Suzak, I absolutely agree that makers often trained in one area and moved to another(s), picking up different ideas along the way. It seems to me that relying entirely on architecture, furniture or even initials on a rifle can lead to misidentification. How many makers in, say, Ohio today build excellent "Southern" guns, and how many contemporary makers in Georgia build nice "Lancaster" guns? In the end, a rifle either stands on its own, or not, and appreciation is in the eye of the beholder. Even when a rifle is fully signed, we don't often know if it was really by "John Smith" who worked in Arkansas or his cousin "John Smith" who worked in Indiana. And, as much as I appreciate Southern guns, I don't appreciate all of them, while I do appreciate very much many guns made elsewhere.
I don't argue with your premise or your assertion about the geographical origins of this particular rifle. My questions remain, however: how do you actually know where it was made and who made it? What clues tell you that? What finally convinces you? It would be educational for us to know.
Best regards,
Wayne