The Carolian type G, Southern rifles and the Golden Age

[rich pierce]

Nine square on the inside suggests it was large caliber, probably at least .60.

 

[rich pierce]

Thanks Rich. I wasn't trying to insinuate that there weren't any English guns up North. I just felt I was being bated....and maybe unrightfully so....and was just clarifying my statement above.

J.D.

No worries, we're all just adding what we know or have read. :thumbsup:

 

[Shine]

Neat huh. A rifle before the revolution in New England. We were not supposed to know of such witchery :grin: Until Morgans men came stumbling through swatting the black flies and skeeters.

 

[54ball]

Lacrosse in this book the Frontier Rifleman suspects that at least some rifles or rifle tactics may have been used by Ethan Allen and the Green Mountain Boys.

 

[kaintuck]

black powder burn rate, size of game hunted, availbilty of lead for bullets, general desires and evolution from german guns.....and artistic desires....all made the 'long' rifle develope, then horses and better powder made them 'shorten up'

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

black powder burn rate, size of game hunted, availbilty of lead for bullets, general desires and evolution from german guns.....and artistic desires....all made the 'long' rifle develope, then horses and better powder made them 'shorten up'

You sure about that? Long rifles were carried on horseback for at least 75 to 100 years before they shortened up as you say, better powder maybe but horses and longrifles worked together just fine.

 

[jdkerstetter]

You sure about that? Long rifles were carried on horseback for at least 75 to 100 years before they shortened up as you say, better powder maybe but horses and longrifles worked together just fine.

In Kaintuck's defense, I've also read that from various sources trying to explain things like the Hawken rifles' shorter barrels.

I think they were drawing on the fact the many cavalry weapons before and since were shorter muskets and rifles.

I don't know that anybody knows for sure.

J.D.

 

[54ball]

Concerning powder.....

This is concerning military powder. Immediately following the Revolution the French powder maker Dupont started producing powder in the United States.

Some say the powder of the day, especially produced by the Duponts was superior, possibly superior than what's available today.

Occasionally long barreled Jaegers show up in Europe fairly early like 1720s. They were not the norm but there are European specimens found with long barrels.

I still think one of the reasons for the longrifle's length is due to the use of the long barreled early trade guns. The Indians and hunters were used to the length and preferred it.

 

[tg]

There was a general thought that longer wass better in guns and naval cannon once this wass overcome it likley made it easier for folks to shorten guns though shorter guns were not uncommon in earlier times in Europe and neither were longrifles there were 3'-4' rilfes imported here in the 1750's, there is a trend to find the one answer for all on this issue and it goes a lot deeopre the farther one follows it, military and civy use are generaly best considered seperatel I would think as the need and applications were often very different and time periods and places are so important when anything from the past is being examined and these are to seldom mentioned in any threads trying to give answers or even ask questions about the past, as there was a trememndous versitality from time and place from say 1750-1840 and the number one thing is to put the 21st century mindset/thinking/analytical process on the back burner when talking about history. I know they were as smart as us but that does not really mean anything when studying the whats and whos and wheres of the past.If a person cannot grasp a few basics about the existing standards of study and interpretation of history some aspects of the sport that the one might be better off not giving opinions as any opinions must be based on a true accurate underatanding of the subject matter.I do not think one can really have a valid opinion if the topic matter is not understood, I know thta I could not even begin to give a sensible knowledeg based opinion on the current theories on cosmetologys/physics string theory. Just an example, I have heard some terms and seen/read a bit, just like many do on ML and 18th/19th century history.This is a case where the best thing is to listen and not talk untill a basic working understanding of the subject is achived, just my opinion as I have seen enough BS pitted against sound history research to have one on this topic

 

[jdkerstetter]

Well said TG.

Sometimes the only "evidence" we have is speculative at best.

But sometimes it's fun to speculate and we can all learn from it as speculation leads to discussion.

These camp fire chats can bring the really knowledgible people out fo the woodwork.

J.D.

 

[tg]

"
Sometimes the only "evidence" we have is speculative at best"

I agree 100% but we are best off to speculate based on the best and closest information we have not what we prefer or would like things to be like.Often I think this is the case as it opens the door to leave whatever we do have in the way of evidence behind in favour of preference

 

[jdkerstetter]

Yep! There is too much changing of history to get the outcome one desires. :hatsoff:

J.D.

 

[kodiakmarine]

I am particularly interested in North Carolina rifles, lowland and mountain. I have not seen the type "G" trade gun, but I assume it is long and slender as were the other fowlers and trade guns of the day. I also have not had the opportunity to read Shumway's GCA, something I need to rectify.

I have looked at as many examples of Carolina rifles as I could find. As far as I can tell, the first riflemakers of North Carilina were Moravian gunsmiths of the early 1750s. I do not know if they came directly from Germany or by way of Pa or VA. They made brass mounted rifles in the Germanic tradition with the exception of using English locks. I can only guess that English locks were the only ones available when they first arrived in NC, and after a while they simply became part of the rifle making culture.

They seemed to follow the same evolution as the PA rifles, i.e. wide butt plates, long shallow trigger bows, maple stocks. After 1800 rifles seemed to become lighter and trimmer in NC just as they did in PA. This is hardly surprising as they shared a common starting point and cultural tradition.

I cannot disprove your theory, but I do not see the cause and effect relationship that would show Carolina rifles being light and trim prior to the rifles of PA, something I would expect if the trim trend was the result of a Carolina trade gun.

I'm not Moses bringing the stone tablets, just another member giving an opinion.

BTW, I find these discussions enlightening. I always learn new things, even (or perhaps especially) from the people I disagree with. Now, to find some examples of those type G guns... :hatsoff: - John

 

[jdkerstetter]

If you don't "Colonial Frontier Guns" by T.M. Hamilton, you may want to consider it.

It covers the history and evolution of the early European Trade Guns, French, English and Dutch in North America.

I was kind of dissapointed when I first got it as the pictures are mainly of parts recovered at digs and just a few guns. Once you start reading though you discover how rare these guns are. They just didn't survive.

Pieces of the Carolina gun have been found as far South as Mississippi (most parts) and as far North as New York and Michigan. Basically everywhere the English traded with the Indian.

Jack and Mike Brooks have both built nice reproductions of the Type G Trade Gun and a quick "google" search will bring them both up.

Jack did a really interesting one finished in red with a folk art floral pattern on the stock modeled after an original.

Here is a link to pictures of the original that he copied it after:

http://www.flintriflesmith.com/Antiques/bumford_tradegun.htm

Enjoy, J.D.

 

[rich pierce]

I am particularly interested in North Carolina rifles, lowland and mountain. I have not seen the type "G" trade gun, but I assume it is long and slender as were the other fowlers and trade guns of the day........
I have looked at as many examples of Carolina rifles as I could find. ...... Now, to find some examples of those type G guns... :hatsoff: - John

Hi, John, I didn't make it clear when I say "carolina gun" I mean "type G" which were called Carolina guns in the trade.

 

[kodiakmarine]

Thank you JD. Those are beautiful guns. It's hard to believe guns that long can be so light. That takes a great deal of skill! :thumbsup:

 

[kodiakmarine]

I beg your pardon Rich. I can see now how your argument carries more weight. :hatsoff: - John

 

[54ball]

tg said...

This is a case where the best thing is to listen and not talk untill a basic working understanding of the subject is achived, just my opinion as I have seen enough BS pitted against sound history research to have one on this topic

I guess I was not educated enough to begin this conversation. I stated early on that this was a complex subject. Maybe I tried to lump too much into too little space.
As far as BS I can't think of anything I have said that can be construed as BS. Can you enlighten me on what is BS so I can explain specifically what I meant.

JD said...

Yep! There is too much changing of history to get the outcome one desires.

J.D.

I said in my second post...

I'm not trying to re write history. As a matter of fact I accept the history of the longrifle.

There are many mysteries in the development of these arms. I just asked if my view had any merit.

This would be a good verbal conversation, but due to the complexity it's hard to type it in these little boxes without typing War and Peace.

[/quote]

This makes it sound like my original post was agenda driven. I may have been too simplistic. I tried to be humble and convey speculation but for the sake of brevity, I may have come across to heavy handed.

Nothing I said was new. I'm not shooting from the hip on this. Maybe the way it was presented clouded the issue.

These camp fire chats can bring the really knowledgible people out fo the woodwork.

J.D.

Apparently I'm not one of them. :shocked2:

 

[54ball]

Thanks for your response on this topic.

Lets start with the Trade Gun type G...

As a matter of fact I was going to give you the Bumford link but J.D. beat me to it.

The article says that those type guns were imported by the tens of thousands and they were primarily an Indian trade item but found general usage. The one dated in the article is 1750-60ish.

There have been others found much earlier. Parts of some were recovered from the wreck of the Queen Anne's Revenge. This is 1718. So the Type G had been around for decades.

Indian Trade...
The type G was not the only trade gun. The European powers all competed against one another in Indian trade. The first main commodity the Europeans traded the Indians for were slaves. The tribes needed guns to capture slaves from other tribes. The Biloxi tribe on the Gulf Coast was about wiped out, being captured and sold to the French.
The Europeans soon found out that Native American slaves were not efficient. They could simply escape, did not work well and were prone to disease especially if taken to the West Indies. It was found that Africans were much more efficient. Thus starting the Triangle Trade.

With the Native American slave trade at a virtual end the new commodity was deerskin. As the Eighteenth Century progresses, there is more and more demand for deerskin. Deer are now hunted year round, buck, doe,fawn, no matter. So deer begin to get more scarce. The tribes now dependent on European goods have to travel further and further to get deer. Add the trade and land conflict between the European powers this all escalates to the French and Indian War where Britain emerges as the victor in 1763.
As demand for deerskin increases and deer decrease, the Indians start to use rifles.

Rifles...

Rifles date early in the Eighteenth century. many of these are Germanic types " Jaegers" or English copies of such. Daniel Boone's first boyhood rifle was reported to be an English Short Rifle. Of course we know about the German and Moravains who begin to produce their own rifles in Pennsylvania and the Carolinas. The Colonies begin to expand, Virginia claims land to the Pacific. There are many conflicts Like Dunmoore's War between the tribes and settlers during this period. So much so the King George III bans settlement across the mountains.
It is during this time the longrifle begins to take form. Early rifles resemble pieces made in Europe. Some even use European hardware like the Marshall Rifle. As stated earlier long barreled Jeagers are found time to time in Europe. American rifles during this period tend to get longer and longer. The rifle being a frontier weapon moves with frontier. The Indians purchase them as well as whites. So much so the English copy American rifles to trade to the Indians. it's very possible the gunmakers copy English copies.
Why would these Colonial makers depart from European tradition and create a slender, longer arm? Could it be that the attributes of the long barreled trade guns that numbered in the thousands were at least part of the development of the American rifle?

The Revolution...

Rifle Corps were raised. Rifleman from many areas were exposed to each other. Among these men were many present and future rifle builders.

The Golden Age...

In a few short years after the War the development of the American longrifle explodes and rather quickly. Many new branches are added to the longrifle tree. Could this be due to the exchange of ideas during the War?

http://americanhistoricservices.com/html/jos_bogle.html
http://americanhistoricservices.com/html/christian_oerter.htm

Compare these two rifles. Some date the Bogle to the mid 1780s, some say the early 1790s.

That's a lot of change in 10 to 15 years. It may not be fair to compare these two, the difference in time and place, but that is precisely the point I'm trying to make.

 

[rich pierce]

Regarding the Bogle rifle, Ketland and Company who made the lock did not export to America before 1790 and Bogle died in 1811 I believe so the rifle was made between those dates. If I compare this rifle to others of the time it looks at least 1810 to me based on the narrow buttplate and curvature of the buttplate. I find such rifles less pleasant to shoot than the early rifles and have no idea, other than fashion, why rifle buttstock styles changed in this manner.