Flintlock Hawken
- Thread starter JSTRAW
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
Stubert said:
His Hawken? It is a Hawken. He is an expert. He bought it from the Hawken Shop when the family had an auction and sold everything. He also has some tools from the shop.
I think most agree that Jake made flintlock rifles in St. Louis. It's what they looked like and how many, that's the question. How many of them would have been the evolving plains rifle with double set triggers and a scroll guard; among those few dozen (at most), would they have had the Kentucky rifle style cheekpice or a rounded one, would it have been the full beavertail if round, would the early plains flintlock rifles have a fixed or hooked breech, pins or wedges, etc. It's entirely plausible to build an 1820's flintlock rifle that is a "reasonable" research based gun that could have been made by Jake Hawken in St. Louis. But today's builder does not have an existing 1820's flint Jake Hawken plains rifle to go by, so far as I know, and must extrapolate a little to make one. By contrast it would be easy to make an accurate copy of an 1820's flintlock trade rifle made for the western fur trade.
A few things to keep in mind on this topic:
1) As others have mentioned no flint J&S rifles are known to exist.
2) There are no known examples of a signed Jake Hawken rifle and there are no business records from his time before working with Sam that document anything other than blacksmith work and gun repair. But his experience suggests he had the skills to build guns.
3) Sam did move to St. Louis and worked independently of Jake and Lakenan prior to Lakenan's death in 1825 and Jake and Sam's merger that year.
4) I am aware of one brass-mounted, script-signed S. Hawken long rifle of Maryland styling that was found in the St. Louis area. The gun is original percussion and is thought by the owner (one of the most knowledgeable Hawken scholars in the country) to come from the 1822-25 period in STL.
5) During the 1820s and early 30s, the market was pretty well flooded with inexpensive, well-made flintlock rifles from Lancaster, Philly, Hagerstown, and Europe. STL was a major crossroads for trade and newspaper adds of the period suggest there was no shortage of quality arms available.
The following are my conclusions from the points above.
Flint J&S rifles were likely made, but were likely uncommon and the lack of surviving pieces and the numbers of surviving percussion pieces both support that. In order to build a clientele and a reputation in STL, Jake and Sam likely had to differentiate themselves from the masses by offering something better than what was commonly available. There are several existing pieces from theirs early years together that support this. They produced fine percussion guns for the important STL families and fur trade bourgeois. The first records of guns showing up for sale at rendezvous are in 1834, and it is just a handful of guns nine years after Jake and Sam went into business together. I believe the evidence shows that Hawkens were top drawer guns throughout the 1830's and 40's, and men laying down that kind of money probably went most commonly for the most up to date technology.
This does not in any way say that no flintlocks were built. The oddball Smithsonian gun Dan mentions above proves that at least one guy wanted Sam to build a flintlock after James death. It just says that people have been looking for a flint J&S since Horace Kephardt started repopularizing Hawkens in the 1930s and none have been found. If a guy wants a flint J&S, more power to him. However it was probably an oddball gun back then.
Your mileage may vary.
Sean
1) As others have mentioned no flint J&S rifles are known to exist.
2) There are no known examples of a signed Jake Hawken rifle and there are no business records from his time before working with Sam that document anything other than blacksmith work and gun repair. But his experience suggests he had the skills to build guns.
3) Sam did move to St. Louis and worked independently of Jake and Lakenan prior to Lakenan's death in 1825 and Jake and Sam's merger that year.
4) I am aware of one brass-mounted, script-signed S. Hawken long rifle of Maryland styling that was found in the St. Louis area. The gun is original percussion and is thought by the owner (one of the most knowledgeable Hawken scholars in the country) to come from the 1822-25 period in STL.
5) During the 1820s and early 30s, the market was pretty well flooded with inexpensive, well-made flintlock rifles from Lancaster, Philly, Hagerstown, and Europe. STL was a major crossroads for trade and newspaper adds of the period suggest there was no shortage of quality arms available.
The following are my conclusions from the points above.
Flint J&S rifles were likely made, but were likely uncommon and the lack of surviving pieces and the numbers of surviving percussion pieces both support that. In order to build a clientele and a reputation in STL, Jake and Sam likely had to differentiate themselves from the masses by offering something better than what was commonly available. There are several existing pieces from theirs early years together that support this. They produced fine percussion guns for the important STL families and fur trade bourgeois. The first records of guns showing up for sale at rendezvous are in 1834, and it is just a handful of guns nine years after Jake and Sam went into business together. I believe the evidence shows that Hawkens were top drawer guns throughout the 1830's and 40's, and men laying down that kind of money probably went most commonly for the most up to date technology.
This does not in any way say that no flintlocks were built. The oddball Smithsonian gun Dan mentions above proves that at least one guy wanted Sam to build a flintlock after James death. It just says that people have been looking for a flint J&S since Horace Kephardt started repopularizing Hawkens in the 1930s and none have been found. If a guy wants a flint J&S, more power to him. However it was probably an oddball gun back then.
Your mileage may vary.
Sean
Rich, my friend used to live in St. Louis and still owns a house there. Strong possibility you know him, he was a member of the Daniel Boone ml club. I'll PT you later and tell you his name.
Thanks. This weekend there was a local St. Louis presentation by a collector who had 6 Sam Hawken rifles on the table. One was a (likely) Hagerstown, Maryland-built Samuel Hawken flintlock longrifle with nicely engraved brass patchbox, all brass mounts, and light carving.
2 were typical half-stocked mountain rifles, though one was scaled down and perhaps a boys gun, at 40 to 45 caliber. Not a local squirrel rifle style, it had the iron scroll guard, buttplate, 2 barrel keys with escutcheons, etc. The third was a heavy target rifle, with about a .45 barrel maybe 1.25" at the breech and 36-38" long. The last was a fullstock that may or may not have been a Sam Hawken rifle though it had a signed barrel. It was not as nicely proportioned and the brass furniture seemed out of place. Might have been a re-use of a Hawken barrel.
2 were typical half-stocked mountain rifles, though one was scaled down and perhaps a boys gun, at 40 to 45 caliber. Not a local squirrel rifle style, it had the iron scroll guard, buttplate, 2 barrel keys with escutcheons, etc. The third was a heavy target rifle, with about a .45 barrel maybe 1.25" at the breech and 36-38" long. The last was a fullstock that may or may not have been a Sam Hawken rifle though it had a signed barrel. It was not as nicely proportioned and the brass furniture seemed out of place. Might have been a re-use of a Hawken barrel.
That would have been fun to attend.
I also neglected to mention the heavy match rifle marked J&S Hawken now at Cody. While the Museum has mixed the photos on the website with another FS Hawken this rifle has a converted flintlock, has two lock bolts, was apparently converted by cutting the breech of the barrel about 1" and installing a patent breech.
Not a Mountain Rifle but it was surely made a FL by the looks of it.
Its pictured in Baird's first book. At that time it belonged to Harold Fuller of Cooper Landing AK.
Dan
Not a Mountain Rifle but it was surely made a FL by the looks of it.
Its pictured in Baird's first book. At that time it belonged to Harold Fuller of Cooper Landing AK.
Dan
Dan,
I have serious doubts about that heavy target rifle being an actual Hawken. There are lots of rumors around about it, but one thing has always bugged me about it. It has a late Hawken breech and tang on it that is inconsistent with other early guns they built. It possible that the gun came through the shop for repairs and was stamped by them, but rumor has it that one of its prior owners also possessed a J&S stamp. There is not much else about that gun that says Jake and Sam to me.
Sean
I have serious doubts about that heavy target rifle being an actual Hawken. There are lots of rumors around about it, but one thing has always bugged me about it. It has a late Hawken breech and tang on it that is inconsistent with other early guns they built. It possible that the gun came through the shop for repairs and was stamped by them, but rumor has it that one of its prior owners also possessed a J&S stamp. There is not much else about that gun that says Jake and Sam to me.
Sean
- Joined
- Aug 25, 2007
- Messages
- 3,746
- Reaction score
- 5,356
I cannot claim any real authority on the subject, but I do know a little about the evolution and adoption of various types of technology, such as the percussion cap. Just think how many people still purchased horse-drawn vehicles well into the automobile age. Why? Maintenance, repair, fuel, etc. So I would have to land on the side of Jake Hawken building flintlock rifles in the 1820s and 1830s. It just makes sense. Survivability. I know of companies that manufactured several hundred automobiles in the early 20th century and not a single example survives today. Personally, I always liked the beefiness of the replica "fullstock Hawken" rifles and have owned a couple. The fact that they were Poo-pooed by the "purists" led to my selling them off and getting eastern mountain and late Lancaster style rifles for early fur trade accuracy. But a well-known builder of modern ML rifles told me that all of this was very sad, as he felt that it was entirely in the realm of possibility for someone to have had a fullstocked rifle built by the Hawken brothers during the fur trade period with a beefy wrist to survive abuse in the west better. Just my musings on the subject.
I sure appreciate all the great advice and facts from everyone. I am learning a lot from all the experts that would take an individual years to discover. My T.C. Hawken is new so it should have the better lock and vent liner. I ordered 2 dozen flints from Mr. Pierce so hopefully I'll be trying it out in few weeks. I use FFF Goex in most all my B.P. guns. I am hoping it will work in the priming pan so I can keep things simple. I can get ffff or even Null B if needed fairly local, but simple is always splendid. Thanks again for welcoming a new flintlock owner. I kill deer but I punch far more holes in paper.
I use 2f Goex in my TC flinter and usually use 4f in the pan, mainly because I was told I needed it and bought a pound. (a pound of 4f priming lasts a loooong time!) On more than 1 occasion I ran out of 4f in my primer before the end of a shoot and finished off priming with 2f out of my horn, it worked fine. As long as your touch hole and sparks are good 3f will work fine for priming.
BTW I also found that RMC touch hole liners work much better in MY TC than the TC liners.
BTW I also found that RMC touch hole liners work much better in MY TC than the TC liners.
