly found in Virginia in the 18th century, I came across this reference for “Black Pine.”  I remember in an earlier discussion that forum members were asking what wood this was, so I thought I would include it here in hopes it may be useful to those wondering about it.

PITCH PINE, OR BLACK PINE (Pinus rigida Mill.)
THE pitch pine grows on dry ridges and slopes and in cold swamps and bottoms in the mountains and outlying hilly regions up to about 3,500 feet elevation. It occurs scattered, or in small groups with hardwoods or other pines.
More info may be found in the link below:
http://www.newrivernotes.com/topical_natural_1928_virginia_commonforesttreesofvirginia.htm

[Artificer]

Only red oak will allow the bubbles. True white oaks as a group have plugged pores (with tyloses)- hence their use for tight cooperage. Would be a true pity for good whiskey to leak out of the barrel!
J.B.

J.B.
Thanks for adding that about Red Oak.  Not sure if I would ever think to use it, but with Griz' and your comments, I will make sure I DON'T use it.  Grin.
Gus

[Micah2]

I have some originals and they are pine.  I am speculating that pine was a material that was used because there would  have been an abundance of pine already felled from the war effort I.e. roads, bridges, stockades,etc.  pine was much more dense back then as well.  Would a solider have lathed his plug?  I can easily see just sawing appropriate sized rounds off of a limb.

[Artificer]

I have some originals and they are pine.  I am speculating that pine was a material that was used because there would  have been an abundance of pine already felled from the war effort I.e. roads, bridges, stockades,etc.  pine was much more dense back then as well.  Would a solider have lathed his plug?  I can easily see just sawing appropriate sized rounds off of a limb.

Micah,

An excellent question.  I have studied Artificers’ Lists and Artificer Armourers’ Lists of tools the British Army used during the 18th century and have not seen anything that could easily or economically used to turn the wood for end plugs.  Artificers were the “support personnel” for 18th century Armies and generally were in charge of fixing whatever was broken, when/if they could.    But that’s only part of the problem.

The other part of the problem is getting the horns soft enough to drive turned or carved end plugs into them without cracking the horn.    I readily admit I’m speculating here as I’ve never worked with fresh cut or relatively fresh horn.  Perhaps fresh cut horn is still pliable enough that with some boiling, may allow an end plug to be force/friction fit?   I don’t know. 

I read in the articles that Horners write, that boiling horns in water often does not make them pliable/plastic enough to force fit end plugs.  (Actually, from what I’ve read, it seems force/friction fit end plugs were not common except for commercial horns?)    Horners normally talk about two ways to heat horns to make them pliable enough.  The first is to submerge them in heated oil.  I doubt an Army in the field is going to have the oil to do that for large quantities of horns needed fairly fast and there are personal injury hazards with that method one probably would not want to try with men unfamiliar with the process.  The other way is to bake horns in an oven.  Armies of the time period knew how to make field ovens and almost always did so in camp if they were going to be there for more than a few days.  Perhaps by sticking branches/iron rod, or even iron/steel rammers in the ground and sticking/setting the horn bases on them (like a liberty cap on one’s head) above the coals of the fire, they could have gotten the horns pliable enough to do some force fitting of the end plugs?   They could have borrowed tongs from the Blacksmith Artificer to pull them out when they were still hot. 

Using the above method and using branches as “stock” for the end plugs, seems to me to be the best way to make/fit a whole bunch of end plugs for a lot of horns to be made fairly fast.
Gus

[The Original Griz]

I didnt use walnut for 2 reasons, first is price. if you can find it at the sawmill its not cheap and hard to find. second I get a good price on the maple and I stain it dark anyway and I just hate to use a nice wood as walnut and then stain it. I dont think it gives me the look on a horn that I want if it is left plain.

as for the black pine, I googled an image of it and in this neck of the woods, I think it looks like a pine that is called Jack Pine here. I cut some of it and it has a slight black shade to the tree we cut. interesting....

just keep in mind, these are only my thoughts and I am usually found to be 3/4 idiot:)

[Longshot]

Just another view, but, since a boiling water soak does, in fact, render a horn pliable enough for a force fit plug, or for insertion of a 'rounding' form, my guess is that that was a common, easily executed past-practice, especially when a turned plug was used.   Little doubt that other methods, i.e., direct heat,  heated stone or sand were also in use, as today.

[The Original Griz]

Just another view, but, since a boiling water soak does, in fact, render a horn pliable enough for a force fit plug, or for insertion of a 'rounding' form, my guess is that that was a common, easily executed past-practice, especially when a turned plug was used.   Little doubt that other methods, i.e., direct heat,  heated stone or sand were also in use, as today.

Yes boiling water will make a horn soft enough to be pliable, but, it will not get hot enough to break the memory of horn. if you boil horn and shape it, let it lay overnight or a day or two, it will return to its original shape. I have had them crack because they were fighting to get back to the shape they were. I use lard at 330 degrees for about 45 seconds and that gets hot enough to break the memory and the horn will retain the shape you make it.
But this is just my ramblings and I am certainly not any kind of an expert.

[Beaverman]

Just another view, but, since a boiling water soak does, in fact, render a horn pliable enough for a force fit plug, or for insertion of a 'rounding' form, my guess is that that was a common, easily executed past-practice, especially when a turned plug was used.   Little doubt that other methods, i.e., direct heat,  heated stone or sand were also in use, as today.

Yes boiling water will make a horn soft enough to be pliable, but, it will not get hot enough to break the memory of horn. if you boil horn and shape it, let it lay overnight or a day or two, it will return to its original shape. I have had them crack because they were fighting to get back to the shape they were. I use lard at 330 degrees for about 45 seconds and that gets hot enough to break the memory and the horn will retain the shape you make it.
But this is just my ramblings and I am certainly not any kind of an expert.

YOU DA MAN GRIZ!

[The Original Griz]

Beav, you did see the part about NOT being an expert

[Habu]

I think a couple of factors are being overlooked here.  

First, cross-grain slices off a branch or log are going to crack.  Slices like that also have a habit of changing shape--expanding, shrinking in strange directions, twisting, etc.  These changes argue against using cross-grain slices of wood as an end plug.  

Was it done at various times?  Sure.  Did it work?  If it was a common practice, it seems horns made in that fashion had a poor survival rate.  Fewer than 1% of the non-commercially made horns I've examined used that orientation of the grain; of those with strong attributions to the 1750-1790 period, none used this orientation.  There could be a lot of reasons for this, but the most-likely explanation is that it was not a common practice.

I'm not saying that horns were never made with the plug grain oriented parallel to the length of the horn, but most horns made with this orientation seem to have used wood that had been previously split or sawn from a log.  It is my impression that the vast majority of those horns had end plugs that were turned on a lathe; offhand I can only think of a few crude exceptions to this.

Second, the breeds/types of cattle "donating" the horns used today are not the same as those used 200 years ago, and today's examples of most of those breeds have been changed through selective breeding practices.   Older breeds and production practices seem to have produced horns that were "thinner" (thickness of the horn walls), and more round, than today.  Even today, modern examples of those breeds tend to produce horns with thinner walls.  Thinner walls are easier to work (no ridges inside, thicknesses are more even, etc), and easier to shape using improvised methods like boiling water.  

Edited because I mis-placed a decimal point.

[Artificer]

Just another view, but, since a boiling water soak does, in fact, render a horn pliable enough for a force fit plug, or for insertion of a 'rounding' form, my guess is that that was a common, easily executed past-practice, especially when a turned plug was used.   Little doubt that other methods, i.e., direct heat,  heated stone or sand were also in use, as today.

Yes boiling water will make a horn soft enough to be pliable, but, it will not get hot enough to break the memory of horn. if you boil horn and shape it, let it lay overnight or a day or two, it will return to its original shape. I have had them crack because they were fighting to get back to the shape they were. I use lard at 330 degrees for about 45 seconds and that gets hot enough to break the memory and the horn will retain the shape you make it.
But this is just my ramblings and I am certainly not any kind of an expert.

Griz,

First, thanks for the added information on why you normally don’t use walnut for an end plug.  I was glad to read it wasn’t because of some physical property of walnut.

Also appreciate this added information on breaking the memory of horn, as that explains some difficulties they would have run into when taking rather large numbers of raw horns (or horns that had just had the innards removed) and turning them into powder horns in an Army Camp in a fairly quick time.   

I could be mistaken, but when the original accounts say that 100 or more “raw” horns were provided to the soldiers to make horns, they don’t really mean fresh raw horns.  There just doesn’t seem to have been enough cattle production for meat in the 18th century to get that many horns that quickly.  Unless I’m mistaken, imported “raw” horns already had the innards boiled and scraped out of them?


I’m old enough to remember the Eye Doctor bending plastic rimmed eyeglass frames to adjust them to your face, after dipping them in heated sand in an electrically heated rectangular open “pot” that resembled a bread pan and was electrically heated and temperature controlled.  That was the first thing that came to mind when I read Longshot mentioning using sand to heat the horn to make it pliable and lose its memory. 
 
Griz, when you mention that you immerse the horn in lard at 330 degrees for 45 seconds, is that something that could be done “by eye” on an open fire outdoors in an “Army” or similar camp?   I know they had the cooking pots and they either could get the fat from fresh slaughtering or even maybe from local butchers.  What I don’t know is if they could judge the temperature enough by eye to get the right heat for the lard?

The next problem I imagine they ran into was unless they could find enough dead branches in sizes that were large enough to make end plugs from, it seems they would have had to resort to green wood for the end plugs?   The problem with that is shrinkage of the end plugs after the wood dried out more.  Of course that could be “fixed” later by using pitch or even fitting a new plug.

Griz, with your knowledge of wood and horn, may I impose upon you to relate how you think they would have heated the horns in an Army camp and fitted the plugs for a large number of horns?   

Gus