Last of the Mohicans

[dkloos]

I was wondering the same thing about that sling he had on 1/2 the time. It looks as though the one end is secured to the wrist using a sort of fabric taping, and that the other end is simply tied onto the barrel. He is Hawkeye, he needs not use his sights. :haha:

 

[bron]

Yes, but I am Carver, I do!

 

[Toomuch_36]

This really isn't a reply to anyone specific, but wanted to get in through a crack. Watched the LOTM again for the 2nd time this week, and I don't know if it was discrempancies in filming or what, but sometimes there would be a shoulder strap on Killdeer, and sometimes it wouldn't. Never showed him putting it on or taking it off. My question, instead of having swivels for straps, which I couldn't make out on the movie, could they be using, would it be historically correct, to construct a strap with loops on each end to fit over the butt stock and barrel and be snugged down for transporting? Thinking about doing that for my firearm. It would have to be removable, I'd think the strap looped around the barrel would get in the way of the front sights. Any thoughts? Anyone?

You got it right off! A "quick sling" would have a pocket for the butt stock and an eye-noose to go around the barrel. This would be used in "non-hostile" territory when hunting, or just traveling (to be removed before taking the shot) as the strap around the barrel would get in the way of the sights.
It does seem, in the movie, that they used the sling indiscriminantly even in enemy territory, (but that's Hollywood). :winking:

Toomuch
..........
Shoot Flint

 

[tg]

I used a sling with a loop that went over the wrist and the other end over the barrel below the first pipe, the front sight was tall enough and the sling material was thin enough that one could shoot with it in place.

 

[bron]

What kinda material did you use, if I might ask? :hmm:

 

[Toomuch_36]

I used a sling with a loop that went over the wrist and the other end over the barrel below the first pipe, the front sight was tall enough and the sling material was thin enough that one could shoot with it in place.

With taller sights you can get away with this. On most older rifles I have seen the front sight is usually low (less than 3/16 tall).

Toomuch
........
Shoot Flint

 

[Stophel]

I, personally, am not a fan of the idea of the "hasty sling", tied onto the gun. I think it is a fantasy. Sights were so low that such a contraption would have negated their use. I think people simply did not use slings. If sling use were the norm, more American rifles would have been made from the beginning with sling swivels. In fact, post 1770 American guns with sling swivels are increasingly rare. I don't doubt, that on occasion, someone might have quickly tied a string onto a gun to put it across his back so his hands could be free for some certain immediately pressing need, to be removed upon the completion of said task, but I (again, PERSONALLY) seriously doubt anyone had such a purpose-made thing as a hasty sling. IF the question is on the "period correctness" of such a thing... :winking:

Let the anti-period correct attacks begin!

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The one I had was made of linen in a fairly coarse weave. I used it on rifles and fowlers with equal success. After years of use, I lost in the woods 20 years ago and more. I must replace it one of these days--maybe when my new fowler arrives.

 

[bron]

Let the anti-period correct attacks begin!

A bit on the defense are we? :rotf:

I would not take any side of PC because I'm not educated enough - yet. Give me a few more years of reading you peoples input, then watch it!

Having said that, I noted that you based your comments on personal preference, thought process and lack of documention from the opposition. Given Americans penchant for engenuity (hum? American engenuity?) I can't imagine it not being done. My father used to say, "Americans are lazy." He didn't mean that in a bad way. He always follow that comment up with, "Give them a job and they'll figure out an easier, faster, more effecient way to complete it." I can imagine a guy carrying his pack, accoutrements, rifle, etc, thinking, "Man, if I only had a strap on this rifle, I could sling it over my shoulder." I would. Am I alone? Would I document it? Why? :hmm:

 

[mikee51848]

What kinda material did you use, if I might ask? :hmm:

I bought a weave strap from somebody on eBay. Ain't the best picture but you get the idea. Do a search on it and I'm sure you'll find others. Think it was about $20. :hmm:

 

[Rebel]

i have one of those too. Mine has leather on the ends that i split into two long leather thongs. I tie one end around the wrist and the other end around the barrel. I can still see my sight with it on.

 

[Stophel]

"Defensive"? Dude, you have to be ever-ready!!

I have never gone for the very popular "they MUST have done it" argument, seductive though it is. It has been applied to any number of things, generally in order to support someone's preconceived notions/preferences (iron furniture on early guns is the big one :winking: ). If it is something you want to do, by all means, do so, but then if you ask "did they do it back then", the answer might be different (and undesireable!).

I have often wondered about the Great Vanishing American Rifle Sling. It is a rare German rifle indeed without sling swivels. There are several very early American rifles that also have sling swivels, continuing the tradition, but they seem to have all but disappeared by the beginning of the Revolution (and even before). They seem to have weaned themselves from the use of the sling, for whatever reasons. (as have I, and now, I don't miss a sling at all). If sling use had continued to be common, one would assume that rifles would continue to be made with sling swivels, which are simple to make and would cost a pittance to install. If you anticipated using a sling, why not "go for it" and simply get real sling swivels attached to the gun? Besides this, I have yet to see or hear of any documentation for the use of a "hasty sling", much less, the regular use of them. This is my reasoning behind my position.

Again, I have NO doubt that on occasion, a man might tie a string to his gun to quickly sling it across his back for some reason, like climbing over rocks or some such, where he needed both hands free. However, I think such a thing would be done using what materials were immediately at hand...such as a leather string ("whang", if you must :grin: ) from out of the repair kit. I don't think there were purpose-made hasty slings with barrel loops and butt-pockets, buckles or adjustment ties and such (in the 18th century, anyway. I have no inkling if such a thing might have been done in the mid- late 19th century...).

 

Besides this, I have yet to see or hear of any documentation for the use of a "hasty sling", much less, the regular use of them. This is my reasoning behind my position.

Could some things be so common place that they weren't documented? For example, I doubt that they would go out of their way to mention a rifle sling in a diary or when relating a story to an interviewer, years after the fact. Prehaps it was of no more interest than which shoe they put on first when getting dressed?

 

[Mike Brooks]

Slip slings like this just will not work on antique longrifles. The sights are less than 1/8" tall...most I've seen are 1/2 of that or less. With a sling like that on you'd never be able to shoot the gun.
Ive not found a sling to be overly usefull on a gun with a barrel over 31" long. A slung longrifle is usually caught in the trees, or the muzzle dangerously close to the ground. Now, if ytou were a militia man marching all over the place on roads, I could see were a sling would be pretty handy....

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

I have to agree with Chris and Mike on this, if a sling were considered necessary on a regular basis they would have put attachment points on the guns, swivels and/or buttons. These slings are modern inventions that would not have been considered necessary or even desirable in the 17th - early 19th Century. As both Chris and Mike have pointed out, the sights used were too low and no matter how you try, you cannot explain or dream away that fact. Modern longrifle sights on the other hand are very different so if you feel that you want a sling, the above-mentioned modern style slings made of what may be considered period correct materials can be used but we shouldn’t try to fool ourselves into thinking that they were used to any real extent 200 years ago. Chris is right, if a way of carrying a rifle could be improvised when both hands needed to be free, it could then and can be now improvised out of materials at hand. Otherwise, I just don't believe that it was done.

 

[mikee51848]

Slip slings like this just will not work on antique longrifles. The sights are less than 1/8" tall...most I've seen are 1/2 of that or less. With a sling like that on you'd never be able to shoot the gun.
Ive not found a sling to be overly usefull on a gun with a barrel over 31" long. A slung longrifle is usually caught in the trees, or the muzzle dangerously close to the ground. Now, if ytou were a militia man marching all over the place on roads, I could see were a sling would be pretty handy....

I dunno, mine attaches to the barrel with a piece of rawide, which is what, 1/8 inch thick? Got no problem with the sights. It comes in handy to sling, for me, in dragging a deer out.
Hey, to each his own. :v
As for militia men, there is great debate as to if they even had slings. As far as I can see, there was no command (Von Steuben or '64) to carry your firelock with the sling. At least I've never been issued one.

 

[paulvallandigham]

With all due respect to my learned friends, the first sling I saw on a ML rifle used a strip of deerskin that had a slit broadside to one end, wich was looped over the barred and behind a pipe. The " Sling " was tied to that buckskin " loop", which was sin thin, and did not interfere with either the front or rear sight on this reproduction PA long rifle. The sights were, like originals, very low in height. I remember remarking to the man how he had solved the problem of using a sling that didn't interfere with his sights. The other end was lopped on the wrist of the gun. He told me it was a " Hasty sling", as it was easily removed, and these guns were not regularly carried slung over a shoulder, or they would have had metal sling swivels like the Brown Bess and other muskets of the time. I don't know where he got the sling, or where he got his information, but I don't think this is rocket science, either. And, our forebearers knew enough about making due that this would not have been a difficult idea to form. I suspect for a true hasty sling, they just used a length of leather tied to the barrel and to the wrist of the stock and got the job done. So much of history went unwritten because so much was thought to be of common knowledge, and not worth reducing to writing. When is the last time you saw a written article on how to tie shoelaces? Or how to hone a straight razor? Or to find dry kindling in the woods on a wet day? I don't want to argue that this WAS done. Who knows? But its not important enough to bunch your shorts in a knot over, either. :shocked2:

 

[mikee51848]

And perhaps slings just had special applications, like when you're running after Indians with a hawk in one hand and yer knife in the other? :rotf:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

And perhaps slings just had special applications, like when you're running after Indians with a hawk in one hand and yer knife in the other? :rotf:

Naah, the sling is still not necessary. Carry the empty rifle in your left hand, the hawk in your right hand, and the knife in your teeth. It looks so "kewl"... :rotf:

 

[subknave]

From a practical standpoint a sling probably wasn't very useful. When on your shoulder the barrel would probably get caught in low trees and bushes and when off your shoulder the sling would get caught on bushes. Until the explorers crossed the mountains into the flat land of the ohio valley and Mississippi valley, pretty much until they got to Illinois, they would have been traveling through DENSE woodlands. This would have been first growth forest. Very few areas like that exist n the eastern united states anymore. If you were traveling any distance you would be on a horse or boat and if you were in the settled regions there may have been times you didn't take your rifle at all. I doubt many people in downtown Philidelphia walked around with their rifles all the time. Except for soldiers marching on open roads and following the traditions of european armies I doubt anyone used slings.