Short Starters Never Existed????????

[Sir Michael]

I just found the following in my search of historic documents for something completely different.

Practical Instructions for Military Officers, for the District of Massachusetts, published 1811

Equipment

The balls attached to the cartridges are enclosed in a linen or milled leather patch well saturated with grease; when the powder is emptied into the rifle, the ball is to be separated from the paper, placed upon the muzzle and driven in with a stroke of the mallet, as will be described in the exercise of the rifle.

The bayonet must be slung on the left side, in a scabbard, the belt of which buckles round the waist.

The pouch is worn in front like those of the cavalry, and the belt also buckles round the waist.  To this belt a case is fitted for the handle of the mallet, which must hang down the right thigh.

V. Load!  One Compound Motion
Turn up the right hand and shake the powder into the barrel, pressing the cartridge with the thumb and finger, to force out the powder; instantly bring the paper to the mouth and with the teeth separate it from the ball and, patch, which place upon the muzzle, the stitched side up, and instantly slide the left hand to the muzzle and place the fore finger upon the ball; at the same time, with the right hand, grasp the mallet, draw it partly out, and seize the handle.

VI. Drive Ball!  One Compound Motion
Bring up the mallet, flipping the finger from the ball, and with one or two strokes drive the ball into the muzzle; with a quick motion, place the end of the handle upon the ball and grasp it with the thumb and finger of the left hand, and with a few smart strokes upon the mallet with the right hand, drive the ball down the full length of the handle; instantly return the mallet to its sheath and seize the ramrod with the thumb and finger of the same hand, the thumb up.

Sure sounds like a short starter to me.  It isn't referred to as a new innovation but a standard shooting item.  The British Rifle Regiment was also initially outfitted with a mallet as well but it was discarded as requiring too much time to use.

[Kermit]

It's not a "short starter," it's a MALLET. Gotta keep this straight, ya know...

[Three Hawks]

I've written letters, and called sundry museums and asked if short starters are commonly found in the Colonial, Frontier, and Mountain Man era shooting pouches in their collections.  Most of the time the answer is, "What's a short starter?"  Other times it has been, "No".  The fact that using a mallet and it's handle as a short starter in a military situation does not indicate to a certainty that a mallet-like implement would be common elsewhere.  

I realize my experience is anecdotal, and that anecdote does not usually equal data (Except in Anthropoplectic Gloe Bowel Wormering)  but I threw my short starter away years ago, in preference to my massively powerful right thumb.  With it I can ram a patched ball flush with the muzzle of my rifle, allowing me to cut the patch from the strip, then seat the ball on the charge with my rammer.  One less gilchickie to fish in the pouch for between shots.  And I have yet to drop or misplace my right thumb while reloading.

Not sayin' they weren't there, just that they don't seem to show up all that often with the other goodies that are there.

YMMV,

Three Hawks

[Sir Michael]

Kermit, a Rose by any other name.

place the end of the handle upon the ball and grasp it with the thumb and finger of the left hand, and with a few smart strokes upon the mallet with the right hand, drive the ball down the full length of the handle


BTW
[size=200]There is no such thing as a Frizzen on a Flintlock.  So stop calling the Hammer a Frizzen.[/size]

 :rotf

[Uncle Russ]

And I have yet to drop or misplace my right thumb while reloading.

Geeesh, you ain't no fun.......Wish I could train my thumbs that well.  

Uncle Russ...

[Captchee]

i think  this comes down to who , what where and when .
 can we document what we know today as a  short starter ?
no i don’t believe we can .
 Buy the above information can we document a military  as advising the use of a hammer  that was duel functioned as a short starter .
Ohm ya , I don’t thing anyone can dispute that .as I have read German accounts that  describe much the same thing with patched conical  “ please don’t ask me to list them , it would take me  a very long time to find them “

 But can we  actually say that a frontiersman or farmer with a long rifle carried a hammer  to use as a short starter ?
 The documentation just isn’t there . If it is , its been lost and not as of yet  found .
 If it is found , can it be said to have been common . I don’t think we can  classify it  as common  with so many original  bags  and descriptions  not  including   a description.

 I have been fortunate enough to have  had the opportunity to shoot a hand forged  barrel  for many , many years now .
 I can tell you that if one is not careful, just the process of  cutting a patch at the muzzle , can mar the muzzle  .
  I to can load without  a short starter  and the barrel is not coned .
 But it requires a smaller ball . Its still very accurate  for hunting situations   by providing a 2 to 3 inch group .

 But if I want target accuracy from that  same load , I need a tighter fit ball which  I cannot load with my thumb .

 The softness of the muzzle  concerned me  greatly   after   owning the rifle    for a very short time . So much so that  I made a short starter specifically for that barrel .
  To do this , I used a elk horn cut so the small starting nub would be place in the pith of the horn .  With use , that area now has a  deep  area  surrounding the nub  which is  a dowel with a 9mm shell casing on top  to help protect it .
 Even with this I have to be careful or I  can mar the crown   or throw up a burr on a rifling .
 From this experience , I often look at the muzzles on original rifles . Not only looking for  coning but also to see if I can see any signs of what would appear to  me to be signs of the use of a short starter

 I know , its in conclusive but like Michael the  documentation is often conflicting

Case in point  riflemen  during the  revolutionary war  often did not stand and fight  like line troops ?/ why .
Well its said that  it was because their rifles did not carry the bayonet and they loaded much slower then a  musket .

 So do we not have to ask why they loaded slower ?
 I would think if the reason was  based around  not using pre loads , a remedy would have been  developed  IE preloads with patched round balls . Or simply loading  to a fouled barrel with no patch at all ??
 
So considering the consensuses that  the rifle was slower to load  then the musket , I think we have to ask why . Because frankly  when I thumb a pre  patched rb , I have no problems loading any  just as fast as  I can my smoothbore using  paper cartridges.

 But if I use my short starter .  I can only get  about ½ as many shots off in the same length of time  

So I often wonder if the answer to this age old question isn’t in  proving or disproving the short starter of some kind of tool that we can associate as being used as a short starter , but in finding out  why  the loading procedure for a rifle back the was slower then that of a musket ?
 I don’t know . But it sure is a fun topic to hash over now and then

[pathfinder]

Since I've been coning all my muzzles and going to a slightly smaller ball, one more thing eliminated from the pouch,along with the priming horn. Accuracy has not been affected at all,2 of my guns shoot better now.

[Sir Michael]

Good points Capt.  My line of thinking is that if you look at the number and type of MILITARY garb, equipment, tools, and weapons used today by modern shooters it can be extrapolated that farmers, hunters, trappers, and shooters in general also tried to emulate the military of the day and the premier military of the day were riflemen.

Regarding the employment of Riflemen, this same document has the following to say.

1 - Rifles should be equipped to mount a bayonet so they can defend themselves and/or conduct a close attack if necessary.

2 - Operate at a distance from the enemy so as to take advantage of the range and accuracy of the Rifle.  "The Rifle where the Musket begins or ends"

On another note, the slower loading speed of the rifle was dealt with in the British Army by issuing two different balls to units equipped with Rifles, 20/# for loose ball and powder loading and 22/# for cartridges and more rapid loading.

[flintlock62]

I have a picture of an antique late 1800's hunting pouch, and It has a short starter fixed to the outside.  It is about 6" long with a ball end.

[Captchee]

could you post that please .
 it would also be nice to be able to document that the  bag actually contained the short starter and that it was not  something that was added  years later Or that some museum  wrongly added to the accessories of the bag .
 Not uncommon for them to do

[cb]

Alvan Clark inventor of the false muzzle, describes the use of a short starter in 1841.

As to Frizzen - it all depends on date and place like so many other things. It's a Scots word and I found one use of it in 1858. This date fits with the time period when such changes in what were considered scatalogical terms during the "polite" Victorian era.
Cock was not considered an appropriate term and it became hammer during the early Victorina era. Thus the old "hammer" or steel had to change and became the frizzen (also frizzle or frizzel).

The problem with using "original" terms is they changed in usage over time and how was applied in 1776 was not necessarily how it was applied in 1830 or 1850 so IMO trying to "speak" in original tersm can confuse the issue because we're long past those eras and what was PC for one historical era may not be PC for another :
Firelock originally was applied to the matchlock, it later was applied to the fint lock.
Ball - while we think of it as being a round ball only, period sources also show it was applied to conicals. In an 1858 Colt advertisement the term was applied to both.
Caliber/calibre - originally a French term it was at first used interchangeably with gauge or balls to the pound - i.e a 20 caliber was the same as a 20 gauge. After conicals became the bullet to use caliber began to refer to the bore/groove diameter. In that same 1858 Colt add, they gave the "caliber" in three methods:
balls per pound - round ball
balls per pound - conicals
and last but not least bore diameter - i.e .375" for the 36 Navy