is this a RAMROD

[thinreadline]

Came across this the other day and wondered what it was . It is hardwood & 90 cm long with a diameter of 9 cm ( 3.5 inches ) at the fatter end . At the thinner end it has a brass female screw section which obviously takes another pole section . Weighs 2 kg. There are no markings that I can discern.

[fernando]

Hi Richmond,
Thinking out loud ...
This is hardly a ramrod, guessing by the parameters you give.
If it has 90 cms. lenght and the female screw suggests a second section, this would make it too long, unless if it were for a long gun (cannon) which is out of question.
If on the other hand, the thread is not for an extension but for applying a cleaning or extracting device, you still have to odd details to consider; its considerable 2 Kgs. weight and the sturdy diameter of its grip, suggesting it not to be for raming with your fingers but for turning it with one or two hands.
But again, i may be talking nonsense .

[Matchlock]

Hi Richmond,


This definitely is a 19th century ramrod, and, as the thickened grip denotes, it also acted as a muzzle plug; ramrods of that type were primarily used on shooting ranges.

The threaded iron finial (German: eiserner Setzerkopf mit Innengewinde) should show traces of copper or brass welding over its length, and is geared up to receive small tools for cleaning the barrel, like a scourer, or to extract a ball with the help of a worm.
Such iron finials on wooden ramrods have been in use for at least 500 years, and right up to the late 19th century.

Please see attachments of such finials for various little tools to screw in, on 16th century matchlock muskets in the Graz Armory in Styria, Austria, where those tools still are preserved in the 'patch' boxes of the buttstocks!, and on some wheellock pistols.
I also attached an early 16th century drawing, from the Löffeholz ms., '#2' - this being my own temporary assignment) - , obviously authored in either Nuremberg, or possibly Swabia, in about 1520-30; and depicting a wooden ramrod with an iron finial to both ends, together with various tools to screw in.
Furthermore attached are images of an incredible number of those rare 16th to 17th century worms and scourers in my collection, some scourers even being combined with a turnscrew!

Now please don't expect me to explain, let alone prove how that might have worked, both possibly and actually - especially when that little tool was screwed to the short iron finial of a wooden ramrod that was at least 120 cm long. For that was the average length of a wooden ramrod for a 'military' long gun of the late Renaissance period of ca. 1600 - like a matchlock or wheellock musket ...
Furthermore, may I impress you with the fact that an average musket of that period was about 160 to 170 centimeters (63 to 67 in.) long, meaning a - usually attuned - barrel/ramrod length of about 126 to 135 cm (ca. 50 to 53 in.)!


Have fun studying!
Best,
Michael

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi Richmond,
Thinking out loud ...
This is hardly a ramrod, guessing by the parameters you give.
If it has 90 cms. lenght and the female screw suggests a second section, this would make it too long, unless if it were for a long gun (cannon) which is out of question.
If on the other hand, the thread is not for an extension but for applying a cleaning or extracting device, you still have to odd details to consider; its considerable 2 Kgs. weight and the sturdy diameter of its grip, suggesting it not to be for raming with your fingers but for turning it with one or two hands.
But again, i may be talking nonsense .

Thanks for your reply Fernando , but why do you say 'out of the question' for a cannon ?
Richmond

[thinreadline]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Hi Richmond,


This definitely is a 19th century ramrod, and, as the thickened grip denotes, it also acted as a muzzle plug; ramrods of that type were primarily used on shooting ranges.

The threaded iron finial (German: eiserner Setzerkopf mit Innengewinde) should show traces of copper or brass welding over its length, and is geared up to receive small tools for cleaning the barrel, like a scourer, or to extract a ball with the help of a worm.
Such iron finials on wooden ramrods have been in use for at least 500 years, and right up to the late 19th century.

Please see attachments of such finials for various little tools to screw in, on 16th century matchlock muskets in the Graz Armory in Styria, Austria, in the Herresgeschtliches Museum Vienna (Army Museum), and on some wheellock pistols.
I also attached an early 16th century drawing of a wooden ramrod with two iron finials finials, together with various tools to screw in, as well as images of many 16th century worms and scourers in my collection, some scourers even combined with a turnscrew.


Have fun studying!
Best,
Michael

Thank you Michael , most interesting and very helpful
Richmond

[thinreadline]

Hi Michael , probably my stupidity but I cannot see the attachments you mention in your reply .

[fernando]

Hi Michl,
Can you expand your explanation some further ?
... Or illustrate it with specific examples ?
Considering the length of this device as having 90 cms, we may assume the thinner section has some 50 cms and the thick part the balance 40 cms. To my ignorant eyes the first is too short for a (soulder gun) barrel rod and the second too long and sturdy (9 cms) for a muzzle plug.
I can easy assimilate that, the brass (not iron) threaded part makes sense for the application of cleaners or extractors (as i previously noted), but the whole ensemble makes me puzzled .
Looking at the superb pictures you posted, i still don't get it; maybe i am blocked ... wouldn't be surprised


Richmond, what is the thickness of the thin section ?

.

[Matchlock]

Hi Richmond,


I'm sure you are able to see them now! p


Please do understand that it often even takes me hours to find all the apt photos out of my 280,000 plus photo archive ...
So my attachments my be late at times.

Attached below find the images of my ample collection of 16th and 17th worms and scourers.


Best,
Michael

[fernando]

Originally Posted by thinreadline

Thanks for your reply Fernando , but why do you say 'out of the question' for a cannon ?
Richmond

Wouldn't a cannon ramrod have different features; like being an entire crude piece and not split in two parts ?
Also in artillery rammers, it is the thick end that goes into the gun muzzle; you hold the shaft by the thinner plain part... no metals envolved.

[Marcus den toom]

I don't believe either that this tool is for a cannon.
It would be very impractical to use a tool that has to be screwed on and of and changed several times for every shot.
A cannon is a long distance weapon, which was shot more often than a normal musket during battle (it is ussually easier to load a weapon when you are not fired at !!) Cannons beeing out of range for most of the battle, they where relatively save i assume.. eventhough they would be targeted as well when possible.

Coming back to my first point, the cannon would be shot using a ramrod (1), cleaned (2) and in the case of a falconet or small caliber cannon, you might also get the ball out again (3)

So if such a rod would exist of 2 parts, you would constanly be changing.. which makes no sence when all you want to do is pound the guts out of some people a few hundred yards away.


Attached is an artillery cleaning rod, most likely american revolution (about 8feet long, roughly 180cm).

[fernando]

If your device were a ram/cleaning rod, the existing threaded end would be to extend a second (and even a third) section and then a final threaded end, often narrower than the sectional ones, would be for the application of a male extraction worm, a cleaning brush or other.
Still the dimension of the so called grip in yours would be too big for the operation.
Something doesn't square here, or this is an atypical specimen, at least to my non experienced eyes.
Attached are examples of 20th century shotgun kits and a replica of a 19th century pistol rod, some time shortened.
Your device, far from being an ancient accouterment, should be comparable to these, i guess .

.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Marcus den toom

...Attached is an artillery cleaning rod, most likely american revolution (about 8feet long, roughly 180cm)...

And here is a sketch of the whole set:

.

[Matchlock]

Hi, Nando and Marcus,

Sometimes, I too, find it hard to believe that these worms on wooden ramrods actually should have worked and extracted a lead ball without the wood breaking; they are called ball extractors in contemporary documents though, and in my collection are one or two leaden balls that show holes where the worm entered.
We also know that by the early 17th century, musketeers were ordered to extract the ball and powder load from their muskets after keeping watch, and they definitely did not have iron ramrods ...

Best,
Michael

[fernando]

Lead is soft. And the cannon and musket balls, before the advent of rifled barrels, had a diameter narrower than the barrel bore (windage), so the friction is reduced when extracting them. Also the pulling action may be done in a rotating mode, which also helps a lot the ball to come out without much fight and without risking to break the rod which, in any case, must be made of the hardest woods ... ebony for one.
Eventually in the cannon case and even if iron balls are used, i realize that what you extract with the worm is the wad (plug); the ball rolls out by itself, once you incline the gun.
It looks as i know the slightest thing about this issue

[thinreadline]

Marcus and Fernando ... appreciate your input , however the dimensions of this item are perfectly feasible for a cannon . At no point was I thinking that it was a ramrod for a handgun ! That would of course be absurd !
The fact that this is just half of the rod is not impossible either. The rest of the pole would not have to be screwed on and off between shots .... I think it is more probable that it unscrewed to reduce its length for stowage when NOT in use.

[fernando]

No Richmond, this ougth to be something but not a cannon ramrod.
That thick part would have to be the front, whereas it has all ingredients to be in the back, namely a grip. You don't have a rammer with a rounded head and even with that little portrusion, all so much in the shape of a handle.
Also the brass connection is not adequate for a cannon rammer, unless you were talking about some contemporaneous miniature/replica.

-

[thinreadline]

yes I see your point Fernando ...