Man, thatīs sweet... maybe Iīm biased, because Iīm in the middle of my own first hump on learning curve through my off (mostly)-on scratch&scrap build, but I have seen some @!*% fine, as well as just plain true workmanship originals.
And what can be seen from the photos is just a joy to see, because it looks like some true workmanship with occasional slip due to serious lack of time. Donīt get it bad and wrong, I know thereīs heap of work under everything whatīs visible on the surface, but somehow it can be feeled that all comes from one pair of hands which have some skill, just not actally fully adapted to the "know how". And somehow hard to tell if due to it is the first, or 50th under unknown time pressure. The photo of the patchbox is not all that clear in detail, but I would bet that you did the inlay first and then you did the brass washer under the lid screw. The obvious learning curve in engraving around the inlay is sweet.
I higly regard and apreciate what a lot of people can do, considering wood to metal fit, finishes, engraving preciosity etc. But in the means of workmanship, your rifle is somehow just down to the roots and very apropriate for the kind of the rifle. No patina needed, it looks like a well-build, higly cared-of fancy tool. In the soundest meaning of the word "tool".
From the begining, Iīm wishing to end up this way with my rifle, because flaws on first build are obvious. Now I wish I end comparable to your gun.
(Only after diggging into it past of Point of No Return I realized that making "what an advanced american aprentice could build after falling in love with Alexander Henry sporting rifle" or "how an american gunsmith, totaly unfamiliar with the style, would re-stock an Alexander Henry sporting rifle" is maybe of the toughest first builds. Did my tapered underrib three times just to scrap it...)
