1903 Rumor

[petri]

Well as long as Herbert Wagner of At the Creation is on the boards I'll throw this in. I have read your books which I have thoroughly enjoyed and which seem to be very well researched. I thought I might as well pass this along due to your interest in these matters. Add it, to your no doubt long list of unsubstantiated rumors. Maybe others out there know something of this lady already and can add some insight.
In early october I was out east and visited the Indian museum in
Springfield, MA. It needs a little help. While there I talked to a docent/volunteer, a lady of a certain age named Esther. Well, she was the only person there and turned on the lights only when a visitor would arrive. I don't know her last name but she was a bit unusual.
She claimed she still rode a 1940 Indian Four, was a pilot and just passed another flight physical and still flew jets! I'm a pilot and she seemed to be able to "talk the talk" but...... She also claimed to have been around long enough to have actually known/met Hendee. She must be well into her 80's. She claimed that Hedstrom was the engineering brains and Hendee was just a playboy and womanizer. In fact, she made a number of disparaging remarks about Hendee in this vein.
During the conversation the subject of the year of the manufacture of the first Harley Davidson came up. Esther claimed she has some sort of documentary evidence that shows the first Harley was made in 1903, as per the official factory claims. She claimed that Hendee was in the habit of keeping meticulous notes and this evidence is in some of those notes. Apparently there are old factory records stored there. Whether these notes are the result of some kind of correspondence between the two factories, I don't know. She said she is going to write a book, maybe two books, but I seriously doubt that at her age. She is a feisty little old lady though. Carries a gun because Springfield is such a dangerous place.
So there you are, another rumor for what it's worth, which isn't much. Perhaps you know of Esther or can follow up on this if you're interested and she is willing to cooperate. Good luck and keep up the good writings.

Howard Petri
Vincennes, IN
petri@midwest.net

[AdminGuy]

Man-oh-man! This is great! Well.... you were talking to Esther. Nuff said.

She is very much "a unique individual".

[LouieMCman]

That dear old lady really loves it when you wear a Harley shirt to the museum!

Louie

[INLINE4NUT]

She is truely a lost treasuer! And a hoot to talk to! But dont expect to get in 1 second before the gate opens on Indian day unless your vending and I dont care how far youve traveled! I think thats how she puts it every year!

[petri]

So who is this lady? Does anybody know her full name and how she comes to be so involved with the Indian Museum? Is she really still riding a Four? And why no pictures in the museum? She claimed no picture taking was allowed. I only have pics of the outside of the buildings.

She certainly is an interesting character, I only wish my mother were as dynamic. I really wonder what sort of old Hendee notes she has discovered there? Sounds like it might be worth somebody's time to do some investigating. But getting her to cooperate might be a problem. And she is toting................

Howard
petri@midwest.net

[INLINE4NUT]

the spelling maybe wrong but I do believe its Mantos (last name) and she runs the place! She is the Queen! You met the Boss!!! Go to INDIAN DAY IF YOU WANT THE WHOLE SHOW!

[Tom P.]

I believe the lady's name is Esta Manthos.She and her late husband Charles founded the museum back in the seventies and at one time were going to try to resurrect Indian.Even had Pop Armstrong and some of the original employees lined up.She must be past 90
yrs. old by now and I'm afraid she'losing it a bit,at least that's the impression I got when I was out there last fall.
If you go to the museum remember she is a hoot,but to qoute a Boston Globe article from a few years back"Esta herself admitsshe can be "Miss Nasty",and she has a long list of severe dislikes includig Japanese motorcyles,(Gilroy Indians-prpaphrasig here),and alowwing photos to be taken of herself or the motorcycles in the museum."
DO NOT contradict her,even if you know she's wrong!

[HarleyCreation]

Re: 1903 Rumor

Originally posted by petri
(extract)
During the conversation the subject of the year of the manufacture of the first Harley Davidson came up. Esther claimed she has some sort of documentary evidence that shows the first Harley was made in 1903, as per the official factory claims. She claimed that Hendee was in the habit of keeping meticulous notes and this evidence is in some of those notes. Apparently there are old factory records stored there. Whether these notes are the result of some kind of correspondence between the two factories, I don't know. She said she is going to write a book, maybe two books, but I seriously doubt that at her age. She is a feisty little old lady though. Carries a gun because Springfield is such a dangerous place.
So there you are, another rumor for what it's worth, which isn't much. Perhaps you know of Esther or can follow up on this if you're interested and she is willing to cooperate. Good luck and keep up the good writings.

Howard Petri
Vincennes, IN
petri@midwest.net [/B]

Excellent rumor!

I sincerely welcome any and all new "evidence" on this subject in whatever form it may take. There may well be records that survived in Springfield or elsewhere discussing the subject of the "1903" Harley-Davidson between Indian's bosses and Harley-Davidson and most likely directed to "Bunce" (Arthur).

There was a period (circa 1908-1919) when they were ALL exaggerating like crazy in print and in advertising. One of the best (which I quoted, p.180) is the one where Mr. Hendee claims there were Indians sold in 1900 and he claimed to have met the rider of a 1900 model who had racked up some 36,000 miles and he even gave the serial number of the supposed 1900 Indian as Serial Number 21!

Who today would believe that? But such prevarications may have given the other outfit an advertising idea a few years later about a certain "100,000 mile 1903" bike.

Unfortunately, while Indian's early fibbing didn't stick Harley's loose handling of the facts became much more deeply entrenched. That's why I think after 1920 when the Fabricator-in-Chief S. Lacy Crolius "left" the company, origin accounts became a taboo subject until after Walter's death in 1942.

I too have heard a recent "rumor" of supposed "new evidence" about a "1903" Harley. Perhaps it comes from the same source. Perhaps another. The person with the info hasn't yet filled me in with the details. But I'm patient.

Here is the situation as I last reviewed it:

There was a 1903 machine constructed by Harley and the Davidsons. But that was a little (about) 10 ci motorized pedal-bicycle begun back in 1901 of which there is no surviving photo or drawing and only brief early descriptions.

According to my research THAT motorized-bicycle was what they assembled and tested during 1903. None were sold.

Finding this little motor-bike underpowered (and also critically importantly their seeing new 1903 designs on the market specifically the 1903 loop-frame Milwaukee Merkel), the boys went back to work and created a 2nd and vastly improved design with the big (25 ci) engine and a chassis that was a dead ringer for the 1903 Milwaukee Merkel.

The prototype of that 2nd design (which was also the first Harley-Davidson motorcycle as we know it) was finished sometime in 1904. We know that as a FACT because they raced in on 8 September 1904.

Those 8 September 1904 newspaper clippings comprise the first known (to me) appearance of the Harley-Davidson motorcycle in the actual as-it-happened historical record.

In my opinion, that 1904 first prototype Harley-Davidson motorcycle was the rationale behind the Harley-Davidson Motor Co. putting the 50th Anniversary medallion on the 1954 models and NOT on the 1953 model. Until we figured it out that odd inexplicable little detail had baffled everybody and their brother for generations.

If anybody (including that nice lady in Springfield) can provide "evidence" of a Harley-Davidson motorcycle in existence (not the 10 ci motorized-bicycle mind you but the loop-frame 25 ci motorcycle) BEFORE 8 Sept. 1904 I strongly urge them to share this evidence with all Harley-Davidson enthusiasts world-wide for us to examine and test against other available known evidence.

In other words, let it rip!

Earl should be showing up any second now. He's like a bloodhound on the trail...

[33vld]

1903 rumor

I would love to see these notes refering to the 1903 Harley-Davdison. Can't somebody who lives near the museum stop and ask the lady to let us see them? Any and all information is needed to finally put to rest the myth of the 1903 Harley-Davdison motorcycle. With Harley's new museum just around the corner we need to know what the truth is. At this point in time there is no evidence from the year 1903 that a complete and running (motorcycle) was ever built. No drawings, blueprints, photographs, letters, articles, diaries, notes, etc. Nothing! There were plenty of stories written years later but nothing from 1903. Herb and Earl and Bruce did the research and came up empty handed as far as 1903 is concerned. Nobody is trying to make HD look bad.

Far from it.

There is no problem whatsoever with saying the Harley-Davdison Motor Co. started in 1903. You could say they started in 1901 for that matter. What the Harley-Davdison Motor Co. has done in the last 102 years is just incredible. Almost mythological. It's just that with the evidence we have today it shows they(HD) didn't build a complete, working, full frame, big motor motorcyle untill 1904 and didn't start producing motorcycles until 1905. It's not difficult. The evidence is there. Read Herb's book.

I myself have been looking hard for the last 10 years into the life of Perry E. Mack which took me to places and times that connect directly to Harley's very early history. I have found unknown facts and photographs. I have found memorabilia. I have found legal documents. The earliest information I found about Perry E. Mack was from 1870. I have never found anything from the year 1903 to support the myth that there was a 1903 Harley-Davdison motorcycle produced.

If these notes exist, bring it on. Hopefully they were written in 1903 or 1904. That would be the information everybody has been looking for. And to all you fellow club members, check your local libraries, historical societies, museums and local goverment records. Look at old newspaper microfiche. Old magazines in university libraries. Check with relatives and ask to see old family photo albums. Just because you don't live in Milwaukee doesn't mean you won't find anything. People move. Businesses move. The purpose of a motorcycle is to go someplace else. I found Perry's family bible in Nebraska along with his school records. The people who had these items didn't have a clue who Perry E. Mack was. Most ordinary people don't have a clue what that picture of great grandpa's old motorcycle really is. You would be suprised to find what is in your families past if you only look. Somewhere, somebody has a photograph of the first Harley-Davdison taken a short time after it was built. Just exactly when is what we need to know. Prove me wrong.

[Paquette]

As I am doing research for a book of my own, and visited the H-D Archives in early November let me add my opinion. The current restorers at the Archives tell me that the introduction of new models were standardized so that July became the intro of models for the following year. Following that logic, the 1904 motorcycle may have been backdated to 1903 by H-D for the 50th anniversary.I will have to say that Mr. Wagner has to "take the cake" on this one because he is one of the few if not the only historian of the Motor Company that offers either foot or endnotes to allow further research of his sources. That is the mark of a true historian, state your opinion but leave a trail for others to follow. Sounds to me that we have a lady that suffers from "Oldtimers" disease.

[JohnR]

Google search on "Esta Manthos MA"

http://www.google.com/search?sourcei...sta+Manthos+MA

[petri]

1903 Rumor

Well clearly this is a subject of some interest to investigators and historians of early motorcycle history. Apparently this woman has had a close intimate connection with Indian over a long period of time through her and he husband's efforts. I didn't reallize that this was a private museum founded and owned by her and her husband, which makes things interesting. Interesting in that the museum may have materials as yet unstudied by researchers in the field.

Which leads me to wonder if previous writers such as Harry Sucher and Jerry Hatfield, who have written extensively on the subject of Indian Motorcycles, had access to these materials? Harry Sucher's book, The Iron Redskin (1977), has a bibliography that lists amongst other references, The Archives of the Hendee Manufacturing Company and the Archives of the Indian Motocycle Company. In fact he lists these references in all his books. Jerry Hatfield's books seem to rely on the Ford Museum Archives of the DuPont era and many personal references. Both of these gentlemen could no doubt shed some light on original materials from the Indian Museum and whether or not they were granted access to them and or what they might contain.

This is particularly true of Harry Sucher who references old Indian archives. Were these archives owned by the Indian Museum or were they other archives? Since Harry Sucher's book was written almost 30 years ago, the "Hendee Notes" Esta Manthos has referred to may be newly rediscovered. Or maybe he saw such notes back in 1977. In any case someone with access to these people ought to pose these questions. How about you Herbert, who has so thououghly researched this early period? Do you have contact with these other authors?

Then of course someone who knows Esta Manthos ought to approach her on a personal basis. Surely someone in the AMCA is a friend of hers. I doubt she is going to bring forth these records on her own at this time. At the very least, if they exist, they need to be protected for future researchers. What happens to this museum in the event of her death?

Howard

[HarleyCreation]

Re: 1903 Rumor

Originally posted by petri
Well clearly this is a subject of some interest to investigators and historians of early motorcycle history. Apparently this woman has had a close intimate connection with Indian over a long period of time through her and he husband's efforts. I didn't reallize that this was a private museum founded and owned by her and her husband, which makes things interesting. Interesting in that the museum may have materials as yet unstudied by researchers in the field.

Which leads me to wonder if previous writers such as Harry Sucher and Jerry Hatfield, who have written extensively on the subject of Indian Motorcycles, had access to these materials? Harry Sucher's book, The Iron Redskin (1977), has a bibliography that lists amongst other references, The Archives of the Hendee Manufacturing Company and the Archives of the Indian Motocycle Company. In fact he lists these references in all his books. Jerry Hatfield's books seem to rely on the Ford Museum Archives of the DuPont era and many personal references. Both of these gentlemen could no doubt shed some light on original materials from the Indian Museum and whether or not they were granted access to them and or what they might contain.

This is particularly true of Harry Sucher who references old Indian archives. Were these archives owned by the Indian Museum or were they other archives? Since Harry Sucher's book was written almost 30 years ago, the "Hendee Notes" Esta Manthos has referred to may be newly rediscovered. Or maybe he saw such notes back in 1977. In any case someone with access to these people ought to pose these questions. How about you Herbert, who has so thououghly researched this early period? Do you have contact with these other authors?

Then of course someone who knows Esta Manthos ought to approach her on a personal basis. Surely someone in the AMCA is a friend of hers. I doubt she is going to bring forth these records on her own at this time. At the very least, if they exist, they need to be protected for future researchers. What happens to this museum in the event of her death?

Howard

Yes, this 1903 business remains an intriguing topic because there are many blanks yet to be filled in and it's such a crazy maze of contradicting claims, false leads, and dead-ends. Only watch out: in a way it's like tampering with the Divinity of Christ. But like I sometimes joke: "Unless somebody asks, nobody will EVER understand."

Bottom line it's all to the enduring greatness of Harley-Davidson and Indian too. The Harley-Davidson story is much better and more involved than I ever dreamed.

I have been in contact a tiny bit both with Mr. Sucher and Jerry Hatfield, but I don't know either very well. Writers tend to be secretive about their sources so as not to be scooped by the next guy.

Mr. Sucher seems to have started his research early. Wish I could say that. At one point (his AMA book maybe) he even claims to have interviewed Perry E. Mack, who died like in the early 1950s (Dick will correct me here). What he actually has and where that original research will go when he passes is an important question. Hopefully some serious archives will receive it.

One thing Mr. Sucher gives is the name of the "German draughtsman" as Emil Kruger or Kroeger (sic). Nobody else ever named him.

Not even Harley-Davidson!

[HarleyCreation]

Originally posted by Paquette
[B]As I am doing research for a book of my own, and visited the H-D Archives in early November let me add my opinion. The current restorers at the Archives Bill Rodencal and Tom Platz tell me that the introduction of new models were standardized so that July became the intro of models for the following year. Following that logic, the 1904 motorcycle may have been backdated to 1903 by H-D for the 50th anniversary.

A 1903 model by the 50th or the 60th anniversary?

The H-D collection bike claimed to be the earliest has gotten progressively older over the decades. It started out as a "1904," later became a "1903-1904," and currenty is a "1903."

However, AMCA early-Harley experts have looked at every nut & bolt on that bike and the consensus is that it is "mostly" a 1905 motor in a 1906 or later frame. Nothing has been identified earlier than 1905 -- which is logical because 1905 was when production began according to original period documentaion.

That, however, has not been Harley-Davidson's "official" position based upon their own internal traditions which are very strong and you can't change the course of a battleship very easily or quickly.

I prefer to define the oldest collection bike as a "representation" of the original 1904 prototype (sounds better than calling it a "parts bike"). Because work on that 2nd design probably started yet in 1903, I suppose one could hedge and label it a "1903-1904" and remain fairly close to the actual events. But IMHO calling it only a "1903" is describing a Harley-Davidson motorcycle that never existed.

The 1901-1903 period is when they were working on the 10 ci motor-bike, which was a hugely important learning experience and enabled them to create a really really FINE 2nd design which I believe was the dang BEST motorcycle on the 1905 market and set a standard that even Indian was forced to follow.

Originally posted by Paquette
I will have to say that Mr. Wagner has to "take the cake" on this one because he is one of the few if not the only historian of the Motor Company that offers either foot or endnotes to allow further research of his sources. That is the mark of a true historian, state your opinion but leave a trail for others to follow. Sounds to me that we have a lady that suffers from "Oldtimers" disease.

Thanks for noticing the endnotes. Leaving a trail to follow as you put was my intent. Professional historians may pick up the scent someday (the 200th?) and this is a guide that sets forth a documented framework to build upon because there is more to find when it chooses to reveal itself.

[Paquette]

I noticed the endnotes right off the bat and frankly was the reason I bought the book ( and soon after your other ones).After all those years in graduate school, I have a hard time reading non fiction works without documentation, but I guess that is just my training. As an interesting note, I received some info on seats from the H-D archives yesterday and the first one listed is a Troxel bicycle for the 1903/1904 model . I guess they still can't make up their mind !!!!