Fessler at Rock Ford thread

[Eric Kettenburg]

Am I crazy or dd the thread vanish?

Anyway since the subject was broached, is there documentation of Heinnerich Fessler being in Lancaster?  I'm not up on all the Lancaster research via tax lists, church records etc. so I'd certainly be interested to know.  I am aware of the Henrich Fesler that arrived in 1733, and Dave M (who I believe was the author of the now-vanished posting) had quite a while back found an interesting reference in online records of Baden-Wurttemburg which were posted online but now do not seem to exist.  There was a record of an action taken by Christpher Schaller (sp?) in Wertheim against a 'Heinrich Fesler buchsenmacher' sometime in the early 18th century - unfotunately I can't seem to access the record anymore but I believe it was maybe ca. 1710-1720 or so, so he could either be the same guy who arived in 1733 or maybe he had a son who also was trained in gunstocking?  Maybe Dave can find it again - the old link to the records no longer works.

So do we know fr certain there was a Johan Heinrich Fesler of some spelling in Lancaster for certain?  The musician rifle lock is signed with the "I" for the J in Johan before the Heinerrich Fesler signature but the "I" is hidden under the cock when it is at rest.  I'm going to assume that by placing him in Lancaster, the author of the book has some concrete period documentation?

I'm sure he was probably signing his work "John" right?  So I'd assume that's the signature on the barrel.  John Fesler. 

About the Rock Ford rifle, it's certainly got what we would expect of the right architecture for an early Dickert-style or Lancaster-style rifle, maybe pre-War, although the attribution to "ca. 1770" seems a bit early to my mind for a fully developed daisy box with side plates.  Maybe the box is a replacement for a wood lid?  I don;t know, but I don;t think anyone has ever proposed that the 4-piece daisy box was fully developed by "ca. 1770."

I'm guessing the thread for some reason was yanked because of the photos?  So no photos.  Let's not anger the photo gods.

[rich pierce]

Are you crazy?  Hmmm. I am! Depends on who you ask.
Did the Fessler pix disappear? Yes.
Do we know why? The moderators don’t know why.

When I glanced at the photos we saw yesterday of the rifle purported to be by Fessler or Fessler the lines immediately reminded me of a plain Lancaster rifle Shumway showed in his Longrifles of Note series in Muzzle Blasts. August 1982. It shows a nearly indecipherable signature. Shumway speculated the first name was Philip. I believe this is the rifle we are discussing. If anyone wants pix I will photograph the article.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Yep I'd like to see that.

[Hungry Horse]

Me also, the ranch in California I was raised on was purchased by my parents from a couple named Fessler. I always assumed they were recent immigrants, but maybe not. Parts of the Fessler clan might have moved West, just like parts of my clan did. It would be cool to find out the Fessler’s were originally gunsmiths.

Hungry Horse

[rich pierce]

PMs sent.

[WESTbury]

Are you crazy?  Hmmm. I am! Depends on who you ask.
Did the Fessler pix disappear? Yes.
Do we know why? The moderators don’t know why.

When I glanced at the photos we saw yesterday of the rifle purported to be by Fessler or Fessler the lines immediately reminded me of a plain Lancaster rifle Shumway showed in his Longrifles of Note series in Muzzle Blasts. August 1982. It shows a nearly indecipherable signature. Shumway speculated the first name was Philip. I believe this is the rifle we are discussing. If anyone wants pix I will photograph the article.

Rich, I would be interested in seeing those pictures as well.
Kent

[WESTbury]

About the Rock Ford rifle, it's certainly got what we would expect of the right architecture for an early Dickert-style or Lancaster-style rifle, maybe pre-War, although the attribution to "ca. 1770" seems a bit early to my mind for a fully developed daisy box with side plates.  Maybe the box is a replacement for a wood lid?  I don;t know, but I don;t think anyone has ever proposed that the 4-piece daisy box was fully developed by "ca. 1770."

Okay Eric, you have me a little confused, which has been a normal state of mind for me since taking an interest in longrifles.

How would you date the Dickert rifle on pgs 104-105, having a Lancaster type patchbox?

I'm not trying to put you "on the spot" but just looking for a reference point for dating these Lancaster rifles.

Thanks,
Kent

[DaveM]

Sorry guys, yea was not sure if we are supposed to share or not.  No one told me to remove them so here they are.  Unfortunately I did not get any of the cheek side.

[DaveM]

Another more general note about this one - I believe some have said british locks like this one were imported only before the revolution, but then no british imports after the war started till the mid 1790’s??  And by the mid 90’s british locks were a different style with the flat face, slashed tail.  Or was this type of lock also imported and used on american rifles right after the war in the 1780’s?

[Eric Kettenburg]

I don't have the book as I have seen most of the rifles involved and have photos of my own of a good number of them.  I'm not sure which Dickert rifle to which you are referring.  FWIW, I still believe that a couple of the Dickert rifles that George illustrated in RCA are probably the earliest extant, and I do bleive that the boxes on those with the more 'tulip' simple finial were probably his initial brass boxes of the early to mid 1770s. 

Peersonally - and it's just my personal opinion which I will clearly state as opinion - I do not believe a fully formed 4 piece daisy box was developed until after the War.

[DaveM]

Is this the dickert referred to? I took these photos at Rock Ford














upload

[WESTbury]

I don't have the book as I have seen most of the rifles involved and have photos of my own of a good number of them.  I'm not sure which Dickert rifle to which you are referring.

Sorry about that Eric. Told you I am confused.

The Dickert rifle I am refering to appears on pgs 18-19 of Pat Hornberger's 2015 book The Lancaster Long Rifle as well as pgs 104-105 0f this new book. Hopefully you have Pat's book.

[WESTbury]

Is this the dickert referred to? I took these photos at Rock Ford

That's it, thanks Dave!

[WESTbury]

Peersonally - and it's just my personal opinion which I will clearly state as opinion - I do not believe a fully formed 4 piece daisy box was developed until after the War.

Thanks Eric, appreciate your thoughts and insight.

[rich pierce]

Peersonally - and it's just my personal opinion which I will clearly state as opinion - I do not believe a fully formed 4 piece daisy box was developed until after the War.

Shumway was not 100% certain the patchbox was first work.

[Eric Kettenburg]

Yes George sure tiptoed around the box on that rifle very politely!  Thanks for the article.  I see at the time he said the signature was indecipherable.  It still looks indecipherable to me but that's just a photo.  Possibly someone in-hand can get a better read on it.  It does look like a good early 'utilitarian' rifle and I'd personally have no problem with the 'ca. 1770' dating if it had a wood box or even some form of more prototypical brass box.  But I just don't buy that daisy box being that early.

For the record I don't view the above Dickert rifle is pre-dating the War either.  Again, just my opinion.  I would date it to the years following.

[mountainman]

Don't mean to interrupt but Gun # 18 is an early beauty! Is there a name attached to it as to who the maker is?

[rich pierce]

Don't mean to interrupt but Gun # 18 is an early beauty! Is there a name attached to it as to who the maker is?

Yes it’s #52 in Shumway’s Rifles of Colonial America. Everything we want to see in a gun we think could be pre-1770. Big .64 smoothbore. Could be contemporary with the early Oerter rifles. I think there’s a lot of guessing involved in the big early guns. A gun could be 1750 or 1770 and maybe look about the same if it has a wooden box and big fat buttplate.

[Stoner creek]

I agree. That #18 got my attention straight away.

[smart dog]

Hi,
RCA 52 is one of my favorite guns and inspired this one I built.

[DaveM]

Here are a few other shots of RCA 52 #18

[rich pierce]

Back to the Fessler topic. I’m thinking that people want to know if this gun was made by the maker of the Musician’s rifle.

I guess both could have been made by the same maker. The Lancaster Andreas Albrecht rifle is quite different from guns from Christians Spring where Albrecht served, as an example.

On the current rifle on display attributed to a Fessler, the barrel is 15/16” at the breech and .46 caliber. Somewhat small compared to a number of rifles proposed to be pre-Revolutionary War.

[WESTbury]

Relative to the Musician's rifle, I can find a group of photos on line but each is of only a small section of the rifle. Is there a group of photos extant that shows the complete rifle?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/94428970@N02/albums/72157633106158428

[rich pierce]

Relative to the Musician's rifle, I can find a group of photos on line but each is of only a small section of the rifle. Is there a group of photos extant that shows the complete rifle?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/94428970@N02/albums/72157633106158428

I’ve heard it’s closely held by a family which has possessed it for quite a long time. Small black and white photos of it were included in Muzzle Blasts articles by Wallace Gusler; never focusing solely on this gun but to illustrate features found on early rifles. MB January 2003, MB May 2003, MB March 2005, MB July 2005 (lock side full buttstock). There are no published full length photos SFAIK.

[WESTbury]

Relative to the Musician's rifle, I can find a group of photos on line but each is of only a small section of the rifle. Is there a group of photos extant that shows the complete rifle?
https://www.flickr.com/photos/94428970@N02/albums/72157633106158428

I’ve heard it’s closely held by a family which has possessed it for quite a long time. Small black and white photos of it were included in Muzzle Blasts articles by Wallace Gusler; never focusing solely on this gun but to illustrate features found on early rifles. MB January 2003, MB May 2003, MB March 2005, MB July 2005 (lock side full buttstock). There are no published full length photos SFAIK.

Well, who the heck is Mark Tyler who posted those photos online? Are those photos of The Fesler Rifle or of another Fesler rifle?