The Great April Fools Day Hoax:Confederate General Basil W Duke’s .22/32 HFT revolver

Another thing to remember with the sights placed on the early .22/32 HFT's that the Paine will come with a U notch rear sight and the Patridge sight will come with a square notch rear sight. In my database I show that the early guns shipped mostly with the Paine front sight however there are a few that came through ordered with the Patridge.

Changed later by the factory one would hope to find a date stamp on the left side of the grip frame however if changed by the dealer, gunsmith or the eventual owner then no such mark will be present.

As far as the historical letters are concerned, remember that Roy and Don use a formatted letter template and merely change the particulars for your individual gun. When changing the details it is very easy to overlook one section especially when you are trying to crank out 50 letters a week or whatever it is that are coming in. Add to that answering the numerous phone calls that come in and those interruptions alone could cause one to miss something.

The good news is that both historians have always been gracious about making any corrections needed.
 
Another thing to remember with the sights placed on the early .22/32 HFT's that the Paine will come with a U notch rear sight and the Patridge sight will come with a square notch rear sight. In my database I show that the early guns shipped mostly with the Paine front sight however there are a few that came through ordered with the Patridge.

Changed later by the factory one would hope to find a date stamp on the left side of the grip frame however if changed by the dealer, gunsmith or the eventual owner then no such mark will be present.

As far as the historical letters are concerned, remember that Roy and Don use a formatted letter template and merely change the particulars for your individual gun. When changing the details it is very easy to overlook one section especially when you are trying to crank out 50 letters a week or whatever it is that are coming in. Add to that answering the numerous phone calls that come in and those interruptions alone could cause one to miss something.

The good news is that both historians have always been gracious about making any corrections needed.

It's a U-notch rear sight, consistent with the Paine beaded front sight on this revolver.
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2675.jpg
    IMG_2675.jpg
    41.8 KB · Views: 15
What an awesome piece of history! Getting that index card in the mail would be such an incredible BONUS!

Looking at the photos, two things come to mind.

1) It appears that there is some holster wear at the muzzle and on the the high points of the cylinder - though that may just be reflections in the photos.

2) There also seems to be a pretty pronounced turn line or "ring" around the cylinder. I hate to be a naysayer, but that makes me think that either there were significantly more than 11 rounds fired through this revolver, or else someone did a lot of dry-firing with it. Again, that may just be due to reflections in the photographs.

I may be way off base in these observations, and if so, I apologize. Just my thoughts about what I *think* I'm seeing in the photos.

Regardless of all that, speaking as the great-great-great grandson of a soldier conscripted into the Confederate Army in that same region (southern Missouri - 50m miles from the Kentucky border) I find this revolver and its historical provenance absolutely fascinating! My ancestor could very likely have served under General Duke!

Thanks for sharing such a great find!

There is a turn line present—minimal, but present. And some possible holster wear at the end of this revolver. General Basil Duke died on 16 September 1916, in which case he owned this revolver less than 18 months. His widowed daughter appears to have inherited it. Her index card was typed when this revolver was 42 years old. So, her statement then is likely true—fired 11 times ( maybe a few more—but not many more) in 1915, stashed away in her personal effects from late 1916 until at least 1957, and probably at least until her death 07 July 1961. From then until now is over 6 decades. Who had it, who fired it, how much it was used is a big unknown. Even if donated to a pro Confederate cause or institution, or even the Filson Historical Society, artifacts often have a habit of being deacquisitioned, in which case any known history associated with an object is separated and lost forever.
 
I have posted photographs of a close up shot of the Paine Beaded front sight on this revolver. The letter describes the front sight as a Patridge. The letter does not match what is on this revolver, but it doesn't mean that the letter doesn't match what is in the factory records, and so I emailed the Historian.
IMO, the front sight has been changed. Target shooters are picky. Somewhere in its life, someone may have preferred the old Paine bead he was used to instead of the "new fangled" Patridge.
The current bead shows signs of replacement-
>There is what appears to be a tiny punch ding below the pin.
>The end of the pin shows signs of being hit with a punch.
>The ends (corners) of the blade appear to stand a bit proud of the base and are normally fitted flush by the Factory.


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2671-1.jpg
    IMG_2671-1.jpg
    111.9 KB · Views: 353
I need to start going to more auctions as you never know when unknown gems like that gun might turn up!!!! Outstanding find and a great piece of history. Thanks for the pictures and all of the information concerning the revolver and the general. Along with many other Confederate generals, he was one of my favorites. You are indeed an extremely lucky man.
 
IMO, the front sight has been changed. Target shooters are picky. Somewhere in its life, someone may have preferred the old Paine bead he was used to instead of the "new fangled" Patridge.
The current bead shows signs of replacement-
>There is what appears to be a tiny punch ding below the pin.
>The end of the pin shows signs of being hit with a punch.
>The ends (corners) of the blade appear to stand a bit proud of the base and are normally fitted flush by the Factory.


attachment.php

Well, the history since at least 1961, and possibly 1957, remains unknown. Someone new acquired this off the estate or the museum and installed a different front sight and enjoyed it a bit. Enjoying it only a few times a year a few times a decade could cause at least some wear and perhaps the front sight was changed out by a new owner in the early 1960s. Six decades is a long time…

I thought the "U" notch rear sight made the Paine Beaded front sight more likely?
 
Last edited:
I thought the "U" notch rear sight made the Paine Beaded front sight more likely?
It takes about 30 seconds to loosen the rear sight screws, replace the rear blade and tighten the screws.
I'm not going to dig them out, but I have a small baggy of rear sight blades. :D They were readily available from the Factory, and you may recall that Reg Mags were even shipped with a spare.
 
It takes about 30 seconds to loosen the rear sight screws, replace the rear blade and tighten the screws.
I'm not going to dig them out, but I have a small baggy of rear sight blades. :D They were readily available from the Factory, and you may recall that Reg Mags were even shipped with a spare.

I didn't know those rear sight blades were that readily available. If you DO dig these up and want to sell them—I'm interested!
 
And so the 19th of February is Confession Day (I didn't know this, I had to look this up). And so, I will confess that this revolver and factory letter are genuine, and, yes, I did purchase this revolver at auction in 2023, but the rest of this thread is a HOAX.

I was intending to bring this revolver to Concord with me, along with my 1913 production L C Smith typewriter, an index card, a blue ball point pan, a tea bag, and my tea mug, and entitle my display "Provensnce: What is It?". But I won't be there to do it, and so the five attached photographs will have to suffice.

First, I hope I have your forgiveness. I created this thread as an April Fool's Day hoax, intending to it being just that, thinking a few might believe it, but others would question this "provenance". This was going to be confessed, and this was to be a learning experience about "buy the gun, not the story". Which it took nearly a year for it to evolve this way—but I had to wait for Confession Day to come around.

Some questioned the front sight—very good, I might add—but I had a plausible explanation, as many do who make up stories.

It was stated that this "provenance" perhaps doubled or tripled the value of this revolver. Well, today that will be reset to what it truly is worth based on market conditions, and, yes, I decreased what I might have been able to sell this for in future, but it's not value I'm concerned about, it's the lesson this tale of provenance teaches us. Many unscrupulously sellers and auction houses are the reverse. They create elaborate tales for financial gain. I know one such rifle sold by a well known auction house gives a lengthy tale about the farm of which this rifle was found. Going into its history, agricultural practices of the farm that have nothing to do with the rifle, the reverend who owned it who was blind and used to roll down a hill in a wheelchair seemingly out of control, to scare guests and family members. This all is a story, none of it can be proven, but did certainly help this particular rifle hammer into the stratosphere. Now, I thought that rifle inspired me to create this thread, but a quick search on the internet reveals that particular rifle surfaced a few months after this thread was created. Nonetheless, there are so many faked provenance stories out there, perhaps it didn't take just one specific example to inspire me to create this thread.

Let's start with the creation date of my thread. 01 April 2024. That's a tip off. April Fool's Day! However, unscrupulous sellers don't just use April Fool's Day to deceive. They rely on the other 364 days a year to do so, and once every 4 years in the 29th of February as well.

I promise you, at least with myself, I'm completely above board 364 days a year, but on April Fool's Day, anything goes!

When I received this revolver, it had the "H.C.K." initials in the butt. Plan A was to come up with "provenance" involving a renowned individual with those initials who purchased it in 1915, but I couldn't find anyone meeting such criteria. Plan B—make those initials stand for something. If you have the letter "C",?no doubt a good place to start is with that "C" standing for Confederacy.

Civil War generals who fought on behalf of the lost cause always elicit great interest. And so, while I waited for the historical letter, I researched somewhat prominent Civil War generals alive well into the Twentieth Century. Basil W Duke came up. I got his 1911 book through interlibrary loan. Great, he's from Kentucky. No doubt, the "K" in "H.C. K." stands for Kentucky. From Basil Duke's Wikipedia page, we can see he had a daughter in Massachusetts and died in New York on the way to visiting her in 1916, and so my story was going to be about how he was in failing health but made a mad dash to purchase this revolver in one of his later trips north, assuming that the odds were this revolver shipped to somewhere northerly like New York or Chicago.

Imagine my amazement and delight when I did get this letter and it shipped to Louisville, Kentucky, Basil Duke's home town. Not only that, it shipped a month prior to the 50th anniversary of the end of the Civil War. All the pieces fell into place remarkably well! And, Basil Duke's memoirs being from 1911 and this revolver and my story dating from 1915, being subsequent to his book, made the actual story about his actions, thoughts, and actual location on the 50th anniversary of the ending of the Civil War. Never let pesky little facts get in the way of a good story that might result in ill founded financial gain!

And so, with very little effort, using household items that once cost very little to begin with (I think I paid $25 for the typewriter at auction a decade ago), I turned my run of the mill .22/32 HFT revolver into one of great desire, or at least much more interesting, through "provenance".

I present to you, Exhibits A through E.

Exhibit A: An L C Smith typewriter manufactured in 1913. Predates 1957, when Basil Duke's daughter typed that index card. Not that a typewriter post dating 1957 couldn't be used, but you might get hung up on a technicality, such as a font not commonplace until well after 1957. Not that you can tell that the typing is actually on a typewriter that predates when this revolver shipped, but it helps that it looks old. Julia Duke may not gave been one to even buy a typewriter, preferring to use Daddy's, perhaps, as she attended to her affairs later in life.

Exhibit B: An index card. Index cards are timeless—and believable!

Exhibit C: "Provenance" is more believable when it's signed. Now, matching this signature to the real signature of Julia Duke could quickly expose my hoax, but it's not readily available on the internet in searches for it. I'm sure there are examples extant somewhere in Louisville. Blue ink helps tremendously.

Exhibit D: An Earl Grey tea bag.

Exhibit E: A tea mug. Spill a bit of tea on the card, make sure the tea mug ring is evident. Ages that awfully new looking index card, and also, adds more credibility to the "provenance".

And so, yet again, buy the gun, not the story!

Caveat emptor!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_3561.jpg
    IMG_3561.jpg
    90.9 KB · Views: 40
  • IMG_3562.jpg
    IMG_3562.jpg
    60.4 KB · Views: 49
  • IMG_3560.jpg
    IMG_3560.jpg
    102.9 KB · Views: 44
  • IMG_3563.jpg
    IMG_3563.jpg
    116.8 KB · Views: 45
  • IMG_3559.jpg
    IMG_3559.jpg
    102.2 KB · Views: 45
Opens the door for more of the same. If not already happening.....

Yes, I created this as an April Fool's Day thread, and also, as a learning experience. It wasn't created for financial gain.

This is going on all over the place these days—and, for financial gain.
 
"Letter from Potchernick's to S&W saying...
We are returning a 375 Magnum Revolver with a 5 inch barrel, serial No. 47138. This gun is the property of Jomer C. White, c/o the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and who is very much dissatisfied with it, and says that the gun is out of time.
Please correct this irregularity and return to us immediately and oblige."


Well, did they fix it?
 
I don't think I've ever bought a gun based on the story or provenance if there was any. I have found provenance though after buying a gun which seems a less expensive and less risky option. The most recent, just a few months ago, was a Registered Magnum at auction with zero provenance but which turned out to have been ordered by a Coast Guard Lieutenant who fought in WWII and retired as an Admiral.

Thanks for reminding us that provenance may add value but can be faked or "enhanced" and sometimes lost.

Jeff
SWCA #1457


https://flic.kr/p/2qz6e4f https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

https://flic.kr/p/2qz6czd https://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/

https://flic.kr/p/2qz4TkMhttps://www.flickr.com/photos/194934231@N03/
 
MRCVS,
Thank you for posting this. It's very timely for me.
I have been contemplating an "April Fools" gag for some time now.
I really admire engraved guns such as the ones that RKmesa and others post. I thought it would be humorous to post that "I finely found an engrave gun with provenance that I liked and could afford". Then post a story and pictures of an embossed TOY cap gun followed by a series silly emojis.
Now I don't think I will follow through with it.

I will follow provenance more carefully now as well

Thank You,
Terry
 
Ian,

Yesterday was the first time that I had seen this thread. I read through it with interest and wondered what April Fools had to do with it. Then I got to post #49 which revealed that you had completely fabricated the story.

Honestly, it made me pretty hot that you had perpetuated this fraud for nearly a year. I thought I would wait a day before replying to cool off, but I am still pretty hot. :mad:

And so the 19th of February is Confession Day (I didn't know this, I had to look this up). And so, I will confess that this revolver and factory letter are genuine, and, yes, I did purchase this revolver at auction in 2023, but the rest of this thread is a HOAX.

I was intending to bring this revolver to Concord with me, along with my 1913 production L C Smith typewriter, an index card, a blue ball point pan, a tea bag, and my tea mug, and entitle my display "Provensnce: What is It?". But I won't be there to do it, and so the five attached photographs will have to suffice.

First, I hope I have your forgiveness. I created this thread as an April Fool's Day hoax, intending to it being just that, thinking a few might believe it, but others would question this "provenance". This was going to be confessed, and this was to be a learning experience about "buy the gun, not the story". Which it took nearly a year for it to evolve this way—but I had to wait for Confession Day to come around.

What utter garbage! First you confess that you had to look up "Confession Day" and then you use it as an excuse for not setting the record straight right away. In the first place, April Fools is a silly and juvenile excuse to play a prank. Regardless, anything related to such a prank should be confessed to by the end of April 1, yet you perpetuated the very convincing deception for several more days afterward. You even roped in Lee Jarrett in a discussion of front sight nomenclature - which was actually informative, but tainted by your lies.

You hope you have our forgiveness? You do not have mine.

I promise you, at least with myself, I'm completely above board 364 days a year, but on April Fool's Day, anything goes!
What possible reason should we have for believing you? You've already proven that this statement is false, by perpetuating your hoax for nearly a year.

And so, with very little effort, using household items that once cost very little to begin with (I think I paid $25 for the typewriter at auction a decade ago), I turned my run of the mill .22/32 HFT revolver into one of great desire, or at least much more interesting, through "provenance".

I present to you, Exhibits A through E.

Exhibit A: An L C Smith typewriter manufactured in 1913. Predates 1957, when Basil Duke's daughter typed that index card. Not that a typewriter post dating 1957 couldn't be used, but you might get hung up on a technicality, such as a font not commonplace until well after 1957. Not that you can tell that the typing is actually on a typewriter that predates when this revolver shipped, but it helps that it looks old. Julia Duke may not gave been one to even buy a typewriter, preferring to use Daddy's, perhaps, as she attended to her affairs later in life.

Exhibit B: An index card. Index cards are timeless—and believable!

Exhibit C: "Provenance" is more believable when it's signed. Now, matching this signature to the real signature of Julia Duke could quickly expose my hoax, but it's not readily available on the internet in searches for it. I'm sure there are examples extant somewhere in Louisville. Blue ink helps tremendously.

Exhibit D: An Earl Grey tea bag.

Exhibit E: A tea mug. Spill a bit of tea on the card, make sure the tea mug ring is evident. Ages that awfully new looking index card, and also, adds more credibility to the "provenance".

And so, yet again, buy the gun, not the story!

Caveat emptor!
I suppose you think yourself quite clever for being able to dupe Forum members with your fabricated "provenance". But who would expect such behavior from a member of the SWCA, the S&W Historical Foundation and the NRA, regardless of the date? Your excuse for making up this story as a cautionary tale for unwary buyers and leaving it out there for - again - nearly a year, simply means to me that you are an untrustworthy person.

Caveat emptor indeed.
 
Ian,

Yesterday was the first time that I had seen this thread. I read through it with interest and wondered what April Fools had to do with it. Then I got to post #49 which revealed that you had completely fabricated the story.

Honestly, it made me pretty hot that you had perpetuated this fraud for nearly a year. I thought I would wait a day before replying to cool off, but I am still pretty hot. :mad:



What utter garbage! First you confess that you had to look up "Confession Day" and then you use it as an excuse for not setting the record straight right away. In the first place, April Fools is a silly and juvenile excuse to play a prank. Regardless, anything related to such a prank should be confessed to by the end of April 1, yet you perpetuated the very convincing deception for several more days afterward. You even roped in Lee Jarrett in a discussion of front sight nomenclature - which was actually informative, but tainted by your lies.

You hope you have our forgiveness? You do not have mine.

What possible reason should we have for believing you? You've already proven that this statement is false, by perpetuating your hoax for nearly a year.

I suppose you think yourself quite clever for being able to dupe Forum members with your fabricated "provenance". But who would expect such behavior from a member of the SWCA, the S&W Historical Foundation and the NRA, regardless of the date? Your excuse for making up this story as a cautionary tale for unwary buyers and leaving it out there for - again - nearly a year, simply means to me that you are an untrustworthy person.

Caveat emptor indeed.

He is not the only one who posts "Tall Tales" on the forum. There are several that I think fall into that category. Very hard to separate the Wheat from the Chaff as the saying goes. I just try to shake my head and let it go as they are only fooling themselves.
 
Ian,

Yesterday was the first time that I had seen this thread. I read through it with interest and wondered what April Fools had to do with it. Then I got to post #49 which revealed that you had completely fabricated the story.

Honestly, it made me pretty hot that you had perpetuated this fraud for nearly a year. I thought I would wait a day before replying to cool off, but I am still pretty hot. :mad:



What utter garbage! First you confess that you had to look up "Confession Day" and then you use it as an excuse for not setting the record straight right away. In the first place, April Fools is a silly and juvenile excuse to play a prank. Regardless, anything related to such a prank should be confessed to by the end of April 1, yet you perpetuated the very convincing deception for several more days afterward. You even roped in Lee Jarrett in a discussion of front sight nomenclature - which was actually informative, but tainted by your lies.

You hope you have our forgiveness? You do not have mine.

What possible reason should we have for believing you? You've already proven that this statement is false, by perpetuating your hoax for nearly a year.

I suppose you think yourself quite clever for being able to dupe Forum members with your fabricated "provenance". But who would expect such behavior from a member of the SWCA, the S&W Historical Foundation and the NRA, regardless of the date? Your excuse for making up this story as a cautionary tale for unwary buyers and leaving it out there for - again - nearly a year, simply means to me that you are an untrustworthy person.

Caveat emptor indeed.

My apologies if you take offense. I didn't mean that.

And I do remain in search of the proper front sight.

This thread went on about three days and then nothing until now. The original plan was to see if I could make it to Concord, but I won't be able to—plus not everyone on this forum will be at Concord.

Again, my apologies. I didn't mean this as a lesson, and from unscrupulous sellers and auction houses, there never will be an explanation—any lessons learned are usually expensive ones by the new owner.

I'm sorry you take offense, as there was no financial gain on my part. I suppose I could have pawned this off for $2500, but I didn't. Financial gain wasn't my incentive.

I suppose I could have fessed up earlier, but I had a potential display in mind. Plus this thread was active on the forum only 3 days and that was it.

I was inspired by a lot of "provenance" associated with some high dollar firearms out there that is little more than poppycock.

Here's such an example in the world of high dollar antiques: How an antiques reporter exposed 'one of the best folk art fakes of all time'

But, in the end, I hope those who don't take offense view this as a valuable learning experience.
 
I just stumbled onto this thread. What a hoot! You were able to draw me in with the first post, and then kept my attention through the rest of the thread. Just as any author would hope to do with a story. Superb.

Am I saddened it is not so? Not really. The ride alone was worth my time. Did you try to capitalize on this "hoax"? Not that I am aware.

I, for one, enjoyed the story, presentation and the moral. And the bits of history thrown in.

Thank you for taking the time to present this and for explaining the hoax.

Kevin
 
Back
Top