Info on Robert Wilson?

[Flint62Smoothie]

Hi: I am attempting to define within a certain range of years, what era a Wilson Trade gun might be from? I found this so far:

"Robert Wilson was made Free of the Gunmaker’s Company in 1742 and Master in 1764. He was gun-maker to the Hudson’s Bay Company from 1766, he died in 1772."

Would a typical Wislon trade gun be 'too late' to be used before or during the F&IW?

 

Hanson lists a Richard Wilson, London 1738-1752
and a Richard and William Wilson & Company from 1757-1760. The dates are posting the years the trader supplied the HBC.
There was a Robert Wheeler of Birmingham, who made fowlers, muskets and trade guns as well. His manufacturing dates are late for F&I period guns.

The Northwest fusil or Hudson Bay fuke in its final form as we all know it today is too late for the F&I era. The Wilson gun that some factors sell on the market today is a pretty good representation of the {Wilson Trade Gun] was available through those years. The barrel is about 4" too short, BTW. It is a fax of the French guns offered at the same time. Kind of an English knock off of the French Fusil Fin of the same time period now known as a Type D. See Hamilton's O'Conner gun on page 78 and 79. It all gets very confusing with all the various makes and models that were offered through the trade over the years. The term Northwest fusil was used before the popular understanding of a Hudson Bay fusil was developed. The triangular boxy butt, cast serpent side plate, sitting fox stamped, big tg bow, flat sheet brass nailed on BP trade gun was not available until around 1780 or so, by the same London makers that were making the french fowler type knock offs.

 

[akapennypincher]

Hanson lists a Richard Wilson, London 1738-1752
and a Richard and William Wilson & Company from 1757-1760. The dates are posting the years the trader supplied the HBC.
There was a Robert Wheeler of Birmingham, who made fowlers, muskets and trade guns as well. His manufacturing dates are late for F&I period guns.

The Northwest fusil or Hudson Bay fuke in its final form as we all know it today is too late for the F&I era. The Wilson gun that some factors sell on the market today is a pretty good representation of the {Wilson Trade Gun] was available through those years. The barrel is about 4" too short, BTW. It is a fax of the French guns offered at the same time. Kind of an English knock off of the French Fusil Fin of the same time period now known as a Type D. See Hamilton's O'Conner gun on page 78 and 79. It all gets very confusing with all the various makes and models that were offered through the trade over the years. The term Northwest fusil was used before the popular understanding of a Hudson Bay fusil was developed. The triangular boxy butt, cast serpent side plate, sitting fox stamped, big tg bow, flat sheet brass nailed on BP trade gun was not available until around 1780 or so, by the same London makers that were making the french fowler type knock offs.

Bingo knew someone who have the Hamilton book. :thumbsup:

 

Aye, Senor. The question on the Wilsons and Wheelers, and other many English gunmakers is usually "which one?" There were a lot of Juniors who kept using their pap's proof marks. It was a common practice which confuses the heck out of us today.

As for the guns themselves. Mike Brooks posted some stuff on these a while back. Search his posts. If I remember right. He said this style was fairly limited in terms of time and geography. I believe it was post F&I, pre Rev War and mostly around the Great Lakes, but don't quote me. Maybe he'll chime in here on the topic again.

Sean

 

[Rod Lassey]

S. James Gooding's Trade Guns of the Hudson's Bay Company 1670-1970 has the following list of Wilson makers and dates of their contracts:

Wilson, Richard 1730-56
" , Richard & Wm. 1757-59
" , Richard & Co. 1759-66
" , Robert 1766
" , William & Co. 1767-85
" , William 1786-93
" , William & Son 1794-1808
" , William 1809
" , William & Co. 1808-31

From the looks of it, Robert only supplied the HBC for one year. Depending on the year, another Wilson might be more appropriate for an HBC gun. Now, whether or not Robert supplied other companies shipping guns to North America, I haven't any idea.

Rod

 

IIRC, I've got an old paper here somewhere from George Shumway on English trade rifles that mentions that William marked his guns with the same proofs as Robert for at least a time. I'll try to look it up tonight.

Sean

 

The paper I have is from the old Buckskin Report March 1982, 'Arms of the Indian Trade: English Pattern Trade Rifles Part 2'. It relates to Richard and William, not Robert. Shumway stated that the Gunmaker's Company of London allowed the son of a maker to use the fathers mark for several years and that William used his father Richard's proof mark well into the 1770's while the family's guns were marked 'Wilson' for about 4 generations. My point was only that it can be tough to accurately date and determine the makers of these guns based on names and proof marks.

Sean