I’m just thinking aloud, don’t own any term and don’t mean to judge / criticize in any way. It is interesting that a book intended to show the wide variety of daily life and style / details of rifles within that umbrella of Moravian connection may result in lumping them all together.
“Christian’s Spring” (and Bethlehem) from George Shumway’s book was descriptive, as that was one location. Still the men and boys and their work changed over 40 years – so a date range is helpful.
Dickert and others at Lancaster worked with a different profile and details. “Early Lancaster” – maybe through Rev War, and “late Lancaster” – thousands of treaty and fur trade rifles after 1820 – those terms are helpful, as we know the location and can guess at a range of years. Might be room for “mid or Golden Age Lancaster” as well to cover the classic Isaac Haines, Henry Albright, Schweitzer, et al. Dickert made them all over 60 years, so good to put a date range with a Dickert rifle.
Robby’s nice rifle described as early Lancaster, a good early lock, lots of Dickert with Albrecht patchbox and other influences is helpful, ties it to a place and time.
“Moravian” may be a fad, and we tend to follow what’s in print – photos of fine old rifles in books and articles, contemporary copies of them by Jud, Jack, Mark, Allen and others. I do not think this term should be limited to a “C’s Spring, stepped wrist and stout” rifle. But history and language are written every day.
