Carving or no carving?

[Doug Lykins]

Here's another new guy question. I've noticed that most high-end PA / German style rifles have rather ornate carving whereas, for example, the Hawken / Leman / plains style guns seldom have any, even the pricey customs. I'd assume this duplicates the original builders back in the day. Generally speaking, what styles of rifles should / shouldn't be carved? :hmm:

 

[Twice boom]

I would think a lot would have depended on the builder and with whom he had to compete with in a particular local..
It's hard for me to imagine a builder of fine rifles in Pa that did not have a standard set of embellishments for every rifle he made...

I'm not saying he /they did not build plain Jane's,I am sure they did but that would have been by request at keeping the price down.....IMO.

 

[Birddog6]

IMHO, I would guestimate that 95% of the rifles made were plain jane as people needed firearms & couldn't afford the embellishments.
What we see now are the Last of a Very Few fancy ones that were saved. Most of the "utility" rifles were used up or left out in the barn or chicken coop when percussion & then cartridge rifles were made, thus lost or thrown away.......

Good example are the thousands of rifles the indians had..... where are they ? used up, lost, taken & tossed, scrapped, etc. How may rifles do you see a indian owned ? very few. But they had literally Thousands of them.....

 

[Stophel]

It's more of a time period thing. The later you go, the less likely you are to see carving. The earlier you go, the more likely, in fact, it's almost universal.

I have never bought the "plain guns were used up" argument.

:wink:

 

[Birddog6]

Well, if they weren't used up or abandoned, where the heck are they ? :grin: There were hundreds of thousands of them made, where did they all go ? Only place you can find them are in museums or a rare few someone has handed down.

 

[ehoff]

I have to agree with Stophel, people had very diffrent view of everyday items firearms included. We live in the "clean era" smooth lines, little in the way of decoration on items. Back then it was diffrent, people where proud of what they made, look at the fancy painted dowery chest of the PA dutch, wooden planes with the owners initals and date carved in them, guns where no diffrent.

 

[Dave K]

We see tons of what I call Ohio guns, here in Ohio, that are made after probably 1835. Almost always very plain and simple. Rarely do see I top of the line gun from that period and yet this period is before and actually continues into nearly 1900. I think there was a ton of these simple guns made and that is why they survived. Granted though, allot can happen to a gun that was made from 1760 up that went through the percussion period. How many were canabalized to make these other guns? Restocked? Converted to percussion and shortened? Used as tomato stakes? But where are all the high class guns from this period after 1835, was there any?

 

[Stophel]

Remember also, that there simply were not anywhere near as many guns in America in 1770 as there were in, say, 1830. Not many survived because there weren't all that many to begin with.

And, there are tons of "plain" guns that still exist...from the 19th century, but that was the style at the time.

We went through a major change in popular decorative arts during this period. From Baroque in the early 18th century, through Rococco in the middle of the 18th century to the (ugh) NeoClassical in the late 18th/early 19th centuries. Not just with guns, but with everything else. Carving disappeared from guns, simply because that was no longer in style. Instead of carving, you get lots of inlays, often well beyond the point of being gaudy. Also, gunmaking became more and more a factory industry. Gunmakers were spending less time doing hand work or decorative work. The demand for guns was also increasing greatly, as population grew. The gunmakers didn't have time to put much decoration on their guns.

In the 18th century, I believe even the "plainest" of guns would have some carving (and the extant ones do), simply because that was just the way it was done. It was expected, and doing moulding lines, teardrops, a leafy thing behind the tang, etc, doesn't take an awful lot of time to do, really, so wouldn't increase the cost of the gun appreciably.

 

[George F.]

ts. The survial rate of the Native American guns are small, I guess it's from a few things. There weren't a number of gunsmiths among their population to repair a broken spring or other broken parts. And they were basically a normandic society. They didn't put it in the barn and forget about it.These are just my opinions of course. ...Geo.

 

[Doug Lykins]

On his instructional DVD, A well known builder comments that the average rifle back in the day was rather plain compared to now. Also, that most of those builders were trying to make a living at it and weren't so particular on quality. I'm not quoting him but I'm real close.
I think this would be particularly true for rifles built for trade and can see how most of them would've been used up and discarded.

 

[Stophel]

This is the argument that "there MUST have been ultra plain guns in the mid 18th century...there just MUST have been", even though there seem to be NO examples of them (beyond Rev War and later militia type guns that were hastily assembled). It is basically a desire to project "modern" ideas into the past.

The British rifles that we know of that were actually made for Indian trade/gifts in the late 18th century were fully carved and decorated in normal fashion.

 

[paulvallandigham]

The only decorations I have every seen on a documented original Mountain, or " Plains" rifle were brass nails and tacks, often associated with Indian ownership. No inlays, and no carvings. I think you are right about this. :thumbsup:

 

[LaBonte]

The only decorations I have every seen on a documented original Mountain, or " Plains" rifle were brass nails and tacks, often associated with Indian ownership. No inlays, and no carvings. I think you are right about this. :thumbsup:

Seek and ye shall find....just few examples...
The Modena/Medina Hawken has several inlayed GS stars and a cheekpiece inlay

The Atchison Hawken has a number of Sterling inlays and patchbox

The Hawken featured on the following link has a cheekppiece and wrist inlay or silver... http://www.bbhc.org/collections/bbhc/CFM_ObjectPage.cfm?museum=CFM&VarObjectKey=22284

 

[Stophel]

There was a major change in styling in the early 19th century, and 19th century guns can't really be compared with 18th century guns.

 

[Zonie]

When folks talk about the plain Plains guns I often think of the Modena Hawken as a fine example of "never say never". :grin:

 

[paulvallandigham]

I am glad you posted that. I was trying to remember that very rifle, but was thinking it was the smaller caliber hawken made for Kit Carson. Obviously, there are exceptions to every general " rule." I have seem some ornate Indian guns in both pictures, and in museums, but as I indicated, most involve using brass nails or tacks. Some came out of the " Indian Nations" in what is now Oklahoma, so its a bit difficult to say whether something is truly INDIAN in style or something that many of the eastern tribes, who lived and worked among white people along the East Coast before the great removal in 1933-36 occurred learned and used on their guns after arriving in the territory. A lot of changes were going on in that first half of the 19th century, as has been noted.