The gun that really won the West.

[James K]

The gun that really won the west was not the Winchester 73 or the Colt Single Action Army, or even the carbines of the cavalry.

The gun that really won the West was the .45-70 trapdoor rifle, carried by long lines of the low-paid, ill-fed, ill-clothed and footsore infantry who manned the Western forts, guarded the railroads, and marched long distances in blistering heat and freezing cold to put down Indian uprisings. They rounded up the "hostiles", guarded the reservations and kept the lid on while the more glamorous cavalry got the publicity and the glory.

Jim

 

[Hafoc]

...or perhaps the Hall Breechloader. IIRC that was standard US Army issue during the Mexican-American War. You could say that was when the West was won-- or lost, depending on which side of the border you prefer.

 

[Pointer]

The Minutemen with George Washington and the other Founding Fathers won the west with squirrel guns.

Dan'l Boon and John Coon and Davy Crockett won "the west" with the Kentucky long rifles...

And then Mountain men like Hugh Glass and Jim Bridger and John Johnson (Of Jeremiah fame) won the "mountain west" with the short barreled Hawkin 30's and 50's.

Thomas Jefferson bought the Louisiana territory from Napoleon... he didn't even use a gun for that.

The Texicans like Sam Houston and Travis and Crockett and Bowie took Texas from Mexico and began the winning of the south west...

And then Lewis and Clark won the north west...

And then the pioneers won the west...

And the Pony Express riders... (Bill Cody)

And the buffalo hunters like Bill Cody and Rail Roaders...

And Wyatt and Bat and Wild Bill and Tom Horn and Chism and Texas Cattle trail Cowboys...

Then the High Wall and the Sharps...

And then maybe the Trap-door and the Cavalry showed up to claim the fame (Like Custer)...

And some time after that came the Henry 44 and the Peacemaker and the Winchester 73... And the west had finally run out of glory hounds claiming to have carried the guns that won the west...

Not to be argumentative, but looking deep inside yourselves... does anybody really give a damn?

 

[johnrtse]

Heck, I always thought it was the SHOTGUN that won the West.

Without a doubt, It was the most prevelant weapon in the US at that time.

 

[4V50 Gary]

It wasn't guns wielded by soldiers, frontiersmen, cowboys or even the buffalo hunters. It was hoof & mouth that killed the buffalo. Nowadays, we should forsake our beef and eat buffalo instead. Lower fat and better for you too.

 

[TexiCali Slim]

I thought Influenza blankets won the west

 

[Father Knows Best]

Good point, Jim. Have you read Forty Miles a Day On Beans and Hay? If not, I highly recommend it. It's all about life in the Army during the Indian Wars.

 

[sundance44s]

sundance44s

If we could bring Custer back .. i bet he would say the Henry won the west where he stood .

 

[Gewehr98]

Influenza or smallpox?

I thought Influenza blankets won the west

One source of the smallpox blanket legend:

The only documented case of smallpox blankets being given to Indians was by Captain Eucyer of the British army. I challenge anyone to offer documented proof, except for the two blankets given out by Captain Ecuyer at Fort Pitt, of smallpox infected blankets being deliberately given to Indians as a means of spreading smallpox. Letters by General Amherst and Colonel Bouquet mentioning spreading smallpox to Indians does not mean that this was ever carried out. Assumptions derived from letters and oral traditions are not proof of anything.

In a letter (1763) to Colonel Bouquet, Lord Amherst wrote, "Could it not be contrived to send the Small Pox among those disaffected tribes of Indians? We must on this occasion use every stratagem in our power to reduce them".

Bouquet replied that he would try and use infected blankets as a means of introducing the disease among the Indians, but was wary of the effects that it would have on his own men...at least twenty-five percent or more of Bouquet's soldiers would have been susceptible to the smallpox virus.

a www.thefurtrapper.com link

Heading to Ruby Tuesday's tonight - they serve Bison Burgers, yum!

 

[TexiCali Slim]

well that explaines smallpox but what about influenza?

 

[Ironbarr]

sundance44s...

If we could bring Custer back .. i bet he would say the Henry won the west where he stood .

Where he stood?? I believe, where (and while) he was standing, that he'd moan and groan, bi$%$ing that the Henry had too many FTF's and stovepipes and were dust, horse manure, loose feathers and other elemental unmentionables, maintenenace-unfriendly.

Maybe what he needed were Gatlings or M-16's... or maybe a different plan of attack, huh?

 

[Missoura Don]

So no ones gonna mention the deringer huh??..Ok..I will..

 

[Old Dragoon]

I keep hearing that Cusater had Gatling guns, but he left them as they were too heavy and too ungainly and he thought he didn't need them. They weren't and he did.

Don't know if the story is true, but I keep hearing it every now and then.

 

[sundance44s]

sundance44s

Yep heard that story too just the other night on the history ch. Custard just didn`t think he would need the gatlins .. he didn`t know the indians had been hording the Henrys and winchesters just for a good chance to up rise ... the indians didn`t let up with their repeaters , Custards men with their single shots just didn`t have a chance . The Gatlin gun could have been a huge factor in the out come of that one .

 

[SIGSHR]

I would like to know more about "the Gun that Won the West." The Colt
SAA was introduced in 1873, I recall reading that Wild Bill Hickock carried
Colt Navies, Smith & Wesson was filling their contracts for the Tsar and few
S&Ws were sold on the civilian market. The Henry and Winchesters fired fairly
low powered catridges, the brass cartridge as we know it was fairly new and
still being developed. Hazarding a guess, I would say that outisde the Army
most Westerners used muzzleloaders till say 1880 or so.

 

[Steve499]

I'm sure there were muzzle loaders in substantial use until a lot later than the 1880s. My great uncle used a percussion Colt .36 for rabbits until the 1930s, and Elmer Keith talks about their use well into the 20th century. That being said, I don't think you can overestimate the lengths and expense a person of that era was willing to go to in order to obtain the very latest in firearms technology. Entire units during the Civil War equipped themselves at their own expense with Henry rifles at a staggering cost compared to what they made. When the Peacemaker first came out, I think it sold for around the equivalent of a month's wages for the average Joe. I believe I'd be willing to fork over a month's wages today for the equivalent technology leap, say an M-16 or Glock compared to a Peacemaker or trapdoor Springfield, if I was going to be where I might have to fight Indians or defend against bands of outlaws.

Steve