Prior to 1869, Smith & Wesson did not have an in house engraver, I believe it all started with Gustave Young.

Nonetheless, prior to 1869,Smith & Wesson would contract out engraving to engravers in the Springfield, Massachusetts area, some of these being identified as Richard Bates Inshaw and F W Martin. In the last few years, a few of these have come up for auction. Here is the first one in our study, a revolver identified as the work of Richard Bates Inshaw, in 1866:

Very Fine Smith & Wesson No. 1 Second Issue Revolver with Gutta-Percha Case, Gold-Washed & Factory-Engraved by Richard Bates Inshaw

The hammer price on this one is a misnomer. Two spirited bidders chased after this one, I being the runner up. I went way over my highest bid limit, simply because it almost closed at 16 k to me and a last minute bidder snuck in a bid, and I decided to either teach that competing bidder a lesson or be taught a very expensive lesson myself. Fortunately, I didn’t win this one.

This one sold earlier today at auction, and I’ll gladly be writing a check for $8812.50 to take it home, before shipping is calculated. It does have a few condition issues compared to the other revolver, namely with some tool marks to the ejector rod, and the engraving on this revolver is a little simpler. It dates to the following year—1867.

Very Fine Cased & F.W. Martin Engraved Smith & Wesson No. 1 Second Issue Revolver

Look closely at the engraving styles and patterns of both revolvers, realizing that the 1867 production revolver was probably a less expensive pattern, maybe engraved with a bit more haste?

However, when one compares these revolvers, less than 8000 serial numbers apart, and possibly engraved only months apart, the engraving looks similar enough to be the hand of the same engraver.

Does the forum collectively agree with me? If so, are both the work of Inshaw, or Martin, or other? If the forum disagrees with me, is the first revolver engraved by Inshaw, is the second by Martin, or are one or both engraved by other engravers?

A factory letter will not provide insight as to the matter as Smith & Wesson’s sole agent at the time would have been J W Storrs in New York City.

They are both excellent.
The engraving does look similar.
Congrats Ian.
The first one would be my choice... If I didn't have to pay

The first one IS the better of the two, but definitely not 6 times better!

Thoughts anyone, comparing or contrasting, the engraving found on these two revolvers and whether or not they are by the same hand?

Any further insights or observations before I discuss this with a preeminent Smith & Wesson authority in the near future?

A number of years past, I snuck this Frank Wesson model 1870 pistol into the SWCA meeting to get some opinions regarding the engraver. In the estimation of Roy Jinks, this was the work of Robert Inshaw. I was also told, at another time and place by a different authority, that this is one of three known model 1870 pistols and the only one engraved.







Bob

Thank you, red9! That’s exactly what I am looking for. I think the two engraved revolvers I provided links to are stylistically very similar. I believe your Frank Wesson Model 1870 pistol contains an engraving style that differs enough from the two I posted, such that Robert Bates Inshaw cannot thus be the engraver of these Model 1 Second issue revolvers.

Therefore, if appears that the engraver of both would be F W Martin.

Additional commentary or criticism is welcome.

Here is what I see..
Rev #1 listed as engraved by Richard Bates Inshaw
Rev #2 listed as engraved by F.W. Martin
Single Shot Wesson possibly engraved by Inshaw

Only looking at the engraving style(s), cutting techniques, skill level in cutting, artistic layout, shading, ect...
I'd would say the 3 different firearms were engraved by 3 different people.

The Wesson pistol pattern, shading, style of scroll, ect has little in common with Revolver #1 (Inshaw engraved).
Though they both have smooth scroll to scroll transition (the Wesson being the better), the shading and detail given to the scroll work is completely different betw them.

The Wesson scroll has multiple closely spaced, actually touching, shading lines tangent from the main scroll and coming outward. A very common shading technique. Done with a single point hand graver.
Then there is the use of a multi line 'Liner Graver' to add shading to the main scroll plus the other scrolls that turn off of the main scroll.
The engraver uses it tipped up on edge to make it cut at some times only 2 lines at a time, and then carefully lowers the graver to engage more of it's lined surface to cut more 'Lines' as the cut continues.
It's a way of producing shading that can look nearly the same as single point shading. But the big give-away is that the lines are always parallel and never converge as you can make them do in single line shading.
It is quite fast to do however.

Other techniques that are seen on the Wesson engraved pistol are the use of the hollow punch background,,But,,in this engraving the punch marks are carefully place so as not to overlap one another. They sit side-by-side.
On the Rev #1 & #2,,the HollowPunch is also used as a background punch. But in this instance it is used to 'stipple' the background. It is used in a random manner in which the punch marks cover the area and themselves in matting the surface completely.

The background style use of the hollow punch as ween on the Wesson pistol is the same style that you will see used by the Winchester, Marlin, Colt engravers of the era.

The Hollow punch on the Wesson pistol was also used to make the small 3 or 4 diminishing size half circle marks inside the scrolls. These are placed at the convergent lines where a leaf or inside scroll comes togeher with the main inside scroll line. Just a style type and you will see it often.
While the hollow punch was used on the Wesson holding it tipped to one side when struck,,the Rev#1 & Rev #2 patterns have those same accent marks in the scroll work. But they are placed there by use of a graver (at least on #1), Small cuts with a V point or even a small flat graver. Not as bold as the hollow punch mark.

The Wesson pattern makes use of the Wriggle Cut quite a bit around the frame and on the bbl as well.
The same flat graver being 'walked' along the surface that the Wolf&Klar engraved guns are noted for being engraved.
Different width flat gravers held at different angles to the work and worked at different wrist speeds gives you unlimited variations of the same 'cut'

That's just some of the differences in the two pieces Rev#1 and the Wesson that I see in the Engraving.
I look at them from the standpoint of do I think they were done by the same person,,not were they done by the same person named Richard Inshaw.

Rev#2 ..
The overall engraving pattern is not as well laid out as the other 2.
Not as smooth as far as the scrolls, arcs and how how one scroll joins or departs from another.
There is some out of round issue to the scroll(s) in some parts and the scrolls don't wind around smoothly and to a nice tip.
Shading is scant and doesn't follow any particular pattern. Some Liner work here and there. Plenty of the accent marks, the half circle marks at the convergance point inside the scrolls. It looks like maybe the engraver used the background punch tipped on it's side,,but then it may be that they are simple cut with a graver. Can't really tell, but he liked to use that the technique as there are plenty of them!

So that's what I see when looking at the 3.

I'll add that it is very tough to assign a 'style' or cut to an engraver and be able to look at a piece of work and say 'so and so' did that.
I know there are those that say so, but there are way to many variables in the mix.

If these two revolvers are not engraved by Robert Bates Inshaw, I would imagine one of the two, most probably the first one I posted, was engraved by F W Martin. Please correct me if my assumption is misleading. And so, who would have engraved this other revolver?

At the time, there were many people listed as Engraver as their occupation.
Most were doing Stamp and Die work, a job that some Firearms Co in house engravers were tasked to do as well and took up a great amt of their time.
W/O that work being done (either in-house or by outside work engravers/die cutters), the production lines come to a halt.
All the stamps and roll dies were hand cut at that point.

All the industries used them, and recutting (sharpening) of the same was a steady business.
Every machine, fixture, jig, part that had calibration or other ID markings it, those markings were done with a stamp or die. Someone had to make those dies.

Print plates were also made by hand engravers. The older term of CopperPlate engravers comes from the hand engravers that did the reverse image engraving of scenes, portraits, of every 'picture' that was in print in a newspaper, book or simple poster.
These were done on Copper blocks for use in the presses,,the name copper plate engravers from that.

All that fancy border work on printed items such as bank note and govt bonds, mortgage and stock certificates, currency, Stamps, Military documents,,etc,etc.
All done by hand engraving a master reverse image plate.

Jewelery engravers were many as well. Some of the bigger shops in NYC and Chicago had several engravers employed in house at a time.
No shortage of hand engravers at the time.
..and don't believe the often told line about a Jewelry engraver won't engrave a piece of steel cause it's too difficult. Totally untrue especially when talking about the era of gun mfg in the 19thC and early 20thC.
Every one has their favorite mediums, but when these arms were made, the steel/iron used was soft.
If case hardened, it was no different than case hardened steel in todays guns. It needs to be annealed first,,cut then recase hardened.
(It can be cut thru with modern Carbide bits, but it looks awful as the edges of the cuts chip out from the brittle thin 'case'. Considered poor work)

Who could have engraved 'the other revolver'?

I don't know. As I said I don't know who engraved any of them.
I pointed out the differences in all 3.
Plus the few things that may be in common.

As I stated:
"...I'll add that it is very tough to assign a 'style' or cut to an engraver and be able to look at a piece of work and say 'so and so' did that..."

An example, at Colt F/A in the ten yrs from the middle of the 1870's to the mid 1880's, Helfricht was their 'Master Engraver'
But in that time period, Colt employed at least 20 different engravers, some of what would be considered Master skill level, down to apprentice engravers.

Helfricht didn't engrave everything Colt sent out the door. He was their main guy til the early 1920's.
But all those other engravers that worked there, all those that came and went, different skill levels, levels that likely improved over time with practice and mentoring from those around them,,,where is their work?
Some didn't make it in trade most likely. Other did.
Who decides what engraved guns are attributed to them?,,What where their names and how long and exactly when did they work there?

Same with the larger engraving houses that took in work from the factorys. Same questions.

Since most all factory and work done 'for a factory' is done to a pre-determined pattern with little or no deviation allowed by the engraver, how does one look at all the work and decide who cut what.

Does a person that is not an engraver understand what exact chisel points are used or can be used to make a certain cut, or one that can be subed for another? How about sharpening the graver, How is it done, what angles(s), how often, with what, what grit polish, hammer or hand graver, RH or LH'ded engraver,,can you tell?
Single point or liner, punch marks or graver,, or chisel cut.
Lots of things that are clues that an engraver sees go un-noticed by someone that does not actually engrave.
To ID those points usually still not be enough to use to then ID a specific engraver that did the work.

The running thought is that there were about 200+ active firearms engravers in the USA betw 1850 and 1900. Most of German and Austrian descent.
I don't know where that # comes from. Someones guess or maybe a big list of engravers exists. If someone has that list of names and where they worked, I'd like to see it!
But for me, it does not sound unreasonable. Not all working at the same time of course, at least I don't take it that way.

I would adjust the statement to read just 'engravers' and not 'firearms engravers' however.

There were plenty of candidates for a possible engraver for any of the 3 firearms shown.
Who engraved anyone of them is unkn to me. I would not place a guess based on any sort of analysis of the engraving cuts, style or layout.
They are each different and there were a lot of active engravers at the time.