Is this historically correct?

[Powerkicker]

I am looking at this rifle with some interest. Is it historically correct with the way the lock is worked into the stock and is the lack of patchbox common in period pieces as well? Is it relatively historically accurate or should I pass? The wood shaping right behind the hammer seems like it dives back down earlier than normal. Thanks.

 

[David W.]

I couldn't get your link to work.

 

[Powerkicker]

Can you see the pics now?

 

[Flint311]

Pics are working fine. Nice lookin' rifle. Yes, for that style they may not have had a patchbox. Just got home and can't get my mind to remember the style, based on stock and trigger guard....

 

[bnail]

that looks like a TN Mt. Rifle poor boy and it should do fine for RMFT, or Alamo, can't say about 1812. as for the specific details of the gun itself, there's far more folks than I who can speak to the authenticity of the lines/deminsions, etc. but it's definately a documented style. I always liked the greese hole in the buttstock opposed to a patch box.

 

[SR James]

It is a Tennessee or southern style rifle. My only quibble with it is that an English-style lock would be more appropriate than the Germanic Siler that is on it.

 

[hawkeye2]

"The wood shaping right behind the hammer seems like it dives back down earlier than normal".

The builder may have done that in an atempt to make the molding streamline down to the top of the lock plate or he may have just figured it would be better to have too much clearance than too little.

 

[hanshi]

That is a very nice rifle and I agree it's a SMR/Tn style. The overall architecture is very graceful and looks HC to my novice eyes. I agree with the others that while a Germanic lock was not unheard of on the originals, an English lock would have been more common. Mine has a Siler also.

 

[Mark Black]

Looks like a Jack Garner TN Mt rifle. Very nice!! If you don't want it, buy it and ship it to me!! :rotf: Any markings on the barrel? A buddy of mine has a Jack Garner and it looks almost identical.......

 

[Dausener]

I guess it depends on what time period and place your reffering to. It looks like a nice rifle. (I was lookin at that one too) If you like it buy it. :thumbsup:

 

[Mike Brooks]

I have never seen an original TN. rifle with a german lock. It needs an english lock.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

As far as being "correct" to the 18th century..., post American War of Independence, not bad, first decade of the 1800, no worries.

While it is true that it doesn't match the current standards for a Southern Mountain rifle as the lock isn't as "English" as those found on surviving examples..., it is rather tough to pronounce such a lock as "wrong" when perhaps we should be saying "not the best, but not bad".

This is of course my opinion, but so few of the original rifles of any school remain compared to the records of the number that we can say were made, who knows when different locks were substituted? Who knows how many rifles had locks scrounged as used from other guns?

Below is the link for a paper on the 1792 and 1807 "Contract Rifles" ordered from civilian makers and bought by the US. The government standards were issued prior to 1792, and first deliveries and accepted rifles happened in 1792..., hence the terminology. Out of 3400 rifles bought, less than 2% survive, and the example in the paper is a flinter converted to percussion. The lock plate is considered original. It is very similar to your lock's plate, only the tail of the lock plate in the original was bobbed. Otherwise the lock plate lines are "Germanic". Which shows that such a lock style with Germanic lines were being used in the colonies, though maybe not in the South as "new". It appears that all of the contractors were from the Lancaster area, so that would explain why they had Germanic style locks on some of the contract rifles. Again don't forget about the possible use of a used lock by a Southern gunmaker. There would be nothing to stop a Southern gunmaker from using such a lock, just that the availablity would probably have been less than one of English lines.

If you check the paper further, there are three 1807 contract rifles shown, two with very similar lock plates to yours, one very different. So with that in mind, my opinion is that the lock on your rifle isn't "bad"..., it's just not the classic type of lock many folks expect to see on such a rifle. It is, however, within the realm of possible locks that might have been used on such a gun prior to 1800, and after. Again it just depends on "how" a maker crafting an iron shod, mountain style rifle came to use a Germanic style lock when it appears that the English type was more available.
1792 and 1807 Contract Rifles

LD

 

[varsity07840]

I was looking at that rifle too. Fair price. The only real flaw I see is the joint where the nose cap meets the forestock. I also noted that the seller says the barrel is 1" at the breech. If the barrel isn't swamped, that rifle is really going to be muzzle heavy. Looking at the pic of the muzzle, I don't think it is. If it's a Garner rifle it'll most likely be signed by him on the top flat.

Duane

 

[matt denison]

I have never seen an original TN. rifle with a german lock. It needs an english lock.

The OP's question was "is this historically correct?" Mike answered it. Or could have just said "no".

IMHO, the lock is wrong for that gun.

Respectfully,

L'dog

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

At this point anything else is just wishful thinking. :yakyak:

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

Powerkicker, when you say "historically correct" what period do you mean? It is a nice rifle but everyone who has given it a date is far too early in that date. It's style and Southern Mountain stock and furniture patterns both date it to no earlier than 1815 and with the proper flintlock, it may date as late as 1855. The Germanic style lock was rarely if ever used below the so-called Lower, or as non-natives say, Northern, Shenandoah Valley of Virginia, around Winchester.

As far as using locks of the US military's "M"1792 and "M"1807 rifles as examples of "it's okay to use" this lock, that is completely incorrect. The 1792 and 1807 Contract Rifles (you can not call them Models since they were not made to a specific "US Model" designed for adherence to) were made to a the style of the then current Lancaster Pattern civilian rifle made in Pennsylvania and they used whatever locks were available at a good price to the contractors that supplied them to the government - the contractors used what their trade commonly used, the locks imported in large quantity from German makers into Philadelphia at a good price and, often, so-so quality. One of the biggest problems the US had with the Contract Rifles was the poor quality of the locks. Powerkicker's rifle is, as I stated above, far too late in style and is made in a different section of the country to have been made before 1820, it's only 18th Century feature is it's Germanic style lock. In closing, we need to recall that the lock of the US M1803 Rifle made at Harpers Ferry, as well as the so-called Brenise Rifle illustrated under Contractor rifles, used a lock styled after the French military lock. It is neither Germanic or English.

 

[dave_person]

Hi Powerkicker,
You also asked about the way the lock molding dips down by the cock. That is fairly common on production, semi-production guns, and by makers who either don't spend the time or don't know how to shape that area so the groove is not necessary. There are original antique guns with the same treatment. Overall, I'd say this gun was competently made but only that.

dave

 

[hanshi]

I can see it clear as day, now. An Appalachian gun maker sits there with a big pile of parts he's scrounged and bought over the years and an almost finished rifle on his bench. He thinks, "Dang, can't use this lock cause it ain't HC/PC and I just don't have the correct lock on hand. And it'll be summer before I can get to Richmond."

 

[Mark Black]

Regardless of whether the rifle is hc/pc or not, it's still a fine looking piece and should be acceptable at pretty much any rondezvous you attend. Buy it, shoot it and enjoy it!! I know I would :thumbsup:

 

[ApprenticeBuilder]

Being in the business of being in business, I will reach way out on a limb here (just as you have done) and say that

the particular builder you reference would have purchased his wares in quantity,

15 barrels
15 locks
etc.

Enough parts to hold him over until the next supply run.

Business has not changed that much in the last 250 years, guy brings you in a broken down beat hunk of a rifle you sell him a new one and salvage his parts to repair the salvageable work that comes in later on.

Sounds more plausible