AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Antique Gun Collecting => Topic started by: smart dog on August 05, 2022, 06:51:19 PM
-
Hi,
My brother and I visited Edward Hand's Rock Ford plantation after attending the Kempton Gun Makers Fair. Hand commanded rifle units during the Rev War and was just as important a leader as Dan Morgan. They are showcasing a long rifle exhibit that will run until October. It is well worth the visit and includes many of the earliest long rifles of which we know. The Edward Marshall, Tileston, RCA 52, a Newcomer, early Beck, early Dickert and quite a few others are there. In addition, the famous Turvey rifle in RCA 1 is there. Included is a short Germanic style rifle attributed to one of the Bakers purported to be the earliest gunsmiths in the Lancaster area. The rifle looks a lot like a German gun and is thought to date from the 1730s. The barrel is huge. Do any of you have more information on this gun?
dave
-
Eagerly hoping for pictures or other information!
-
Hi Rich,
I could not take any photos in the museum. They would not have been very good anyway although the glass cases allow you to see both sides.
dave
-
That's the thing about attributing with no signature and no signed surviving pieces upon which to base the attribution: lots of creative leeway! And lots of fun.
Sorry, had to be a wisenheimer.
Sincerely, JOHN GEORGE RUPP ::) ::) ::) ::) ::)
-
Hi Eric,
I agree. I am hoping someone can tell me more about this gun. The curator of the show is John Kolar.
dave
-
Yes I'm well aware. ;D
-
Included is a short Germanic style rifle attributed to one of the Bakers purported to be the earliest gunsmiths in the Lancaster area. The rifle looks a lot like a German gun and is thought to date from the 1730s. The barrel is huge. Do any of you have more information on this gun?
dave
I've checked in my meager library of books featuring "Lancaster" rifles and have been unable to find a photo of any early rifles by an early Baker gunsmith. There must be at least one or two rifles represented in some publication.
-
Hi Kent,
I have never seen any gun attributed or signed by any Baker from early Lancaster but my knowledge is limited. Maybe there is or are guns discussed among collectors but I am not aware of them. I have references listing the Bakers in early Lancaster but no photos of guns. The show will produce a book so more folks may get to see this rifle.
dave
-
The show will produce a book so more folks may get to see this rifle.
dave
Dave ,
Thanks for your comments. I"ll be looking for that book. The June issue of MAA Magazine contained a two page ad for the exhibit. Unfortunately, no photo of the rifle your saw. I understand that they have a New England rifle on display as well. Not quite sure how that fits into the theme of the exhibit.
Kent
-
I have done some work with out there and saw many of their rifes before they were put on display. Most of what I saw came out of the Henry Kauffman collection. Kauffman was once a professor in my department at Millersville and a prolific author, he had quite a collection at one time. More of his collection can be seen at the earby Landisville Museum. Here is a link to another thread about Kauffman.
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=3832.0
-
I believe there is a Peter Berry rifle as well......................
-
Hi Eric,
Yes, a very nice Berry.
dave
-
War-era I'm sure. :P
-
I have done some work with out there and saw many of their rifes before they were put on display. Most of what I saw came out of the Henry Kauffman collection.
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=3832.0
Is there a publication with the Kauffman Collection in it? I have his PA. Kentucky Rifle book which is a little sparse but full of great information. Our friend Bob Lienemann tells me that the book contains info that has not been repeated in any other book published since 1960.
-
... the book contains info that has not been repeated in any other book published since 1960.
I'm not sure what this means. Does it mean that there is good information in Kauffman's book that deserves to be better known (but hasn't been repeated)? I wonder what an example of this would be.
-
... the book contains info that has not been repeated in any other book published since 1960.
I'm not sure what this means. Does it mean that there is good information in Kauffman's book that deserves to be better known (but hasn't been repeated)? I wonder what an example of this would be.
I wish I knew myself. Perhaps Bob can enlighten us. He is usually very precise. I bought the book last Spring during a Road Trip at a thrift shop for $8.00 and have not fully explored it.
Wanted to add that they had the book in the Travel Section under Pennsylvania.
-
Hi,
Eric, the Berry is definitely post war but it is still one of his best.
Kent, they identify the iron mounted Tileston rifle as New England made and dated 1773. The iron hardware on that gun just has to be seen. It was made extremely well. The maker and date are stamped on the barrel and the stock appears to be cherry. If I recall, some folks suggest the gun was southern made but there is definitely a Thomas Tileston, gunsmith, documented from Mass.
dave
-
In addition, the famous Turvey rifle in RCA 1 is there.
dave
That's one i would love to see!
-
Hi,
Eric, the Berry is definitely post war but it is still one of his best.
Kent, they identify the iron mounted Tileston rifle as New England made and dated 1773. The iron hardware on that gun just has to be seen. It was made extremely well. The maker and date are stamped on the barrel and the stock appears to be cherry. If I recall, some folks suggest the gun was southern made but there is definitely a Thomas Tileston, gunsmith, documented from Mass.
dave
Thanks for the info Dave. Would love to see it. Is the rifle published anywhere?
As far as I know (which might not be far enough as usual) what most collectors consider the Classic New England Rifles, were not produced until late in the 18th Century.
I do know that Don Andreasen referred to the "Tileston" rifle on pg13 of his 1982 article, Observations on the New England Flintlock Rifle in MAA Magazine. Andreasen states that, "research indicates" that Tileston may have been the owner and that John Holbrok made the rifle. Without photos of the rifle, it is difficult to form an opinion. Can you give some particulars if you took a look at it?
Perhaps Joe Puleo may weigh in here. He is very knowledgeable about firearms made in New England.
In any case, a New England Rifle is still out of place in a PA. Rifle display, in my opinion.
Kent
-
Hi James,
I was thinking of you when looking at the Turvey. I really needed to see that gun in the flesh because the photos in RCA 1 do not convey the size of it at all. It is a big gun. My first thought when seeing it was the Edward Marshall rifle. It is almost that massive through the lock and wrist. It is not at all dainty like a fowler. I was very gratified to see that my recent English rifle got the dimensions and shaping right.
dave
-
This article is posted on the Rock Ford website. It is from the March April 2022 issue of Early American Life.
The National Museum of the U.S. Army has the Tileston marked rifle and can be seen on their website under "Founding the Nation"
https://historicrockford.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/02/2204_long_rifles_sm.pdf
https://www.thenmusa.org/exhibit/founding-the-nation/
https://www.thenmusa.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/Founding-the-Nation-Highlights-PAO.pdf
https://americansocietyofarmscollectors.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/1981-B44-Worcester-County-Gunsmiths-1760-1830.pdf
-
I am going to Rockford later this month and look forward to seeing all these arms.
I have already seen quite a few of the information plaques/panels, since friends or other visitors to the exhibit have posted them on Facebook.
I'm sure this phenomenon will have struck others besides me: the persons who own these objects are the same persons who are writing these informational plaques (sometimes factually incorrect, often full of what Eric calls "creative leeway") and providing information for the writers of these articles, which will in turn be cited as published evidence of certain "facts" when the same persons sell the rifles at a later date.
-
Hi Kent,
The intention of the display is to show early rifles in America in addition to those with some Rev War provenance. So it was not just PA rifles. They had one of Ernie Cowan's Ferguson replicas there as well to display an early breech loader used in the war. Unfortunately, despite all the hype about strict historical accuracy Cowan and Keller included in their write up about the Ferguson included in Bailey's book on British military rifles, they screwed up the color and finish on their gun. I don't know why it is that so many guys insist, despite evidence to the contrary on every British gun at least, that every military gun made in the 18th and 19th centuries had stocks colored really dark and looking like they were dipped in linseed oil and left to dry dull with an "in the wood" oil finish. British military guns, including the Ferguson and I handled the original in Morristown, were finished with a slightly glossy linseed oil VARNISH and many, if not most, are not almost black in color now nor when they were made.
dave
-
Hi Kent,
The intention of the display is to show early rifles in America in addition to those with some Rev War provenance. So it was not just PA rifles.
dave
Dave,
Thanks for the clarification. I was just going by Rock Ford's exhibition title which specifically limits the exhibition to Lancaster gunsmiths.
Kent
-
Hi,
Another observation. One of my all time favorite guns is RCA 52. I built a version of it but got the stock dimensions wrong (too skinny), so I remade it into my "North Bucks Lehampton Valley Spring" rifle. ;D Anyway, none of the published photos of that gun do it justice. It is a beautiful gun and the carving is much more sophisticated and well executed than is revealed by the photos. You cannot appreciate that rifle until you see it first hand.
dave
-
In the magazine, if I got it right, the early rifle they attribute to Baker looks to have a nice cast sideplate mated with a plain buttplate and a guard with a straight grip rail well off the wrist.
-
Hi Rich,
Yes, and a massive but short barrel.
dave
-
By the way, I am lucky to have a framed print of The Battle of King's Mountain by DonTroiani that is shown in the magazine article. The picture in the magazine does not do that Troiani print justice by a long shot. I believe that a few prints may be still available.
-
Hi Kent,
The show has a reproduction of one of the prints in David Hansen's book on long rifles. It purports to show a rifleman (Timothy Murphy?) shooting from a tree at a British officer during the fight at Bemis Heights. The problems with the painting is the rifleman has a battalion cartridge box hanging from his side. No American riflemen used cartridge boxes. Secondly, there is no documentary evidence that Murphy was even at Saratoga. His wife's pension petitions mention his service everywhere but Saratoga. And if he shot General Fraser, don't you think she would have mentioned that?
dave
-
Dave,
I read and still have two books on Saratoga, one by Ketchum and the second by Luzader. Ketchum does not mention Murphy at all and Luzader relate a very similar story as you, about Murphy's widow. I've read Ketchum's book twice, it is a long hall, but worth it. How about you?
Another myth about the Rev War bites the dust!
Kent
-
Henry's book from 1960 covered so much ground, he presented just a few examples of old records that Scott is now finding and sharing with us, lists of trade rifles and their makers with notes on barrel finishes which really opened my eyes, and the status of some rifles we enjoy back in 1960. Plus some that have not been seen since.
P 13 shows RCA # 52 that Dave mentions - a big rifle that is light and handles well, reminiscent of Oerter's rifles in line and feel. It had an 1830's double throated cock and lock in her then. Compare the tang carving on this rifle now, to what it had in RCA photos!
Bottom of p 15 shows outline of patchbox on an attributed John Noll - Bart Twnshp rifle, and Henry noted the engraving was very worn. At one of my first KRA annual meetings this same rifle was displayed with clean and clear engraving and a $75,000 tag on it. I remembered Henry's note, pointed it out to some of my hosts, and a little while later the rifle was priced at $7,500.
This book introduced me to Leman, Albrights and Henrys, and a few of their records, so I knew where to go looking for more. Also Mattias Roesser's inventory of gunshop and pages from gunsmith ledgers, letters, advertisements and business cards.
I was fortunate to spend a day at his museum next to the Ed Hand House with cases open, to study many fine rifles. Then he took us to dinner and we had a fine time.
This inexpensive book has much to offer if you take a slow read every ten years, and judge what you have learned in that time. Bob
-
The historical value of Kauffman's Pennsylvania-Kentucky Rifle and Kindig's Golden Age, published the same year, as the foundational texts in this field cannot be measured. They established the language in which we still talk, they set the problems that we're still working out, they are the ones who sparked (as Bob's example testifies) so much new research and discoveries.
But it is a very different thing to rely on the information in Kauffman's book--by which I mean the information in the second half of the book that is organized by gunsmith--or to believe that there are still useful nuggets of information in Kauffman's book that later writers have overlooked. Regarding the areas of this field that I spend my time working in--I can't weigh in on other gunsmiths--the information is hopelessly out of date. Here's what he says under Henry Albright: "The relationship, if any, between Andrew Albright and Henry Albright might never be established, but circumstantial evidence points to the fact that Henry was probably the son of Andrew. It is known that sons were frequently apprenticed to, or at least followed, the trade of their father, so it would seem reasonable to assume that there was a father-son relationship between these two." Kaufmann's entry for Andrew Albright is a single line noting that he appeared on a Warwick tax list in 1780. These are not hand-picked examples to make my point. One would rely on the information in Kauffman's extensive discussion of the Henrys at one's peril.
It has been sixty years. We wouldn't go to a 1960 biology textbook to guide us through diseases and therapies. We wouldn't use a 1960 TV GUIDE as a guide to the type of comedy or drama that is entertaining or worth watching. (No Star Trek yet!--let alone Breaking Bad or the Sopranos or Schitt's Creek.) We know so much more now, thanks to writers such as Bob Lienemann. (Kauffman never mentions Christian Oerter.) Kauffman and Kindig are the giants, but by standing on their shoulders we see a lot more than they did. I'd encourage people to read the first half of the book, though with care when he discusses particular gunsmiths, and avoid the second half.
-
For the Tileston rifle see pages 6-10 of the December 2015 issue of Muzzle Blasts magazine. The article was written by John Kolar.
I believe he also wrote an article for Man at Arms for the Gun and Sword Collector magazine... but I don't have that issue.
-
Bob
Thanks for the info.
Unfortunately, I do not subscribe to Muzzle Blasts.
Kent
-
I bought a (mostly) complete run of Muzzle Blasts a few years ago from a seller here: I'll scan John Kolar's Tileston article tomorrow & send it to you, Kent. (If anybody else wants it, just let me know.) -- Scott
-
I bought a (mostly) complete run of Muzzle Blasts a few years ago from a seller here: I'll scan John Kolar's Tileston article tomorrow & send it to you, Kent. (If anybody else wants it, just let me know.) -- Scott
Scott,
You are a gentleman and scholar (literally :) ).
Kent
-
A friend took a string of very photos of the Tileston rifle many years ago (and a different owner or two ago) when we were able to really examine it at a KRA show. It's a fantastic rifle and as Dave mentioned, the iron furniture forgings are so good they almost seem like modern investment castings (which they clearly are not). I asked the photographer a little while back about sharing the photos so I'm going to **try** to do this the easy way because it's time consuming to try to edit and post them here without sludging everything up.
This is a dropbox link - I've never tried this before so let me know if this doesn't work. Hopefully anyone who wants can download them. Possibly the photo taker may chime in and take credit and can add some more commentary on the gun. It's been disassembled as well right there in the hotel room but no photos of that :(
https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wxgafx6q2t5oo6t/AAC2cqoTO2hqyB2dx_JQKt2fa?dl=0 (https://www.dropbox.com/sh/wxgafx6q2t5oo6t/AAC2cqoTO2hqyB2dx_JQKt2fa?dl=0)
-
BTW - and this is important - there is a fowler in Grinslade's book with **identical** carving around the comb (which is quite unique) and I believe the same or similar around the lock/tang as well but I'll have to dig out his book to verify.
-
That Heylin lock is very similar to a Heylin birding piece i had at one time. Definitely a re-used lock off an English gun. Wonderful choice to compliment the quality of this beautiful Tileston rifle. Has anyone made a close copy of this rifle?
-
Eric,
Thank you so much for those photos! They are spectacular and they show the gun was made extremely well and by a real master gunsmith. I can provide some definitive comments about the lock. I believe James Rogers mentioned much of the same information about that lock in a thread about this rifle posted some years ago. It is almost identical to a lock on a Heylin fowler dated to 1767 as James mentioned. The lock has all the features consistent with British locks from the period 1765-1775. I can even guess why the sear dropped too low. I suspect the bridle was fragile and broke allowing the sear screw to drop lower. The photos below shows the inside of a Heylin lock on the bottom and the outside of the lock (converted to percussion) in the middle.
(https://i.ibb.co/q5RRSVG/flat-faced-locks-inside.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
(https://i.ibb.co/QjHHKkY/flat-faced-locks-outside.jpg) (https://ibb.co/yBkkQpg)
dave
-
The DropBox worked for me - thanks!
The high quality of the guard and the simplicity of the patchbox finial make me want to speculate that the guard and perhaps buttplate were obtained (not fabricated) by the stocker of this fine rifle.
-
That gun is beautiful. Thanks for sharing those pictures.
-
I of course agree with Scott's comments on Henry's book, and other early authors' efforts. Kauffman was a curious gentleman who studied, collected, taught and wrote books on a variety of early trades or crafts. His affordable book encouraged me to look further. What I appreciate most from his efforts are the rifles and other items he collected, and his efforts (museum and books) to share what he was discovering with us. I've tried to follow that approach.
The list of makers of western fur trade rifles was especially interesting back then, and seeing that some barrels were blued or browned, but the rest "bright as usual" informed my work at the bench. Those original documents he included showed me that there is where I needed to focus - on the source material. Seeing these photos of originals in different condition than they are today is also very informative. Many have been played with over the years.
He did guess that Henry Albright was the son of Andreas, but that is also misleading, as Henry was the only son who became a gunsmith. The entry of HA in Warwick confused me, as there was a Warwick Township, but I later learned that Warwick was the name of the settlement surrounding the closed Moravian community of Lititz. Henry had married outside the Church, so was living close by when he returned from Ohio.
There is still so much more to learn. Thanks Scott, Eric and others for your work and willingness to share. And for these photos Eric just provided. The effort continues. Bob
-
Eric,
Thanks for posting the photos. I had no problem looking at them.
It is a great looking rifle!
Kent
-
Yes, thank you Eric for posting these photos of the 'Tommy gun; by Thomas Tileston. I saw the rifle when Dick Zeschke owned it. He exhibited it at the NRA meeting that was held in Phoenix. No one seemed to know much about it then, but glad that we now know a lot more about the maker. It is indeed a grand gun and too bad that we don't have a full length shot or two of it. My observations of the gun at the time was that it was a fine. southern, iron mounted piece. Without knowing the facts as I do now, I would likely still harbor that notion. Hooray for NE guns!
Dick
-
In the magazine, if I got it right, the early rifle they attribute to Baker looks to have a nice cast sideplate mated with a plain buttplate and a guard with a straight grip rail well off the wrist.
ugly quick and dirty splice for the peanut gallery
(https://i.ibb.co/7nnTYLc/baker-rifle.jpg) (https://ibb.co/F55fxCv)
-
With regard to the Tileston marked rifle.
Why are we so sure that it is a New England produced rifle?
-
Hi,
Eric, your memory for detail is incredible. I pride myself on that same aptitude but you make me look like an amateur. The guns in Grinslade that you are referring too are NE45 and NE46, both have locks marked Thomas Holbrook. He was born in 1747 and died in 1810. The lock panels on both guns are identical to the Tileston rifle and so is the carving around the comb and barrel tang on NE46. It would be hard to explain that away except for some connection between the rifle and Holbrook.
Kent, the cherry stock, the actual shape of the butt stock, and the decoration around the comb and barrel tang scream New England. A feature so often found on NE guns is the carving at the end of the barrel tang is like a potted plant at the end of a featureless table. There is no florid design connecting the lock moldings in with the tang carving that you find so often on PA long rifles and even southern guns of the period. Here is an example, the famous Hawk fowler:
(https://i.ibb.co/stMFx1M/Hawkes-fowler-barrel-tang-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/yVb8vkb)
dave
-
Kent, the cherry stock, the actual shape of the butt stock, and the decoration around the comb and barrel tang scream New England. A feature so often found on NE guns is the carving at the end of the barrel tang is like a potted plant at the end of a featureless table. There is no florid design connecting the lock moldings in with the tang carving that you find so often on PA long rifles and even southern guns of the period. Here is an example, the famous Hawk fowler:
dave
To me the triggerguard and odd patchbox do not look N.E. Also, the relief carving behind the cheek rest is very unusual for a NE Rifle. But, anything is possible. Never say "never".
My NE Rifle was added to The Miller Library by Mark back in 2019, so I am somewhat familiar with them.
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=56680.0
Also, I am very suspicious of signed and dated NE Rifles Al Thompson covered that in the article below in paragraph #6.
https://americansocietyofarmscollectors.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/1981-B44-Worcester-County-Gunsmiths-1760-1830.pdf
However, as I do not have access to any published material on this rifle, I am "flying blind".
Kent
-
Hi,
I am familiar with NE rifles too and most were made much later than 1773, if that date can be believed for the Tileston rifle. I also know about Kimball Arms and their engraver "Teff" who forged all kinds of names, dates, and signatures on NE guns.
dave
-
Hi,
I am familiar with NE rifles too and most were made much later than 1773, if that date can be believed for the Tileston rifle. I also know about Kimball Arms and their engraver "Teff" who forged all kinds of names, dates, and signatures on NE guns.
dave
Morning Dave,
So we "seem" to be on the same page (or near it!) with regard to engraved names and dates on any rifle and in particular N.E. Rifles.
I just received via E-mail the Muzzle Blasts article from our good friend Scott. I am anxious to start reading it to get a feel for this nice rifle.
Kent
-
Hi,
Eric, your memory for detail is incredible. I pride myself on that same aptitude but you make me look like an amateur. The guns in Grinslade that you are referring too are NE45 and NE46, both have locks marked Thomas Holbrook. He was born in 1747 and died in 1810. The lock panels on both guns are identical to the Tileston rifle and so is the carving around the comb and barrel tang on NE46. It would be hard to explain that away except for some connection between the rifle and Holbrook.
Kent, the cherry stock, the actual shape of the butt stock, and the decoration around the comb and barrel tang scream New England. A feature so often found on NE guns is the carving at the end of the barrel tang is like a potted plant at the end of a featureless table. There is no florid design connecting the lock moldings in with the tang carving that you find so often on PA long rifles and even southern guns of the period. Here is an example, the famous Hawk fowler:
(https://i.ibb.co/stMFx1M/Hawkes-fowler-barrel-tang-1.jpg) (https://ibb.co/yVb8vkb)
dave
To bring this back around, since the topics of Kimball Arms and later NE rifles has been brought up. In my simple way of thinking:
A) Similarly to Holbrook’s work could easily place it earlier than most NE rifles.
B) It doesn’t resemble NE rifles which are all later.
A) lends support to it being both from New England and pre-1810.
B) doesn’t help us much.
I’ll keep it simple in my head. A cherry stocked early rifle with carving like Holbrook’s makes NE a strong choice for origin. The architecture and furniture styling and lock could easily place it in the whereabouts of 1773. Tiff would more likely choose a known gunsmith and a more Revolutionary date, methinks. These are all just leanings, not conclusions.
-
I see the question of it's origin in the same way as does Rich. There is not much point in comparing it to much later New England rifles as the date on the Tileston gun is considerably earlier. The carving closely matches up with two pieces signed by a NE gunsmith. The signature on the piece is of a known NE gunsmith. Granted, the furnishings are not what we would "expect" but I don't find that to be enough of a reason to immediately dismiss a NE origin; after all, how can we know what to expect of a 1773 pre-War New England rifle when we don't have another to compare? Yes we can compare it to the many surviving fowlers, but if someone up there in 1773 wanted to stock up a rifle to perhaps mimic what was going on in PA and points South, perhaps he would look to pieces he had seen of that type rather than what everyone in MA was stocking. So it ends up looking like a weird yet attractive 'combination' piece. JMHO.
One interesting point which has been made in the past by multiple people is the location of the lock: it fits the mortice well but the pan fence is considerably to the rear of the breech which is quite odd and awkward.
-
I'm sure this phenomenon will have struck others besides me: the persons who own these objects are the same persons who are writing these informational plaques (sometimes factually incorrect, often full of what Eric calls "creative leeway") and providing information for the writers of these articles, which will in turn be cited as published evidence of certain "facts" when the same persons sell the rifles at a later date.
A point which has certainly not gone unnoticed. However, for many, the phrase "eyes wide shut" still seems to apply.
-
The signature on the piece is of a known NE gunsmith.
Eric,
In my less than meager library on N.E. Firearms, I cannot find where a Tileston is listed as a NE Gunsmith. Would you please let me know where I can find him listed. I have Lindsay's N.E. Gun book but that book has some issues as we all know.
As I mentioned earlier in this thread, Andreasen states that Tileston "was more than likely the owner and not the maker." However, Andreason's article in MAA was from 1982 (when my hair was still black ::)) so I'm guessing there has been further research since then, that you are quoting.
Kolar's 2015 article states "the author has not found information in the records of the Massachusetts Historical Society that referred to Thomas Tileston as a gunsmith."
Kent
-
Hi Kent,
You got me laughing because Lindsay locates Tileston in Duxbury but provides no documentation and then Whisker in his "Arms Makers of Mass" identifies a Thomas Tileston on the basis of the "Tileston" rifle. It is kind of a circular confirmation bias. Nonetheless, we have carving on the rifle that is virtually identical to 2 NE fowlers by Holbrook. In many circles, that would be sufficient to attribute a gun to a specific maker with the same style.
Eric, that odd positioning of the lock may have to do with accommodating the pan gutter and drain slot between the pan and fence. Note the fence arches backward to form the drain slot.
dave
-
Dave,
Thanks for your observations on Tileston, the supposed and still unconfirmed (at least to me) gunsmith.
I'll consider Andreason's statement that Holbrook could be the maker of this rifle, until other documented evidence surfaces.
I am looking at page 174 of Lindsay's alphabetical listing of Massachusetts Small Arms Makers from his 1975 book and do not see Tileston's name. What list of Lindsay's are you referencing?
Where is Joe Puelo?
Kent
-
Hi Kent,
Page 12 of Lindsay in his intro to NE rifles.
dave
-
Hi Kent,
Page 12 of Lindsay in his intro to NE rifles.
dave
Thanks Dave for the heads-up. Somewhat odd that he did not include Tileston in his lists at the other end of the book. Probably just an oversight the Proof Reader did not catch.
My attention was always focused on pages 65 to 91. Kind of myopic, but that is the way it was. I have not looked at the book for many years, until just the other day
Kent
-
I'm sure this phenomenon will have struck others besides me: the persons who own these objects are the same persons who are writing these informational plaques (sometimes factually incorrect, often full of what Eric calls "creative leeway") and providing information for the writers of these articles, which will in turn be cited as published evidence of certain "facts" when the same persons sell the rifles at a later date.
A point which has certainly not gone unnoticed. However, for many, the phrase "eyes wide shut" still seems to apply.
Fidelio
-
Hi,
Eric, the Berry is definitely post war but it is still one of his best.
Kent, they identify the iron mounted Tileston rifle as New England made and dated 1773. The iron hardware on that gun just has to be seen. It was made extremely well. The maker and date are stamped on the barrel and the stock appears to be cherry. If I recall, some folks suggest the gun was southern made but there is definitely a Thomas Tileston, gunsmith, documented from Mass.
dave
Thanks for the info Dave. Would love to see it. Is the rifle published anywhere?
As far as I know (which might not be far enough as usual) what most collectors consider the Classic New England Rifles, were not produced until late in the 18th Century.
I do know that Don Andreasen referred to the "Tileston" rifle on pg13 of his 1982 article, Observations on the New England Flintlock Rifle in MAA Magazine. Andreasen states that, "research indicates" that Tileston may have been the owner and that John Holbrok made the rifle. Without photos of the rifle, it is difficult to form an opinion. Can you give some particulars if you took a look at it?
Perhaps Joe Puleo may weigh in here. He is very knowledgeable about firearms made in New England.
In any case, a New England Rifle is still out of place in a PA. Rifle display, in my opinion.
Kent
This rifle has been discussed endlessly and without any consensus being arrived at. Personally, I'm of the feeling that Tileson was probably the owner, not the maker. I believe we published pictures of it in MAA when the Army acquired it – which was fairy recently. If it was made (assembled might be a better term) in New England, I doubt that the rifled barrel was. The barrel could well have been imported and made into a rifle. Certainly rifles were known in England 1773 and a well-to-do American with an interest in such things could easily have imported a barrel and had it made into a rifle. He could also have purchased a barrel from one of the several Pennsylvania sources available. I haven't handled the gun myself and I suspect that, even if you were able to dismantle it, it would be difficult to tell where the barrel was made. If it was English-made, it would not have to have been proofed. In 1773 the requirement for proof only applied to complete guns sold in London and the surrounding area. It did not apply to exported guns or to gun parts.
I can't remember whether the information I've seen regarding this rifle has been published or not. I am privy to a lot of unpublished research and have to be very careful not to cite data that someone else has found but not published as yet so I'm being vague here on purpose. As many of you know, I am very skeptical of attributions when no documentary or physical evidence survives and this is especially true of NE guns where there is very little difference between most of them regardless of the maker. That said, Holbrook was an excellent gunmaker — better than most. I've had at least one Holbrook fowler that was comparable to a "best quality" British fowler so I have a high regard for his craftsmanship. (I traded that fowler to Don Andreason for a NE rifle).
I'll add that very little emphasis should be placed on the stock wood. That's another of my projects but my preliminary research into the British imports of American hardwood shows that Walnut, Maple and Cherry, imported from American ports, were readily available from British timber merchants well before the American Revolution.
[Edit] Lindsey's book is just about worthless.
-
Joe,
Thank you for your sober insight and comments regarding this particular rifle, it is appreciated.
Kent
-
I might have fired off to quickly and will eat my words if required; I remember looking for Thomas Tileston many years ago and definitely remember finding something relative to him, but unfortunately I can no longer remember where I found it or what specifically it was. I may have simply found a Thomas Tileston, but can not say for certain whether I found evidence of gunsmithing or not. I will have to look for this.
I also believe I remember discussing this with Wallace at the same KRA show where these photos were taken, and I believe he mentioned Tilestons being in Virginia. On that one, I can't say one way or the other.
-
The pictures of the tileston rifle were great. I have a question a little off topic. I noticed on the tileston that there is a chunk of wood missing under the sear area of the gun. I have seen this before and never gave it much thought but I was studying an original the other day for measurements and architecture and it had the same section missing and it was clearly intentionally cut away as the tileston appears. I was told this was done so they could get lubrication to the sear area. Seems crazy to do that to a beautiful, functioning rifle when you could easily remove the lock.
Was this a common practice?
-
Not a common practice. If a sear tip wears the sear bar keeps dropping lower. Also careless removal and re-installation of the lock can cause such wear. Could be other things as well.
-
No, this is the sear and tumbler interaction wearing and dropping the sear lower, and instead of modifying or repairing the sear as the arm drops lower through wear, it's easier albeit less attractive to simply cut away wood to allow for the sear dropping lower.
-
Oops was typing and Rich beat me to it!
-
Hi Kent,
Page 12 of Lindsay in his intro to NE rifles.
dave
Thanks Dave for the heads-up. Somewhat odd that he did not include Tileston in his lists at the other end of the book. Probably just an oversight the Proof Reader did not catch.
My attention was always focused on pages 65 to 91. Kind of myopic, but that is the way it was. I have not looked at the book for many years, until just the other day
Kent
All of the names in Lindsay's list came from secondary sources, some of which were very dated if not outright questionable.
-
Ok. That makes sense. Thanks for the explanation.
-
Hi Guys,
Yes, as a sear tip wears it may drop lower but not if it hits the trigger bar. For a sear to drop as low as you see on the Tileston rifle, the trigger bar would have to be so low that there must have been 1/4 to 3/8" creep before it engaged the sear.
dave
-
Hi Guys,
Yes, as a sear tip wears it may drop lower but not if it hits the trigger bar. For a sear to drop as low as you see on the Tileston rifle, the trigger bar would have to be so low that there must have been 1/4 to 3/8" creep before it engaged the sear.
dave
True, but when the sear bar falls below the lockplate with the lock out of the mortise, it could perhaps cause wear or hogging out issues when the lock is removed and re-installed.
-
The trigger blade itself also typically wears at an even faster rate as the majority of them clearly were not casehardened.
-
The trigger blade itself also typically wears at an even faster rate as the majority of them clearly were not casehardened.
To Eric's point, photos attached showing the worn trigger blade and "hole" under the lock from a Graeff signed rifle.
Check out RCA# 28 &67 for a similar conditions.
(https://i.ibb.co/QfVkYBL/17-A.jpg) (https://ibb.co/1LNMRV1)