James Butler Hickok

Status
Not open for further replies.
After "Wild Bill" was murdered the story goes, a S&W #2 .32RF revolver was found on his body. Then when he was buried, it and his rifle were buried with him.

Over time, the gravesite was vandalized by souvenir hunters, so Bill's remains were dug up and moved. At the time the rifle and revolver were recovered. Historians were able to confirm the rifle's association because they found a picture of Hickok with an identical gun. Without consequential evidence they presumed that under the circumstances the revolver was also genuine. I'm not sure, but I believe it's now in the Autry museum in L.A. or a museum in Deadwood.

At the time the revolver and rifle were recovered the serial numbers on both were recorded. They're could be counterfeits, but it would be hard to make one that wouldn't be detected.

Given that he was no longer a peace officer and reputed to be going blind, the .32 would be a practical choice if he had to defend himself across a card table. Obviously nothing would have saved him when he was shot in the back.
 
Perhaps the guns were loaded with the cylinders removed from the frame, like some of the pocket model open tops.

In any case, I quoted that passage because it said "holsters", not "sash".
 
After "Wild Bill" was murdered the story goes, a S&W #2 .32RF revolver was found on his body. Then when he was buried, it and his rifle were buried with him.

Over time, the gravesite was vandalized by souvenir hunters, so Bill's remains were dug up and moved. At the time the rifle and revolver were recovered. Historians were able to confirm the rifle's association because they found a picture of Hickok with an identical gun. Without consequential evidence they presumed that under the circumstances the revolver was also genuine. I'm not sure, but I believe it's now in the Autry museum in L.A. or a museum in Deadwood.

At the time the revolver and rifle were recovered the serial numbers on both were recorded. They're could be counterfeits, but it would be hard to make one that wouldn't be detected.

Given that he was no longer a peace officer and reputed to be going blind, the .32 would be a practical choice if he had to defend himself across a card table. Obviously nothing would have saved him when he was shot in the back.
 
His attire was generally that of the Mississippi steamboat gambler--a long-tailed cutaway coat of dark cloth; wide blue trousers, narrow at the bottom; a fancy vest; high-heeled boots with taps under the trousers; a leather belt with two white-handled cap and ball Colts
Click to expand...

Hickok, 1869, in street attire with belt and holsters.

attachment.php


Hickok. 1873-74, in stage costume for Buffalo Bill’s Wild West, wearing belt without holsters and with knife.

attachment.php


Images from Buffalo Bill’s Wild West: An American Legend, and The Peacemakers: Arms and Adventure in the American West, by R.L Wilson.
 

Attachments

  • Hickok 1869.jpeg
    Hickok 1869.jpeg
    45.1 KB · Views: 406
  • Hickok 1874 2.jpeg
    Hickok 1874 2.jpeg
    49.6 KB · Views: 392
44 Dave... your strategy at the table is all wrong. Keep your guns out of sight when wanting to start a card game. Wait until there's a lot of money on the table and then "call" while reaching for the trigger(s) on your double barreled coach gun mounted below. You'll still have the same problem with nobody wanting to play with you, but. "You'll have also won the pot by then!" :D
 
As I understand it, the location of only one revolver of the pair is known. That would be the Autry Museum in L.A. However I wouldn't be surprised if on occasion it wasn't loaned to the museum at Cody WY.
Click to expand...

I dont know about the Autry museum, though the Cody museum has a pair of Colts Navy pistols, both attributed to Hickok. I had pics of them, they were there for several years that I know of, and at the same time others were talking about seeing one of his guns at the Autry museum. As mentioned earlier, there was more than one occasion he was known to have been given guns, including Colts Navy pistols, so the claims of authenticity arent neccesarily mutually exclusive. There was a floral carved holster with the pistols at Cody. One of the guns had a small dovetail front sight (not the first I've seen on old percussion Colts, for front or rear). I guessed that it may be to keep both guns hitting to the same point of aim. Perhaps one front sight was damaged or lost and that was what was available for local gunsmithing to get it up again, who knows.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0062.jpg
    IMG_0062.jpg
    178.4 KB · Views: 88
Last edited:
Some of those photos show pretty well how he got the moniker "Duck Bill", which later was changed to "Wild Bill" when he proved a bit dangerous to friend and foe alike.

Jim
 
have read somany accounts that indicatedBill used many revolvers, but he is best known forusing a .36 cal, Cap a d Ball Colt Navy model as his primary gunfighting and Killing guns.
I wish I knew why he chose the .36 Navy over the more powerful Army models?
Perhaps it's all stories, as he evidently was carrying a larg caliber cartrige revolver at his death.
I like the preformance of the .36. low recoil. high velocity and apparent eep penetration. From accounts from the Civil War, it was very effective and deadly!
Admittedly, the 44 is a more powerful revolver and no doubt more effective yet!
So what's the truth about the .36? Was it Wild Bills favorite? Is it as good as history has portrayed it or was it just more available and preformed well enough?
I sure wous like to know more about the .36 Navy!
Please teach me if you can?
Thanks ZVP
 
i've fired a cap n ball 36 navy. it was just a cheap knock off, but was very accurate at 10 yards.
it didn't kick much so you could get off a second shot fast. since he was a precision shooter he may have liked quick follow up shots that were accurate.
i've never fired a bigger caliber cap n ball so i really don't know it they had enow recoil to slow down follow up shots, but i'm guessing they were slower.
 
I have fired both the 1860 and the Improved Navy, the 1861. There is no recoil with the 61 and only a small bit with the 1860. Both with full charges of powder and round ball.

I would say it was personal choice that led him to carry the 1851s when he did. He was known to have lots of handguns throughout his life. When he got down on his luck he would get rid of them and buy additional when he was able.

Supposedly, he was carrying some sort of cartridge Colts when he went to deadwood.

Kevin
 
I've read posts here--anecdotal evidence only--that some cosidered the .36's to penetrate deeper, and thus possibly be better "killers" in the right situation.
 
I'd say nearly all pictures of that era were posed and with the western novels being all the rage and guys like Hickok having a reputation and those without wanting to get one pretty much everyone embellished themselves in on way or another.
Horseback is not a smooth way to travel and those who carried guns and sharp things likely did so in a way that they could be kept track of just like today.
 
I've read posts here--anecdotal evidence only--that some cosidered the .36's to penetrate deeper, and thus possibly be better "killers" in the right situation
Click to expand...

I dont know if one can say the 36 was necessarily "better" than a 44 percussion load, but, like today, concerning the 9mm vs 40-45 discussion, many may simply have felt it was quite enough to get the job done, liked the particular guns better, shot them well, (or even better, being a bit milder to shoot) and its what was easily available.

Keith wrote about the percussion guns in his book Sixguns. He refered to some civil war vets he knew when young, and their comments generally ran to the 36's working fairly well, even commenting that they felt they worked better than the early round nose 38 spl loads. The blunt soft lead round ball bullets seeming to give better results than the harder RN 38 spl loads. On larger animals and horses, the larger caliber percusssion guns gave better results, particularly the Dragoons. On people sized work, the 36's seemed to work well enough.
 
In a practical sense, were I back in those wild and wooly days with my current cap&ball revolvers, I'd favor the .44s, as they are proving much more accurate, and shoot much tighter. My only .36 is shooting much looser groups, but plenty fine as a backup pistol, say carried behind the back.
I too have read of the .36 penetrating better, but that may be in limited circumstances?
It would be a good test to compare the two calibers, from otherwise identical revolvers, shot into ballistic gelatin, and perhaps into a pig carcasse. :cool:
 
There was a written account of an instance in Wyoming in the 1850s. The writer came upon other soldiers that had shot a grizzly a number of times with their 36 cal pistols. It wasnt convinced of its mortality yet. He shot it twice with his Dragoon and ended it. When they skinned the bear, they found the 36 cal balls didnt penetrate past the fat layer, the 44 Dragoon balls didnt have a problem getting in where needed. The Dragoons were also used some for running buffalo on horseback.
 
i've read about grizzlies not going down to repeating civil war rifles too. 44s i think.
not sure if best for bears means best for people.
maybe it does but i don't know.
 
I watched it again and didn't catch him saying it was 2F. At. An average of 900 fps I'd assume it to be 3F. I'd also say it's certainly not standard Goex powder either.
 
From Kansapedia, just the left side of a Photo taken at Ft. Harker in 1867 with WI\ild Bill on the far left:
N94etP.jpg

Ron
 
The .36 caliber was often used by the Navy and was called the "Navy caliber" which is why .36 caliber revolvers were often called "Navy revolvers." The Army preferred a larger caliber since soldiers often had to shoot horses (no "humane societies" in those days) and the .44 did a better job. Consequently, the .44 was called the "Army caliber", and guns in that caliber were called "Army revolvers." In reality, both calibers were used by both services.

(In the movies, riders are "shot" and fall off the horse. In the old day, soldiers were trained to shoot the horse, it being a bigger target, plus a horse with a bullet in him was uncontrollable and would not only throw his rider but would flail around and break up a cavalry formation.)

Jim
 
Rodwha it in the description underneath the video. You have to expand it with the 'show more' button. Regular GOEx 2Fg powder. That's pretty high velocity for 2Fg.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

J
  • Locked
Hickok, Tutt and Wikipedia
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
BHP FAN
B
S
  • Locked
Wild Bill Hickok
2
Replies
47
Views
5K
Old Fuff
O
J
  • Locked
Guns Are Not a Magic Talisman
2 3
Replies
73
Views
5K
ProficientRifleman
P
Crawdad1
  • Locked
Good book for the Colt bp revolver and Sharps rifle guys.
Replies
8
Views
667
witchhunter
W
M
  • Locked
Hickock VS Dave Tutt-Less BS than you might guess.
Replies
7
Views
2K
mec
M
Back
Top