• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Brown Bess Carbine...

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Thanks guys

Great history of the Brown Bess given here. And not one opposing voice heard...regarding the Indian Trade Gun...

Hmmmm,
Well, let's see,I bought the gun to go Turkey Hunting with this fall ~ I'll bet it gets the job done.:surrender:

Giz
 
Mule Brain said:
Many upon many of original muskets were cut down.

That is a proven fact, due to barrel failure or other damage.

So they are correct :thumbsup:
No they aren't. The barrel taper is all wrong. If you took a standard length Bess barrel and cut it off at that length it would be incredibly thick at the muzzle instead of thin like these reproductions are. No matter how you Bess carbine people want to make outlandish exceptions for them, they just didn't exist in the form that they are being marketed today.
 
engravertom said:
Thanks very much for the link! Great pics!

Were those vine designs ever lightly carved instead of painted?

Tom
Not that I have ever seen. There are so few surviving guns that we don't really know. The Bumford gun is a bit of an anomaly. The butt plate is unlike any other Carolina gun butt plate that has survived, either on a gun or dug up. Other wise It's a very good example of a mid 18th century english built trade gun.
 
I'd like to add.....before you folks fall into believing all the hype gun sellers will print to sell their guns, buy some books and arm yourself with knowledge. :thumbsup: The information is out there and easy to find.
Dewitt Bailey's book is an excellent source on the subject. Cost about $40.
 
Mike Brooks said:
I'd like to add.....before you folks fall into believing all the hype gun sellers will print to sell their guns, buy some books and arm yourself with knowledge. :thumbsup: The information is out there and easy to find.
Dewitt Bailey's book is an excellent source on the subject. Cost about $40.

Here is a list of books by De Witt Bailey in my library and which I use frequently:

1."British Military Longarms,1715-1815" {1971}
2."'British Military Longarms 1815-1865"{1972}
These two books are a little dated but are still useful.
3."Pattern Dates for British Ordnance Small Arms 1718-1783"{1997}
4."British Board of Ordnance Small Arms contractors 1689-1840" {1999}
This source which I previously cited covers trade and Indian gift guns. It is good to remember that the same makers furnishing trade and Indian gift guns were also selling guns to merchants and traders in America for open sale to anyone who could afford them and that such sales continued well after the frontier had moved west.As was the case in Pennsylvania many of these sales were to Indian as well as White market hunters, Earl Lanning citing Wes White.These sales included rifles as well as fowlers.
5."British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840" {2002}

Another source I have used is "Proceedings of the 1984 Trade Gun Conference Part II,selected Papers which contains some very pertinent information especially the English Pattern trade rifles made both in England and later in America by Henry Leman,J.Henry and others.This volume is part of a two volume set {part I is "Dutch and Other Flintlocks From Seventeenth Century Iroquois Sites by Jan Puype" published by the Rochester Museum and Science Center and I believe is still available there at a reasonable price.I hope this helps.
Tom Patton
 
Mike,

But how do I address the bigger issue...

Do you think the Turkey will care? :hmm:


Giz
 
Mike Brooks said:
engravertom said:
Thanks very much for the link! Great pics!

Were those vine designs ever lightly carved instead of painted?

Tom
Not that I have ever seen. There are so few surviving guns that we don't really know. The Bumford gun is a bit of an anomaly. The butt plate is unlike any other Carolina gun butt plate that has survived, either on a gun or dug up. Other wise It's a very good example of a mid 18th century english built trade gun.

I agree with Mike here as to the Bumford gun. It was made by John Bumford of London who was a contractor with the British Board of Ordnance,

"Bumford,John,London. ID July 1756-July 1757; FD Mar.1771.
SETTER UP. One delivery of wall pieces complete with molds in 1771"
"British Board Of Ordnance Small Arms Contractors 1689-1840"{1999}P.39

It seems clear that the date of origin is probably before 1860 as stated by Gary Brumfield although it could have been slightly later.I stated in another forum that I had issues with this gun and Gary asked what these issues were.For some time I have wondered about the decorated Carolina/Type G guns as to when the decoration was applied ie; pre Indian distribution or post Indian distribution.I remain unconvinced that the Bumford gun was intended for Indian use although I am beginning to view it as having been decorated either in England or by a seller in America.Bailey cites guns from the Indian Fusils of 1710 contract as being "painted and spotted according to pattern"{Bailey supra P.26}so the jury is still out here.I have not seen the extended provenance of the Bumford gun but,as stated above,I have come to suspect that the vine decoration was likely applied in England or possibly in America before its initial sale.Any way you look at this gun,however, it is a fine example of a mid 18th century English fowler.
Tom Patton
 
Many Klatch said:
The British kept about 50,000 Bess Carbines in the Tower of London at any one time. The carbines were issued to Artillery, Cavalry, and Light troops. They did differ a bit from each other more than the musket but they did exist. I have one and have used it as several thread counter type events without a comment from anyone.

The Pedersoli Carbine shoots a smaller ball than the musket. The musket shoots a .735 and the carbine shoots a .715. With 90 grains of 2F and a.010 patch it will keep the balls in one hole at 25 yards.

Many Klatch




Carbines were of carbine bore - .65. That is just a "shortened" musket.


EDIT: Appologies to ATED and Okwaho, I didn't read the entire thread before I posted, I shouldn't have doubled up on your more detailed info. :redface:
 
Not sure what you are saying here. If you're saying that you heard no one pointing out that the Pedersoli "trade musket" version of the Brown Bess is a fantasy gun, then you weren't listening. That an older, damaged Bess might have had its barrel bobbed is possible. Equally possible is that it would have been stripped of its usable parts which then would have been recycled into a new gun. But the Bess and its variants weren't built specifically as trade guns as others have pointed out.
 
Nice gun, I bought the carbine myself. Did the plum brown on mine with a torch - 15 coats and it turned out beautiful. Got pics on THR. (.20 ga short barrel)


I think you started that thread also - Did you do the browning on yours? It will definitely take turkey.

Far as being historically accurate??? That was not a factor for me when I bought mine. It is still my all time favorite smoothbore. I had a cut down Dixie Brown Bess for about 20 years. Sold it and just was not happy till I bought my Pedersoli. The carbine just carries and handles well in the field.
 
RTF,

I am guilty as charged...I wasn't listening, I was reading instead :)

No, my statement was a surrender to the facts presented, that the Pedersoli is a fantasy gun as represented.

However, do I believe that short barreled Besses were used by the Mountain Men or Indians ~ you bet...Living and hunting in Maine's western foothills, I know a short barreled carbine is best as a puckerbrush gun...witness the modern leveractions and carbines used to this day...and I've seen plenty of cut down shotguns in use to convince me that the same thing happened to older smoothbores... :v

Common sense dictates that what still holds true to this day, would have been the same for our forefathers...


Giz
 
Giz, you can't always go by that. What people today do isn't always an indicator of what folks did 200+ years ago. They didn't think the same and they lacked scientific and technical knowledge that we take for granted. The average sixth grader today has more scientific and technical knowledge than 99.5% of folks back then.
But shortened muskets were no doubt in use in some circumstances but they just were not a special class of weapon. The weren't called canoe guns or blanket guns, instead they were called Old Thunder Butt or Old Thump@$$.
 
The average sixth grader today has more scientific and technical knowledge than 99.5% of folks back then.

RTF,

Got to agree that the average sixth grader today as more scientific and teck knowledge then the 99.5% of folks back then...

If you will agree that they more then likely have less common sense. :grin:

Folks back then were more intimate with their environment. Hunt the thickets of Maine with me and then hit the antique stores. Lots of cut down smoothbores that were wallhangers until recently.

A fast and lively short gun is going to put more partridge on the table then a long gun that gets hung up in the branches and brambles. Nothing to do with history, nothing to do with written records of guns built, and certainly nothing to do with guns in the Tower of London. Just plain folks trying to feed the family, using common sense...

But if I were in a long boat, or shore hunting ducks in salt water marshes ~ you can bet I'd want the longer gun.. Again, just common sense...

Giz
 
...try not to judge the past by the present..the maine woods of today are second growth...50 years?...(maybe)...old growth forests of our ancestors were a different story... :v :v :v
 
No argument on the common sense thing! Lockjaw does make a good point about the old growth forest--it was much more open back then.
I do recall one short barrelled smoothbore that few would argue existed as a separate class: the blunderbus. And not all of them had the huge bell at the muzzle. And these guns often resembled the Bess. Or at least the military musket of the time period in question.
 
British Military Firearms 1650-1850 by Howard L. Blackmore. ARCO Publishing Company,Inc. New York.
On Page 98 There are 5 carbines shown starting with one with a 3ft. 1 inch barrel and descending to 2 Pattern 1796 carbines of musket bore with 26 in. Barrels.
I hope this helps you out Rusty
 
I thought we were talking about Brown Bess trade carbines? Or rather the fact that they never made any. The 37" barrelled carbine has already been discussed and is not a trade carbine. The 26" barrelled carbines aren't Besses--they are specially made cavalry carbines and as such don't relate to arsenal or government produced Brown Bess trade muskets in any way whatsoever. Especially since it appears that no such animal ever existed.
Bet they'd make a great buffalo running gun. Just pour a handful of powder down the bore, spit a ball out of your mouth and down the bore--all to be done on the back of a galloping horse...
Or if you find yourself in a canoe and suddenly need to shoot something...
 
"No they aren't. The barrel taper is all wrong."

This is the point I have been trying to make on this and another forum on this topic, some one really should offer a "cut down" gun that had the dimensions and apperance of an original cut down gun just a "mini me" version where the length alone is the only common thing that one from then and one of todays offerings shares, as thye are being built the only thing they resemble is a shorter than normal out of the armory gun, which we cannot document to the 18th century and there is not much from the later ML period either. This is the issue when someone claims them to be PC/HC
as they are being offered they are not. it is no different than haveing a NW gun built with a Siler lock, Maple stocks on French guns(not incuding re-stocks) or a number of other historicaly shakey gun building issues, by all means buy, make or use one, but consider what they would look like if they were cut down as an after market repair before bringing PC/HC into the conversation, and we really need to put the "if they cooda they wooda" thing and trying to use todays logic and mindset on the back burner it is of no importance in determing the history and evolution of guns or anything else.
 
Sorry Rusty for the misunderstanding. I thought you meant you didn't see a reference to military carbines. If you take a look at the pictures on the page I referenced it sure looks like they followed the Bess lines, but I'll let you be the judge of that with your infinite knowledge on these guns. I wouldn't have the slightest idea if Bess carbines were ever made for Indian trade. If you don't have a copy of the book let me know and I will see if I can scan the page for you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top