English longrifles

[Rajin cajun]

Has there been any other research done on the English longrifles made for the Indian trade.
I have the articles by Shumway in The Buckskin Reports of 1982.
Any help appreciated.

Bob

[rich pierce]

Bob, I’ve not seen much since Shumway’s work. He published in an historical journal as well but much was the same. The Encyclopedia of Trade Goods volume 1 Firearms of the Fur Trade chapter 11, British Trade Rifles and Indian Rifles and Pistols has some color photos. They rely heavily on Shumway’s research.

[smart dog]

Hi,
Chapter 6 "Indian rifles in British service to 1783"  in Dewitt Bailey' "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840".

dave

[Rajin cajun]

Thanks fellows.
Bob

[Mattox Forge]

Hi,
Chapter 6 "Indian rifles in British service to 1783"  in Dewitt Bailey' "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840".

dave

Second this reference. There are some good photos and detailed descriptions in it. Be advised that trade guns shown didn't look much like an American long rifle per se, they were patterned after the contemporary half stock English sporter.
Mike

[JHeath]

If you are looking for an example to copy, look no further:

https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/british-board-of-ordnance-canadian-indian-presentation-rifle-by-henry-tatham-4019218

[Carl Young]

Hi Bob, I don't have anything to offer yet, but I have a book on order from the University library that deals with British firearms as an industry. I'll post back here if it contains anything interesting.

Greetings to all my LA friends!
Carl

[Rajin cajun]

Thanks Carl. Hope you can make it to the Knoxville show. The La. crew will be there, God willing.

Bob

[Rajin cajun]

Hi,
Chapter 6 "Indian rifles in British service to 1783"  in Dewitt Bailey' "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840".

dave

Second this reference. There are some good photos and detailed descriptions in it. Be advised that trade guns shown didn't look much like an American long rifle per se, they were patterned after the contemporary half stock English sporter.
Mike

Mike, they did resemble American rifles. I now am fortunate to own one of the 2nd type made by Ketland.

[Dphariss]

Hi,
Chapter 6 "Indian rifles in British service to 1783"  in Dewitt Bailey' "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840".

dave

Ditto on Dewitt Bailey. You really need that book.

[Mattox Forge]

Hi,
Chapter 6 "Indian rifles in British service to 1783"  in Dewitt Bailey' "British Military Flintlock Rifles 1740-1840".

dave

Second this reference. There are some good photos and detailed descriptions in it. Be advised that trade guns shown didn't look much like an American long rifle per se, they were patterned after the contemporary half stock English sporter.
Mike

Mike, they did resemble American rifles. I now am fortunate to own one of the 2nd type made by Ketland.

That is a beautiful rifle. My post was slightly confusing. I didn't mean to imply that there were not British made trade guns that were patterned after and resembled American long rifles. I really meant that the pictures in Bailey's book were mostly of the English patterned guns. I still highly recommend Bailey's book though.

Mike

[smart dog]

Hi Mike,
You are referring to the wrong chapter.  Go read chapter 6 not chapter 16.

dave

[Mattox Forge]

Hi Mike,
You are referring to the wrong chapter.  Go read chapter 6 not chapter 16.

dave

Ahh, I will.

I was just reading the article by Shaumway about the Type B rifles. Are the other articles he wrote available online?

Thanks,

Mike

[Rajin cajun]

Mike, Shumways articles were in the Buckskin Report in 1982. They were in every issue except two that year. I received that info.on where to find the articles from Rich Pierce. I was fortunate to find the entire year of The Buckskin Report for sale.
PM me your cell # and I will get you that info...!

Bob

[Mike Brooks]

I have handled probably 5 of the early guns, they are much different than the later ones. Much more robust.

[BradBrownBess]

I ordered a copy of the Dewitt book as I have not read it. Shumway never gave much indication of how he was determining the English Made guns intended uses. I think them being made as a "trade gun" sounds logical but I am wondering if "Indian Trade Gun" sounds like maybe a stretch of sorts. I even think the word "trade" might be a stretch as opposed to made to sell and possible trade.

What I mean is - Could these guns simply have been made Post Revolutionary War as guns to sell into the former colonies?

I don't believe any of the rifles Shumway describes (type A, B, C) were made pre 1790. He even states that in his articles or says it would be naive to think the Type A and B were made many years apart. The Type A is in the style of an earlier rifle to a large degree but there is nothing to guaranty these were made Rev War period.

I'm just wondering if some gun makers in Britain made thousands of these guns to sell/trade anywhere there was demand. The popular style in the Americas by 1790/1800 was the carved long rifle. So British gun makers made something that was popular.

I'm just skeptical to attaching the word "Indian" implying these guns in existence were most likely native owned. I'm really skeptical of that as most guns that were native owned were customized and eventually used until trashed.

I'm just thinking these guns are more accurately described as British made long rifles for sale in the Americas when they were popular. Not trying to split hairs.
Trying to avoid another "Revolutionary War" attribution or a "Native American Owned" attribution.

They are well made guns and far above what I would consider a typical "trade gun" in the sense of later poorer made guns with cheaper parts and no embellishments.

[lexington1]

Proceedings of the 1984 Trade Gun Conference has a section discussing these earlier rifles. It's a good read, but I don't really agree with Shumways dating of the earliest rifles. He maintained that the early Wilson rifle was earlier than the Grice example, but if you ever see them side by side the two are nearly identical, except for the patchboxes. DeWitt Baileys book sort of makes the point that they were contemporaneous with each other. Also I have an early Grice rifle that was either restocked or was made from parts that were imported. It's still a very early style and has both Grice  and Wilson markings on the barrel.

[Mike Brooks]

In my opinion, the earliest stye was probably made during the Rev. war.  They aren't nearly as graceful in hand as they are in pictures. A little chunky and slab sided. I also believe these early guns were handed out to British allies, both white and Indian, not traded or sold.

[lexington1]

I think you are right on. I don't have the book in front of me, but I believe DeWitt Bailey quoted a receipt to Detroit in 1781 concerning the delivery of these rifle. You are right about how clunky they are. I sort of get the feeling that they were stocked by those familiar with stocking muskets.

[mr. no gold]

Mike, you are right on the money with your thought that the Brits gave out weapons to those whom they wished to influence. This certainly happened in the War of 1812 when arms were given out from 'His Majesty's Stores' in Canada. The Shawnees were given pairs of pistols, tomahawks and other items from that inventory. Why not in the Rev. War, also?
Dick

[Mike Brooks]

The French  were in the same habit of distributing guns to those they wanted to keep close all through their period of influence as well
.

[Mattox Forge]

The fact that the use of the guns was a military function is probably why the Ordnance department was in charge of the contracts.

It also explains the chunkyness of the guns as the contractors were used to musket production. The tolerances for copying musket patterns were somewhat loose.

No doubt the first patterns were simply actual Pennsylvania rifles purchaced in the colony for the original pre Revolutionary War/Revolutionary War contracts. Bailey seemed to think that the same patterns were used for the early post war contracts. By the 1812 war the patterns had shifted to Britush sporting rifles patterns, e.g the Joseph Brandt rifle noted above and the Chapter 16 rifles.

Mike

[Rajin cajun]

The Ketland model with daisy patch box is a sleek , slim 48” bbl. gun.
I’ve never examined an earlier wood box rifle so I can’t comment on that model. But the Ketland that I own has very pleasant Architecture. 

Bob

[lexington1]

That's interesting. I've handled several of the Grice and or Wilson rifles but never the Ketland example. I had always assumed that it was a chunkster too.

[Daryl]

If you are looking for an example to copy, look no further:

https://www.cowanauctions.com/lot/british-board-of-ordnance-canadian-indian-presentation-rifle-by-henry-tatham-4019218

A fine looking gun and likely to be of decent bore size.