Halfstock, Flintlock Hawkens??

[Erwan]

I already consulted my flintlock guru, and he, very logically, believes that there were no half stock, flintlock hawkens...But for the sake of discussion and fun, I have a few thoughts. My history nerd brain has the gears grinding...the percussion cap was slow to make itself out west. Many were hesitant until it was tried and proved by a considerable amount of plainsmen and settlers. I theorize that it is possible that some of their early halfstocks could have been flintlocks. Maybe rare and few and far between, but still. Who knows? The Hawken brothers were a custom shop just like Sharps of Connecticut. A lot of those companies would basically give in to what you wanted provided you had the coin. What does everyone think?

In collaboration with the Swiss arms manufacturer Jean Samuel Pauly, the French François Prélat invented the mercury fulminate capsule between 1808 and 1818 (1812 in fact and the primed cartridge near 1818).
It remains to be seen whether, active between 1825 and 1855, Jacob and Samuel Hawken were able to provide fulminate capsules in sufficient quantities to supply St. Louis and the Santa Fe market at the beginning of their production.
And, important thing : if these capsules could easily be found in the mountains and remote areas...

 

[Notchy Bob]

@HighUintas ,

Regarding the pin in the forestock, I will take your word for it. It would not surprise me a bit if the barrel were pinned.

There is in fact an indentation in the wood about where the hammer (or the cock on a flintlock) would arc. It appears shallow and less well defined than I would expect, but it may very well have been adequate for the cock to clear.

I believe you are correct about the single lock bolt on some southern flintlock rifles. It's just that flintlocks typically had two bolts. However, I have a fowling piece made by Jackie Brown with a very large L&R Queen Anne flintlock. It has only one cross bolt (or "side nail," as our British friends would say) and there have been no issues with the lock shifting.

Bringing southern rifles into this discussion is spot-on. Jacob Hawken's business partner in St. Louis, before Sam moved out to join him, was James Lakenan, a gunsmith who I believe was originally from Virginia. It would stand to reason that Lakenan would bring some of his familiar, southern rifle design concepts with him, and share some of those with Jacob.

Notchy Bob

 

[HighUintas]

I've never been into mysteries or the solving of them... But for some reason trying to piece together historical information to learn what traits really early Hawken or Hawken/Lakenan rifles may have had is intriguing.

Either here or on the American Longrifle forum, a well known builder (can't remember who) said that the Ashley descendants in StL still have William H Ashley's Hawken that they built for him in ~1825. They had one of the well known StL area builders in 1970s or maybe 1980s restore Ashley's rifle. The guy had pictures of it but he's since passed and no one knows where the pictures are, and the family doesn't care to show the rifle publicly. I think the restorers name may have been Keith Neubauer or something like that.

 

[Grenadier1758]

@HighUintas

Keith Niebauer was a St. Louis rifle maker with the credibility to have done the restoration work on the Ashley rifle. He was the mentor that taught Bob Browner how to build some of the finest Hawken replica rifles today. Bob only builds percussion lock rifles.

 

[DuncNZ]

This is my Henry Nock 14 ga shotgun which has been in my family since new , some where in the late 1700's I believe , It was converted to caplock by my great grand father in about 1850 ish, It looks a lot like a Hawken in style , it even has a patent breach

 

[Notchy Bob]

This is my Henry Nock 14 ga shotgun which has been in my family since new , some where in the late 1700's I believe , It was converted to caplock by my great grand father in about 1850 ish, It looks a lot like a Hawken in style , it even has a patent breach View attachment 123758

That's a nice gun. I see what you mean, in the way the nosecap is fitted just ahead of the lower ramrod pipe, and the two wedges or keys to retain the barrel.

St. Louis was a busy place, and could have likely been considered an "international" city. It would not surprise me to find that some English sportsmen had passed through. The Hawken brothers were professional enough to recognize practical design features when they saw them. Charles Hanson readily acknowledged the English influence on Hawken rifle design.

Thanks for showing your gun!

Notchy Bob

 

[HighUintas]

@Notchy Bob ,

Check the last couple photos of post #118 here. Mountain Man rifles This is the same fullstock hawken that you posted a link to that we discussed. In the first picture, you can see it absolutely is pinned. Apparently Don Stith has inspected it, thinks it's authentic, and has copied the parts!

 

[DuncNZ]

From what I have seen and read Hawken's used many different makes of locks , and barrels . Is it possible in a shipment of locks there was a flintlock lock which either had already been converted or was converted to percussion by Hawken's ? Those old gunmakers did not waste anything . Just a thought .

 

[Herb]

In Post 116, Notchy Bob gives a reference to an 1830 J&S Hawken Fullstock Plains Rifle. I looked it up, and the pictures are too dark to see much detail. This rifle is much different from most Hawkens. I made the following observations:
1: The comb line if extended does not touch the top of the breech. On most Hawken rifles, it either does or extends an inch or so forward of the snail.
2: The grain runs wrong through the wrist, which is cracked similar to the Beale Hawken, and others.
3: There is a sight base on the tang front, never saw one in this location- others are further back.
4: There had been a sight screwed onto the top of the barrel ahead of the tang.
5: The trigger plate is short, as High Uintah noticed.
6: The trigger guard is similar to Track's TG-Hawk-N-I, and I have not seen this on any other Hawken.
7: The front tang bolt comes inside the trigger bow- I never saw this before.
8: The lock was converted from flint with no front lock bolt. It resembles the one on Page 363 of Jim Gordon's book "Great Gunmakers for the Early West, Volume III-Western U.S", which has a front lock bolt.
9: The tang is parallel sided and does not flare to the breech plug.
10: The comb nose is not sharp at front, and some others are not, but it is not rounded at the nose.
11: There is only 1.8 inches of drop at the heel from the top of the barrel, most Hawkens are three inches or more.
12: The pitch at the muzzle is about 17 inches. This compares to about 3.5 inches for the Carson and about nine for the Bridger Hawken.
13: The butt plate is five inches tall.
14: The name stamp letters seem large, hard to tell from the dark print. But the ampersand (&) has been recut at the top loop.
I do not question that this is Hawken rifle, only that it has these differences.

 

[HighUintas]

In Post 116, Notchy Bob gives a reference to an 1830 J&S Hawken Fullstock Plains Rifle. I looked it up, and the pictures are too dark to see much detail. This rifle is much different from most Hawkens. I made the following observations:
1: The comb line if extended does not touch the top of the breech. On most Hawken rifles, it either does or extends an inch or so forward of the snail.
2: The grain runs wrong through the wrist, which is cracked similar to the Beale Hawken, and others.
3: There is a sight base on the tang front, never saw one in this location- others are further back.
4: There had been a sight screwed onto the top of the barrel ahead of the tang.
5: The trigger plate is short, as High Uintah noticed.
6: The trigger guard is similar to Track's TG-Hawk-N-I, and I have not seen this on any other Hawken.
7: The front tang bolt comes inside the trigger bow- I never saw this before.
8: The lock was converted from flint with no front lock bolt. It resembles the one on Page 363 of Jim Gordon's book "Great Gunmakers for the Early West, Volume III-Western U.S", which has a front lock bolt.
9: The tang is parallel sided and does not flare to the breech plug.
10: The comb nose is not sharp at front, and some others are not, but it is not rounded at the nose.
11: There is only 1.8 inches of drop at the heel from the top of the barrel, most Hawkens are three inches or more.
12: The pitch at the muzzle is about 17 inches. This compares to about 3.5 inches for the Carson and about nine for the Bridger Hawken.
13: The butt plate is five inches tall.
14: The name stamp letters seem large, hard to tell from the dark print. But the ampersand (&) has been recut at the top loop.
I do not question that this is Hawken rifle, only that it has these differences.

Herb, did you happen to get your hands on that rifle to make those measurements? That is quite a bit of detailed information on that rifle.

 

[Herb]

All this can be learned from the photos. I Forgot to mention that the length of pull is about 15.6 inches, which is the longest I know of. These measurements are based on Track's TG-Hawk-N-I that is 6 3/4 inches from rear loop to front bow. The rifle in question may have a slightly different length here, but it will be within several percent. From that known length on the photo, everything else is proportional. I measured the rifle on my computer screen and calculated the values from that data.

 

[HighUintas]

Clever! I was wondering if you somehow just measured off the image from a known value.

 

[Notchy Bob]

First of all, thank you @Herb for weighing in on this. Your expertise is always appreciated.

Second, I want to show something to you gentlemen. All right... the rest of you varmints can look at it, too, but here is a rifle for your consideration:

What we have here is a half-stocked flintlock rifle with a scroll on the triggerguard. That peculiar "shallow crescent" cheekpiece is remarkably similar to the cheekpiece on the fullstocked J&S Hawken in post#116, as well as the Peterson Hawken, which has been pretty well documented and is now in the Buffalo Bill Historical Center:

However, that rifle shown in the first two photos is not a Hawken. It was built by Silas Allen of Shrewsbury, Massachusetts sometime around 1820 for a Colonel Jacob Bates. Its provenance is impeccable. The rifle is currently housed in the Metropolitan Museum of Art, of all places, and The Met has kindly provided us with a series of excellent photos and a nice write-up on their website. Check this out: Silas Allen Rifle

I guess what is in the back of my mind is that we have seen some period artwork showing half-stocked flintlocks, some with scroll guards. The Allen/Bates rifle reminds us that we can't just assume these were Hawkens.

I think @plmeek put together a nice collage of Hawken cheek pieces. The J&S Hawken fullstock from Guns International, referenced in post #116, and the Peterson Hawken both have this "shallow crescent" cheekpiece. These are both believed to be "early" J&S Hawkens, likely built only a very few years after this 1820 Silas Allen rifle. Maybe that style of cheekpiece was sort of a fad in the 1820-1830 period... I don't know. George Shumway illustrates several German rifles with similar cheekpieces in his book about jaegers, and Jim Chambers offers something like it on his "Little Feller's Rifle."

You can find more photos of the Peterson Hawken in the BBHC Collections Database:

Hawken Plains Rifle - Left Side

J&S Hawken - Bottom View

J&S Hawken - Top View

J&S Hawken - Left Side Close-up

If you do try those links, you'll see a little double-ended arrow above and to the right of each image. Click that for a full screen view.

Sorry about rambling on... Thanks for reading!

Notchy Bob

 

[HighUintas]

@Notchy Bob , thanks for the information on that Silas Allen rifle. Very interesting!

The JS Hawken fullstock on guns international does have a full beaver tail cheek piece and not the half crescent like the Petersen and Silas. It's just very hard to see. I could see it after turning the screen brightness up all the way and zooming in. Nonetheless, it is amazing how many other gunsmiths made rifles that have similar characteristics to some Hawkens.

 

[French Colonial]

I am not a fan of highly decorated guns but that Silas Allen gun is AWESOME!

Thanks Notchy Bob, that post is great in so many ways.

 

[shorthair]

That’s it. Can you imagine

Iicrc it was said that Sir Samuel was was a very large man of great stature, anything that spins him around I just want to try. 2 bore with an elongated ball loaded with an explosive in the nose, whoo whee.

 

[Herb]

I have been studying the photos in the "1830s fullstock plains rifle" from Notchy Bob's post 116. I do not know how to reference that here. I have some further observations.
1: There is a hammer groove at the top of the lock, it was a flintlock.
2: The left lock panel has a hump, never saw that on a Hawken. It is also fat.
3: The lock bolt escutcheon is larger than on any other Hawken I've seen.
4. The tail of the lock panel is above the rear trigger. Most are behind it, but some are above it.
5: The entry pipe is different, but the one on Jim Gordon's page 364 may be the same.
6: The rear sight is different from most, but the rifle referenced in my No. 4 looks the same.
7. This same rifle has a short trigger plate.
8. The front trigger plate tang appears rounded, can't be sure, but unusual if it is.
9. There is a screw in the front trigger plate tang. Never saw this on a Hawken.
10. The triggers are different from the Hawkens in Gordon's book.
11. There is no fluting along the comb.
12. The butt plate overhangs the toe plate.
13. The toe plate is 5 inches long, looks like a beavertail, which is 3 inches long on Hawkens.
14. The buttplate tang is about 3.6 inches long, most are 3 inches.
15. There is no fluting along the comb.
16. What I called rear sight screws at the top of the breech is really one tapped hole in the tang and an index mark of the tang to the barrel.
17. There seem to be photos of two different name stamps. The third picture down shows a very rough barrel after the name stamp, maybe even more letters.The second photo from the bottom shows this area very smooth.
18. The name stamp does not show St. Louis. May have been cut off by the photo. BUT- the J.&S. Hawken stamps on pages 364 and 365 also do not show it. They may have been missed by the photo, or maybe it wan't stamped. The earliest looking rifle on page 363 does show St. Louis following J.& S. Hawken. The ampersand is different from the subject 1830 "Plains Rifle".
19. The photos referenced above are not named "1830 Hawken", but "Plains Rifle". I do not think this rifle was made by J&S Hawken. I doubt this rifle sold for a high price, but it would be interesting to phone the sellers and see if they would divulge the sales price.

 

[Notchy Bob]

@Notchy Bob ,

Check the last couple photos of post #118 here. Mountain Man rifles This is the same fullstock hawken that you posted a link to that we discussed. In the first picture, you can see it absolutely is pinned. Apparently Don Stith has inspected it, thinks it's authentic, and has copied the parts!

@HighUintas

I did check that link to the old thread on this forum. I believe you are right, it is the same rifle, but from a different batch of photographs! It must have been listed on Guns International before. I sure would like to know the story on this rifle.

@Herb 's comments have been noted. This is an unusual Hawken, but if it is genuine, I think it probably dates from a time before the brothers "found their groove."

As for the cheek-piece, I'll take your word for the full beavertail configuration. I don't see it, but the photos are not clear and I'm unable to enhance them. I also took another look at Don Stith's website. The stock in his J&S Fullstock parts set has a straight, "Tennessee" style cheekpiece. The stock for his J&S Halfstock has a full beavertail cheekpiece. I think it is possible that these parts sets are "composites," made with features found on typical rifles of their respective types, rather than bench copies of specific originals. In any event, I don't see that he has listed a parts set for a rifle like the one linked in post #116.

One problem Hawken builders today have is availability of parts. The fullstock Hawken percussion rifles, for example usually had solid patent breeches, i.e. not hooked. While a few builders may have some of these squirreled away for special projects, to my knowledge nobody is making a Hawken-styled solid patent breech now. Even Mr. Stith uses a hooked breech on his fullstocks. I have a Hawken-styled fullstock built for me by John Bergmann. It has a hooked breech, although we did go with the "comma" shaped snail:

Mine also has a "flat to wrist" triggerguard, which is appropriate but is different from the early J&S triggerguards with the big bow and circular scroll. I would like to say that this rifle was not built to be a bench copy of any known original, but was intended to be a reasonably authentic Hawken-styled rifle that would be easy to maintain and fun to shoot. I was inspired by the Hoffman & Campbell rifle owned by mountain man and California pioneer, Jim Waters:

The original picture cut off the heel of the butt like that. Anyway, the Jim Waters rifle had the "flat to wrist" triggerguard and proportions that appealed to me.

Since my rifle has a hooked breech and I do take the barrel off to clean it, I also requested escutcheon plates inlet for the barrel wedges. Most original Hawken fullstocks did not have these, since they had solid patent breeches and the barrels would not be routinely dismounted for cleaning. I'm pretty happy with mine.

Best regards,

Notchy Bob

 

[DuncNZ]

So many old rifles had broken stocks , especially at the wrist , there must be a lot out there which have been restocked by someone other than the original maker

 

[BP Addict]

According to Bob Woodfill in his new book (2020) “The Hawken Rifle – Its Evolution from 1822 to 1870”, aside from General William Ashley’s “Super Hawken” which was made in the winter of 1822 & b23, no other rifles were manufactured at the Hawken Shop between 1822 and 1830.

He also mentions that the Brothers had other business interests in the city. The time they spent in the shop would have been repairing guns and supplying goods to the Fur Trade. By 1830, Percussion Caps were plentiful in Saint Louis. Therefore, the guns they built would most likely have had the latest technology.