16' Kennebec 2071
- Thread starter kmuller
- Start date
I'm sorry about the long delay in responding to this request. The Kennebec canoe with number 102071 is a 16 foot long "Kineo Special" model shown on pages 206 and 207 of volume four in the Kennebec ledgers. It was planked by Cameron on November 28th, 1928. The canvas covering was applied by Saucier on the same day. The first filler coat was applied by Giroux on the same day. The second filler coat was applied by Saucier on December 4th, 1928. It was railed by H. Sheehan(?) on December 11th, 1928. The "F 22" (Function number 22 or the keel?) was completed by J. Thib. on the same day. The original color was red. It was shipped on July, 2nd 1929 to location "29-761". This location is probably an order number but we don't currently have enough information to identify it.
The scans of these build records can be found by following the links at the attached thumbnail images below. These original Kennebec records are reproduced through the courtesy of the Maine State Museum.
The microfilms and scans of these records were created with substantial grants from the Wooden Canoe Heritage Association (WCHA). I hope that you will join or renew your membership to the WCHA so that services like this can continue. See http://www.wcha.org/wcha/ to learn more about the WCHA and http://www.wcha.org/join.php to join.
It is also possible that you could have another number or manufacturer if this description doesn't match your canoe. I have no idea what the "M" signifies. Can you attach a picture? Feel free to reply here if you have any other questions.
Benson
The scans of these build records can be found by following the links at the attached thumbnail images below. These original Kennebec records are reproduced through the courtesy of the Maine State Museum.
The microfilms and scans of these records were created with substantial grants from the Wooden Canoe Heritage Association (WCHA). I hope that you will join or renew your membership to the WCHA so that services like this can continue. See http://www.wcha.org/wcha/ to learn more about the WCHA and http://www.wcha.org/join.php to join.
It is also possible that you could have another number or manufacturer if this description doesn't match your canoe. I have no idea what the "M" signifies. Can you attach a picture? Feel free to reply here if you have any other questions.
Benson
Attachments
Greg Nolan
enthusiast
Probably just wild conjecture, but I seem to recall reading in earlier forums that there was some sort of link between Kennebec canoes and Morris canoes, with Kennebec assembling some Morris hulls. Might this "M" on the builder plate have anything to do with that relationship? Does this canoe have a splayed stem?
There was connection between Kennebec and Morris (on several levels), but it has nothing to do with the "M" on the plate. That actually has a simple explanation... The Kineo Special model was assigned serial numbers starting with 100,000. The "M" simply substitutes for the leading "10" in these canoes' serial number as stamped on the plate (the full number is usually on the stem).
This is an interesting theory but the Roman numeral "M" actually stood for 1,000 and "C" stood for 100 as described at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Roman_numerals and elsewhere. Their technique numbers in the thousands range was to put a horizontal bar over the top so 100,000 would be a "C" with a bar on top (which is not easy to represent on a modern computer with the standard English ASCII character set) or with parentheses placed around it. I don't have a better theory for why the "M" is there so Dan may actually be correct.
The Morris models listed in the Kennebec records are all in the 50,000 range and there are lots of other Kennebec models with flared stems like a Morris scattered through the rest of their serial numbers.
Benson
Last edited:
I can't say whether the "M" has its roots in Roman numerals (perhaps the leading 1000 when they were in the otherwise 3-digit period), or something else unrelated to Roman numbers, but so far observation supports the theory. Therefore, the challenge is to prove me wrong...
