Great Gunmakers of the Early West

[Herb]

Our library bought this set of three books by James D. Gordon. The books are about 11 1/4 by 14 1/4 inches with 509 pages. All color photos and good descriptions of gun makers and individual rifles. Volume I is "English" and Volume II is "Eastern U.S."

Volume III covers gunmakers from the Mississippi to the Rockies. There are photos of 37 Hawken rifles, usually a full length lock side, left side to the entry pipe, barrel markings, muzzle, lock and tang line and toe line photos. I am currently building a couple more Hawkens, always striving to have the lines correct, and these photos have widened my knowledge of how the Hawkens shaped their rifles. There are five marked "J&S Hawken", 23 marked S. Hawken, two marked Wm. Hawken, and seven either illegible or marked only "Hawken". There are also pistols and shotguns.

All 37 seemed to be of maple, and 24 I judged were grade 1 (little or no figure), seven grade 2, and six grade 3, figured full length. I like to build plain ones, you don't need a lot of figure for those graceful lines. One had a checkered pistol grip with a base for a tang mounted peep sight. One seemed to have a "closed buckhorn" sight, like one I saw in the Arches Natnl. Monument(or whatever its name is) National Park Service museum in St Louis maybe 8 years ago. I photographed it but can't find my photos. Apparently it is different from the one in the book that Gordon owns.

There is a lot of variation in the nose of the comb and the cheek piece, and the lock panels. The Kit Carson, Jim Bridger, Mariano Modena and Liver Eating Johson rifles are pictured. There are six full stock rifles. Most keys are inserted from the left. One has no escutcheons. Some are of silver. Some rifles are brass mounted, some have long patch boxes, some the Pineapple patchbox, and some "cap boxes".

So if you thought you knew what a Hawken rifle looks like, these photos cure you of that idea. I knew there was much variability, but not this much! There is enough detail shown for most rifles that I could build a close copy of any of them, leaving out the wear, damage and repairs. These books are like none you have ever seen. I called Jim Gordon tonight to order my set. He said it was OK to post his phone number. He has a private museum in Sante Fe, NM, open to view upon his availability. His phone number is 505-982-9667 and the set of three books is $295 postpaid to the continental U.S. I think they are privately printed and he is the only source for them. Forget Amazon.com, etc.

 

[Mike Brooks]

Sounds like a great set of books, I'll have to save up a few $ and get the set. Thanks for the info! :thumbsup:

 

[Herb]

Mike, Volume I has a lot of fowlers, Northwest guns and pistols. I've barely glanced at it so far. What I thought was a shotgun in Vol III is really a double rifle by Hoffman and Campbell. Author Gordon explained 'While there is occasional mention in Hawken promotional material of shotguns, we actually know of no examples surviving to date.' He does show four Hawken pistols.

He privately printed this set of books, there is no ISBN number, so he is the only source for them. Forget Amazon.com, et al.

Mike, if you wanted specific information on any builder, I could study the books and get back to you. PM me if so. There are 28 English gunmaker's work illustrated in Vol I and nine Belgian guns and two pistols.

 

Herb,

Jim's books are on my list to purchase this fall. I've talked with him about this project and he says the color photography is top notch, hence the $300 price tag for the slip cased set. He also photographed guns from both his collection and the Museum of the Fur Trade for the project. Jim is a contributor to the MFT and has helped in a photo documentation of the MFT's entire collection of firearms. Jim's personal collection is extensive and impressive. His focus is primarily on western fur trade era stuff running from the late 1700s-1860. I spent a day there a couple of years ago, and there is simply nothing like it. It is a must see if you are in the SW. I've been planning to go back since, but have not been able to get the time. He's also a really nice guy.

Sean

 

[BrownBear]

So if you thought you knew what a Hawken rifle looks like, these photos cure you of that idea. I knew there was much variability, but not this much!

Oh shucks. More dogma bites the dust. Breaks my heart! :grin:

This is really important and useful stuff. Thanks for bringing it to our attention Herb.

 

[Herb]

Thanks for the further info, Sean, and thanks also, Brown Bear. One thing, it makes it a lot tougher for anyone to tell you, "that don't look like a Hawken". You look at all these photos and some of the rifles I recognize as a "Hawken" but a couple are almost ugly. And these are only 37. Charles E. Hanson (Museum of the Fur Trade) wrote in "The Hawken Rifle, Its Place In History" that "We hazard a figure of 2,000 J&S guns of all types and 500 S. Hawken guns through 1854. How many more were made after that with the "S.Hawken" stamp is anyone's guess."

With these photos all in one place for a reference, it is easy to compare the commercially available "kits" such as Track's, Stith's, Pecatonica River, Muzzleloader Builders Supply, etc. Or pick one of them and modify it to more closely match one or features of several of these originals.

 

[BrownBear]

With these photos all in one place for a reference, it is easy to compare the commercially available "kits" such as Track's, Stith's, Pecatonica River, Muzzleloader Builders Supply, etc. Or pick one of them and modify it to more closely match one or features of several of these originals.

I spent just enough years working in smith shops and gun stores to really appreciate the huge variation possible in custom guns, much less the evolution of standard models over the years. From all I can gather from Hanson and others, it sounds as though a whole lot of the Hawken production was on orders rather than over the counter. Unless human nature has changed a whole lot in 150 years, every time someone orders a scratch built gun, there's going to be some unique touches. Using the handful of existing Hawkens to define what is and isn't a Hawken is more speculative to me than trying to guess what variation was possible.