42nd F&I War Weapons

[MacRob]

Have to weigh in on the firearms you are reviewing, understanding your initial questions were about swords and dirks. Those questions have been answered I believe. Incidentally the GGG regimental sword is a good choice but, as Luke said it should be a back sword, which was what was issued to the privates. This sword is mild steel so keep that in mind.

As far as pistols, the Murdoch is the wrong choice for more than one reason. The only two pistols that were actually issued to the Highland Regiments were, as far as I know, the John Waters produced pistol, made in London and the Isaac Bissell pistol from Birmingham. MVT provides a copy of the Bissell, which is a better choice from an aesthetic standpoint. However, as Orvis points out, the quality of these guns is suspect. They are made in India and no, they are not proofed. Further, I would not fire a proof load in one of them for a million dollars! I have one of the Murdochs which I got from MVT and no powder has ever gone down the barrel. It is a wall hanger. The best thing would be, if you can find one, a Waters pistol. These guns were made in Italy and England, prior to the Bi-centennial and afterward. They may still be made, I do not know. I have one. The pistol, if it were not for the Italian proofs and maker’s name, would visually pass muster as an original. However, the stock is cast when the originals were hammered out of thin sheets of bronze over a mandrel. The lock is a Highland lock, like the original and works well. The lock on my Murdoch has a very heavy mainspring and eats flints. It does not spark well and the half cock notch is in the wrong location - I cannot close the priming pan all the way with the lock at half cock. All this is moot, however, if your regiment has a requirement that you be armed otherwise.

One clarification to Luke’s post regarding firearms. The term carbine in that era referred to a shorter and lighter musket, of a smaller caliber than the Long Land Pattern, i.e. Brown Bess. These muskets were not short, like we think of carbines these days but they were shorter. Few of them were rifled but at one point, the best marksmen in the Black Watch were issued rifled carbines.

Hope this helps. The F&I War is a fascinating subject.

[JMorganKuberry]

The brass pistol was my first choice but as near as I can tell no one sells them anymore.

I ordered a MTV RHR pistol but a local unit says they prefer people to carry the Murdoch so I changed my order. This was back in March. Now I am reading on here that MTV guns are dangerous to use and I'm considering canceling my order and eating the 20% cancellation fee. I'd like to at least take my flintlock pistol to a firing range a couple times. Can anyone provide a link to someone that sells a safe Murdoch or regimental issue pistol?

I don't actually have a regiment unit to join in the typical sense. I have three friendly units around(ish) that I can fall in with and one that identify myself with on paper. But I'm effectively starting a unit of one.

My choices for musket at this point, all from Loyalist Arms in Canada, are basically a long land pattern, or a LLP with cut down barrel, or an artillery carbine.

The Gedney one is supposedly a backsword made in the issue style but not picture is on his site of it. http://gggodwin-com.3dcartstores.com...449_p_716.html He has not yet replied to a request for clarification.

[MacRob]

The brass pistol was my first choice but as near as I can tell no one sells them anymore.

I ordered a MTV RHR pistol but a local unit says they prefer people to carry the Murdoch so I changed my order. This was back in March. Now I am reading on here that MTV guns are dangerous to use and I'm considering canceling my order and eating the 20% cancellation fee. I'd like to at least take my flintlock pistol to a firing range a couple times. Can anyone provide a link to someone that sells a safe Murdoch or regimental issue pistol?

I cannot say, nor will I say, that all these pistols are dangerous. My comment concerned the one that I own and have been able to examine carefully over a period of time. All the "Murdoch" pistols on the market currently are made in India by several companies. Some may be better than others but I, personally, would not fire any of these guns with ball. They have not been proofed, the metallurgy is uncertain as are the construction methods. Some people have owned and shot these guns for years without issue, others have had problems. The decision is yours.

As far as the authenticity of the Murdoch...it really is not. The stock is clunky, the rams horns are too big. It has none of the graceful lines of the originals. The lock is not a Highland Lock. The trigger does not resemble any trigger I have seen on an original Scottish all metal pistol and I have seen a lot of them. The overall appearance of the pistol is just not authentic. I think you can say it sort of resembles a Scottish pistol but that is the best I can do, at least.

Good luck in your search. By the way, when the Scottish regiments got to America and found out they would be fighting in dense forests, they began to shed equipment and alter their uniforms. By the end of the war, the average soldier preferred a musket and bayonet over the pistol, sword and dirk, which was reported to HQ by their officers in the field. In 1776 they were told to turn in their swords and pistols and apparently most did so willingly. Officers retained these weapons, of course.

[Luke MacGillie]

I cannot say, nor will I say, that all these pistols are dangerous. My comment concerned the one that I own and have been able to examine carefully over a period of time. All the "Murdoch" pistols on the market currently are made in India by several companies. Some may be better than others but I, personally, would not fire any of these guns with ball. They have not been proofed, the metallurgy is uncertain as are the construction methods. Some people have owned and shot these guns for years without issue, others have had problems. The decision is yours.

As far as the authenticity of the Murdoch...it really is not. The stock is clunky, the rams horns are too big. It has none of the graceful lines of the originals. The lock is not a Highland Lock. The trigger does not resemble any trigger I have seen on an original Scottish all metal pistol and I have seen a lot of them. The overall appearance of the pistol is just not authentic. I think you can say it sort of resembles a Scottish pistol but that is the best I can do, at least.

Good luck in your search. By the way, when the Scottish regiments got to America and found out they would be fighting in dense forests, they began to shed equipment and alter their uniforms. By the end of the war, the average soldier preferred a musket and bayonet over the pistol, sword and dirk, which was reported to HQ by their officers in the field. In 1776 they were told to turn in their swords and pistols and apparently most did so willingly. Officers retained these weapons, of course.

My India made Murdoch has a ground down carriage bolt as a breech plug.......One of the guys in the unit makes new breech plugs for those that wish to drill the toucholes and shoot, but pretty much only blanks. The DOM tubing that is used for the barrels on these is not precision made tubing, there are wide variances on the ID, so accuracy is more like minute of planet, vs minute of angle.

As to the use of traditional weapons in the Highland Regiments here in North America, It was in many ways regiment and culture dependant.

The 77th, and later 42nd being made up of folks that did not grow up in the Highland martial tradition were quick to discard swords and pistols as they simply did not know how to employ them properly. These units also also were quick to adopt things like little kilts and leggings. The 78th on the other hand, was a much more traditional unit. They practiced sword fighting, banned the use of little kilts on duty, used leggings and mocs only when on snowshoes in the winter and pretty much were a throwback to the old Highland ways.

[IsaacW]

The 78th on the other hand, was a much more traditional unit. They practiced sword fighting, banned the use of little kilts on duty, used leggings and mocs only when on snowshoes in the winter and pretty much were a throwback to the old Highland ways.

And of course you need to remind me of this and make me more and more intrigued by the 78th!

[JMorganKuberry]

I am not planning in carrying all of the weapons all of the time. But I am looking for one example of each and generally striving for typicality. Ie, if God plucked a random member of a Highland regiment from North America on a random date in the war, what musket is he most statistically likely to be carrying?

The reasoning behind the Murdochs that I have heard is, prior to the 'royal' designation, pistols were not issued at all, but some of the company officers are known to have bought lots of civilian pistols to issue to their own men in the earlier part of the war. Dunno if it's true but, that's it.

[Luke MacGillie]

I am not planning in carrying all of the weapons all of the time. But I am looking for one example of each and generally striving for typicality. Ie, if God plucked a random member of a Highland regiment from North America on a random date in the war, what musket is he most statistically likely to be carrying?

The reasoning behind the Murdochs that I have heard is, prior to the 'royal' designation, pistols were not issued at all, but some of the company officers are known to have bought lots of civilian pistols to issue to their own men in the earlier part of the war. Dunno if it's true but, that's it.

There are a few of the Bissel's that look to have been marked HR on the top of the barrel, and then in an obvious different hand had added an "R" to the marking.

As to pistols and swords its all time/place dependant. What was the practice in 1743, was no longer the practice in 1756.... Far to often "Facts" are taken way out of context to justify modern reenactor practices that simply make it easier.

I have a rather jaded view of reenacting, and reenactors, based on a lifetime in the hobby, so I feel I have the right to say that reenactors will almost invariably make the wrong choice if presented with a choice.

[OC Richard]

I am...generally striving for typicality.

This is music to my ears.

I did various kinds of re-enacting back in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and the bane of much of it was people doing the opposite, going for the outliers and oddities. Even if an outlier is fact-based, it violates the principle of typicality.

So on a local Civil War battlefield maybe a quarter of the Union troops were dressed the way that 99% of actual Civil War Union troops were dressed.

The strangest was, if I remember the cockamamie story correctly, a unit that captured a circus train and dressed in top hats, tailcoats, and all sorts of outlandish clothes.