Rifles of the 1830s

[JCKelly]

"An authentic Hawken of this style would have sold for tens of thousands of dollars,"

Well, I didn't bid on it & wondered why it went so low

 

[plmeek]

There have been several rifles listed at auctions houses and websites that are questionable. Here are a couple that we've discussed on this forum.

Suspicious Hawken Rifle

Do You See Anything Suspicious About This Rifle?

There was a recent listing of a rifle on Gunbroker that was discussed on ALR that was represented as a Hawken but probably not. The serious Hawken collectors out there know there are a lot of fakes floating around, and they want to know the provenance of a rifle before the spend tens of thousands of dollars on it.

The rifle discussed in the second link above (108733) has been removed from the auction house's website, so I think they ultimately became aware of its status.

 

[JCKelly]

So do you all like this one?
https://www.rockislandauction.com/d...acob-samuel-hawken-percussion-halfstock-rifle

Inscribed for George W. Atchison in 1836

 

[plmeek]

I do like that one, for a number of reasons. And some other people like it, too. It sold three years ago this month for $109,000!

Lot Detail - HAWKENS, PRESENTATION RIFLE, NSN, 52, PROV

It will be interesting to see what it brings this time.

The GW Atchison rifle came to light in the 1980's. It was first written up in the April 1981 issue of Buckskin Report. It has a well established provenance.

It is a presentation rifle made for George W. Atchison, a river boat captain and owner of several steam boats. As a presentation rifle, it has a number of unique features not found on work-a-day mountain rifles, but its basic form is still classic J&S mountain rifle underneath all that bling.

Probably the most important feature of this rifle is that it is dated on the cheekpiece inlay, 1836. It is the only rifle with an undisputed date on it. The other being the Mariano Medina rifle with the date 1833 engraved on its cheekpiece inlay which many people question since it wasn't put there until 1878.

There are other features of the Atchison Hawken that are important such as the style of engraving which ties it to other J&S Hawken rifles with similar if not exact engraving style. This helps date these other rifles or at least put them is some chronological order.

 

[cannonball1]

Here is my interpretation of a 54 Caliber Hawken with a Rice Barrel I made for my Grandson.

 

[Tom Compton]

Back to the OP question - IMO a trade gun was probably the firearm most carried during the period in question.

 

[plmeek]

Here is my interpretation of a 54 Caliber Hawken with a Rice Barrel I made for my Grandson.

That's a very nice Hawken, cannonball1. Ggood job.

 

[plmeek]

Back to the OP question - IMO a trade gun was probably the firearm most carried during the period in question.

By whom? If Indians, I would agree. But I read the OP's original question as to what rifles the MM were carrying in the mid-1830's?

There are several threads on this forum that ponders the question of MM use of trade guns versus rifles. If you go to this post by Chuck Burrows and this post by Rod Lassey you will see some of the best information posted on this topic.

 

[Sun City]

Kind of a nebulous title, I know. I have been through a pile of muzzleloaders during the past decade, some custom, some production, but did not do so with intent to do buckskinning. Now that I am semi-retired and living in an area where some opportunities exist, I want to kit up correctly. Working on getting my buckskins and mocs in order. But I am torn on the right (?) rifle. Currently, I have a real nice Late Lancaster that will have both percussion and flintlocks. But looking at some Hawken and Leman style rifles as well. Would like to have a rifle to convert back and forth from flint to percussion. Most custom Hawkens I see are set up as only percussion capable. By the mid-1830s, what would be the most common rifles in the Rocky Mountain fur trade? I know I will get flooded, but hit me with all that you have. Wife is out of town and I need the stimulation! LOL.

You need this one then:

Untitled by Sharps Man, on Flickr

Sharon barrel/L&R Lock/Davis triggers....$1350.00

 

[cannonball1]

That's a very nice Hawken, cannonball1. Ggood job.

Thank you plmeek. I have made quite a few Hawkens with GreenRiver barrels as well as other types, over the years, and most of them have been a little bulky than most of the commercial ones you see. With your "GRRW" name logo I'm guessing you are very familiar with the Hawkens they used to produce. I would like some information from you, if possible. My guns are 1 3/8" wide X 1.50" at the wrist just behind the lock flat. What have you found on most of the GRRW Hawkens. Some years ago I saw those dimensions that someone said were Bridger's Hawken. Would appreciate any light you could shed on this?

 

[plmeek]

Cannonball1,

I helped take some detail measurements of a couple late S. Hawken rifles during my last trip to Santa Fe almost a year ago. One was the Kit Carson Hawken in the Masonic Lodge in Santa Fe and the other was a late S. Hawken in Jim Gordon's collection. These two rifles are similar in that they were made with the same cast parts including butt plates, trigger guard, nose cap, and probably breech plug.

The height of the wrist on the Kit Carson was 1.66" and the width of the wrist was 1.25". The other Hawken we measured in Gordon's collection was very close with a wrist height of 1.63" and width of 1.26".

My Jim Bridger Commemorative Hawken #9 made by GRRW for the Montana Historical Society has a wrist height of 1.60" and width of 1.26", so pretty close to the two originals previously mentioned. I don't have measurements on the original Jim Bridger Hawken rifle, but GRRW tried to make their stock to the same dimensions as the original. Herb Troester might have those measurements on the original Bridger Hawken since he has personally examined it.

 

[Flinty Scot]

You need this one then:

Untitled by Sharps Man, on Flickr

Sharon barrel/L&R Lock/Davis triggers....$1350.00

Very nice stock figuring in what seems to me a good example. Price seems fair, too.
If I were looking for one...

 

[cannonball1]

Thanks PLMeek. Measuring before I just used a ruler. I got the calipers out and the wrist was 1.59 high X 1.39 wide. Looks like I am a little less in height and a little wider, than the Santa Fe. Close enough for me when I am not trying to match that particular gun. Really good to know - appreciate it much.

 

[cannonball1]

PLMeek, In the photo where the wrist looks higher than 1.59, I had the camera to close to the gun it is more thinner than shown.