Author Topic: Rochester Rifle (Read 7691 times)

120RIR · « **on:** May 07, 2021, 10:39:06 PM »

Okay...I'll admit I was being selfish in not bringing this up a month ago when the listing first appeared but I suspect other participants on this forum were keeping it quiet as well. The "Rochester" rifle discussed in Moravian Gunmaking II just sold for $25,000+ on Cottone Auctions in upstate N.Y. A lot of photos were posted on the Invaluable and Live Auctioneers web sites which is where I saw it. I was hoping (against all odds of course) that it was going to be a major sleeper but alas, such was not to be the case. I hope the buyer will make it available for research. I'm am, however, going to cry myself to sleep tonight!

Fullstock longrifle · « **Reply #1 on:** May 07, 2021, 11:00:44 PM »

I heard it sold for over $250,000.00 and with the juice it was over $300,000.00

mr. no gold · « **Reply #2 on:** May 07, 2021, 11:02:49 PM »

I was tracking the bidding on the "Monmouth' rifle. When I left the line it was up to $255K and appeared to still be alive in bidding. Good to know that there are still some guns bringing serious money.
Dick

120RIR · « **Reply #3 on:** May 07, 2021, 11:44:43 PM »

Whoops...I misread the auction results and essentially left off a zero. Yeah, definitely outside of my relatively humble financial abilities until my wife finally hits it big on the poker tour (still dreaming). Again, hopefully this rifle will come to light for study. The auction description and photos show a 33-inch barrel with what appears to be a Germanic mark on the top flat of the breech, a J.J. (I.I.) Behr lockplate, and Jaeger-ish hardware but a clear Bethlehem/Christian's Springs influenced curly maple stock. The Battle of Monmouth association is neat but clearly to be taken with a grain (or an entire shaker) of salt.

debnal · « **Reply #4 on:** May 07, 2021, 11:54:49 PM »

I saw this rifle over a week ago and thought that it might slip by. Boy was I wrong! A great Christian Springs, possibly Albrecht, rifle. Very close to the Edward Marshall rifle. One of the earliest known.
Regards,
Al

mr. no gold · « **Reply #5 on:** May 08, 2021, 12:39:49 AM »

It looks like a Euro gun (parts) stocked in PA. The wrist shield was a later addition it appears. Great gun, Christians Spring gun, who knows? Carving for its age was spectacular though. The trigger guard configuration would have said German but for the fine maple wood stock. Though relatively small, the gun was graceful and did not have the 'clunkiness' that I usually associate with the CS guns. The rifle has been known for awhile and Westor White is said to have made drawings and taken photos of it many years ago. Hopefully, it will receive some conservation if not outright restoration. Maybe if it doesn't slide into obscurity we will get to see it down the road. Upside is that the auction house will receive a nice commission and the consignor, a public institution will get a lot of money to continue their work.
Dick

debnal · « **Reply #6 on:** May 08, 2021, 01:26:15 AM »

I originally thought that it was a restocking of a German Yeager rifle. But it could have been stocked with parts ordered from Europe.
In either case it is a very early gun possibly 1760ish.
Al

mr. no gold · « **Reply #7 on:** May 08, 2021, 08:51:03 AM »

Al, given the size of the gun, I would not be surprised if it was carried by a mounted soldier, especially if captured at Monmouth battle; perhaps a loyalist cavalry member. It would have been somewhat easier to manage (much like a carbine) from horse back than a musket. One thing that is sure is that the gun was somewhat old before it was ever carried off to war. Too bad the data with the gun did not include more about its history. Also, the lock was apparently made by York maker I.I. Behr, who was fairly early in the trade. As usual, more questions than answers.
Dick

Eric Kettenburg · « **Reply #8 on:** May 08, 2021, 02:24:34 PM »

I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang. Looks like the tang broke at the original screw hole, but perhaps was still well breached, so simply squared off and redrilled. I would have a very hard time believing a barrel tang that short was originial, untouched/undamaged work. Also no reason the wrist escutcheon may not be original; it 'fits' the rest of the hardware and there surely is enough room for it, given the stubby tang moving the carving forward probably by at least 1/2".

spgordon · « **Reply #9 on:** May 08, 2021, 03:39:57 PM »

Quote from: mr. no gold on May 08, 2021, 12:39:49 AM

Maybe if it doesn't slide into obscurity we will get to see it down the road. Upside is that the auction house will receive a nice commission and the consignor, a public institution will get a lot of money to continue their work.
Dick

This comment gets at something that I've been thinking a lot about in the last few years. I agree that it is great that the Rochester museum will now have $$$ to spend on things closer to their mission. But this sale is a step backwards, it seems to me. A rifle that was available to the public, for inspection and analysis, is now in private hands--and whether or not it will end up "in obscurity," which is possible, access to it is now controlled by a private individual. That situation isn't always a problem. But obviously private individuals can control access to things that they own and, by controlling access, can control what gets known and said about the item. That is not a good situation.

I know there is nothing that can be done about all this. It is what it is. But I just wanted to elaborate on Dick's interesting remark.

Fullstock longrifle · « **Reply #10 on:** May 08, 2021, 04:00:16 PM »

I’m betting that it will be on display at this years KRA show in June, at least I hope so, I would like to see it close up.

Jay Close · « **Reply #11 on:** May 08, 2021, 04:03:49 PM »

Can anyone provide a link to one of those sites with photos of this rifle? I can't seem to find it. Thanks!

120RIR · « **Reply #12 on:** May 08, 2021, 04:18:55 PM »

I couldn't find them on the Cottone web site but they're on Invaluable (see below). I tried posting the photos on this forum but there seems to be something in their format (they look like regular jpg) that prevents them from being downloaded here. Perhaps someone with more advanced computer skills can figure a way around that.

https://www.invaluable.com/auction-lot/american-revolutionary-war-era-tiger-maple-long-g-b514399a1c

Steve Collward · « **Reply #13 on:** May 08, 2021, 04:30:42 PM »

Not sure if this will work but try the link below.

https://live.cottoneauctions.com/lots/view/1-4FGMB7/american-revolutionary-war-era-tiger-maple-long-gun

Steve

WESTbury · « **Reply #14 on:** May 08, 2021, 05:01:41 PM »

Quote from: Eric Kettenburg on May 08, 2021, 02:24:34 PM

I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang.

The stamped proof at the breech of the barrel does look like that of Fredrick the Great, although I would not swear to that given the fuzzy photo.

debnal · « **Reply #15 on:** May 08, 2021, 05:27:52 PM »

Check the barrel tang carving on this rifle to the barrel tang carving on the Edward Marshall rifle in Schumway's book. Also, the cheekpiece carving has very much the same feel. May have been made by the same gunsmith.
Al

Jay Close · « **Reply #16 on:** May 08, 2021, 05:34:12 PM »

Thanks, folks for the the picture links. My knees are weak. Such an important rifle and such an impressive price.

Mike Brooks · « **Reply #17 on:** May 08, 2021, 08:07:12 PM »

Quote from: Eric Kettenburg on May 08, 2021, 02:24:34 PM

I lean toward a restocked German rifle given the stubby little barrel tang. Looks like the tang broke at the original screw hole, but perhaps was still well breached, so simply squared off and redrilled. I would have a very hard time believing a barrel tang that short was originial, untouched/undamaged work. Also no reason the wrist escutcheon may not be original; it 'fits' the rest of the hardware and there surely is enough room for it, given the stubby tang moving the carving forward probably by at least 1/2".

What EK said.

rich pierce · « **Reply #18 on:** May 08, 2021, 10:51:46 PM »

Not sure if there’s a hint of a stepped wrist or not. Similarities to the Marshall rifle are striking.

blienemann · « **Reply #19 on:** May 08, 2021, 11:37:57 PM »

Thank you to 120RIR for posting this topic. We tried hard to locate this rifle back in 2016 for the second book, talked with the Roch Hist Soc, their museum folks, local auctions and historical folks, but no one knew anything about it! Sounds funny now that the description says the RHS sold it. But it is great to have this important piece for study, along with the recovered Valley Forge Oerter rifle now at the Mus of the American Revolution. There is still this Oerter barrel in a restock – perhaps we will find it someday soon, in this connected world we have?

To Scott’s point, had the RHS and their fine museum displayed this rifle and made it available, that would have been as intended and appreciated. But they have apparently been hiding it, or did not appreciate its value until now – estimate vs bid. The Bucks Co Hist Soc and Mercer Museum with the Marshall rifle are a great example of how this should work, have been open and great to work with.

When we worked with other museums and historical societies to photograph arms for the book, many of the directors and staff were not interested in “guns”. We were careful to approach in terms of these special examples of our early art and history. Occasionally this opened eyes, they became proud of what they had, planned to display the arm, and even told us about other “guns” they had hidden away.

New management often comes with a new direction. Someone probably donated this fine piece to RHS years ago so that it would be shared. Now it is going back to the private side, presumably so RHS can support other priority historical items or topics. In the case of the Atwater Kent museum in Phila, it has now closed, and the pair of Wm Henry, Jr pistols and paintings of the Henry family are at risk. When items are donated to such groups, we hope that they sustain themselves and continue to display the items we donate. There will probably always be tension between the two approaches.

This rifle could have used a bit of conservation, but is generally in very good condition for its age. It may look a bit different when we see it next, but it is so valuable to have these photos. Thanks again for sharing and for all the comments - this is a great group of folks and website. Bob

spgordon · « **Reply #20 on:** May 09, 2021, 01:04:20 AM »

Quote from: blienemann on May 08, 2021, 11:37:57 PM

In the case of the Atwater Kent museum in Phila, it has now closed, and the pair of Wm Henry, Jr pistols and paintings of the Henry family are at risk. When items are donated to such groups, we hope that they sustain themselves and continue to display the items we donate. There will probably always be tension between the two approaches.

Public museums & public libraries can make mistakes; public museums & public libraries can have financial difficulties; public museums & public libraries can (God forbid!) burn down. But these are exceptions to a general rule--which is that the public museums & public libraries offer access to items on a fair and equitable basis and care for their collections over the long haul. This is not the case with private ownership. Private owners of objects can police access to these objects--to their friends, to those who will be sure not to say anything that will decrease their value, etc. They can use whatever criteria they please. They are their objects and one needs to play by their rules. And of course they can also do whatever they want to the item.

I can't really think of any other field of collecting in which nearly all of the prized objects remain in private hands and so few them are in public collections. Maybe modern art, I guess, but even that example would show that over the last 50 years the amount of modern art in museums has steadily increased. The example currently under discussion shows the reverse, the movement of an extraordinary object from a museum into private hands.

Would anybody think it would be better if the greatest of Renaissance paintings--which are presently in museums and can be studied, researched, even questioned--were (back) in private hands?

lexington1 · « **Reply #21 on:** May 09, 2021, 01:19:09 AM »

Do you think that the furniture is from a much earlier German gun? The trigger guard in particular looks very early to me. I have a Johann Wolf Peter rifle that goes to right around the turn of the 17th century that has very similar straight bottom guard like this one and I have always associated these with being around that time frame.

mr. no gold · « **Reply #22 on:** May 09, 2021, 01:27:11 AM »

Good points, Scott. There definitely is an academic aspect to all of this. In fact, personally, I have assembled a modest collection of Rev. War materials in my chase for the 'American Rifle.' In preparing for the day when they will no longer mean anything to me, it is my hope and am taking steps to ensure that they will transfer to one of the major arms museums.
It is my feeling that as these things get older in years, the more they become part of the public patrimony which helped shape our nation. Such things in private collections usually are not available to the public and will remain so as long as there are so many secretive collectors. So, there is a dilemma in all this.
With all of this, I am surprised that the gun was deaccessioned and sent to sale. Not sure what NY laws are regarding this but there have been some major lawsuits brought by donors against historical institutions when the donated items were sold off. The plaintiffs won in almost every instance.
Why did this gun bring so much money? Condition wise it is somewhat pitiful as these things go, but am wondering if someone knows something that the rest of us do not? Could it be a member of the donor family seeking to bring it back home? I don't know and can't even guess. While these situations are never wholly satisfying, they sure do kick up a lot of dust and that is a good thing, in my opinion.
Dick

rlm · « **Reply #23 on:** May 09, 2021, 02:43:34 AM »

Public ownership (museums) vs. private collectors, always a conundrum. I will say this. The vast majority of knowledge availed to the public regarding the American longrifle has always come from the collecting fraternity. IMO

Eric Kettenburg · « **Reply #24 on:** May 09, 2021, 02:48:55 AM »

Why so much money? I defy anyone to look at the carving and deny that *most likely* the carver was the same guy who carved the Marshall gun, maybe #43, 42 of course is much more debatable. But if we are to assume that the Marshall gun and #43 at the least are NH County Moravian work (whether Bethlehem or CS), then one would assume this piece to be NH County Moravian work. Or maybe all three were stocked by Behr?

. Anyway the point being, there is clearly a connection to the Marshall gun, #43, the Moravian Hist Soc gun etc. That can only add immense value. It's not like they're making any more of them. Also - the Battle of Monmouth inscription is clearly very old. Perhaps the provenance of the rifle can be traced back further than Rochester, so perhaps as Dick notes, maybe someone has some additional knowledge that we peons do not? I suppose more information will pop up sooner or later.

I think a key to trying to pinpoint a stocking date range for this rifle would be to try to really narrow down just how early those lock nail escutcheons could be. I have always thought them - or of that style - to be 1760s at earliest, but perhaps they may predate that by a decade?

News:

Author Topic: Rochester Rifle (Read 7691 times)