John Rupp - Sotheby's and Poulin's

[Eric Kettenburg]

I don't know about thread drift but it sure causes a grimace, stamping of the feet and a gag reflex.

The Poulin's gun definitely looks like mainspring blowout.  The side-opener, not so sure.  I suspect the wood there in front of the guard was simply excessively thin and it broke through, so someone patched it.

[Dan Kiel]

Perhaps a topic for another discussion, but a good part of this dialog is about applying a maker and or date to enhance value.  The new 3rd edition of Kindig's book (pg. 339) attributes Rifle #11 to Peter Neihardt.   I'm curious to see the supporting evidence.   I recalled the MB June 1993 article.  Shumway suggested a possible location; however, he made no claim of  a maker.
 

[Eric Kettenburg]

Everyone likes to make attributions.  Sometimes it's clearly about value, other times someone may 'see' something or group of somethings in a particular unsigned piece that is reminiscent of a known maker's other work.

Talk of Neihart gets thrown around very often and in conjunction with many unsigned pieces.  Typically anything with a lot of gouge cuts worked into decorative design will be attributed to him immediately   

[spgordon]

Perhaps a topic for another discussion, but a good part of this dialog is about applying a maker and or date to enhance value.  The new 3rd edition of Kindig's book (pg. 339) attributes Rifle #11 to Peter Neihardt.   I'm curious to see the supporting evidence.   I recalled the MB June 1993 article.  Shumway suggested a possible location; however, he made no claim of  a maker.

As I saw in print somewhere (maybe I put it there), attributions are part connoisseurship and part just con. I guess we just need to hope that most attributions are more the former than the latter.

[Eric Kettenburg]

As I saw in print somewhere (maybe I put it there), attributions are part connoisseurship and part just con. I guess we just need to hope that most attributions are more the former than the latter.

I think they are.  I'd like to think most people who are interested in these old guns are more interested in the history, the artistic nature of each piece, the potential 'story' that may lie within, and/or the life of any potential gunstocker.  Also it's human nature to desire to transform the unknown into the known, so each unsigned piece is a challenge presented as mystery.

Hopefully I'm not just "...a simple country boy, you might say a cockeyed optimist..."   

[spgordon]

Hopefully I'm not just "...a simple country boy, you might say a cockeyed optimist..."   

... "who somehow got himself mixed up in the high stakes game of transatlantic gunstocking and international sleuthing ..."

[Eric Kettenburg]

 

[Eric Kettenburg]

Anyone have any thoughts as to my proposal of the donor rifle?  I realize of course that were are in the realm of speculation here, but I'd like to know if I'm way out on the diving board into the pool of insanity or if I'm firmly strapped into the life vest.

[Tom Currie]

As far as a possible donor rifle goes my thought is how early would we expect to see the fully developed Lehigh Fluer de lis patchbox finial that we see on the Rupp rifle in question ?  Niehardt's 1787 rifle is about the earliest dated example that I can remember. As i look for an earlier version of that patchbox finial design I see John Moll rifles ( Kindig #63 and 64 ) that appear to be maybe 1780 decade rifles, not yet exactly developed Lehighs. These rifles could be contemporary to Kindigs #11 mentioned by Eric and something like these could have been the donor. 

[Buck]

Kindigs 63 & 64 are attributed to the Moll family, details not shown in the photos point in the direction of another patriarchal builder who was closely associated to the Molls. Eric - care to comment without revealing the details?   

Buck

[Eric Kettenburg]

Noel you've been working on this for quite some time, I know, and others have as well as I believe.  One thing I can say with a fair degree of certainty is that those Kindig rifles are not 'early Molls' so it does affect how we view development of all these pieces in specific regions.  I don't think these two noted Kindig pieces, or the others that look like them whether published or not, really have any relation to John Rupp's work *directly* but I'd never say never as there is always more information to uncover.

We discussed another one of these - not one of the Kindig pieces but another by the same guy - quite a bunch of years back with Earl involved, as it turned up down in NC but the situation with it involved a huge pile of BS that did not come to light until later.  Suffice it to say, this dude's shop was apparently quite prolific.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Just to update:  I've added some discussion of two additional unsigned rifles over in the "Johannes Rupp of Macungie" thread here:  https://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=68720.150.  These two additional rifles are also extremely interesting and seem to display a number of what I believe to be characteristic details which point to John Rupp being the maker.

[Craig Wilcox]

I've always wondered how much the different gun makers got together, maybe Saturday night at a local tavern.  Certainly, if they lived close enough to each other - but we have to remember that 30 miles or so distance would take at least 5 or 6 hours travel by horse.  So a whole day taken up by going and coming,

I can see how, if living in the same vicinity - within 5 or 10 miles - there might be some visiting from time to time.  Perhaps looking for a good piece of stock wood, or a lock already built.  Further than that, however, was probably a very rare occurrence.