Log In
Members
Home
Add Reply
Add Topic
A number of years ago, as some of you might remember, I completed a 14 year project into the history of a Winchester Model 1866 Carbine. A firearm that seemed to be of significant historical importance. Well, I’m contemplating another research project that although not a Winchester, would be even more exciting and important to Historians and Collectors than the Winchester. The subject of this project is a Springfield Trapdoor rifle used in combat against the United States in the last quarter of the nineteenth century. At this point I’m not going to go into any particulars, however I would like to seek some advice of the Forum members before I really dive into it.
I’ve a number of questions to ask the WACA members that read this forum. 1) What in your opinion would constitute acceptable provenance on an item where a serial number is unobtainable? 2) Would photographs taken on different dates and locations be acceptable, especially if there is something so unique about the item in question as to make it different from all other Springfields? 3) Would computerized comparisons of both the photos taken in the 1800’s and the actual subject be acceptable if they compare favorably at over 95%? 4) My last question. If the research into this item is successful and proves to the best anyone could possibly prove as I believe it to be, what do you do with it other than donate it to a museum, sell it, blow it up, or whatever?
In any case, before what at 76+ years of age will most likely be my last research project, I sure as hell don’t want to think of it as a waste of time and money doing something nobody really cares about.
Sorry for being so long winded on this, but very curious as to what you WACA Collectors think.
Apache ( ya ta hey)
For starters if the gun is only going to be worth $10k the provenance doesn’t need to be that great but if its going to be a million dollar gun you are going to need impeccable provenance. You would need good 1800’s photos so you could identify the wood grain and the gun would need to have a unique modification that wouldn’t of been used on another gun and the gun is in original condition. Wood grain is just like fingerprints, they are different on every gun. Without being able to tell if the woods original, someone could modify a gun to match a picture. As to what to do with it, its your gun do with it as you want. if you need money sell it or give it to a museum if you don’t.
Bob
WACA Life Member--- NRA Life Member---- Cody Firearms member since 1991 Researching the Winchester 1873's
Email: [email protected]
1873man;
First let me thank you for your reply. Yes it would be a very good idea to match the grain of the wood to the photos taken in the 1800s. I have a question for you. Have you ever seen a firearm that’s been used in combat? Many collectors tend to want “Closet Queens” for their collections. In other words a firearm that looks as though it’s never seen the light of day. A weapon thats been used in war has no resemblance to what it looked like when it came from the manufacturer. We’re talking about a rifle that’s over 150 years old. With the hard usage of war and the patina of age one could hardly expect to see wood grain, certainly not without cleaning 100+ years off it. Yes this rifle has unique features I’ve never seen on a Trapdoor before, and I’ve been collecting since 1959. In those years I think I probably have seen well over a thousand Springfields in person and probably more in photos. As to what to do with it, I may be old, but I’m still capeable of making decisions as how to dispose of this weapon. I just thought I’d ask to hear what you would do with it if owned by you. I guess I shouldn’t have asked.
Thank you for your response, Apache (ya ta hey)
My opinion for what it’s worth, is that there are always a lot of military collectors who are very willing to share their info. I think that that compiled with old photos would be a good start to the research and probably lead to more collectors and more photos. I i’m also surprised at what a firearm, that looks like it’s been buried in the ground for a number of years, can actually be worth. My point to that is the information you know about something will help you and other collectors in the future. I don’t think that Your research and information would go to waste because as a friend of mine used to say ‘if you were thinking about Something, chances are somebody else is thinking about it too’.If you do decide to do the paper, when you’re done with it you can share other collectors and historians as such.good luck if you move forward
Bill;
Let me first thank you for your response and suggestions. It’s always good to hear someones opinion that’s constructive and not critical. Allow me to say that the Springfield was not buried and dug up, but actually in shootable condition. The individual I got it from used it as his first hunting rifle in Oklahoma. In fact in the last 40 years that I’ve owned it I’ve shot it at the range a number of times, this using 45-70 reloads that a friend made up for me. (Low Pressure, Smokeless Powder)
Bill, allow me to thank you once again for your suggestions. All suggestions will help me make up my mind to pursue this project or not.
Apache ( ya ta hey )
November 7, 2015
Offline
Apache-
One of the most interesting “gun” books I’ve had the pleasure of owning and reading is Wendell Grangaard’s Documenting the Weapons Used at the Little Bighorn. Grangaard documents much more than the weapons, he documents the persons known to have possessed the weapons in the weeks and months leading up to and during the battle and continues to track them up to the time he was researching for the book. Much of the provenance is incomplete but that’s the nature of oral histories and some of the cultural barriers involved.
I’d be interested in any provenance you have as it would likely be interesting on it’s own merits. Simply report your findings and let the reader make up his own mind, in my opinion the story of this rifle could very well be more important than the rifle itself but the rifle makes it interesting to people like me. Sounds to me like the story of this rifle and the people who used it needs to be told, but that’s just my opinion.
Mike
Mike;
Always good to hear from you as I have found Texans I’ve met in general to be fair minded when weighing the pluses and minuses of any argument. Yes, in what little research I’ve thus far done it is in fact both the unusual rifle, but more so the individuals that I think used it who’s story should be told. As with the Winchester 1866 finding absolute 100% definitive proof will be extreamly difficult if not impossible. I will however do my best to not accept less than a 95% chance that the story of my rifle and its users be as presented to the public. As before I’ll explain and show the how, where, and when of my research in order that it can be followed by anyone willing to check my evidence. The indiviual’s story has been told before, but not completely, as I think I’ve found new and thus far unrevealed information contradicting the “history” that’s out there. The rifle I feel plays a major part in both people that used it, and the incorrect information that existed for over a century. Perhaps what I find out will correct history that needs to be corrected. If I’m unable to prove my research, at least to my satisfaction, well at least it will keep me busy for as long as it or I last. Ha, Ha, Ha!!
Mike thanks for your interest, Apache ( Ya Ta Hey )
1 Guest(s)
