Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 2nd November 2018, 06:55 PM   #10
Jim McDougall
Arms Historian
 
Jim McDougall's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,196
Default

LOL! Mark.....'beat to Hades'!!! Only a novelist could bring such a perfect phrase into a discussion like this!! perfect!!
That is EXACTLY what many of not most of these colonial pieces are like.
While field repairs made on campaign were in degree crude, they were made by armorers well trained and with many like weapons on hand with which to get parts.
In colonial settings, these were often village blacksmiths, who were far more familiar with tools and implements and without the kinds of components usually required for repair. They relied on innovation and fabrication of replacement components, and crudely tried to imitate the elements of arms originally made by skilled artisans in well tooled shops.

As for the 1728 'pattern appellation' …….as we WELL know from piratical canons (not cannons!!)…...it was not really a set pattern of that year, but a GUIDELINE setting a regulation for the period it was officially recognized in use.
Jim McDougall is online now   Reply With Quote
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:31 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.