NSW Chiefs Grade gun

[montanadan]

Hi Mike ,that is why I shoot right handad flinters left handed.Plus I am too cheap,to spend the extra money,for the lefties...Respectfully montanadan

 

[steveh]

There is logic to Mike's historical assertions. I've never seen for instance, a vintage WWI or II left-handed battle rifle, and I have a few. It is also relatively recent that the civilian arms industry has offered left-handed bolt rifles.
If I buy a left-handed GPR it’s because I want one, not because there is an off chance that somebody made them “back in the day”!

 

[tg]

". A small dose of 18th century reality usually is quite disapointing in justifiying 'not quite right" equipment'

Right O Mike..... at times it is tempting to let some folk slog through the knee deep muck of missinformation than trying to share what valid info there is out there on these guns so they can make an educated choice, it is usually not the one who starts the thread asking about historical issues who causes the stink but a bunch of others who feel the need to present their lack of knowledge and research for the entire forum to view.

 

[Okwaho]

". A small dose of 18th century reality usually is quite disapointing in justifiying 'not quite right" equipment'

Right O Mike..... at times it is tempting to let some folk slog through the knee deep muck of missinformation than trying to share what valid info there is out there on these guns so they can make an educated choice, it is usually not the one who starts the thread asking about historical issues who causes the stink but a bunch of others who feel the need to present their lack of knowledge and research for the entire forum to view.

Good posts Mike and TG; I have followed this thread and it has been truly enlightening.The crux of the matter has been the burning question of whether or not there were left handed trade guns originally intended for Indian ownership.That there were left handed guns manufactured in the 18th century and earlier is without question a fact. Lenk showed a 17th century Scottish pistol and I cited two from Kindig proving that there did exist such arms.Hamilton{1980}PP.60-61 illustrated an archaeological specimen of such a gun but there is no way of determining whether the Indian in whose grave the gun was found was the original owner of the gun.The same is true of the North Carolina{?}rifles recovered from graves in Mississippi and/or Alabama as cited by Gusler.Too many reenactors are guilty of trying to make a solitary example serve as a basis for a class of guns so as to justify their use of a copy of such example when the existence of such a class is extremely doubtful.To this category of such well known fantasy guns as:blanket guns,canoe guns,cut down ranger/ trade Besses,and Tulle carbines can now be added the highly dubious category of left handed Indian trade/gift guns.But,you say,what about the Hamilton example?The answer is that the presence of a left handed Fusil fin de chasse in an Indian grave proves ONLY that the deceased Indian owned a left handed Fusil fin de chasse at his death. There is NO evidence that the gun was either given or traded to him as a new gun.How he got it is a matter of complete conjecture and absent the presence of a really great Ouija board we will never know the answer.My money is on the idea that the gun was a Bourgheois gun brought over by a Frenchman and that somehow our Indian acquired it during his lifetime. How and when he got it is unknown but acquire it he did and he was buried with it.

As to the left handed Chief's grade fusil offered by Noth Star West I submit we are in the same quandry as to an original left handed gun intended for gift or trade to an Indian and that gun,the present whereabouts being unknown,being used as a basis for a class of guns,namely left handed Chief's grade guns.Until I see concrete proof of the existence of a left handed original example of such a gun I will remain unconvinced that such a gun actually existed.That there were a few left handed guns of the Northwest Gun pattern,I have no doubt.I do,however, seriously doubt that any such guns were shipped over for the purpose of trade or gift to Indians.I will anxiously await the appearance of such a gun with an impeccable provenance.
Tom Patton

 

[Capt. Jas.]

It's a fact. There exists a group of studied people who know PC/HC guns (thanks guys for sharing your research). Residing at this board at the same time are those who dont care as long as it goes bang and looks purdy. That's perfectly OK too.
Somehow when questions of historicity come into play many feel their turf has been invaded when someone shares their research.

Since this board has elventy twelve different forums anyway, I would suggest that a forum for HC/PC firearm discussion be had. That way those who REALLY want to inquire about things of that nature will be able to receive responses from those willing to share their research.

 

[rich pierce]

That's a good notion but will not change the dynamics of these discussions which always follow the same formula:

1) Buyer/Consumer with a particular piece bought or considered asks whether the item closely represents items available and used during a particular period of time at a particular place
2) Person who has done a lot of study makes a response based on what they know, including aspects of the item that closely resemble known originals and aspects that do not match known originals
3) Another person, not the original, complains about "PC Nazis" or "PC Prudes" (more politically correct term) because they have an item like the one the person who started the thread has
4) Other persons with expertise add their input, sometimes adding new data, often confirming
5) more of same (3 and 4)
6) Somebody finds a single rare example validating the item of interest or an old book dating the piece much earlier than its now believed to be
7) The rarity or disputed date is discussed
8) We degenerate to a discussion of the value of "PC", "HC", etc.

For those of us who would really prefer to LEARN SOMETHING, it would be nice if we could stop these silly routines and have real discussions based on data not emotions.

Here are a couple of ideas, probably not politically correct:
If you don't want to know, don't ask.
If you really have a problem with folks even discussing whether items are representative of a place and time, why even read this stuff? If you have to say something that is really unrelated to the historical data, why not just say, "I hate PC!" and leave it at that?
If you need somebody else's approval for the item you own (usually the case, somebody owns something just like the item of discussion), then maybe you are in it for reasons I can't fathom.

Question: Why do people who claim to not care so much about historical accuracy, who like to put down such discussions or those who offer their expertise, so wound up about whether an item is or is not deemed "pretty darn close to known examples" or not?

 

Rich, that is an acute observation. I think #3 is the crux of the problem. Then....come to find out they "don't have a dog in this fight" after all. :hmm:
We are trying to help the original poster of the thread and answer his question honestly.
You are right about the sequence of events on HD, PC, HC, questions. I have seen this formula time and time again.

 

[tg]

".How he got it is a matter of complete conjecture and absent the presence of a really great Ouija board we will never know the answer"

good post Tom, by the way is the Ouija tribe from the great lakes area or farther south.......

 

[Mike Brooks]

The Ouija tribe was :haha: from the present day Knoxville Tenn. area.

 

[Okwaho]

The Ouija tribe was :haha: from the present day Knoxville Tenn. area.[/quote/]

Now,now Mike have you been sniffing those chickens again?

 

[Russ T Frizzen]

The Ouijas are a southern tribe. They were all left-handed and wore pink tutus. Since this was not considered PC or HC, they eventually went extinct. Only a few CVA in-lines remain to document their passing. The stainless steel bits and the polymer stocks have held up well despite centuries of weathering.

 

[Okwaho]

That's a good notion but will not change the dynamics of these discussions which always follow the same formula:

1) Buyer/Consumer with a particular piece bought or considered asks whether the item closely represents items available and used during a particular period of time at a particular place
2) Person who has done a lot of study makes a response based on what they know, including aspects of the item that closely resemble known originals and aspects that do not match known originals
3) Another person, not the original, complains about "PC Nazis" or "PC Prudes" (more politically correct term) because they have an item like the one the person who started the thread has
4) Other persons with expertise add their input, sometimes adding new data, often confirming
5) more of same (3 and 4)
6) Somebody finds a single rare example validating the item of interest or an old book dating the piece much earlier than its now believed to be
7) The rarity or disputed date is discussed
8) We degenerate to a discussion of the value of "PC", "HC", etc.

For those of us who would really prefer to LEARN SOMETHING, it would be nice if we could stop these silly routines and have real discussions based on data not emotions.

Here are a couple of ideas, probably not politically correct:
If you don't want to know, don't ask.
If you really have a problem with folks even discussing whether items are representative of a place and time, why even read this stuff? If you have to say something that is really unrelated to the historical data, why not just say, "I hate PC!" and leave it at that?
If you need somebody else's approval for the item you own (usually the case, somebody owns something just like the item of discussion), then maybe you are in it for reasons I can't fathom.

Question: Why do people who claim to not care so much about historical accuracy, who like to put down such discussions or those who offer their expertise, so wound up about whether an item is or is not deemed "pretty darn close to known examples" or not?

Rich, that is a very perceptive post with which I heartedly agree. It has inspired me to reconsider some pessimistic previous thoughts on the matter and instead stock up a new supply of pearls.
Tom Patton

 

[Okwaho]

That's a good notion but will not change the dynamics of these discussions which always follow the same formula:

1) Buyer/Consumer with a particular piece bought or considered asks whether the item closely represents items available and used during a particular period of time at a particular place
2) Person who has done a lot of study makes a response based on what they know, including aspects of the item that closely resemble known originals and aspects that do not match known originals
3) Another person, not the original, complains about "PC Nazis" or "PC Prudes" (more politically correct term) because they have an item like the one the person who started the thread has
4) Other persons with expertise add their input, sometimes adding new data, often confirming
5) more of same (3 and 4)
6) Somebody finds a single rare example validating the item of interest or an old book dating the piece much earlier than its now believed to be
7) The rarity or disputed date is discussed
8) We degenerate to a discussion of the value of "PC", "HC", etc.

For those of us who would really prefer to LEARN SOMETHING, it would be nice if we could stop these silly routines and have real discussions based on data not emotions.

Here are a couple of ideas, probably not politically correct:
If you don't want to know, don't ask.
If you really have a problem with folks even discussing whether items are representative of a place and time, why even read this stuff? If you have to say something that is really unrelated to the historical data, why not just say, "I hate PC!" and leave it at that?
If you need somebody else's approval for the item you own (usually the case, somebody owns something just like the item of discussion), then maybe you are in it for reasons I can't fathom.

Question: Why do people who claim to not care so much about historical accuracy, who like to put down such discussions or those who offer their expertise, so wound up about whether an item is or is not deemed "pretty darn close to known examples" or not?

 

[rich pierce]

Throw them pearls in the sty, Tom!

 

:haha: :haha: :haha:

 

[Okwaho]

Rich,I guess I was really impressed with your post since I quoted it twice but hey,I never said I was computer literate.Anyway,I will take your advice.
C'est la vie et laissez le bom temps rouler
Tom Patton

 

Rich,I guess I was really impressed with your post since I quoted it twice but hey,I never said I was computer literate.Anyway,I will take your advice.
C'est la vie et laissez le bom temps rouler
Tom Patton

Don't feel like the Lone Ranger Tom. I am barely E-literate myself. I liked your post both times. :haha: :thumbsup:
BTW, my literacy doesn't extend to French. Could ya help me out on the translation? :hatsoff:

When I talk French it sounds like Del Gue with an "E" in the Jeremiah Johnson movie.
:rotf:

 

That's life and let the good times roll!

(that should be bon not bom)

courtesy Chuck Burrows - a good ole Cajun boy (on my mama's side!)

 

Hey! Thanks Gray Wolf!! Have a party yer own self!

:hatsoff: Best to ya!

 

Don -
- I am! :thumbsup: :hatsoff: :thumbsup:

It's been a looooong week already and I had to do the dreaded "town trip" today - so I'm kicking back and taking the evening off!

(Well maybe - there's this big ole Bowie sheath just sitting there begging to get finished....... :yakyak: :hmm: :yakyak: