copperhead striker

[Black Hand]

Google is your friend.

True.
I already have 200+ period 18th & 19th century sources downloaded from Google books, but have very little time to devote to reading at the moment.

Unfortunately, for more esoteric items hidden away in recent publications, Google doesn't quite perform. This is why I asked for a scan...

 

[Black Hand]

You know, I found out long ago, that anytime we think that they didn't have it historically...someone comes up with an example of "they did have"! It seems to me that there is an example of such striker in The Museum Of The Fur Trade.

Could be wrong and that's absolute!.... :rotf:

Rick

That may be true, but being an academic, I'd like to see the evidence before I come to any conclusions. I'm not inclined to accept unsupported statements from anyone (including you).

 

[Rifleman1776]

Got it.
BTW, have you run out of coffee at home?

 

[Black Hand]

To follow-up - the book given as evidence of "many documented strikers made from files" apparently contains 4 strikers, of which 1 appears to be made from a file (undated and collected in the early 1900s in North Dakota, from the information received).

As such, it would make it difficult to say that they were a common item, unless others have additional documented items to put forth as evidence.

 

[omarick1948]

Swing a dead cat and your bound to hit an expert!
Verification quote by Will Rodgers

 

[Robert Egler]

To follow-up - the book given as evidence of "many documented strikers made from files" apparently contains 4 strikers, of which 1 appears to be made from a file (undated and collected in the early 1900s in North Dakota, from the information received).

As such, it would make it difficult to say that they were a common item.

You have 4 strikers, 1 made from a file. That proves that 1/4 of all strikers were made from files, that's pretty common. :blah:

Seriously though, I like the striker, HC or not

 

[Billnpatti]

Well......we have incontrovertible evidence of one from the early 21st century. I betcha there were some made earlier. I'd be proud to own one like this one. My persona is early 21st century curmudgeon so it will work very well in my kit.

 

[Nifeman]

To follow-up - the book given as evidence of "many documented strikers made from files" apparently contains 4 strikers, of which 1 appears to be made from a file (undated and collected in the early 1900s in North Dakota, from the information received).

As such, it would make it difficult to say that they were a common item, unless others have additional documented items to put forth as evidence.

Didn't say it was common, but I'm sure there were more than one around at that time.
At any rate it throws sparks and I'm sure it'll start a fire...

 

[Black Hand]

You are correct, you specifically did not make the unsupported claim that they were "common".

However, the claim was made that "There are many period examples of files being used as strikers." and a source was posted, which did not support the claim...

 

[necchi]

Take it easy there big guy, that "source" just came off the top of my head, and my copy of it is loaned out.
I'll find other sources for you to refute, but don't hold your breath. I have seen them and I'll find them again as time passes and I'll certainly share sometime down in the proper forum. :wink:

 

[Black Hand]

First of all, I'm interested in the information for my files, not in refuting it.

Secondly, if you can't provided evidence to back up your statements, perhaps you shouldn't make all-encompassing & sweeping statements as you did.

There are many period examples of files being used as strikers. :slap:

You could easily have said that you had seen a few and would provide the sources. That would have been sufficient. Instead, you decided to be patronizing...

 

[44-henry]

First off, it is a neat idea and I am inclined to like it. Whether it is HC or not really doesn't matter to me, or probably most who have joined into this thread. I look at it as something that quite easily could have been made and used in a wide variety of periods and that is good enough for me.

Furthermore, waiting to find solid documentation to prove the historical existence of something like this could be a long wait and about all you could hope to prove is that they did exist, no academic worth their salt would ever dare to say that they could not have and that leaves lots of freedom for folks like yourself to build and enjoy.

 

First off, it is a neat idea and I am inclined to like it. Whether it is HC or not really doesn't matter to me, or probably most who have joined into this thread. I look at it as something that quite easily could have been made and used in a wide variety of periods and that is good enough for me.

Furthermore, waiting to find solid documentation to prove the historical existence of something like this could be a long wait and about all you could hope to prove is that they did exist, no academic worth their salt would ever dare to say that they could not have and that leaves lots of freedom for folks like yourself to build and enjoy.

Since you mentioned it - - -

Here we have the old, "Show up wearing and using anything, because who's to say they didn't or couldn't have had it" theory of history.

Yes, they could have had semi-auto pistols in the Revolutionary War, we just haven't found the evidence yet, but - the materials were there and they were "as smart as we are" - conclusion? "They could have".

 

[Black Hand]

First off, it is a neat idea and I am inclined to like it. Whether it is HC or not really doesn't matter to me, or probably most who have joined into this thread. I look at it as something that quite easily could have been made and used in a wide variety of periods and that is good enough for me.

Furthermore, waiting to find solid documentation to prove the historical existence of something like this could be a long wait and about all you could hope to prove is that they did exist, no academic worth their salt would ever dare to say that they could not have and that leaves lots of freedom for folks like yourself to build and enjoy.

The "neat factor" and question of its possibility are two entirely different issues.

Yes, it is interesting as a MODERN piece of art. HOWEVER, its construction in no way suggests a historical approach.

Any academic worth their salt will allow the possibility of an article (because you can't prove a negative), but would still use parameters established by other items in the same category/age/location to establish probability. As such, this item is a modern piece, as it is so far outside what was actually made as to exclude it from a historical possibility/probability.


Is it possible for a steam locomotive to have been built in the 18th century? Yes (they had all the knowledge/materials needed).
Is it probable? No.

 

[Claude Mathis]

First off, it is a neat idea and I am inclined to like it. Whether it is HC or not really doesn't matter to me, or probably most who have joined into this thread. I look at it as something that quite easily could have been made and used in a wide variety of periods and that is good enough for me.

Furthermore, waiting to find solid documentation to prove the historical existence of something like this could be a long wait and about all you could hope to prove is that they did exist, no academic worth their salt would ever dare to say that they could not have and that leaves lots of freedom for folks like yourself to build and enjoy.

Since you mentioned it - - -

Here we have the old, "Show up wearing and using anything, because who's to say they didn't or couldn't have had it" theory of history.

Yes, they could have had semi-auto pistols in the Revolutionary War, we just haven't found the evidence yet, but - the materials were there and they were "as smart as we are" - conclusion? "They could have".

Jack, we've discussed the different levels of historical interest the members have before. When someone starts a post with, "Whether it is HC or not really doesn't matter to me", that eliminates the need to argue the historical aspect with them. We should respect their right to not care.

It may be wise to wait until someone asks if something is "accurate" before getting involved.

 

[44-henry]

I understand the research process and as a university professor it is part of my job description to know it well. In this instance the original poster was simply showing something he had built and seemed proud of, why turn it into a discussion that it was never meant to be?

Furthermore, you have acknowledged having resources that you have not yet read and at least one other poster presented you with another. If it really is that important to you than I suggest you find the time to look at those sources and others as well before weighing in too heavily on the subject.

 

[Black Hand]

If I could read everything I wanted, I'd have no time to do anything else.

Furthermore, you have acknowledged having resources that you have not yet read and at least one other poster presented you with another. If it really is that important to you than I suggest you find the time to look at those sources and others as well before weighing in too heavily on the subject.

Perhaps you should follow your own advice. Much research has been accumulated on the topic of strikers. While this example is similar to a brass-handled one I've seen (but cannot find), not one has used copper nor does one need to see all the strikers to know that this was not common (or done at all in the colonies or Europe).

 

[Black Hand]

An excellent review from Mike Ameling http://www.angelfire.com/journal2/firefromsteel/
It is unfortunate he is no longer around to weigh-in on this topic.

 

[Black Hand]

An interesting collection of viking-era firesteels: http://www.vikinganswerlady.com/fire.shtml

Bronze appears to be the prominent material when used in these specific cases.

 

[OldJoe212]

Nice job. Not everything made “back in the day” was museum quality. You made or had made something that worked. Most people couldn’t afford it, i.e., rifles with engravings and wire inlays. If you made it yourself, that’s normally great. ***ALSO, Leonardo da Vinci, 1452-1519, invented a file making machine. Just like me, when it no longer cuts very good, a knife or striker is made. Maybe resole a frizzen that doesn’t spark too good.