Tim,
Years ago I had put all the Tansel information I had gathered into a short, unpublished article, which I shared with Burt Hanrick and Jim Dresslar. It was the first time anything had been assembled on the Tansels, to try to establish an understanding of when/where/how long they carved horns. Jim had the best collection of Tansel horns back then, better than Burt's or mine, and he asked if he could use my outline for a presentation, along with some of my sketches of horns to support his presentation... which I was glad to do for him. Jim was a special kind of friend and collector, one who would share anything with you, let you play with any of his finest pieces, borrow them to study or sketch, etc. But if you ever lied to him or deceived him, you were on his _hit list for the rest of your life.
This old article must be read with caution. Our knowledge of the Tansels was just being put together for the first time, and Jim was prone to fill in the blanks at times [there were still a lot of blanks] with what he thought was probably true, but at times that wasn't the case.
The signed "John Tansel" horn with the writing on the butt plug is one of those horns that has caused heartburn among Tansel collectors. Per your question, there is an antique paper label glued onto the flat front of the butt plug, on which the information was written in ink.... now badly faded, but I copied it years ago so the words will survive into the future as the old ink fades away.
You'll note in Jim's presentation that he mentions son John was carving horns as early as the War of 1812, when he was only 12 years old. Today we know from the stages of development of John's carving that the carving on this horn dates to about 1820, based on the shape of eagle, border style, animals, etc. Today we can take a harder, more informed look at these horns, with more knowledge than Jim had at that time. This horn is a good study piece for deciphering when/where it was carved.
Note the flat butt plug doesn't really look like a Ky-era Tansel plug... they liked high domed, lathe-turned walnut end-grain plugs [despite any theories to the contrary], so is this really a Tansel plug??? Then look at the spout tip that lacks a raised ring for strap attachment, and has an "odd" faceted tip that was applied and pinned into place. Again, it doesn't look like Tansel work. So what is the real story behind this specific horn?
The horn was a battlefield pick-up by a Kentuckian as noted on its old paper label. Battlefield pickups were a common occurrence back in those days, particularly on battlefields that held meaning for the person revisiting them and making the pickup. But when picked up, it was a plain horn, no fish-mouth and no carving, made by a different hand than the Tansels. It was a true survivor of the Battle of River Raison with bittersweet memories for most Kentuckians. A few years later, about 1820, the horn was taken to John Tansel to have it decorated, probably to make it a more noteworthy battlefield memento and more honored family heirloom. We forget at times that functional horns were often brought to the Tansels to decorate for the owners [Ft. Meigs horns are the best examples], so when we see a Tansel with an odd plug, odd spout, etc., we need to keep an open mind that it might have been brought to the carver already in that form... as this "john Tansel" horn was. There was enough horn body left to carve their trademark fish-mouth detail, but the slender spout and tip remained as-is, along with the flat plug. And how do we know all this with any certainty... because we now have a good idea of how Francis' and John's work, and even Stark's and Tim's work, progressed artistically over their carving years, and we can apply reasonable dates to most of their work.
Well Tim, that's a lot more than you asked for, but hopefully it helps others better understand these great horns.
Shelby Gallien
