I’m pretty sure it’s not just Hollywood, I’ve seen old drawings and paintings of people in battle or duels and they always only use one hand to aim and fire pistols, even after multishot revolvers and pistols are developed.
Why? It’s not like using two hands only became more supportive and stable after 1910.
In: 557
This was answered 4 years ago on this thread in r/history
Basically switching to two hands allows for speed gains when shooting multiple times at targets.
Single hand is fine for shooting slowly at a single target, but is not as efficient at shooting at different targets.
1. Guns back then were just weaker. Before cartridged bullets were invented in the late 19th century, you had to physically pack the gunpowder and very spherical bullet yourself, and there just wasn’t as much room for gunpowder as there is now.
2. Back then, duels were seen as a high-class activity. The upper classes – those who engaged in duels – valued physical strength and stoicism. Being able to shoot a gun with just one hand meant you were stronger than if you needed two hands. “But then you might miss your shot!” yes, because…
3. The goal of a duel usually wasn’t to kill your opponent. You’d expect duels to have a fatality rate of 50%, but very often those engaging in duels would intentionally miss their pistol shot so that their opponent didn’t die. Duels didn’t happen because you are so angry at the other person that you just might kill them if given the chance, duels happened so that you could prove your honor. This is even more blatant in the case of sword duels. Since the rules of a duel are just whatever you and your opponent agree on, sword duels often had the rule of “first to draw blood wins”. This meant you never tried to kill your opponent, just lightly strike their flesh with your blade.
Ooh I know this one 😛 Smoothbore pistols were notoriously inaccurate. Using two hands would ensure better aiming accuracy, but it wouldn’t matter much if the bullet flies off the true aim anyway. Duelists found it better to stand side-on to the target, reducing their own target cross-section and improving their chances of survival. This is likewise why the old style of firing rifles survived so long. Nowadays it’s discouraged to fire long guns “chicken-wing” style, rather than keeping your elbow down and squaring up to the target, especially presuming you’re wearing a ballistic vest.
As for why gunmen continued to shoot one-handed after accurate guns came about, at least as far as revolvers go, you can’t put your second hand high up on the frame because flames come out of the cylinder and would burn you. This is where the “teacup” grip came from, with the second hand supporting the shooting hand. I don’t think it was considerably more effective than shooting one-handed though, especially in a close-range fight.
Now with magazine-fed pistols, we have the option of an effective two-handed grip.
It’s likely because using two hands wasn’t considered necessary for accuracy with early pistols, and one-handed shooting was sufficient for most situations.
Among other things mentioned, maybe to keep the flintlock mechanism as far away from one face as possible.
Modern Bullseye pistol shooters still shoot one handed. They only shoot 5 shots per round, 3 rounds 10, 20, and 60 seconds. At those slower speeds, the incredibly accurate guns, and the ranges they are shooting at the most inaccurate thing is the muscles in your body. Two hands means two arms, and twice as many muscles twitching and moving.
They aren’t using their muscles to aim the gun as much as holding as still as humanly possible and slowly squeezing until the pistol fires. Theoretically it should be a suprise when the gun goes off, as any effort in pulling the trigger at a specific moment is enough to impact the point of aim.
I’m not that good of a marksman, but speaking with the gentleman who are my understanding is that the stronger, and steadier you get essentially the smaller the “circle” of the natural weave of your aim is, and the tighter the grouping of your shots will be. You don’t need two hands for control, so all it can do is hinder your performance.
[removed]
Body armor.
Two hands makes you a fat target but your armor plate is covering everything important.
One hand makes you a smaller target. (Weaver stance?)
And to add one more thing to the really good answer, had to hold onto your horse. Cavalry units pioneered revolvers in the American West, as being able to use a multi-shot firearm with one hand while the other gripped the reins of your horse or the saddle was pretty great.
A two handed grip is primarily important for recoil control so you can accurately fire follow up shots. Not much need for that type of control with a single shot musket.
Latest Answers