AmericanLongRifles Forums

General discussion => Antique Gun Collecting => Topic started by: 120RIR on May 07, 2021, 10:39:06 PM

Title: Rochester Rifle
Post by: 120RIR on May 07, 2021, 10:39:06 PM
Okay...I'll admit I was being selfish in not bringing this up a month ago when the listing first appeared but I suspect other participants on this forum were keeping it quiet as well.  The "Rochester" rifle discussed in Moravian Gunmaking II just sold for $25,000+ on Cottone Auctions in upstate N.Y.  A lot of photos were posted on the Invaluable and Live Auctioneers web sites which is where I saw it.  I was hoping (against all odds of course) that it was going to be a major sleeper but alas, such was not to be the case.  I hope the buyer will make it available for research. I'm am, however, going to cry myself to sleep tonight!   ;)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Fullstock longrifle on May 07, 2021, 11:00:44 PM
I heard it sold for over $250,000.00 and with the juice it was over $300,000.00
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: mr. no gold on May 07, 2021, 11:02:49 PM
I was tracking the bidding on the "Monmouth' rifle. When I left the line it was up to $255K and appeared to still be alive in bidding. Good to know that there are still some guns bringing serious money.
Dick
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: 120RIR on May 07, 2021, 11:44:43 PM
Whoops...I misread the auction results and essentially left off a zero.  Yeah, definitely outside of my relatively humble financial abilities until my wife finally hits it big on the poker tour (still dreaming).  Again, hopefully this rifle will come to light for study.  The auction description and photos show a 33-inch barrel with what appears to be a Germanic mark on the top flat of the breech, a J.J. (I.I.) Behr lockplate, and Jaeger-ish hardware but a clear Bethlehem/Christian's Springs influenced curly maple stock. The Battle of Monmouth association is neat but clearly to be taken with a grain (or an entire shaker) of salt.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: debnal on May 07, 2021, 11:54:49 PM
I saw this rifle over a week ago and thought that it might slip by. Boy was I wrong! A great Christian Springs, possibly Albrecht, rifle. Very close to the Edward Marshall rifle. One of the earliest known.
Regards,
Al
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: mr. no gold on May 08, 2021, 12:39:49 AM
It looks like a Euro gun (parts) stocked in PA. The wrist shield was a later addition it appears. Great gun, Christians Spring gun, who knows? Carving for its age was spectacular though. The trigger guard configuration would have said German but for the fine maple wood stock. Though relatively small, the gun was graceful and did not have the 'clunkiness' that I usually associate with the CS guns. The rifle has been known for awhile and Westor White is said to have made drawings and taken photos of it many years ago. Hopefully, it will receive some conservation if not outright restoration. Maybe if it doesn't slide into obscurity we will get to see it down the road. Upside is that the auction house will receive a nice commission and the consignor, a public institution will get a lot of money to continue their work.
Dick
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: debnal on May 08, 2021, 01:26:15 AM
I originally thought that it was a restocking of a German Yeager rifle. But it could have been stocked with parts ordered from Europe.
In either case it is a very early gun possibly 1760ish.
Al
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: mr. no gold on May 08, 2021, 08:51:03 AM
Al, given the size of the gun, I would not be surprised if it was carried by a mounted soldier, especially if captured at Monmouth battle; perhaps a loyalist cavalry member. It would have been somewhat easier to manage (much like a carbine) from horse back than a musket. One thing that is sure is that the gun was somewhat old before it was ever carried off to war. Too bad the data with the gun did not include more about its history. Also, the lock was apparently made by York maker I.I. Behr, who was fairly early in the trade. As usual, more questions than answers.
Dick
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 08, 2021, 02:24:34 PM
I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang.  Looks like the tang broke at the original screw hole, but perhaps was still well breached, so simply squared off and redrilled.  I would have a very hard time believing a barrel tang that short was originial, untouched/undamaged work.  Also no reason the wrist escutcheon may not be original; it 'fits' the rest of the hardware and there surely is enough room for it, given the stubby tang moving the carving forward probably by at least 1/2".
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: spgordon on May 08, 2021, 03:39:57 PM
Maybe if it doesn't slide into obscurity we will get to see it down the road. Upside is that the auction house will receive a nice commission and the consignor, a public institution will get a lot of money to continue their work.
Dick

This comment gets at something that I've been thinking a lot about in the last few years. I agree that it is great that the Rochester museum will now have $$$ to spend on things closer to their mission. But this sale is a step backwards, it seems to me. A rifle that was available to the public, for inspection and analysis, is now in private hands--and whether or not it will end up "in obscurity," which is possible, access to it is now controlled by a private individual. That situation isn't always a problem. But obviously private individuals can control access to things that they own and, by controlling access, can control what gets known and said about the item. That is not a good situation.

I know there is nothing that can be done about all this. It is what it is. But I just wanted to elaborate on Dick's interesting remark.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Fullstock longrifle on May 08, 2021, 04:00:16 PM
I’m betting that it will be on display at this years KRA show in June, at least I hope so, I would like to see it close up.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Jay Close on May 08, 2021, 04:03:49 PM
Can anyone provide a link to one of those sites with photos of this rifle? I can't seem to find it. Thanks!
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: 120RIR on May 08, 2021, 04:18:55 PM
I couldn't find them on the Cottone web site but they're on Invaluable (see below).  I tried posting the photos on this forum but there seems to be something in their format (they look like regular jpg) that prevents them from being downloaded here.  Perhaps someone with more advanced computer skills can figure a way around that.

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/american-revolutionary-war-era-tiger-maple-long-g-b514399a1c
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Steve Collward on May 08, 2021, 04:30:42 PM
Not sure if this will work but try the link below.

https://live.cottoneauctions.com/lots/view/1-4FGMB7/american-revolutionary-war-era-tiger-maple-long-gun

Steve
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 08, 2021, 05:01:41 PM
I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang.

The stamped proof at the breech of the barrel does look like that of Fredrick the Great, although I would not swear to that given the fuzzy photo.

(https://i.ibb.co/MczqwT5/Screenshot-869.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Htcmwvp)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: debnal on May 08, 2021, 05:27:52 PM
Check the barrel tang carving on this rifle to the barrel tang carving on the Edward Marshall rifle in Schumway's book. Also, the cheekpiece carving has very much the same feel. May have been made by the same gunsmith.
Al
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Jay Close on May 08, 2021, 05:34:12 PM
Thanks, folks for the the picture links. My knees are weak. Such an important rifle and such an impressive price.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Mike Brooks on May 08, 2021, 08:07:12 PM
I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang.  Looks like the tang broke at the original screw hole, but perhaps was still well breached, so simply squared off and redrilled.  I would have a very hard time believing a barrel tang that short was originial, untouched/undamaged work.  Also no reason the wrist escutcheon may not be original; it 'fits' the rest of the hardware and there surely is enough room for it, given the stubby tang moving the carving forward probably by at least 1/2".
What EK said. ;)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: rich pierce on May 08, 2021, 10:51:46 PM
Not sure if there’s a hint of a stepped wrist or not. Similarities to the Marshall rifle are striking.

(https://i.ibb.co/R27S7Z6/03-DF94-F2-9-BC6-47-E8-8-C62-0-BD7-B9-BD93-CB.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/GfmXKJD/0-B203068-F20-E-41-AD-8-AF3-A8552-E2-F6166.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/0yF4RhY/1-EA25-C97-A50-D-4-BCF-909-C-6272092-D6539.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/0tV9r5W/A6-AB5-AD2-02-E9-44-E6-B849-65-E96-C7-CF003.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/nCczP9G/18-D4464-E-3587-4-D67-86-F7-AEE535-DE8-CAF.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/zJCMhPn/5471-A0-CF-9-B2-F-44-D6-8-B13-95-ABF348-A469.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)

(https://i.ibb.co/nRFJ6MV/89-CEF511-4011-4-B8-A-AB20-1-CEC00-C6-DB6-D.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: blienemann on May 08, 2021, 11:37:57 PM
Thank you to 120RIR for posting this topic. We tried hard to locate this rifle back in 2016 for the second book, talked with the Roch Hist Soc, their museum folks, local auctions and historical folks, but no one knew anything about it! Sounds funny now that the description says the RHS sold it. But it is great to have this important piece for study, along with the recovered Valley Forge Oerter rifle now at the Mus of the American Revolution. There is still this Oerter barrel in a restock – perhaps we will find it someday soon, in this connected world we have?

(https://i.ibb.co/mySxS6N/Oerter-restocked-barrel-ema.jpg) (https://ibb.co/T0rCrmW)

To Scott’s point, had the RHS and their fine museum displayed this rifle and made it available, that would have been as intended and appreciated. But they have apparently been hiding it, or did not appreciate its value until now – estimate vs bid. The Bucks Co Hist Soc and Mercer Museum with the Marshall rifle are a great example of how this should work, have been open and great to work with.

When we worked with other museums and historical societies to photograph arms for the book, many of the directors and staff were not interested in “guns”. We were careful to approach in terms of these special examples of our early art and history. Occasionally this opened eyes, they became proud of what they had, planned to display the arm, and even told us about other “guns” they had hidden away.

New management often comes with a new direction. Someone probably donated this fine piece to RHS years ago so that it would be shared. Now it is going back to the private side, presumably so RHS can support other priority historical items or topics. In the case of the Atwater Kent museum in Phila, it has now closed, and the pair of Wm Henry, Jr pistols and paintings of the Henry family are at risk. When items are donated to such groups, we hope that they sustain themselves and continue to display the items we donate. There will probably always be tension between the two approaches.

This rifle could have used a bit of conservation, but is generally in very good condition for its age. It may look a bit different when we see it next, but it is so valuable to have these photos. Thanks again for sharing and for all the comments - this is a great group of folks and website. Bob


Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: spgordon on May 09, 2021, 01:04:20 AM
In the case of the Atwater Kent museum in Phila, it has now closed, and the pair of Wm Henry, Jr pistols and paintings of the Henry family are at risk. When items are donated to such groups, we hope that they sustain themselves and continue to display the items we donate. There will probably always be tension between the two approaches.

Public museums & public libraries can make mistakes; public museums & public libraries can have financial difficulties; public museums & public libraries can (God forbid!) burn down. But these are exceptions to a general rule--which is that the public museums & public libraries offer access to items on a fair and equitable basis and care for their collections over the long haul. This is not the case with private ownership. Private owners of objects can police access to these objects--to their friends, to those who will be sure not to say anything that will decrease their value, etc. They can use whatever criteria they please. They are their objects and one needs to play by their rules. And of course they can also do whatever they want to the item.

I can't really think of any other field of collecting in which nearly all of the prized objects remain in private hands  and so few them are in public collections. Maybe modern art, I guess, but even that example would show that over the last 50 years the amount of modern art in museums has steadily increased. The example currently under discussion shows the reverse, the movement of an extraordinary object from a museum into private hands.

Would anybody think it would be better if the greatest of Renaissance paintings--which are presently in museums and can be studied, researched, even questioned--were (back) in private hands?
 
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: lexington1 on May 09, 2021, 01:19:09 AM
Do you think that the furniture is from a much earlier German gun? The trigger guard in particular looks very early to me. I have a Johann Wolf Peter rifle that goes to right around the turn of the 17th century that has very similar straight bottom guard like this one and I have always associated these with being around that time frame.
(https://i.ibb.co/qYwghRd/20210508-161452.jpg) (https://ibb.co/wh1Q8KR)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: mr. no gold on May 09, 2021, 01:27:11 AM
Good points, Scott. There definitely is an academic aspect to all of this. In fact, personally, I have assembled a modest collection of Rev. War materials in my chase for the 'American Rifle.' In preparing for the day when they will no longer mean anything to me, it is my hope and am taking steps to ensure that they will transfer to one of the major arms museums.
It is my feeling that as these things get older in years, the more they become part of the public patrimony which helped shape our nation. Such things in private collections usually are not available to the public and will remain so as long as there are so many secretive collectors. So, there is a dilemma in all this.
With all of this, I am surprised that the gun was deaccessioned and sent to sale. Not sure what NY laws are regarding this but there have been some major lawsuits brought by donors against historical institutions when the donated items were sold off. The plaintiffs won in almost every instance.
Why did this gun bring so much money? Condition wise it is somewhat pitiful as these things go, but am wondering if someone knows something that the rest of us do not? Could it be a member of the donor family seeking to bring it back home? I don't know and can't even guess. While these situations are never wholly satisfying, they sure do kick up a lot of dust and that is a good thing, in my opinion.
Dick
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: rlm on May 09, 2021, 02:43:34 AM
Public ownership (museums) vs. private collectors, always a conundrum. I will say this. The vast majority of knowledge availed to the public regarding the American longrifle has always  come from the collecting fraternity. IMO
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 09, 2021, 02:48:55 AM
Why so much money?  I defy anyone to look at the carving and deny that *most likely* the carver was the same guy who carved the Marshall gun, maybe #43, 42 of course is much more debatable.  But if we are to assume that the Marshall gun and #43 at the least are NH County Moravian work (whether Bethlehem or CS), then one would assume this piece to be NH County Moravian work.  Or maybe all three were stocked by Behr?  8). Anyway the point being, there is clearly a connection to the Marshall gun, #43, the Moravian Hist Soc gun etc.  That can only add immense value.  It's not like they're making any more of them.  Also - the Battle of Monmouth inscription is clearly very old.  Perhaps the provenance of the rifle can be traced back further than Rochester, so perhaps as Dick notes, maybe someone has some additional knowledge that we peons do not?  I suppose more information will pop up sooner or later.

I think a key to trying to pinpoint a stocking date range for this rifle would be to try to really narrow down just how early those lock nail escutcheons could be.  I have always thought them - or of that style - to be 1760s at earliest, but perhaps they may predate that by a decade? 
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 09, 2021, 11:33:12 PM
The more I look at this, the more similarity I see to Oerter's work than to either the Marshall gun or 42.  This piece utilizes a shorter cheek much like Oerter's work (and I include the lion/lamb which I personally consider an Oerter rifle) and later NH work i.e. Molls or Rupps as compared to the longer cheeks on the Marshall gun or 42.  Also the stock seems to be wrenched downward just forward of the comb more akin to Oerter's pieces in comparison to the Marshall, although of course the MArshall is a step stock so it's not a direct comparison despite Oerter also incorporating a slight step.

Here we also see a lower butt molding that initiates higher (i.e. distance from toe line to molding at the buttplate) than either MArhall or 42, again ssimilar to much of Oerter's work in wire.  And, the extra carved framing around the buttplate edges again seems to mimic the more flamboyant nature of much of Oerter's wire work which could actually get almost crazy.

I think the Euro (or what I see as clearly Euro) hardware here is 'bending the light' when it comes to interpretation of what we are seeing and where/when it may have been stocked.  I think it's clearly the same shop as the MArshall and at the least 43, but... is it the same hand?
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 09, 2021, 11:35:29 PM
Also there is a clearly a red varnish present over probably an aqaufortis stained piece of maple.  42 is also done the same way but unfortunately the MArshall gun is too worn and handled to really see any original finish (imho).
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: BFox on May 10, 2021, 02:37:18 AM
... Though relatively small, the gun was graceful and did not have the 'clunkiness' that I usually associate with the CS guns. The rifle has been known for awhile and Westor White is said to have made drawings and taken photos of it many years ago....
Dick

That's correct. Here are two of the seven "plates" of this gun in the Kentucky Rifle Foundation's Wes White CD which show both Wes' photos and some drawings of the details which may not show up clearly in photos. Bob's book uses some of these photos and also includes a discussion of its architecture and details in comparison with other Moravian rifles. Both are available from the KRF (kentuckyriflefoundation.org).

(https://i.ibb.co/pQJBz0g/Christians-Spring-Rifle-Rochester-Historical-Society-Plate-I.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DY5HCVN)

(https://i.ibb.co/fHb0M9s/Christians-Spring-Rifle-Rochester-Historical-Society-Plate-II.jpg) (https://ibb.co/L1MpSr3)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: mr. no gold on May 10, 2021, 07:59:38 AM
Great photos and drawings. There is one detail shown that is missing from the auction photos. The odd wrist inlay had an inset of some material, metal or stone in it. That is now missing and this is the basis for my conjecture that the wrist piece seemed inconsistent with the rest of the rifle, and was perhaps a later addition. With the presence of that inset the wrist shield now looks to be proper and could indeed have been applied when the gun was made. It also seems to be in agreement with the lock bolt inlays on the counter side.
Thank you BF for going into the archives and providing these photos. Much appreciated!
Dick
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 10, 2021, 01:40:26 PM
Dick, Bob L, BFox,

Do any of you have any thoughts on the barrel proof? I've observed similar looking marks on German/Prussian musket barrels. The color photo I posted as a closeup is, unfortunately, not clear enough for me to have a definitive  answer.

It's a small point but, could help give a time frame for the restocking.

Kent
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 10, 2021, 03:29:04 PM
Dick, Bob L, BFox,

Do any of you have any thoughts on the barrel proof? I've observed similar looking marks on German/Prussian musket barrels. The color photo I posted as a closeup is, unfortunately, not clear enough for me to have a definitive  answer.

It's a small point but, could help give a time frame for the restocking.

Kent

Marking appears to be a rampant lion (similar marking is on an iron mounted Dutch musket I have images of), but I'd also love a clearer image to see if an origin could be pinpointed. Behr is an interesting guy, originally from Würzburg in Bavaria and he worked in both Mastricht and Liege (at least one signed piece from both cities), so this rifle was possibly originally a Mastricht or Liege product before being restocked here.



(https://i.ibb.co/HDqMJ25/behr-j-j-de-jean-yves-12.jpg) (https://ibb.co/7JKT9zs)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 10, 2021, 04:05:00 PM
so this rifle was possibly originally a Mastricht or Liege product before being restocked here.

Thanks for your analysis. The boys in Liege & Mastricht were certainly busy people, seemingly arming everybody.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: rich pierce on May 10, 2021, 05:08:11 PM
Backsplash, when did Behr work?
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 10, 2021, 05:08:50 PM
Where the heck is Immel when you need him?  I realize that much earlier pieces - north German and 'Brandenburg' style rifles for example - used individual sideplates for the lock nails, but they were nothing like these.  I know that there will be some pushing for this to be a 1750s rifle but I just don't see it, those side pieces being exhibit A and the carving to my mind being exhibit B; I see this carving and the shorter cheek being a continued development of the what is present upon the Marshall rifle and which would ultimately end up as the very "full" carved Moll and Rupp style.

It's particularly interesting to finally see color photos of this.  I've had the Wes White disc for a couple of years now and the black/white is one thing, but it takes on an entirely new life in good color photography.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: blienemann on May 10, 2021, 08:08:38 PM
Rich, Heer der neue Stockel lists J J Behr ca 1690 - 1740 and includes Liege and Mastrict in Belgium and Bayern (Bavaria) in Germany. Searching for J J Behr arms online turns up guns from later, it appears he emigrated here, and a son of same name continued stocking arms. There's a pistol supposedly by Behr from Boston Town. More to learn. Bob
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 10, 2021, 09:36:38 PM
In regard to Behr, I have seen arms marked I I BEHR or I BEHR that appeared very early, probably very early 18th century, and some that appeared (in terms of German work) much later, 1770s maybe or even later.  I suspect that there were multiples, not merely a father and son but perhaps also others of the same name unless both father/son were exceptionally long-lived.  Possibly, 3 or 4 generations if all related?  Unfortunately cross referencing German stockers with American immigrants of the same name is somewhat speculative, can be very difficult to pin down a timeline without question.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 10, 2021, 10:21:10 PM
Backsplash, when did Behr work?

from Arne Hoff's Dutch Firearms

(https://i.ibb.co/rkqkGpY/behr-in-hoff.jpg) (https://ibb.co/G7G7vMy)

There are a few early 18thc military style horse pistols by him in Visser V1 p2 (group of 8- sadly none with the same proof mark as the rifle) and the notes mention that he used spelling variations based on the language of his customer "Bair (French), Beer (Dutch), Beehr, Baer, Bahr, Bohr (German)..." that volume includes similar pistols marked both II BEHR and II BHAIR in that grouping. Visser's catalog puts him in Maastricht/Liege post 1700 and active period from 1690-1740.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 10, 2021, 11:36:17 PM
so this rifle was possibly originally a Mastricht or Liege product before being restocked here.

Thanks for your analysis. The boys in Liege & Mastricht were certainly busy people, seemingly arming everybody.

It cracks me up that both the French and English governments were getting inferior knockoffs of their own infantry muskets made in Liege in the 1740s.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 11, 2021, 12:43:20 AM
Where the heck is Immel when you need him? I realize that much earlier pieces - north German and 'Brandenburg' style rifles for example - used individual sideplates for the lock nails, but they were nothing like these.  I know that there will be some pushing for this to be a 1750s rifle but I just don't see it, those side pieces being exhibit A and the carving to my mind being exhibit B; I see this carving and the shorter cheek being a continued development of the what is present upon the Marshall rifle and which would ultimately end up as the very "full" carved Moll and Rupp style.

It's particularly interesting to finally see color photos of this.  I've had the Wes White disc for a couple of years now and the black/white is one thing, but it takes on an entirely new life in good color photography.

Here is an earlier sideplate by Behr on a over the top gun that sold at RIA last year. I guess the chances that the restock used a scavenged partial broken sideplate vs original individual ones is low.




(https://i.ibb.co/6gLQ13X/index.png) (https://imgbb.com/)

another Behr product that looks a lot closer to the Rochester gun sideplate panels.



(https://i.ibb.co/qDtjKYq/90-02-quzyxv.webp) (https://ibb.co/kGRBj2b)



(https://i.ibb.co/GsNFt4Y/90-01-rupijj.webp) (https://ibb.co/JxgCyw6)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 13, 2021, 04:58:26 PM
... Though relatively small, the gun was graceful and did not have the 'clunkiness' that I usually associate with the CS guns. The rifle has been known for awhile and Westor White is said to have made drawings and taken photos of it many years ago....
Dick
snip

(https://i.ibb.co/pQJBz0g/Christians-Spring-Rifle-Rochester-Historical-Society-Plate-I.jpg) (https://ibb.co/DY5HCVN)



Not an exact match, but does this buttplate at bottom center look familiar?


(https://i.ibb.co/8D5kdv0/conestoga-gun-parts.jpg) (https://ibb.co/kg8Z9bx)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Stophel on May 15, 2021, 01:26:54 AM
Where the heck is Immel when you need him?  I realize that much earlier pieces - north German and 'Brandenburg' style rifles for example - used individual sideplates for the lock nails, but they were nothing like these.  I know that there will be some pushing for this to be a 1750s rifle but I just don't see it, those side pieces being exhibit A and the carving to my mind being exhibit B; I see this carving and the shorter cheek being a continued development of the what is present upon the Marshall rifle and which would ultimately end up as the very "full" carved Moll and Rupp style.

It's particularly interesting to finally see color photos of this.  I've had the Wes White disc for a couple of years now and the black/white is one thing, but it takes on an entirely new life in good color photography.

Hey, I just now found out about this gun selling at auction!

I always thought those two little sideplate washers were kinda incongruous with the rest of the hardware.  In the old B&W photos, they look like flat pieces of metal with engraving.  No match at all with the rest of the hardware.  In the color photos, you can see that they have some cast-in relief to them, so not so different from the rest of the metalwork after all.

My thought is that it is restocked ca. 1770.    Obviously, the barrel tang was broken, and rather than fixing it, they just squared it off, which forced them to do that horrible goofy too-far-forward triggerguard placement... which drives me crazy.

I suppose it's possible that those little sideplates are from the original rifle, say, 1730, but they are kind of anomalous for that date.  I can't think of any other gun off hand that has a similar sideplate arrangement.  You do often see washers, basically, with flower shapes, or whatever, or just plain round washers, going way back, but the little swirly extensions are unusual.  They are suitably Baroque, though, so they may well be from such an early date.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: rich pierce on May 15, 2021, 01:45:52 AM
Chris, what do you think of the architecture? Do you see a straight buttstock or a hint of a stepped wrist?
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Stophel on May 15, 2021, 01:49:24 AM
There is definitely a small amount of step in the wrist.  More like just a change in direction.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Stophel on May 15, 2021, 01:52:12 AM
another Behr product that looks a lot closer to the Rochester gun sideplate panels.



(https://i.ibb.co/qDtjKYq/90-02-quzyxv.webp) (https://ibb.co/kGRBj2b)



(https://i.ibb.co/GsNFt4Y/90-01-rupijj.webp) (https://ibb.co/JxgCyw6)

Ooh, I just saw this.  Yep, now it all fits together perfectly.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 15, 2021, 02:24:38 AM
https://m.rochestercitynewspaper.com/rochester/rare-rochester-historical-society-kentucky-rifle-fetches-record-306000-at-auction/Content?oid=13188522 (https://m.rochestercitynewspaper.com/rochester/rare-rochester-historical-society-kentucky-rifle-fetches-record-306000-at-auction/Content?oid=13188522)
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 15, 2021, 02:31:21 AM
I do not think there is a deliberate step at the wrist.  I think because the molding is terminated at the rear TG finial, and the stock is likely rounded under from that point forward, it creates the faint impression of a step as the angle along the sides changes and perhaps the working of the rounding work may result in a very faint dish.  But I would not personally call that a 'step wrist' as it's more of a secondary effect of the rounding forward of the TG finial.  Yes I may be splitting hairs but I'm viewing it from the perspective of intent and I do not believe there is the intent for a so-called 'step wrist' here.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: rich pierce on May 15, 2021, 02:39:37 AM
I was toying with alluding to a possible Lancaster architecture connection to muddy the waters. But everything else looks Oerter-ish to me.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 15, 2021, 04:06:03 AM
I agree very much.  I see more Oerter here than anything else, once one gets by the hardware 'fluff.'  Especially the shaping and length of the cheek.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: blienemann on May 15, 2021, 05:35:07 AM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned rifle # 3 in Shumway's RCA Vol I. Much to compare.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: smart dog on May 15, 2021, 01:09:25 PM
Hi,
Is there any other Oerter rifle with wood carving as fine as that on this rifle?  I am aware of the "Griffen" rifle but I don't think that carving is of the same level of sophistication and execution as is the carving on this rifle.

dave
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 15, 2021, 02:54:44 PM
Partially, that would depend upon the attribution of the 'Lion and Lamb' rifle.  Some attribute it to Albrecht, some to Oerter.

Also, it goes without mention that before Oerter was master at CS, he was an apprentice.  And after he was master, he had an apprentice  ;D

Perhaps this piece represents a stocking by Oerter, and carving by someone else, either before or after he was master of the shop?  Lots of possibilities, at least to my mind.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: backsplash75 on May 15, 2021, 04:30:02 PM
I'm surprised no one has mentioned rifle # 3 in Shumway's RCA Vol I. Much to compare.

Good point, I suspect the beefiness and prior uniqueness of that sideplate arrangement put people off. Interesting Marshallish trigger guard there too.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 16, 2021, 02:20:34 PM
Perhaps this piece represents a stocking by Oerter, and carving by someone else, either before or after he was master of the shop?  Lots of possibilities, at least to my mind.

As has become apparent to everyone, I am a novice with respect to antique longrifles, but I would like to pose a question. Has any research ever found any hints that there may have been what I would call Master Carvers that offered their services to some of these rifle stockers?
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Eric Kettenburg on May 16, 2021, 02:31:35 PM
In this country?  I've not come across anything like that although in the NC Moravian translations by Fries there is mention of an itinerant potter who stayed with them for a short time and taught their potter the latest fashion in Britain.

Bob L maybe can offer more of interest?  He's got good info on Valentine Beck who did travel a bit. 

There always has been a great deal of mystery and discussion/theories about the toasted step stock rifle in RCA2 and the signed Isaac Berlin / Easton rifle, and the phenomenal carving on both.  They're generally attributed to Berlin being that the one is clearly marked, but there's always been a bit of debate as to whether he actually executed that cheek carving, which is straight out of Europe.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 16, 2021, 02:56:47 PM
Thanks for the usual very informed reply Eric.

I have discussed this with Bob and he thought I should post my question on the ALR.

I've never built a rifle and the only carving I've done is on the Thanksgiving Turkey. I would imagine however that the carving on some of these rifle was time consuming. If the stockers had a level of business that required extra help I thought they may have farmed some of it out. Of course they did have apprentices to fill the gap but perhaps their carving skills may not have been enough for more complicated carving work.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 16, 2021, 05:09:36 PM
Let me ask a heretical question, bearing in mind that I'm new to this.

Is there documentation that all of the stockers actually did all of their own carving?

I realize that these people are looked on as artists, but were they really, or just businessmen?
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: Stophel on May 16, 2021, 10:04:50 PM
Let me ask a heretical question, bearing in mind that I'm new to this.

Is there documentation that all of the stockers actually did all of their own carving?

I realize that these people are looked on as artists, but were they really, or just businessmen?

I think it may be true, particularly later on, when population grew, shops grew, and business grew, that the head gunsmith had his journeymen do much of the work.  When I look at later guns by Dickert, I see a pronounced decline in the quality of the work, most obviously the carving.  Nowhere near the level seen on his earliest guns.  This could be because his eyesight was failing him, and he couldn't see well enough to do so well anymore (I can understand that), or he had his employees do it just to get it out the door as quickly as possible.  But that's the opposite of having the carving "professionally" done.  I doubt that ever really went on.
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: WESTbury on May 16, 2021, 10:14:02 PM
Great reply Stophel. Thanks for your insight.

Kent
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: bama on May 19, 2021, 01:50:32 AM
The term master gets tossed around a lot on this forum. I have come to form the opinion that master means master of the art of gunsmithing not master of business. Early on I do believe that the early masters were indeed true masters of every aspect of the trade. Now I am not saying that they were all on the same level in skills. It is apparent that some were better carvers or engravers and some better at the fit and finish and some mastered the whole process. I also think as time went on and the pace of life got more hurried and the demand for products increased that we see a decline in the artistry of the longrifle. Carving got simpler and eventually disappeared.

 I am a rifle builder and I have spent the better part of my life learning the skills required to try to duplicate the work that was done by the early masters. I do not feel that the guns that are well carved, the furniture that is well sculptured, inlays so precisely done and engraved are the work of someone that was not passionate about the work that they were doing. The skills required to do this level of work required much time to develop, it required dedication. We are blessed to have so many skilled craftsmen on this forum. Many whose work can stand up to the skill level of the old masters. I would be willing to bet that all of these men and women have dedicated a great deal of time and money learning these skills. Now with that said did some these men also have to become better business men and speed the process up, yes they did. That is why you can find adds looking for journeymen and apprentices. Did they do all the work on the great longifles, I would say most did. Was some of it farmed out, very possibly yes. I know from my own experience that there are very few men that I think I would let do work on one of my projects. Do I think my work is so much better than the rest, most certainly not. It's just that I have a minimal quality standard and I push my limits to the max to achieve this standard. I would not ask another craftsman to try to achieve a standard that I have such a hard time achieving myself even though their swork skill level may be above my own.

If you are not a rifle builder you may not be able to fully understand my statements above. You have to have a love for what you are doing to dedicate enough of your life to attain the skill level to do the work to create a masterpiece. There have been many projects in the past and even today where more than one master worked toward creating a master piece, but each one served their time learning the skill required to do the work. I think that as time went by and the master had to become more of the business man the artistry disappeared and became more mechanical. 

If you are a business man you probably or I should say most certainly would not choose custom gunsmithing as a way to get rich. I do think that some of the great pieces that have survived where high priced items in their day and they still hold their value today. I also think there were many more common guns made that did not survive the ravages of time, some did but few. I have had the honor of working on a few antique guns, I have seen some of the shortcuts used to save time by the old masters. Not all of them were good short cuts and some of the short cuts caused problems latter in the guns life.  Faster is not always better.

The more I think about it the more I begin to believe that the true master gunsmith could not also be a master businessman.

Oh well, just the rambling thoughts of a rifle builder. Cheers to all
Title: Re: Rochester Rifle
Post by: blienemann on June 18, 2021, 05:24:53 AM
Here is another rifle with separated lock screw washers or escutcheons, like the Rochester rifle. Nice but simple carving as well. Bob
https://auctions.morphyauctions.com/_A__A_GOOD_CZECH_FULLSTOCK_JAEGER_RIFLE_BY_ECCART_-LOT510790.aspx