Your thiughts on Shimmels

[smshea]

Stuart....Well said!

Wayne..... Careful, .They will be coming for you in the night.

[Dphariss]

Here is another group of assumptions (thats what it really is but its worth considering):
Look to the Indian Trade rifles the English started importing for the natives during the Revolution. These were traded to the natives in lieu of American made rifles that were "off the market" for them.
They are full featured American style rifles of the 1770s. Made in England, brass or wood box covers, carving English style but still carved. Buttplate, TG, entry and 2 upper pipes, nose cap. They were made in 3 grades and the cheapest one was very unpopular according to DeWitt Bailey.
What do we learn from this.
We may assume that the typical rifle the natives were used to seeing was relief carved and had a patch box cover of metal or wood.
Based on this we may then *assume* the typical American Rifle of the time was so featured. It is what the natives expected the rifle to be.  The natives wanted something that looked like something they were used to and they knew worked. This is why the NW gun remained unchanged for so long.
Where did the natives see rifles? generally on the frontier. Who populated the frontier, it was not the rich from Williamsburg or Philadelphia for the most part it was people with no place else to go in many cases.
The rifle was the most expensive item most people on the frontier owned.
We have no idea who or when the barn gun was stocked. But we must ask several things. Was it typical? How would we know? Was it stocked by some blacksmith, farmer or frontierman from a barrel and a lock they had on hand or by a trained rifle maker?  Has anyone studied tool marks on the wood? I am sure someone has, Dixon maybe?
Also some gun makers work the THEIR standard NOT the customers.
WE DON"T KNOW. We can only look and make assumptions lacking some written evidence.
So we have to go back to the social mores of the times and WHAT IS ACTUALLY PRACTICAL.
If I were going to Kentucky in 1765 to hunt deer for several months I would want a rifle with a buttplate. Having  1/3 to 1/2 the buttstock split way when way out in the woods is a serious inconvenience.
These were literally life and death issues. What some farmer used to shoot hogs with in 1820 is far different than what someone might accept in an other context like going to Kentucky for months or down the Ohio to Missouri.
If YOU were buying a rifle that you would likely use for the rest of your life what would YOU buy?  I wold buy something more durable than a gun with no buttplate.

Obviously the "shimmel" exists. We have no idea how many were originally made or when or by whom or what they were really used for. But I still think the lack of all the parts needed to make a  durable gun relegates them to a side bar.
Today we tend to embrace "neat, cool, different" this may not have been the case in 1770 Colonial America especially if "different" was sub standard.

Dan

[Dphariss]

Wayne..... Careful, .They will be coming for you in the night.

Tell me about it

Dan

[jwh1947]

Thank you, Dphariss.  Everything you say warrants serious consideration.  One could almost think that when gun guys speak in absolutes, that they are always on thin ice.  We just don't know for certain about lots of the details and need to apply our logic.  Therein lies the fly in the ointment.  Recall the middle ages, when monks used to sit in monasteries  debating how many angels could sit on the head of a pin.  They, too, based their conclusions on logic.  Sometimes conclusions are based on apparently sound logic and yet dead wrong.  I am certainly no exception, nor is any other mortal.

[Stophel]

As this is referring to building shimmels, I have a couple of questions also.  Were they common in a particular area or school?  Also I have noticed that many built today have a finish like on a finer rifle.   

DP   

The "Barn Gun" seems to be almost exclusive to the Lehigh/Berks area, more or less (well, there are a lot of rather crude "Southern" guns of the 19th century...).  Again, these were literally lock, stock, and barrel.  The few I have seen were competently assembled but ROUGH.  I can imagine that the ones I have seen originally had no stain nor finish at all.  I am told that this is pretty common for these guns.  I did one time see a gun made with an old Brown Bess barrel and lock, probably the triggerguard (which was missing).  Of ordinary straight-wrist form, hard to locate.  At this point, I do not recall if it had a cheekpiece, nor if the bottom of the stock was flat or round, but I think round.  It had an opening for a wood box lid, now missing, and the piece of wood at the butt was busted off where there would have been a bit of metal inlet in for the box lid spring to catch on...since there was no buttplate.  Absolutely no stain, and the maple wood was quite yellow from 175 years of handling.   

[Don Getz]

You fellows have to realize that the plain "barn" guns I build are my own creations, not meant to be copies of anything, and I have never seen anything like them in an old gun.   I do follow the basic architecture of old guns, mainly because they were usually pretty good, and go from there.    My next rifle is going to be a J.P.Beck, and I will try to follow the carving and other features of his guns, as best I can.   I've already talked to Allen Martin to give me a hand in laying out the carving......he's a good artist and I appreciate that.   It has a godawful piece of wood on it and I sure don't want to screw it up too bad.   Sure will
be glad when it's finished.   The way my old age is going, it may be quite a chore to get this one done.   I'm now taking physical
therapy for my arm, and now have a disc in my lower back giving me fits....oh well................Don

[bgf]

My opinion would be that few if any would have purchased a severely plain rifle in the early days, simply because the money saved wouldn't have amounted to much.  I would assume that the main costs would be acquiring (or making) lock and barrel, then bringing the stock from plank to gun-like form.  Stopping anywhere short of "full-featured" rifle is likely to save only a small fraction of the cost, as most of the components and skills would be routine and common.  As far as the more elaborate carving or engraving, I can see that being a choice -- since it would consume a lot of a highly skilled craftsman's time; it also might not appeal to all customers; could conceivably even contradict their religious beliefs in some cases.  The patchbox doesn't seem to have been optional, and rifles of that period, even much later, still don't look right to me without a patchbox, which is further down the utility list than buttplate or toeplate, for example.  Later in history when major components became relative cheap or were salvaged from older rifles, it would become practical either to order or make for oneself a rather plain, functional rifle with whatever components were considered minimal.

[jwh1947]

OK guys, we need a poll.  The vox populi is called for.  Honestly, let's break things down for discussion. Just for this review, let's arbitrarily classify as:  A.) From the first-found guns in PA/VA to 1790. B.) From 1790-1830. C.) Beyond 1830

What percentage in each category would you say originally had patch boxes, either wood, brass, or glitterati specials? 

This should be interesting and fun, too.   

[JTR]

Wayne,
For the sake of clarity, you mean rifled rifles only?
Not to include smooth rifles or of course fowlers?
John

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Wayne, if 40 guys who are wrong all agree..............so what?  I am trying to understand what you are trying to find out here. It seems that having the knowledgeable cite their sources and share their educated opinions is a lot more usefully than a poll......This is not aimed at you...just trying to figure out what you are trying to get at....cause I can't seem to get there from here..........Are you from Vermont???

[Benedict]

Tim,
I agree with you.  This site has a lot of very knowledgable people.  I would trust their answer than a lot of guys who only know as much as I do about the subject.  Some hard data would be great but that is not readily available.

Bruce

[northmn]

Two very knowlegeable people mentioned that the Shimmel was found mostly in the Berks County or Lehigh areas.  Why   Were these rural areas and what was the economics of the area in the time they were built???  The poor boys of Tennessee were built in rather remote areas where the forging of the buttplate and took longer than the inlet and the economic situations were tough.

DP

[rich pierce]

OK guys, we need a poll.  The vox populi is called for.  Honestly, let's break things down for discussion. Just for this review, let's arbitrarily classify as:  A.) From the first-found guns in PA/VA to 1790. B.) From 1790-1830. C.) Beyond 1830

What percentage in each category would you say originally had patch boxes, either wood, brass, or glitterati specials? 

This should be interesting and fun, too.   

I'll bite.  If talking about scratch-built rifles (not restocks, not rifles made of old parts, but rifles with new parts, in Pennsylvania only,


A)>80%, B, >80%, c>80% till caplocks appeared.

[B Shipman]

northmn, the true Schimmel comes from the Allemengal region of Pa north of Reading. Allemengal is a Dutch (Germanish) term for bad land. Dixons Gunmakers Fair is located in this area and if you view this land historically , you can see the meaning. Sharp hills and valleys that flood. Compare with the rich land of Lanc. Co and the Lehigh vallley. The word is not historical. Chuck Dixon coined the term in the early 80's for a plain barn gun. The PA Dutch use this term for anything "moldy", workaday. It could be applied to anything and to be sure , a gun. A brilliant term for what Dixon was making at the time. Virtually ALL these guns that are original come from this area. Most gunmakers made plain guns. Plain, but all the furniture. But true Schimmells come from this area.

[northmn]

 

northmn, the true Schimmel comes from the Allemengal region of Pa north of Reading. Allemengal is a Dutch (Germanish) term for bad land. Dixons Gunmakers Fair is located in this area and if you view this land historically , you can see the meaning. Sharp hills and valleys that flood. Compare with the rich land of Lanc. Co and the Lehigh vallley. The word is not historical. Chuck Dixon coined the term in the early 80's for a plain barn gun. The PA Dutch use this term for anything "moldy", workaday. It could be applied to anything and to be sure , a gun. A brilliant term for what Dixon was making at the time. Virtually ALL these guns that are original come from this area. Most gunmakers made plain guns. Plain, but all the furniture. But true Schimmells come from this area.

Thank you.  To me this clears up the issue of shimmels and why they were built and their place in history.


DP

[Stophel]

This is a Schimmel:



 

[Dphariss]

northmn, the true Schimmel comes from the Allemengal region of Pa north of Reading. Allemengal is a Dutch (Germanish) term for bad land. Dixons Gunmakers Fair is located in this area and if you view this land historically , you can see the meaning. Sharp hills and valleys that flood. Compare with the rich land of Lanc. Co and the Lehigh vallley. The word is not historical. Chuck Dixon coined the term in the early 80's for a plain barn gun. The PA Dutch use this term for anything "moldy", workaday. It could be applied to anything and to be sure , a gun. A brilliant term for what Dixon was making at the time. Virtually ALL these guns that are original come from this area. Most gunmakers made plain guns. Plain, but all the furniture. But true Schimmells come from this area.

Very good.
I just received an email along these lines from a friend in PA and come here to find Bill's thoughts along the same line.
Having gone to school in the 7th and 8th grades in one room schools with old order Amish children and my father having business relationships with the sect for years I would not be surprised if the shimmel was a plain gun made for these plain people.

The mens and womens plain clothing is "buttoned" with hooks and eyes and the womens dresses are often held to form with straight pins. No buttons or modern closures. At least in the 1960s-70s in Iowa. They were called "hook and eye Dutch" when I was younger or just "hookies" by us modern types.
The old order Amish do not have modern conveniences. They are not supposed to have their photos taken. They would not have wanted nor would they have owned a fancy rifle in the 18th or 19th century or today. Brass mountings may very well have been too much to be acceptable. A shiny gun would have attracted the eye. They also would likely have retained such guns for far longer than the general population since "new and improved" is something their religious beliefs specifically require them to avoid and so long as it filled the need it would have been retained. This may increase the survival rate.

So a plain rifle/smoothbore with minimal iron mounts with a dark stock would "fit" perfectly. It is possible that the Amish may have had a woodworker or other craftsman in their congregation that would make these. They would not have signed them I all probability.
Yes, they are pacifists but they hunt and they will use firearms to protect lives, crops and other property from predation. They shoot stray dogs ect. They all had firearms so far as I know in the 1960s.

This is probably the most compelling component in the "shimmel" discussion once someone jogged me into thinking along these lines.
It makes perfect sense in context of the Mennonite and Amish and gives a very valid reason for the shimmel's existance.
I am not a fan of the barn gun but this really makes sense to me.

Dan

[Dr. Tim-Boone]

Excellent point.....not everyone was gentry or frontiersman......and those who dressed and lived "plain" were many...... Hence my new Quaker har ffrom Morgan Shea..maybe I better order a Shimmel Barn gun from Bentflint  to go with it??

[B Shipman]

Another point to be made. These guns were not limited to their borders. Tom Ames did an excellent article on "Schimmels" in the KRA journal some years ago. These guns were often picked up by "tinkers" (travelling salesmen) and taken to the frontier for sale with cloth, tools, pots, ect.
There is lots of evidence to suugest that gun production in this area was unique. Most gun makers , then as now, make rifles to order or spec. They did this as well, ( consider a beautifully finished heavy target rifle signed John Derr without B.P. and with a strap T.G.) but also made roughed out guns in the white, just lock, stock and barrel. It kept them busy when there were no specific orders. And gave them quick sales when things got busy.
A customer could come in and pick a gun and have it finished in jig time plain or fancy.
AND a tinker could buy them as they were, finish them quickly and apply a strap guard himself. Ames noted that roghly finished guns of different style often had similar guard straps and guns with identical style had different guards.

Or, the plain guns, still cheap, could be finished and sold that way for sale on the frontier.
THey were a part of history far beyond their little area.
My theory, and it's only that, is that these really rough pieces were the work of tinkers, and the better pieces, though dead plain but with consistent guards, were the ones finished in the shop of the gunsmith.



My

[smshea]

I agree most of the butt plateless guns come from that area but that they were generally made by gunmakers. There are signed schimmels out there and in many cases (David Boyer or the Hess family comes to mind)  you you can definitely tell the hand that made it. If you are including guns that have butt plates and guards(Plain rifles)you can find them anywhere between the Delaware and the Susquehanna. 

[B Shipman]

Scott, the ones that are signed are surely made in the shop and I'll bet they are neatly done. But many, all unsigned, are especially crude. And the evidence points to the sale of unfinished guns. (Tip Curtis today) Nothing really changes.

[Don Getz]

The first gun of this plain type that I ever saw was one that Bob Hoy built, a real neat gun, no buttplate, side plate, entry
pipe...but.....he referred to it as a "poorboy".    The term Shimmel, used to describe this type of plain gun, was coined by
Chuck Dixon.   I never heard an old gun being referred to as a Shimmel until Chuck started to use the term.   If you "google" the name "Wilhelm Shimmel", you will see a lot of rather crude, or "folksy" animal carvings, done with a knife
that this gentleman did.  They are highly collectable now.....big bucks.    They were done down in that Lancaster, Berks,
Lehigh area of Pa.   From what I understand, he would do these carvings to pay for room and board.   I think Chuck Dixon
used this term to describe a plain gun, following the same crude, folksy carving of old man Shimmel..........Don

[Dphariss]

We will never know the real story I suppose.
Its tough when all that exists is the artifact.
Then we have the 19th century accounts of people getting barrels etc and making their our guns.
Guns restocked from left over parts.
Trying to come to an iron clan conclusion could cause skull cramps.
Dan

[smshea]

Bill I agree
 
 I absolutely think the majority of these were sold unfinished. I also think the majority of them came out of established gun maker shops. There were some farmers in the area that built guns in the winter, But I cant honestly say Ive see a schimmel that I was inclined to think came from their hand(Jacob Gerog etc.)But even if they did, I would consider those established gun makers.   Most seem to be Boyer , Hess, Angstadt etc.

[bgf]

The idea that gunmakers would sell unfinished rifles casts a new light on the Schimmel for me.  Perhaps this was the predecessor of the modern kit, a rifle lock, barrel, and stock with functional essentials (ramrod hole, forward pipes, TG, etc) fitted together and sold for the client to finish up on his own and customize (e.g., cut for LOP and buttplate) to his liking and needs.  Like today, some kit buyers did a better job than others -- the ones that did the least ended up owning Schimmels?