Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Bandolier clip Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next 
Author Message
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Sat 26 May, 2007 3:00 am    Post subject: Bandolier clip         Reply with quote

Cavalry muskets and carbines featured a sidebar with running ring on the off-side. This ring was hooked onto a clip suspended from a bandolier which simplified loading by safely supporting the gun.
I have seen several examples of these clips and have two questions to experienced re-enactors using this.
1. Why is there no swivel in this connection?
2. How simple/complicated is únhooking from the springloaded clip? as this seems to be a thréé handed job....

Thanks,

Peter
View user's profile
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Sat 26 May, 2007 3:57 am    Post subject: Re: Bandolier clip         Reply with quote

Peter Bosman wrote:
1. Why is there no swivel in this connection?


Because there's no need to? The ring already provides more than enough mobility.

Quote:
2. How simple/complicated is únhooking from the springloaded clip? as this seems to be a thréé handed job....


It does require some effort to unfasten the ring/clip/hook/whatever from the bar, but it's not that complicated. Though, yes, it's a bit hard to show how to do it efficiently without a video or live demonstration. Wink
View user's profile Send private message
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Sat 26 May, 2007 5:20 am    Post subject: Re: Bandolier clip         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:
Because there's no need to? The ring already provides more than enough mobility.


Ok, I get that. Just thought it might make the ring always in the 'correct' position, but on the other hand as Murphy and chance have it, the snap would then probably be always turned facing the wrong way in the most hurried moment.

Quote:

It does require some effort to unfasten the ring/clip/hook/whatever from the bar, but it's not that complicated.


Ah, its a 'knack'. Again I get that. Again I just thought.... Wink

Btw Lafayette, do you keep your gun resting 'balanced' crosswise on the pommel perhaps using a simple cordon attached to the ring to secure it or what?

Peter[/quote]
View user's profile
GG Osborne





Joined: 21 Mar 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 474

PostPosted: Sat 26 May, 2007 11:00 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Depends on the period. From the Revoilutionary Period foward (at least) the sling clips did have swivels.
"Those who live by the sword...will usually die with a huge, unpaid credit card balance!"
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Sat 26 May, 2007 11:00 pm    Post subject: Re: Bandolier clip         Reply with quote

Peter Bosman wrote:
Ok, I get that. Just thought it might make the ring always in the 'correct' position, but on the other hand as Murphy and chance have it, the snap would then probably be always turned facing the wrong way in the most hurried moment.


That's why we're supposed to check its alignment every few minutes or so. In a real military campaign we'd have lots of opportunities for doing this, such as those moments of boredom when we're just sitting on our horses and waiting for orders, or on the last stages of the approach march before we throw ourselves into the jaws of the fight.

Quote:
Btw Lafayette, do you keep your gun resting 'balanced' crosswise on the pommel perhaps using a simple cordon attached to the ring to secure it or what?


Mmm...not really. I just have it hanging by my hip, and sometimes I had to hold it with my hand to keep it from bouncing. A bit ridiculous, I know. Now I'm planning to build a muzzle-bucket like what I saw in that picture of a French dragoon some time ago because it seems like such a bucket would be a great help in keeping the gun steady.
View user's profile Send private message
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 1:31 am    Post subject: Re: Bandolier clip         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:
Now I'm planning to build a muzzle-bucket like what I saw in that picture of a French dragoon some time ago because it seems like such a bucket would be a great help in keeping the gun steady.


The muzzle bucket was used by USC too, probably all over the gun using world by anybody.

Whether it will solve your problem depends on where and how you choose to attach the bucket. Do NOT strap it to your stirrups! as some sources suggest.

The most stable way to carry a gun is a scabbard that has a strap with springsteel (or otherwise reinforcing structure) at the lower end, running to the cinch.
The proposed 1928 changes to the McClellan mention this, including that this was not new too.

A similar problem is the attachement of the pistol hosters in front of the pommel. Those ideally have a fixing at the bottom too even though few illustrations and historical examples I have seen have this.
I do not use a breast-thingus on my saddles so have to make do and thus the holster I custom made to fit move.... Sad The 'next generation' will have a steel strap inside the lower strap that runs to the cinch underneeth the side panels.


I am still in doubt about the 'best' pistol, gun combo....

Peter
View user's profile
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 1:53 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

GG Osborne wrote:
Depends on the period. From the Revoilutionary Period foward (at least) the sling clips did have swivels.


Thank you, I have meanwhile found an example on http://www.blockaderunner.com/Catalog/catpg27.htm assuming you mean the US revolutionairy period. In Europe 'we' adress 1789-1799 with this. Even this is 'too late' for me though Wink
'My' character lives from 1663 to 1748.
This is however all a bit silly realy since I am not interested in re-enactment or such and my true aim is improving my personal riding skills so I am not tóó bothered about period correctness nor wether he would or would not have used a light or heavy spear. Hence my interest in the skills involved in using-loading-handling pistols and guns in general and not simply the 1720 French cavalry model pistol that my character had pictured illustrating his texts in his book.
I guess any fire-arm between matchlock and percussion would 'do' Exclamation
It is a real pity the 1855 Pistol Carbine is percussion as that instrument has a lot going for it.

Peter
View user's profile
GG Osborne





Joined: 21 Mar 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 474

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 12:05 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Except the downside of any percussion revolver is its occasionally unfortunate perchant to chainfire (all cylinders going off at once.) This applied to the Colt revolving carbine as well. Many seasoned cavalrymen actually carried multiple, pre-loaded cylinders and just switched out the cylinders rather than reload or carry 4 pistols (2 holstered and 2 on the saddle.)
"Those who live by the sword...will usually die with a huge, unpaid credit card balance!"
View user's profile Send private message
Gordon Frye




Location: Kingston, Washington
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 12:52 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Peter;

I've seen illustrations of the carbine snap-hook with a swivel attached to it as early as 1616, in Walhausen's "Krieigkunst zu Pferde", so I suspect that they came up with the idea that the whole thing needs to be as flexible as possible pretty early on. I'm not exactly sure when shoulder belts for holding carbines came into general use though. Might have been late-16th Century, might have been very early-17th Century, but they were in use by the second decade, for certain. (Most of the illustrations I've seen from the 16th Century actually show pommel holsters for the carbines/harquebuses, thus my being rather unsure as to the general adoption of the shoulder sling for carbines and harquebuses).

As Lafayette suggests, most of the time the early carbines were simply held to the side when riding at anything more than a walk. I have yet to see any sort of bucket to hold the muzzle (or butt for that matter, as later on they were carried inverted, at least for the longer carbines of the late-17th/early-18th Centuries) and keep it from bouncing around, which of course it will do at a gait higher than a walk. When anticipating combat, or when riding into a town, of for inspections and reviews, the carbine was to be held just above the lock with the right hand, with the butt resting on the right thigh.

Here's a US ca. 1860's carbine sling, which as far as I can tell is identical in all major respects to one made in the 17th Century:



I have one that is virtually identical with this one, other than having an extra link between the swivel and the snap-hook, which was made during the ACW and I use with my own carbines. Reproductions that I have seen (and own) are also identical to one or the other of these.


Here's an English Harquebusier from the ECW (Royal Armouries Collection), with his carbine slung, using a swivel-snap hook remarkably like the later ACW version as well, the primary difference being the width of the sling;


Something that might be of interest to you also is the use of a chain and toggle, rather than a snap-hook, during the 18th Century. A very simple chain with a toggle, much as used for logging or to hold a snaffle bit in place on a halter, is threaded through the carbine's sliding ring, and the other end of the chain is fixed to a sliding bar on the shoulder belt. A rather ingenious method, and I'm surprized that it didn't stay longer in use. Sadly I cannot find an illustration of one to post, but I'll keep looking.

Here's an illustration of the use of a carbine bucket to hold the muzzle in place, with a strap from the near side of the pommel which wraps around the wrist of the stock, holding it nicely in place resting on the right thigh, from the early 19th Century:


I hope that this is of some service to you,

Cheers,

Gordon

"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
GG Osborne





Joined: 21 Mar 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 474

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 3:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gordon....a nice set of illustrations showing dragoons carrying shortened (not "carbines" but possibly carbine bore .65-.69 caliber) muskets in boots (butt down) can be found in the Duke of Cumberland's Clothing Book with illustrations by David Morier. I think this set of drawings was made circa 1747. The illustrations show the butt in the boot attached to the stirrup leathers and the musket carried under the right arm - a right clumsey arrangement but perhaps indicative that dragoons were originally mounted infantry, not light cavalty as they almost immediately became in the Seven Years War Period.
"Those who live by the sword...will usually die with a huge, unpaid credit card balance!"
View user's profile Send private message
Gordon Frye




Location: Kingston, Washington
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 4:56 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

GG;

I've seen the illustrations, but sadly I couldn't find them on the web (though I may well have easily overlooked them). It's a fairly comfortable way to carry a heavier, weapon than the carbine method illustrated, I imagine. I've used the carbine method when reenacting 1840's-era US Dragoons, using a Hall's Carbine with the Grimsley equipments. I find that far more comfortable than the later style used by US forces with the McClellan Equipments, which is simply dropping the carbine by the belt/snap-hook arrangement, and keeping it in place via the leather socket fixed to the saddle's cinch ring.

Presently, I just carry my carbine dropped, for to the best of my knowledge, there were no such sockets or boots in use during the early decades of the 17th Century (or before, of course).

Cheers!

Gordon

"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 9:38 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gordon Frye wrote:
When anticipating combat, or when riding into a town, of for inspections and reviews, the carbine was to be held just above the lock with the right hand, with the butt resting on the right thigh.


This is a muzzle-up position, right? Could I hijack the thread for a bit and ask what's the (English-language) order for getting the troopers into this posture?
View user's profile Send private message
Gordon Frye




Location: Kingston, Washington
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Sun 27 May, 2007 9:54 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:

This is a muzzle-up position, right? Could I hijack the thread for a bit and ask what's the (English-language) order for getting the troopers into this posture?


Lafayette;

Correct, muzzle up.

The command for bringing the carbine to this position is simply "Order your Carbines". It is still of course attached to the shoulder belt by the snap and ring, and may be "Dropp't" to the "Carry" from the "Order" position. Gently, I would imagine. Wink

Cheers!

Gordon

"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 12:44 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Eek! ¡Wow!

Now we are talking some prácticle info indeed.

The chain&toggle is simplt briljant Gordon. Simple, effective and efficient. If needed you could make it fit to go trhough the chain shackles to create a loop even. The easiest and cheapest thing to produce too. A hook-loop-swivel is incompairably more complex and expensive. Strange as usualy armies are quite keen on exactly thát.

I guess we need to identify three different applications
1. travelling
2. battle readiness
3. fighting

Concerning 1. and 3. the situation dicates the solution.
When actually fighting the weapon will be in hands as much as possible, only 'supporting' it for reloading.
When travelling the rider will need to have the weight of the weapon supported and his hands and posture free.

If the gun is supported by a bucket on the stirrup and against the body there is indeed no way the troop can exploit the speed availeabe to a cavalry unit....

I am a bit surprsied at all the solutions I encounter and you so helpfully explain and illustrate. An arquebus or musket is a lóng tool and thus extremely akward on a horse. No way around that. Carbines (blunderbuss) however cán be carried without hampering the essential speed and flexibility of cavalry as hunters nowadays show.

The solutions wére known. The pommel holster for a arquebus/musket Gordon mentions and too the chain&cshackle again he suggests (one on the waist and one on the pommel) would seem ideal.

I suspect that at least Í am stuck with my idea of a speedy light cavalry unit whereas much of the mounted units were mounted infantry that did not nééd practicle '2. battle readiness' in the saddle as they where 1. and then 3. got off....
Maybe that is why the chain&toggle was not more popular.

Very informative this! Thank you.

Peter
View user's profile
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 2:49 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Right, as stated eralier for me pérsonally this interesting thread leads to more than one answer. Like I talked about with Gordon some time ago a european gentlemen rider around ther turn of ther 17th-18th century would be rather flexible in his choice of weapons. From miltairy type doglock to fine wheellock, from blunderbuss to german long hunting gun.
His 'set' of psitols and gun might have been the examples on which the german gunsmiths in Kentucky based the arms bearing this name.

As how he would have 'carried' the arms is open to variation too.

How common was it for private users to adapt weapons to personal taste and/or requirements? Did they per example add sling buckles/loops or slinding ring bas to non-militairy weapons?
Slings were just about standard on blunderbuss used by the 'bandoleros' in our region and I can well imagine that a running ring would have been very usefull too.

As to the chain&toggle, those could be leather or rope and wood too in stead of metal?!

Peter
View user's profile
Gordon Frye




Location: Kingston, Washington
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 10:16 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Peter;

I've seen photo's of various sorts of carbine/blunderbus with sling-bars fitted to the left sides, as well as large belt-hooks. Such belt-hooks seem to have been particularly popular among Catalan-made escopeta's and blunderbusses (and of course on pistols as well). These style arms were very common on the Northern Frontier of New Spain (present-day Mexico and the US SW) and are found fairly frequently in museums here.

The so-called "Catalan" style escopeta is sort of semi-military, in that they were definitely used by Spanish forces, particularly in colonial circumstances, but usually aren't exactly to a specific "pattern" like other Spanish military arms. Thus they would be of a sort that an Iberian gentleman may well have carried on a day-to-day basis for hunting, pleasure or protection from brigands.

Anyway, it seems as though the Iberians were pretty flexible insofar as how they carried their firearms, be it via a belt-hook, slung from a carbine sling, slung from a musket-type sling, or stuffed into holsters on the pommel of the saddle. You have a pretty wide range of choices!

Cheers!

Gordon

"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Peter Bosman




Location: Andalucia
Joined: 22 May 2006

Posts: 598

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 2:20 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Gordon Frye wrote:
You have a pretty wide range of choices!


Well, depends and up to a point...

This ilustration

makes the point.

Although the spanish guns came in just about all sizes and a wild range of 'customised' hardware, they áll had a miquelet lock and most were trabucos.

As far as I can unearth there were two huegely differing saddles in use. The gentry and thus the mounted men in the army rode with variations on the theme which is now known as the portugesa type saddle and the country-men rode on saddles we now call vaquera type.
These two saddles do not allow the same way of carrying an long firearm. On the vaquera the trabuco would have been hung from the pronounced pommel that almost would resemble a primitive saddle horn if the construction would be different from what it is.
The traditional iberian way of reining is exclusively single handed and most contemporary painting show trabucos carried in the rhs hand, resting with the butt on the rhs thy. The traditional iberian way of riding knows no trot, only step, canter and gallop and and in all those this way of carryng the trabuco is feaseble.

However, the solution may be véry simple. The spanish permit requires proofing data and sofar I have only found european manufacturars providing this. The european manufacturers offer an extremely limited choice in the older guns and even then older is relative ánd they seem to forget their roots and all but exclusively make american replicas. The german 'jäger' rifle seems to be the only exception and that is not exactly a horsenmans arm...
I may have to choose what is availeable and 'customise' the kit-form of it Laughing Out Loud

Peter Laughing Out Loud
View user's profile
GG Osborne





Joined: 21 Mar 2006

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 474

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 6:35 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

There is a gentleman in north Georgia who has and is making very nice reproductions of trhe Escopeta. I have a heavy militray model on order now for early 2008 delivery and he has the parts for a lighter militia type model. The lighter model I have held and examined has a nice belthook as descbibed before. Price is about $2K. If you are interested, please PM and I will supply the makers information. The one I have on order is similar to the style provided by Spain in the 1709 and 1745 Jacobite rebellions and is illustrated by Stuart Reid in the Osprey book on "Highland Warriors."
"Those who live by the sword...will usually die with a huge, unpaid credit card balance!"
View user's profile Send private message
Gordon Frye




Location: Kingston, Washington
Joined: 20 Apr 2004
Reading list: 15 books

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 1,191

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 7:18 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Peter Bosman wrote:
Gordon Frye wrote:
You have a pretty wide range of choices!


Well, depends and up to a point...

This ilustration

makes the point.

Although the spanish guns came in just about all sizes and a wild range of 'customised' hardware, they áll had a miquelet lock and most were trabucos.

Peter Laughing Out Loud


Peter;

I was actually thinking in terms of carrying the weapon while mounted, rather than the arms themselves, in that you have a wide range of choices there. You're right, the proper arm for gentes de sangre or gentes de raison are somewhat more limited. I suspect that the miquelet escopeta in some form or another would be just about perfect. assuming that you can find one. Good luck on that!

Per proofs, indeed almost all of the European nations demand proofing, but by the same token, most have proof houses to perform that service. Unfortunately, for a custom firearm, you usually need to pay for that service, which just adds to the cost. Buying a pre-proofed barrel (probably from an Italian maker, they produce the most) to put in a custom gun would probably be the way to go.

Cheers!

Gordon

"After God, we owe our victory to our Horses"
Gonsalo Jimenez de Quesada
http://www.renaissancesoldier.com/
http://historypundit.blogspot.com/
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website Yahoo Messenger
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,689

PostPosted: Mon 28 May, 2007 9:57 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Peter Bosman wrote:
I suspect that at least Í am stuck with my idea of a speedy light cavalry unit whereas much of the mounted units were mounted infantry that did not nééd practicle '2. battle readiness' in the saddle as they where 1. and then 3. got off....
Maybe that is why the chain&toggle was not more popular.


Well, not necessarily mounted infantry. There were plenty of dedicated cavalry units who carried fairly long firearms, like the 16th/17th-century "arquebusier" and the later versions of the French chevaux legeres. Many of the dragoon units had also transitioned into primarily mounted units by the end of the 17th century, being much less frequently dismounted than they originally had been before that. But you're quite correct in that these cavalrymen's tactical doctrines did not demand them to do a lot of firing on horseback. When mounted they charged, when dismounted they fired.


Last edited by Lafayette C Curtis on Tue 29 May, 2007 9:22 pm; edited 1 time in total
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Bandolier clip
Page 1 of 3 Reply to topic
Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum






All contents © Copyright 2003-2018 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum