Abraham Schweitzer Long Rifle

[dweber49]

I recently acquired this rifle.  Apparently a previous owner cleaned this up and put a polyurethane finish on li.  Any recommendations for getting this off?  I’d like to stain with ferric nitrate and then Tried and True.  Thanks.

[Tanselman]

I have to ask, since I'm not sure what we are looking at. Is this a contemporary Schweitzer, or an original, or a restocked barrel???

Shelby Gallien

[dweber49]

Thanks for the question. I’m thinking original. Take a look at the photos and share your thoughts. The note was in the patchbox, which was jammed. The barrel is difficult to read.


















text te

[Ats5331]

With limited knowledge and not having handled the rifle, it seems to be a restock. Apologies if that is blunt (and possibly incorrect), but just a gut feeling.

The Patchbox is very well executed. Beautiful engraving! Thanks for the additional pictures!

[Tanselman]

It looks like the barrel, triggers and guard are probably original, but everything else looks like modern work to me... including the attractive patchbox with its odd hinge. Usually when an early rifle has been converted to percussion, the fulminates from the caps dry rot the wood just behind the breech on the front side, and even more so the wood just in front of the lock on/near the barrel, and your wood looks new in those areas... with no sign of dry rot or age. The butt carving is inappropriate for a Schwitzer rifle, the butt plate and side plate look new, and the side-facing around the lock looks foreign to Schwitzer's work.

I think you have an original Schwitzer barrel, with perhaps a couple other original parts, that has been built into a new rifle somewhat resembling a Schwitzer but with multiple areas not consistent with his work. Hopefully others will respond, since perhaps they will have different thoughts.

Shelby Gallien

[bama]

I think that this may be a restocked barrel in the late flint period by a fairly good gunsmith and originally a flint gun. Converted to percussion much later maybe than most were. I don’t believe it is a late contemporary restock, maybe an early 1900’s restock.

The reason I don’t think it’s a late contemporary restock is the lock mortise and the patch box are done with old school methods. The rear pipe is hand made and is fairly elaborate for most late contemporary builders. The patch box side plates are nailed on as is part of the finial. This is hard enough to do without deforming the brass sheet the first time around much less pulling it off an old rifle and replacing it on another rifle without deforming the brass. The lock mortise patina is hard to fake or match, not impossible but not easily done. I know in the early to mid 1900’s it was common for collectors to reconvert rifles from percussion to flint but not the other way around.

The carving may possibly be a later addition, maybe the same time as the stock cleaning.

So again I think this is a late flint restock of an older barrel by a fairly good gunsmith. That was converted to percussion late in the game and possibly replaced by one of the new fangled cartridge guns and sat in the corner for many years. At some point someone decided to clean up the old rifle and refinish it. Taking much of the original finish away.

The lock internals do look new, so at some point the lock has been rebuilt to a functional state.

[Tanselman]

Jim,

I'm more skeptical than you about this rifle. Do you believe it has an original patchbox? It's a nice box, but I strongly doubt it is original, based on the strange hinge... and TOTAL lack of any small dings, scratches, dents, hits along its edges, etc. I agree somebody had some skill in making and engraving the box, but I'd bet it is 20th century if inspected closely, not a late flint restock with salvaged box. Nothing explains the fresh, clean edges on the forestock's top edges above the side facings in the 2nd picture... no wear, no dings, no real age. I'm also skeptical a modern lock could fit so perfectly in an "old" mortise, despite what the mortise looks like inside. I would expect more variation in the width of the side facing band around the current lock if it was a replacement for an earlier lock, and I do not see that type variation. To  me, it looks like the mortise was built around this modern lock. I'd agree a competent person did the work, but the carving is all modern, and the stock looks new, no real dings, damage, slivers, etc. I guess we could say it sat in a closet and was not used, but that's a stretch. This stock with its modern butt plate, oddly hinged and untouched patchbox, odd side plate, strange side facing treatment, etc., etc., just doesn't add up to an old rifle restocked in late flint era and reworked a bit later on. But I like the barrel.

Shelby Gallien

[bama]

Shelby, you may very well be right. Without having the rifle in hand it is hard to tell for sure. I just know from experiance to install a patch and nail it down is not an easy task even on a present contemporary rifle. I agree the hinge looks hokey but the rest of the box is old school. I just don't see a modern builder that has the skills to make and install that patch box would put the effort into a rifle that more than likely would not be worth the time spent. I am not convinced the the butt plate is new but even if it is, the skill level to install it and mate it up to the patchbox is much higher than the  than the carving, which I am sure was added later. That's why I feel this may be a late period flint that was converted to percussion but was not used that long before it was forgotten. Anyway it's all conjecture and I was just relaying another possibility. Always fun to make guesses about these old guns.

[JTR]

I tend to agree with Shelby here.

The dark black around some areas, say like the side plate, seem to indicate that the stock was very black at some point, and cleaned off. But, the remaining black just doesn't look right,,, like too black, too new looking. Not normal if it were worn or rubbed off.
Around the carving, from the pics, it looks like it was relief carved into a flat surface, instead of sitting on a flat surface.
 
It looks sort of good, but too many little questions when comparing to his rifles in the books.

It reminds me of something someone might do to enhance a gun to make it appear old and original, but that hadn't handled many originals.

Just my thought's, John

[dweber49]

Thank you all for the insightful and thought provoking responses on this rifle.  At the end of the day, it’s a handsome piece that I am happy with.  I didn’t pay a fortune for it and I think I can restore the poorly done refinish.  As I have it in hand, I would like to share my observations.

Finish:  The black paint was added to attempt to add patina.  It is on top of the varnish, and comes off easily with paint remover and a Q tip.  The varnish is another matter.  I see no indication that the entire stock was painted black.

Fit:  The lock, sideplate, and buttplate all fit very tightly.  The lock needed to be pulled out with the lock bolts, it was so tight.  The stock was apparently made for this lock, as evidenced by the small wood trapazoid that offsets a wide spot in the plate.

Carving:  The carvings are all proud to the stock surface, leading me to believe they were not carved into the stock.

Lock:  obviously drilled to be a flint.  The ingenious method to fill the pan gap shows a high level of skill. It looks like it’s always been that way.  Kindig notes that when Schweitzer died in 1831, he had a debt to his lock supplier.  Perhaps he repurposed a flintlock in the 1820’s as percussion became the norm.

Butt and side plate photos are included as well as the exposed wood.
























res 2 safe code