Poorboy style Flintlock

[Cherokee]

Heres my 2 cents worth guys.
My family is fromt he cumberland gap area. My dad grew up in the middle of nowhere. He was usually barefooted and in overhauls and dirt poor.
I have a shotgun of his that my grandfather bought him when he was 11 years old. A 12 gauge single barrel Red letter Winchester. It had a cracked stock on it when they bought it or traded for it.
It has a curly maple stock and it cracked in one of the grain lines. So what did they do? Take it to a gun smith? No he told me they had no idea where a gun smith was. They really didnt know much of what was going on 100 miles from them. They wrapped the stock with copper wire and the wrapped the wire with some type of fabric tape. Its rock solid and a family heirloom.
I think most people back in the wilds of kentucky and tennessee didnt have a choice. Fix it or trade it off for hogs, chickens etc.
Those were hard times.

 

[BLAHMAN]

Elnathan, there is visual evidence for you to observe, just page through Nueman's book: Weapons of the American Revolution. There is a section devoted to rifles used during that time. They are pretty much basic as is the other weapons used during that time.

I'm lucky, I get to hang around the Log Cabin shop in Lodi, Ohio. I see and handle rifles and guns that were are describing. Two weeks ago, an older man had a broken rifle (old original antique) that he was wanting to repair. That rifle (he had three) had rifling in the barrel with NO TWIST! It was straight! I've never heard that. Did that thing have all the brass trimmings? Nope, it was plain jane all the way, very utilitarian.

This debate over "poor boy" descriptions sound like everybody hypothosizes about their existance, well, they did exist, and in numbers, not just "a few here", "a few there".

 

[loojack]

This is all very interesting, I'm putting the parts together to build a "Barn Gun".
I first heard about Schimmels in Chuck Dixon's The Art of Building the Pennsylvania Longrifle. I got the book in the late '70s, it's marked #75 inside the front cover. On pages 169 and 170 he has an article in which he describes the "schimmel" as an everyday work gun that every frontiersman could afford and all he needed. A gun with a quality lock stock and barrel, minus the frills. Mr. Dixon also states, "To some, Schimmel also meant a "barn gun" a gun left out in the barn." This is in a paragraph he explains that schimmel is defined as something old, thus musty and mildewed, and some thing that has been set back or out of sight. It was also considered as a second or back up gun.
Does this mean that "Grampa's old gun" was relegated to the barn, to get it out of the house because it was old and of little use anymore?
What does any of this mean? I don't know. What kind of records were kept by gun makers? I'm sure books were kept for taxes and etc. Records could put this to bed once and for all. Anyway it is fun debate!.....loojack

 

[Donny]

I don't know if they kept them in the barn, but many guns must have stood the last 80 yrs on a dirt floor. I have a rolling block, 1872, the action is great, the buttplate looks like it was stored under salt water. Ditto many old shotguns at farm auctions.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I think it has regional variations.

The Eastern PA smiths put a lot more embellishment on the early, and especially the later, flintlocks than most of the other regions seem to have.

The club-butt fowlers of the NY Hudson Valley ( 1730's & 40's) are extremely well made, but have almost no ornamentation.

I'm not sure when Tennessee first started producing rifles, but shortly after the War of 1812 styles were changing, fancy hats had "gone beaver", and 1830 to 1840's was the era of "Hard Times Tokens" because no one's credit was good.

And remember, a metal buttplate not only protects the wood, it balances the barrel and serves as a striking weapon when the ball gone. When the country was tougher it was a feature worth having, not just ornamentation.

It would also depend greatly on whether the original smiths made to spec for individuals or made rifles that were sold in the shop to "walk-ins". You might have had to buy what was offerred on display. I think that is why we now have recognizable schools. The gunsmiths made the rifle their own way, not to customer demands. Otherwise, each rifle would be more unique. Few modern gunsmiths specialize now, because they are filling individual orders.

 

[Packdog]

"

I'm not sure when Tennessee first started producing rifles, but shortly after the War of 1812 styles were changing, fancy hats had "gone beaver", and 1830 to 1840's was the era of "Hard Times Tokens" because no one's credit was good."

I believe there was a Bean making guns in what is now TN around 1768. Quote from Jerry Noble's book on Southern mt. Guns.

Packdog

 

[rich pierce]

I have read that there was a Bean then and there but no hard evidence of gunbuilding by the Beans in that era. Even if there was a Bean building guns then, there is no way of knowing (aside from guessing they always made them the "family way") what style of guns were made.

I spent a lot of time at Dixons before and after he wrote his book, before and after he moved to the "new store", between 1977 and 1990. I saw a lot of the "schimmels", "barn guns", what have you, both originals and new re-creations by Dixon and Richard Hjusa and others. I never saw one that was styled before 1790. I believe the same is true of the vast majority of Tennessee "poor-boys" based on the locks they carry and the barrel profiles. There is the occasional "Old Houston gun" etc. but that has parts on it. Iron parts.

Any way, no worries. Muzzleloading is largely about the "feel" and imagfination and emulating our forefathers and foremothers, some of whom could handle a rifle mighty well. Folks should build and use what they like and enjoy it. I can't for the life of me figure out why some folks want to be "period correct" and at the same time need to "reason" or "imagine" or "argue" that there was plenty of this sort or that sort of gun at a given time and place when there's almost no evidence. Why not just say, "I like 'em better this way!"

 

[Packdog]

Rich,

For the sake of discussion. I can only imagine any TN gun built that early (and I agree there may not have been any) would have very strong Virgina characteristics other than availibility of certain parts. I am basing my statement on the fact Bean and many others moved from that area and I assume learned the craft there?
On to your second statement.

Folks should build and use what they like and enjoy it. I can't for the life of me figure out why some folks want to be "period correct" and at the same time need to "reason" or "imagine" or "argue" that there was plenty of this sort or that sort of gun at a given time and place when there's almost no evidence. Why not just say, "I like 'em better this way!"

:RO: :agree:

My TN has a short tang and S. Siler lock.

 

There were gunsmiths along the eastern borders of what we now call Tennessee and Kentucky very early. There was even at least one gunsmith deep in Kentucky by the early 1770s--Squire Boone (English style guns as he had apprenticed to his English born uncle). Most of the early guns being made in that part of the country came from VA and the Carolinas. Most probably had brass mounts, but early iron guns do exist. Many of the early settlers and hunters brought PA made rifles with them, so there would have been a mixture of styles. But, again, only the well-to-do could afford the extra costs of fancy guns. Then as today, carving and fancy inlays cost $$$. The 'poorboy' common today is a copy of early to mid 19th century rifles made in the southern mountains. But early 'plain' rifles not only existed, not only were made locally, but were the common rifles of the common man. The local 'squires' may have bought the fancier guns, but I can't see the typical backwoods hunter with one. Heck, the records show that even the market hunters often rented their rifles from their employers--what kind of gun do you think the employers were supplying? Ornately carved, fancy boxes, fluted nosecaps? Gimme a break! :m2c:

Rich,

For the sake of discussion. I can only imagine any TN gun built that early (and I agree there may not have been any) would have very strong Virgina characteristics other than availibility of certain parts. I am basing my statement on the fact Bean and many others moved from that area and I assume learned the craft there?
On to your second statement.

Folks should build and use what they like and enjoy it. I can't for the life of me figure out why some folks want to be "period correct" and at the same time need to "reason" or "imagine" or "argue" that there was plenty of this sort or that sort of gun at a given time and place when there's almost no evidence. Why not just say, "I like 'em better this way!"

:RO: :agree:

My TN has a short tang and S. Siler lock.

 

[loojack]

Any way, no worries. Muzzleloading is largely about the "feel" and imagfination and emulating our forefathers and foremothers, some of whom could handle a rifle mighty well. Folks should build and use what they like and enjoy it. I can't for the life of me figure out why some folks want to be "period correct" and at the same time need to "reason" or "imagine" or "argue" that there was plenty of this sort or that sort of gun at a given time and place when there's almost no evidence. Why not just say, "I like 'em better this way!" [/quote]
I agree 100%.....loojack

 

[riverrat43]

I also agree with Rich..Now , I keep reading that the average person could not afford the rifle if it were to be embellished with brass furniture rather than iron, butt plate and thimbles as opposed to plain, carving as opposed to none. Just how much did these "extras" cost? Are we just applying logic that says if it is that way today, it must have been that way back then, or do records exist for a particular smith that lists prices of options on a rifle? Could there have been rifle makers who built them they way they wanted to and sold them for whatever the market in a particular region would bear? Maybe these questions don't show my ignorance of the subject too much.

 

[Hota]

Folks should build and use what they like and enjoy it. I can't for the life of me figure out why some folks want to be "period correct" and at the same time need to "reason" or "imagine" or "argue" that there was plenty of this sort or that sort of gun at a given time and place when there's almost no evidence. Why not just say, "I like 'em better this way!"

I think my intention with this post was to derive some idea of historical accuracy rather than determination of period correctness. Two completely separate issues.

There are BP geeks, PC (period correct) geeks and history geeks. I am all three. :thumbsup: :thumbsup:

 

[rich pierce]

In reply to Riverrat,
In my own imaginings, it would be next to impossible to get a new immigrant German gunsmith to make rifles lacking parts (buttplate, trigger guard, entry ramrod pipe, sideplate, nosecap). If any of you have ever tried to get any well-trained craftsman to cut the corners, you may agree. So I imagine that many really early rifles (F&I to Revolution) would be fully appointed with parts. It also takes time for styles to change and develop, and maybe more than one "generation removed" from the European-trained early gunsmiths for guns to be made w/o all the parts.

Also, rifles have always been more expensive than smoothbores. So if somebody needed a cheap gun and could not afford a rifle they could get a smoothbore, suitable for many purposes. So I am kind of "so-so" about the idea that a man had to have a rifle but could not afford to pay the gunsmith to put on all the parts in the early period, when rifles were not "everyman's gun".

But that is just speculation.

 

[elmonk]

Mike,

One of the earliest settlements in the Carolina mountains was what is now Winston-Salem. Founded by Moravians.

There is a book on The Bethlehem Oil Mill. I picked up a copy some years back when we went through the old oil mill.

The book describes how workers/craftsman were shuttled back and forth between the settlement that is now Bethlehem, PA and the one that became Winston-Salem.

There is a quip in the book that the leader of the settlement at Winston-Salem asked Bethlehem not to send down a gunsmith as the presence of the gunsmith attracts the worst sort of people.

My wife and I toured the museum in Bethlehem. I was looking for original stringed musical instruments but they had none on display. But when we looked at the brass musical instruments it was easy to see where the gunsmiths brass working skills had come from.

 

[Donny]

I read somewhere that a southern mtn rifle was a "degenerate" style. wow, the a poorboy must really make the guy ill. What I don't understand is, how any skilled gunbuilder would leave off the buttplate. was it that expensive to use a thin brass plate? Even the cheep NW trade guns had a brass buttplate.

 

[jim gray]

Does Donny get a prize for the 10,000th post in the flintlock forum.

 

[Stumpkiller]

Good Idea!

I'm sure in light of the momentus occasion Claude will grant him a free two-year subscription to this Forum. ::

 

[elmonk]

Donny,

If having a butt plate on a rifle all that important?

I built several Schimmels. My personal one has no butt plate. Built it 20 years ago. It shoulders nicely and the butt wood has held up well.

Several years ago a buddy from Florida spent some time up here. I took him to the range with that rifle. He at first thought the rifle would not shoulder well without a butt plate. He spent several hours shooting the rifle and found that one really does not need a butt plate on certain rifles.

Left out of this lengthy thread is the idea of post Rev War militia groups and their weekend shoots. Those week end militia shoots served a function similar to our present gun clubs. People running for an elected office would campaign at the militia shoots. Really fancy guns got the attention of the crowd. Fancy guns were ststus symbols at the militia shoots. So during that period there were fancy rifles for the militia weekends and common guns for work.

 

[tg]

"I think my intention with this post was to derive some idea of historical accuracy rather than determination of period correctness. Two completely separate issues."

I don't think you can consider one without the other
period correctness IS historical accuracy.

 

[jim gray]

And remember, a metal buttplate not only protects the wood, it balances the barrel and serves as a striking weapon when the ball gone. When the country was tougher it was a feature worth having, not just ornamentation.

I can't imagine what the butt of my rifles would look like after repeated loadings without a butt plate to protect that wood, and I load with the butt resting on my foot. I can't imagine you could do that easily with a longrifle or a fowler with a barrel of forty inches or so.