If I was a man living on the frontier during the revolution what would I have carried?

[Cattywompuss]

The actual AWI itself created a serious overstock of rifles as well to the point that Washington had a number of units reequipped with muskets as soon as he got some available. Men who were not familiar with the rifle were armed with them early in the war because SE PA started turning them out like crazy. These were not pre-owned minuteman guns but new manufacture. That probably did leave a surplus of guns for sale/distribution after the war.

I had forgotten this point until I remembered a biography of Morgan I have read a few times.

 

[flntlokr]

It is stated in 1750 Moravian records , there were as few as one usable gun per 100 souls in America. There also was no money ,so buying guns was done with animal hides , tradable goods, grain , whatever commodities around. You can bet a gun bought on credit would be a very basic "lock , stock ,and barrel " w/ little to no decoration on it. Smooth or rifled ????????

Probably lot of the settlers had and used bow and arrow for small game hunting. Gun s cost a lot, and powder wasn't plentiful or cheap. They mostly wouldn't have had enough to practise or learn with either I don't think. Much better success rate with buckshot than single ball as well.

 

[Cvkotvkse]

It is stated in 1750 Moravian records , there were as few as one usable gun per 100 souls in America. There also was no money ,so buying guns was done with animal hides , tradable goods, grain , whatever commodities around. You can bet a gun bought on credit would be a very basic "lock , stock ,and barrel " w/ little to no decoration on it. Smooth or rifled ????????

By 1750, most of America, including most of the Moravian settlements, was no longer "frontier," but settled seaports and coastal populations, farmlands in the lowlands and piedmont elevations, with larger interior trading towns perhaps just beginning to develop at river junctions. For this population, guns were no longer necessary for subsistence nor for daily, or even occasional, protection. The actual frontier, at least in the Middle and Southern colonies at the time of the AWI, was defined by proximity to the Eastern Continental Divide, the boundary between British territory and the Indian Nations. Protection, as well as subsistence, was an ongoing factor. Hilly or mountainous terrain favors long-distance shooting ability; in addition, gunmakers' records document how much the Native peoples themselves preferred, often DEMANDED, rifles over smoothbores. In cases like this, "Keepin'up with the Jones'," takes on a whole new value when the neighbors start shooting at you from 200 yards out...

 

[Cvkotvkse]

While probably not every one of the Over Mountain Men had rifles, they were still in the time period before the AWI when the trade in deer hides was so huge and profitable and that would have made rifles much more affordable, even to fairly poor folks.

I think its safe to say that a large enough percentage of them must have had rifles, though I can't document what percentage that would have been.


Gus

In the case of King's Mountain, the documentation is that ONLY riflemen participated... In fact, the original 1400+/- men who showed up at the initial mustering at the Cowpens was pared down to the 900 best shots who could ride well enough to make the all-night ride in the cold rain to attack Ferguson and his forces.

 

[Rató:rats]

In John Tanners captivity narrative he states that the First Nations around the Red River area were often short of powder and shot and it wasn’t uncommon for a man to borrow either item in small amounts, enough for one or two shots. Creek bed pebbles and other things provided by nature sometimes substituted for shot or ball. For this reason, plus the lightness of smoothies, I don’t think many natives preferred the rifle to the smoothbore. A rifle is much less forgiving of improvised ammunition not to mention less versatile. T.F. Belue wrote that Daniel Boone was carrying a fowling piece at the Blue Licks fight and he was a man who knew the right tool for the job.

 

[Brokennock]

the mountain boys/men was that they all were long hunters

Given how brief the actual "longhunt" period was, and how few men actually participated in it, this seems doubtful, at best.
The term longhunter is way overused, and misused.

 

[Rató:rats]

“Morgan says Boone went into the battle armed with a fowling piece stoked with a stout powder charge and a mixed load of shot and roundball (what they called buck-and-ball). We’re so used to thinking of frontiersmen as riflemen that we tend to forget that smoothbores played a big role on the frontier. Especially in battle”

https://frontierpartisans.com/836/daniel-boones-combat-shotgun/

 

[Flintlock]

Remember, many people may have owned guns but never fired them becouse Ballistol, Dawn and Windex were in short supply so they couldn't clean their firearms.

 

[Cattywompuss]

Remember, many people may have owned guns but never fired them becouse Ballistol, Dawn and Windex were in short supply so they couldn't clean their firearms.

 

[M. De Land]

I think perhaps a double barrel smooth rifle in about 72 cal. with 28 inch barrels. good for shot or patched ball and a tomahawk. Might have a good heat treated Hickory long bow and quiver of arrows wrapped in and oil cloth with trade steel points on the pack mule packed in line with body of the animal. There are times when a bow and arrow will beat a fire arm all to pieces in rate of fire and stealth.

Rifles certainly became predominate over time and most it seems were under 50 cal East of the Mississippi but in my opinion a hundred yards was a long shot by 1700's standards , even in the Appalachian mountains. A good smooth rifle or even smooth bore will produce killing accuracy on game or enemy at these ranges and is far easier to load and more versatile being able to handle shot or ball.
I'm a rifle guy at heart but I think that although rifles were eventually to dominate the smooth bore was probably far and away the best gun for average citizen in town or country to defend and feed ones family with. Smooth bores were also cheaper to buy which would have made them popular.
1700's America was still pretty closed in by forrest and fence rowed fields even in the agricultural areas. I think it probably a very rare thing for a rifleman in need of a gun capable of consistent 200 yard accuracy.

 

[tenngun]

From the o.p. of this topic,

So, what if the gun he likes best after looking through a bunch of pictures is of a style that didn't develop until the 1790s to 1810s, and maybe developed further northeast?
Example. A nice Lehigh. I really, really love this style, but, it would have been unheard of/unseen/unknown here in New England between 1755 and 1780, and I think the same can be said for the time and place that the o.p. has asked about.

I said something similar earlier. To refine in a bit. Pick the gun you like best from that time and place. One can get to early, or just out of place. Too late within reason might be ok, though forty or fifty years might be the top end of that.
But if you have to invent an unlikely story about why you hav

 

[Cattywompuss]

Rifles certainly became predominate over time and most it seems were under 50 cal East of the Mississippi but in my opinion a hundred yards was a long shot by 1700's standards , even in the Appalachian mountains. A good smooth rifle or even smooth bore will produce killing accuracy on game or enemy at these ranges and is far easier to load and more versatile being able to handle shot or ball.
I'm a rifle guy at heart but I think that although rifles were eventually to dominate the smooth bore was probably far and away the best gun for average citizen in town or country to defend and feed ones family with. Smooth bores were also cheaper to buy which would have made them popular.
1700's America was still pretty closed in by forrest and fence rowed fields even in the agricultural areas. I think it probably a very rare thing for a rifleman in need of a gun capable of consistent 200 yard accuracy.

While the mountains have changed since the old growth is gone, I agree about long shots. I used to run around the Blue Ridge and you aren't shooting far unless you are in somewhere like a big cove or valley. Valley Crucis comes to mind.

 

[Cvkotvkse]

While the mountains have changed since the old growth is gone, I agree about long shots. I used to run around the Blue Ridge and you aren't shooting far unless you are in somewhere like a big cove or valley. Valley Crucis comes to mind.

That's just a few miles downhill of where I have been discussing. Going up and down Beech Mountain, and the adjacent ridges along what had been the border between British and Cherokee territory, and seeing what the visibility opened up to be after the leaves fell, reading up on the Overmountain communities such as the Watauga Association that were almost totally self-sustaining, even to the point of having their own gunpowder mills, convinces me that, overall, rifles would have been preferred. The kind of accuracy described by examination of the British fatalities at King's Mountain also suggests that many among the American forces were quite proficient and comfortable with shots at and beyond 200 yards... which requires much experience with one's weapon and how it handles at such ranges.

 

[Cattywompuss]

That's just a few miles downhill of where I have been discussing. Going up and down Beech Mountain, and the adjacent ridges along what had been the border between British and Cherokee territory, and seeing what the visibility opened up to be after the leaves fell, reading up on the Overmountain communities such as the Watauga Association that were almost totally self-sustaining, even to the point of having their own gunpowder mills, convinces me that, overall, rifles would have been preferred. The kind of accuracy described by examination of the British fatalities at King's Mountain also suggests that many among the American forces were quite proficient and comfortable with shots at and beyond 200 yards... which requires much experience with one's weapon and how it handles at such ranges.

I'm not wholly disagreeing. But after the leaves fall is only half the year. And the seasons dictate war and hunting. I hate winter deer pelts, so if it weren't for our modern seasons, I would takes them mid summer. Summer is also the better, if certainly the not only war season.

Rifles may have been preferred, But they certainly didn't supplant fowlers and muskets. Rose's "American Rifle" and other more sober works on this era have disabused me of the notion that riflemen regularly shot longer shots than we do today East of the Mississippi today.

Again, not picking a fight. But I do not believe we can historically state that the rifle was universal, or even predominant.

 

[Cvkotvkse]

I'm not wholly disagreeing. But after the leaves fall is only half the year. And the seasons dictate war and hunting. I hate winter deer pelts, so if it weren't for our modern seasons, I would takes them mid summer. Summer is also the better, if certainly the not only war season.

Rifles may have been preferred, But they certainly didn't supplant fowlers and muskets. Rose's "American Rifle" and other more sober works on this era have disabused me of the notion that riflemen regularly shot longer shots than we do today East of the Mississippi today.

Again, not picking a fight. But I do not believe we can historically state that the rifle was universal, or even predominant.

 

[Cvkotvkse]

Yeah... "Preferred" rather than "supplant" fits my best guess at this point, as well...

 

[Cvkotvkse]

Hey, Md80runway23! Do you live in that area? I"m up there on top of Beech Mtn. a few times a year... Might be fun to hang out and burn some powder while pondering the ancestors...

 

[Artificer]

In the case of King's Mountain, the documentation is that ONLY riflemen participated... In fact, the original 1400+/- men who showed up at the initial mustering at the Cowpens was pared down to the 900 best shots who could ride well enough to make the all-night ride in the cold rain to attack Ferguson and his forces.

With respect, it wasn't the 900 best shots, but rather the 900 with the best horses who could catch and stop Ferguson before he got into British lines.

Gus

 

[Artificer]

The kind of accuracy described by examination of the British fatalities at King's Mountain also suggests that many among the American forces were quite proficient and comfortable with shots at and beyond 200 yards... which requires much experience with one's weapon and how it handles at such ranges.

Again with respect, this is only partially true, but that is not a criticism of the Overmountain Men at King's Mountain or other American Riflemen.

Since King's Mountain was so heavily covered in tree's, the Overmountain Men fought "NA Style" taking cover behind trees while firing and advancing and doing quite a few tactical retreats before the battle was over. Original accounts talk of them getting within 80 to at most 60 yards of the British, but having been turned back a number of times by British Loyalist (smoothbore) firing until the Overmountain Men finally killed Major Ferguson (the ONLY British Regular in the battle) and took the place.

As to firing at and hitting British Soldiers fairly often at 200 yards, this was possible by aiming at the hats of British Soldiers and with the drop of the bullets at that distance, the ball would strike the enemy in the abdomen or groin, as long as the Riflemen estimated wind corrections correctly. If not, then the balls would go wide of the enemy soldier being aimed at pretty regularly.

Bullet drop at longer distances made hitting the enemy much less certain UNLESS they had time to "range their shots" as they did only one time I'm aware of and that was during the fighting around New York. In one area, they were shooting from a rest and across a river at the British. They were in those positions for 2-3 days, so they had plenty of time to range their shots. It is documented the American Riflemen hit a small portion of British Soldiers there out to around 325 yards, BUT again, this is the furthest documented source where they did so. (In this case it was documented by measuring the distance after the fighting.)

There was an EXTREMELY unusual case recorded by then British Lt. Col. and later General Banastre Tarleton, where an American Rifleman shot at him and his XO at 400 yards. However and even though they watched the Rifleman lay down and take careful aim at them on a day that offered PERFECT environmental shooting conditions, the only thing he hit was the "Bugle Man's Horse."

Further, there was another case in Carolina where around 25 riflemen shooting from inside a cabin and others using the split rail fences as support at a distance of around 150 yards when they began shooting. ALL fired at least once and many fired twice at a "Rather Portly British Major" while he crossed a river on horseback coming towards them. Now the target was moving, but not that quickly, as the horse was swimming for a good part of that crossing. Not ONE of their at least 30 shots fired hit the British Major.

After this, Light Horse Harry Lee who was a STRONG supporter of and VERY knowledgeable on American Riflemen, ordered that henceforth they were ordered to no longer shoot at anything beyond 150 yards.

About 6 years ago on this forum we had a great discussion on the Accuracy of 18th Riflemen and much of the information is from that thread.

Gus

 

[Coinneach]

Besses were owned and issued by the army, it was kings property. One would ‘have some splaying’ to do if you had one.
That said, most every ship carried a musket that looked a lot like a sea service bess, and private folks did get officers fusils, again a gun that looked like a bess only smaller and lighter.

Well they wouldnt have remained "Kings property" for long after Braddocks retreat, or any of the other Battles and skirmishes where the Lobster backs took casualties; then of course as the French and their Indian allies had their turn those weapons would have been picked up by Militia and Rangers and no doubt "recycled".
How many of course is anyones guess, but theres little doubt that Brown Besses, Dutch and French Smoothbores weren't uncommon outside the Brit Army Regiments serving in America at the time.