AmericanLongRifles Forums
General discussion => Antique Gun Collecting => Topic started by: DaveM on April 26, 2024, 02:01:12 AM
-
I asked a leading online artificial intelligence website (ChatGPT) this question. AI’s response shown in this photo seems reasonable to me!
Who do you all think was the finest? Do you agree?
(https://i.ibb.co/3FxShK5/IMG-6225.jpg) (https://ibb.co/pKH4Xq6)
-
Dave, that sounds like a pretty good response!
For example, here is the Dickert rifle in the Library;
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=22664.0
One of my favorite rifles!
John
-
It would be a matter of taste I think, and there was quite a lot of style change from 1750-ish to 1800. I think there would need to be enough known work to have a good feel for the gunsmith’s work. For me there would need to be originality in some aspects of design and decorative elements. For me George Schroyer showed creativity over at least 3 decades and comes to mind because of his productivity too.
-
Dave, that sounds like a pretty good response!
For example, here is the Dickert rifle in the Library;
https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=22664.0
One of my favorite rifles!
John
Wonderful. Maybe AI does know something after all. :)
-
John that Dickert is a real work of art! Must be some of his finest work on that one.
Rich, I also thought of Schroyer. He was probably almost as influential as Dickert.
-
I'd vote for Thomas Earle
-
With human intelligence deteriorating it's a good thing AI has arrived. Ask a typical college grad the same question and see the dumb look on their face.
-
Hi,
I bet if you asked that question to any college grads 50 years ago you would get the same blank look. I think it would be hard to beat Dickert as the choice although Schroyer might be a close second. You see the styling of his guns repeated over and over again in wide region and his decorative elements the basis for countless guns by other makers. He was also a successful businessman and a leader within his trade and community.
dave
-
"Gunsmith" in my mind encompasses a great deal of territory. How about breaking things down by categories? How about, Longrifles, Pistols, and Fowlers. In the case of fowlers, I would include New England Fowlers. "Most" New England Rifles probably date to the 19thCentury.
Please note the qualifier in bold italic. :)
-
I think Dickert would be hard to beat.
He was an early maker, fairly prolific, with good design and obvious carving skills. And as smart dog points out, a successful businessman.
I enjoyed doing the restoration work, and owning that rifle for many years. If I could have one back, that would be the gun! ;)
John
-
Did not contemporary frontiersmen, whose lives depended upon their weaponry, not also vote, often using "Dickert" as a word synonymous with "long rifle"?
-
I don't know about "contemporary" frontiersmen, though I would love to have evidence of that. When I was writing my article about Dickert (https://www.immigrantentrepreneurship.org/entries/jacob-dickert/ (https://www.immigrantentrepreneurship.org/entries/jacob-dickert/)), I tried to talk about this--but the earliest evidence I found that his name had become "synonymous" with long rifle was from the 1850s. Here's what I wrote (several years ago: I'd love to know more!):
Dickert’s signed barrels seem to have created him as something of a “brand.” Indeed by the 1850s the term “Deckard” rifle — it seems likely, though we cannot be certain, that this is a distortion of “Dickert” — became synonymous with a well-built and dependable longrifle. An early account of the Battle of King’s Mountain in J. G. M. Ramsey’s Annals of Tennessee (1853) claimed that all the patriots were “well mounted, and nearly all carried a Deckhard rifle,” “so called,” a note elaborated, “from Deckhard, the maker, in Lancaster, Pa.” A writer in 1915, imagining Daniel Boone in 1760 — just a few years after Dickert’s apprenticeship had begun — pictured Boone “carrying a long Deckhard rifle, hunting knife, and tomahawk.”
Scott
-
It would be very interesting to find out who Dickert learned the trade from in Lancaster. It's interesting that Dickert married a woman named Hafer / Hoeffer in Lancaster. I know there were Hafer gunsmiths there but not sure if there were any of this name early enough to have trained Dickert? Often a gunsmith married into the family of another gunsmith. Wonder if there was an earlier Hoeffer/Hafer he could have learned the trade from?
-
How much of Dickert's reputation is based on the volume of work produced by him and his assistants? I am just curious, and am not disputing anything in this thread.
Regards,
Carl
-
It would be very interesting to find out who Dickert learned the trade from in Lancaster. It's interesting that Dickert married a woman named Hafer / Hoeffer in Lancaster. I know there were Hafer gunsmiths there but not sure if there were any of this name early enough to have trained Dickert? Often a gunsmith married into the family of another gunsmith. Wonder if there was an earlier Hoeffer/Hafer he could have learned the trade from?
Dickert's wife was Hannah Höfer (1746-1819)--but her father, Hermanus Höfer, had died before 1752 (when her mother remarried). Dickert would have been 11 or 12 when Hermanus Höfer died. I don't know what trade he practiced, but he wasn't alive to train Dickert. The father-in-law who Dickert would have known was Johannes Spor (1725-1787), who wasn't a gunsmith.
Hannah mother was born a Weibrecht (Anna Maria Weibrecht Höfer Spor, 1718-1796), if that is of any help: and her family emigrated & was present in Lancaster as well, since her father is present at the baptisms of her children (those she had with Spor).
BTW, Anna Maria had 4 children with Höfer and 7 more with Spor: at her death she had 43 grandchildren and 22 great grandchildren.
-
Carl, in line with your question about how the volume of work (good businessman versus strictly quality) may have led to much of Dickert’s market - I wonder how much he may have tapped into the western expansion market - folks travelling west, compared to other makers. Maybe word of mouth reached folks on the east coast recommending they see Dickert for your rifle on your way west. I read Lancaster was a jumping off point for kany heading west.
I also thought I read somewhere that William Henry had some very early rifle contracts with ther towns and/or folks heading west? Could be wrong about this. But, if so, maybe Dickert got involved with William Henry early on and learned his business ways? Maybe William Henry marketed / sold rifles from several makers?
Scott - thanks for your info on the Hoeffers, that is excellent and narrows the field of Dickert’s possible mentor.
-
I'd vote for Thomas Earle
I will second this nomination with regard to fowlers.
-
Carl, in line with your question about how the volume of work (good businessman versus strictly quality) may have led to much of Dickert’s market - I wonder how much he may have tapped into the western expansion market - folks travelling west, compared to other makers. Maybe word of mouth reached folks on the east coast recommending they see Dickert for your rifle on your way west. I read Lancaster was a jumping off point for kany heading west.
I also thought I read somewhere that William Henry had some very early rifle contracts with ther towns and/or folks heading west? Could be wrong about this. But, if so, maybe Dickert got involved with William Henry early on and learned his business ways? Maybe William Henry marketed / sold rifles from several makers?
This brings up, though, a question we've discussed before. How would the people to whom these rifles were sent--out west (say, Pittsburgh or the Ohio Country)--know that they were "Dickerts" unless they were signed by Dickert? And when do we imagine Dickert began to sign the barrels of his rifles?
William Henry did not have any rifle contracts, but he did send batches of Lancaster rifles to Fort Pitt in the 1760s, I think (haven't looked this up again)--after he had left the gunmaking trade entirely and was partnered in a prosperous hardware store. I believe that he gathered rifles from several makers and sent them in batches. But if these rifles weren't signed at this time (early 1760s), how would buyers/users have learned that they were "Dickerts"?
I don't think there's any evidence that "Dickert" was known as a particularly good or reliable gunmaker before the Revolutionary War. Has anybody ever seen anything that suggested this?
-
Hi Scott,
What gunsmiths before the Rev War were identified as good and reliable in surviving records? Certainly Thomas Earle was recognized in New England but he may have been strongly influenced by Barnabas Mathis, a wonderful gunsmith rarely discussed. Plus Ebenezer Pomeroy, Seth Pomeroy, Medad Pomeroy were all well noted as skilled "mechanics" and "smiths". Which PA gunsmiths were recognized as top quality before the war? Albrecht? Oerter? Henry? Who? Dickert was still relatively young before 1775, however the question was not gunsmiths before the Rev War but the best during the 18th century.
dave
-
Here is an interesting article printed in 1869. It does not mention Dickert’s name specifically, but folks apparently knew Lancaster rifles were THE rifle to own way back.
(https://i.ibb.co/5hPsGZN/IMG-6227.jpg) (https://ibb.co/3mnS4KD)
-
Jacob Kuntz made some very fancy rifles for the upper crust. I don't know the "years".
-
What gunsmiths before the Rev War were identified as good and reliable in surviving records? Certainly Thomas Earle was recognized in New England but he may have been strongly influenced by Barnabas Mathis, a wonderful gunsmith rarely discussed. Plus Ebenezer Pomeroy, Seth Pomeroy, Medad Pomeroy were all well noted as skilled "mechanics" and "smiths". Which PA gunsmiths were recognized as top quality before the war? Albrecht? Oerter? Henry? Who? Dickert was still relatively young before 1775, however the question was not gunsmiths before the Rev War but the best during the 18th century.
I don't know of any contemporary comments that indicated by name that any Pennsylvania gunsmiths were particularly "good" or "reliable" or "top quality" (that is, distinguished from their peers). Maybe I'm forgetting something? Others can chime in.
As I've expressed many times over the years, I don't think eighteenth-century consumers purchased rifles because they knew who the maker was. I don't think, in most cases, they knew who the makers were (or knew who they were merely because they purchased from their local, known gunsmiths). I don't think there was a marketplace with the sorts of choices we take for granted.
The original question was who was the finest gunsmith in the eighteenth century. Somehow the question has morphed into who was known in the eighteenth century as the finest gunsmith? I don't think there's any evidence that permits us to answer that second question.
-
Here is an interesting article printed in 1869. It does not mention Dickert’s name specifically, but folks apparently knew Lancaster rifles were THE rifle to own way back.
(https://i.ibb.co/5hPsGZN/IMG-6227.jpg) (https://ibb.co/3mnS4KD)
This article is from 1869 and suggests that 25 years earlier--1844--Lancaster rifles were all the rage. I think that's two generations past the period we're talking about (although Dickert did keep working into the nineteenth century).
That said: I think there is evidence that Lancaster was known in the eighteenth century as a center of rifle making. No doubt. But, as you said, Dave, it doesn't mention any maker by name. So ... ?
-
I asked AI for the earliest contemporary mention of Dickert and they said this:
(https://i.ibb.co/9nGrW6K/IMG-6229.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ZdNMx54)
I assume it is simply an ad, but he was only 24 years old and it would be interesting to see this ad. Scott do you have a copy of this ad?
-
Which PA gunsmiths were recognized as top quality before the war? Albrecht? Oerter? Henry? Who?
It is worth stating this again and straightforwardly. I don't know of a single piece of contemporary comment that shows that anybody recognized Albrecht or Oerter as particularly skilled gunmakers. We certainly recognize that they were (and I am not suggesting that we're wrong). But did eighteenth-century Pennsylvanians?
Henry was a gunsmith for about a decade (1750-1760), after which he left the trade. The fact that he was hired as an armorer in the 1750s suggests, I guess, that important people trusted him to repair arms efficiently. Whether he made a "top quality" rifle--or whether he made any rifles--is entirely unknown.
The Lancaster Committee of Observation (1774-1777) discusses the various gunsmiths in town quite often. But the quality of their work is never mentioned and they never differentiate one from another.
If anybody knows of any contemporary comments that identify any particular Pennsylvania gunsmith as "top quality," I'd be eager to hear of them.
-
I asked AI for the earliest contemporary mention of Dickert and they said this:
(https://i.ibb.co/9nGrW6K/IMG-6229.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ZdNMx54)
I assume it is simply an ad, but he was only 24 years old and it would be interesting to see this ad. Scott do you have a copy of this ad?
Lesson of the Day: ChatGPT makes things up. When students use it, it often generates entirely fake references in footnotes and entirely fake quotations from real texts.
There was no advertisement for Dickert in the Pennsylvania Gazette on 1 March 1764.
(https://i.ibb.co/6gNKLHy/PA-Gazette-1-March-1764.jpg) (https://ibb.co/xJ3nd12)
(https://i.ibb.co/wQmMkXM/The-Pennsylvania-Gazette-1764-03-01-Page-4.jpg) (https://ibb.co/t2r8Gt8)
(https://i.ibb.co/MpvvfWT/The-Pennsylvania-Gazette-1764-03-01-Page-3.jpg) (https://ibb.co/y599pGT)
(https://i.ibb.co/q0QSpVW/The-Pennsylvania-Gazette-1764-03-01-Page-2.jpg) (https://ibb.co/s5Yfqz6)
-
spgordon, There are a number of us out here ( The silent majority ) who appreciate all the research you do. I know it can be very time consuming and we reap the rewards of your work. Thanks Jim
-
Excellent, Scott, thanks for the fact checking! A lesson indeed! User beware.
Thanks for the interesting thoughts and names that came to mind from this group to the original question - a question that was too broad!
Dickert
Schroyer
Thomas Earle
Pomeroys
Kuntz
Many others
-
I am afraid that the younger generation ( the got to have it now and not really work for it generation ) will take whatever AI tells them for fact without question. I would say that was no such thing as an unimportant gunsmith in early America.
Thanks very much Scott for your input, it really helps put things in perspective.
-
Which PA gunsmiths were recognized as top quality before the war? Albrecht? Oerter? Henry? Who?
If anybody knows of any contemporary comments that identify any particular Pennsylvania gunsmith as "top quality," I'd be eager to hear of them.
close but no cigar. I may have to start all of my correspondence with similar info in brackets. Sometimes aesthetics were not the most important thing to 18th century consumers
Sir Wm Johnson
January the 24th. 1761 , [My Urine Still Foul] The Weather
soe cold that handling Brass, or Iron leaves a Blister on the
Fingers: & in Bed People are cold even with ten Blankets on.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells. People here in general
Shoot very well with Ball, but don't doe much with Shot. The
Dutch all wear their hair (which buckles 17 like Candles) or
Night Caps, they wont be at the Expence of Wiggs, The Men
of them sleep in their Breeches, & Stockings, & the Women in
their Pettycoats. A Slea carries five Barrells of wheat.
There is a sort of whiskey distilled from Peaches, & Rotten
Apples, it is called Brandy: 'tis mostly made in the lower part
of Philadelphia; Should a person be thirsty at Night, he stands
a bad Chance, unless he drinks Rum, every Other Liquor being
frozen.
I think there is a series of letters from Sir Wm J about his difficulties in finding and buying a rifle that lived up to the accuracy hype.
volume 12
Johnson Hall June 11th 1772
p467-8
Sr Wm J to Col George Croghan
"...If Mr. McKee, or You could procure me a Rifle that is proved & shoots verry exact, (otherwise it would be needless to Send it, as there are Several here but none that will Shoot so nice or exact as I hear they do that way.) You would much oblidge me, by Sendiing it * any good opertunity. the [Amt of it] shall be paid to Mr. McKee when known by Yrs.
WJ
Note I don't care how plain it is, if it shoots true or exact.-
-
This Henry quote might also be of interest: https://books.google.com/books?id=jAdmAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=%22Comfort+came+to+me+in+the+shape+of+lieutenant,+now+general+Nichols%22&source=bl&ots=IBdcDgAWHA&sig=ACfU3U2WVzUHOpVPunrT-J1tRKPMxmXnfA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjYvOPo8OKFAxVRElkFHU52D7wQ6AF6BAgDEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Comfort%20came%20to%20me%20in%20the%20shape%20of%20lieutenant%2C%20now%20general%20Nichols%22&f=false (https://books.google.com/books?id=jAdmAAAAcAAJ&pg=PA60&lpg=PA60&dq=%22Comfort+came+to+me+in+the+shape+of+lieutenant,+now+general+Nichols%22&source=bl&ots=IBdcDgAWHA&sig=ACfU3U2WVzUHOpVPunrT-J1tRKPMxmXnfA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjYvOPo8OKFAxVRElkFHU52D7wQ6AF6BAgDEAM#v=onepage&q=%22Comfort%20came%20to%20me%20in%20the%20shape%20of%20lieutenant%2C%20now%20general%20Nichols%22&f=false)
The following morning, (October 24*) presented me with many difficulties : to be sure my horn, with a pound of powder, and my pouch, with seventy bullets, were unharmed by the water, though around my neck in the course of our swimming: Yet I had lost my knapsack, my hat, and my most precious rifle. P60
Comfort came to me in the shape of lieutenant, now general Nichols, then of Hendricks. He had two hats—he presented me one:
Money was out of the question, an order upon my father, dated at this place, for the price of twelve dollars was accepted, and afterwards in due time, paid honorably. This gun was short, about 45 balls to the pound, the stock shattered greatly, and worth about 40 shillings. Necessity has no law. Never did a gun, ill as its appearance was, shoot with greater certainty, and where the ball touched, from its size, it was sure to kill. This observation, trifling as it may seem, ought to induce government to adopt guns of this size, as to length of
barrel, and size of ball.
_________________
[45 balls to the pound would be .469 dia. or probably for a .48 or .49 bore on the rifle.]
-
In 1763 Edward Shippen (check out that handwriting!) praised Matthias Roesser (1708-1771), who trained William Henry (1729-1786)--and perhaps Dickert?--as "ingenious"--but he was speaking of Roesser's locksmithing skills:
"Old Mathias Roeser our ingenious Locksmith (from Germany) has at last brought me your Chest Lock with the screws and Pins belonging to it, which I send you ..."
(https://i.ibb.co/RzWycNB/Screenshot-2024-04-27-at-1-38-11-PM.png) (https://ibb.co/MML67fG)
-
Thanks again Scott. FYI you are on my "must read" list of posters!
Regards,
Carl
-
Thanks again Scott. FYI you are on my "must read" list of posters!
Thank you, Carl. Very nice of you to say!
-
Maybe one should define the criteria for " the finest " before any names are dropped.
-
Maybe one should define the criteria for " the finest " before any names are dropped.
Agree 100%.
Consistent excellence?
Innovation?
Fame?
Production?
Trend setting?
Individuality/creativity?
Carving and engraving virtuosity?
Cool or funky folk art style?
We all have our own criteria.
Another approach might be, “what is the most stunning rifle of the pre-Revolutionary War period in your view? Why?”
Same question, Golden Age?
-
How about most influential?
And thoughts / photos welcome on any of the specific variables Rich notes?
-
How about most influential?
And thoughts / photos welcome on any of the specific variables Rich notes?
The earliest English trade rifles were sturdy, wooden patchbox guns that had architecture and carving seemingly modeled after Lancaster rifles. Did they study and choose what was likely to be well accepted or just have an early Dickert or similar colonial rifle in hand and ran with what they had? This might point toward “most influential”, or not.
-
Despite an innocuous (to my mind) thread title, this thread has been quite interesting!
FWIW, Henry Moll/Mull was in Lancaster town quite early, 1740s or slightly earlier I believe? Will have to double check. He apparently ran up debt, however, and left for other pastures. Much like Roesser, no documented surviving work.
Christopher Breitenherd(hard?) was also apparently quite talented and was there fairly early, don't know how his age compares to that of Dickert.
-
Here is another - John Schreit of Reading - he came over from europe in 1731 where he was listed as under 16 years of age on the ship. I assume he would have trained entirely in america. His family lived at Ephrata north of Lancaster. Who in the world trained Schreit here in the 1730’s/1740’s? Maybe Mathias Roesser or another Lancaster maker? I doubt that Schreit would have trained east of Reading. And Reading only formed in 1750-1751.
And what if George Schroyer actually did some training in Lancaster before he went to Reading in about 1762? Peter Resor’s early rifle (1770’s) kind of reminds me of Schroyer’s work. Did Schroyer also spend time in Lancaster with the Roesser’s before 1762? Hmmmm
-
Peter Resor’s early rifle (1770’s) kind of reminds me of Schroyer’s work. Did Schroyer also spend time in Lancaster with the Roesser’s before 1762? Hmmmm
I’ve wondered if there are unknown connections between Newcomer, Schroyer, and Peter Resor. But, I digress.
-
Take a look at this map and listing of Lancaster’s first lot owners. It appears that in 1740, Henry Mull the gunsmith and Mathias Roesser the gunsmith bought lots two doors away from each other..lots 425 and 468 on King Street.
(https://i.ibb.co/GsFL1Zk/IMG-6233.jpg) (https://ibb.co/hXCjnGH)
(https://i.ibb.co/zbbwpLG/IMG-6232.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Dkknh65)
-
That's very interesting, Dave!
I know nothing about this Henry Moll/Mull.
Breidenhart seems to have arrived in Lancaster in 1752 or 1753 and by 1757 owned property on Queen Street--which, a decade later (after it passed through other owners), Dickert purchased. In that 2013 article, I speculated that either he or Roesser trained Dickert.
Breidenhart is not listed in the 1765 Lancaster city tax list as a gunsmith (I think he's listed as a tavern keeper): the only men listed as gunsmiths are Dickert, William Foulks, Roesser, and John Henry (William Henry's younger brother).
Breidenhart is, however, one of the gunsmiths hauled before the Lancaster County committee of inspection in November 1775 and was forced, with other gunsmiths (Christian Jack, Peter Reigert, Michael Wither, Jacob Kraft, Peter Gonter, John Miller, John Frederick Fainot, John Graeff, Peter Reasor), to make muskets instead of rifles. Presumably Dickert was not hauled before the committee because he was already in compliance with its demands.
-
There is an old newspaper article that lists the Lancaster taxables in 1754. Henry Mull is still listed as a lot owner then. Christopher “Reydenhart” is listed,with out the “B” in front of his name as a lot owner of a 1/2 lot. I assume that is the same person. We may want to broaden searches to his name without a B?
It notes a Rudy Stoner renting a property from Mathias Roesser (Razer). It is unclear if this means Rudy was renting 5 proprties from Roesser, or if Roesser owned 5 properties and Rudy rented one of them. It is interesting that Mathias Razer himself is listed in the “English” section of the tax list.
This is all “in the weeds” but could give some clues as to who really was the primary early gunsmith beginnng to influence others to develop the american longrifle.
(https://i.ibb.co/fpgpFk5/IMG-6234.jpg) (https://ibb.co/jMNMfy2)
(https://i.ibb.co/hYbB7Bv/IMG-6235.jpg) (https://ibb.co/8YqrKrV)
(https://i.ibb.co/3Bt5cTV/IMG-6236.jpg) (https://ibb.co/f4mVHXZ)
(https://i.ibb.co/6HxQWhK/IMG-6237.jpg) (https://ibb.co/QPR0KBW)
-
There is an old newspaper article that lists the Lancaster taxables in 1754. Henry Mull is still listed as a lot owner then. Christopher “Reydenhart” is listed,with out the “B” in front of his name as a lot owner of a 1/2 lot. I assume that is the same person. We may want to broaden searches to his name without a B?
It notes a Rudy Stoner renting a property from Mathias Roesser (Razer). It is unclear if this means Rudy was renting 5 proprties from Roesser, or if Roesser owned 5 properties and Rudy rented one of them.
This is great stuff!
I strongly suspect that the dropped "B" in Breidenhart's name was a unique transcription error: usually these variations in names occur because people hear things differently & write down what they hear (as best they can)--but I doubt anybody would have heard "Reydenhart" instead of "Breidenhart." I'd need to look at the original document from that 1754 list to see whether the error stems from whoever put the list together in 1754 or, as I am guessing, whoever wrote that article for the Lancaster County Historical Society journal.
Fun fact: in 1760, William Henry purchased his two-story brick home on the northwest corner of the original Market Square in Lancaster. His neighbor, who purchased the other part of lot No. 175 on the same day in February 1760, was Rudy Stoner (1728-1769)--he was a clockmaker. (One of Stoner’s tall clocks sold at auction in 2015 for $192,000.)
It's always interested me that in the late 1740s/1750s William Henry was apprenticed to a Moravian (Roesser) and rented property from a Moravian (Bender) but didn't visit the Moravian church until the early 1760s and didn't join it until 1765.
-
I keep re-reading the replies. Anyone have a clue as to the Philadelphia gunsmiths Sir William Johnson was referring to? Or is it possible that Philly was a marketing hub getting guns from Lancaster? Seems SWJ would have known of Lancaster. He was well traveled.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells.
-
Sorry one more - this I found online and it is interesting. Especially Roesser’s friendship with Heger/Hager, the fellow who founded Hagerstown Md.
(https://i.ibb.co/kq50B8K/IMG-6238.jpg) (https://ibb.co/ssbQRwj)
(https://i.ibb.co/kqfK4CF/IMG-6239.jpg) (https://ibb.co/r5SkxrJ)
(https://i.ibb.co/wNMHBS3/IMG-6240.jpg) (https://ibb.co/KjFZb2R)
(https://i.ibb.co/HFnhs42/IMG-6241.jpg) (https://ibb.co/2ngZQh6)
-
That article has interesting info. But--just to pre-empt further mistakes--it confuses William Henry I (who was Roesser's apprentice & who did leave the gun trade to become a merchant) with William Henry II (who, as a teenager, apprenticed to Albrecht, became a member of the Moravian congregation at Lititz). Nor was Roesser an armorer to Braddock's expedition. (That's a new one!--the author is confusing Roesser with William Henry I, who, we now know, also wasn't armorer to Braddock's expedition.) The article also lifts some of my published writing verbatim without acknowledgement, but that's the internet!
Fun Fact 2: When Albrecht moved to Lititz, he may have purchased Roesser's tools. When Moravian authorities were discussing whether Albrecht should move to Lititz, they noted that “the tools of a gunsmith who died in Lancaster” (that was Roesser) “are supposed to be sold this month.” All the tools that Albrecht would have used as a gunsmith in Bethlehem and Christiansbrunn between 1750 and 1766 were owned by the Moravian congregation and wouldn't have been "his" to take with him to Lititz.
-
As of a deed/indenture of May 1755, Henry Mull was noted as "late of the boro of Lancaster" so I would assume that by May 1755 he was gone. (This is a more modern transcription of the original file)
(https://i.ibb.co/1LFJDcz/Screen-Shot-2024-04-28-at-10-20-51-AM.png) (https://ibb.co/wR5r9tc)
(https://i.ibb.co/H77cyJx/Screen-Shot-2024-04-28-at-10-15-24-AM.png) (https://ibb.co/sjjT4B6)
-
Eric, I can do some digging but I think Henry Moll/Mull moved to Windsor Township in Berks County. He is noted on a deed from the 1760’s there as a blacksmith. That may be up towards the Hamburg vicinity.
-
Since you're "eyes on the ground" there Dave, how far would that be from where Johannes Moll was located right near George Angstadt in Rockland twp.?
I am almost positive - almost - those two Molls (Henry and Johannes) were connected.
-
Eric, it looks like maybe 15 miles from Windsor Township to Rockland Township. I Don’t remember exactly where the Angstadt/Moll lands were in Rockland. Nor do we know where the Moll property was in Windsor.
In between Windsor and Rockland there is Richmond Township. The same Henry Moll, blacksmith, living in Windsor Township as of 1768, bought a property in Richmond Township in February 1768 at sheriff sale. He sold it the same year, so I guess he flipped it. The property had a forge for making bar iron, and a saw mill and grist mill. Richmond Township is next to Rockland Township. This Henry Moll had a wife named Elizabeth. It would be interesting to find the name of the wife of Lancaster’s Henry Moll to seeif it is consistent.
In the Windsor Twp tax list for 1767, Henry Moll is shown owning 300 acres.
-
The 1751 deed that Eric posted indicated that Henry Mull’s wife (at that time) was Mary.
-
Yes, Iam doing a bit of digging because actually the Moll family of Windsor Township are in my family and I have some rough info for them. It appears that my ancestor Michael Moll, born in 1698 (whose children lived in Windsor Township), had a brother named Henry who was born in 1699. That brother Henry MAY be the gunsmith in Lancaster. But the Henry in Berks/Windsor on the deed (oldest son of Michael my relative) may have been born in 1733, too late to be the same man in Lancaster. I don’t have real great info for the Berks Moll side of my family so I would need to study it further. My impression also is that they are all probably the same broader family. Could Rockland Township gunsmith John Moll be a son of Lancaster gunsmith Henry (maybe born 1699)??
-
How about most influential?
And thoughts / photos welcome on any of the specific variables Rich notes?
The earliest English trade rifles were sturdy, wooden patchbox guns that had architecture and carving seemingly modeled after Lancaster rifles. Did they study and choose what was likely to be well accepted or just have an early Dickert or similar colonial rifle in hand and ran with what they had? This might point toward “most influential”, or not.
8)
-
I keep re-reading the replies. Anyone have a clue as to the Philadelphia gunsmiths Sir William Johnson was referring to? Or is it possible that Philly was a marketing hub getting guns from Lancaster? Seems SWJ would have known of Lancaster. He was well traveled.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells.
To play devil's advocate, Philly was also a marketing hub for imported rifles and parts.
-
I keep re-reading the replies. Anyone have a clue as to the Philadelphia gunsmiths Sir William Johnson was referring to? Or is it possible that Philly was a marketing hub getting guns from Lancaster? Seems SWJ would have known of Lancaster. He was well traveled.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells.
True, true, but it does say “making”. But no idea who the makers would be, as I don’t know any supposed to have been prolific makers. Antes?
To play devil's advocate, Philly was also a marketing hub for imported rifles and parts.
-
I keep re-reading the replies. Anyone have a clue as to the Philadelphia gunsmiths Sir William Johnson was referring to? Or is it possible that Philly was a marketing hub getting guns from Lancaster? Seems SWJ would have known of Lancaster. He was well traveled.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells.
I think it's very possible that the speaker was not being precise here--that he just heard there were impressive rifles "down there in Pennsylvania" and said "Philadelphia."
These remarks were not said or written by Sir William Johnson, who was well-traveled and would have known of Lancaster.
It is from the diary of Johnson's brother, Warren Johnson. He was from Ireland and had landed in America on 10 September 1760; he wrote this entry on 24 January 1761. So who knows what he knew or what he had heard?
On the other hand, Warren Johnson did land in Philadelphia & spent a week there. His single diary entry from his visit there doesn't mention rifles. But maybe he learned about these impressive rifles when there and repeated that info a few months later.
Warren Johnson's entire journal is printed in The Papers of William Johnson, vol. 13, pp. 180-214.
-
I keep re-reading the replies. Anyone have a clue as to the Philadelphia gunsmiths Sir William Johnson was referring to? Or is it possible that Philly was a marketing hub getting guns from Lancaster? Seems SWJ would have known of Lancaster. He was well traveled.
They are remarkable at Philadelphia for making rifled Barrell
Gunns, which throw a Ball above 300 yards, vastly well, &
much better than any other Barrells.
I think it's very possible that the speaker was not being precise here--that he just heard there were impressive rifles "down there in Pennsylvania" and said "Philadelphia."
These remarks were not said or written by Sir William Johnson, who was well-traveled and would have known of Lancaster.
It is from the diary of Johnson's brother, Warren Johnson. He was from Ireland and had landed in America on 10 September 1760; he wrote this entry on 24 January 1761. So who knows what he knew or what he had heard?
On the other hand, Warren Johnson did land in Philadelphia & spent a week there. His single diary entry from his visit there doesn't mention rifles. But maybe he learned about these impressive rifles when there and repeated that info a few months later.
Warren Johnson's entire journal is printed in The Papers of William Johnson, vol. 13, pp. 180-214.
Apologies for the imprecise copypasta! :-[
-
That’s clarifying!
-
I have an old book about german immigrants that is includes this writeup about Breidenhart including some of his own writing.
What is interesting is that he turned up in Lancaster presumably in 1753, and in germany had been making guns in Cassel and Potsdam. Was he making guns when he got here that looked like Potsdam guns? Or was he quickly integrated with makers like Roesser and Mull making something with a longer barrel and more americanized in 1753/1754?
Or, to the point about english guns, were the guns they were making here in 1753 a bit more british in appearance?
(https://i.ibb.co/t81c4ZD/IMG-8454.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Qrxnf8M)
(https://i.ibb.co/Qc5cQ2Q/IMG-8455.jpg) (https://ibb.co/VNKN979)
free photo hosting (https://imgbb.com/)
-
I wonder if anything is known about the German gunsmiths Gross or Tanner?
-
I had a chance to do a little more digging on the Molls. So far, I found that Henry Moll, possibly born about 1715, first lived in Lancaster, then by the period of 1755-1763 moved to York County. It appears he was the gunsmith who bought the lot in downtown Lancaster in 1740. He was taxed in Lancaster and then Huntington Township in York County as a gunsmith. He had a son John born in 1754 (a shoemaker, not gunsmith), a son Henry and had another another son Ludwig who I believe was older and was said to be a gunsmith but th8s is not confirmed.
However, this younger Henry born in 1715 or so as mentioned above, may have had a father named Henry, born about 1690 who may also have lived in York County. I think that Henry Sr (would have been born about 1690) may be a brother of Michael Moll (born 1698) of Windsor Township Berks County. I did not verify this Henry Sr but saw it in other genealogies info.
This may open the door to s discvering that the Moll family could yave consisted of an earlier generation of gunsmiths before John Moll. I suspect John Moll Berks County gunsmith was probably the slightly younger brother of Henry Jr above, and possibly also a son of the possible Henry Sr. He may have lived in Berks near his other Moll relatives/uncle. Or maybe the old Henry Sr lived in Berks? It is interesting that Henry Jr (born 1715) took a warrant on land in York County in 1763, the same year John the gunsmith moved north to Allentown. It is possible that their father died that year - that inheritance often would lead to moves by children but this is just hypothetical. Looks like gunsmith Henry Jr died in 1791 in York County. Whew! This is a big research endeavor.
-
Here is the gunsmith Henry Moll’s will from 1789, and a tax list for 1780 showing him as a gunsmith. Most of what I am seeing are secondary sources, and probably not much more than you found before Eric. Unfortunately hs will shows nothing of his occupation. I do wonder if some early records in Lancaster for “John” Moll maybe referencing Henry since his name was Johann Henry?
(https://i.ibb.co/TRnP4MF/IMG-6338.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XpdF7xv)
(https://i.ibb.co/NrhZvkH/IMG-6326.jpg) (https://ibb.co/XDBSQdv)
(https://i.ibb.co/X8mzBYv/IMG-6327.jpg) (https://ibb.co/rsnZPd1)
-
Looks like Henry Moll gunsmith was in Huntington Twp York County at least by 1758 based on this baptism for his son Ludwig.
It is interesting that in the baptism records for severalof his children his wife’s name is Gertraud. But there was also a 1761 baptism in this same township where Henry and wife (named Maria) were sponsors. Was the Henry with wife Maria the father of the Henry with wife Gertaud? Or was it the same woman maybe withthe name Maria Gertaud? It is tough to say. I assume the John Moll in this record beneath He ry’s entry is Henry’s son John the shoemaker.
(https://i.ibb.co/D9JwBvB/IMG-6340.jpg) (https://ibb.co/c6B2WZW)
-
I believe John Moll, in Rockland Township Berks, may be from the same family as the Molls of Windsor Twp Berks County. The location where John Moll lived in Rockland Township was only about 15 or so miles west of where Johann Michael Moll settled in Upper Hanover Township, Montgomery County. I am looking for links between them. Johann Michael was born sometime before 1700 and immigrated with his wife and small son in 1731. The interesting link so far - Michael traveled with his wife and son, and Michael’s brother Christopher and family on the same ship in 1731. But on the very next ship, arriving in Philadelphia only days later, was a 15 year old Johannes Moll traveling without any other Molls. These two ships may have essentially followed each other or left within days of each other. I think this Johannes may be the gunsmith, and Eric pointed him out before. I am wondering if 15 year old Johannes gunsmith, and older Michael and Christopher on the next ship were brothers.
On the map, the place where Johannes the gunsmith lived in Rockland Township was geographically right in between the place where Michael settled in Montgomery County, and Windsor Township, Berks County, where some of Michael’s children settled.
-
If only more guns survived and could be attributed! So much great information on the gunsmiths.