PISTOL FAILS in Victorian Era Warfare?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 28 сен 2024
- We often talk about the relative merits of swords and pistols in the 19th century, but let's see what some actual historical soldiers and experts had to say. History Story Time!
▼3 extra EXCLUSIVE videos each month on PATREON, which make this channel possible:
/ scholagladiatoria
▼Facebook & Twitter updates, info, memes and fun:
/ historicalfencing
/ scholagladiato1
▼Schola Gladiatoria HEMA - sword fighting classes in the UK:
www.swordfight...
▼Matt Easton's website & Pinterest:
www.matt-easto...
www.pinterest....
▼Easton Antique Arms - antique swords for sale:
www.antique-sw...
#pistol #history #britisharmy
![Tee Grizzley - Blow for Blow (feat. J. Cole) [Official Video]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/wNLN5xsx5dc/mqdefault.jpg)
“The Gorn slowly staggered towards me as I struggled with my makeshift apparatus. When he was a mere 5 meters away, I placed the burning cloth on the firing aperture. It failed to ignite! Fortunately, as he lunged for me I was able to roll to the side. I then was able to bring my backup weapon to bear (a rock). I struck him repeatedly on the head until he at last fell back unconscious. But rather than finish him off, I scorned our unseen captors for putting us in this barbaric predicament in the first place.”
The only Star Trek episode where Kirk didn't have sex with the alien.
@@webtoedman Allegedly...
The image of a officer weilding a sword and pistol is to me hella cool.
It is the proper way.
+][+
Yes, but as a lefty I just couldnt decide what to put into which hand.
Think I could shoot better with the right (ignoring my dominant left eye), than I could fence with that hand.
@@corneliussulla9963 Historically "lefties" have been forced to become "righties" because it was simpler for the Corps. In the US Cavalry, you would have your sword in your right hand and your pistol in your left whether it worked for you or not.
@@corneliussulla9963 Sword in your dominant hand, pistol in the other. At least according to the people who actually fought that way. You'll only be using the pistol at short range anyway.
@@alltatI' primarily left handed and that's how I do it 🙂 There's a lot more manual dexterity goes into using the sword.
Although I'm also ambidexterous so have no trouble sighting down the pistol outside of short range, not sure how it would be for a truely left handed person
It helps one understand why some British officers preferred a 4 barrel Lanchester pistol to a revolver, A revolver shot 5 times puts 5 shots of fouling in the bore, with a Lanchester 4 barrel each shot only dirties one of the barrels once and cleaning is much easier as well.
Very few of them. The total number of 4 barrels Lanchesters manufactured were only 712, and not all of them in military cartridges
ruclips.net/video/JOGpt-lPXjU/видео.html
Apparently some who could afford it carried a Lanchester as a backup to their Webley or even Adams
I'd love for you to do a collaboration with Forgotten Weapons one of these days. I find your videos about guns very entertaining and informative.
I was speaking to Ian recently. It's certainly possible.
as a Brit who watches all of Ian's videos and buys from Easton Antiques, I'd love to see that collab!
Captain Context even gives context as to why he is "Uncle Matt"! 😆
Genious!
historically accurate uncle
The black powder percussion revolver was very much affected by water (rain) and humidity in a tropical climate. One way to deal with that was to daily unload the pistol, usually by firing it, and then to reload the weapon with fresh powder and ball. Some sort of grease sealant at the cylinder bore mouth would also improve reliability, both from humidity and chain fires.
Wild Bill Hickock made that practice a daily habit, and he carried matching 1851 Navy Colts most of his career, favoring them over cartridge cased center fire pistols.
The Adams revolver was preferred, not because of its caliber, but because it was double action.
Hell yeah.. I'm a convicted felon so the only guns I can legally carry around are blackpowder guns. I definitely concur with this. You don't want to leave rounds loaded for too long because moisture can creep in there and affect the way the rounds will fire and what not. Ps.. probably gonna start collecting swords now and make sure I always have a little dagger or something with me just in case there are any issues with firing
That practice of "freshly loading" a revolver, by way of firing it, also figures in a scene from "Quigley Down Under."
One more thing not super common but definitely done at times was to drip candle wax over the percussion caps on the nipples to seal em up, keep out moisture... I'm American by the way and do have cap n ball revolvers and muzzleloader rifles and have shot them a good bit and hunted deer with rifle too. No matter how carefully you load misfires and hang fires still happen from time to time... Once a deer was standing broadside to me at about 15 yards extremely easy shot But cap popped and the charge didn't, of course the deer ran away. A second cap did ignite the charge but of course u may well b run through by the time you're able to recap.
@@adamdudley8736 What did you do to get convicted?
@@StaroyProbably just had some weed
The gun and sword go together like peanut butter and jelly.
Just like the spear and sword.
it's almost like swords were always meant to be sidearms.....
Why on earth would you want a wobbly gelatine dessert anywhere near peanut butter? I think you mean jam and even that's got no business being mixed with peanut butter. You yanks are weird.
Or like the sword and the shield. Or the sword and the buckler. Or the sword and another sword.
@@dustyboots2693 sword and another sword? You mean Sword and a shorter sword or dagger as a back up? And rarely both used at once?
Blessed swords, they have elevated fights!
As a forever GM. in tabletop RPGs. I find that whenever I run a period game in the black powder era, I have players wanting some way to quickly reload a pistol. That wasn't something that happened. If you shot your six, you then drew a sword or knife. These things take minutes to load and you are not doing it under fire.
Absolutely.
@@scholagladiatoria In general yes, there are some revolver were you rip the cylinder out and load in a preloaded one, I think forgotten weapons did a video about it. It is TTRPG that could be a masterwork revolvers or a rare item.
@@PJDAltamirus0425 , there were cartridge conversions available for muzzle loading revolvers like the Remington 1858. They were sold starting in 1868. That is what the Preacher (Clint Eastwood) used in "Pale Rider."
@@PJDAltamirus0425 I had a replica 1858 Remington percussion revolver. A lot of US Civil War officers on both sides preferred the .44 Remington to the Colt .36 1851 Navy or .44 1860 Army because it had a solid frame with the cylinder held in place by a removable cylinder pin that was in turn locked in place by the closed loading lever. Once you dropped the loading lever, the pin could be pulled forward and the cylinder slipped out of the frame for cleaning -- or for replacement with a fresh loaded cylinder.
(Another advantage of the Remington was that it had a notch for resting the hammer between the chambers, allowing the user to carry it safely with all six chambers fully loaded instead of "hammer down on an empty chamber" like the Colts. So you got six shots out of a Remington instead of five.)
My replica Remington -- made iirc by Uberti -- came in a nice wooden case with three spare cylinders. Some Civil War users carried as many as six spare cylinders. And, of course, in some of the cavalry units especially on the Southern side, the men carried up to SIX revolvers -- two in belt holsters, two in saddle holsters, and two in their boot tops. That gave them 36 shots in a charge (or 30 if they carried Colts).
Not if I have a vest with 6 on the front, and a belt with 2 on the front, 2 on the side, 2 on the rear, and a double barrel. I’ll go all day long. (Obviously button holsters.)
Only a very few individuals are able to shoot a pistol accurately single handed when moving. Let alone with their off hand. We should admire people who managed that feat,
Because very few people actually had a pistol
Churchill did it well enough at Omdurman. He ever withdrew at least once (I forget how many times) to reload his mauser with stripper clips. He even stated that many men around him armed with swords were pulled down off their mounts by the enemy and killed while he was able to quickly engage many targets in quick succession.
And how would you become a good shot? Ammunition wasn't so cheap to keep shooting all day like you can practice with a sword.
@@Treblaine ammo isn't expensive. You're making stuff up. Just stop, get help.
Cap & ball revolvers are relatively inexpensive to shoot , becoming a good shot is a matter of good practice habits , I know as I've been shooting them for the last forty six years. 😊
man.. i wish i had an uncle that told stories like this and had a stash of cool asf antiques .. your neice or nephew is a blessed bugger ❤
Matt, your points about a bladed weapon being useful for both defence and when your side arm is out of ammo is very pertinent. Back in 2013-14 I was deployed to South Sudan and armed with a modern 9mm automatic pistol. I also carried a machete, which on three occasions proved ‘rather useful’ so the point still holds.
I loved how you had to explain the mechanical operation of a revolver, had to remember you're in the UK and gun ownership is very uncommon.
Gun ownership is pretty common in the UK, especially in the countryside. Handguns however have been illegal since the 90s.
@@BFBCFTWyou forget that the vast majority of our population is urban, and of those who are rural only a very tiny few are involved in range shooting, hunting, wild fowling, clay pigeon shooting or any other rural firearm activities.
The government got very very firm about getting it out of our culture in the 1800s when the Napoleonic veterans made it clear what firearm-familiar people do when destitute and downtrodden
@@BFBCFTW it's not pretty common, it's quite rare.
gov.uk estimate that a little over 3% of people own guns.
97% of the population not owning a gun means gun ownership isn't common. It's miserable how the firearm culture of England and the UK deteriorated, through natural means of changing culture and through government mandate.
Go visit a small Southern town where there's a gun in every second house. THAT'S common, and nobody has tried to rob me in a busy part of Kentucky, Florida, or Nevada.
@@AdamOwenBrowning Shocked to hear that tbh. I shot in scouts, cadets, basically everyone I know goes clay shooting or game shooting. I know it's not common in urban areas but being a rural man it's just a way of life here.
Swords never run out of bullets!
That's why you bring more bullets than there are enemies.
Swords never make it to the fight either when a gun is involved
😂@@oglordbrandon
Swords also never run out of fashion!
Bullets don't run out of measure.
“Why are you carrying a cheese? - It’s extra sharp!”
Don't scare the British government, or else they might mandate that all cheese be of the soft spreadable or aerosol type.
Best kind of cheese to make swords out of.
Swords by Wallace and Gromit
@@michaelwarenycia7588theyre already trying to ban crossbows and up punishments on zombie knives- both for our 'protection' of course
@@Rynewulf ah yes, I saw the news clip (LBC?) Of the middle ages suit wearing expert political activist holding a large knife and trembling, terrified of how someone might be hurt. I was thinking, goodness, you're the one with the knife. If it's so amazingly deadly, you should feel powerful, calm. I actually have shown that clip to friends here (I live in Ukraine), to encourage realism that "allies" whose "men" are so pathetic will never come to fight for us; it's up to us ourselves. I do think if Ukraine was populated by Londoners, we'd have surrendered in 72 hours. Kids fight with sticks, play with butterfly knives, and ride their bikes after dark here all the time. Our toddlers are more manly than those who rule London (though I'm aware some old fashioned Englishmen must surely exist, somewhere).
These are absolute favorite videos of yours when you do a story time with uncle Matt!
Love these videos where you go through a primary source and add your perspective to them
Great video Matt. I would be surprised if that chap only loaded five chambers for safety reasons. That was a much later practice (I believe MUCH later, not done in the 19th century other than by rare individual choice) and there's no need to do it with the percussion revolvers because of the intermediate position for the hammer between chambers. I think it's more likely that he means that he fired five of his six "barrels".
As early as the American Civil War, Colt advocated loading but not capping the sixth chamber since the hammer tested on the percussion nipple. Loading all six led to negligent discharges with alarming regularity. The Remington pistol had notches machined between the chambers specifically to rest the hammer in order to allow all six chambers to be loaded. It was a major marketing move and resulted in Remington carving into Colt's market share. It remained a thing through the early cartridge days, particularly with Colts. The US Army regulations allowed only five chambers to be loaded until entering action. I have personally seen two negligent discharges by other people with single actions loaded with six rounds.
@@coldwarrior78 Interesting. Do you have a reference for Colt advising not to cap one nipple? As for the U.S. Army reg what date is that if you have it - percussion or cartridge I'd like to know when the practice originated. As for seeing NDs, I certainly don't argue that it isn't a good idea, merely that it wasn't common in-period as far as I know. As I say, there are safety pins between the nipples for the hammer to rest on although they were prone to damage and if there was an early movement to not cap/load one chamber perhaps it arose from that.
I think there is some inherent bias from primary sources. If they used a pistol and it functioned correctly they were probably unlikely to write home about it. But if some or all of the chambers failed to fire and they had to resort to a sword they were probably more likely to record the event.
That being said, I remember reading a source from the Indian mutiny who mentioned every night having to pull the bullets and and recharge the “barrels” every evening because the humid climate and hydrophilic nature of black powder caused the powder to become damp. It’s quite possible that a lot of people carried their pistol loaded for a week or two and when they needed it the damp power failed them.
On accidental discharge- if the older revolver was holstered with the hammer down on a cap or cartridge, it can discharge just bouncing up and down in the holster attached to the camel or horse.
As a detective, I have investigated what were reported as suicides and found them to be accidental discharges that were fatal. Often times this happened because the colt revolver’s cylinder rotated clockwise and the smith and Wesson revolvers rotated counterclockwise. The user, intending to drop the hammer on an empty chamber positioned the empty chamber incorrectly. And that miscalculation caused the cylinder to rotate to a live round and fire.
It may seem insignificant whether it was ruled suicide or accidental, but when life insurance was considered, the policy often would cover accidental death but not death by suicide.
Thats interesting to be fair its not something you can as an arms manufacturer plan to prevent until casualties start showing up in the field and the military reports the issue back up the line
Can you put together an assortment of these types of stories? These would make excellent bed time readings. I loved the videos you did about the tomahawks
The combination of sword/long knife and pistol was popular far in the 20th century even beyond WWII.
In some parts of world more than in others😢
I would love this sort of content in a podcast format so I can bring this on my daily drive
A major work around until the self contained cartridge (and even after a bit) was to use derringer style pistols and have more that one. This is mentioned in the vid @19:40 with the comment about Howdah pistols. You also have the advantage of having a (usually) larger bullet; Matt even mentioned this in one of his previous vids. Spent primers jam black powder revolvers like nobody's biz and it is why they were often raised after firing to clear the primer from the mechanism. 2 locked breech pistols + sword = winning combo.
Early percussion caps were charged with mercury fulminate which is known to be sensitive enough to detonate if you stare at it cross-eyed. This is why people used to leave an empty chamber under the hammer.
No that's not why it's because there was no barrier between the hammer and the primer, so a bump on the hammer could fire the revolver. Modern revolvers and pistols have a firing pin safety, which is a physical barrier that retracts only when the trigger is pulled. So they won't fire even if dropped and it lands on the hammer.
In a revolver, a bullet can still fire and make a right mess if it's not lined up with the barrel. (Look up "chain fire.") And each chamber has its own cap.
Thus, leaving one empty chamber would not make a pistol safe if the caps are so dangerous.
It's to keep the hammer from striking the cap, as SSHitMan described.
We still do this with reproductions of old cartridge revolvers even though we’re able to use modern cartridges in them. The only safety feature that many of them have is a thin flimsy half cock notch to keep an accidental bump to the hammer from setting off the primer. These break easily with a solid hit or fall, or weaken over time with several minor hits so even with modern primers it’s still unsafe to carry a cartridge underneath the hammer. On .38 caliber revolvers there is usually the option of carrying all 6 chambers loaded and resting the firing pin between the rims of two cartridges. It is pretty secure but a hard hit to the hammer might damage the firing pin since it is now resting against solid steel instead of an empty chamber. Some historical examples of .45 cal revolvers have had the firing pin thinned so that it’s able to fit between the wider rims of .45 cartridges.
In some revolvers you could rest the hammer on a halfway point between two chambers.
Please create a video about the breeding evolution, equipment (like spiked collars) and tactical use of dogs/hounds in war. Those were especially popular in ancient times at the start of a battle but it seems a topic not very known to the general public.
Errata for 20:40 re Major Kitchener.
The account is from 1866 in Sudan, where British expeditions did venture. A percussion cap pistol could go off if the hammer was resting on a capped cone/nipple, especially back then, due to the mercury fulminate caps being notably more sensitive and overall more powerful than modern non-mercury caps. The constant pressure and vibrations, exacerbated by movement (lumbering camel) could easily cause a discharge.
This begs the question, why the interpreter didn’t:
- rest the hammer on an empty chamber; or
- engage a safety feature, such as a Colt or Remington safety notch between cones/nipples, or the safety lever on an Adams.
Any of these measures would have worked a treat and saved the camel. This stoutly suggests user error.
Which brings up a valuable point; percussion cap revolvers are fiddly and require an element of witchcraft to use reliably and safely. Witchcraft is a rare commodity in large 'modern' armies that didn't engender shootist culture in revolver users.
Just finished your latter century Cav and sword video . Where you speak about the yoemanry unit etc etc . When speaking of the 1897 inf and adapted cav I have seen some larger and some smaller bladed in terms of width . I feel like a proper sharpened 1897 with a blade on the wider spectrum would do fairly well in the cut . Not the best but I have seen a few decent sized 1897’s out there
The Missouri Bushwacker guerilla troops led by Quantrill and Bloody Bill Andersen both before and during the US Civil War exclusively used Colt's revolvers---not sabers. They also often intentionally underloaded the powder charge as much of their shooting took place at point blank range with the barrel almost touching an opponent. Yes, each man carried as many as 4 to 6 loaded revolvers, but they had no issues with their armament that I ever read about. True the Bowie knife was still frequently carried also but was used for scalping or mutilating opponents more than as a back up weapon.
I would also just point out that the usual reason for failure in cap-and-ball pistols is the primer cap. That's a key component in the firing sequence, so...bad cap, no fire.
I expect you probably know about Gustavas Von Tempsky who was heavily involved in the Taranaki Wars in New Zealand. He succeeded in dealing with the Maori in the bush where regularly equipped British forces had considerable trouble. His toolkit was a huge Bowie knife and a colt revolver. The Bowies were made of wagon springs by a local blacksmith. The Von taught a group of lads to use them in combination and the use of Bowie Knife and colt revolver turned out to be formidable. John Warner. Australia
well in the end the maori eventually end up dealing with him.
20:49 Did he arrive?
Coming down the mountainside?
The inventor of the Walker Colt was killed in battle. From the history of Colt
"Walker, armed with a Colt, missed. His opponent, armed with a lance, did not".
Lots to unpack here, even in contemporary muzzle loaders, some are more apt to be effected by moisture. Perhaps oil on the nipple can be blamed, or oil in the base of the chamber. Even in modern army's American troops have carried a hatchet, this was very popular backup in Iraq and Afghanistan. Things happen in war and you need Things to kill the other guy.
Pistols in Victorian Era warfare covers single shot muzzleloaders up to the early semiautomatic pistols. With everything in between. Pepperboxes, the early Colt Pattersons, later Colts, Remmingtons and others in cap and ball. Through the cartridge conversions and the dedicated cartridge designs. Single and double action. It also includes oddballs such as various single shot breech loaders. One example being the Werder.
The point is lots of fodder for sucesses and failures.
Possibly the problem was the novelty of the revolvers. People didn't have the same level of training and familiarity with them as they did with the sword. Those that did get the training would have been safer and more accurate.
W.R.T. movie sets, those are normally _incredibly safe._ They often go for decades at a time between "incidents" ("incident" here being defined as "one insane egotist decides he no longer needs to heed the rules of firearms safety as specifically spelled out in SAG-AFTRA guidelines, leading to injury and/or death to a person or persons on set").
We can see how effective firearms were against the Zulu with their Asagi (hope I spelled that right) at the battle of Isanlawanda
An item black powder shooters use is a "nipple pick". Its a sewing pin or wire used to run into the nipple hole to eliminate any clogging of the nipple hole on the powder side.
I've never had an issue with barrel fouling with my percussion revolver and yes, I'm using real BP.
There are issues, but thats not one of them. Bear in mind, i do also grease the mouth of each chamber as well.
You may be interested in the 1854 fight with Johnathan R. Davis using Colt revolvers and a Bowie knife.
We really are not justified to criticize the fighting men of their time. We have the advantage of 20-20 hindsight. We can afford to smugly sit in judgement while not having to fight for lives. The recounting of history give us the ability to learn from the past and apply the actions to our modern times.
As a martial artist I am curious Matt whether there's any mention of any unarmed, so grappling or wrestling training, they would've been given to use with just the small firearm like the revolver? 🤔
Last year I got home from some sparring and my 13yr old nephew asked me why I bother when I could maybe just get a gun and I made him laugh when I gave him our training prop of a handgun and pushed it off line when he pointed it and said "you missed me" 😄
I've been doing Jujutsu for over 20yrs and have got into the best moving and grappling ideas that could work with a reliable firearm, but I've never considered if they did it historically? I just assume that they have because why wouldn't they...
It is never a mistake, to train unarmed martial arts in addition to firearms training. To defend yourself, you must draw a pistol. But when a surprise attack happens? Also in addition to a pistol and unarmed martial arts, a dog also can be a thing of Security.
@@brittakriep2938I was always taught that anything I plan to use as a weapon should be used with my unarmed training, especially as I'm not military trained so it'll be in a civilian context if it does happen so I'm with you all the way there 🙂
I'm just curious if there were any literary mentions of it being taught or encouraged? We can just assume but there're a lot of things we could be taking for granted, maybe they didn't think it was important or there just wasn't any call for it? 🤔
And as for training guard dogs I grew up with pets I'd never put any of them in harms way, my labrador would bark and I'd be right there to protect her I wouldn't have it any other way 😊
@@valandil7454 : I am german, Brittas boyfriend only using her Computer too Was born 1965, but for reason of my bad eyes, german Bundeswehr described me , not serviceable'. So i also have No military training. For Martial Arts i was to lazy, also light autism. But my interest in historical weapons, reading german arms magazine for over 40 years gives me some theoretical knowledge. But in contrast to my young Years, crime rises, partty caused by policy, so i have decided to learn Krav Maga, starting in September/ Oktober. I noticed, that not far away a man teaches Caneful a simplified Cane defence, but here i need more information. We here have similar problems with selfdefence items like you in Brittain. To dogs: My father for a long time owned Rottweiler dogs. As a Younger/ midaged man He was involved in Dog Training. This style of Dog Training was called Schutzhund/ protection Dog, is currently No more popular in Germany. Was/is basicly a watered down Police Dog Training for civilians. Now, having a Rottweiler in your Garden, barking when Strange things happen, is a good protection. One of the dogs barked one night, Burglars Had been in neighboring Garden.Training is necessary, but Attention, a to aggressive Dog is dangerous. So a larger Dog of any Type IS sometimes better than nothing. May be adding a small Dog , Terrier or Zwergpinscher/ Miniatur Pinscher is No mistake. This small dogs scare Nobody, but they fastly notice a Person in your Garden and their barking wakes Up your Labrador.
@@brittakriep2938it's always good to have an interest especially if you're feeling unsafe where you live. I only started learning because I felt unsafe at home, my dad was a drinker and I tried to keep him away from my mum and sisters. Not the best reason to learn to fight I know 😔
As for cane fighting you'll come across the same problems we get in any weapon based martial art, you won't be allowed to carry most of them around here in Europe anyway, it's been a long time since carrying a sword was mandatory in Germany 😋
And other than learning a martial art I also have a law degree, there're a lot of reasons why being trained to defend yourself and causing TOO MUCH damage to someone can come off worse for you regardless of the situation, so you need to learn moderation and control first.
That especially goes for trained animals, I'd never forgive myself if I trained a Shepherd or my Labrador to protect me and they were put down when they did it 😢
Highly likely that the unintentional discharges were mechanical. The mercury fulminate caps & primers in early firearms were notoriously finicky & could either fire with the slightest bump or not fire even if hit with a 4lb sledgehammer. Saddle holsters were also still fairly common in this era. The camel incident may have been nothing more than the hammer catching slightly as the pistol bounced in the holster due to the rocking gait of the camel, then coming down with a slight jar on the percussion cap (or primer) & discharging the revolver. Something similar could have happened with the horseman, either whilst drawing the revolver or whilst it was still in the holster.
Modern gun users don't appreciate just how dirty black powder is...unless they're black powder shooters, of course.
Bill Hickock's morning routine was to fire his .36cal Navy Colt pistols every morning, clean them and reload before commencing his day.
He no doubt also cleaned them after a gunfight.
Lesson: if you're a 19th Century gunman, clean your firearms every day and after every use.
And keep your sword or Bowie knife handy.
Misfireing in all 5 chambers? Did they not practice with these. How did they only discover malfunctions during combat? If they were malfunctioning like this in combat, why would they even take them?
Probably high humidity in that area of India.
They weren't just going to the range. They were living in a humid, tropical climate on campaign for weeks or months at a time, marching or on horseback, not getting driven around in air conditioned APCs.
Yeah I have a feeling the powder has time to absorb plenty of moisture by the time it reached combat
I’ve often thought that the best sci-fi role playing build would be a blaster in one hand and a blade in the other
Wonderful video, especially alongside your video on mid-late 19th century American accounts of pistol and blade.
Are there technical comparisons by Adams and/or Colt of their respective revolvers?
It would make sense (in any business) to test competitor products and adopt features to provide a market edge. While the reading would be dry, if it was for internal design use rather than marketing it might give insight as to how, why and how much Colt models were inferior to Adams. I'm also curious what if anything was done by Colt to address their shortfalls before the company withdrew from the British market.
How much did national pride (on either side) play into Colt's failure in Britain? NIH (Not Invented Here), tradition and aesthetics have been a significant factor in arms acquisition since ancient times, but Colt may well have been flush with their success in the U.S. and unwilling to redesign, retool and adapt to counter the Adams.
Things are seldom either or though we like it to be which is why we need CONTEXT!! This is why Matt and his channel are so awesome.
And the Scots officer who Hurled his spent pistol (in Afghanistan) hard enough to break bone, and followed it up with his Sword.
Think it was a McRae under Colin Campbells leadership... Though could be wrong.
In the US "uncle" or "unc" is often used to describe an older more knowledgeable gentleman😅
Saddle holsters were used ever since handguns were invented. Often a horse gun would rest on either side of the saddle horn in saddle holsters.
More history story time with uncle Matt please
You can get a kit to change your navy colt to a modern .38 that makes it way more reliable I don’t think this is legal in the uk though
"Guns just totally and completely replaced swords instantly!" Things I've actually heard.
No. Not until really reliable ammo and rapid shooting happened.
Those ninety century guns often had very little safety in terms of preventing the hammer bouncing back and forth in case the gun was struck, dropped or shaken. If it was a Colt or similar pattern, then there was this safety notch between the nipples and the shooter always making sure that the gun is carried with hammer dropped onto the notch. Otherwise just leave one chamber empty and make sure you carry with the empty chamber under the hammer. Both those accidents on the horseback and the camel could happen even without the user error. All it takes it's not taking those extra safety steps paired with XIX century primers that could be of very random quality.
Your stories about 1800s pistols failing due to bad powder/firing caps makes all of the stories from the Boxer Rebellion in China and the Ghost Dance rebellion in North America, where the Natives describe magical practices that made them bullet proof make sense.
If the weapons were that unreliable, then it stands to figure that someone might be convinced that their anti firearm magical talismans were working when the enemy's firearms either failed to fire, or sent a round down range without enough power behind it
I’ve made it a personal discipline to shoot an 1851 Navy replica and legally carry it in my area. It is POSSIBLE to make the first shot 99% reliable, but it is likely that over 6 shots, at least one chamber will misfire. For that reason, I’ve developed a habit of carrying a club or long knife. When I anticipate serious business, I generally just carry a 9 mm Glock. Percussion revolvers inevitably hang themselves up. I invite readers to see my videos for demonstrations of the piece, with malfunctions included.
Many of the refinements to firearm designs since the 19th century have been safety related. To prevent unintended discharges and to improve reliability. It's rather difficult to get a modern firearm in good repair to discharge without the user pulling the trigger. The ultimate line of defense is the strict following of the cardinal rules of firearms safety.
Thaaaanks uncle Matt Matt. X
Thanks Uncle Matt! Love this stuff!
At that point in time 1, the propellant was fairly weak compared modern powder 2. 5 or 6 shots that's it no reloading at pistol range combat, blades were as deadly then as they are now, blades don't run out of ammo. A good % of people in the States that carry a fire arm also carry a defensive blade. I've heard more than one person say they would rather be shot than cut up.
Even 40k officers use sword and pistol. This might be the inspiration.
In modern self defense use in America, we use the 21 foot rule. If a attacker is coming at you with a knife, at 21 feet they reach you before a person can draw and fire your pistol.
It was traditional and is still used to only carry five rounds in a revolver ie keep the hammer over an empty cylinder.
My friend had his ancestors pistol that was used in the Crimea. I think it was something like a le mat .it actually had a shotgun shell in the middle and you had to adjust the trigger in order to fire it. God knows how well it worked.
I think it's possible that a strap somewhere on the body of a rider or even the reign of the horse could hang down and catch the hammer of a single action revolver and pull it just enough to not engage the half cock safety but have enough spring tension to strike a cartridge hard enough to fire it. that would suck, man
16:00 Knowing what we now know about terminal ballistics the chances of a .44 or .45 bullet doing the job when a .36 bullet didn't are vanishingly slim. At those velocities it's the difference between a hole that's just under 1cm and a hole that's just over 1cm.
At the time ofc caliber was consider the be all end all.
I think the real problem was inconsistent loading, powder and moisture since these were black powder muzzle loaders.
You are forgetting muzzle energy and the mass of the bullet. A .380 ACP and a .357 are both pistols and have the same (actual not nominal; a .380 ACP bullet is really .355) bullet diameters. Yet nobody in their right mind - certainly nobody who ever used one or saw one used, or set regulations for their usage - would consider them to be basically the same in performance. Indeed, they are considered suitable for widely different applications. Good luck getting a hunting license for certain medium sized game trying to convince the licensing body that your .22LR is the same, or essentially the same as a .223 or .270.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 Correct, tho the .36 Colt had a 220 ft/s velocity advantage in this case. Also the obsession with caliber was something they had *at the time* .
In this case neither of the bullets used by the Colt and the Adams achieved velocities even close to being able to convert their rather pitiful energy into anything but penetration.
@@hjorturerlend ehhh I dunno....from a cursory search, the colt navy fired either round balls of only 86 grains in weight, or conicals up to 146. The Adams' bullets were usually 225 grains. If he was using round balls in the Colt, that's almost just 1/3 the mass of lead going into someone - a way bigger difference that was suggested just by comparing diameter. Given that, for most rounds, heavier (even in the same caliber, and even if slower) bullets are preferred for stopping bigger game, especially dangerous game, he might have been observing, over the course of many battles, similar effects, that might not be anything dramatic or cut in stone, but add up as they accumulate. Even with modern smokeless powder guns, potentially an almost 3x difference in bullet mass is considered highly relevant. *Edit* I was just thinking, even modern pistols are too low velocity in any of the popular calibres to create much "hydrostatic shock" (or so a lot of research says). 9mm, or 45 ACP, .40, , even a .357 magnum doesn't come near high enough. Yet shooters expect and get (tons and tons of tests on RUclips in all kinds of mediums) very diff performance between these and even between say, a 9mm loaded with 147gr. ammo vs 115gr.
I disagree, based on the 1 shot stop statistics from police here in the US, I think there could be a meaningful difference. Remember this is before hollow points too. There’s about a 10% difference in one shot stops between 9mm and 357 mag for example, which are both 35 cal but the 357 has more velocity so it can expand harder. I think 45acp is similar to 357. This is from a pretty large sample size of police shootings.
That was a really wholesome video! Especially in the end thank you Matt
"His friend Speke only had a revolver and came a cropper as a result."
Horseshit!
John Hanning Speke was shot by HIMSELF at about 2.30 p.m. on the 15th of September 1864. He climbed over a stone wall UNSAFELY and BOOM!
You're mixing up two things :-)
Speke was captured by the Somalis because his revolver apparently misfired (although to be fair, accounts of that vary, due to his later disputes with Burton). Speke later escaped. I was referring to this incident, not his later death.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hanning_Speke
So did they fight with pistol in one hand and sword in the other? If so was there a preference or even drill for the use of either in the “off hand?”
I'm actually very curious about this as well! It sounds to me that in the cavalry accounts at least, they either dropped or holstered the pistol before drawing their sword, as they would have had the reins in the other hand.
Thanks for this video Technically Uncle Matt
Blackadder to Douglas Haig.: it was a viciously sharp slice of Mango wasn’t it sir. I guess either Blackadder’s revolver or sword came in very useful in Mboto Gorge in ‘92.
Any chance they just weren't very good at loading their revolvers? You have a percussion cap and a powder load. The fired cap jamming the cylinder from rotating was a known issue, but you only mentioned that once and I've always found it easy to clear. That's different than it not going bang when the trigger is pressed.
I think we take a lot for granted with modern materials, powder and caps. Modern steel is WAAAAY better than the average original Colt of this period, and powders and caps were notoriously variable in period. Powder was so varied in quality, that it was even a noted factor in the performance of British vs French musketry in the Napoleonic Wars. Then we get into the 'field conditions' aspect, of what happened to the guns, powder and caps, during transport and active service. We all know the problems that modern military rifles face (M-16, G36, SA80...) when thrown into actual war conditions instead of range shooting.
Look at some of the fights of David Boye. The pistol was the secondary to the melee.
The tumbnail is extra.
Those sound to me 80% user error and 19% poor quality ammunition.
WW2 soldiers were still equipped with bayonets, and there were documented instances of use.
"uncle matt. no relation"
Great video! I know this doesn't apply necessarily to the 1850s time period that this video is applicable too. But did the British ever consider a carbine as an alternative?
I apologize in advance because I'm going to see him like the typical American who only knows his country's history when I say this 😅 But I know, at least by the time the American Civil War breaks out the Spencer Carbine sees some good service as a good compromise for an officer who needs to command and potentially defend himself simultaneously.
Now of course, I know it's still not an blades weapon capable of course. But afterall it is what we see happening by at least the 1930's in both American and British (and German) militaries.
I know that's more of a rifle vs Carbine video that opens a whole different can of worms. However perhaps the question really is, in the Great War...why were officers still using pistols and not carbines?
I like his shirt!
All these misfires were due to human failure. Wild Bill Hickok used the Colt 1851, he cleaned it daily after shooting the day old powder and caps. You can not keep them loaded with same caps and powder for days on end, if you do, expect misfires.
I would leave my 1851 navy .36 loaded for 3-5 months at a time and never had an issue firing after that duration. It’s important to use the correct sized balls and caps to help seal the chambers.
Most people missed the point of your wry look and comment about Sir Richard Francis Burton's "own testimony".
I would attribute most NDs to human error, dont take historical accounts at face value. so many people who accidentally have a gun go off swear their "gun wasnt loaded", or "wasnt cocked" etc.
Tell us another story Uncle Matt!😊
One thing I do not understand is whay in the American Civil War it was considered rude to sharpen your sword ( to most ) .
I mean we were getting most our tactics from the Europeans etc etc
I love 19th Century sauces
Pistols are secondary weapons, rifles and carbines are primary weapons and are even better if you put a bayonet on the end of it!
If your guns are going off too early, just breathe, don't tense up, and keep your eyes open.
Both are just tools to do a job.
If you can carry both(and there are very few circumstances where you can't) you might as well.
Training to be proficient with both weapons is important and it is probably quicker to achieve this with the pistol.
@scholagladiatoria Now we even have spear attacks on the eastern border of the EU! So I wonder what the reaction will be. Because shooting may not always be the first response to an aggressive crowd. In addition, rifle bullets arriving on the other side of the border could easily start a war.
I wonder how much difference the climate makes to the reliability of those guns? Reliable in the dry American South West, less reliable in the wet British Isles.
Among Native Americans, it's common to call adult males "Uncle" as a term of endearment, whether they are your actual uncle or not.😁 Speaking of Native Americans, and speaking of the effectiveness of early revolvers: why don't you ask the Comanche tribe how effective the Colt Paterson and Colt Walker were!
I guess there is a reason why the British Army still issues a bayonet... I remember the training well lol
...NICE one!!!😀
Reminds me of this one Indiana Jones scene...
Yeah, big difference by the 1930s though. Pistols, and especially revolvers, were WAY more reliable and effective by that date.
you're not old enough to be my Uncle...but I suspect you are a really cool uncle all the same. I wish I had a cool 'sword uncle' when I was young
cartridges are cool.
how practical is a sword pistol hybrid weapon?
Not very, I know they were made but never caught on except as curiosities.
Makes for and awkward hard to aim pistol and a clumsy heavy sword. Officers had lanyards on their pistols buttoned on to their shoulders so they could just drop their pistols when drawing their swords.
The bayonet, a sword spear hybrid was popular though. As it only adds a little weight to his rifle or musket while giving the common soldier a weapon with longer reach than a sword for a cheap price. Still more heavy and awkward than a dedicated spear though.
That’s so sad to me that his revolver has to be “deactivated” to have it in the UK. It’s not like it’s a freakin AR15? I just don’t get it…
Technically I could have a fully functioning one of these on my firearms certificate, but that would have to be locked in the gun cabinet at the range etc. There are legal ways to own and shoot handguns in the UK, and we can fairly easily own and shoot muzzle loading pistols (which I do). The advantage of having a deactivated one is I can have it sitting on my shelf as an ornament and grab it quickly for videos. But yeah, our handgun ban of 1997 needs revision, because our Olympic pistol team has to leave the UK to practice, which is the height of nonsense.
If memory serves, in the US, a none de-activated version of this pistol would not only be perfectly legal without all the hoops that Matt has described, but wouldn't even be classed, legally, as a firearm.
Yes I am, please do
For the first time in history I'm in a position to offer a different position to Matt? Pistols and swords did NOT fill "slightly" different roles, they were carried together and used for their intended purposes? One for ranged attacks and the other for melee combat, sure you can hit with a pistol and throw a sword but neither is even close to its intended use?🤣👍 I don't think he intended it as it sounded but I'd be a pretty poor armchair internet troll if I didn't point it out?🤷🤣👍 Love the channel mate keep up the great work!🥰👍
Scrolling through the comments I noticed that only I notice dumb shit like this?🤷🤦🤣
Victorian Upper Class Officer: *polishing his sword* Not as clumsy or as random as a pistol. An elegant Weapon, for a more civilized age.
When I first starting reading your comment I thought, "polishing his sword" was a euphemism .
@@stephena1196 mmmmmhhhhhh could be
_vvvrmmmmmmmm_
A Royal Navy seamen, polishing his sword. Then lubricating his pistol.
Haha.
Very good😊