Indian Trade Gun???

[MStriebel]

Hi All,

I have been seeking to purchase an Indian trade musket of the correct type and era as may have been used by the Native American tribes in the Northwest Territory and lower Canada that were led by Tecumseh in the time period preceding and during the War of 1812.

I came across the musket shown in the attached photos, which I believe may be what I am seeking. I was hoping some of the experts on this forum that have far more knowledge than I do on the subject might be able to give me their thoughts.

I believe the musket was likely produced from 1797-1808 for the following reasons:

Robert Wilson *RW Mark on Barrel
o Richard Wilson as a company was in production from the early 1730s to 1832
Northwest Company Mark on Lock
o The Northwest Company was in operation from 1783 to 1821.
”Wheeler” Mark on Gun Lock
o Richard Wheeler had a British Ordinance contract from 1797-1808. That firm was succeeded by Richard Wheeler & Sons. I have seen locks made by that firm with a distinctive “Wheeler & Son” stamp to the front of the cock. For this reason I am assuming this musket with a “Wheeler” stamp to the rear of the cock was produced by Wheeler from the 1797-1808.

The seller of this musket said that, “this gun is of the configuration of the Canadian Trade rifles imported from England and was actually found in Canada. “ The Northwest Trade mark on the lock, ribbed barrel design on the ramrod pipe, and the bow and arrow mark on the bottom of the trigger guard is typical of what I would expect on a gun built for the Indian trade.

However, not all features seem to fit what one would expect in an Indian trade gun. The classic Northwest trade gun would have an enlarged trigger guard and a serpent side plate. This musket has neither.

I have seen chief’s guns that had a similar trigger guard. Those chief’s guns I have seen also had a somewhat similar shaped side plate, but typically the side plates on the chief guns I have seen have had a bit more of a curved shape and some engraving on them. This musket also lacks an escutcheon with either the “Crown over GR” mark that I would expect on British made chief guns made in the 1790s and prior or the escutcheon with a side view of an Indian chief that was used on British made chief guns from the 1790s through the War of 1812.

I believe this is a gun that is of the right era, but I am not sure if this may be of a type that was intended for the Indian Trade.

Would you please provide your thoughts on:
1) Whether my estimate of a time period of 1797-1808 for a date of manufacture for this musket seems accurate?
2) Whether this musket has the characteristics one would expect in a genuine Indian trade musket from that era?

Thanks for insights you might be able to provide.

Matt

 

[vtbuck223]

Forgive me if I am wrong...without going to my references...I have a couple Wilson made arms...I thought that the Wilsons were done in America long before 1797. The marks on the barrel...are very crisp...if original....they appear to be earlier. Perhaps a restock?

 

[vtbuck223]

In response to myself: According to D.Bailey "After the close of the American War the old Indian trade
structure fell apart and was taken into new hands. Panton,
Leslie & Co. established a near monopoly over much of the
Southeastern Indian trade. Researchers of this company’s history
have not found any connection between it and the
Wilson firm of gunmakers, although Wilson did continue to
supply the British Government with Indian guns well into the
1790s and perhaps beyond. Most of these entered through
Quebec. There was of course a great slump in military
firearms production following the end of the American War,
which did not revive until the war against France was
renewed in 1793."

 

[MacRob46]

I think you have a mixed bag in that gun. The stock is probably not original to the piece. I think it is a restock using components from different trade guns. The components, except the stock, all appear to be from either a Northwest Gun - the lock, ramrod pipe and barrel - or a chief's grade gun, the trigger guard and possibly the side plate. The butt plate can't be seen well enough in the photo to give any idea of its origin. The trigger is probably not from a trade gun.

These guns were used over many years and were repaired, restocked, cut down and decorated by their users in an infinite number of ways so finding one like this is not uncommon. It looks like an interesting piece and, if the price is commensurate with what it is then I think you will have a good buy there. As far as dating, Hanson says that Richard Wilson and Co. supplied trade guns until around 1760 so if it is the same company and if Hanson is correct, then this gun is almost certainly a restock.

 

[curator]

I agree with MacRob46 (probably a re-stock with parts added) in that the side plate and trigger guard are not "typical" of an Indian Trade gun of the period. Trade guns had a very simple bent "U" for a trigger guard, and the sideplates were the "serpent-dragon" type that the natives looked for as a sign of British quality.

 

[MacRob46]

I agree with MacRob46 (probably a re-stock with parts added) in that the side plate and trigger guard are not "typical" of an Indian Trade gun of the period. Trade guns had a very simple bent "U" for a trigger guard, and the sideplates were the "serpent-dragon" type that the natives looked for as a sign of British quality.

I think the trigger guard, and possibly the side plate came from a "chief's gun" which had a different configuration from the standard Northwest gun. One thing which does surprise me is the barrel. If it was originally on a 1760s trade gun then I am amazed that it survived the hard use they usually got without being shortened or otherwise modified.

 

[larryp]

So are you looking only for originals or would you take a quality replica? North Star West makes the most authentic copies around of Indian Trade Guns and the owner Matt is a member of this forum. http://northstarwest.com/Default.aspx

 

[Zonie]

If MStriebel wants something other than an original, a new topic needs to be started in one of the other forum areas.

This area is for discussing original guns.

 

[MStriebel]

Hi MacRob,

Following up on your comments on the possible Wilson barrel on this gun, I found a couple of new pieces of information today.

I found in an article by Dewitt Bailey on the The Wilsons: Gunmakers to Empire 1732-1832". After seeing MacRob's post I wondered if the *RW mark on the barrel may have changed after the 1760s when the firm's name change to William Wilson & Son as Richard Wilson's son and grandson took over the firm. However, Bailey says, "These changes in firm style are academic since no change was made in the way their products were marked. Barrels continued to be stamped with a six-pointed star over RW and locks to be engraved WILSON in either block letters or script depending on the grade and quality of the piece."

That would seem to explain how a Wilson barrel could be made long after Richard Wilson was dead and buried. However, another twist on the barrel markings was provided when someone mentioned to me earlier today that he thought Wheeler used the same *RW mark on his gun barrels as the Wilsons.

This caused me to do some further searching where I ran across an interesting article from the Birmingham Gun Museum that makes me have some different thoughts on the matter.

Link

I guess I always think of knockoffs and trademark infringement as a problem mainly with Asian companies producing various products in recent decades, but until I read this article I never thought of the English gunmakers doing such things. With the London gunmakers of the 1700's having a reputation as being the finest in the world, gunmakers in Birmingham and elsewhere had a strong incentive to try imitate their markings to increase their own sales.

While the article from the Birmingham Gun Museum does not show any barrel markings used by Wheeler, it does show a "Crown of RW" stamp being used as a mark by another Birmingham gun maker in what was a probable attempt to closely mimic the *RW mark of one of the most well know London gunmaking firms run by Richard Wilson and later his decendents from 1732-1832.

I had always thought that "Crown over CP" and "Crown over V" barrel marks were only used by London gunmakers. However, after reading this article I learned the Birmingham makers copied these marks frequently. I then found a flintlock pistol made by the Birmingham gunmaker, Robert Wheeler with these same "Crown over CP" and "Crown over V" markings that the London makers used to distinguish their guns.

I have not turned up any firm evidence yet, but it would not seem out of the question that Wheeler used a *RW in an attempt to mimic its much older and more prestigious London competititor.

If anybody out there has seen some barrel markings on other Wheeler made firearms that confirm this, please let me know.

Thanks,

Matt

 

[MacRob46]

Interesting...

Robert Wheeler operated in London between 1767 and 1813, according to Merwyn Carey. He produced various kinds of pistols and blunderbusses. The reference also states he "Had contract with the Hudson's Bay Company for flint-lock trade muskets." The name of the firm was changed in 1813 to Robert Wheeler & Son (Robert had probably died) and the company continued operations until 1830. Barrel markings are not mentioned in the reference. It could be that you have a Wheeler barrel as well as a lock.

 

[matt denison]

Much of this speculation could be cleared up with one more picture of the wrist medallion and a close up of the top barrel flat to see if there is evidence of a fox stamp like the one on the lock. The arcitecture, trig. guard, side plate point to a Chief's gun pre 1813 (sunken oval proofs) with a barrel made by Richard Wilson which was quite common. I need to find my copy of James Hansons article in the MFT quarterly Journal to be more specific. ..to be continued..

 

[matt denison]

I found what I was looking for. MFT Quarterly, fall 2005. In it James Hanson has a feature artile on Chief's guns. The title is TOWARD A CHRONOLOGY OF BRITISH GOVERNMENT CHIEF'S GUNS

He lists Chief's guns as types I through VI. His type IV has the same proof marks as the OP's and he says the "RW" is NOT Richard Wilson but is Robert Wheeler so I stand corrected (shouldn't go around half cocked with out references). A similar set of proofs and identifier is also present on the type I. It's all very interesting to the student of Chief's guns. One thing made very clear is that there is so much variation over the years and from different manufacturers. These were Board of Ordinance guns, made by private companies filling contracts. Ketland, Wheeler and Wilson were big suppliers to the B.ofO.

You can get back issues of the Quarterly from the Museum of the Fur Trade. Ask for Volume 41, Number 3. They are very inexpensive. Another source for info on these and other trade guns is FOR TRADE AND TREATY by Ryan Gale available from Track of the Wolf.

 

[MacRob46]

Hi laff....

I did not notice the wrist medallion until you mentioned it. Doesn't show up in the photo very well. That would answer a whole bunch of questions. With what you provided, I am pretty sure that we have a barrel and lock which were together, at least. Don't know about the rest of the parts.

 

[matt denison]

I'm 90% sure that he has an original Wheeler that has been converted from flint to percussion. I don't agree that it is a restock or collection of parts built into a gun. It may or may not be a board of ordinance gun, can't say without seeing more, precise pictures. Even then, as Hanson points out, some Chief's guns didn't have any B of O markings. Most obvious would be a "CROWN OVER BROAD ARROW" on the lock plate just under the pan.

I wish that Rod L. would chime in, he is much better at explaining this stuff. I make assumptions that others have the requisite knowledge so I tend to skip over stuff.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

That is a Richard Wilson marked barrel for sure.

 

[Rod Lassey]

The barrel mark is probably Wheeler rather than Wilson, they look very much alike, but Wheeler tended to use an "indented" asteric or star, leaving the circle around it. Both used the initials RW. The proofs, as noted are pre-1813 crown GP and crown V. The fox on the lock looks to be the same as those associated with the Michilimackinac Co. and South-West Co. Also referred to by modern collectors as the "big headed fox". The Michilimackinac Co was a consortium of NorthWest Co. partners, with the addition of John Jacob Astor, which operated south of the Great Lakes. With the assertion of US sovereignty in the area, the NWC partners sold out to Astor, who gained a majority shareholding in the company, later renamed the SWC (southwest of the Great lakes, as opposed to the NWC). The 3-screw lockplate also indicates an earlier date.

During the War of 1812, the British BoO armed their Indian allies with guns marked very similarly to those of the SWC, apparently in an attempt to make Astor look bad to the US gov't (selling guns to hostile tribes).

The triggerguard is typical of the higher-end trade guns (so-called Chief's guns), it's a common fowling gun guard. The side plate is a little unusual, but not out of line for one of these guns.

I'll echo the others in wanting better photos, especially of the wristplate and buttplate. Does it have a front sight? Photos of the lock interior would be nice, as well.

By the way, the best source for information on these can be found in Hanson & Harmon, 'Firearms of the Fur Trade'.

http://www.furtrade.org/store/books?product_id=124


Rod

 

[Capt. Jas.]

Maybe those are not London Gunmakers Company proofs. It is hard for me to tell from my cell phone. I was not aware that Wheeler's mark was exactly like Wilson. He for sure couldn't use it within the London radius within the company's jurisdiction where that mark was Wilson's.

 

[Capt. Jas.]

I blew the proofs up as much as possible. If the proof has a GP on it then I still vote this a Wilson barrel. The sideplate is not out of an English shop in my opinion and I think this is a parts gun.

 

[MStriebel]

Gentlemen,

Thanks to all for your comments and good information.

I have since found out some further information and have additional photos to share.

I originally thought for certain the barrel was made by Wilson, but after reading Rod's comments, I did some further research. I found a pair of Wheeler pistols, circa 1798 to 1813 that sold at James D. Julia auction house in the fall of 2008. (See final two attached photos below.) Sure enough, the barrel markings are a *RW, along with two Tower crown over crossed scepters proof marks. The only difference between the Wheeler and Wilson *RW marks is that Wheeler surrounds his six pointed star with a circle.

This is exactly what appears on the barrel of this trade gun. It seems as though Mr. Wheeler was really pushing the envelope by nearly copying the mark of the older and better known Wilson firm.

Furthermore, I went through Gale's, "For Trade and Treaty" and looked at each of the several Wilson marked barrels from the 1700s and early 1800s his shows. None of the Wilson barrels had the circle around the * mark as does the Wheeler barrel.


That still leaves the question of why a Birmingham gunmaker would have London proof marks on the barrel. That mystery was solved by an article published by the Birmingham Gun Museum entitled, “English Provincial Gun Makers Marks”. It said the following, "As previously noted, many gunsmiths from Birmingham and other towns made use of the private proof service available at the Tower of London. These barrels were stamped with the crossed scepter mark struck twice. A few provincial makers chose to have their guns proved by the London Gunmakers Company and marked as such. This practice was comparatively rare, probably because the Tower proof house charged less.”

This all leads me to now believe the lock and barrel to be from the same maker and from the same early 1800’s time period.

However, there are two other questions that came up on this musket when I got further photos.

1) In looking at photos and talking with folks I finally realized something that should have been obvious. The lock is a 3 screw lock as one would expect from a lock of the early 1800s. However, the side plate is a two screw side plate. This and the straight shape of the side plate seem to indicate the plate was switched out for some reason at a later date.

2) There is a wrist escutcheon as shown in the attached photos. However, there are no markings on it. I normally thought that the escutcheon/thumplates had a crown over GR mark on earlier chief guns and a silver side profile of an Indian in the 1790s and later. However, I do not know whether there may have been some plainer versions that were used as well.

With all that being said -- if this is a genuine trade musket from the early 1800s that only had the change to percussion and the side plate switch as the major changes, I suppose I would see those as acceptable changes that could happen in the life of an old musket. However, if the wrist escutcheon or other features also are not legit, I would feel I was just buying a cobbled together bunch of parts.

Any final thoughts from the forum before we put this thread out of its misery?

Thanks,

Matt

 

[Captjoel]

I have had a deep interest in trade guns of the northwest for many years and have studied about everything about them that I could get my hands on. As a gun collector, I have learned that there are many spurious/fake/restocked old parts sets out there in the market place that are being sold as original guns. It is an area of collecting that takes more hands on experience (studying original pieces) along with strong ties with experts in the field than nearly any other form of collecting. A little over a year ago I purchased an interesting piece that had several mixed traits of standard NWTG and Chief's grade parts and through research discovered some hard facts about my gun. I traced the ownership down from the man I bought it from to a guy that had sold it to him. He was currently living in northern Michigan and had formerly lived and worked down-state for the Henry Ford Museum. Several years ago, not sure of the exact date, there had been a fire in the storage warehouse of the museum. Several original NW trade guns were lost in the fire. This man salvaged a bunch of parts and over the years had built several guns using these old parts. My piece was one of those. My advise to anyone wanting to get into this field of collecting......make sure you buy from reputable dealers/collectors and get a written guarantee! Buyer always beware.