Who Used Fowlers?

[Bob McBride]

Bob maybe the pan flash seems puny but the gun is a percussion cap fowler not a flintlock , Birmingham proofed at 9 drams on black powder {27.1/2 grains to a drm and 6 oz of shot
Feltwad

Well that explains that. I should have known as most were percussion. Wow. Kicked like a Mule I’ll bet.

 

[Smokey Plainsman]

At the risk of sounding too phyosophic I think the language & how it evolves is to serve us , Not we it . Much as delight in Shakespearian English it had evolved from earlier usage & went onto to todays usage . Good or bad & how you view it. It evolved & doubtless will continue to do so . Rudyard

I agree, Rudy. “Fowling piece” is more cumbersome to say (or write) than simply “fowler”, and language does change and evolve. Without a doubt virtually everyone reading these boards knows well what a “fowler” is supposed to be, referring to the guns. In fact, few refer to those who hunt birds as “fowlers” even on these boards. Most simply call them “hunters.”

Such is the degradation of human language and society. We’ll just have to find a way to grunt on, as I doubt the term “fowler” for these guns is going to go away anytime soon.

 

[Brokennock]

Who used fowling pieces....?

Graydon, Alexander. Memoirs of His Own Time, with Reminiscences of the Men and the Events of the Revolution. Edited by John Stockton Littrell. Philadelphia: Lindsay & Blakiston, 1846.

We find the members of this detachment described in Captain Graydon's
Memoirs as "...old-fashioned men, apparently beyond the meridian of life. They
were truely irregulars; and whether their cloathing, equipments or caparisons
were regarded, it would have been difficult to have discovered any
circumstance of uniformity. Instead of carbines and sabres, they generally
carried fowling pieces; some of them very long. and such as are used for
shooting ducks."

Spence

Darn it Spence. I just placed an order for some books, barely a nibble out of the list of books I'd like to get. Now, you add another to the list. Lol.

 

[Feltwad]

Well that explains that. I should have known as most were percussion. Wow. Kicked like a Mule I’ll bet.

Yes when fully stoked it shakes your brains a bid not for the faint hearted type who shoot small bores
Feltwad

 

[Artificer]

So it isn’t a “pickup lorry”? I very much fancy a full English breakfast! Black pudding is not something that has yet caught on here, and that is a shame! Fried up with a side of tomatoes and Heinz beans, with some eggs and toast, it’s amazing!

Ah, but please don't forget the Bangers and Shrushmooms!!!

I LOVE a big breakfast to begin a hard day and I was in seventh Heaven at the Kenilworth Hotel, Kenilworth, Midlands, UK where they served a banquet breakfast to everyone on the U.S. International Muzzle Loading Team during the World Championships at Wedgnock, UK in 1998. Unfortunately, they had to serve scrambled eggs instead of fried eggs, but everything else was traditional.

The Bangers were not as "juicy" as American Breakfast sausages and they had more grain as a filler, but they were still delicious.

The first morning I quickly noticed the round chafing dish with the Shrushmooms in it. I excitedly exclaimed, "WOW, there's fresh/cooked Shrushmooms!!" One of the servers looked at me curiously and I grinned and informed him it was a humourous name for Mushrooms. I spooned out a good portion, but did not want to wish to deny others the treat, so I refrained from taking as many as I wished. Well, after looking around, very few others on the Team were eating them. So the next day I picked up a bowl sized for cereal and filled it with Shrushmooms and enjoyed them every morning. The English serving staff found that interesting/humorous and often pointed me out in good humour for the rest of the stay at the Hotel. I guess even they didn't eat quite that many mushrooms in the morning!

OK, back to the subject, here's a link you may find interesting on period Fowling Pieces/Smoothbores:

http://ladybemused.com/jaeger/NRA/Hunting Guns in Colonial America.htm
Gus

 

[TNGhost]

The Swiss Family Robinson used "fowlers"

"...two very good fowling pieces from the great cabin, two pistols,..."

"... made it to shore vw'th a supply of fishing hooks, fowling-pieces, bags of powder and ... "

Written in 1812, it could give some clue as to the nomenclature used during that period when the fowling pieces themselves were in common use.

Perhaps I should have said the Swiss Family Robinson were fowlers using fowling pieces?

 

[Carbon 6]

In 1620 Edward Winslow of the Plymouth colony wrote:

"The 5th day, we, through God's mercy, escaped a great danger by the foolishness of a boy, one of Francis Billington's sons, who, in his father's absence, had got gunpowder and had shot a piece or two, and made squibs, and there being a fowling-piece charged in his father's cabin, shot her off in the cabin; there being a little barrel of powder half full, scattered in and about the cabin, the fire being within four feed of the bed between the decks, and many flints and iron things about the cabin, and many people about the fire, and yet, by God's mercy, no harm done."

 

[artrepro]

Who used fowling pieces....?

Graydon, Alexander. Memoirs of His Own Time, with Reminiscences of the Men and the Events of the Revolution. Edited by John Stockton Littrell. Philadelphia: Lindsay & Blakiston, 1846.

We find the members of this detachment described in Captain Graydon's
Memoirs as "...old-fashioned men, apparently beyond the meridian of life. They
were truely irregulars; and whether their cloathing, equipments or caparisons
were regarded, it would have been difficult to have discovered any
circumstance of uniformity. Instead of carbines and sabres, they generally
carried fowling pieces; some of them very long. and such as are used for
shooting ducks."

Spence

So Bob does this description describe the two of us?

Chuck40219 gmail.com

 

[George]

So Bob does this description describe the two of us?

I think he nailed us, Chuck. Sounds like the 'good old days' to me, though.

Spence

 

[kingsax26]

Thank you! I am interested in the most early of American-made, or imported and used in America, smoothbore guns that would be appropriate for a lower class person for hunting. Thinking pre-F&I War. Can anyone point me in the direction of guns that might fit that style?

this is an exact copy from a documented originl Pre F&I war. The gun is a mix of fowler and rifle parts. barrel is 46" smooth bore with rifle sights. brass buttplate is hand cut and hammered flat. This gun is typical of a frontier gun maker salvaging parts to make a new gun. the stock is fashioned in a field expedient fashion of very plain , rock hard maple , it is actually V shaped instead of rounded at the bottom as was the original. The only deviation I made is that mine is .62 where as the original was .75. The lock is typical germanic that might have been found on a Jeager rifle.

 

[Brokennock]

this is an exact copy from a documented originl Pre F&I war. The gun is a mix of fowler and rifle parts. barrel is 46" smooth bore with rifle sights. brass buttplate is hand cut and hammered flat. This gun is typical of a frontier gun maker salvaging parts to make a new gun. the stock is fashioned in a field expedient fashion of very plain , rock hard maple , it is actually V shaped instead of rounded at the bottom as was the original. The only deviation I made is that mine is .62 where as the original was .75. The lock is typical germanic that might have been found on a Jeager rifle.

That is very interesting. Do you have any pictures of the original gun you could share. Any other info on it?

 

[Grenadier1758]

All of a sudden I think I have an idea for how to use a lock I have stored away. @kingsax26 , that is a beautiful smooth rifle.

 

[FlinterNick]

Sold off militia and military guns were very commonLy used on the frontier. They were cheap and reliable. India pattern brown bess muskets, springfields and contract muskets were very common.

 

[kingsax26]

That is very interesting. Do you have any pictures of the original gun you could share. Any other info on it?

i would ahve to get the documentation from the builder

 

[Brokennock]

i would ahve to get the documentation from the builder

Oh well.

 

[FlinterNick]

What separates a fowler from a musket is a matter of a few facts. 1. No provision for a bayonet on a fowler and 2. leaner and lighter carbine sized muskets, 3. Most fowlers were smoothbore, Ive read on occasion that some were rifled like todays modern day reproductions, the procedures for rifling a gun were long and complicated in the 18th century which is why most rifles were made in an octagon shape or pentagon shape, they could be gripped fairly easily for cutting groves. Rifling a round barrel was not impossible just not practical, I tend to think most fowlers would have been rifled as a sort of customiced upgrade, if the barrel permitted for it, early rifling was cut deep. Ferguson rifles were one round barrel that was rifled however military contractors not civilian 4. Ive seen fowlers with full round barrels and half round half octagon, typically having flats at the breech end provides for a more stable surface for sighting. 5. Some Hudson Valley Fowlers were very large, and had bores up to .80, I tend to refer to these and buck and ball guns.

 

[Stophel]

What separates a fowler from a musket is a matter of a few facts. 1. No provision for a bayonet on a fowler and 2. leaner and lighter carbine sized muskets, 3. Most fowlers were smoothbore, Ive read on occasion that some were rifled like todays modern day reproductions, the procedures for rifling a gun were long and complicated in the 18th century which is why most rifles were made in an octagon shape or pentagon shape, they could be gripped fairly easily for cutting groves. Rifling a round barrel was not impossible just not practical, I tend to think most fowlers would have been rifled as a sort of customiced upgrade, if the barrel permitted for it, early rifling was cut deep. Ferguson rifles were one round barrel that was rifled however military contractors not civilian 4. Ive seen fowlers with full round barrels and half round half octagon, typically having flats at the breech end provides for a more stable surface for sighting. 5. Some Hudson Valley Fowlers were very large, and had bores up to .80, I tend to refer to these and buck and ball guns.

I think there is much wrong with most of these statements. I'll only address the last point here. The large, long Hudson Valley Dutch Fowling guns are just that. Fowling guns. They are NOT "buck and ball guns" (which seems to be a modern collectors' term). While they could certainly load buck and ball, that was definitely not their main intention. They were loaded with large volumes of ordinary shot for taking ducks/geese. And .80 is not that big. It's only a little bigger than 12 gauge. Many are not even that large. Very often around 16 to 12 gauge.

"Buck and ball gun" is the term applied to smoothbore guns that have somewhat thicker barrel walls, as opposed to many fowling guns that have lightweight barrels, paper thin at the muzzle. It is supposed that these were intended to be "general purpose shotguns", rather than specifically "fowling guns", and their heavier barrels would be more suited for shooting buck and ball.. so the story goes.

 

[Belleville]

Thank you! I am interested in the most early of American-made, or imported and used in America, smoothbore guns that would be appropriate for a lower class person for hunting. Thinking pre-F&I War. Can anyone point me in the direction of guns that might fit that style?

Also see Kevin Gladysz' The French Trade Gun in North Am.

 

[FlinterNick]

I think there is much wrong with most of these statements. I'll only address the last point here. The large, long Hudson Valley Dutch Fowling guns are just that. Fowling guns. They are NOT "buck and ball guns" (which seems to be a modern collectors' term). While they could certainly load buck and ball, that was definitely not their main intention. They were loaded with large volumes of ordinary shot for taking ducks/geese. And .80 is not that big. It's only a little bigger than 12 gauge. Many are not even that large. Very often around 16 to 12 gauge.

"Buck and ball gun" is the term applied to smoothbore guns that have somewhat thicker barrel walls, as opposed to many fowling guns that have lightweight barrels, paper thin at the muzzle. It is supposed that these were intended to be "general purpose shotguns", rather than specifically "fowling guns", and their heavier barrels would be more suited for shooting buck and ball.. so the story goes.

It wasnt intended to be accurate, in the very last line I mentioned I regard guns of .80 caliber or higher as a buck and ball gun. A .80 cal gun has to have a thick barrel wall from breech to the middle before it tapers out. Or you could call it a shotgun.... much of what read and discuss is perspective.

There were all types of guns made in the Hudson Valley, lighter Fowlers, larger Fowlers and some were made excessively larger. The largest ones with 50” barrels and bores up to almost .85. With many of the parts being imported from Britain, and the Netherlands these guns take many characteristics. If you reference the E.Allen gun on page 195 Neumans book, its even marked as a “Fowler/wall gun”. With a 59 inch barrel at .82 cal, this so called fowler was repurposed for a wall gun due its larger bore And very long barrel. Washington’s Army utilized buck and ball whenever they could, it was advocated, I cant imagine these guns would have not been used for buck and ball.

 

[rich pierce]

Trade gun, fowling piece, musket, smooth rifle. It’s not always multiple choice or simple. Often we do not know the intended purposes of smoothbores. Only military muskets clearly made in first work to be used with a bayonet are really straightforward in classification. A fowling gun could become a musket by making it bayonet-capable or be used in militia as is. Any smoothbore could shoot shot, ball, or buck and ball. Broad or comprehensive statements that don’t reflect this fluidity are trying perhaps too hard to categorize guns.

To the original question, “Who used fowling pieces?”, the simplest answer is, “their owners.”

Next follows, “who owned fowling pieces?” and then, “how did they use them?” The answers are as varied as people are.