Hudson Valley fowler?

[debnal]

I have just acquired this fowler. It is in totally attic, untouched since the day it was put up 250 years ago, condition. The curly maple stock has the original finish and has a nice washboard feel to it. The piece is 72 inches long with a 56.4 inch .72 caliber round barrel. Marked on thumbpiece AS and was reportedly from the Staat house in Albany, NY. While it looks like a Hudson Valley fowler I would like comments. It is in a picture with a classic HVF for comparison. Could it be an early Indian trade gun? Also, nearly all of the features are early but the sideplate.. Any thoughts as to date? It is pictured in the tome “The New York Firearms Trade” which is a new five volume set that costs $500. I have included an old painting that shows an Indian with what looks like a HVF. Nice to see a gun that has not been touched since it was no longer useful.
 






 

[smart dog]

Hi Debnal,
I am no expert on HVF but the barrel of that gun is English (British proof marks) and I think the makers stamp is an RW with some sort of mark above the letters.  My guess is that the maker was either Richard Wilson or Robert Wilson.   Richard Wilson established his mark in 1730 and Robert established his mark in 1759.  Both did contract work for the Hudson's Bay Company and Richard also worked for the East India Company.  The indian portrait is a picture of Sa Ga Yeath, a Mohawk chief, published in 1710.

dave 

[longrifle]

That is a nice one. I really like them in untouched condition like that.

[rich pierce]

It's of the earliest style of HVF- sheet brass buttplate, nailed on, and the tang bolt comes from the guard upward.  Dandy.

[Collector]

You live in an area with some outstanding old attics!!  I love these old HVF pieces.  Thanks for sharing it with us!

[longrifle]

I wish you could find stuff like that in attics around here.

[tom patton]

That is a very nice Hudson Valley fowler and I'm sure that Tom Grinslade would be interested in seeing it especially in the attic condition in which it was found. Mid 18th century fowlers like this one don't come down the pike very often. I'm not sure about the Wilson attribution and it is definitely not an Indian trade gun.Nevertheless it's a fine gun and one that would be a pleasure to own.
Tom Patton

[James Rogers]

T I'm not sure about the Wilson attribution

Tom,
I believe the attribution was only to the barrel manufacturer which is a Wilson.

[debnal]

I appreciate the information. The RW mark appears to have a crown above it. My book on English makers shows at least ten RW candidates. Does anyone have info on the RW mark with a crown?
Al

[tom patton]

T I'm not sure about the Wilson attribution

Tom,
The believe the attribution was only to the barrel manufacturer which is a Wilson.

James and Debnal,I do not disagree with the atttribution of the barrel markings to one of the Wilson family the  members of which were very active during much of the 18th century. I have no idea who might have made the gun only that he was a most accomplished gunsmith. I do,however, feel stongly that this gun is not an Indian trade gun. It has become increasingly common to see the term,"Indian trade gun" applied to those guns which seemingly defy ordinary classification. Here our task is relatively easy since this most attractive gun in its wonderful attic condition is in my opinion a fairly early Hudson Bay fowler. See PP.135 and 136 in "Flintlock Fowlers" by Tom Grinslade.

Tom Patton

[James Rogers]

I appreciate the information. The RW mark appears to have a crown above it. My book on English makers shows at least ten RW candidates. Does anyone have info on the RW mark with a crown?
Al

Could it be a six pointed asterisk? That would be Richard Wilson's barrel mark.

[debnal]

It could be an asterisk but still looks like a crown to me. It's very worn.
Al

[smart dog]

Hi Debnal,
My sources show a Richard Welford with a makers mark of RW with a crown over the letters.  Welford worked from 1712 to 1747.  He was a gunmaker to the British Ordnance department and to the East India Company.

dave

[Dan'l 1946]

Hi Debnal,
My sources show a Richard Welford with a makers mark of RW with a crown over the letters.  Welford worked from 1712 to 1747.  He was a gunmaker to the British Ordnance department and to the East India Company.

dave

Dave--I think your dates are closer to the fowler's period. The maple stock might mean the gun was built here using an imported barrel and lock. The early features such as the tang bolt coming up from below and the bridle-less frizzen plus the nailed on buttpiece could indicate an even earlier date. Whatever the story  turns out to be, this is a wonderful find and a great treasure.
 I agree with Tom. This fowler would be  of great interest to Tom Grinslade. Congratulations on finding a great and historical old fowler! Thanks for sharing these photographs with us. Got any more ?
                                                             Dan

[James Rogers]

Maker's marks sure help a bunch.

 Devil's advocate here to stir the conversation and inspire further thought on this great piece.  I caveat my forthcoming comments with the fact that I know little compared to most of you. ......

The barrel and lock are certainly from the period Dave has nailed the barrel maker's mark to. The TG and pipes seem old dutch as well.  The solid side plate is the big kicker that makes me think this is a gun stocked up in America in maple at a later date than everyone else is assuming using old parts rather than imported new parts.

The nailed on sheet butt plate is seen on cheap guns into the next century. The tang bolt coming from the bottom carried on as well on cheaper arms and I could see myself doing it that way if the gun I got the old parts off of had it done that way.   I am guessing these two features inspired curiosity as to whether this might be a trade gun or not but I think they are evidence of cost effective and timely means to put a non-functional group of parts into a serviceable firearm.

I also find the "A" on the thumbpiece very interesting in design. Comments and thoughts?

[California Kid]

I thought that as well. Looks kind of masonic, but I don't know a lot about masonic symbols.

[Mike Brooks]

Maker's marks sure help a bunch.

 Devil's advocate here to stir the conversation and inspire further thought on this great piece.  I caveat my forthcoming comments with the fact that I know little compared to most of you. ......

The barrel and lock are certainly from the period Dave has nailed the barrel maker's mark to. The TG and pipes seem old dutch as well.  The solid side plate is the big kicker that makes me think this is a gun stocked up in America in maple at a later date than everyone else is assuming using old parts rather than imported new parts.

The nailed on sheet butt plate is seen on cheap guns into the next century. The tang bolt coming from the bottom carried on as well on cheaper arms and I could see myself doing it that way if the gun I got the old parts off of had it done that way.   I am guessing these two features inspired curiosity as to whether this might be a trade gun or not but I think they are evidence of cost effective and timely means to put a non-functional group of parts into a serviceable firearm.

I also find the "A" on the thumbpiece very interesting in design. Comments and thoughts?

that's a wilson punch mark for certain sure. The lock is Dutch. the pioes are typical products of the HV area. The sideplate is a bit different, but not that far from the norm for a HV fowler. The buttplate is quite typical and identical in shape as a couple of the Grinslade guns....even down to the two piece construction with the joint on top of the return.  The tang bolt coming up from the bottom held on in this area longer than other areas....very normal. EVERYTHING on this gun was made in the HV except the lock and the barrel. The trigger guard is quite typical of the area as well.
This gun has absolutely NOTHING to do with being a trade gun. Strictly made as a wild fowling gun for some Dutchman to blast ducks and geese with.
 Not picking on you James, You just had all the questions nicely lined up so I used them.....

[James Rogers]

Glad you replied Mike. I am not versed in these northern guns but have recently acquired an interest in them due mainly to their Dutch characteristics.
A few questions if I may to get myself more familiar.

Do we know for sure that those types of fancy, early Dutch trigger guards and pipes were made here? I was under the impression that was pure Dutch import stuff.

When you say the solid side plate is not far from norm for a HV gun, what time frame are you talking about? I am not familiar with any solid plate guns as early as the barrel and lock and other hardware. Grinslade suggests only a two pre- 1745 solid plate HV guns but their provenance is only a barrel date or date scratched into a stock. He also states the solid plates show British influence in their design which I thought would only probably be a fair statement for guns of a date much later than the manufacture date of the barrel and lock on this gun.

Yep , nothing trade gun on this one. A mighty nice find!

[Mike Brooks]

Do we know for sure that those types of fancy, early Dutch trigger guards and pipes were made here? I was under the impression that was pure Dutch import stuff.

For the most part I think yes, they are pretty crude compared to Euro stuff, especially the t-guards. Something as simple as pipes I think would have been made here, unless they are cast....I have never had one apart to know if they are cast or sheet.
 This particular gun isn't as high end or artistic as many in Grinslades book. That's why I'm not surprised by the ugly lump of a sideplate. I don't read anything particular into it  date wise....more of a  half hearted "make do" thing.
Al just my opinion of course , others may have other opinions.

[debnal]

Rich,
Thanks. That's the kind of discussion I was looking for. What makes this gun special for me is that nothing has been done to it, so we have an example of exactly what the gun looked like 25,0 or so, years ago. I just do not see truly untouched guns much anymore.
Al