I often wondered how many guys from 1750ish said to their gunsmith, Make it look like it is 200 years old? Not too many. Every rifle, horn, bag, knife was new at one time. I would wager that more often then not a new item held a higher value then a used one. A lot of the wear and tear you see on old guns happened in the closet or attic over the past 190 years, not the ten years it was used. What would the rifle of a pioneer or longhunter look and feel like WHEN HE WAS USING IT? It would often times look like a new rifle with a little honest wear and use. The best way to achieve that is through a little honest wear and use. It does not have to look like a browning made in japan all super shiny and perfect. It can look new and not have a shiny finish on it.
Just one man's opinion.
Pat Cameron
A couple of observations:
1) While some folks do make the 200 year old look, many if most most of us do more of a used not abused look or just a well worn look.
2) While true that everything was once new not everyone owned new - used goods were purchased as well and that is documented. Those used goods would have had age on them
3) As to wear and tear -- few of us today put anywhere near the amount or in the time factor the old timers did - again documented. One letter from the L & C Expedition noted that if it had not been for their resident gunsmith their guns would have been out of service quite early on (IIRC within 6 months?). The Indian Dept noted that guns amongst the Natives generally lasted no more more than 18 months to two years.
4) While I personally don't find the commonly used term "honest wear" offensive, it does imply (intentionally or not) that anything else is "dishonest" and dishonest in my book = illegal.......and yes there are fakers, but all of the makers I know either personally or by reputation who make aged goods are as honest as the day is long - they are just artisans practicing their craft.
5) My last point is that not everyone buying aged goods is a re-enactor/living historian, many (if not most?) are collectors - a completely different yet still valid (and for the maker generally lucrative) market...different strokes fo different folks
This is a very difficult subject I admit. It is impossible to use items and not have them show some wear. However. Knifes and hatchets and gun parts do not pit significantly with normal use unless intentionally neglected. Horns do not look 200 years old even if used quite a bit for 20-30 years. So why all the pitting? Pitting and etching is far different than having marks from the hardening fire on the blade of a knife for example.
I have a friend who has been involved with making MLs and associated equipment since I was a baby if not before.
His first comment on aging, concerning guns especially, is always "fraud". There is no other reason for it from his stand point.
Here is one definition:
"• a person or thing intended to deceive others, typically by unjustifiably claiming or being credited with accomplishments or qualities : mediums exposed as tricksters and frauds."
There is so much of this stuff out there from rifles to "corn boilers" and its been done for so long that its impossible to tell old from new right now in too many cases. How does one tell an 40 or 80 year old fake from an original when its possible the "expert" has been looking at "documented" fakes 25 to 50% of the time so fake is old and old it fake?
What about damage to the "historical record" for researchers 80-100 years from NOW? What provenance does one trust?
Trying to place the guilt on the innocent buyer with the ever popular "let the buyer beware" defense is simply an admission of guilt IMO.
This opinion has nothing to do with "appreciating good work". Aged items do have a visual appeal. However.. Aging is a fine way to cover sloppy work especially in firearms since the metal parts are not expected to fit right. After all its supposed to be old right?
Fact or fantasy?
So long as there is a demand someone will make it. The people who want it will create whatever fantasy they can dream up to justify their buying the stuff they like. So when people talk of "fantasy rifles" for example all the aged guns fall into the classification. Its fantasy as opposed to a continuation of the art. I would bet my house that JP Beck did not make aged guns with bores already rusted and the stock pre-cracked in the the wrist. Just like people would not pay a premium for a new pickup with dents, scrapes, flaked paint and cracked windows today, in 1770 people did not buy new goods that were beat up, much less pay extra for them.
But people who want to talk the talk and not have to walk the walk find the aged stuff appealing.
They like to look experienced and knowledgeable but would have to be dragged kicking and screaming into the woods if they knew the Shawnee were waiting out there to kill them since they have kindergarden level skills in the woods and in the use of their equipment. But they look really cool cause their stuff looks 200 years old.
I guess my primary complaint is the folks that demand "aged" stuff and the people that make it, are distorting the history they claim to love. That this history has already been damaged by this practice is beyond dispute.
Dan
