|
|
Post by artificer on Mar 3, 2020 14:16:49 GMT -7
Spence, I'm right with you on preferring to use the correct terms for the time period one is doing. BTW, your quotes have been excellent sources of period correct terms and I appreciate it very much. ewoaf, I love doing first person, but I've found one has to do it so the general public can follow it AND be careful of using some terms so modern folk don't take it the wrong way, especially at places like Colonial Williamsburg. I often begin by telling visitors I will begin by doing first person, so they can experience the language of the period, but I will follow it with a "modern day" explanation so they might better understand. Something proved quite popular with visitors was I would make a point to address and gather up a group of kids, by saying to them something like, "Does anyone wonder what is going on here when Soldiers are wearing Short Skirts?" That usually got a laugh and by interesting the children, the parents came along and other adults did as well, but I always welcomed the kids in front of the group by saying the Lads and Lassies should be in front. Then I told them in "my Gaelic" they are called "Wee Bairns" meaning they were small and not yet full grown and Bairns meant more than just children, the best translation was/is "Beloved Child." Needless to say that goes over well with the parents as well, though sometimes there is a jovial crack from the crowd. Of course one has to be especially careful with some period terms and especially around children: For example, when I held up my Whisk and Prick and since I was usually doing a Private Soldier in the Major's Coy of the 42nd RHR; I would quickly add that I found Colonials often refer to it as a Whisk and Pick. Then I would go on to show and explain its use. I usually don't mention the term "Pricking Iron" when talking about period leather working, unless only adults were around. When going over parts of the lock, I point to the Cock, name it and quickly say it may have gotten that name from the way a Cock Rooster pecks the ground, though there are some other period explanations. When pointing out the Uniform Items names and when I got to it, I would say, "Now I think you have been wondering why we wear skirts? Actually, it is not a skirt at all, but rather a True Piece of Manly Clotheing called a Philabeag or the term sometimes used by Colonials is Short Kilt." I would add the colour and pattern are not a Clan Tartan Plaid (pronounced Played) but rather the "Government Sett" for his Majesty's Highlanders. Gus Gus, I have seen the term pricker used in period writings, is your term whisk referring to the pan brush, is pan brush the wrong term? Keith. Keith, You are correct, as far as the 18th century British Ordnance terminology. Bailey documents it as the "Whisk and Prick." I think it is also mentioned in "Of Sorts for Provincials" and/or "A Soldier Like Way," though I would have to dig out the pages it is mentioned. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by spence on Mar 3, 2020 15:12:20 GMT -7
Keith said: "As far as I am aware, swan shot & goose shot are the same as modern day buckshot." Here is a chart of shot sizes by Ezekiel Baker in 1821 showing buckshot, small buckshot, swan, goose and duck.  Spence |
|
Keith
Hunter
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 1,002 
|
Post by Keith on Mar 3, 2020 15:23:29 GMT -7
As far as I am aware, swan shot & goose shot are the same as modern day buckshot. Keith. Keith, You may be interested that Hamilton in "Colonial Frontier Guns" documents the French here ordered the additional sizes of shot from France in 1733: Bustard shot, Duck Shot, Wild Pigeon or Royal Shot, half-Royal Shot Also, he gives the sizes to a degree - "Cast Shot, Buck and Swan, 471" to .350", Rupert Shot .215" to .087" This from documentation and actual excavations all over the Colonies. Gus Many thanks Gus, I will look into this. Keith. |
|
Keith
Hunter
Bushfire close but safe now. Getting some good rain.
Posts: 1,002
|
Post by Keith on Mar 3, 2020 15:30:03 GMT -7
Gus, I have seen the term pricker used in period writings, is your term whisk referring to the pan brush, is pan brush the wrong term? Keith. Keith, You are correct, as far as the 18th century British Ordnance terminology. Bailey documents it as the "Whisk and Prick." I think it is also mentioned in "Of Sorts for Provincials" and/or "A Soldier Like Way," though I would have to dig out the pages it is mentioned. Gus Thanks Gus. Keith. |
|
|
|
Post by spence on Mar 3, 2020 21:25:37 GMT -7
The name I have collected most often is "priming wire" or just "wire".
1739 a Worm and Priming-wire fit for his Gun
1752 a Worm Priming Wire and Brush
1776 Also WIRES and BRUSHES for firelocks
Neumann uses pick, priming wire and prickler.
I haven't collected whisk.
Spence
|
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Mar 4, 2020 5:07:46 GMT -7
Would the correct term be "brush"?
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Mar 4, 2020 7:46:01 GMT -7
Would the correct term be "brush"? I think it all has to do with the context during the period. IOW, if one is talking about a civilian use, then "Brush and Wire" or "Wire and Brush" is probably the most correct. If one is talking about the British Military, British American Provincials and Militia before or during the early part of the AWI.....then Whisk and Prick is probably more correct. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by Black Hand on Mar 4, 2020 7:48:45 GMT -7
Excellent - thank you!
|
|
|
|
Post by artificer on Mar 4, 2020 8:04:29 GMT -7
A post on another forum just reminded me of another term that is way, WAY overused or incorrectly used in the hobby/sport today and that term is "Long Hunter," or the common derivatives of the spelling. This seems to have been the replacement for "Buckskinners" from many years ago. "Historian Emory Hamilton asserts that "The Long Hunter was peculiar to Southwest Virginia only, and nowhere else on any frontier did such hunts ever originate"[1] although the term has been used loosely to describe any unofficial American explorer of the period. Most long hunts started in the Holston River Valley near Chilhowie, Virginia. The hunters came from there and the adjacent valley of the Clinch River, where they were land owners or residents. The parties of two or three men (and rarely more) usually started their hunts in October and ended toward the end of March or early in April.[1]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longhunter#cite_note-Emory_L._Hamilton_1970-1So if one is in a camp with women and children, which I personally applaud and enjoy, then it AIN'T a Long Hunter camp or group. I think it far better to use the word Frontiersman/men or people on the Frontier. Settler would even be a better word for much of the time. Gus |
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Mar 4, 2020 8:36:47 GMT -7
A post on another forum just reminded me of another term that is way, WAY overused or incorrectly used in the hobby/sport today and that term is "Long Hunter," or the common derivatives of the spelling. This seems to have been the replacement for "Buckskinners" from many years ago. "Historian Emory Hamilton asserts that "The Long Hunter was peculiar to Southwest Virginia only, and nowhere else on any frontier did such hunts ever originate"[1] although the term has been used loosely to describe any unofficial American explorer of the period. Most long hunts started in the Holston River Valley near Chilhowie, Virginia. The hunters came from there and the adjacent valley of the Clinch River, where they were land owners or residents. The parties of two or three men (and rarely more) usually started their hunts in October and ended toward the end of March or early in April.[1]" en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longhunter#cite_note-Emory_L._Hamilton_1970-1So if one is in a camp with women and children, which I personally applaud and enjoy, then it AIN'T a Long Hunter camp or group. I think it far better to use the word Frontiersman/men or people on the Frontier. Settler would even be a better word for much of the time. Gus Ya, I'm with you here. I think my opinion on this was stated in that thread, hopefully my aggravation with it did not show through too much. I do think this one is a little more understandable in its misuse. So many people come to this from the shooting, hunting, and firearms angle, and one of the most celebrated civilian identities of period outdoorsman, even if misrepresented, is the longhunter. So, if one wants to get into period dress, learn to use period outdoorsman gear, and hunt and trek with same, what does one call themselves? Well, they've heard of longhunters, and a frontiersman could be almost anyone, in any outdoor clothing, from any time period. So, wrong, but understandable. One has a bag to keep just the stuff for ones gun to make the shot, and the next shot, and to keep the gun functioning to make,,, more shots. Let's call it a possibles bag,,,,,,,, that makes NO sense! Duh, how about shot pouch. |
|
|
|
Post by spence on Mar 4, 2020 9:01:39 GMT -7
Would the correct term be "brush"? I think it all has to do with the context during the period. IOW, if one is talking about a civilian use, then "Brush and Wire" or "Wire and Brush" is probably the most correct. If one is talking about the British Military, British American Provincials and Militia before or during the early part of the AWI.....then Whisk and Prick is probably more correct. Gus As with so many things in the hobby, maybe not all the time. Journal of Arthur Harris of Bridgewater coy of militia, requirements for Mass. militia in 1775: “Each soldier to provide himself with/ A Good Fire Arm/ A Steel or Iron Ram Rod and Spring for Same/ a Worm Priming Wire and Brush/ A Bayonet fitted to his Gun/ A Scabard & Belt Therefor/ A Cuting Sword or Tomahawk or Hatchet/ A Pouch Containing a Cartridge Box that will Hold fifteen Rounds of Cartridges at Least/ A Hundred Buck Shot/ A Jack Knife & Tow for Wadding/ Six flints, one Pound of Powder/ forty Leaden Balls fitted to the Gun/ A Knapsack & Blanket/ A Canteen or Wood Bottle to hold 1 Quart.” Spence |
|
|
|
Post by spence on Mar 4, 2020 9:06:05 GMT -7
Gus said: "I think it far better to use the word Frontiersman/men or people on the Frontier. Settler would even be a better word for much of the time."
A term commonly used for the people actually living in the frontier areas, not just visiting for hunting or exploring, is 'backwoodsman'.
Spence
|
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Mar 5, 2020 7:42:48 GMT -7
Spence... I have to ask. Can I travel down and be the envy of the forum where I get to spend a weekend with you on an outing!? I bet we are not far from each other. :-)
|
|
|
|
Post by brokennock on Mar 5, 2020 8:48:46 GMT -7
You would truly be the envy of the forum. Been wanting to do the same for years.
|
|
|
|
Post by hawkeyes on Mar 5, 2020 8:54:06 GMT -7
You would truly be the envy of the forum. Been wanting to do the same for years. It truly would be an amazing opportunity to have everyone together for a mass outing. The ability to pass experience, knowledge and just watch, listen and learn would be invaluable and something I'd personally cherish. However, I'm thinking we all need to go to Australia, or raise funds for Keith to fly over here. Not to stray off topic, if this is something of an interest to the community maybe we can start a separate discussion for this to potentially become a reality. We have some well experienced gents who, believe I can say are more than willing to share their knowledge with us all. I for one am very grateful for that. |
|
