ftp.xmission.com

home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search

/ ftp.xmission.com / 2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar / ftp.xmission.com / pub / lists / hist_text / archive / v01.n175 < prev next >

Wrap

Internet Message Format | 1998-11-15 | 44KB

From: owner-hist_text-digest@lists.xmission.com (hist_text-digest) To: hist_text-digest@lists.xmission.com Subject: hist_text-digest V1 #175 Reply-To: hist_text Sender: owner-hist_text-digest@lists.xmission.com Errors-To: owner-hist_text-digest@lists.xmission.com Precedence: bulk hist_text-digest Sunday, November 15 1998 Volume 01 : Number 175 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Sat, 14 Nov 1998 06:00:14 -0800 (PST) From: Richard Pickert <walksinthenight@yahoo.com> Subject: MtMan-List: bp derranger ho list i am looking for a bp derranger that would be correct for the fur trade era. any help would be greatly appreciated. walks in the night > > > > > > > > > > == Rick(Walks in the Night)Pickert _________________________________________________________ DO YOU YAHOO!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 17:01:30 -0500 From: "John L. Allen" <jlallen@snet.net> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: direction? Ho the list, OK, I wasn't going to get in on this one but I couldn't resist when Kurt mentioned Lewis and Clark. The captains did use "larboard" and "starboard" to mean (usually) the left and right side of the boat. Occasionally, they used "larboard side" and "starboard side" to mean the left and right banks of the river. According to DeVoto's edition of the Journals, the left and right banks of the Missouri are (I'm quoting here): to the right and the left respectively of the boat. In other words, the right bank of the Missouri (to Lewis and Clark) was the bank on their left as they proceeded upstream, on their right as they proceeded downstream. I have, in my own examinations of the Original Journals, verified DeVoto's conclusion. For Lewis and Clark, the convention was to name the banks of a stream based on the direction in which the stream was flowing. For a stream flowing from the north, then, the right bank was the west bank, on the right hand side of someone traveling south down the river. I certainly hope that clears up the confusion! I thought I understood perfectly what Lewis and Clark meant by "l.s." and "s.s." until I started this. Keep your horse happy and you won't have to deal with either bank of the river. John Dr. John L. Allen 21 Thomas Drive Storrs, CT 06268 860/487-1346 jlallen@snet.net - -----Original Message----- From: Kurt Westenbarger <kwesten@wyellowstone.com> To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com <hist_text@lists.xmission.com> Date: Thursday, November 12, 1998 7:22 PM Subject: Re: MtMan-List: direction? >I tried sending this once, I guess it didn't get through so if this is >double for you folks I apologize. KW > > >Isn't it amazing (and wonderful) how such a simple question can raise so >much contoversy! I was laying up >thinking about this last night (yes I need to get a life, or mayhap >better dreams) and wondered about Lewis & >Clark. After all they wrote bunches about where they went. Often they >refer to left & right as "larboard & >starboard" which refer to left & right sides of a water craft. (as I >understand it - been on the ocean twice and >never heard either term - so if I'm wrong please correct) But they use >it in reference to the river banks such as a >river might enter upon the larboard side. My question is: do their >references to left and right change when they >change direction in relation to river flow. Is larboard (their left) >when facing up the Missouri still their left when >going down the Columbia in 1805? Is an object spotted on the larboard >side on the way up the Missouri still on >the larboard side while headed down? And is the same true when they >refer to right and left instead of starboard >& larboard? > >Just thought I'd throw this out and see if anyone wants the research >challenge and will report back. Personally I >find the topic interesting but there's not enough spark to catch fire - >yet anyway. > >Another brain fart: I thought that when a ship entered harbor in the >early days (whenever that was) there was a >"pilot" or some such person who came out to the vessel to guide it in. >This implies (to me) an absence of >channel bouys. If this is so (and I plainly admit I'm way over my head >when out on the ocean) when did >channel bouys come into common use in harbors, river mouths, and in >navigable rivers such as the >Mississippi? I ask because the date may provde some insight into the >direction issue. > >Snowin' here in West Yellowstone! :-) >kurt > > > ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 02:47:30 EST From: JohnDies@aol.com Subject: Re: MtMan-List: direction? Larboard did fall out of favor, but port wasn't invented to replace, it was commonly used for centuries. Starboard is a corruption of steerboard or steering board. Rudders were lashed on to the left side of the vessel. Steerage was handled similar to a paddle & canoe, except much larger. Docking tended to snap off the steering board unless you tied up on the other side of the boat. Left side, port side. Right side, steerboard side. Allowing that port and starboard had the same practical use as left and right, I would imagine that directions to the pass "left of the mountain" would naturally change to "right of the mountain" when returning. Although if they didn't do that it would explain why they never left the mountains. - -john ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 11:20:36 -0800 From: "JON P TOWNS" <AMM944@prodigy.net> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0D65.4E8D65A0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Pat the statement of Cottonwood might be in correct I think they used Ponderosa Pine. I don't remember if I read it or see it in at Ft Clatsop OR or just dreamed it. But recall the pine because I know how hard it is to work when it is wet with pitch. Later Jon T - ---------- : From: John L. Allen <jlallen@snet.net> : To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com : Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 3:26 PM : : More on the collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: : : As my original message stated, the iron frame boat was intended to be : covered with skins or bark. Rubber was never--as far as I know--even : suggested. : : The boat was NOT carried across the mountains. It was abandoned during the : portage around Great Falls (of the Missouri). After covering the iron frame : with skins on July 9, 1805 (above the Great Falls), to produce the : collapsible boat, Lewis tried to make her river-worthy. The buffalo hides, : however, shrunk and the iron boat foundered. Knowing that it was too late in : the season to get and prepare more buffalo hides, the decision was made to : abandon the iron frame.To quote from the Journals, Lewis's entry for : Tuesday, July 9th, 1805: I therefore relinquished all further hope of my : favorite boat and ordered her to be sunk in the water, that the skins might : become soft in order the better to take her in peices [sic] tomorrow and : deposited the iron fraim [sic] at this place as it could probably be of no : further service to us. : : This was end of the iron boat experiment. Ken Karsminski of the Museum of : the Rockies in Bozeman, MT, has made a concerted search for the iron frame : in the Great Falls area without success. My guess is that the Indians found : it and broke it up for the iron to use in war-axes, etc. : : But the iron or collapsible boat did most certainly not cross the Rockies : with the Expedition. : : Keep your powder dry. : : John. : : Dr. John L. Allen : 21 Thomas Drive : Storrs, CT 06268 : 860/487-1346 : jlallen@snet.net : : : -----Original Message----- : From: Pat Quilter <pat_quilter@qscaudio.com> : To: 'hist_text@lists.xmission.com' <hist_text@lists.xmission.com> : Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 1:41 PM : Subject: RE: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : : : >Regarding the collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: : >As I recall, the frame was lugged over the mountains to the first western : >flowing stream, where the Corps attempted to complete the plan of covering : >it with skins (not rubber). This was one of several "high tech" devices : >produced to support the expedition, such as the well known lead canisters : >with powder, the air rifle, and the 1803 pattern Harper's Ferry rifles. : This : >one, however, failed, despite the best efforts of Lewis, as recounted in : >"Undaunted Courage". They used glover's needles to sew the skins, which : >produced slight slits which opened up under strain, and they couldn't get : >adequate pitch or a substitute for sealing. After some weeks of effort, : >Lewis had to abandon the project and cached the frame. Meanwhile, Clark had : >moved men downstream until they found cottonwoods big enough to make : >dugouts, which carried them down river to the Pacific. : >Pat Quilter : > : >-----Original Message----- : >From: John L. Allen [mailto:jlallen@snet.net] : >Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 8:59 AM : >To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com : >Subject: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : > : > : >Ho the list, : > : >A question was raised a few days ago about whether or not Lewis and Clark : >had a rubber boat. This question came out of the thread relating to rubber : >ponchos, etc. : > : >Lewis and Clark did not have a rubber boat. They carried an iron frame : (made : >in Pittsburgh) for a "portable boat" up the Missouri as far as Great Falls : >where they abandoned (or cached) it. This iron frame was intended to be : >covered with hides and/or bark. Although we have no good description of it, : >it was probably something like an Irish curragh--or even like a Mandan : >bullboat. : > : >John C. Fremont, in 1842-44, used rubber boats on his first two expeditions : >into the West. He refers to them as "India rubber" boats and mentions them : >in his journals as being used on both the North Platte and the Great Salt : >Lake. His rubber boat worked well on the Platte in 1842. The next year, on : >Salt Lake, he noted that the rubber boat didn't work as well since it : wasn't : >"as well stitched together" as the one used on his first expedition. This : >suggests a boat made from several pieces of material sewn in some fashion. : >These rubber boats were 20 feet long and 5 feet wide and could carry a : >wagon. They were apparently inflatable (he mentions several places "filling : >our India rubber boat with air"). Best source for Fremont is Donald Jackson : >and Mary Spence (eds.), THE EXPEDITIONS OF JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, 3 vols. : >Univ. of Illinois Press. : > : >If Fremont, in 1842-44, was using an inflatable rubber boat, then obviously : >the technology was in place to make serviceable ponchos, etc. out of rubber : >or rubber-coated cloth during at least the tail end of the Rocky Mountain : >fur trade era. : > : >Keep your powder dry. : > : >John : > : >Dr. John L. Allen : >21 Thomas Drive : >Storrs, CT 06268 : >860/487-1346 : >jlallen@snet.net <mailto:jlallen@snet.net> : > : > : > : > : : - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0D65.4E8D65A0 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF">Pat the statement of Cottonwood might = be in correct I think they used Ponderosa Pine. I don't remember = if I read it or see it in at Ft Clatsop OR or just dreamed it. But = recall the pine because I know how hard it is to work when it is wet = with pitch. Later Jon T ---------- : From: John L. = Allen <jlallen@snet.net> : To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com : Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : Date: = Monday, November 09, 1998 3:26 PM : : More on the collapsible = boat of Lewis and Clark: : : As my original message stated, the = iron frame boat was intended to be : covered with skins or bark. = Rubber was never--as far as I know--even : suggested. : : The = boat was NOT carried across the mountains. It was abandoned during = the : portage around Great Falls (of the Missouri). After covering = the iron frame : with skins on July 9, 1805 (above the Great Falls), = to produce the : collapsible boat, Lewis tried to make her = river-worthy. The buffalo hides, : however, shrunk and the iron boat = foundered. Knowing that it was too late in : the season to get and = prepare more buffalo hides, the decision was made to : abandon the = iron frame.To quote from the Journals, Lewis's entry for : Tuesday, = July 9th, 1805: I therefore relinquished all further hope of my : = favorite boat and ordered her to be sunk in the water, that the skins = might : become soft in order the better to take her in peices [sic] = tomorrow and : deposited the iron fraim [sic] at this place as it = could probably be of no : further service to us. : : This was = end of the iron boat experiment. Ken Karsminski of the Museum of : = the Rockies in Bozeman, MT, has made a concerted search for the iron = frame : in the Great Falls area without success. My guess is that the = Indians found : it and broke it up for the iron to use in war-axes, = etc. : : But the iron or collapsible boat did most certainly not = cross the Rockies : with the Expedition. : : Keep your powder = dry. : : John. : : Dr. John L. Allen : 21 Thomas = Drive : Storrs, CT 06268 : 860/487-1346 : jlallen@snet.net : = : : -----Original Message----- : From: Pat Quilter <pat_quilter@qscaudio.com> : To: 'hist_text@lists.xmission.com' <hist_text@lists.xmission.com> : Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 1:41 PM : = Subject: RE: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : : : >Regarding the = collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: : >As I recall, the frame was = lugged over the mountains to the first western : >flowing stream, = where the Corps attempted to complete the plan of covering : >it = with skins (not rubber). This was one of several "high tech" = devices : >produced to support the expedition, such as the well = known lead canisters : >with powder, the air rifle, and the 1803 = pattern Harper's Ferry rifles. : This : >one, however, failed, = despite the best efforts of Lewis, as recounted in : = >"Undaunted Courage". They used glover's needles to sew the = skins, which : >produced slight slits which opened up under = strain, and they couldn't get : >adequate pitch or a substitute = for sealing. After some weeks of effort, : >Lewis had to abandon = the project and cached the frame. Meanwhile, Clark had : >moved = men downstream until they found cottonwoods big enough to make : = >dugouts, which carried them down river to the Pacific. : >Pat = Quilter : > : >-----Original Message----- : >From: = John L. Allen [mailto:jlallen@snet.net] : >Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 8:59 = AM : >To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com : >Subject: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : = > : > : >Ho the list, : > : >A question was = raised a few days ago about whether or not Lewis and Clark : >had = a rubber boat. This question came out of the thread relating to = rubber : >ponchos, etc. : > : >Lewis and Clark did not = have a rubber boat. They carried an iron frame : (made : >in = Pittsburgh) for a "portable boat" up the Missouri as far as = Great Falls : >where they abandoned (or cached) it. This iron = frame was intended to be : >covered with hides and/or bark. = Although we have no good description of it, : >it was probably = something like an Irish curragh--or even like a Mandan : = >bullboat. : > : >John C. Fremont, in 1842-44, used = rubber boats on his first two expeditions : >into the West. He = refers to them as "India rubber" boats and mentions them : = >in his journals as being used on both the North Platte and the Great = Salt : >Lake. His rubber boat worked well on the Platte in 1842. = The next year, on : >Salt Lake, he noted that the rubber boat = didn't work as well since it : wasn't : >"as well stitched = together" as the one used on his first expedition. This : = >suggests a boat made from several pieces of material sewn in some = fashion. : >These rubber boats were 20 feet long and 5 feet wide = and could carry a : >wagon. They were apparently inflatable (he = mentions several places "filling : >our India rubber boat = with air"). Best source for Fremont is Donald Jackson : >and = Mary Spence (eds.), THE EXPEDITIONS OF JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, 3 = vols. : >Univ. of Illinois Press. : > : >If Fremont, = in 1842-44, was using an inflatable rubber boat, then obviously : = >the technology was in place to make serviceable ponchos, etc. out of = rubber : >or rubber-coated cloth during at least the tail end of = the Rocky Mountain : >fur trade era. : > : >Keep your = powder dry. : > : >John : > : >Dr. John L. = Allen : >21 Thomas Drive : >Storrs, CT 06268 : = >860/487-1346 : >jlallen@snet.net = <mailto:jlallen@snet.net> : > : > : > : > : = : </f= ont></font= ></body></html> - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0D65.4E8D65A0-- ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1998 20:27:55 -0800 From: Dennis Fisher <dfisher@sbceo.k12.ca.us> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Black Powder Henry B. Crawford wrote: > >I find it hard to believe that there were 4 grades of powder > >back then. > >Any ideas? Besides the four grades of rifle powder, there were various grades of blasting powder and cannon powder. I'll try and dig out some of my old references and see what I can find. Before the days of dynamite, black powder was the only commercial blasting agent available. Dennis ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 8 Nov 1998 16:42:35 -0800 From: "JON P TOWNS" <AMM944@prodigy.net> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Re: AMM-List: aluminum This is a multi-part message in MIME format. - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0B36.CA1B9F60 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-MIME-Autoconverted: from 8bit to quoted-printable by pimout1-int.prodigy.net id TAA99002 Yea John K I have the book and I was just hoping someone could come up wi= th facts but the 1700's is to good to be true. The 1850 or + would be more like it. Later Jon T =20 - ---------- From: John Kramer <kramer@kramerize.com> To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com Cc: ammlist@lists.xmission.com Subject: MtMan-List: Re: AMM-List: aluminum Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 2:34 PM Jon T. The only attributed cookware of George Washington's, I am aware of, is pictured in "Collector's Illustrated Encyclopedia of the American Revolution"=A0 George C. Neumann and Frank J. Kravic=A0 ISBN 0-8117-0394-0 Page 94 shows the cook kit with plates, platters and pots all in tin.=A0=A0= The confusion may result from the top of the Washington Monument being capped in aluminum (the most expensive metal at the time it was built). It is unlikely any early cookware was made of metal more valuable than gold. I'm still digging for an exact date but, if memory serves to something noted long ago in passing; the first aluminum was made somewhere in the late 1850's. John... At 06:33 AM 11/8/98 -0800, you wrote:=20 > > Paul J. I also hope someone can come up some references for George > Washington's =A0cook ware Now days it takes electric power to make alum= inum I > am union pipe welder by trade and I worked with an old welder who could weld > aluminum with a torch. =A0But me it took a Tig welder. =A0But I can do = magic with > a Tig torch. =A0I am going to also send this to the Hist-list. =A0Later= Jon T > > ---------- > : From: Paul Jacobson <cougar95@lightspeed.net> > : To: ammlist@lists.xmission.com > : Subject: Re: AMM-List: aluminum > : Date: Saturday, November 07, 1998 1:39 PM > :=20 > : These are interesting questions...I hope someone knows the answer and will > : include it here. =A0I can't add a thing of real value, except that my mother, > : bless her memory, got a set of aluminum cook ware for a wedding prese= nt in > : the late 20's/early 30's. =A0Rumor was the aluminum would poison the cook, > : but her South Dakota good sense thought that silly. =A0I still have '= em, and > : the big pan makes damn good popcorn. =A0It has since I was little watching > : Wallace Berry on our first TV. > :=20 > : Cougar Heart > : Paul Jacobson #1597 > : ---------- > : > From: WIDD-Tim Austin <AustinT@silltcmd-smtp.army.mil> > : > To: ammlist@mail.xmission.com > : > Subject: AMM-List: aluminum > : > Date: Friday, November 06, 1998 6:37 AM > : >=20 > : > Mr Kramer just brought up a subject that I have been interested in > : > because of its current availability. =A0Aluminum. =A0Several years = ago I read > : > that a General George Washington, revolution war era, had a cook se= t of > : > aluminum. =A0Seems I also read the a Mr. Stewart took a set of alum= inum > : > cook ware with him West of the Mississippi River when he went. =A0D= oes > : > anyone have the exact documentation on this subject, or did my memo= ry > : > totally fail me on this one? > : >=20 > : > Thank you for your assistance. > : >=20 > : > Tim Austin #1564 > : >=20 > : > -------------------- > : > Aux Ailments de Pays! > :=20 > : -------------------- > : Aux Ailments de Pays! John T. Kramer, maker of:=A0 Kramer's Best Antique Improver >>>It makes wood wonderful<<< =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 >>>As good as old!<<< <http://www.kramerize.com/> mail to: <kramer@kramerize.com>=20 - ---------- - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0B36.CA1B9F60 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <html><head></head><BODY bgcolor=3D"#FFFFFF">Yea John K I have the book and I was = just hoping someone could come up with facts but the 1700's is to good = to be true. The 1850 or + would be more like it. Later Jon T = ---------- From: John Kramer <kramer@kramerize.com> To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com Cc: ammlist@lists.xmission.com Subject: MtMan-List: Re: AMM-List: = aluminum Date: Sunday, November 08, 1998 2:34 PM Jon = T. The only attributed cookware of George Washington's, I am = aware of, is pictured in "Collector's Illustrated = Encyclopedia of the American Revolution"=A0 George C. Neumann = and Frank J. Kravic=A0 ISBN 0-8117-0394-0 Page 94 shows the cook = kit with plates, platters and pots all in tin.=A0=A0 The confusion = may result from the top of the Washington Monument being capped = in aluminum (the most expensive metal at the time it was = built). It is unlikely any early cookware was made of metal more = valuable than gold. I'm still digging for an exact date but, if = memory serves to something noted long ago in passing; the first = aluminum was made somewhere in the late = 1850's. John... At 06:33 AM 11/8/98 -0800, you = wrote: > > Paul J. I also hope someone can come up some = references for George > Washington's =A0cook ware Now days it = takes electric power to make aluminum I > am union pipe welder by = trade and I worked with an old welder who could weld > aluminum = with a torch. =A0But me it took a Tig welder. =A0But I can do = magic with > a Tig torch. =A0I am going to also send this to = the Hist-list. =A0Later Jon T > > ---------- > : = From: Paul Jacobson <cougar95@lightspeed.net> > : To: ammlist@lists.xmission.com > : Subject: Re: AMM-List: aluminum > : = Date: Saturday, November 07, 1998 1:39 PM > : > : These are = interesting questions...I hope someone knows the answer and will > = : include it here. =A0I can't add a thing of real value, except that = my mother, > : bless her memory, got a set of aluminum cook = ware for a wedding present in > : the late 20's/early 30's. = =A0Rumor was the aluminum would poison the cook, > : but her South = Dakota good sense thought that silly. =A0I still have 'em, and > : = the big pan makes damn good popcorn. =A0It has since I was little = watching > : Wallace Berry on our first TV. > : > : = Cougar Heart > : Paul Jacobson #1597 > : ---------- > = : > From: WIDD-Tim Austin <AustinT@silltcmd-smtp.army.mil> > : > To: ammlist@mail.xmission.com > : > Subject: AMM-List: aluminum > : = > Date: Friday, November 06, 1998 6:37 AM > : > > : = > Mr Kramer just brought up a subject that I have been interested = in > : > because of its current availability. =A0Aluminum. = =A0Several years ago I read > : > that a General George = Washington, revolution war era, had a cook set of > : > = aluminum. =A0Seems I also read the a Mr. Stewart took a set of = aluminum > : > cook ware with him West of the Mississippi River = when he went. =A0Does > : > anyone have the exact documentation = on this subject, or did my memory > : > totally fail me on this = one? > : > > : > Thank you for your = assistance. > : > > : > Tim Austin #1564 > : = > > : > -------------------- > : > Aux Ailments de = Pays! > : > : -------------------- > : Aux Ailments = de Pays! John T. Kramer, maker of:=A0 Kramer's = Best Antique Improver >>>It makes wood = wonderful<<< =A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0 >>>As good as = old!<<< <http://www.kramerize.com/> mail to: <kramer@kramerize.com> ---------- </f= ont></body></html= > - ------=_NextPart_000_01BE0B36.CA1B9F60-- ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1998 22:50:24 -0800 From: Dale Nelson <dnelson@wizzards.net> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Black Powder RR1LA@aol.com wrote: > > JD, iirc (if i recall correctly) powder was not originally packaged by > fineness grades, but did change as it was carried around and ground itself > down. The powder in my horn doesn't "grind itself down" The coarser stuff was used down the barrel; the finer in the pan, as it > ignited faster. Who screened the coarse from the fine? The British Brown Bess musket was about 12 balls to the pound, or about .75 caliber. They used a paper cartridge. I DO NOT RECOMEND THIS, but in combat the soldier tore the bottom off the paper, primed the pan, closed the frizzen, poured the rest of the powder down the barrel followed by the ball, paper and all and rammed it home while the gun was PRIMED AND COCKED, but then soldiers tend to get hurt in combat so that might be some justifaction for doing it that way. The point I'm trying to make is they primed with the same powder as the charge. I'm thinking that they probably had a better quality powder than we do. My Dixie Gunworks repo brown bess won't fire primed with FFg, and the gun sparks real good. I can prime with FFFg and it works fine though. I wonder if in those days they had the same granulations of powder that we do today? Dale Nelson ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 20:00:14 -0400 From: bspen@aye.net (Bob Spencer) Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Black Powder RR1LA@aol.com wrote: > JD, iirc (if i recall correctly) powder was not originally packaged by > fineness grades, but did change as it was carried around and ground itself > down. And Dale Nelson wrote: >I wonder if >in those days they had the same granulations of powder that we do today? Basically, yes. I've just ben searching the Pennsylvania Gazette for 1728-1800, and found some interesting advertisements of goods for sale which relate to this question, as well as mention in other articles. September 28, 1752 The Pennsylvania Gazette "....brown and yellow ware, raisins and currants, F, FF and FFF powder , shot, lead,....." July 2, 1752 The Pennsylvania Gazette "....mens and boys castor and felt hats, F, FF, FFF powder, shot and bar lead,...." Some other terms used for powders, and the earliest references I found: "glazed and unglazed" or "rough and glazed"---1739 Dutch gun powder---1748 "best pistol powder"---1749 "American manufactured"---1790 So, as early as the second quarter of the 18th century, they had at least the same three main granulations we do, plus cannon powder, and they had glazed powder. Bob Bob Spencer <bspen@aye.net> http://members.aye.net/~bspen/index.html non illegitimi carborundum est ------------------------------ Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1998 13:34:03 +0000 From: andersons@mcn.net (Norman Anderson) Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods Lewis and Clark used both cottonwood and ponderosa for their dugouts. At Fort Mandan, at the Great Falls, and on the Yellowstone on Clark's return, they made canoes from cottonwood. While with the Nez Perce after crossing the divide they made more canoes from ponderosa for the voyage down to the coast. Respectfully, Norman Anderson >Pat the statement of Cottonwood might be in correct I think they used >Ponderosa Pine. I don't remember if I read it or see it in at Ft Clatsop >OR or just dreamed it. But recall the pine because I know how hard it is >to work when it is wet with pitch. Later Jon T > >---------- >: From: John L. Allen <jlallen@snet.net> >: To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com >: Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods >: Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 3:26 PM >: >: More on the collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: >: >: As my original message stated, the iron frame boat was intended to be >: covered with skins or bark. Rubber was never--as far as I know--even >: suggested. >: >: The boat was NOT carried across the mountains. It was abandoned during >the >: portage around Great Falls (of the Missouri). After covering the iron >frame >: with skins on July 9, 1805 (above the Great Falls), to produce the >: collapsible boat, Lewis tried to make her river-worthy. The buffalo >hides, >: however, shrunk and the iron boat foundered. Knowing that it was too late >in >: the season to get and prepare more buffalo hides, the decision was made >to >: abandon the iron frame.To quote from the Journals, Lewis's entry for >: Tuesday, July 9th, 1805: I therefore relinquished all further hope of my >: favorite boat and ordered her to be sunk in the water, that the skins >might >: become soft in order the better to take her in peices [sic] tomorrow and >: deposited the iron fraim [sic] at this place as it could probably be of >no >: further service to us. >: >: This was end of the iron boat experiment. Ken Karsminski of the Museum of >: the Rockies in Bozeman, MT, has made a concerted search for the iron >frame >: in the Great Falls area without success. My guess is that the Indians >found >: it and broke it up for the iron to use in war-axes, etc. >: >: But the iron or collapsible boat did most certainly not cross the Rockies >: with the Expedition. >: >: Keep your powder dry. >: >: John. >: >: Dr. John L. Allen >: 21 Thomas Drive >: Storrs, CT 06268 >: 860/487-1346 >: jlallen@snet.net >: >: >: -----Original Message----- >: From: Pat Quilter <pat_quilter@qscaudio.com> >: To: 'hist_text@lists.xmission.com' <hist_text@lists.xmission.com> >: Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 1:41 PM >: Subject: RE: MtMan-List: Rubber goods >: >: >: >Regarding the collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: >: >As I recall, the frame was lugged over the mountains to the first >western >: >flowing stream, where the Corps attempted to complete the plan of >covering >: >it with skins (not rubber). This was one of several "high tech" devices >: >produced to support the expedition, such as the well known lead >canisters >: >with powder, the air rifle, and the 1803 pattern Harper's Ferry rifles. >: This >: >one, however, failed, despite the best efforts of Lewis, as recounted in >: >"Undaunted Courage". They used glover's needles to sew the skins, which >: >produced slight slits which opened up under strain, and they couldn't >get >: >adequate pitch or a substitute for sealing. After some weeks of effort, >: >Lewis had to abandon the project and cached the frame. Meanwhile, Clark >had >: >moved men downstream until they found cottonwoods big enough to make >: >dugouts, which carried them down river to the Pacific. >: >Pat Quilter >: > >: >-----Original Message----- >: >From: John L. Allen [mailto:jlallen@snet.net] >: >Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 8:59 AM >: >To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com >: >Subject: MtMan-List: Rubber goods >: > >: > >: >Ho the list, >: > >: >A question was raised a few days ago about whether or not Lewis and >Clark >: >had a rubber boat. This question came out of the thread relating to >rubber >: >ponchos, etc. >: > >: >Lewis and Clark did not have a rubber boat. They carried an iron frame >: (made >: >in Pittsburgh) for a "portable boat" up the Missouri as far as Great >Falls >: >where they abandoned (or cached) it. This iron frame was intended to be >: >covered with hides and/or bark. Although we have no good description of >it, >: >it was probably something like an Irish curragh--or even like a Mandan >: >bullboat. >: > >: >John C. Fremont, in 1842-44, used rubber boats on his first two >expeditions >: >into the West. He refers to them as "India rubber" boats and mentions >them >: >in his journals as being used on both the North Platte and the Great >Salt >: >Lake. His rubber boat worked well on the Platte in 1842. The next year, >on >: >Salt Lake, he noted that the rubber boat didn't work as well since it >: wasn't >: >"as well stitched together" as the one used on his first expedition. >This >: >suggests a boat made from several pieces of material sewn in some >fashion. >: >These rubber boats were 20 feet long and 5 feet wide and could carry a >: >wagon. They were apparently inflatable (he mentions several places >"filling >: >our India rubber boat with air"). Best source for Fremont is Donald >Jackson >: >and Mary Spence (eds.), THE EXPEDITIONS OF JOHN CHARLES FREMONT, 3 vols. >: >Univ. of Illinois Press. >: > >: >If Fremont, in 1842-44, was using an inflatable rubber boat, then >obviously >: >the technology was in place to make serviceable ponchos, etc. out of >rubber >: >or rubber-coated cloth during at least the tail end of the Rocky >Mountain >: >fur trade era. >: > >: >Keep your powder dry. >: > >: >John >: > >: >Dr. John L. Allen >: >21 Thomas Drive >: >Storrs, CT 06268 >: >860/487-1346 >: >jlallen@snet.net <mailto:jlallen@snet.net> >: > >: > >: > >: > >: >: ><html><head></head><BODY bgcolor="#FFFFFF">face="Arial">Pat the statement of Cottonwood might be in correct I think >they used Ponderosa Pine. I don't remember if I read it or see it in >at Ft Clatsop OR or just dreamed it. But recall the pine because I >know how hard it is to work when it is wet with pitch. Later Jon T > ---------- : From: John L. Allen <color="#0000FF">jlallen@snet.net> : To: >hist_text@lists.xmission.comcolor="#000000"> : Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : Date: >Monday, November 09, 1998 3:26 PM : : More on the collapsible boat >of Lewis and Clark: : : As my original message stated, the iron >frame boat was intended to be : covered with skins or bark. Rubber was >never--as far as I know--even : suggested. : : The boat was NOT >carried across the mountains. It was abandoned during the : portage >around Great Falls (of the Missouri). After covering the iron frame : >with skins on July 9, 1805 (above the Great Falls), to produce the : >collapsible boat, Lewis tried to make her river-worthy. The buffalo >hides, : however, shrunk and the iron boat foundered. Knowing that it >was too late in : the season to get and prepare more buffalo hides, the >decision was made to : abandon the iron frame.To quote from the >Journals, Lewis's entry for : Tuesday, July 9th, 1805: I therefore >relinquished all further hope of my : favorite boat and ordered her to >be sunk in the water, that the skins might : become soft in order the >better to take her in peices [sic] tomorrow and : deposited the iron >fraim [sic] at this place as it could probably be of no : further >service to us. : : This was end of the iron boat experiment. Ken >Karsminski of the Museum of : the Rockies in Bozeman, MT, has made a >concerted search for the iron frame : in the Great Falls area without >success. My guess is that the Indians found : it and broke it up for >the iron to use in war-axes, etc. : : But the iron or collapsible >boat did most certainly not cross the Rockies : with the >Expedition. : : Keep your powder dry. : : John. : : >Dr. John L. Allen : 21 Thomas Drive : Storrs, CT 06268 : >860/487-1346 : jlallen@snet.netcolor="#000000"> : : : -----Original Message----- : From: >Pat Quilter <pat_quilter@qscaudio.comcolor="#000000">> : To: 'color="#0000FF">hist_text@lists.xmission.com' ><hist_text@lists.xmission.comcolor="#000000">> : Date: Monday, November 09, 1998 1:41 PM : >Subject: RE: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : : : >Regarding the >collapsible boat of Lewis and Clark: : >As I recall, the frame was >lugged over the mountains to the first western : >flowing stream, >where the Corps attempted to complete the plan of covering : >it >with skins (not rubber). This was one of several "high tech" >devices : >produced to support the expedition, such as the well >known lead canisters : >with powder, the air rifle, and the 1803 >pattern Harper's Ferry rifles. : This : >one, however, failed, >despite the best efforts of Lewis, as recounted in : >>"Undaunted Courage". They used glover's needles to sew the >skins, which : >produced slight slits which opened up under strain, >and they couldn't get : >adequate pitch or a substitute for sealing. >After some weeks of effort, : >Lewis had to abandon the project and >cached the frame. Meanwhile, Clark had : >moved men downstream until >they found cottonwoods big enough to make : >dugouts, which carried >them down river to the Pacific. : >Pat Quilter : > : >>-----Original Message----- : >From: John L. Allen [color="#0000FF">mailto:jlallen@snet.net] : >>Sent: Thursday, November 05, 1998 8:59 AM : >To: color="#0000FF">hist_text@lists.xmission.comcolor="#000000"> : >Subject: MtMan-List: Rubber goods : > : >> : >Ho the list, : > : >A question was raised a few >days ago about whether or not Lewis and Clark : >had a rubber boat. >This question came out of the thread relating to rubber : >ponchos, >etc. : > : >Lewis and Clark did not have a rubber boat. They >carried an iron frame : (made : >in Pittsburgh) for a >"portable boat" up the Missouri as far as Great Falls : >>where they abandoned (or cached) it. This iron frame was intended to >be : >covered with hides and/or bark. Although we have no good >description of it, : >it was probably something like an Irish >curragh--or even like a Mandan : >bullboat. : > : >John >C. Fremont, in 1842-44, used rubber boats on his first two >expeditions : >into the West. He refers to them as "India >rubber" boats and mentions them : >in his journals as being >used on both the North Platte and the Great Salt : >Lake. His rubber >boat worked well on the Platte in 1842. The next year, on : >Salt >Lake, he noted that the rubber boat didn't work as well since it : >wasn't : >"as well stitched together" as the one used on >his first expedition. This : >suggests a boat made from several >pieces of material sewn in some fashion. : >These rubber boats were >20 feet long and 5 feet wide and could carry a : >wagon. They were >apparently inflatable (he mentions several places "filling : >>our India rubber boat with air"). Best source for Fremont is >Donald Jackson : >and Mary Spence (eds.), THE EXPEDITIONS OF JOHN >CHARLES FREMONT, 3 vols. : >Univ. of Illinois Press. : > : >>If Fremont, in 1842-44, was using an inflatable rubber boat, then >obviously : >the technology was in place to make serviceable >ponchos, etc. out of rubber : >or rubber-coated cloth during at >least the tail end of the Rocky Mountain : >fur trade era. : >> : >Keep your powder dry. : > : >John : > : >>Dr. John L. Allen : >21 Thomas Drive : >Storrs, CT >06268 : >860/487-1346 : >color="#0000FF">jlallen@snet.net <color="#0000FF">mailto:jlallen@snet.netcolor="#000000">> : > : > : > : > : : > ></fon >t>ody></html> ------------------------------ End of hist_text-digest V1 #175 ******************************* - To unsubscribe to hist_text-digest, send an email to "majordomo@xmission.com" with "unsubscribe hist_text-digest" in the body of the message. For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send "help" to the same address. Do not use quotes in your message.