Witchcraft...

[andy_e]

OK - lets get Bushcraft recognised as a Religion - religious obrervance is one accepted reason for carrying an edged tool!
Sorted!

Hehehe - absolutely

 

[sandbender]

OK - lets get Bushcraft recognised as a Religion - religious obrervance is one accepted reason for carrying an edged tool!
Sorted!

It'll end in tears, the first schism, the church or Ray vs the church of Bear with the agnostics caught in the middle....

The older faith, the church of Mors will weather the storm...

 

[andy_e]

I can picture it now The Church of the Latter Day Strouds railing against the Friction Fire Methodists.

 

[firemaker]

With some others, I have been searching for societies that still use and make the fire piston. Our researches show the earliest written record of the fire compression effect to be in De Litteria Expeditione per Pontificam Ditionem published in Rome 1755.

And the author of that book recalls seeing his first fire piston in 1747.

As for fire pistons and magic….There are many today who think there are “secrets” in making a fire piston. I would not find it to be farfetched that some might believe that the fire piston was some sort of heresy 200 years ago.

As anyone here who has done leg work in fire piston history research, you will find that this information is hard to come by. It is random information such as this that has gained us leads to answers to questions of the curious lost history of this tool. If not, in other languages we can search other references for more details as we go along that might gain more insight.

Witchcraft may have been made legal in 1776 but the fire piston has been around for 30 years at least already. Even if it witchcraft was legalized, it’s a ignorant prejudice that would have taken the changing of generations to truly abolish, after the fire piston would have been retired. As will with any major change that defies of the known natural laws of one’s generational reference, the mass human population of a dominate generation will not agree. Slavery was abolished in America in 1865 but it wasn’t until 1964 that the civil rights law came into order and sadly, even in my life time, I have seen the lasting effects of KKK toward even children. Point is, whether or not witchcraft was punishable by law in the mid 1700‘s to the mid 1800‘s, there may have been many people that would have still needed to blame the unexplained and perceived evil on something, witchcraft, or other and there would have been many others who would have ignorantly followed such theory. Were fire pistons one of those perceived evils?

I struggle to find much history of them in the US but there where here. Why weren’t they as publicly spoke about here? If they were indeed around in Europe in 1745, why did it take until at least 1802 to get a patent on one? What held it back? Could it have been because of witchcraft like thought? Maybe they came from SE Asia and Europeans got spooked on the fact that they saw “Aboriginal Voodoo” or something of the sort. But if they weren’t found in SE Asia until 1850, then it would make more sense that we introduced these tools to them. If indeed they were available in 1745, then they could have been around in Europe much earlier giving time for them to travel throughout the more primitive regions. But if the Chinese invented black powder as early as the 9th century, then is it conceivable that they might have invented this tool much earlier and had discarded this technology for something better? This would have given time for this technology to travel south and time for us to bring it back to Europe and this has been a theory since at least 1907. Without having all the history in one language and in one place to look at, it makes it difficult.

With all these questions, we have to start looking at different angles to try and find the answers. I have spent a lot of time looking for it but I think that I do not have the correct verbiage for what I am looking for. I have to do extensive research into unrelated areas to find new ways of searching for the same thing.

Becky

 

[firemaker]

It'll end in tears, the first schism, the church or Ray vs the church of Bear with the agnostics caught in the middle....

The older faith, the church of Mors will weather the storm...

This is far too funny to me. I actually have a family member who thinks that this is cultic. When I told them that there were people who did reenacting for a living and traveled around to different places each weekend to sell their wares, I was told that it sounded like a cult and I should be more aware of the type of activities that our kids are exposed to.

I said they needed to get out more.

Becky

 

[Toddy]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but the fire piston is made from wood, yes ?
The piston needs a decent seal to work effectively, yes?
The chamber and piston need to be dry, and slide contiguously, yes ?

This is Western Europe, it's damp, and until the advent of central heating keeping wood dry was a pita, doors and drawers stick, they swell and warp, so would the piston.
It just wouldn't have been as reliably effective as flint and steel or the lucifers that replaced them.

Nowadays we use plastic as well as wood, I have a brass one and I can't get it to work at all. The firepiston is just too much bother to be honest.
Nice toy to have though

cheers,
Toddy

 

[firemaker]

• Most traditional fire pistons in Europe were actually made from Brass while bone, antler, horn and wood were also used to a lesser degree. Wood was often used in SE Asia.
• The chamber and the piston do not need to be dry to work.
• The seals are very flexible. It is reported that the seals in SE Asia were made from "whatever worked" that was available in their environment from leather to natural grass like fibers.
• An alchemist in 1668 made the first match with phosphorus. They weren't sold until a pharmacist in England invented and sold them in 1826. The next development was in 1680 with a phosphorus covered piece of paper that was struck by a splinter of wood dipped in sulphur. Because phosphorus was hard to obtain, it did not take off. In 1826, the first friction match was invented, from very dangerous red phosphorus. The next one was the white phosphorus in 1830 which eliminated the odor but did not make it safe. It was not until 1892 that matches were put in books and sold and 1910 that the first non-phosphorus match was patented.
• In short, it took 242 years from the first developments of the match until it became safe. So far we can see it took at least 57 years for the fire piston from start to patent but it was popular in Europe until matches were more affordable.

Fire pistons also traditionally sat on the hearth waiting for use by more elite owners. They were not only used reliably to light your pipe or your fire but were also in part a status symbol. Quality fire pistons, no matter the material, should not give you trouble to light. I would wonder what is causing the brass one to not work for you. Maybe there is tinder stuck at the bottom of the barrel or it needs more lubricant. These are the top two reasons why we get calls. Darrel once had a guy yell at him for it. When he found Darrel was correct with the fact he had not placed his tinder securely in the cup and it had fallen out and simply got stuck the to the bottom, he hung up on him in his embarrassment. Its common and remember Darrel threw his first fire piston deep into the woods and five minutes later realized it was damp tinder, not a poorly made fire piston, which he was able to test again an hour later when he finally found it. Most cases we hear outside of these two reasons is because of workmanship issues, and more rarely, accidental abuse. I would contact your maker after troubleshooting and explain to them what you are experiencing. Most makers are willing to fix an error in a timely manner for you.


Many scientists saw them as novelty and since no one took them seriously for sometime, it took awhile for them to gain acceptance as a common household appliance and gain enough support to earn a patent. It took a few years to get a patent in one case. In the first demonstrations, the conclusion was that is was an interesting phenomenon that needed further investigation but was not seen as an independent tool.

Many of those who have become accustomed to the flint and steel have a hard time with the thought of relying on a fire piston, even Darrel who can use both equally reliably. Fire pistons kind of take the "magic" out that the flint and steel has when you see it sparking.

My friends kids, ages 10 & 14, had the opportunity to learn both methods recently. At first they were more interested it the fire piston. They quickly made a coal and then moved onto the more challenging flint and steel. They kept that up for the three days they were with us, much to my dismay, we had little flint chips flying everywhere! (remind you we had four younger children who could have got them in their eyes.) But it was a great learning experience for both of them and they are proud owners of flint and steel kits. I think its brings you back to when you where a kid trying to slap two rocks together like the Flintstones to get sparks. Its a deeper accomplishment when it works.

 

[Toddy]

I didn't realise you made and sold fire pistons.

My brother reckoned that the iissue with the brass one I have is that the brass cools the whole thing so effectively that the coal never comes to sufficient heat, I have cleaned and checked both bore and cup/ socket.

How 'popular' is popular I've never seen them in an archaeological setting or to be honest in a historical one as a 'household' item except as a notation in reports from the Eastern Empire.
Flint and steel though, we have those by the thousand, worn thin and eventually discarded.

cheers,
Toddy

 

[Bernie Garland]

I'm with Toddy on this one,fire pistons are i feel a bit of a novelty,yes they work but a lot easier to start a fire with the flint and steel.

Bernie

 

[andy_e]

..This is Western Europe, it's damp, and until the advent of central heating keeping wood dry was a pita, doors and drawers stick, they swell and warp, so would the piston.
It just wouldn't have been as reliably effective as flint and steel or the lucifers that replaced them...

Doesn't the fire piston hail from SE Asia where it's even damper than our beloved Scotland?

The main problem (apart from the risk of mechanical failure) with the fire piston as far as I can tell is the same one that affects the flint and steel - availability of suitable tinder, not working conditions.

 

[Toddy]

I think it does, but it's warmer too, things dry; and, they grow bamboo, one of the most amazing natural resources which handlily comes ready bored and in different diametres

Bone and horn and antler, we have aplenty though.

Actually, come to think of it, if it is such a useful piece of kit, why don't more of 'us' carry one ?

cheers,
Toddy

 

[BOD]

If they were indeed around in Europe in 1745, why did it take until at least 1802 to get a patent on one? What held it back?

Before then it would have been problematic enforcing the patent as any artisan could have copied it. With the shift to cities and ready access to courts and the legal process it became feasible. The advent of the industrial revolution and Urban conglomerations and The dawn of retail trading to the middle classes, suggested a business oppotunity. Unfortunately a better invention came along.

But if they weren’t found in SE Asia until 1850, then it would make more sense that we introduced these tools to them. If indeed they were available in 1745, then they could have been around in Europe much earlier giving time for them to travel throughout the more primitive regions.

Unfortunately, just because the (European) written record of fire pistons in Asia is blank before the 1850s , it does not follow that Europeans introduced them. All it suggests is that Europeans did not write about them before then and even that is problematic since many key European records have been lost e.g. the Great fire of Lisbon in 1755

The reporting of the use of fire pistons in Asia coincides with the expansion of European influence from the trading settlement phase of Mercantilism, when companies secured trading monopolies, to the colonial phase when European governments began to administered large areas. This led to greater penetration of the interior.

If you look at the oldest settlements you will see that they were tiny and traders kept close to these. There were only three settlements in Malaya by 1820. One on the coast, two on islands

James Brooke became Rajah of Sarawak in 1841. Before that hardly anything was known about Borneo and Europeans avoided the southern South China Sea as much as they could due to pirates and head hunters. It was only 1852 that the British annexed Pegu in Burma)

This colonial expansion began to attract the adventurers , writer s and travellers who were the sort who wrote about what they saw as well as colonial officials who sent back reports about social conditions.

It is easy to over estimate the speed of dissemination of a new technology. The terrain of inland South East Asia then was very difficult. If the technology is mainly associated (as it seems to be) with the interior hill tribes then it is no wonder it was not seen earlier. Even today you find people from the same ethnic group have not visited relatives over the other side of the mountains for many years.

I have also yet to see a cargo manifest from that era which show that Europeans stocked up on fire pistons along with the fabrics, mirrors, knives and other trade goods. These documents still exist all over Europe. The absence of fire pistons for export in these documents is very suggestive.

Personally, I think the “we-discovered-it-first” claim by some people in the West (not you Becky) is based on the sorts of imperialistic attitudes displayed in Balfour’s article on the fire piston.


Toddy, There is superb tinder readily avaibale in Asia. In Borneo it is the Apiang palm and in mainland Asia the Caryota mitis (the Burmese Fish tail palm)

 

[firemaker]

Shortening the explanation, I was saying that it can be difficult to sort out all the different theories as you must research each one. Its made more difficult because it is different languages. Trying to think outside the box by asking what may seem like off the wall questions has yielded some of the most interesting results, although they are often unrelated to the question I had originally set out to answer, yet still informative toward the main subject.

I have gotten quite excited to see that others have as much interest in the history of the tool as we have. The “we-discovered-it-first” attitude has made it all that more difficult for us as it many thought that our intentions were for our own monetary gain. We are interested in our evolving history as many here are and being able to say we can use that knowledge. We are knowledge seekers. When we learn something, we learn to use that knowledge, teach and share that knowledge, and then we immediately seek to learn another. Researching fire piston history has not lost its flare as there is always a little more to learn.

Toddy, There is superb tinder readily avaibale in Asia. In Borneo it is the Apiang palm and in mainland Asia the Caryota mitis (the Burmese Fish tail palm)

Some of this tinder has been shared with us and it is indeed very reliable.