Native American "Gift Musket" from Britain

[Loyer]

Picked this up the other day. It is a converted Rolfe musket given to the waring clans of Native Americans and used to fight the soldiers of what is now the USA.
Rolfe made muskets for the British Indian Department from 1807 to 1817.

 

[Clark Badgett]

Fairly standard NW gun of that era. Nice clear proofs. I’m curious about the square nuts on the forward and rear plate screws.

 

[Loyer]

The main difference from a NW gun is the British broad arrow stamping on the inner and outer lock plate (per "For Trade and Treaty" by R Gale pg133).
Just nails used on the should plate
I am guessing the square nuts are an old field fix during it's percussion period..

 

[Clark Badgett]

It’s still a NW gun, just one sent by the board of ordnance instead of a trading company. It would be real cool if it had the broad arrow brand on the stock.

 

[Loyer]

A NW gun delivered to the allied Indians to fight for Britain. See attached references from James Gordon's "Great Gunmakers for the Early West Vol 1"

 

[Clark Badgett]

A NW gun delivered to the allied Indians to fight for Britain. See attached references from James Gordon's "Great Gunmakers for the Early West Vol 1"

View attachment 339997View attachment 339998

Hey……I’ve got that set of books.

 

[Rancocas]

Nice old gun.
But I have to question the wide use of the term "Northwest" Trade Gun. I'm certainly no expert, but to my mind a NW gun is of a somewhat later age, has a shorter barrel, and was more generally distributed when the center of the fur trade had moved closer to the Mississippi and on to the west. Similar, but longer barreled guns were being made and sent to the colonies at least 100 years earlier.
Would you call a similar gun that was shipped to a trader in Charlestown or Savannah a NW gun, or maybe a SE gun? Or, is any smoothbore, with a large bow trigger guard, long or short barrel, a NW trade gun?
I have a copy of a Wilson's Chief's Grade Trade Gun made by Caywood. It resembles the one pictured above, and what ya'll are calling a NW gun, but it is not a NW gun. It is a light fowler.
So, what the heck exactly makes a gun a Northwest gun?

 

[Loyer]

Here is what the experts say:

 

[Clark Badgett]

The term Northwest Gun was in common enough usage by 1753 that British ordnance used the term for guns it wanted sent to the Iroquois. The pattern was in its now recognized form by 1749 according to the researchers. Now there were early, middle and late guns, but the differences were subtle.

 

[Rancocas]

That doesn't help me, guys.
So, let's say a shipment of English trade guns comes to Philadelphia, PA. All the guns have British marks. They are then divided, with some being sent out to Pittsburgh, and some sent south to Savannah, GA. Many of the Georgia guns made it into the hands of the Creeks, the Seminoles, and the Cherokees. Is the same gun shipped to the colony of Georgia a NW gun? Or a SE gun? Or just a common trade fusil/musket/fowler?
Would James Oglethorpe, who founded Georgia and fought to keep the Spanish out, know the type as a NW gun?
If so, what makes it a NW gun? Is there a specific pattern? In the document above I see "English Pattern" and "Lancaster" style mentioned. They certainly are not the same. What other "patterns" might there be? Or, is a NW gun simply any trade gun in the more northernly areas of North America, and it would be called by another name elsewhere?
Maybe we're just stuck on semantics here. But IMO the term "Northwest Gun" is overused and I'm not sure that it isn't a more modern term.
Please, show me or direct me to the historic text, prior to 1800, that mentions a "NW" gun.

And I do apologize for hijacking this thread.

 

[Loyer]

The term NW gun comes from the "North West Company" (not a compass direction). It was similar to the Hudson Bay Company.
Is this where the confusion lies ?

 

[rickystl]

WOW !! Nice find. And in better condition than most of these NWT guns are usually found. Certainly in better condition than mine. LOL

Here is one I own. Thanks to the folks on this Forum it was determined to be a Belgium copy of the NWT gun from the period. Instead of the fox in the circle, it's what is called fox in the coffin. Apparently was done so as to not violate a paten back then. Belgium being Belgium, it's not surprising they wanted a piece of that market.

Rick

 

[Clark Badgett]

That doesn't help me, guys.
So, let's say a shipment of English trade guns comes to Philadelphia, PA. All the guns have British marks. They are then divided, with some being sent out to Pittsburgh, and some sent south to Savannah, GA. Many of the Georgia guns made it into the hands of the Creeks, the Seminoles, and the Cherokees. Is the same gun shipped to the colony of Georgia a NW gun? Or a SE gun? Or just a common trade fusil/musket/fowler?
Would James Oglethorpe, who founded Georgia and fought to keep the Spanish out, know the type as a NW gun?
If so, what makes it a NW gun? Is there a specific pattern? In the document above I see "English Pattern" and "Lancaster" style mentioned. They certainly are not the same. What other "patterns" might there be? Or, is a NW gun simply any trade gun in the more northernly areas of North America, and it would be called by another name elsewhere?
Maybe we're just stuck on semantics here. But IMO the term "Northwest Gun" is overused and I'm not sure that it isn't a more modern term.
Please, show me or direct me to the historic text, prior to 1800, that mentions a "NW" gun.

And I do apologize for hijacking this thread.

NW gun was simply a pattern. It also went by several other names such as the Indian gun or Indian Fusil, the London gun, etc. Northwest just ended up being the most common.

 

[Clark Badgett]

WOW !! Nice find. And in better condition than most of these NWT guns are usually found. Certainly in better condition than mine. LOL

Here is one I own. Thanks to the folks on this Forum it was determined to be a Belgium copy of the NWT gun from the period. Instead of the fox in the circle, it's what is called fox in the coffin. Apparently was done so as to not violate a paten back then. Belgium being Belgium, it's not surprising they wanted a piece of that market.

Rick

View attachment 340488View attachment 340489View attachment 340491View attachment 340492View attachment 340493

Nice middle period example.

 

[rickystl]

Nice middle period example.

Thanks Clark. Amazingly, it still has all it's parts except the ramrod. It looks like it was used all the way till the tumbler broke. And converted from flintlock, like most. Has anyone ever seen an original example that was not converted ?

Rick