Who knows about Springfield Models 1795 or 1807?

[kdave21]

I see that an auction house in the region is advertising a "Springfield 1807 Flintlock."

I am sending off an e-mail to the auctioneer to try and get pictures of this item to help correctly identify it. Based on an initial perusal of Flaydermans, I suspect that this could be a Springfield 1795 which is simply marked "1807" or perhaps an actual model 1807 aka Indian Carbine.

At this point, since I have no pictures of it, my question is, how many fakes/reproductions are there out there of these two models? My second question is, what is the market like for these. I am upfront in stating that, while I would be intrigued by a gun like this, I would not be purchasing this for myself, but rather as something to turn around and sell.

Just thought I would see what people know about these. I know that the 1807s are rare, but wasnt sure about the 1795's. If I get more info, Ill post it.

 

[AlexanderA]

That whole era from 1795-1812 is very confusing to Springfield collectors. Many years later, there were attempts by collectors to designate distinct models by year, but this wasn't done officially at the time. What actually happened was a more or less continuous "product improvement" process, with changes introduced randomly. Keep in mind that guns were individually assembled in those days. Despite the con job that Eli Whitney tried to pull on Jefferson regarding interchangability of parts, full interchangability wasn't achieved at Springfield until the Model 1842 musket. (The Hall Rifle Works did it earlier, in the 1830's.)

 

[4v50 Gary]

From Robert Ball's Springfield Armory: Shoulder Weapons 1795-1968 And Daniel Hartzler and James Whisker's The Northern Armory: the United States Armory at Springfield, Massachusetts, 1795-1859:

On 3 March 1807, Secretary of War Henry Dearborn wrote to Springfield Armory Superintendent Benjamin Prescott stating that "One thousand small muskets or carbines are wanted for the Indian Department. I will than you to inform me what proportion, in point of expense, such guns will bear to the common musket with bayonets. The length of the barrel should not exceed 2'10"; and its caliber suited to a ball weighing half an ounce; the mounting to be brass, including the sight, with a thumbpiece. The stock to be secured not by hand or slides, but in the old usual manner, the end of the stock, at the muzzle to have a small brass ferule or hoop around it to prevent its splitting; the lock be light and plain; the ramrod to be of wood well made, with a horn or brass butt and a worm at the other end."

In a subsequent letter, Dearborn wrote, "You will please have twelve hundred of the small muskets manufactured." There were approximately 1,201 Indian carbines produced at the Springfield Armory in 1809 and 1810. These were intended to be presented to the chiefs in treaty ceremonies, but it is believed that this occurred in very few cases. According to the records, in 1830 there were still 950 of these carbines in storage at Springfield, and as late as 1848, "690 Carbines manufactured in 1808 or 1809 which I consider unsuitable foe Public Service," were carried on the Armory books, according to Major Ripley. These were subsequently disposed of prior to 1851. A few carbines were sent to West Point in 1814, while a larger number were altered with the additions of bayonets in 1830 and 1832 for use as Cadet Muskets at the Academy.

Lockplates may be marked 1807, 1808, 1809 or 1810. Date was also stamped on the upper portion of the buttplate.

Brass furniture. Bbl 33.75", OAL 47.875", bore 54 cal.

Moved to a forum where more knowledgeable folks may chime in.

 

[kdave21]

Great info, thanks! Also appreciate moving this to a better forum. Will post pics if/when I get them.

 

[kdave21]

Im thinking US model 1795 type II, but that is just a beginning guess. Help please! Also...what is the worst case scenario for retail value if you can tell from these pics?

 

[kdave21]

two more pics

 

[4v50 Gary]

I can't give you an appraisal, but since the depicted gun has barrel bands, I am more inclined to say it is a 1795 Musket than an 1807 Carbine (which had no barrel bands).

 

[AlexanderA]

That's one of the many iterations of the 1795.

The sling is totally incorrect. (Looks like an M1907 sling.)

 

[kdave21]

These old guns are so interesting. Thanks guys. I believe you are both right, 1795 it is...

 

[kdave21]

Bought it. Looks like a fine weapon. Probably going to Gunbroker. Id pay good money to know where this guns been...

According to Flayderman's this is a textbook example of a type II. Everything seems to line up. Very neat gun.