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
“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 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
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.
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.
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 ua-cam.com/video/JOGpt-lPXjU/v-deo.html
Black powder, wash your hands!,strip off and shower ,by the time I drive home from the range my car reeks like a camels rear end after it's eaten a rancid egg and bean curry🐫😂
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.
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.
@@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.)
If you have ever ridden a camel, you wouldn't be wondering why said pistol went off in the saddleholster. It's the roughest ride in the world besides a green bronco.
I was thinking that too lol. The two examples given (camel/horse), both can be rough. Also stated is sometimes only 5 cambers were loaded, so the hammer rests on an empty chamber. Leads me to wonder if there was an issue with the hammer design at the time, where the hammer could rub on a holster or if bounced hard enough, to cause a discharge...
@phreakfactor the caps of a cap and ball revolver sit proud of the cylinder. This, coupled with the friction and bouncing up and down violently against a wooden saddle, will cause the exposed chambers to fire. There's a reason why cowboys walked funny, and it ain't for the drinking or saddlesore. It was because caps are filled with a primary explosive, and primary explosives are friction and impact sensitive.
Another reason why British officers preferred the Adams was it's double-action trigger mechanism. Whereas, the Colt is a single-action, requiring the hammer to be manually cocked. In several accounts, officers recounted how the ability to fire more rapidly saved them in the press.
Yes absolutely. And just about every other European military agreed - the French and Spanish, who also experienced a lot of colonial warfare at this time, also went for double-action revolvers. Colts were briefly popular when they first appears, but quite quickly replaced in European armies and their colonies.
Of course, the fact that it was a double action may have accounted for the misfires. I can't imagine you would hit the broad side of a barn from inside if you were trying to fight the hammer spring of a Colt by the action of pulling the trigger, so I imagine light strike misfires (where the hammer doesn't have enough kinetic energy to set off the cap/primer) were more likely due to lighter trigger springs. This is just conjecture, as I am only familiar with Colt and Remington antique revolvers. I do know, however, that some people will replace the hammer spring of antique revolvers for "fanning" and occasionally it causes light strikes. It is not outside the realm of possibility that he just had too little tension on his trigger spring. He may have also just not taken care of it, because much like swords, if you don't take care of them, they can fail at an important time.
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,
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.
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. 😊
In the Victorian context, which was a transitional period on so many levels of human life, neither the cap and ball revolver nor the single cartridge loading pistols (possibly multi-barrel, like the Lancasters) made bladed weapons obsolete. The sword and the bayonet had a necessary place until the widespread introduction of cartridge clip and cartridge magazine loading firearms. If you can't insert multiple cartridges into your firearm in one move, be that a pistol or a rifle, you need a melee option, so a sword or a bayonet.
I really hope these crazy new laws in the UK don't cause you any problems. You are an oracle of information. A military history wizard. How I love listening to your UA-cam videos. Best of luck to you. Thanks :)
Hi Matt. Love the channel. Are any of the books u mention, “man stopper” or “the swordsman one,” available on any other format? I’m totally blind, so can’t read print books. Many thanks
14:30 Resting the hammer on an empty chamber was for routine carry. In battle the soldier will normally load the empty chamber. It was probably a .31 caliber Colt 1849 pocket pistol.
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.
Folks insisting on the infallibility of percussion revolvers probably haven't spent much time with percussion revolvers. In my experience, the 1851 or 1860 Colt is as fine a weapon as you could wish for 3 or 4 cylinders, with Slixshot aftermarket cones. But a fight that lasts long enough for you to reload a percussion revolver that many times is likely to be won or lost long before. I would love to try one of the Adams revolvers someday! Col. Mosby, the Confederate Partisan, actually managed to parry several sabre cuts with an empty pistol before one of his own troopers, (with a sabre), came up to his aid.
@@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).
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
@@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.
An interesting follow-up to this could be a discussion of the "regulation" or expectations of how the the various Corps wanted the sword-pistol combo to be used. You have discussed how it was used and the problems, but how was-it expected to be used? Secondly how were they rigged? In USA Cavalry the sword is drawn by the right from the left and the pistol is drawn by the left from the right (cross draws). Anyway, thank you for another great discussion. Cheers!
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.
I enjoyed this discussion/ presentation. I read the book you referenced after you mentioned it in another video. Your forward was well written and interesting. I’m interested in learning more about the howdah pistol and its use by military officers. For instance, were they ever loaded with buckshot? How were they carried? They seem to have been purchased and used in braces or pairs and as sidearms. Were they carried in two holsters on the belt? I’ve never heard or seen in print an account of how they were pressed into service ( in detail). Keep up the good work- God bless and keep you and yours
This is fascinating. Does this mean that we should treat cowboy films very sceptically in settings before the mid 1880s? Should they seldom be able to get off more than two shots in a row from a single revolver? And my other question: were there any instances in which people cited their particular revolver's ability to reliably be emptied at need?
InRange TV on UA-cam tested something like this with I think 3 different models of popular cap and ball revolver. When freshly and carefully loaded according to period manuals, they worked perfectly. But even a brief exposure to simulated rain had massive impacts on reliability. If I recall correctly he suspected that the very poor reliability of cap and ball revolvers when exposed to the elements was a reason behind why they tended to use huge, protective (though not very fast for the draw) flap holsters in those times.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 what's interesting to me is that you'd think the same would apply to howdah pistols, yet there continued to be a considerable market for those among the British army until the late 1800s. Or is it specifically the revolver design that exposes the caps to the elements?
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
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.
Love that Adams Mk II that you have. A thoroughly underappreciated revolver, especially compared to the bigger names such as Colt, Remington, and Webley etc.
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.
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
Id be interested to see if earlier, single shot weapons (caplock and flintlock pistols, muskets, rifles, ect, muzzle or breechloading but only with a single chamber that must be reloaded after firing) are talked about similarly - do the sources paint a picture of them being generally more reliable? Is it similar? Worse? Might be interesting to make a comparison here
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.
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.
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.
Never carry a blade to a gun fight however never go anywhere without a blade, an adage that I follow still after I retired from the Army, in Afghanistan I carried a Kukri and a forged tomahawk.
@@stevenpremmel4116 I actually used my hawk to get into a vehicle to pull some soldiers out after a vbied hit, the widow was partially cracked and I used the back pick end to get in and unlatch the door
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.
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.
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.
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.
There's still the 20-foot rule, which has been tested repeatedly. While it is not an absolute natural law, generally an edged weapon seriously increases the risk of pistol users in CQC. An ex-brother-in-law, a truck driver, who carried a single action .38 revolver to discourage robbery, had an accident with the pistol that included a remarkably unlikely sequence. He was mounting into the ca when the uncocked revolver, carried on an empty cylinder, fell out of ??? It hit a step in the ladder to the cab and apparently then cocked. It then flipped around, and striking the ground butt first, discharged, hitting him in the backside and putting him off driving for several days.
I'll bet he was the "butt" of the joke for awhile. Lee Marvin was asked during an interview how he was wounded during WWll. His reply was well when you are prone taking cover and you get it. You tend to get hit in two places. Either the head or the ass. He survived.
To be fair, British officers even in the late Victorian period had a pretty poor service revolver(Enfleid) set as standard until the Webley came around.
Service revolvers were relatively late in the day; privately acquired ones, before and after the adoption of a service revolver as standard, were quite good - as the man says in this video and others - Adams and Tranters etc. were considered among the best revolvers of their time, even preferred in America, though Colts etc. were also available and widely used in the British Empire.
A great account of using both revolver and sword was how the Zulus who participated described the death of the last Napoleon in Southern Africa. He was deserted by British calvery and outnumbered about 50:1 and both heroically in a losing effort.
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.
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
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 😢
So many great points as usual, especially the early percussion revolvers…very dangerous unreliable things…😂. Colt eventually gained its stride though, I think you need to take a trip to the U.S. and shoot a fancy slicked up modified race-gun colt 1873 and see if you feel the same about colts! 😉🤠
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.
I suspect that the unintentional 19th century pistol discharges are due to the fact that there was no transfer safety bar between the hammer & the cartridge/percussion cap. Striking the hammer with anything would detonate the cartridge. This is why many carried their revolver with the hammer down on an empty chamber. Some cylinders have safety notches on them so all cylinders could be loaded while the hammer rested safely in a notch between chambers. Cartridges do not spontaneously combust.
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").
Even if your pistol has a 1 in 5 chance of actually firing, it's not like there's much to do while someone is charging at you but out of melee reach, so you may as well try your luck and hopefully make the melee fight much easier or even not happen at all. And that's not even counting the fact that your opponent may decide the chance of gaining a brand new hole where it's not supposed to be isn't worth it. So, yes. I see why pistols were used even if they were not reliable. They're easy to carry and can do things your empty off hand cannot. I view the pistol as the "maybe I'll get lucky" tool and the sword as the "as expected" tool, instead of the pistol being the "as expected" and the sword being "just in case". In war, take all the unfair advantages you can!
Sword and pistol is an awesome combination even better than sword and shield or rapier and dagger. The sword is excellent in offensive defense, preventing people from closing and grappling or tackling you and if they try to keep their distance you can shoot them. You have 50 meters of reach, a second short range attack you can use at the same time, and usually very nice hand protection.
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.
This may or, may not be relevant. I purchased twenty years ago a Enfield mk 3 & 4, pretty. Fired surplus 303 from the 50's. British ammo or, I suppose use fairly dirty ammo in comparison to GI surplus from the same time. Also love the design of British revolvers.
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.
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?
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.
16:40 or the thing got wet. Karl from Inrange TV had interesting videos on loaded black powder revolvers and water (raind ect.). Showing how much impact water has on percussion cap firearms.
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.
Being from Texas, I was surprised that England (assuming you are in England) has laws preventing you from owning or using a hundred plus year old pistol because it uses metal cartridges. But, you can own essentially the same pistol as a cap and ball revolver. Is this correct? I understand many countries have banned semi automatic weapons. But, was unaware of the prohibition of revolvers. I truly enjoy your channel and the history you bring to the screen. I especially like the American history from the civil war and your Bowie knife episodes. Thank you.
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.
Kinda makes me wonder why pistol bayonets weren't more common. You can pull a pistol out in a quicker action than a sword and the knife blades mean in a better defensive and offensive tool in melee than a unloaded revolver.
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.
Hey Matt, if you haven't considered this, perhaps you could give it some thought. What if you chose a public domain book and read and discussed it on video. That would be great. We've had books on tape for decades, and I've been pitching books on video for a while now, but no one is biting yet. It would be better to pick one that you might have something to say about. So if it's in any way historical or something that just interests you, you can take little interludes to talk about it. It would make for a great series and wouldn't even require much editing. I'm sure we'd all be here for it.
As an American who goes target shooting on a regular basis, I can tell you that modern smokeless power isn't always reliable. I've had squib loads that have just enough powder to fire, but the bullet gets lodged in the barrel and have had dud rounds that don't fire at all. This only happens with Winchester White Box ammo.
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.
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.
Surprised to hear about the navy colts when the Brits picked up percussion caps at Constantinople. Maybe another problem? Went for what they could get in the way of caps.
Using black powder revolvers sounds like having to pray to the machine spirit in W40K or something. Explains why they were often 5 shots instead of 6. Probably not going to function by the last few.
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.
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 UA-cam 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.
Captain Context even gives context as to why he is "Uncle Matt"! 😆
Genious!
historically accurate uncle
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
“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...
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!
Now I understand why Richard Sharpe was so adamant about his men cleaning their rifles.
Now that's real soldiering.
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!
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
ua-cam.com/video/JOGpt-lPXjU/v-deo.html
Apparently some who could afford it carried a Lanchester as a backup to their Webley or even Adams
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😊
"Story time with Uncle Matt" is now my favorite framework of your videos
This is one of my favorite formats that you do please keep doing things like this I love hearing you read actual accounts. Thanks, Uncle Matt.
Black powder, wash your hands!,strip off and shower ,by the time I drive home from the range my car reeks like a camels rear end after it's eaten a rancid egg and bean curry🐫😂
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.
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.)
If you have ever ridden a camel, you wouldn't be wondering why said pistol went off in the saddleholster.
It's the roughest ride in the world besides a green bronco.
I was thinking that too lol. The two examples given (camel/horse), both can be rough. Also stated is sometimes only 5 cambers were loaded, so the hammer rests on an empty chamber. Leads me to wonder if there was an issue with the hammer design at the time, where the hammer could rub on a holster or if bounced hard enough, to cause a discharge...
@phreakfactor the caps of a cap and ball revolver sit proud of the cylinder. This, coupled with the friction and bouncing up and down violently against a wooden saddle, will cause the exposed chambers to fire. There's a reason why cowboys walked funny, and it ain't for the drinking or saddlesore. It was because caps are filled with a primary explosive, and primary explosives are friction and impact sensitive.
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😢
Imagine getting into a cowboy style duel where you draw first but the gun misfires. I would straight haunt Samuel Colt so hard.
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 ❤
Another reason why British officers preferred the Adams was it's double-action trigger mechanism. Whereas, the Colt is a single-action, requiring the hammer to be manually cocked. In several accounts, officers recounted how the ability to fire more rapidly saved them in the press.
Yes absolutely. And just about every other European military agreed - the French and Spanish, who also experienced a lot of colonial warfare at this time, also went for double-action revolvers. Colts were briefly popular when they first appears, but quite quickly replaced in European armies and their colonies.
Of course, the fact that it was a double action may have accounted for the misfires. I can't imagine you would hit the broad side of a barn from inside if you were trying to fight the hammer spring of a Colt by the action of pulling the trigger, so I imagine light strike misfires (where the hammer doesn't have enough kinetic energy to set off the cap/primer) were more likely due to lighter trigger springs. This is just conjecture, as I am only familiar with Colt and Remington antique revolvers. I do know, however, that some people will replace the hammer spring of antique revolvers for "fanning" and occasionally it causes light strikes. It is not outside the realm of possibility that he just had too little tension on his trigger spring. He may have also just not taken care of it, because much like swords, if you don't take care of them, they can fail at an important time.
I've always wondered if the Adams was the "service revolver" that Dr. Watson carried to back Holmes up, the one he'd carried in Afghanistan.
These are absolute favorite videos of yours when you do a story time with uncle Matt!
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. 😊
In the Victorian context, which was a transitional period on so many levels of human life, neither the cap and ball revolver nor the single cartridge loading pistols (possibly multi-barrel, like the Lancasters) made bladed weapons obsolete. The sword and the bayonet had a necessary place until the widespread introduction of cartridge clip and cartridge magazine loading firearms. If you can't insert multiple cartridges into your firearm in one move, be that a pistol or a rifle, you need a melee option, so a sword or a bayonet.
*sigh* I wish I had a cool sword and pistol uncle
My Uncle gave me a set of, stolen, fencing foils. He bought me my first BB gun. He's not cool though.
I was fortunate to get into reenacting.
I really hope these crazy new laws in the UK don't cause you any problems. You are an oracle of information. A military history wizard. How I love listening to your UA-cam videos. Best of luck to you. Thanks :)
Love these videos where you go through a primary source and add your perspective to them
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.
Hi Matt.
Love the channel.
Are any of the books u mention, “man stopper” or “the swordsman one,” available on any other format?
I’m totally blind, so can’t read print books.
Many thanks
14:30 Resting the hammer on an empty chamber was for routine carry. In battle the soldier will normally load the empty chamber.
It was probably a .31 caliber Colt 1849 pocket pistol.
I had the same thought.
It totally depend on the battle situation. Did he even have minimum conditions to fill the empty chamber? Conditions like time for exemple.
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.
Folks insisting on the infallibility of percussion revolvers probably haven't spent much time with percussion revolvers. In my experience, the 1851 or 1860 Colt is as fine a weapon as you could wish for 3 or 4 cylinders, with Slixshot aftermarket cones. But a fight that lasts long enough for you to reload a percussion revolver that many times is likely to be won or lost long before. I would love to try one of the Adams revolvers someday! Col. Mosby, the Confederate Partisan, actually managed to parry several sabre cuts with an empty pistol before one of his own troopers, (with a sabre), came up to his aid.
“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).
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
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.
An interesting follow-up to this could be a discussion of the "regulation" or expectations of how the the various Corps wanted the sword-pistol combo to be used. You have discussed how it was used and the problems, but how was-it expected to be used? Secondly how were they rigged? In USA Cavalry the sword is drawn by the right from the left and the pistol is drawn by the left from the right (cross draws).
Anyway, thank you for another great discussion. Cheers!
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.
I enjoyed this discussion/ presentation. I read the book you referenced after you mentioned it in another video. Your forward was well written and interesting.
I’m interested in learning more about the howdah pistol and its use by military officers. For instance, were they ever loaded with buckshot? How were they carried? They seem to have been purchased and used in braces or pairs and as sidearms. Were they carried in two holsters on the belt? I’ve never heard or seen in print an account of how they were pressed into service ( in detail).
Keep up the good work- God bless and keep you and yours
This is fascinating. Does this mean that we should treat cowboy films very sceptically in settings before the mid 1880s? Should they seldom be able to get off more than two shots in a row from a single revolver? And my other question: were there any instances in which people cited their particular revolver's ability to reliably be emptied at need?
InRange TV on UA-cam tested something like this with I think 3 different models of popular cap and ball revolver. When freshly and carefully loaded according to period manuals, they worked perfectly. But even a brief exposure to simulated rain had massive impacts on reliability. If I recall correctly he suspected that the very poor reliability of cap and ball revolvers when exposed to the elements was a reason behind why they tended to use huge, protective (though not very fast for the draw) flap holsters in those times.
@@michaelwarenycia7588 what's interesting to me is that you'd think the same would apply to howdah pistols, yet there continued to be a considerable market for those among the British army until the late 1800s. Or is it specifically the revolver design that exposes the caps to the elements?
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
Even in WWII Bayonet and Kukri where still being used very effectively, so as a back up I doubt swords were useless 50 plus years before that era.
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.
Love that Adams Mk II that you have. A thoroughly underappreciated revolver, especially compared to the bigger names such as Colt, Remington, and Webley etc.
I would love this sort of content in a podcast format so I can bring this on my daily drive
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.
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
Id be interested to see if earlier, single shot weapons (caplock and flintlock pistols, muskets, rifles, ect, muzzle or breechloading but only with a single chamber that must be reloaded after firing) are talked about similarly - do the sources paint a picture of them being generally more reliable? Is it similar? Worse? Might be interesting to make a comparison here
20:49 Did he arrive?
Coming down the mountainside?
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.
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.
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.
Refers to himself as Uncle instead of Papa, +1 wholesome point to scholagladatoria.
Never carry a blade to a gun fight however never go anywhere without a blade, an adage that I follow still after I retired from the Army, in Afghanistan I carried a Kukri and a forged tomahawk.
Those ration boxes never knew what hit them.
@@stevenpremmel4116 I actually used my hawk to get into a vehicle to pull some soldiers out after a vbied hit, the widow was partially cracked and I used the back pick end to get in and unlatch the door
@gunnerbhb50 That's great. You didn't go round calling it a hawk out loud though, did you?
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.
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.
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.
More history story time with uncle Matt please
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.
Back when I first died a replica Colt Navy I quickly started tossing it vertical to help clear the spent percussion caps.
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.
There's still the 20-foot rule, which has been tested repeatedly. While it is not an absolute natural law, generally an edged weapon seriously increases the risk of pistol users in CQC. An ex-brother-in-law, a truck driver, who carried a single action .38 revolver to discourage robbery, had an accident with the pistol that included a remarkably unlikely sequence. He was mounting into the ca when the uncocked revolver, carried on an empty cylinder, fell out of ??? It hit a step in the ladder to the cab and apparently then cocked. It then flipped around, and striking the ground butt first, discharged, hitting him in the backside and putting him off driving for several days.
I'll bet he was the "butt" of the joke for awhile. Lee Marvin was asked during an interview how he was wounded during WWll. His reply was well when you are prone taking cover and you get it. You tend to get hit in two places. Either the head or the ass. He survived.
Timely, Uncle Matt
I would love, and I think I speak for everyone here, to have a HEMA Sword Uncle.
Very fascinating as always "uncle" Matt!
To be fair, British officers even in the late Victorian period had a pretty poor service revolver(Enfleid) set as standard until the Webley came around.
Service revolvers were relatively late in the day; privately acquired ones, before and after the adoption of a service revolver as standard, were quite good - as the man says in this video and others - Adams and Tranters etc. were considered among the best revolvers of their time, even preferred in America, though Colts etc. were also available and widely used in the British Empire.
A great account of using both revolver and sword was how the Zulus who participated described the death of the last Napoleon in Southern Africa. He was deserted by British calvery and outnumbered about 50:1 and both heroically in a losing effort.
…..and USED both…
Thanks Uncle Matt! Love this stuff!
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.
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.
My Remington New Model Army was quite reliable, too. Of course, a New Model Army or Colt Dragoon weigh as much as 2 or 3 swords, or a light pollaxe.
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 😢
So many great points as usual, especially the early percussion revolvers…very dangerous unreliable things…😂. Colt eventually gained its stride though, I think you need to take a trip to the U.S. and shoot a fancy slicked up modified race-gun colt 1873 and see if you feel the same about colts! 😉🤠
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.
We can see how effective firearms were against the Zulu with their Asagi (hope I spelled that right) at the battle of Isanlawanda
I suspect that the unintentional 19th century pistol discharges are due to the fact that there was no transfer safety bar between the hammer & the cartridge/percussion cap. Striking the hammer with anything would detonate the cartridge. This is why many carried their revolver with the hammer down on an empty chamber. Some cylinders have safety notches on them so all cylinders could be loaded while the hammer rested safely in a notch between chambers. Cartridges do not spontaneously combust.
You should do a video on the armor of the tine. If slashing swords were still such a big part of warfare at the time, why such a lack of protection?
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").
Even if your pistol has a 1 in 5 chance of actually firing, it's not like there's much to do while someone is charging at you but out of melee reach, so you may as well try your luck and hopefully make the melee fight much easier or even not happen at all. And that's not even counting the fact that your opponent may decide the chance of gaining a brand new hole where it's not supposed to be isn't worth it.
So, yes. I see why pistols were used even if they were not reliable. They're easy to carry and can do things your empty off hand cannot. I view the pistol as the "maybe I'll get lucky" tool and the sword as the "as expected" tool, instead of the pistol being the "as expected" and the sword being "just in case". In war, take all the unfair advantages you can!
Sword and pistol is an awesome combination even better than sword and shield or rapier and dagger. The sword is excellent in offensive defense, preventing people from closing and grappling or tackling you and if they try to keep their distance you can shoot them. You have 50 meters of reach, a second short range attack you can use at the same time, and usually very nice hand protection.
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’ve often thought that the best sci-fi role playing build would be a blaster in one hand and a blade in the other
It's interesting that Fred Burnaby borrowed a friend's shotgun that he used to deadly effect at Abu Klea..somewhat controversially.
Even some of the Australian Light Horse were issued 1908 sabres for a while during WW1.
This may or, may not be relevant. I purchased twenty years ago a Enfield mk 3 & 4, pretty. Fired surplus 303 from the 50's. British ammo or, I suppose use fairly dirty ammo in comparison to GI surplus from the same time. Also love the design of British revolvers.
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.
You may be interested in the 1854 fight with Johnathan R. Davis using Colt revolvers and a Bowie knife.
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
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
16:40 or the thing got wet. Karl from Inrange TV had interesting videos on loaded black powder revolvers and water (raind ect.). Showing how much impact water has on percussion cap firearms.
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.
Thaaaanks uncle Matt Matt. X
Being from Texas, I was surprised that England (assuming you are in England) has laws preventing you from owning or using a hundred plus year old pistol because it uses metal cartridges. But, you can own essentially the same pistol as a cap and ball revolver. Is this correct? I understand many countries have banned semi automatic weapons. But, was unaware of the prohibition of revolvers. I truly enjoy your channel and the history you bring to the screen. I especially like the American history from the civil war and your Bowie knife episodes. Thank you.
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.
Kinda makes me wonder why pistol bayonets weren't more common. You can pull a pistol out in a quicker action than a sword and the knife blades mean in a better defensive and offensive tool in melee than a unloaded revolver.
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.
Hey Matt, if you haven't considered this, perhaps you could give it some thought.
What if you chose a public domain book and read and discussed it on video. That would be great. We've had books on tape for decades, and I've been pitching books on video for a while now, but no one is biting yet.
It would be better to pick one that you might have something to say about. So if it's in any way historical or something that just interests you, you can take little interludes to talk about it.
It would make for a great series and wouldn't even require much editing.
I'm sure we'd all be here for it.
As an American who goes target shooting on a regular basis, I can tell you that modern smokeless power isn't always reliable. I've had squib loads that have just enough powder to fire, but the bullet gets lodged in the barrel and have had dud rounds that don't fire at all. This only happens with Winchester White Box ammo.
Thanks for this video Technically Uncle Matt
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.
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.
Surprised to hear about the navy colts when the Brits picked up percussion caps at Constantinople. Maybe another problem? Went for what they could get in the way of caps.
Using black powder revolvers sounds like having to pray to the machine spirit in W40K or something. Explains why they were often 5 shots instead of 6. Probably not going to function by the last few.
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 UA-cam 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.