Native American gunstock club

RSWORD · 6th June 2007, 06:51 PM

I think it is wise to lean towards precaution when reviewing these items. Unfortunately, my pictures really do not do the piece justice and I think it is hard to make assessments simply from pictures, unless of course someone says, "hey, that is regularly sold on such a such website." Some online research yielded the following mid-19th examples for comparison purposes.

http://www.wrtcleather.com/1-ckd/haw...arclub-002.jpg

http://www.wrtcleather.com/1-ckd/haw...arclub-003.jpg

Now, for my education and from these additional pictures please tell me how to tell the difference between machined and hand made?

Lew · 6th June 2007, 08:47 PM

Question

Does the blade have any markings on it? I would think if the blades on these clubs were made either in Europe or the USA way back in the 1800s they would be stamped with some type of mark?

Lew

Tim Simmons · 6th June 2007, 09:08 PM

A couple of questions. Are these based on a gun stock. Was this form made before a frequent supply of guns. The examples I have in books all sugest they are from the early 1800s- 1820 . Which may suggest it is possible that they are not actual fighting weapons? when compered to other Wood Land clubs and plains weapons. Many of the real fighting weapons do seem to look a little more like the big knobkerries from SA. Surely the supply of guns in the Eastern Wood lands by the 1800s made these more as prestige items. It would be really nice if this was the real thing, I do not like the angle cut at the handle.

CharlesS · 6th June 2007, 10:41 PM

My info on these is that they were quite literally made to look like gunstocks to deceive an enemy from a distance. In a time when muskets were a feared and precious commodity among Native Americans just the simple perception that one side had more guns than the other could start...or stop...potential battle. Some seem to think that many of the clubs were literally made from gunstocks, thus the name, but this is generally untrue. You could make an arguement that these made have been a psychological weapon to a degree.

Tim's comment about dress or ceremonial pieces is a good one. These types of clubs show up an awful lot in the famous portraits(Catlin, etc.) of the era.

I don't think there is any 'absolute' rule with these, like so many other ethnographic pieces.

Andrew · 7th June 2007, 03:08 AM

Rick, any wear on it not visible in the photos? Marks on the blade?

It is extremely similar to a club that appears on page 23 of Taylor's Native American Weapons. It is described so:

Quote:

A magnificent gunstock-shaped club collected in the 1820's by the traveler, Duke Paul of Wurttemberg...This one, probably from the Osage, has a trade steel blade and a handle wrapped with snakeskin.

Your's has painted line detailing on the "stock" nearly identical to Duke Paul's. The similarities are, otherwise, striking.

Outstanding club, Rick!

Andrew · 7th June 2007, 03:15 AM

Some claim these go back as far as the early 17th century.

A convenient era of origin to choose, as guns would have been familiar, even if not truly common, in the Americas by that time.

Let's face it, once guns became readily accessible to Native Americans, all other major weapons became obsolete and relegated to either ceremonial use or obsolescense.

What a devastating weapon this must have been when in regular use!

Tim Simmons · 7th June 2007, 08:14 AM

Look at this club in the Detroit institute of arts. To me it knocks anything described as "Jewel encrusted with profuse and lavish decoration of thick silver and gold" into a tricorne hat.

6th June 2007, 06:51 PM	#1
RSWORD Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greensboro, NC Posts: 1,087	I think it is wise to lean towards precaution when reviewing these items. Unfortunately, my pictures really do not do the piece justice and I think it is hard to make assessments simply from pictures, unless of course someone says, "hey, that is regularly sold on such a such website." Some online research yielded the following mid-19th examples for comparison purposes. http://www.wrtcleather.com/1-ckd/haw...arclub-002.jpg http://www.wrtcleather.com/1-ckd/haw...arclub-003.jpg Now, for my education and from these additional pictures please tell me how to tell the difference between machined and hand made?

6th June 2007, 08:47 PM	#2
Lew (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: East Coast USA Posts: 3,191	Question Does the blade have any markings on it? I would think if the blades on these clubs were made either in Europe or the USA way back in the 1800s they would be stamped with some type of mark? Lew

6th June 2007, 09:08 PM	#3
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,875	A couple of questions. Are these based on a gun stock. Was this form made before a frequent supply of guns. The examples I have in books all sugest they are from the early 1800s- 1820 . Which may suggest it is possible that they are not actual fighting weapons? when compered to other Wood Land clubs and plains weapons. Many of the real fighting weapons do seem to look a little more like the big knobkerries from SA. Surely the supply of guns in the Eastern Wood lands by the 1800s made these more as prestige items. It would be really nice if this was the real thing, I do not like the angle cut at the handle.

6th June 2007, 10:41 PM	#4
CharlesS Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Greenville, NC Posts: 1,854	My info on these is that they were quite literally made to look like gunstocks to deceive an enemy from a distance. In a time when muskets were a feared and precious commodity among Native Americans just the simple perception that one side had more guns than the other could start...or stop...potential battle. Some seem to think that many of the clubs were literally made from gunstocks, thus the name, but this is generally untrue. You could make an arguement that these made have been a psychological weapon to a degree. Tim's comment about dress or ceremonial pieces is a good one. These types of clubs show up an awful lot in the famous portraits(Catlin, etc.) of the era. I don't think there is any 'absolute' rule with these, like so many other ethnographic pieces.

7th June 2007, 03:15 AM	#6
Andrew Member Join Date: Nov 2004 Location: USA Posts: 1,725	Some claim these go back as far as the early 17th century. A convenient era of origin to choose, as guns would have been familiar, even if not truly common, in the Americas by that time. Let's face it, once guns became readily accessible to Native Americans, all other major weapons became obsolete and relegated to either ceremonial use or obsolescense. What a devastating weapon this must have been when in regular use!

7th June 2007, 08:14 AM	#7
Tim Simmons Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: What is still UK Posts: 5,875	Look at this club in the Detroit institute of arts. To me it knocks anything described as "Jewel encrusted with profuse and lavish decoration of thick silver and gold" into a tricorne hat.