Being a resident of western Pa I have a section of Braddocks Road that passes within a half mile of where I live in Fayette Co. and one of the camps (Jacobs cabin/Camp ) is only a mile or so away also Braddocks grave is also close by . I started thinking about the possible rifles that were used on both sides of the conflict My weak google skills have only got me that both sides used muskets ?? yes I know..... what can anyone tell me what models specifically? I assume that Braddock and his troops used the Brown Bess ? So what were the French /Indian side of it armed with ? there seems there are a few French arms made during that time frame that possible could have been used .
Thanks,Tim
This is an old post, but I'm new here....So what the hell.
For the British/Colonial forces, the most commonly carried longarm by the infantry regulars would have been the Brown Bess Long Land Pattern. This was the 46" barreled .75 caliber smoothbore, bayoneted Bess that had been in use in the British infantry since the 1720s. Brass furniture and wooden ramrod. By the time of the Battle of the Monongehela (Braddock's Road) the dragoons would probably have been issued some of the Short Land Patterns as well - same musket, just shortened by 4 inches. These did not show up in the British infantry ranks until after the F&I War, just before the American Rebellion.
The colonial militia marching with Braddock, and their handful of Mingo allies/guides (there were less than 10), would have had a mixture of cast-off English Besses, trade guns, and American longrifles of the period, most likely in the .50 caliber range, though larger or smaller calibers are possible. Bayonets were not likely for any of the military arms. And while the colonials would have had access to regular infantry munitions more freely, anyone armed with a rifle would have access to powder but were on their own for properly calibered rounds. There would also have been a free mixture of hatchets/hawks and knives, traditional frontier weapons.
While the colonials were considered "militia", they were mainly farmers and shopkeepers that were serving their obligation to the crown to force back French incursions into the Ohio Valley. The militia's purpose was a pool of volunteers for quick/emergency activation to repel invasion until the British regular forces would arrive, so their use in offensive strategy in the F&I war was inconsistent and (to George Washington) frustrating. They were not paid soldiers, and were not trained as the regulars were.
As to the French, the small number of regular infantry (Troupes de la Marine) under Captain Beaujeu (from Fort Duquesne) engaged in the Wilderness would have been armed with the Charleville Model 1728. Smoothbore, .69 caliber, 46 inch barrel, bayonet. The one in use by this time would have had some minor improvements such as iron ramrods, some flint pan improvements and maybe minor flint cock design improvements.
The Indians allied with the French formed the bulk of Beaujeu's force in the fight. They consisted of Ottowa, Iroquois, Huron, Delaware, Shawnee and Miami natives, and would have been armed with a mixture of infantry Charlevilles, trade guns, long rifles and perhaps even some cast-off Brown Besses that were floating around the continent, in addition to their traditional hawks and knives. Bayonets would not have been employed. Bows and arrows may have been present, but by this time the Native military allies would have been well armed with firearms through trade and the "gifting" programs designed and utilized by the French (and later, the English) to curry favor with the native population and gain allies.
There were a small number of French/Canadian militia involved - mainly from the fort. They would have most likely been armed with a mixture of Charlevilles (without bayonet) and long rifles common to the area.
Hope that helps.
Rich
I don't think the Iriquois were ever allied with the French.They hated the Hurons and very nearly wiped them all out.
Actually there were some with the French at Monongahela, or so the accounts say, before the English decided to start trying to woo natives into their camp - mainly to deny them to the French. The French had really plied all the nations with goods and gifts - especially since they lacked manpower to field significant regular infantry and needed allies. But you are right in that the Iroquois maintained independence for most of the war from both sides; they came to depend on the English in Albany for material goods, but were no friend of the Huron or the French by mid-war.
But like all the Indian relationships with the contestants during that war, everything was complicated, inconsistent and arbitrary, combining internecine squabbles and rivalries and outright hatred with gifts, promises of greater freedoms and less restraint for land from both sides; neither of which did (or would have) come through for them.
Yes that was an older post and thank you for replying I very much enjoyed the history lesson
Thank you , Tim
The beauty of it is there is no such thing as an old post around here - anyone is free to dredge up all older posts and breath new life into them... unless they are locked by admins of course.