[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Re: Kentucky long rifles
Thank you Kevin for answering.
There are going to be some wierd questions but here goes.
I am working on a story about Gen. Arthur St. Clair's daughter, Louisa.
At one point in the story she appears "dressed in the Indian manner with a
short rifle strapped to her body". I don't want people to simply skim over
this sentence so I will tell them she was riding bareback astride the horse
so people get the impact of her unconventional conduct.
It's the part about the short rifle strapped to her back that I want to
fully explore with you and another that has replied. I won't put much of
this in the story, have to keep it to around 800 words, but I just want to
envision what was really going on. That's just how my mind works.
I understand that the longer the rifle barrel the more accurate the shot.
Louisa was supposed to have been an expert marksman but she used a short
rifle because I don't think she really couldn't have handled the heavier and
longer rifle, right? With shorter arms, a woman would hardly be able to
raise a long rifle to sight, I would think. Of course they could rest it on
something and shoot that way but that something might not always be handy.
Or could a woman quickly raise the long rifle, shoot, and then rest her arms
as she reloaded? There might not be much time to sight. The encyclopedia
says that Daniel Boone's wife was a good shot and we read that other women
did also. But were they using the long rifle or something proportion to
their size? So does it follow that because she used the shorter rifle, she
was a better shot than a man?
But then Daniel Boone was supposed to have been a short person. Was
that short relative to today or for that era? Daniel's skill with the rifle
lasted into his 80's as observed by a person who visited him when he had
moved on to Missouri. It was said he could still shoot a squirrel and ?
paces. So did Daniel have as long a rifle as other men, or was he just
more accurate with a shorter one. I also wonder whether he might have been
farsighted. Perhaps many of the successful hunters were and the
shortsighted men stayed in the cities???
How did they carry the long rifles when riding fast? They used saddles
so it would have been difficult to guide their horses with their knees,
Indian style, right. So with the reins in one hand and riding rapidly as
possible down a narrow Indian trail, dodging branches, etc. would they have
been able to sucessfully carry the rifle in the other hand or did they have
some kind of boot like the cavalry?
Louisa's rifle was "strapped" to her body. Would the men have done that?
If it were behind them, it would be difficult to quickly use it. I am
envisioning it strapped or tied somehow vertically
in front of them so they could grab it quickly. But then a long rifle would
stick up really high and get caught in the trees? Maybe they slung it in
front of them over their shoulder. But when you are galloping that would
really bounce around and tend to go diagonal and thus catch in trees on the
side of the trail. Or was it strapped/ tied horizontally along the side of
the horse? What do you think?
----- Original Message -----
From: "kevin and rika" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Sent: Friday, November 03, 2000 8:41 AM
Subject: Re: Kentucky long rifles
> I could help a bit if no one else steps forward. Highly unlikely on this
> list ! Take care , Kevin
> [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, email@example.com
> [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, firstname.lastname@example.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html