Barn Gun / Schimmel

[marcstephen]

With Barn Guns are the originals (still left) Smooth Bore or Rifled or Both?


Thank you

:front:

 

[Okwaho]

With the term,"barn guns" being rather recent in origin similar to blanket,canoe and poor boy guns, I would assume that they can be either depending on what the customer wants.
Tom Patton :m2c:

 

[rich pierce]

The originals I saw years ago at Dixons varied. Lots of finer guns from that area were smooth rifles anyway. If a guy was going cheap as possible, rifling would add cost. I agree with Tom, whatever the customer (you?) wants. For me, a .54 or 28 ga smoothie would be the ticket for rabbits in the thicket, varmints in the cornpatch and deer in the holler.

 

[PvtC]

For what it is worth, Dixon's "Building the PA Longrifle" book states that most were smooth but one is known to have straight (no twist) groove rifling. There are some cliches surrounding these guns

"this style reflects PA Deutch frugality"

"don't see many cause they were used hard"

The contemporary builders who specialize in Northampton County or Allentown guns with the Roman nose architecture seem to be convinced that they were prevalent in SE PA during the Federal period. :m2c:

 

[Stophel]

I have gotten to see and handle now 3 or 4 "barn guns". Two from Berks county (and I have photos of 2 more), the others from who knows where. All have been smoothbores. A rifled one would certainly not be out of the question, however.

 

[kettenburg]

I've probably examined about 75 of these things at this point ranging in date from ca. 1790 through about 1840. I could count on one hand the number that carried evidence of rifling.

 

[Okwaho]

Erik,it's good to see you on this board and it occurs to me that we've been down this road before.It also occurs to me that we are to some degree in a battle of semantics here.As to the "poor boys" which seem to exist only in the mountainous regions of East Tennessee,North Carolina,South Carolina,and Kentucky I can only say that in 41 years of looking at old guns I had never encountered that term until about 10-15 years ago.We just always called them cheap guns and they were priced accordingly.I bought a quentesential Southern "poorboy" in 1964 for $55.00 and sold it about 10 years ago for $300.00.As I said we had never heard that term until folks like TOTW and Dixie began using it.

A similar situation exists with "Schimmels/barn guns". Until you raised the use of the word Schimmel in regards to rifles,the only time I had ever heard the term was in regards to the itinerant barn painter and carver,Wilhelm Schimmel{1817-1890}.Now I don't for a moment think that there weren't very plain inexpensive guns made in the very late 18th century and on into the 19th century just as they were being made in virtually every locale in which muzzle loading rifles were being made.I also think that the style of these guns followed the earlier guns in the area in which both were made whether it be Southeastern Pennsylvania or in Eastern Tennessee where old muzzle loading guns were often used to kill hogs thus the term,"hog rifle".In Southeastern Tennessee production of muzzle loading rifles including some flintlocks continued well after the Civil War and in both there and North Central Tennessee a class of guns developed called "chunk guns".These were heavy barreled guns laid across a chunk of wood in target shooting,hence the name.

I think as the Kentucky rifle began to degenerate in the 19th century after it's golden age that the demand for purely utilitarian guns began to outstrip the demand for the more highly decorated guns to the point that price was the major consideration assuming the gun was well built and shot well.Earl once told me that Wes White had documentation that after the Revolution and on into the 19th century that fully 50-60% of guns made in Lancaster County,Pa. went to Indian market hunters.

As I said,I've been looking at old guns for 41 years and I constantly see terminology being used that 25 or more years ago was totally unheard of. Terms like "blanket" and "canoe" denote guns which are purely fantasy guns."Schimmel" and "barn" guns are fairly recent terms."Hog" and "chunk" guns are a little older but not very much.Basically we are talking about the same type of gun ie;a plain sturdy utilitarian gun used for a variety of everyday tasks and in the case of the "chunk" guns for target shooting.I guess that the bottom line is that an inexpensive gun was hard to sell and so names had to be coined to make them more marketable.I will concede the possibility of the terms "schimmel" and "barn" having a regional basis as do the "hog" and "chunk" guns but I am not prepared to accept these terms as anything more than a possible regional background. As to "canoe" and "blanket" guns,they are fantasy guns and no more just as are cut down ranger Besses and Indian Besses.
Heresy is a lonely road
Tom Patton :m2c:

 

[marcstephen]

I used the terms "Barn Gun and Schimmel" just as a term that many people on the forum had heard. Just so we would be on the same page, speaking the same language.

I think you are right as far as the terminology being relatively new. I feel that wee use these terms to describe weapons or whatever so we can talk the same language. I just retired from Civil War reenacting. We used terms like, "Richmond Depot Type I,II,III" These are terms that did not exist until the 1980's. BUT, it allows people to speak on the same level. That way everyone knows what we are talking about and eliminates (hopefully) confusion.

ff: :hatsoff: :thanks:

 

[kettenburg]

This is why a discussion of these things always deteriorates: for some reason, semantics become ridiculously important to the discussion and it's all down hill from there! I don't much care what we call them so long as everyone engaged in the discussion knows what we're talking ABOUT! These pieces can be viewed in regional terms much like much more decoated arms. I have always called them "barn guns" when specifically applied to pieces of SE PA because very large numbers of them have survived and they appear to have been as common as dirt along PA German farm country along the base of the Blue Mountain ca. 1790s-1840s. Chuck Dixon and others call them 'schimmels' because they are IN SPIRIT reminiscent of the folksy, basic work of the woodcarver and because it is believed that peddlars were buying them from gunsmiths in towns and then carrying them out into the farm country for sale. As Tom has stated the terms schimmel or barn gun are modern descriptions, used because we have to call them SOMEthing and we don't know what they were called 200 years ago.

 

[Stony]

Probably 200 years ago, they were called "Pa's gun" :crackup:

:sorry: I couldn't help myself.

 

[PvtC]

Echoing Tom's sentiment, it is cool to have Erik weigh in here. I've been awe struck by many of his firelocks over the years. Was wonderin if Erik could take a couple of minutes to itemize the salient features of the utilitarian aka Schimmel :winking:guns he has examined?

 

[Okwaho]

Erik,I don't have a problem with the term "schimmel" used to denote a regionalized gun of late 18th and 19th centuries Pennsylvania.This sort of classification based on research and localized appearance is very reminiscent of the "chunk gun" in Southeast Tennessee and North Central Tennessee where shoots are held each year at Pall Mall,Tennessee the home of[url] Sgt.Alvin[/url] York.There is also a similarity in terms where Appalachian rifles are called locally and by students of these guns,"Hog"{pronounced Hawg} rifles and it has not been too many years since Calvin Hetrick identified the Bedford County {Pa.} rifles.I do,however, have a problem with the overuse of the term "barn gun" designating ANY plain undecorated late gun with Pennsylvania styling as a "barn gun" just as I have problems with "poorboys","blanket" and "canoe"guns,cut down Indian and ranger guns, and Brown Bess "trade" guns.The term "poor boy" is a very modern term and in 41 years of collecting and studying Tennessee rifles less than 5% have been what one would call a "poor boy"and I am being liberal here. The others mentioned are just plain fantasy guns and I am starting to see otherwise good plain late rifles from areas other than Southeast Pa. referred to as "barn guns" a term which encompasses a VERY wide range.I understand Marc's position very well and understand that many people see a need to categorize guns but let's do it on a scholarly and objective basis. I accept Erik's well reasoned thesis on the Schimmels and have already said so but I am not prepared to accept terminolgy based on catalogues, contemporary builders{ not many}and generally uninformed people who often don't understand the need for serious and objective research.

I once asked a well known builder why he built "early"{pre-1789} iron mounted guns at a time when virtually none were known.His response was "I build whatever people will pay for".Well it's hard to argue with that logic.The problem is that with a number of those guns being built over a fair amount of time pretty soon the correctness of the gun becomes accepted and that's downright scary.I am also pleased to say that I am authorized by my old friend Earl Lanning,"The old man of the mountains" to state that he concurs in this post and further says Hello.
The way of a crusader is indeed a lonely one especially when he is also considered heretical.
Tom Patton :m2c:

 

[Gaze]

Yer dern toot'in.

Here is an idea, though not new one, I

 

[marcstephen]

Yer dern toot'in.

Here is an idea, though not new one, I

 

[rich pierce]

It's all just words, but we use the words to communicate. We can attach values to words based on our experience. My experience with barns is very good and I consider farming to be the most honest labor a person can do. Adam and Eve were farmers. So the term "barn gun" is no more derogatory to me than the term "hay fork". We don't need to get into class struggles here. We're talking about guns and trying to know what each other is talking about. It's not the "haves" versus the "have-nots". That's worth discussing for those focusing on politics.

In this case, the terms "barn gun" or schimmel", to many of us, mean plainly built guns made in SE Pennsylvania from 1790-1840. It describes a regional set of guns that have been found and studied and named for convenience in discussing them. Their use was not by frontiersmen, longhunters, Indian fighters, militiamen, or other romantic figures. We guess that because they have been found on farms near where they were made, not on battlefields or west of the mountains. It is likely they were used by farmers to shoot stuff that needed shooting- cattle, hogs for butchering, racoons in the corncrib, deer in the holler, varmints and such. Just as the single barrel Iver Johnson 12 ga was used in the early to mid 1900's.

Other plainly built guns do not count as barn guns or schimmels. Yes there were plenty of them and there are probably more Chevy Cavaliers today than Corvettes.

Just for clarity, I'd not use the term "Poor Boy" to describe a gun made north of the Mason-Dixon line, nor any gun made before 1790.

It's easy enough to say, "plain rifle-built gun" to talk about a plain rifle-built gun made elsewhere.

 

[Okwaho]

To Marc and Gabby[what a wonderful avatar},thanks for the kind words and support. Marc,I noted that you were recently retired from Civil War reenacting.I started in this hobby in 1984 as a backwoodsman with Indian influence and then spent 9 years as an Assistant Surgeon with the rank of Captain.I started at the Gettysburg 125th aniversary in 1988 as Chief of Contract Surgeons under the Medical Director for the ANV.I wound up doing both CS :grey: and US :blue: depending on the needs of the event and retired in 1997.It was a good run but I'm happy as a Mohawk Sauvage.Natives have more fun especially when allied with the Francais.
Megwetch
Tom Patton :thumbsup:

 

[marcstephen]

Tom,

As you know Civil War can take up your life if you let it. I am (hopefully) going to grad School this spring so I retired. I always did Infantry. Reb, Union whatever was needed.

It just took too much time from my family. :grey: :blue:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Most of the guns that were made were cheap guns.

Where is your evidence? The ledger books of gunsmiths show $11 & $12 guns, but no mention of "sold two $5 rifles off the factory-seconds discount rack today".

Now lets compare pianos. People that are apt to buy a new piano want a darned good piano. A company that throws cheap pianos out the workshop door doesn't stay in business long. The companies that hand-craft fine pianos are back-ordered for months. You want to spend less? Buy a used piano.

"Cheap" modern guns are mass-produced on replicating CNC machines with very little hand crafting. Rifling was done by hand, one groove at a time. You can't compare a hand-made flintlock to a J.C. Higgins.

In the 1700's a gunsmith lived or died by his reputation, and he had little interest in swapping volume for quality if he was making ends meet. The materials were worth much more than his and the apprentice/shop boy's labor. Just the opposite of today's gun shop.

In the American Revolution there came a desperate need for weapons, and a lot of muskets were thrown together. Thereafter, a "cheap" gun would likely have been one of those or a used up issue Bess.

I believe many of the "barn guns" were assembled from old parts, and the dates fall into the 1830's or thereabouts - when the country was in a bad depression and materials were hard come by. That would put the date of the assembly long after the parts were dated, and probably not by the original smith.

Again, just conjecture for discussion.

 

[arilar]

Hi Marc,
For a foreigner as me this thread learns me a lot about how you look at this matters in U.S. In my small place called Sweden it is a little bit different.... maybe. In my country existed what I think in english is called a guild-system from at least 1356 until 1846 (with regulations ended first 1864).So, the "Masters" in making guns protected their trade and were situated in the major citys. High grade guns, expensive and not to be owned or used by ordinary people (farmers et.c.). Instead they had locally made guns, by a gunsmith "close to you". This gunsmith was not allowed to put his name on the gun. This weapons were mostly not expensive but often highly effective. Sometimes even made with surprisingly high quality. I have several of this from period 1680-1870. Some simple and other very high quality. They carry snap-lock (flint or percussion), flintlock or percussion-system. Some quality-barrels has been surviving through all this time like 1660-barrels on a 1840 rifle.
All this guns are called in Swedish "Allmoge vapen", in english translated to country people or peasantry weapons. Maybe most of them were smoothbored but many also rifled in small calibers (6-8 mm) some in bigger caliber made for hunting seal at the coast or game as moose, bear or wolf in forest-areas.Some made of different older military parts. I have one with civil stock but 1726 military barrel and 1746 military flintlock.
Silly me has actually translated our Swedish peasantry guns to "barn guns" that now seems not to accurate.
Just thoughts from another horizont!
Regards,
ARILAR :: :thumbsup:

 

[Gaze]

Most of the guns that were made were cheap guns.

Where is your evidence? The ledger books of gunsmiths show $11 & $12 guns, but no mention of "sold two $5 rifles off the factory-seconds discount rack today".

I apologize for using a value-loaded term like