American Fur Co Rifle?

[rbs]

Attached are two photos of what appears to be an English made trade rifle with a lock marked "Am.Fur Co" and dated 1838. I only have photos of gun showing one side of butt and lock and not rest of gun. However, the gun has a full stock with stock also heavily tacked like butt, bore is smooth and gun has general appearance of an English trade rifle and barrel has what appears to be old English proof marks. Seller believes this gun was distributed by American Fur Trade company and that only other lock similarly marked "Am Fur Co" is at Museum of the Fur Trade.

I would appreciate your thoughts re the following questions: 1. Have you ever seen or heard of gun with lock marked "Am. Fur Co"? 2. Do you think AFC marking on lock genuine of the period or by someone falsely trying to link this gun to the American Fur Company; 3. Do purported Indian additions to butt of gun (the sun, etc) appear genuine? 4. Approximate market value of this gun?

Thanks for any thoughts you may have re this gun.


lRBS

[Avlrc]

Sounds suspicious to me. I don't know about American Fur Company, but almost every thing you see marked HBC ( Hudson bay co.) is fake. You see a lot of knives & axes marked with HBC, I don't think any of them are original.

 They are more Indian guns today, then they was back when the American Indian actually used them. Not only  have they survived but they  reproduced, LOL...

[Bob Roller]

rbs,
Please send a full picture of this lock.I made a lock like this but need a picture
of the whole thing to see if it's one of mine.

Bob Roller

[louieparker]

RBS,  I can only see a small portion of your lock. But that bit don't appear to be old.....LP

[Shreckmeister]

I find the inlay of the quiver with the arrowheads stick outward interesting.  That might ruffle a few feathers.   Oh.....I crack me up.

[tallbear]

RBS

I fixed your pictures!!

Mitch Yates

[rich pierce]

Let's call it a trade gun. Certainly not a rifle.  It doesn't look right to me.  It would not be English made and be made of curly maple.  The inlays look like somebody's current idea.  The lock looks new, the stamped lettering looks new.

[Dphariss]

Unfortunately since the 1960s there has been so much "Mountain Man" stuff made for reenactors that much of it is now showing up as "real" since it was aged and/or heavily used in some cases. What does the interior of the barrel look like? Is it really a rifle? Or is it a trade gun/smoothbore? It does not have a rifle buttstock and the barrel looks round to me.
Its really tough to know from photos. But it appears that the barrel has more corrosion than the lock. I would not be surprised to find that its been converted or reconverted to FL. The wood rot looks like percussion cap flash related rot to me but its not possible to tell from here.
With many items its best to consider it to be a fake until proven other wise. Rifle has to be disassembled to see if its marked in some hidden area. Faked proof marks are common too.

Dan

[JTR]

Lot's of good advice here.

So how much are they selling the gun for?

John

[Hungry Horse]

 More than a few modern trade guns have been made, and sold, to museums in the U.S. and Canada. They were not intended to be thought of as originals, but over time, records, get lost, directors, retire, or die, and the gun gets bestowed with honor it hasn't earned. Green River Forge bragged about their guns being sold to museums, to show what an authentic representation of a very rare indian trade gun really looked like. I'm sure if Green Rive guns ended up in museums, North Stars, did as well. It is interesting that years ago, trade guns, were extremely rare finds at gun shows, and sales of collections. But, now they approach being almost common.

                  Hungry Horse

[rbs]

Gun for sale for $15k. Purported to be one of two known trade guns with afc marked lock...other supposed to be at museum of fur trade. From comments to date I looks like sale to knowledgeable buyer may not be easy.

[Bob Roller]

Can you take this lock off the gun? I have made a lot of these
over the years and still have one set of parts for it. It is another
style of Ketland and the moulds still exist and for only the plate,
cock,and frizzen.The top jaw for the Maslin works well for the cock.
I would certainly like to see what kind of mechanism is in this lock
and if it is one of my first versions,I want to see if my logo has been
obliterated.

Bob Roller

[JTR]

Personally, I have a hard time believing the lock is original to the gun.

As Dan pointed out, the wood is burned away around the barrel tang which is a good indicator of percussion cap use. Then as Louie pointed out, the lock looks pretty new. No wear on the frizzen or really anything else. True, the lock has a bit of pitting, but the screws are in remarkably good condition with almost perfect slots. Then, even though the lock plate has a bit of pitting, the pitting doesn't seem to have affected the stamped fur trade lettering or the date stamping.....
Then, well, maybe its just the picture, but the screw hole in the plate that holds the lock in place is clearly shown, but there doesn't seem to be a screw in that hole... nor a hole in the wood for the screw to pass through... So maybe its a replacement lock with the screw located behind the hammer,,, but then the lock is what is adding all the value to the gun....

I'd take a double dose of caution on this one,

John

[rbs]

In reply to Bob, fortunately, since it's not mine and on sale at a very high end antique store, I cannot take lock off. It would sure be interesting to do and get good photos of inside of lock. Owner of store where it's for sale, who seems nice and quite knowledgeable about fur trade era guns and 19th century, claims to have paid $12k for it. Perhaps a good test of his "sincerity" would be whether he would allow this. He is a long distance from where I live but if I get back there and gun not sold, I will see if he will remove lock and let me photo. If so, I will post photos.

[firelock-inc]

Looking the lock screws, they are made after the Civil War!

I say 20th century lock!

Rickp

[KLMoors]

I don't know if this will help- but I looked in the Museum of the Fur Trade book -"Firearms of the Fur Trade 1" and here's what I found with a quick perusal-

From about 1822 onward, the guns should be marked with a "Fox in a Tombstone" logo with the letters IA under the logo. It goes on to state that this goes up into the 1840's (pg 158)

On Pg 194 they show images of the fox in the tombstone, and another of a fox in a circle. Both have the IA under.

On pg 358 - 359 there are pictures of a 'Chief's Gun" that is at the Museum of the Fur Trade. It was built by Chance of Birmingham for the American Fur Company and has a  different  (from your example) lock on it. Also, there is the fox in tombstone stamp under the pan on the lock.

They go on to state on those pages that all other known examples are marked with "Chance and Son" on the tail of the lock, and all have the fox logo under the pan. The barrel marks have proofs and the fox logo on the barrel.

The chief's gun is in Chapter 13, which covers 1820 - 1875. No date is given for the gun they pictured.

That's all I got!

Ken Moors

Edited to add:   Shreck - you cracked me up too

[alyce-james]

 rbs; Sir To me I don't believe this gun looks or smells of correctness. Put me in the column for fake. Thanks for sharing, AJ.  PS. In order to make more definitive statements concerning the correctness of this trade rifle, additional pictures are needed. example; Barrel markings, butt plate area, trigger guard area, side plate area and muzzle end of stock. 

[Hurricane ( of Virginia)]

Help me out. Should not the tacks , brass right? , have "oxidized" ( aged) over the years and there be some evidence of that process on the stock?
Hurricane

[Roger B]

I did a little research on Henry rifles used in the fur trade a few years back and also read the Gordon book. As far as I can tell, American fur companies didn't mark guns or their parts with the company name.  They sold them with the maker's marks, British or American, only.
Roger B.

[Habu]

1. Have you ever seen or heard of gun with lock marked "Am. Fur Co"?

Yep.  Fakes, both of them.  Of the guns and rifles I've examined that are known to have been sold by AFC, none are marked in such a manner. 

2. Do you think AFC marking on lock genuine of the period or by someone falsely trying to link this gun to the American Fur Company?

The marks on the lock, and the lock itself, do not appear to be of the period indicated by the date.  The only person who can address the question of motive for the marking is the one who did it.   

3. Do purported Indian additions to butt of gun (the sun, etc) appear genuine?

How are you defining "genuine?"  They do not appear to be of the period of use of the gun shown in the photos, and do not appear to have been done by the folks who usually decorated their weapons in such a manner during the period of use of the gun shown in the photos. 

Unless, of course, that "period of use" is the 1970s or so.

4. Approximate market value of this gun?

To a collector of original rifles, or a student of history (unless it is the history of the "mountain man revival"), the gun is basically worthless.  As to what it might bring on the open market. . . there's a fool born every minute--and some of them have money. 

[JV Puleo]

I can't add much to the comment above...
The markings, done in a modern, condensed sanserif typeface with hardware store stamps wouldn't fool the average collector of K98k Mausers... There is an official engineering name for that marking face. I don't remember it, because I never use them but it screams "modern".

As far as what the antiques dealer paid... it happens fairly often, especially when one ignorant person thinks they are taking advantage of someone else's ignorance or places too much credence in an unverifiable "expert" opinion.

A few weeks ago I was offered a very nice signed NE fowler for the modest sum of $45,000. In my mind, only about 10 times what it might fetch on a very good day and only to a handful of collectors .... maybe (but I doubt it). It was, realisitcally, a $2,500-$3,000 gun at best. The gentleman had bought it from a prominent local collector and "expert" along with an astonishing amount of pure speculation on its origins and date. (i.e. "Revolutionary War" period though it had a lock that could not have been made before 1801). Someone made a killing and the gentleman I met was the last one standing when the music stopped.

[Tony Clark]

In reply to Bob, fortunately, since it's not mine and on sale at a very high end antique store, I cannot take lock off. It would sure be interesting to do and get good photos of inside of lock. Owner of store where it's for sale, who seems nice and quite knowledgeable about fur trade era guns and 19th century, claims to have paid $12k for it. Perhaps a good test of his "sincerity" would be whether he would allow this. He is a long distance from where I live but if I get back there and gun not sold, I will see if he will remove lock and let me photo. If so, I will post photos.

Don't bother to test his "sincerity" just move on!