Who Used Fowlers?

jbwilliams3 said:

I have that Burke article on my hard drive. It's a good one. One thing to note is the difference between what we commonly call Type G/Carolina gun and the later Northwest Trade Gun (NWTG). The former "type" is represented by the extant "Bumford Gun" of which you can see many pictures using an internet search. The original is in the Colonial Williamsburg collection. Though the term "Carolina Gun" continued to be used synonymous with "trade gun" they were not of the same pattern as post-revolutionary war trade guns which we now call NWTGs. In an over generalization, if you are an English-speaking person pre-1780 who happened to own a trade gun or if you are a member of an Indian tribe who trades with the English (and you don't own a Wilson-made trade rifle), then the gun you have most likely resembles the Bumford gun... perhaps not with the painted vines, maybe not painted blue or red, but definitely in that general form with brass hardware. I'm not as familiar with the NWTGs, and I'm not familiar with their use outside of the geographic location that their name entails.

Click to expand...

A few things that seem to distinguish the Carolina pattern from the NWTG are:
Butt stock architecture- they both had the plate nailed on but the Carolina gun butt plate was more ornate with some floral engraving. It seems the comb of the NWTG was very straight in relation to the barrel. Carolina guns tended to have a little more drop(had a chance to examine an original butt plate back in November....very thin brass)

Stock treatment- I am not aware of any NWTG that were listed as being 'painted" The Carolina guns were primarily stocked in beech. There are descriptions of the stocks being painted Blue, red, Yellow & "spotted" I wonder if the Bumford fell in that category?

Side plates- the typical Carolina serpent side plate was engraved flat brass that was inletted into the stock....The latter NWTG side plates were still serpents but cast with more 3 D details

Barrel- The extant Bumford & TR gun have 46 inch barrels. One detail particular to the Carolina guns is the brass rear sight. I have not had the opportunity to look at any original NWTG....The pictures I've seen seem to be devoid of a factory rear sight. I have often thought the rear sight was an indicator that these guns were being used primarily like deer hunting slug guns with the ability to use shot for small game.

As I stated before....if the builder uses a correct barrel profile.....these things are light. At 5 1/2# it is an easy gun to carry around. When you compare the assault weapon of the time...1st model Brown Bess.....the Carolina guns weight almost half. In Alabama the Carolina gun parts are scattered everywhere....I've seen found parts form north, south east & west..... looking at the map Mr. Burke included in his article.....these things must have been imported in astronomical numbers & then used into Oblivion
I can truly say I do not regret the kidney I had to sell to buy mine built by the late Dave Wagner.....it is a great shooter!
David

Toklo Etee said:

Stock treatment- I am not aware of any NWTG that were listed as being 'painted" The Carolina guns were primarily stocked in beech. There are descriptions of the stocks being painted Blue, red, Yellow & "spotted" I wonder if the Bumford fell in that category?

Click to expand...

I'm not familiar with painted NWTG's either, but the one extant Carolina gun I've seen in person (the Bumford Gun), is painted with a pretty vine pattern. Certainly better looking than the unsightly (to our eyes) blue painted repros which CW has in their Magazine or that some contemporary makers have recreated. I had a red-painted Carolina gun at one point that wasn't nearly as ugly, but wasn't as pleasing as the Bumford gun or even just plain old beech. And man are they a joy to carry. Better balanced even than my much shorter modern side-by-side bird gun.

Smokey....Sorry for hijacking your thread...when you guys started talking about early English & French guns I couldn't help myself!.........as to what the other guys have said....for your area, I think a Fusil de Chasse or Carolina gun would fit the area & time period. In colonial frontier guns their are images of EARLY French guns that made it long enough to be converted to cap lock. We live in an age where everyone has to have the latest & greatest of everything. I imagine the expenses of a decent firearm was enough that they were kept functional as long as possible.
This is a picture of my gun with a buck I shot a few years ago. I chose to have mine painted red. It turned out a Salmon color. A dear friend of mine who used to post here years ago asked me if my gun was what they gave guys who sold Mary Kay!!....he used to call my gun the Pink Panther.....I told him you had to be secure in your man hood to carry a pink gun!
Are you building your gun or are you looking for a builder?

David

Smoke. Here’s a few pics of my Jack Brooks ‘Bumford’ Type G. They’re, painted or unpainted, the most graceful of the TGs. They get my vote.

Bob, that's a nice gun...Did Jack build that gun? I had a chance to see a few of his on display at the Indian conference in Ohio back around 2001...my gun was a Jack Brooks kit that Dave Wagner built. I think Dave was assembling some of the locks and was also building some of the kits on the side. Richard Guthrie who passed away recently Introduced me to Dave . Both of those guys used to work at Williamsburg and if I'm not mistaken Dave apprenticed under Wallace G. I see you got your barrel blued....I wanted to get mine charcoal blued but I had sell one kidney to afford the gun and felt like I needed the other! LOL
One thing that REALLY surprised me was the internals on the lock. To have a bridleless tumbler....I expected the lock to not be that fast.......it is faster than the Davis lock I have on my Fusil fin.
Mine has a .60 bore & it shoots a .595 ball teally well with wadding.
Again Bob...that is a NICE gun! I'm sure your proud of it. Between my two guns.....I grab that Carolina gun more times than not if headed out the door to hunt or go to a living history gig.

David

Yes. This is one Jack built himself in 2005. And he charcoal blued the barrel in his yard. I have the pics. Pretty cool. I love it. One of my faves.

Toklo Etee said:

Bob, that's a nice gun...Did Jack build that gun? I had a chance to see a few of his on display at the Indian conference in Ohio back around 2001...my gun was a Jack Brooks kit that Dave Wagner built. I think Dave was assembling some of the locks and was also building some of the kits on the side. Richard Guthrie who passed away recently Introduced me to Dave . Both of those guys used to work at Williamsburg and if I'm not mistaken Dave apprenticed under Wallace G. I see you got your barrel blued....I wanted to get mine charcoal blued but I had sell one kidney to afford the gun and felt like I needed the other! LOL
One thing that REALLY surprised me was the internals on the lock. To have a bridleless tumbler....I expected the lock to not be that fast.......it is faster than the Davis lock I have on my Fusil fin.
Mine has a .60 bore & it shoots a .595 ball teally well with wadding.
Again Bob...that is a NICE gun! I'm sure your proud of it. Between my two guns.....I grab that Carolina gun more times than not if headed out the door to hunt or go to a living history gig.

David

Click to expand...

David,
Did Jack Brooks ever offer Carolina gun kits? I knoew MIKE Brooks did and I knew Jack had taught a few classes on building them from the stick.

Y

Capt. Jas. said:

David,
Did Jack Brooks ever offer Carolina gun kits? I knoew MIKE Brooks did and I knew Jack had taught a few classes on building them from the stick.

Click to expand...

Yep. He sure did. Once upon a time. I think there’s still a dead link on his website. Mike did too. No more sadly. All Mike’s doing now outside of his custom guns is some castings I think.

I didn't know that. Someone on another thread is looking for a rear sight. Maybe Jack had one laying around.

Capt. Jas,
Just as Bob said, Jack was offering kits & I think Dave was assembling locks for him. I went to an event at Conrad Weisers in 1999 and that is were Rick Guthrie introduced me to Dave Wagner. Both guys were true craftsmen. I got my gun in 2000 & and Dave passed away a few years afterwards. It was this past winter that I learned of Rick's passing. I didn't know Dave personally but he built a hell of a gun.....it is definitely an item I will pass down to my son's. Rick was quite a character.....the way he told me about Dave building guns was this question:

How would you like to own a great reproduction of the quendesental Southeastern trade gun?

Lol......I was all ears at that point! Understand this was a guy who gave me a great deal on a Peter Gobal brass kettle because.....in Rick's words
"The height of the kettle was an 1/16" off..........so any time Rick gave an item praise he felt it was spot on!
Rick worked in the blacksmith shop at Colonial Williamsburg and was probably one of the most well read individuals concerning Southeastern Native history....Everytime I talked with him he was always mentioning a great source document I had not heard of before......great guy.

I love my French Tulle fusil-de-chasse in .62 I shoot both patched round ball and shot. However I have great interest in the smaller smooth bores 24 and 28. Has anyone used one of these smaller bores with shot? If so did you find them easier to obtain a uniform pattern with than the .62?
Thanks,
Ferret Master

Toklo Etee said:

Hey guys.....saw you were talking about one of my favorite topics! The attached images are from an article by Lee Burke on Carolina guns. It's not a long article but one of his major points is that while there maybe variation....The English had a pattern that gunsmith's were using in their production of the guns. He breaks down the extant TR gun and compares it to the archeological recovered parts if the Yuchi town gun.
The English were cutting some corners using sheet brass for furniture & painted beech wood stocks but.....the workmanship on the guns is well executed. At 5 1/2# these slender guns were a joy to carry. Most of them were fitted with brass rear sights......the Carolina gun was the work horse of the 18th cen Deerskin trade.

Click to expand...

That would be the map I was thinking of.
Thanks.

jbwilliams3 said:

I have that Burke article on my hard drive. It's a good one.

Click to expand...

@jbwilliams3 is that article saved in a format that you could p.m. or email me the file? This is my ideal gun for the most part. I don't own one, yet, but someday I'll find a way to get one. In the meantime I'm fascinated with them, and other than cost and current availability, I don't see what they aren't more popular.

So as to the original question and one of my responses regarding French guns in the hands of American colonists. Spence posted this elsewhere,

"
From The History of New Ipswich, New Hampshire, 1735-1914: With Genealogical Records of the Principle Families, by Charles Henry Chandler, Sarah Fiske Lee. It describes men marching from New Ipswich, NH, toward Stillwater, NY, and the battle known as Bemis Heights. It tells of Capt. Stephen Parker's company leaving for Stillwater in 1777, as related by a citizen of the town who remembered the event.

"To a man, they wore small clothes, coming down and fastening just below the knee, and long stockings with cowhide shoes ornamented by large buckles, while not a pair of boots graced the company. The coats and waist-coats were loose and of huge dimensions, with colors as various as the barks of oak, sumach and other trees of our hills and swamps, could make them and their shirts were all made of flax, and like every other part of their dress, were homespun. On their heads was worn a large round top and broad brimmed hat. Their arms were as various as their costume; here an old soldier carried a heavy Queen's arm, which had done service at the Conquest of Canada twenty years previous, while by his side walked a stripling boy with a Spanish fusee not half its weight or calibre, which his grandfather may have taken at the Havana, while not a few had old French pieces, that dated back to the reduction of Louisburg....."

I cut it short and edited the heading as it is rather long, ended it with the point about French guns in our revolution.

Ferret Master said:

I love my French Tulle fusil-de-chasse in .62 I shoot both patched round ball and shot. However I have great interest in the smaller smooth bores 24 and 28. Has anyone used one of these smaller bores with shot? If so did you find them easier to obtain a uniform pattern with than the .62?
Thanks,
Ferret Master

Click to expand...

Not a lot of information on 24 bores but with an old double flint shotgun by Wm Parker I once slew 4 woodpigeons With one shot . We where harvesting but I noticed ' woodies' feeding on chick weed. So dinner time I stalked up and fearing misfireing I let go both together I could look up the loadings as I kept accounts but this wasn't a long shot and hardy the info you seek but might be of interest perhaps. Rudyard

What a great and informative post this has been for an iggerunt person like myself. The sheer hugity of the range of firearms used by the early settlers, and the dependency on their ethnic roots for inspiration, makes even the basic study of them into a lifetime commitment. I just wish we lived in a country where single-shot muzzleloaders were not regarded as as much of a firearm as a Barrett M108..............

Britsmoothy said:

Fowler's.
Next

Click to expand...

Fowlers, plural. "Who used fowlers." As in "Who used shotguns."

If he had titled it "Who used a fowler's" you'd be correct.

JB67 said:

Fowlers, plural. "Who used fowlers." As in "Who used shotguns."

If he had titled it "Who used a fowler's" you'd be correct.

Click to expand...

Fowler's used fowler's so to answer who used fowler's the answer is, fowler's. Folk that hunted and shot fowl.

A stand of original half and full stocked fowlers
Feltwad

Britsmoothy said:

Fowler's used fowler's so to answer who used fowler's the answer is, fowler's. Folk that hunted and shot fowl.

Click to expand...

I hate to be a grammar nerd, but it's hard for me to ignore. You used a singular possessive of the word "fowler." The apostrophe plus "s" denotes possession by the singular subject. In other words, it was cut off: "fowler's... what? fowler's fowler? fowler's hat?" I'm dying to know! If we're being super precise, the whole title of this post would be a bit confusing. "Who used fowlers?" In a literal sense, we're asking, "who used people who hunt fowl." We should be asking, "who used fowling pieces." There. It's out of my system.