Colonial longarms of the Concord fight

[Kaylee]

Hey y'all!

I had the chance to stop by the National Heritage Museum again and check out their relics from the Concord fight. There were a number of muskets and fowlers provenanced to participants in the Concord fight. No pictures, and I'm not an expert so could easily be missing some identifying trait or another, but here's what I noticed -



1. Musket, mid-1700's, carried by Solomon Brown at the Battle of Lexington.
  a. iron triggerguard (the only one of the bunch that did - most were brass)
  b. flat faced lockplate and cock, but the lockplate has a crown and "S+E" marking that looks like French military. There's a "D..." in script as well.
  c. there is a grooved rear "sight" filed into the tang/breechplug area.
  d. no endcap on the nose of the stock
  e. wood rammer (though it looks like a more recent replacement)

2. Fowler, 1774, carried by Moses Mossmon, a physician who also "mended and sold guns."
a. Drooped New England style butt (just like your early CZ-452)
b. front sight, rear sight groove.
c. octogon-to-round light weight barrel
d. flat lockplate

3. Fowler, 1773, carried by Thomas Earle.
a. rounded lockplate w/owners name engraved upon it.This is the only rounded lockplate I recall seeing on the colonial arms.

4. Musket, 1745, James Farmer, Gingham England. (This may be a British-carried piece, I'm not certain from the signage)
Long land pattern Brown Bess. Eschuton is marked:
XXI
---
23

Brass furniture, no end cap, wood rammer, forearm knob IS present, but the piece is flat under the trigger guard.
There is a faint "X" stamped into the tang just shy of the barrel.


5. Fowler, 1730-1774. From Amerstam, Holland.
(The settlers of New England had a centuries long connection with the Dutch. Most of their ancestors were from the Eastern part of England just across the water from Holland, and recall that is where the Pilgrims stopped prior to coming to Plymouth. A couple hundred years before that, you see Dutch weavers coming over to England. Lots of back-and-forth)
Carried by  Ezekial Rice, pricate East Sudbury Minutemen, at Old North Bridge.
His father used this weapon in the French and Indian War at Fort William Henry.
a. wooden rammer, no end cap.
b. front sight is about 5" back from the muzzle
c. 3 sheet brass thimbles
d. rear sight notch filed in tang
e. fancy carving/engraving on barrel, lock, and the lock area of the stock.
f. octogon-to-round barrel

6. Fowler, 1777  (1777?? that's what the signplate said)
a. engraved flat lockplate
b. plain octagon to round barrel
c. endcap of brass sheet
d. brass thimbles for a metal rammer - the front one is a "trumpeted" like on a Bess.
e. a low front sight around 5" back from the muzzle, and a heavier bayonet lug mounted UNDER the muzzle.
provenanced to a private in Cpt. Thomas Gates' militia who served on 4/19/1775



Anyhow, that's that.

What struck me most about the arms on display was the near ubiquity of rear sight grooves on the colonial arms.
For those who aren't familiar with muskets of the time - you're basically dealing with a long shotgun with an aiming bead up front. No rear sight at all.

... except on those fowlers.

They weren't rifle sights like we know them - not even as good I suspect as on rifles of the day - but they were considerably finer than anything on military muskets. More, it looked like a lot of those rear sight grooves I saw were filed in at some time AFTER production - they weren't part of the original weapon. On the doctor/gunsmith fowler it looked like it belonged and the engraving followed its lines - on some of the others it looked pretty crude, like the owner had just sat down with a file and did it himself.

I simply don't have the experience to say if what I saw was universal in the colonies on sporting arms at the time, or if it was a wartime measure - or even if they were added *after* 4/19/1775, after the New England militia had had a chance to rub shoulders with riflemen come up from the back country as the war heated up.

Whenever it was done though, it's sure evidence that the men in the colonial militia gave marksmanship - even with smoothbore fowlers and muskets - a lot more weight than did the British infantry. Someone modified those weapons so they could be aimed.

[asminuteman]

I wish I could have gone along! sounds as if you had an enjoyable (and educational) time.

wohdoh nah

[slim]

Huzzah!

Those "aftermarket" mods are still around today! 

[Unbridled Liberty]

Huzzah!

Those "aftermarket" mods are still around today!

Also known as Bubba Jobs!  Some Bubba's better than other Bubbas.  Not much has changed in that department.  I'm wondering if the Colonials actually had an "AIM" command?  Anybody know?  My understanding of the Redcoats is they had a "Make Ready" (cock the hammer), "Present" (shoulder the musket), and "Fire" (yank the trigger).  Correct?  Interesting stuff and thanks for the post Kaylee.

UL

[Kaylee]

I'm wondering if the Colonials actually had an "AIM" command?  Anybody know?  My understanding of the Redcoats is they had a "Make Ready" (cock the hammer), "Present" (shoulder the musket), and "Fire" (yank the trigger).  Correct?

Correct. And yes, the Continental Line did use "AIM!" instead of "PRESENT!" - at least after von Steuben.

As I understand it, historians are still arguing to this day as to how relevant that distinction actually was - especially since the regular Continental Soldiers were using military muskets no more precise than their redcoat opponents*

Personally, I'm inclined to think it is a meaningful distinction. By the time the Pennsylvania riflemen start to filter into New England for the "festivities" you're already getting warning letters sent to the English press of the "behind every blade of grass" variety.** 

And of course, even when you're talking New England colonial militia we have men like Isaac Davis drilling his men in marksmanship, as is covered in Appleseed.





====================
* And contrary to The Patriot showing redcoats shrinking from the flash of their firelocks, the British army was rightly feared as one of most professional, best trained armies of the day - perhaps the best. They too "knew what they were about."

** My copy of The Frontier Rifleman has gone missing, but there's at least one or two in there.

[asminuteman]

the colonies were sued after the war by the British over the "aim" command.

They called it "murder".............

"Present" was  (in their minds) a "matter of fact" or "to whom it may concern".....type of command.
no-one was "singled" out to die.