Did our forebearers use a shooting rest or stick for rifles?

[Sir Boniface Harrison]

Wasn't General John 'They couldn't hit an elephant at this distance' Sedgewick killed at a distance of 1000 yards by a sharpshooter using a Whitworth Rifle? I know Whitworths were more advanced than the early rifles of the Revolutionary War, but I cannot imagine this feat being performed by a rifle without some kind of support.

 

[tenngun]

The very first muskets were matchlock and big, they came with a rest. Match lock match guns were made with peep sights and a boot on them to set on a rest

 

[cebusey]

I can speak from a N-SSA perspective. Last Friday I was at the range and hitting a man sized steel target at 200 offhand is boringly easy. I'm hardly the best shot in our org and I've seen others shooting 3in and less at 100yds offhand.

So, do I think it possible, absolutely. Could the average shooter do it, not likely. Shoot from a rest when hits matter in combat or hunting, yes whenever possible.

I have a partial hand written diary of a Union Arty officer who was chatting with a friend in his words a good 800 yds from the front lines when a round struck his friend in the head killing him instantly. Understandably he was completely unnerved by this as he thought they were safe from small arms fire. I am pretty positive it was not aimed due to the distance and he did not know really where it came from. It could even have been from friendly fire a lot closer.

 

[Sam squanch]

McDonald Hasting’ s book tells of a child watching a soccer game who suddenly dropped dead. The police found a .22 caliber hole in his skull. From the angle of the entrance wound, it was determined the shot came from over a mile away. Some guys were shooting rooks with a .22 at the top of trees.

 

[Tumbledown]

McDonald Hasting’ s book tells of a child watching a soccer game who suddenly dropped dead. The police found a .22 caliber hole in his skull. From the angle of the entrance wound, it was determined the shot came from over a mile away. Some guys were shooting rooks with a .22 at the top of trees.

This has nothing to do with the subject at hand.

 

[Sam squanch]

Tell that to the previous poster.

 

[Sun City]

Tumbledown said: "
"Riflemen were known for kills at great distances"

I have read a lot about the Rev. War and am convinced most of those long range shot stories are just that, stories. I believe most are myth. There probably were some shots taken with the barrel at high elevation that hit someone in a mass of opposing soldiers. But, with a fixed sight ml rifle holding for a 200 yard or more means the barrel blanks out any sight hold.

I beg to differ that the barrel 'blanks out' any sight hold! A short front sight and a hot load works pretty well with my .54 flintlock at 200 yards!

 

[William Lincoln]

Shooting sticks shaped like a Y are still used in African
Safari for hunters who need them. They are used to prop-up
heavy rifles for weaker/older clients. They are placed by one
of the assistants just before a shot. There are some Youtube
videos showing them in use for double rifles. It is likely
that early Colonists used them because the firearm traditions in Africa and America stem largely from the British who did use them

 

[smo]

"Shooting at marks was a common diversion among the men, when their stock of ammunition would allow it; this, however, was far from being always the case. The present mode of shooting off hand was not then in practice. This mode was not considered as any trial of the value of a gun ; nor, indeed, as much of a test of the skill of a marksman. Their shooting was from a rest, and at as great a distance as the length and weight of the barrel of the gun would throw a ball on a horizontal level. Such was their regard to accuracy, in these sportive trials of their rifles, and of their own skill in the use of them, that they often put moss, or some other soft substance, on the log or stump from which they shot, for fear of having the bullet thrown from the mark, by the spring of the barrel. When the rifle was held to the side of a tree for a rest, it was pressed against it as lightly as possible, for the same reason."
Joseph Doddridge Notes on the settlement and Indian wars of the western parts of Virginia and Pennsylvania, from 1763 to 1783

So for Doddridge there was no need to carry anything to use as a rest such as the crossed sticks of the buffalo hunters on the Great Plains would use decades after the above was penned. The riflemen of his day, being in the woods, used natural objects to steady their shots. I don't take "offhand" shots in the woods for the same reason, and I move from tree to tree if moving, and halt at a good tree to break up my human outline and ALSO to give me something to help support the flintlock when I shoot.

LD

Great post LD

The answer too the question seems simple too me…
Why would any woodsrunner/ frontiersman carry any additional means of support when nature provides plenty… in most cases.

Wiping rods as mentioned by tenngun,could have been used as support for shooting in a hunting environment, but in a battle scenario.. probably not as much..

I’d rather take my chances from behind a big Oak tree if I had the choice..

 

[tenngun]

Great post LD

The answer too the question seems simple too me…
Why would any woodsrunner/ frontiersman carry any additional means of support when nature provides plenty… in most cases.

Wiping rods as mentioned by tenngun,could have been used as support for shooting in a hunting environment, but in a battle scenario.. probably not as much..

I’d rather take my chances from behind a big Oak tree if I had the choice..

In battle, if the shooters are setting up an ambush from cover one could in theory have a rest.
One of the differences between hunting and warfare is the end result. A hunter needs dead game, and with the least fuss possible. While snap shots can happen especially with small game, large game are more often taken by surprise, either by careful stocking from down wind or sitting near a game trail. One generally has time for a placed shot.
A man with ill intent toward you fist has to be hit. A gut shot that kills in three days, a wound to the leg or shoulder can remove him as a threat, wether he dies or not
A six inch group for a deer is big, and you want to aim better. A twelve inch group on an enemy is plenty.
Carson and some others was caught by some Indians and had to fight in the open. They killed their horses and used their bodies as breatworks. I’m willing to bet they rested their rifles over the horse bodies, they were able to hold off the band with long shots till night when they could slip away

 

[SOLANCO]

Most often the purpose of firing a bullet is to hit a target. Try as you might, you will never irritate an inanimate target. A target that bleeds and breathes is another matter. I feel confident that the man trying to kill another armed man will give himself every possible advantage.

 

[Twisted_1in66]

Aint much under the sun....If we can figure out the advantage of something with our occasional hobby use, be sure those individuals who made a living with their arms and carried them all day long figured it out long ago. the heavy clumsy arms of the 17/a8th century petty much required a dedicated rest to be carried. Nowadays, any kid in the woods with a BB gun figures out the advantage of using available rests potshoting the local critters early on.

Your comments about people figuring out that a rest improves your accuracy are correct. However your comments about 17th and 18th ct. requiring a dedicated rest to be carried is not. Certainly the early hand-gonnes used them because they were like small cannons cast from iron or brass. But from the time of flintlocks on, those dedicated rests became very unusual. The American Longrifle of the 18th ct. is a prime case in point. I have two replicas of those. One which is a production gun (Traditions Pennsylvania Longrifle) with a straight octagon 40¼" barrel, and one that is an Early Lancaster Longrifle that was made by a custom builder from here on the forum. My early Lancaster Longrifle has a 44½" swamped rifle barrel and the overall length of it is 60". You can see the muzzle section of that rifle in my avatar. The butt of it is resting on the ground.

This 5-foot long rifle is easy to carry, mount, hold on target, and fire because of its swamped barrel. It needs no supporting rests and I've never seen them used with a longrifle. The "swamped-barrel" tapers from the breech to the middle and then swells back out the last 12" or so of the barrel, up to the muzzle. That puts the balance point of the rifle at the same point where I hold onto the forearm. It is easy to carry that way and it's easy to fire off-hand. Nonetheless, if I have a choice to fire it from a rest, I will. Good news is with a longrifle that if you're hunting in the woods, there's almost always a tree branch nearby to use as a rest.

The Traditions longrifle on the other hand uses a straight octagon barrel which is quite nose-heavy as are all long straight or tapered octagon barrels. Even though they are more awkward to hold and to mount and hold on target, there is no rest required or carried to use with it. That straight tapered rifle barrel was not available in the 18th century. It wasn't until about 1838 (19th ct.) that Remington invented the method for drilling a barrel out of a steel blank using a long hollow drill bit with oil being pumped through the hollow center. Prior to that, all rifle barrels were hammer forge-welded into a swamped profile from a flat skelp of iron. So the type of barrel on my Early Lancaster is very much typical of the type of rifle barrel found in the 18th ct. I will rest it on a tree limb or other rest if one is handy, just as I would with a modern firearm, but I don't and they didn't carry gun rests around with them.

 

[bpd303]

I guess I'm a throw back because I regularly carry the shooting sticks when going out in the woods. They are adjustable for height and on our property there are many places that there are overlooking benches farther down the hill and nothing to use as a rest like trees or big boulders.
I still hunt and do a lot of walking, in that case I use them folded up as a walking stick. Lots of times I will stop at a bluff line and sit down looking at the grassy bench as far as 50 yards down the hill that has deer trails, set up the sticks and rest the rifle to get the best sight picture and wait for game to come strolling by. I made them from some black bamboo on the property and they are very light and sturdy when opened up.

 

[Jay Templin]

I found some good info HERE. It's a contemporary account, excerpted below.

Colonel Tarleton and myself were standing a few yards out of a wood, observing the situation of a part of the enemy which we intended to attack. There was a rivulet in the enemy’s front, and a mill on it, to which we stood directly with our horses’ heads fronting, observing their motions. It was an absolute plain field between us and the mill, not so much as a single bush on it. Our orderly-bugle stood behind us, about three yards, but with his horse’s side to our horses’ tails. A rifleman passed over the mill-dam, evidently observing two officers, and laid himself down on his belly, for in such positions they always lie to take a good shot at a long distance.

That rifleman’s ball passed through a narrow gap between Hanger and his friend, killing the trumpeter’s horse behind them. Hanger himself later paced the distance, which he said was 400 yards. Good article here, where they have nailed down the specific date and location!
https://allthingsliberty.com/2017/03/prowess-american-riflemen-mystery-now-solved/

 

[bpd303]

Good web site and article. I have bookmarked it for future research thanks.

 

[Sam squanch]

I don’t think a lead round ball would kill a horse instantly at 400 yards. Either the officers were bad at judging distance, or they wanted an excuse to parliament to execute captured riflemen on the spot. Has this shot been done over by anyone as an experiment out there?

 

[Tumbledown]

I don’t think a lead round ball would kill a horse instantly at 400 yards. Either the officers were bad at judging distance, or they wanted an excuse to parliament to execute captured riflemen on the spot. Has this shot been done over by anyone as an experiment out there?

It doesn't say the horse was killed instantly, nor was it at 400 yards, but it's obvious it was pretty quick.

 

[brazosland]

It doesn't say the horse was killed instantly, nor was it at 400 yards, but it's obvious it was pretty quick.

The British officer went back later and measured the distance. Reading is a valuable skill…

 

[Tumbledown]

A

The British officer went back later and measured the distance. Reading is a valuable skill…

Ah, in the footnotes. Now I see it. Even better proof of the effectiveness of rifles.

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I have a partial hand written diary of a Union Arty officer who was chatting with a friend in his words a good 800 yds from the front lines when a round struck his friend in the head killing him instantly. Understandably he was completely unnerved by this as he thought they were safe from small arms fire. I am pretty positive it was not aimed due to the distance and he did not know really where it came from. It could even have been from friendly fire a lot closer.

Just as an FYI: the rifled muskets shooting Minié balls (actually a .58 caliber conical with a skirted semi-hollow base) had a huge range and could reliably hit targets at 500-yards. 800-yards (½-mile) was considered the far end of its range but it is/was possible. The standard load was 60-grs. of black powder behind the .57" Minié The rifled muskets came with a flip up sight that had individual sights for 100-yards, 300-yards, and 500-yards. At 500-yards it would basically be a huge lob, not quite as much as a mortar round, but about as highly arched a trajectory as you can imagine. Most of the time the 300-yard sight was used during battles. Both sides did form Sharpshooting Companies who were deadly at long distances with this sight, and the telescopic sight were also used by some sharpshooting companies.

Here are some pics of the Minié Ball and gun sight.

Here's the Minié Ball design of 1855 from the Harper's Ferry Armory:

This example shows the shape of the Minié Ball and the hollow cavity that made it work so well. the pressure on the inside of the round when fired, caused the soft lead skirt to expand and engage the rifling.

This is an example of the flip up sights that were used on the rifled muskets during the Civil War:

Here's a pic of a company of Massachusetts's Sharpshooters from the Civil War in 1861. Notice the length of their scopes.: