Lebanon or Dauphin or.....

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Take a look at the Nicholas Beyer on Kindigs site http://kindigrifles.com/rifle_beyer.html

A Lebanon Gun...Well that is where the builder lived...... Now I just spent a year building a Peter Berry rifle (Dauphin County) and in the process did a great deal of research and by golly except for the personal trademarks in Berry's carving under the cheeekpiece, etc they sure sdo look similar to me. even the butt molding coming all the way up to the trigger is the same, the carving that separates the cheekpiece and comb from the wrist is very similar.....

So is the school determined by the commonality of the guns or by the location in which the builder lived??

[jwh1947]

I take this opportunity to repeat statements already made under other headings.  The facts are as follows.  Nicholas Beyer worked in what is now South Annville Twp., contiguous to Annville proper, in what is now Lebanon County, PA.  This is between Hershey, PA (Dauphin Co.) and Lebanon city, the county seat of Lebanon Co.

That being said, the following is relative.  All this area was part of Lancaster County prior to 1785.  In 1785 this land became part of Dauphin County.  Then, in 1813 this area became part of the newly formed county of Lebanon, about 90% of which came from Lancaster Co. and the tiny remainder ceded by Dauphin.  Beyer appears on Lebanon Twp., Dauphin County tax records reportedly from 1807-1810 and I have seen 1810 photostats. After 1813 he paid taxes to Lebanon County. That's all that I can say as an historian.  All the rest is commentary on a specific piece.  History class need not be boring.  JWH

[smshea]

I'm going to get smacked for this but Ive said it before so here goes...... I think this "School" thing is over played. By that I mean that I believe structuring groups of rifles with similar features into area specific categories is great for research work and study but way to many people put too much emphasis on the county names or rigid boundaries associated with those names. Wherever two of these areas meet you can find the styles melting into each other, sometimes for many miles. The area between Lehigh and Berks is one of many examples .
 Lebanon(and I live here) could be seen as a melting point of Lancaster and Dauphin influence... but that would be based on the work of three makers, two doing there own thing and one that seems to have the blend of both. And then you have the womelsdorf crowd doing something very different On Lebanon's east border and the Dauphin Co makers doing something else an equal distance away to the west. None of this adds up to a school in my book.

[jwh1947]

Scott, you are correct.  Think about recent events...there appears to be a trend to put all the subgroups into neat schools.  Take Berks, for instance.  I have heard lately of the Womelsdorf school, the Kutztown school, and the Reading school, not to mention the Allemengal school.  I guess it boils down to what we wish to consider a school and a subschool.  Then we need to deal with the renegades that did something a bit differently.  Some Beyers I have seen show a distinct Lancaster influence on the comb, while the standard expectation for me is a bit of Roman nose.  The Middletown (Dauphin Co.) shops did both, also.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

As a neophyte it is helpful to read your remarks!!!  I simply can't believe that people in 18th century America were as incredibly regimented in their art and work as some of the books seem to imply....and these guys did move around and see each other's work etc......

[jwh1947]

Bottom line.  The term "school" as applied to Kentucky rifle lore, is purely a 20th century coinage.  Kindig probably gets the most credit for the proliferation of the concept, though the term was commonly understood before 1960, the date of publication of both Kindig's and Kauffman's major works.  This makes for compartmentalization, but not necessarily neat, and definitely not absolute ordering.  So some have learned to live with the ideas as the backdrop for a general framework and accept them for what they are and are not, and others find more satisfaction in creating other compartments and defining things further.  Any way you look at it, it is the manipulation of conceptual notions, having their base and lines of demarcation in the thinking mind rather than on a chart or map.  

Becoming more tedious and specified on geographical boundaries is a slippery slope.  I once talked to one of these specialists regarding subschool evolution and brought up the inconvenient fact that one or two locals didn't fit the mold.  The response was somewhat like, "Yes, I thought about that and assume that they came from another county.  I'll just leave them out."  The results may read well, but do you know what type of controls were applied during the creation of the yarn?  

Incidentally, up around these parts when we come across a really ugly gun where we can't actually pinpoint origin we all agree to conclude that it is a
...
    ...
       ...Virginia gun! Come on guys, just funnin.

[Bill-52]

Tim:  Just sent you a PM.....

Bill

[Don Getz]

One of the first books I bought when I first got into this crazy game was Shumway's "Longrifles of Note".  In it he depicts
a nice gun typical of a given School.  What these designations do is to allow us, when we see a rifle of unknown oigin, to
tell approximately where it was made.   Further digging is usually required to ascertain exactly where, within that "school"
it may have been made.   In studying an unsigned gun, we can compare details of other guns from this school to determine where it may have been made.  This is the fun part of collecting and studying old guns.........Don

[SPG]

Gentlemen,

Does it not make sense to assume that a master 'smith was capable of building a rifle based on any School/Design that he, or more importantly, the customer wished? Just as today, I think that every gunsmith had favorite design elements that he preferred, and would execute if left to his own devices, but I believe that the "School" that was most often adhered to was the School of the Dollar, i.e. "The Customer Is Always Right."

I think it also safe to assume that there was much restocking and recycling of rifles and parts which can lead to confusion in our modern-day analysis. Especially since we live in a throw-away society; nothing was thrown away by those thrifty Germans. I have a heavy match rifle with a one-flatted round barrel in .62 caliber, full-stocked stocked in walnut, early-style handmade set triggers and beautiful early Lancaster hardware. Superior workmanship, no makers name...but cut with a 1-36 twist for a picket ball and fit with a false muzzle. I reckon this gun would cover just about every School that has ever been discussed...however, I believe it was made for the arming of the early Union sharpshooter units in the Civil War. It is obviously a "parts" gun but of very good quality and obviously done by a master 'smith. This rifle may have been made much earlier as a target rifle and re-worked several times by different gunsmiths and in it's last stages been fixed up for the war. Who knows?

If a customer went to his local gunsmith with hard cash in his hand and wanted a rifle with design elements from another "School" (gunsmith) I'm thinking for the most part he got what he ordered. Just like today...

Just my thoughts,

Steve

[WElliott]

I agree that the "school" idea is often overstated.  It seems to me that the most important influences on the architecture and execution of a rifle was (1) where and with whom the gunsmith had trained and (2) the demands and tastes of the market in which he was working at the time a particular piece was made. In early 19th century rifles made in my state, Georgia. we often see stylistic influences from Virginia and the Carolinas.  That makes sense because many of Georgia customers, and the gunsmiths themselves, had migrated to Georgia following the Revolutionary War because of land grants to veterans.  There are local stylistic adaptations which begin to appear as gunsmiths who were trained in different areas begin to work, and to compete, in the same market.
Wayne

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

In my experience of the results of education, advanced degrees especially, it seems that the unspoken faith is that if you can separate things into categories, then you are an expert and understand them.  To my way of thinking, categorizing is not the same as understanding or knowing.   What is the value of this practice of clumping guns into categories (schools) re longrifles??
It is an easy way to catalog them...Kindig had so many this was probably useful!!!  

  It seems to me that recognizing the differences in the details of guns made by the same builder and by different builders and trying to understand why those differences exist is a more fruitful endeavor, whether in art appreciation or as a contemporary builder...... its the art...... I think many of us begin to lose interest when the guns became factory built production models........ thus the Golden age???

Not knocking the work done by others... just musing on why things are done the way they are and what are the strengths and weakness regarding the appreciation and building of longrifles.... Just feeling philosophical today...... or maybe it is the  @%$@%#% research proposal I am working on??

[Dphariss]

I have a friend who thinks, right or wrong, that the  "school" idea was invented so it was impossible to have a collection of Kentuckys unless the person had one of each school.
But he is a cynical old codger but he has been in the game since the 1950s.

Dan

[jwh1947]

Cynical old codgers often hit grand slams.

[Dr. Tim-Boone]