Historically Incorrect, or (A Story of Thread Counting and Delrin Rods)

[kje54]

Forgive my ignorance, So I am assuming clay pipes is the only way for an individual to get their tobacco fix? What choices would one have?

Meerschaum pipes were introduced in 1723 but were considered more of a luxury item at the time. I believe even the Black Forest Tyrolean Pipes date back to the late 17th century, early 18th century.
Corn cob pipes however weren't introduced until 1869 so are definitely not PC for anything before that.

 

[Steve2md]

I avoid this type of discussion since I will "never" build a rifle myself with a hand forged barrel mounted in a stock that "no power tool" helped shape.

I figure that I would have to stretch the definition of HC quite some way unless I totally disregard the method used to make the components.

Kinda like the "Made in USA" - is it still made in USA if the caveat exists "from domestic and imported components"???

Never?!?! Why!? I’ll be attempting to forge out my first barrel (pistol) soon. If she works well, I’ll be hand cutting rifling for the second one..... also....made in USA

 

[Steve2md]

Meerschaum pipes were introduced in 1723 but were considered more of a luxury item at the time. I believe even the Black Forest Tyrolean Pipes date back to the late 17th century, early 18th century.
Corn cob pipes however weren't introduced until 1869 so are definitely not PC for anything before that.

Briar is good back to the 1400s, bone and soapstone as well. Tobacco use on all continents where it grows is known earlier, but the manner of consumption is up for debate.

 

[tenngun]

Cigars were known in England by middle eighteenth century if not before. Spain kept a tight reign on her colonies so spread out of the carribian was slow. France and Italy both flirted with them and English Dutch Scandinavians Germans could of got them through there.
Seaman often chewed, as smoking was limited. Snuff was real popular but expensive and an upper class thing.
As cigars/ sigars got into the Mississippi valley English American colonist could have seen them before the revolution.
I can’t see a bunch of colonials at the green dragon puffing away on cigars , I bet had you walked Boston waterfront you might have seen one.

 

[kje54]

Cigars were known in England by middle eighteenth century if not before. Spain kept a tight reign on her colonies so spread out of the carribian was slow. France and Italy both flirted with them and English Dutch Scandinavians Germans could of got them through there.
Seaman often chewed, as smoking was limited. Snuff was real popular but expensive and an upper class thing.
As cigars/ sigars got into the Mississippi valley English American colonist could have seen them before the revolution.
I can’t see a bunch of colonials at the green dragon puffing away on cigars , I bet had you walked Boston waterfront you might have seen one.

Cigar production in England began in 1820, by 1821 Parliament enacted laws regulating cigar production. It is believed cigars were intruded to the American colonies when Israel Putnam (later an American general in the Rev War) returned from Cuba in 1762 with a collection of Havana cigars and Cuban tobacco seed. By 1790 cigar production had been started in France and Germany
I remember reading somewhere that the early cigars were long and slender like what we now call cigarillos only longer. Cigar production in the US began to flourish in the early 1800s but didn't become all that popular until the Civ War. As a matter of fact cigarettes (paper cigars) were introduced in the early 1800s as a cheap alternative to cigars but they didn't really take off until WWI.

 

[Brokennock]

I recall the 70's' "verse" that says "If it feels good do it." I'm NOT a fan of it, but from that perspective I say; if it makes you happy, who am I to whizz on your parade?

Which is it?
You don't care, or, those that strive to not only get the historical aspect correct, but, more importantly, pass on the correct information,,,,, are "snobs."

I'm certainly no snob. And far, far, far, from rich. And while I don't have intimate knowledge of the blacksmith's or gun maker's craft, I don't see how and why getting some things correct needs to cost more. Most of my endeavors in this field could be (and are by some) considered "living beyond my means."



Continued in a reply to the o.p.

 

[Brokennock]

I think there are those who see HC/PC as an integral part of their muzzleloading experience because their primary interest is in the period represented by the firearms they choose to shoot. In other words, a proper history buff who’s primary hobby is shooting. Then there are those who do not consider the period correctness of the accoutrements needed to shoot a muzzleloader because their primary interest is in firearms and the shooting sports and have little or no interest in the history represented by their firearm of choice. In other words, a shooter who’s choice of firearm is a bit ‘eccentric’ but otherwise, just a gun. (I am in one camp, so if I am misrepresenting your camp I’d love to know)

I see lots of threads that seems to show these two factions don’t seems to understand where the other is coming from, ie. “Why worry about that? Just use what looks good to you!” or “That’s a sketchy choice because one of those wasn’t around at the time your rifle represents.”

Perhaps a small discussion about why you are in the camp you are in would be helpful in regards to understanding each other....

...sort of a sitting around the fire passing around the peace pipe thread.

Thoughts?

I think there is more than enough room for both camps.

I have said this many, many, times. But, I think it gets lost in people who want nothing to do with historical correctness.
I don't care if someone wants to be historically correct or not. We all make our choices. I certainly wasn't always interested in it, and definitely got into some tiffs with some hardcore hc/pc folks that aren't on this board anymore.
My only concern is the passing on of correct info. I don't care what you call your gear, nor do I care if your article of clothing is cotton, linen, 100% wool or a wool blend,,,,, if it is made to a correct pattern, great.
I do care when folks tell new comers or onlookers that, "this is how the minute men/longhunters/mountain men/frontiersmen, did it, or this is what they wore or used,,,,, and it isn't even close, or is completely wrong.
This is also the problem with broad unsupported suppositions. We don't have all the info on everything, but we have a lot of info, and more of it than a few decades ago. The "well it looks old timey," and the "if it is made of stuff they had or could have had back then," attitude is okay for an individual. But shouldn't be the basis for the passing on of knowledge. It is why we have been having the same discussions for 40 years, and arguing to eradicate what we now know to be wrong info, for 20 or 30 years.

The guy in blue jeans or bib overalls and a sweatshirt or flannel with a TC, or "canoe gun," is just as welcome at my fire, or to hunt with me (as long as they are safe, which goes for both sides) as the most hc/pc purist.
It is what they tell people asking questions and seeking knowledge that I am concerned with.

 

[Bob McBride]

I think there is more than enough room for both camps.

I have said this many, many, times. But, I think it gets lost in people who want nothing to do with historical correctness.
I don't care if someone wants to be historically correct or not. We all make our choices. I certainly wasn't always interested in it, and definitely got into some tiffs with some hardcore hc/pc folks that aren't on this board anymore.
My only concern is the passing on of correct info. I don't care what you call your gear, nor do I care if your article of clothing is cotton, linen, 100% wool or a wool blend,,,,, if it is made to a correct pattern, great.
I do care when folks tell new comers or onlookers that, "this is how the minute men/longhunters/mountain men/frontiersmen, did it, or this is what they wore or used,,,,, and it isn't even close, or is completely wrong.
This is also the problem with broad unsupported suppositions. We don't have all the info on everything, but we have a lot of info, and more of it than a few decades ago. The "well it looks old timey," and the "if it is made of stuff they had or could have had back then," attitude is okay for an individual. But shouldn't be the basis for the passing on of knowledge. It is why we have been having the same discussions for 40 years, and arguing to eradicate what we now know to be wrong info, for 20 or 30 years.

The guy in blue jeans or bib overalls and a sweatshirt or flannel with a TC, or "canoe gun," is just as welcome at my fire, or to hunt with me (as long as they are safe, which goes for both sides) as the most hc/pc purist.
It is what they tell people asking questions and seeking knowledge that I am concerned with.

Can't argue with that. Mostly what interests me on this subject and the reason for the OP is the seeming lack of comprehension of the other sides motivations by many folks. I do things the way I do them for me and with history and context in mind, but I like history and context in mosts everything I do. If I buy a new bandsaw I enjoy researching the history of bandsaws. I'm sure most folks do things in their ML adventures like they do most things in their life.

Personally I like a correct gun and have fun putting together a bag/horn set for the gun that is plausible, but not necessarily a copy of something extant, with accoutrements that are known to have existed. My favorite part is the journey of streamlining what I carry and how I carry and use it. It's a sort of a practical archaeology I enjoy. I leave the rest to the folks who find their enjoyment beyond that. As has been said, there's a thousand right ways to do something, many wrong ways, but just a few perfect ways. The perfect interests me only to the extent that the journey I take has me discarding right ways that I chose to discard so I occasionally stumble on the perfect. I don't search for the historically perfect, but the historical that is perfect for me.

 

[user 49399]

I'm with you fellers.

Does anybody else find it a little humorous that we're using iPads, iPhones, laptops, etc., to access the internet so we can discuss the pc/hc aspects of our hobby? Having said that, if not for our modern conveniences I wouldn't be able to learn as much about this hobby as I do now. Nor would I be able to watch Blackpowder Tv, Black Powder Maniac Shooter or Hickok45.

One of my other hobbies is antique collecting. I don't collect from a certain time period, I like anything old. Same with muzzleloaders and accouterments. I like anything from 18th century on.

There's room for all of us from the thread counters to the Hollywood mountain men like me.

 

[Griz44Mag]

Whats the jury's ruling on good cigars?


Would they fly in about any camp?




Asking for a friend.

I would think that as long as he shares, should be GTG!!!!

 

[Kenn]

I can't argue with that. Mostly what interests me on this subject and the reason for the OP is the seeming lack of comprehension of the other sides motivations by many folks. I do things the way I do them for me and with history and context in mind, but I like history and context in mosts everything I do. If I buy a new bandsaw I enjoy researching the history of bandsaws. I'm sure most folks do things in their ML adventures like they do most things in their life.

Personally I like a correct gun and have fun putting together a bag/horn set for the gun that is plausible, but not necessarily a copy of something extant, with accoutrements that are known to have existed. My favorite part is the journey of streamlining what I carry and how I carry and use it. It's a sort of a practical archaeology I enjoy. I leave the rest to the folks who find their enjoyment beyond that. As has been said, there's a thousand right ways to do something, many wrong ways, but just a few perfect ways. The perfect interests me only to the extent that the journey I take has me discarding right ways that I chose to discard so I occasionally stumble on the perfect. I don't search for the historically perfect, but the historical that is perfect for me.

I agree, Bob, & David had some excellent perspectives too. David described what Civil War re-enactors often refer to as "seeing the elephant." Seeing that B-1 number fly overhead must have been the epitome of "wet towels," eh? Being in an encampment at night, well after spectators have departed, helps eliminate extraneous, modern reminders; add a little imagination & willingness to go with the moment, & yeah, you're just about there. It can be an intermittent, fleeting experience, but it's memorable whenever it occurs.

Here's another aspect perhaps of HC/PC: Some find enjoyment in the hours of sanding, polishing & otherwise finishing a muzzleloader kit. Some, for various reasons, would rather not & purchase their firearm &/or accoutrements in a completed state. There's nothing wrong with either approach.

Those innumerable moments devoted to a kit build, however, are relatively therapeutic for me. It's also a memorable, learning experience to "compare notes" with someone who has also finished such a project & why he/she selected that particular item.

We're indeed fortunate to be able to enjoy these pursuits! It's been enriching for me to read in this thread of others' opinions & experiences.

 

[mushka]

Being as it seems to be so difficult to be perfectly pc/hc nowadays, I was thinking about how an 1805 mountain man would view our modern made smoke poles and clothing. I would venture to say that he would give his left nut for a good Pedersoli rifle or even a TC Hawkin and a gore tex suit of clothing if he new they were available. He wouldn't be pc/hc for his time but he'd be better armed and clothed. How's that for a train of thought?

 

[Griz44Mag]

Being as it seems to be so difficult to be perfectly pc/hc nowadays, I was thinking about how an 1805 mountain man would view our modern made smoke poles and clothing. I would venture to say that he would give his left nut for a good Pedersoli rifle or even a TC Hawkin and a gore tex suit of clothing if he new they were available. He wouldn't be pc/hc for his time but he'd be better armed and clothed. How's that for a train of thought?

Against the grain - but SPOT ON!

 

[mushka]

I tend to be against the grain most of the time.

 

[Carbon 6]

I guarantee as soon as he announces a Brown Bess every hard nose stitch counter will have his deposit in.

OMG, he'll need a whole nother factory to keep up with the orders. Bakers, Springfields, Charleyvilles, oh my. So many guns he could touch and they'd turn to gold.

 

[Pete G]

...and far, far, far, from rich. And while I don't have intimate knowledge of the blacksmith's or gun maker's craft, I don't see how and why getting some things correct needs to cost more. Most of my endeavors in this field could be (and are by some) considered "living beyond my means."

Or as Dolly Parton put it "It takes a lot of money to look this cheap".

 

[tenngun]

Which is it?
You don't care, or, those that strive to not only get the historical aspect correct, but, more importantly, pass on the correct information,,,,, are "snobs."

I'm certainly no snob. And far, far, far, from rich. And while I don't have intimate knowledge of the blacksmith's or gun maker's craft, I don't see how and why getting some things correct needs to cost more. Most of my endeavors in this field could be (and are by some) considered "living beyond my means."



Continued in a reply to the o.p.

On a forum like this one can sound like a snob, as opposed to how it would sound around a fire.
someone ask opinions about a look os an item and another points out such and such wasn’t correct. None of us are 100% correct but we strive to be.. or not. And a comment may be informational but can be taken as snobbish
I recall talking about my TFC at an event. Mines a centermark and not exactly a copy. I didn’t point out all that was wrong with it to the tourist, but did talk about French guns and how they worked, I often say ‘modeled on’trade guns or ‘patterned after’.
I have a German lock on my SMR. Not correct to the style of gun. But I have a lot of folks show interest in it when shooting. A correct lock would make me feel better but would not make them more interested. And again I say misled after or based on.
‘OMG this is an F&I event and that fellow has a WTBS style tin pot’. That would be absurd, and snobbish. While having a rule against wal mart blue speckle ware is not.....IMHO
Of course our sins always look worse on other people.

 

[Bob McBride]

It's something like the RC Airplane hobby. If you have three guys who fly RC planes there might be two who race and one who flies at his local park. Of the two guys who race, one is an engineer-type who spends all his time at the workbench, trimming weight here and there by 1/100th of a gram, and testing slight variations of wing shape in his handmade windtunnel. The other racer is a jock and spends all his time flying the course, trying to trim 1/10th of a second off his lap time. The guy who loves zipping his plane under powerlines at the local park will say, "Why bother? Just have fun!", the engineer will say, "I don't mind not winning, as long as I have the most perfect race plane I can build!", and the Jock will say, "Come look at my trophy case!" To each of these guys, the snob is one of the other two, and he is the only one having any real fun....

 

[Coot]

Forgive my ignorance, So I am assuming clay pipes is the only way for an individual to get their tobacco fix? What choices would one have?

Snuff

 

[Rod Man]

Snuff

Ha, yeah gonna have to figure out something that is acceptable. I ain’t dipping snuff or I’ll be hurling all over the place...which I guess that’s “HC/PC” correct enough. Thing is for me, I know I know nothing on how all this reenactment stuff works but I do know, should I decide I want to pursue something like that then I would be all in. I would do the research and make the contacts, make sure my kit was squared away and then go play. If while playing and someone notices an error by all means square me away. However, an un solicited comment in an environment that has nothing to do with a particular event then it is unwarranted and I will respond accordingly. I would submit that common courtesy goes a long way. Thinking from what I’ve seen on this forum that rarely happens and if it does it’s usually a misunderstanding or a claim was made that’s not quite accurate and someone points out that deficiency. Does that have to happen? For some it does, when it happens to me ( which I am sure it will) OK, noted, thanks, moving on. No biggie. Where’s my beer? Jus saying.