Simple ? for you Gurus

[hawkchucker]

OK I am looking at this for my first smoothie.http://www.longrifles-pr.com/tulle.shtml
It does say that it is PC for Rogers rangers, but what about the AR. Is there any documentation on these being there. I figure since I work in Lexington Ma. that I should look into portraying from this timeline.

I have shot a Tulle at a recent event and did like it. so I was going to order this kit to do. Any Comments?

 

[Mike Brooks]

I've never read that Roger's Rangers ever were carrying tulle de Chasses.
It does make a great sales gimmik for selling guns though. :winking:
I'm sure there were some De Chasse left around for the rev war, but probably they weren't common by any stretch of the imagination.

 

[Swampman]

If you like it, I think it would be acceptable for most 18th c. events. If you are going to have a personna, some thought should be given to what that person would have carried or had access to. I had a CenterMark Grenadier and it was an excellent small game weapon.

 

[hawkchucker]

The reson that this is what I really like also has to do with my own family history. French Canadian. So maybe I will go with it. It was that or a mass Militia rifle. Any thoughts on that also?

 

[tg]

You can find a much more historicaly correct French Fusil from TOW or R.E.Davis if this matters.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

I have read Roger's Rangers were armed almost exclusively with tulles.

 

[tg]

"I have read Roger's Rangers were armed almost exclusively with tulles."

How would one go about arming oneselve or a group with a town/armory in France?

 

[Mike Brooks]

I have read Roger's Rangers were armed almost exclusively with tulles.

Certainly you jest. :rotf:

 

[tg]

If the buildings in the town of Tulle were made of brick maybe they hauled them in carts and threw them at the enemy/.....it is interesting that the French made flints wewre highly prized over the English spauls, by the English at this time in history.

 

[J.D.]

I have read that the Rangers bought their firelocks from Greg and Cunningham, but there was no description, other than being a "neat fuzzee firing 47 balls to the pound". I'm quoting that from memory, so it may only be a paraphrase, however no one, that I know of has found a description of those firelocks.
J.D.

 

Where are we getting this info, is Al Gore rewriting History again. 47 to the pound would be roughly .46 Caliber, and secondly R.R. were Brittish in Loyalty. Why in the heck would they be carrying French arms. Bill

 

[TANSTAAFL]

The author I read used the supposition there were many captured tulle muskets, as Rogers and his Rangers operated behind the French lines, their usage of the enemy as an ammunition supply source was one of the reasons why they used the tulle muskets. After the F&I war, many of these captured, light and quick handling French tulles were very well received and used by the civilian population of present day north eastern US.

For sometime, it was supposed the Rangers used carbines manufactured in Europe for calvary usage. That theory did not pan out, as the carbines referenced, used an odd sized ball, of which none have ever been found or documented.

Another theory was they used Bess Long Land Pattern muskets and cut them off, as Rogers supposedly told his men to cut them short. Some cut off musket barrels have actually been found on an island in his area of operations.

 

[spotlink]

I went to that link, the Tulle is very nice. If I didn't already have a Charleville or was looking to expand my collection I would get one myself.

 

[Mike Brooks]

I'm not jammin' ya or anything, as all I've ever read was RR's were issued 1st model Bess's and carried those. I'm not entirely convinced they cut off a whole lot of those. the cut off ends that were found were about 2" long....would 2" really make that much difference in the way a 1st model carried? Must be less than 1oz. of barrel.....
Anyway, out of respectfull curiosity , where did you read RR's were carrying french guns? If that is indeed the case I'd like to know. :thumbsup:
I've read years ago about RR's carrying jeagers too, never was convinced of that either, but I'm willing to learn!

 

Fischer, in his book Washington's Crossing, quotes a letter home from a PA militia volunteer in Washington's Army ca.1775/6 in which he tell's his wife that he is carrying a "French fussee" strapped on his back; but it does not tell us it was a Tulle fusil.

 

[rich pierce]

I am surprised, no- aghast- that Okwaho has nothing to say on the subject. All I can surmise is that he is hibernating or is in a state of shock over hearing that Rodgers Rangers carried Tulle's.

Let's use some reason here. Roger's Rangers were outfitted British troops fighting the French. There was long-standing war between Britain and France, separated by periods of posturing and positioning for another conflict. Each side believed they were inherently superior to the other. Roger's Rangers using "Tulles" (let's substitute French fusils here) would be like Americans using Japanese or German arms in WWII, or Russion arms in Vietnam. Of course, it made sense to pick up a gun in battle from a fallen enemy- and keep it or destroy it or give it to an ally. But Rodgers Rangers and other companies all needed to be carrying the same caliber balls, no confusion there. What if one guy was short on paper cartridges and could not use those from his comrades because they would not fit down the bore? These were military companies, not bands of woodsmen.

 

[rebel727]

I seem to remember reading somewhere that each man was given a sum of money to outfit himself with including weapons. I would imagine if this is true there were all kinds of weapons used.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

I do a lot reading, but my memory retention faculties fail me often. :redface: Wish I could recall the author and source I did read of the French guns, I will attempt some searches to see what turns up.

I have also read the reason Rogers had some of the musket barrels cut off, was due to careless use of plug bayonets which had bent the thin walled muzzles of the muskets. If so, raises the question, were they carrying civilian guns, or were some military weapons of the time not equipped with socket bayonets?

I have seen accounts of some long barreled (?) Jaegers of German origin issued to Rogers Rangers, but no confirmed documentation.

 

[TANSTAAFL]

http://www.americanheritage.com/articles/magazine/ah/1971/5/1971_5_81.shtml
[url] http://www.usgennet.org/usa/topic/colonial/rogers/bio.html[/url]

Rogers Rangers operations would in no way represent the British army as a whole of the time. They were a specialized and very small unit set up to operate in guerrilla war fashion behind enemy lines in a most brutal manner. The British military in the main resented and resisted the unit and their stated tactics being formed at all.

Rogers rangers were recruited from local civilians in nearby colonies, more than a few were Indians and freed slaves. The Rangers were trained to use the most unorthodox tactics, which appalled senior British officers.


"”¦I do therefore Hereby Constitute and Appoint you the said Robert Rogers to be Captain of an Independent Company of Rangers to be forthwith raised and Employ'd”¦"

 

for what it is worth, the official guidelines for the Rogers Rangers reenacting group stipulates a Brown Bess. If you believe the movie they carried trapdoor Springfields :rotf: