MASTER CARVERS????

[spgordon]

Scott, I have no doubt they would!
Makers that were far enough from one another, so that a buyer might not be familiar with that distant maker might be a different story. But if you take Lancaster Co, where there were several makers working, I have no doubt the guns of each maker would be recognized at arms length by prospective buyers, or owners at shooting matches.

Sorry, I edited my first post above while you were replying. I didn't expect such a quick reply!

I hadn't thought about shooting matches, to be honest. I should have: I just taught Cooper's The Pioneers (1823) and there's an extended scene involving a shooting match (and, throughout the novel, elaborate descriptions of rifles).

A shooting match is an interesting example because it does provide a setting in which many rifles were gathered and could be compared.

It's hard to think about other moments when this would be possible--when rifles could be gathered and compared, as we can do so easily on the internet or at a show. Another would be militia service.

Thanks again. I'm enjoying this discussion!

[WESTbury]

I'd like to thank everyone that responded to this thread so far, it has been enlightening for me. The range of opinions is great.

Kent

[JTR]

Scott, I have no doubt they would!
Makers that were far enough from one another, so that a buyer might not be familiar with that distant maker might be a different story. But if you take Lancaster Co, where there were several makers working, I have no doubt the guns of each maker would be recognized at arms length by prospective buyers, or owners at shooting matches.

It's hard to think about other moments when this would be possible--when rifles could be gathered and compared, as we can do so easily on the internet or at a show. Another would be militia service.

Scott, another example that comes to mind would be hunts, particularly driven hunts where a number of hunters would gather to hunt through an area to shoot some critter in particular, whether for food, or to just rid the area of that critter.
Even today, at a shooting range, some guys can tell if you're shooting a Winchester or a Remington from 50 yards away!

PS, I should add that I'm a pretty low level collector in the big scheme of things. I've owned some nice carved guns, but none of the top level, and there are guys here that know a lot more than I regarding this subject.
John

[Clint]

Henry Jarvis is long deceased, when he was young he made a living as a crew member on big iron hulled square rigged ships. He sailed mostly from New your to San Francisco and out to Perth. I remember a friend of mine asking Henry why it was superstitious to set sail from port on a Friday. Old Henry looked at him and said "it"s not superstitious you d...ed fool, it's common sense!
Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

[Frozen Run]

Relative to the German Immigrant communities in PA. I would imagine that some of them may have been cabinet makers in Germany and brought their skills with then of course. Perhaps they imparted their knowledge to some of the local gunstockers from time to time. Those same stockers could have sought out their assistance during times of high volume business. Don't forget that many of these people were in tight knit religious communities and possibly helped each other when required.

Your thoughts?

 
Most people already had rifles. The cabinetmakers were probably the first people to get overwhelmed during a population influx, the idea of extra time to freelance is difficult to imagine.

     

[WESTbury]

Frozen Run,

Thanks for your reply.

I threw this out there as an example. It's hard to imagine that there would be so many incoming settlers year around, with plenty of disposable income to be purchasing furniture on a continuing basis.

Was your reply speculation or "gut feel", or do you know of documentary evidence?

Your statement, "Most people already had rifles." is interesting. If these immigrants did have rifles already, what were the rifle builders doing to earn income?

Kent

[WESTbury]

Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

Tom Grinslade's 2005 book, FLINTLOCK FOWLERS has many fowlers with carving, to one degree or another. Particularly around the barrel tang. If we are strictly limiting this to the rear side of the buttstock, your statement is quite accurate.

[spgordon]

Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

So what is the prevalance of rifles with carving v. rifles without carving? It is "often"--or one in two hundred? Are there any reliable statistics?

[spgordon]

Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

So what is the prevalance of rifles with carving v. rifles without carving? It is "often"--or one in two hundred? Are there any reliable statistics, at least of surviving examples?

The question matters because if carving was prevalent (not, that is, featured on only 1 in 200 rifles) then it was probably also routine, something users may have expected to see but didn't look too closely at. If carving was quite rare, then maybe anybody who owned a carved rifle had chosen it as a mark of "distinction" (much as a high-end car speaks to one's status, disposable income, etc.).

[rich pierce]

Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

So what is the prevalance of rifles with carving v. rifles without carving? It is "often"--or one in two hundred? Are there any reliable statistics?

“When” is the important variable in this question.  Pre-1790 even British trade rifles - copied after Lancaster rifles - were carved. These were for sale or trade to Native American British allied tribes. This is one piece of evidence suggesting varying was expected in this timeframe. Later English and American trade rifles were not carved, by and large, suggesting a shift.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Most people already had rifles.

That is somewhat of a blanket statement and frankly I don't think it's accurate.  I certainly can't speak to the entire eastern seaboard, but Northampton Co. was composed of a large number of Palatines.  There is period documentation that when the natives went on a killing spree there during the outbreak of the F/I war, there were very few functional arms present and it was a mad rush to arm as many people as possible as quickly as possible.  It has been suggested that this may have been one reason behind Johannes Moll's move from Rockland twp in Berks Co. over to the "new" town of Allentown - his services there would have been in huge demand.  No way to prove this of course but it does make sense.

[spgordon]

Fowling guns are generally not carved while rifle guns are often carved. It's common sense.

So what is the prevalance of rifles with carving v. rifles without carving? It is "often"--or one in two hundred? Are there any reliable statistics?

“When” is the important variable in this question.  Pre-1790 even British trade rifles - copied after Lancaster rifles - were carved. These were for sale or trade to Native American British allied tribes.

Thanks for this, Rich. I have been talking, throughout this thread (and in anything I post!), about eighteenth century America, which the period I study. I think you are stating that plenty of eighteenth-century rifles were carved--that is, that carving was not as rare at this point as 1 in 200.

The landscape of consumer choice is radically different by the early nineteenth century: that I know. So perhaps the statistic that John mentioned refers to that later period, when you also suggest that there's a shift and more and more rifles did not have carving. This corresponds to larger trends in which goods became more differentiated and consumers had more choice (and those choices were often made, as we make our choices, to display status or lay claim to a status one aspired to).

So, I am still skeptical that eighteenth-century users differentiated one rifle from another on the basis of the carving--except in extraordinary cases such as carvings of deer or dogs or griffins. Most rifles came carved, like most sheets today come with some pattern, and that was that.

Do we know of any eighteenth-century "gun guys"?--or any instance in early America of anybody treating a gun as a status symbol rather than as an entirely practical object (like a lawnmower)?

In the Oerter letter that I found in the PA state archives a decade ago, Oerter describes the rifle as "mit Siber Draht ausgelegt" (which we translated as "decorated" for some reason but can also mean "designed with" with silver wire)--and he calls it "well made," which could refer to its decoration or just to its general reliability. Maybe in this case Oerter is emphasizing the artistry of the rifle--but actually, in the letter, he speaks more about how good the powder he is sending is than about the rifle itself.

In 1770, the Christiansbrunn shop valued its "new" rifles differently, two at £6 each and two others at £4.15 each, which may indicate ordinary vs. high-end rifles ...

[James Rogers]

Do we know of any eighteenth-century "gun guys"?--or any instance in early America of anybody treating a gun as a status symbol rather than as an entirely practical object (like a lawnmower)?


Scott,
I can't speak of rifles and the fellow's order below could just be considered practical as in "lawnmower" type usage but I believe that specifying the potential makers in this order for London guns has just as much merit in keeping up with the Jones family as it does in seeking a quality made arm.

That said, I believe as a general rule, with a few exceptions the 18th century rifle customer couldn't tell much difference in the carvings you presented. I do believe considerarion would have been given as to whether it was there or not.. Even in this day, how many pats on the back do we see given online by average black powder enthusiasts of rifle builds with architectural and other problems that are just obviously glaring to some of our more affluent builders and collectors on this forum?


Frederick Green P Letter, 26 November 1771, Wallace, Davidson & Johnson Order Book 1771-1774, Chancery Papers Exhibits 1773-1776, MSA no. 528-27, Maryland State Archives, Annapolis, Maryland, 47.

In 1772, Charles Carroll ordered:

1 neat cocking Gun 3 feet 1 In & ½ in the Barrell with brass mounting to be bot of Wm
Turvey - Stanton or Wilson, or a good as one as can be made may be got for four Guineas.
6 Steel spring charges for do to contain in each charger a load of powder & shot & no
more of each than the proper load of the gun.
1 neat small gun well fortified 1 Foot 8 Inches & ½ long in the barrell, the Barrel an Inch
& 3/15 of an Inch wide the Stock proportioned to the Barrall neatly mounted with Brass.
6 Steel Spring charges for do each to contain a full finger of powder & shot, & no more.
Direct the head of all the screw pins to each gun to be substantial and the channel in them to be cut deep that the turn Screw may take a good hold.
Direct the stocks near the muzles to be neatly capped with Brass (that part of the
stock being very apt to split) and Screws neatly & strongly fixed with the end of
each gun stick to draw the gunns. A bullet mold to each gun.(

[rich pierce]

Scott, I have the strong impression that the typical Lancaster cheek carving of c-scrolls, similar to Christians Spring, became a recognizable brand. That does not mean it was a must-have, but it communicated something about origin and expected quality. Maybe like the grille on a current Lexus automobile. We see that and say, “Lexus” and think “luxury, expensive, performance, upper class.”  Similarly we see the shape of a super compact Fiat today and think, “that’s a Fiat” and “Italian car” and “working class” and “not a construction worker driving that little thing” and so on.  They are all cars that one could buy to get from A to B.  Buyers of rifles would have choices to make as well.

That the CS-Lancaster cheekpiece carving motif was adapted and used so widely, suggests something, even if it is simply, “this is a current accepted design, and I can fiddle with it a bit and customize it but it’s still mainstream right now.”  Like tail fins on late 1950’s American cars. You see it, know where made (America) and when made (1957-1963).

All speculation, for discussion.

[spgordon]

Buyers of rifles would have choices to make as well.

It really comes down to this! I appreciate this succinct formulation. I totally agree that, where there are choices, there is typically differentiation. Given a product (a car, every instance of which, as you say, needs to get you from A to B), different makers come to stand for different things: luxury, tough and reliable, etc. (There was a great article years ago called "The Unbearable Ugliness about Volvos," which explained why academics all bought Volvos.)

So the question then is how much choice did rifle buyers have in 1760 or 1780? Depends on where you were, of course. Interesting that, in the example James R posted just before, this Maryland planter was looking to England for his fine gun. (Could be many reasons for that.)

[rich pierce]

So the question then is how much choice did rifle buyers have in 1760 or 1780? Depends on where you were, of course. Interesting that, in the example James R posted just before, this Maryland planter was looking to England for his fine gun. (Could be many reasons for that.)

The choices were very diverse in detail if a customer could access them all. There was no Amazon. But let’s pick Lancaster Pennsylvania as a model. In the 1770-1780s one could choose a mainstream Lancaster rifle with daisy patchbox and typical carving from the big Dickert shop, Gonter, Graeff, Abraham Henry, Henry Albright, Haeffer, J Haga, and others. One could go French folk style with a Fainot rifle, or unique carving by Valentine Fondersmith, next level carving and patchbox design by Isaac Haines, or elegant, English -looking carving by Newcomer. And that is just one gunmaking center. I suspect a rifle aficionado back then would find a Newcomer, Dickert, Fainot, Valentine Fondersmith, and an Issac Haines rifle from Lancaster 1780 as different as a teenage boy in the 1960s would a Chevy Bel Aire, Ford Galaxy, and so on from the each other. The Mercuries and Fords would bear a close resemblance, perhaps the same for Dodges and Plymouth models, or Buicks and Oldsmobiles. But when Bob got a new car, some neighbors exclaimed, “Bob got himself a brand new Oldsmobile!”  Others, “I see Bob got a new car.”  Or, “Bob got a new station wagon.” It would depend on the level of interest a person had in cars.

The cars mentioned could all have similar basics - say 4 door, six cylinder, hardtop, 3 on the tree, AM radio and so on - but be easily distinguished. The rifles could all have barrels of similar length and caliber, similar locks and curly maple stocks, but easily recognizable to those for whom rifles were a “thing”.

[spgordon]

So the question then is how much choice did rifle buyers have in 1760 or 1780? Depends on where you were, of course. Interesting that, in the example James R posted just before, this Maryland planter was looking to England for his fine gun. (Could be many reasons for that.)

The choices were very diverse in detail if a customer could access them all.

Exactly, agreed: if a customer could access them all. And this is the difference between us and them. We can access them all on sites like this, auction catalogs, books. We can be "gun guys" because we have this diversity to study. They had extremely limited access.

Except in very rare places--and you're probably right about Lancaster. But Lancaster was not usual, not exemplary of other places, not a "model" or "just one gunmaking center" with lots of others like it.

A. Lancaster was by 1760 the fourth largest city in early America because it was the gateway to the west.

B. Yet, in 1765, there were exactly four gunsmiths working in Lancaster: Dickert, Matthew Roesser, William Foulks, and John Henry.

C. All these gunsmiths that you list were not working at the same time in Lancaster. And you've included others who worked outside of Lancaster city in the county more generally--some of these people worked twenty miles away from one another (prob. not the same market).   

But, that said, I agree with you that, if anywhere (but anywhere else?), Lancaster would have offered the sort of product differentiation--and educated consumers--that you're describing.

[rich pierce]

Scott, yes, but. If we limit to 1765 in Lancaster, I agree. True anywhere in 1765. But in addition to your listing, in a cursory glance, I find Joel Ferree 1758, and John Newcomer 1767. There seems to have been a significant upswing in the years leading to the Revolutionary War. By 1771, a few scant years after 1765, we have Albrecht, Haines, Fainot, Gonter, and so on. Perhaps following the close of the French and Indian War, a rise in demand for longrifles occurred.

Of course if we place any weight on any of our theories on the subject at hand, we’ve invested badly, as we are talking about undocumented world views of people long dead and distant from our world views.

[spgordon]

Of course if we place any weight on any of our theories on the subject at hand, we’ve invested badly, as we are talking about undocumented world views of people long dead and distant from our world views.

No, I can't agree with this. We read (and write) histories because, with careful study, we can know things about people long dead. We often (I'd say usually) find that their views are distant from ours, as you say--which is why I'm very skeptical that the attitudes of 21st century collectors resemble those of 18th century consumers.

Albrecht never worked in Lancaster; he worked in Lititz. We know, from surviving documents found via hard work, that he could not find customers after he moved there. He was hoping to find a market for his products in Pittsburgh. I suppose that supports your account: there were so many gunsmiths in Lancaster and Lancaster County that one more (Albrecht) wasn't needed.

I appreciate this exchange! Thanks.

[Frozen Run]

Most people already had rifles.

That is somewhat of a blanket statement and frankly I don't think it's accurate.

Thank you for the correction.

[Frozen Run]

It's hard to imagine that there would be so many incoming settlers year around, with plenty of disposable income to be purchasing furniture on a continuing basis.

I wouldn't look at it in terms of disposable income, I would look at it in terms of you need lots of furniture. Beds, tables, chairs, cabinets, boxes, shelves, pantries, etc. It's a necessity so you find a way to acquire it. The bigger your family grows the more of it you need and the volume needed just gets exponentially greater as more and more people settle in the area.

Your statement, "Most people already had rifles." is interesting.

It's also inaccurate, I'm going to defer to Eric on this one. I meant to say long guns in general but it doesn't change anything.

If these immigrants did have rifles already, what were the rifle builders doing to earn income?

It's difficult to answer that question without narrowing it down to a specific time and place. Generally speaking: repairing them, freshening up the rifling, re-rifling, blacksmithing, any number of things. A statistic I would like someone to address is the ratio of new guns built/restocked versus old guns repaired.

Also it's important to take into consideration that much of the status of a professional tradesman came from the fact that many people just didn't have the aptitude or dedication to complete their apprenticeship. So you would have on top of your apprentices, people with varying degrees of skill in a particular field who would work for a shop master. So in really busy times they could just hire people to come work for them. The other problem with a freelance carver, let's say a cabinetmaker, is while they have the aptitude and skill to perform carving on furniture, do they understand composition in regards to a rifle? Something beautiful on a piece of furniture would just look out of place and wonky on a rifle.

     

[spgordon]

Most people already had rifles.

That is somewhat of a blanket statement and frankly I don't think it's accurate.  [...] There is period documentation that when the natives went on a killing spree there during the outbreak of the F/I war, there were very few functional arms present and it was a mad rush to arm as many people as possible as quickly as possible.

I suspect, Eric, that you're referring to that quotation from 10 and 17 October 1763 that Bob Smalser used to run up the flagpole all the time. On 10 October, somebody writes the governor from "Northampton Town" [later Allentown] that he "found the inhabitants ... had neither Guns, Powder nor Lead, to defend themselves," and a week later, from Lancaster, James Burd confirms that "in the town of Northampton (where I was at the time), there were only four guns, three of which were unfit for use, and the enemy within four miles of the place."

I used to ask Bob if he knew how many families there were in Northampton Town at the time? He never would reply. But we know this answer: Mathew S. Henry's History of the Lehigh Valley (1860) describes an 1764 assessment list that lists only thirteen families residing in Northampton Town (p. 264-65). So the fact that in October 1763 James Burd found "only four guns" is a lot less surprising than, say, if we had been imagining even a small town at what is now Allentown.

In addition, it is possible that the town had more guns earlier but many of those guns had left with the militia men who owned them or had been taken by authorities for use by soldiers between 1755-1763.

At the same moment (or a few months earlier: August), we know that nearby Bethlehem was well armed--thanks to imported arms (not arms produced there); eighty-eight arms in all, nineteen provincial guns stored in the brothers’ house, forty-one guns with Andreas Weber (steward of the boarding school), eleven guns with Kliest, nine guns possessed by married men, and eight guns possessed by single brothers. On August 10 authorities assigned people and guns to different locations—the tannery, the waterworks, the stable, the tavern—and established two companies that would have no fixed location but “rather will rush to help where they are most needed.”

Is there any other contemporary evidence that suggests a lack of guns in Northampton County at this time?

[Eric Kettenburg]

Scott I will take a look back through my notes as I believe there are additional snippets to be found here or there which led me to believe that a fairly decent proportion of the surrounding farmland was unarmed or poorly armed.  Yes, I certainly was referring to the October quotations you mention and while I do realize the town was not much more than a blip on the road at the time, it surely does say something that even by 1763 - after hostilities had been ongoing for multiple years - those 13 families had nothing with which to defend themselves and/or only one gun fit for use.

Now delving into *speculative* matters, was Bethlehem well-armed by 1763 because they had been all along, or was the town fortified and well-armed because of what had been happening in the previous few years?  They saw fit to open a brand spanking new gunshop at CS just a couple years prior - does that indicate a sudden ramp up of regional need?  I do find it interesting that CS is set up and Moll moves to Allentown within a year or two of each other.

[spgordon]

Now delving into *speculative* matters, was Bethlehem well-armed by 1763 because they had been all along, or was the town fortified and well-armed because of what had been happening in the previous few years?  They saw fit to open a brand spanking new gunshop at CS just a couple years prior - does that indicate a sudden ramp up of regional need?  I do find it interesting that CS is set up and Moll moves to Allentown within a year or two of each other.

Not speculative: Bethlehem's authorities purchased these arms in late 1755 because of what had been happening (the outbreak of violence in the months after Braddock's defeat).

The Christiansbrunn gunshop is built just after this resurgence of violence in fall 1763. Albrecht is there earlier; presumably he's working in the smithy at Christiansbrunn before a separate structure is built for him in August/September 1763.

[spgordon]

it surely does say something that even by 1763 - after hostilities had been ongoing for multiple years - those 13 families had nothing with which to defend themselves and/or only one gun fit for use.

Well, they found 4 guns in 13 families--about 30% of families were armed, even discounting the possibility that they  found only 4 guns because others had been confiscated for the militia or were actually in the hands of Northampton-Town men serving in ranging units.

I'd feel more comfortable saying that Northampton County generally (note that the above, even if interpreted as "no guns!", is only Allentown) had few guns if there was additional data besides this particular "fact."