Old photo card, help identify revolver & rifle, new close up pics added **

digi-shots

digi-shots

Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2006
Messages
1,774
Reaction score
4,048
Location
Virginia
Hi folks,

I was going through some old photos I have and came across this vintage photo "cabinet card".

You can barely make out the name on the bottom: Addison (photo studio?) and the location, "Fort Sill".

photocowboyatftsill.jpg
<span class="ev_code_RED">**</span>
 
Register to hide this ad
Hi folks,

I was going through some old photos I have and came across this vintage photo "cabinet card".

You can barely make out the name on the bottom: Addison (photo studio?) and the location, "Fort Sill".

photocowboyatftsill.jpg
<span class="ev_code_RED">**</span>
 
Marlin Model 1889. The butt stock style (thin, sharp comb), the lever catch, and the lever style (upper portion of the trigger guard loop visible in front of the trigger) distinguish it from the later Model 1894. Chambered in 32, 38 and 44 WCF cartridges and I'm guessing a real working cowboy's revolver caliber matched that of the rifle.
 
Linda you prob. already know but if the photographers catouche says Ft Sill it will be territorial because Okla. did not become a state until 1907. Your image looks to be circa 1880s from dress and weapons , the handgun appears to be a Colt SAA with 7.5 inch barrel. An image like that would have considerable resale value. If you can Id the subject he might be a personality of note. This gentleman does not appear to be using studio props which was a common thing back then. I would venture a guess that everything he has on is his and has been for sometime.Google Addison Fort Sill and there is quite a bit of info. His photos bring a high price.
 
Lawandorder,

Under the Fort Sill embossing are initials that I can't make out, but I'm sure they're I.T. The embossing wasn't deep or hard enough to read.

You can see the . marks after the initials

Oklahoma was I.T. or Indian Territory.

And.. unfortunately there's no name or anything penciled on the back...

BUT.. he does have a pinky ring on his left hand and there's writing on the gloves he's holding. I never looked closely til now!
 
It's hard to tell, but the grip on the handgun looks to me like the grip on a Colt Bisley, or even the grip on a S&W Schofield...

GB
 
Here's an update on the photographer:

From 1890 to 1895, George A. Addison operated a photo studio at Fort Sill, Oklahoma Territory, where he concentrated on photographing the Indians being held there.
 
if the photographers catouche says Ft Sill it will be territorial because Okla. did not become a state until 1907
Click to expand...

Under the Fort Sill embossing are initials that I can't make out, but I'm sure they're I.T.
Click to expand...

My opinion - I. T. means Indian Territory.

Later marking could be O. T, would have been for Oklahoma Territory (before statehood)

Bekeart

My opinions/advise; free and possibly overpriced.
 
Originally posted by digi-shots:
Here's an update on the photographer:

From 1890 to 1895, George A. Addison operated a photo studio at Fort Sill, Oklahoma Territory, where he concentrated on photographing the Indians being held there.
Click to expand...
Linda,
I would do some heavy research on that pic. If you pull up the pic of Tom Horn in jail about 02-03, take a look at the similarity in the EARS, and the high forehead on both men. Horn was a Pinkerton ca.89-94, and worked all over the west out of the Denver office. He was forced to resign from them and rambling in 94. Geronimo was at Sill in 1894. Maybe he stopped by for a visit.
In the jail photo, he is 42. In 1894, he would be 33-34.
Like I said, there is a remarkable resemblance in the two men's ears- check it out.

Your pic says "O.T." below the "Fort Sill". O.T. was formed in 1890.
 
Nice photo, however I'm leaning towards this gentleman being an Eastern Dude all dolled up in studio props. He's wearing the gun belt backwards, unless he's left handed, which then puts the Colt revolver on the wrong side for a left hand draw. Take away the prop gun belt & what holds up his pants? (No suspenders, commonly worn at that time) The clothes are much too fancy for a cow puncher or a settler's every day wear,or even Sunday-Go-To-Meeting duds. (Granted that he could be an actor or performer in a wild west show going thru Ft. Sill) And the clincher being that he is clean shaven. You look at other photos of OKLA. citizens of that period and you never see anybody clean shaven. The U.S.Army museum at Ft. Sill, where I was once Curator many eons ago, has or had, a collection of Addison' work. You might send a copy to them to see if there is a match to any of the items. Just my 2 cents. Ed.
 
He's wearing the gun belt backwards, unless he's left handed, which then puts the Colt revolver on the wrong side for a left hand draw.
Click to expand...
Ed,
You are right, but I have seen some old rigs in the past that seemed to be built backwards, so I am not convinced it meant one was left handed. Maybe the leathersmith was!
Similarly- notice that his vest is buttoned right over left- the normal configuration for WOMEN'S clothes nowadays. That vest COULD be covering suspenders or belt.
 
Thanks for the comments...

The Ft. Sill museum only takes requests by letter... so, I'll have to print out a hard copy of the photo and send it to them.

Ed, any chance you were there in July-Sept. 1967 time frame? I know someone that was there at the same time (same fellow I got a model 10-5 from).

There is an Addison museum... I've sent them an email with an attachement of the photo.

In looking at some "Addison" cabinet cards online, they have an O.T. under the Fort Sill name (Oklahoma Territory).

I noticed too, that his vest was buttoned on the wrong side. Had to take a quick look at the pic and make sure the image wasn't reversed... it wasn't based on the ejection port of the rifle.

He might be a "city slicker", I've seen lots of those type photos. He does appear to have "knee high" boots on, unless he's got boney knees!

You can't see it in the photo but with a magnifying loupe you can see some writing on his gaunlet gloves... looks like Captain Russell or Charles Russell. Haven't found any young photos of "Charles Russell" yet, other than his 1896 wedding photo.. but I'm looking.
 
I think opoefc has it right. To me everything about that photo says "staged", it is in front of a painted background, there is little or no wear apparent on the chaps or any of the clothes, even the boots. The leather items are not scuffed, and everything looks too clean and neat. How many of us would hold that rifle without all 4 fingers wrapped around the barrel?
 
The (last?) name on the glove looks like 'Ryan' to me (the 'y' with a long tail) and the 2 digits '39' or '59' at the end of the second line underneath that,,but just my way of looking at it. The revolver looks like a Colt SAA & has a repair/replacement to the bottom screw in the backstrap. The grips are the one piece style common to the military issue 45Colt revolvers but they'd interchange with some degree of fitting with other SAA's. Not a perfect fit, but they'd work. The rifle looks to have some hard use as does the Colt.
Neat pictures and comments..
 
In my thoroughly inexpert opinion he's a dude.

That ring on his pinkie looks like it might be too valuable for a cowhand to be wearing.
 
Now I am having second thoughts. I have been searching the web for info on Addison and everything seems to indicate that he didn't shoot faked photos. Yes, he worked on a set, with decorative props, but the people were real cowboys and Indians from the area.

BTW- I found several Addison photos of Geronimo and other Indians selling at auction for $1,200-$2,500.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

Stu1205
You Just Might Be A Gun Nut If.....
2
Replies
22
Views
6K
Golddollar
Golddollar
F
  • Locked
Several pistols, rifles, and shotguns NEW GUNS ADDED 2/26/09!!!
2 3
Replies
46
Views
6K
firedog3700
F

Latest posts

Back
Top