Most Period Correct Load

What was more common for the 18th century man to have kept loaded in his smoothbore, shot or ball?

I would think coarse shot would have been the general choice for woods roaming, but I could be wrong.

Does anybody have any documentation? Or could you reccomend a book or website?

 

[Swampman]

The swan shoot the the Second Company used to make was about the size of #4s. They looked like little tear drops.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

I would think ball was by far more common. Shot was expensive to purchase and very difficult to make at home. Ball would out range buckshot for reliable results on attacking Indians and large predators or for that deer which wandered into the cow pasture.
Now if we're talking "Gentleman Hunters", such as myself, Well if I load up for rabbit hunting and don't get a shot, I just leave that load of #6 in the barrel untill I do have occasion to fire it or pull it when I want to change loads. :grin:

 

[Capt. Jas.]

The Executive Journals of the Council of Colonial Va. documents the Virginia frontier militia and rangers preferring "large goose shot" to ball for indians.

 

I am not sure that question is answerable with any knid of certainty, and it is probably situation dependent. There are records of militia units being ordered to carry "buckshot" loads and a reference to D. Boone loading coarse shot in a fowler before going into a battle late in his life. "Buck and ball" was a common load even with the regular military musket. But, if a soul was out after bear he'd likely load with ball, if after turkey with "swan shot" and so on....to use a modern analogy: my father was n FBI Agent and he had four weapons--a .38 snubby on his hip and in an office safe he had a .45 Tommy gun, a .308 sniper rifle and a 12 guage pump shotgun. Guess which longgun he took when he knew it could be a battle? Yep, the shotgun loaded with buckshot.

 

[Rusty Old Gunns]

I'm a member of the Huntington Militia founded in 1636 in Huntington Ney York.

We carry (carried) paper cartridges in a standard cartridge pouch and it was manditory that we also carry a shot pouch full of shot.

There seems to be some confusion as to what #. We believe it was heavy #4 goose shot, but it was said that many carried #6 since since we live on Long Island and there was always a lot of water fowl, rabbit and squirl about. (Gotta feed the kids)

 

I agree that if someone was specifiacally going after bear they would probably load ball and if going after small game would load appropriate shot. :thumbsup:

My question is regaurding the person who was just walking through the woods not knowing if occasion would come to shoot at deer, squirell, turkey or whatever.

I think in this instance that coarse shot something like BB size would have been used.

I know it is not legal today but a load of BB shot at close range will take deer or maybe even larger size game.

In Louisiana it is legal to hunt hogs with whatever weapon can be used for the season in progress. This means if you are squirell hunting with a shotgun loaded with #6 and you see a hog that you can legally shoot it. Granted that would have to be CLOSE range. :youcrazy:

I also know someone who shot a deer in the head with #4 shot (not legal) :nono: but still very effective. :grin:
They said that the deer dropped in its tracks.

Also I read an article in the Dec issue of Backwoodsman Magazine about natives in South America who regularly hunt game animals weighing up to 400 lbs. with single shot shotguns loaded with #2 shot. :shocked2:

Just food for thought you know. :hmm:

I thought this would be an interesting subject and wanted to get other peoples opinions.

 

[rich pierce]

I'd use a round ball. If the small game is close, I could hit it. If big game presented, could hit that too. If i miss a chance at a squirre, no big deal. If I miss a chance at a deer, that's a big deal. This is "pot hunting"- very different from market hunting, where the hunter was expected to bring back big game. In the Lewis and Clark journals, it looks like they would send out a couple of hunters who were expected to come back with elk, buffalo or deer. There was no way to feed a mob of hungry soldiers on small game. To much shooting for too little gain. Powder and ball were expensive. I think that's one reason for smaller calibers when small game became the main target. They are not more efficient on small game- just cheaper to shoot

Last but not least, having trapped before, I could nearly always bring back more than a family could eat in 3 days from one to two hours of walking a trapline, and get furs too whe they were prime. A beaver could go a long ways, and a roasted coon could feed the bunch all day. Even a few muskrats or possums would be plenty of protein for a growing family. In that case- knowing I'd have a packbasket loaded with dead "small game"- I'd carry a loaded smoothbore with a ball while on the trapline, for protection and for large game.

I think that pot-hunting is more for fun than survival, given that a small trapline and a trotline are more productive.

 

[Itegorm]

I don't know about other parts of the country but up here in the Great Lakes there have been a few smoothbores found (mostly underwater along the old canoe routes) that were still loaded. Most all of them were loaded with shot. Many had multiple shot sizes loaded ranging from little (#7-8) on up to some pretty big stuff (around #4 buck). Granted this would have been along water routes, but then again almost everything around here is water routes, at least for easy travel, so waterfowl and assorted small game would have been the usual targets. Besides it would be alot easier to pull a shot load and drop down a ball for something like a moose than it would have been to pull a ball and drop an ounce or so of shot for shooting into a flock of geese on the water (remember we are talking grocery shopping rather than sport hunting).
I tend to follow the same philosophy with my trips to the woods. I almost always load with shot in mixed sizes. In fact my shot flask is sitting here in front of me as I type. It has everything from #8 on up to #2 and everything in between, there is even a bit of drip shot (sometimes erroneously called swan shot) in the flask. I also carry a small bag of #4 buck shot and a few .590 roundball in my bag. The multi size shot load has accounted for lots of game from grouse and woodcock on up to coyote. And if it were close enough (under 10 yards or so) I'm sure it would do for a head shot on deer (not something I would suggest).
As for shot being hard to make, I don't really believe that. I have cast uncountable pounds of shot in the last couple of years sing period style gang moulds. Failing a mould shot can be made by dripping lead into water to make drip shot, not the most balisticly superior but very servicable none the less (on a side note I had a conversation not to long ago with someone who had worked the digs up at Michillimackinac who said they had found evidence that similar shot was being made and then having the tails clipped off to make it roundish). Also shot can be made by casting a long, thin cylinder then trimming it to shorter lengths (found in the wreck of the Phips, an early 18th century shipwreck in the St. Lawerence) or by casting a lead sheet and then trimming it into cubes. All work pretty easily but take a bit of time.
Below is a pic of the flask and shot I mentioned above.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

I tend to agree with Rich Pierce that for "subsistence hunting", small game was probably not worth the cost of powder and shot. Rabbits and squirrels are easily snared, birds can be trapped, snared or taken with baited fish hooks, gruesome but effective.
Now I'm thinking in terms of the impoverished frontier farmer, woods roamer, jack-pine savage sort who had no time or money for sport hunting as we know it today. The object being to fill bellies as cheaply and easily as possible.
Having lived that way myself on a few occasions the gun I found most usefull was a .22 rifle. I had a Savage .22 over 20 gauge but very seldom fired the shotgun barrel. I did sometimes wish for a more "reaching" rifle, so upon return to so called civilization I built a second set of barrels for the Savage in .22 over 30/30 and if required to live in the woods again that is what I'd carry. In the west that is. :hmm:

 

[tg]

An interesting topic, I saw a program today that showed the remains of a 1600 Plymouth man killed by a large ball and multiple shot of varying size out of a matchlock to the leg, this would have been a good miitia defense load and could have taken game also, I agree that a time/place/situation factor would play strongly here.

 

[Itegorm]

Perhaps this might shed a bit of light on the subject. It is a quote I found this morning while looking for something else. "Gunworms is very unhandy, being short and too wide for a ramrod, they being obliged to put a piece of paper round the ramrod before the worm be fast, by which reason they lose many a deer etc. before they have time to draw the small shot to put a ball in." The quote is ascribed to James Isham at York Fort and was dated 20 July, 1739 and came from Letters from Hudson Bay, 1703-1740. I found the quote in A Toast to the Fur Trade by Robert C. Wheeler.

 

Interesting info :hmm: ...

I wonder about just dropping a ball on top of the shot charge.

I did this once while squirell hunting. I saw a deer and just dropped the ball on top of the shot and covered with a wad.

I tried to follow the deer but the tracks dried up quick and could not pick up the trail.

I discharged this load by shooting at a knot on a tree about 20 yds away. The ball hit just to the right of the knot and would have certainly killed a deer had I been able to shoot at it.

This may account for the shot and ball in the 1600's man. Maybe they just dropped a ball on the shot charge when they decided to shoot something bigger than a duck... :hmm:

It seems from the quote and program that shot was quite common.

I suppose we would have to view much more evidence to draw any definitive conclusions.

More food for thought though... :hmm:

 

[Capt. Jas.]

I find it most interesting the use of the term "ramrod" in the above 1739 quote. Use of that term today among most living historians is considered modern and a no-no. Thank for the reference.

 

[Itegorm]

I had a friend of mine suggest just dropping a ball down over the shot before. It may work for some but I shoot pretty stout shot loads to start with and I really don't want a ball on top of them after that. No buck and ball loads are another story, I love that set up.

 

[Itegorm]

I had wondered about the phrase ram rod as well when I first read the quote. But perhaps all the guys who say that ram rod wasn't a term used are mistaken, maybe it just wasn't a common usage in the pieces they had read. Also I seem to remember the term "rammer" being used in a 17th century setting before which many will say is a no no. Regardless unless one can lay there hands on a copy of the original scource it is tough to say if all of the verbage is 100% correct. At any rate I thought it was a nice quote that seemed to have some bering to the discussion as far as being from the period. C'est la vie.

 

[CoyoteJoe]

That is an interesting quote. With a card wad over shot I find it only necessary to ram the small end of my "ramrod" to tip the top wad so the shot can be poured out. If tow or a wad of paper or cloth were used as a top wad one would have to resort to a worm to pull it.
I recall Ruxton speaking of bird hunting in Spain, if I recall correctly. He was set upon by bandits and taking cover behind a wall he said, "it was but a moments work to ram a ball down each barrel". I don't recall that he first pulled the birdshot but it's been 30 years since I read that book and no longer have a copy.

 

[tg]

"Gunworms is very unhandy, being short and too wide for a ramrod, they being obliged to put a piece of paper round the ramrod before the worm be fast"

Sounds like they have a tapered rod which the worm fits the large end for cleaning, and when pulling loads they affixed it to the small end?

 

[Itegorm]

Sounds like they have a tapered rod which the worm fits the large end for cleaning, and when pulling loads they affixed it to the small end?

Sort of. Generally the rod was tappered at one in to accept a spiral shaped worm. The can be used for cleaning, pulling a wad from the barrel or several other non gun uses like holding your capote closed, worn through the ears in place of earrings, stealling beads through the chinking in the Trading post (a documented use from the Great Lakes), etc. They were pretty common up here especially with the smoothbores that were prevelant. Here is a pick to help out.

 

[tg]

I have a couple of them that I use on my French Fusil I made the other end rather large but cheated by adding a larger piece of rod about 3" long then tapering it down, it seemed a lot quicker than stating from scratch