Brown bess questions

[Abbl]

Hello,

I recently got this 1814 brown bess as a gift.
As i dont realy know much about these i have a few questions.
This wil be a restoration project.

1.is the hammer correct. It seems as old as all the rest but shouldn't this be a ring necked? Does the hammer always incline a bit towards the barrzl

2. The pan is soldered on or just very worn out? I can't find pictures of this pan.

3. Was the original finish of the metal always polished?

4. Wat do the numbers mean on the buttplate

5.where there members of the British army equipt with brown besses of the eic?

Kind regards
Enzo

 

[Eric Krewson]

I am not any way a student of a bess, if you don't get any answers you can post it over at the American Longrifle site in the antique section and get a lot of answers.

I turned the lock over to try to see what the markings are, for what little I know they are different from any bess I have seen. The lock fit is poor so it may be a replacement.

 

[Eric Krewson]

Take your pictures outside in good light so more detail shows up, it makes a big difference.

Here is an outside picture for an example, this was shot with an el-cheapo 5MP 30 year old kodak camera I bought off ebay for $20;

 

[Grenadier1758]

1814 puts this model in the Third model East India Company pattern. The lock stampings are Eastern. Maybe this is one of the Nepalese guns. The lock plate is different from the plate I am familiar with but looks like the lock plate on other East India Company muskets. The butt plate stampings are consistent with regimental company and rack numbers. The hammer looks to be correct.

The British Army would have had EIC muskets with British stamps on the lock plate. GR and broad arrow.

Are there any other stampings on the barrel?
Any other stampings elsewhere on the musket?
Can we see a full length photo of the musket?

 

[Eric Krewson]

I looked at all the bess lock pictures on Google and found your lock or something close, unfortunately I hit the wrong button and it disappeared ,I looked again and it is nowhere to be found. It had the same marking on the lock under the pan. All I remember is it was a long land version. i think it said 4th generation.

 

[Eric Krewson]

The nepalese locks had a distinctive stamping under the pan.

 

[toot]

I am not any way a student of a bess, if you don't get any answers you can post it over at the American Longrifle site in the antique section and get a lot of answers.

I turned the lock over to try to see what the markings are, for what little I know they are different from any bess I have seen. The lock fit is poor so it may be a replacement.

View attachment 51704

it looks like AN EAST INDIA, Co, musket with THE DANCING LION ON THE LOCK TO ME. not a THIRD MODLE INDIA PATTERN BESS. made by the BRIT'S.

 

[Eric Krewson]

Yep, you nailed it Toot, I couldn't make out the stamping, didn't know it was a dancing lion. The butt stock is shapped diferently than the picture below.

 

[FlinterNick]

You have a third model Brown Bess, not sure if its an India Pattern 3rd model. Some third models were made by other contractors for military and commercial use.

The lock looks like a poor attempt at reconversion. The flintcock (hammer) might be replacement or broken ringneck Brown Bess flintcock.

The shape of the Butt tells me this is a late Third Model, before the 1817 new land pattern was issued, this was the last Brown Bess series to have a rail comb.

Markings on India Pattern Brown Bess’s are not always easy to figure out because so many of these guns were sold off to other countries like Mexico, Argentina, and used in many common wealth states like Canada and the Pacific Colonies.

 

[Story]

Hello,

I recently got this 1814 brown bess as a gift.

4. Wat do the numbers mean on the buttplate

Enzo

20th weapon, 1st Company (of whatever Regiment)

 

[Rudyard]

This is a East India Company' Windus pattern' musket 1771 to 1818 The Lion isn't dancing he's Rampant /Regard holding a crown There is no' Hammer' on this one only the **** that is correct for that date . these where made for the company but with the press for arms the Ordnance first bought company muskets then adopted the pattern as it was simpler & cheaper to produce .the Lion replaced the former quartered heart mark in 1790 or so . The Example Mr Krewson shows is the later' New Land 'style stocking post 1819 the ring neck **** comes in in 1813 being adopted earlier by Ordnance . All these where made in England non in India if restocks & modifications would occur & many got botched about & copied by Native gunsmiths whether by the Company or by the ' Native States rulers' The friendly Maharaja's . Nepaul is an exception sort of close but no cigar. in terms of standard.

The Raj didn't extend to Nepaul rather they where respected allies . Still are . .What happened to the hammer or' frizzen' if you persist. No idea but looks like its had a rough trip but the price was right ..Cocks don't normally lean over the barrels .. looks like it has a tale to tell . Oh if British regiments serving in India required new arms then yes the Company supplied their own patterns . Just a good as Govt arms . Think of the East India Company as a well armed Hudsons Bay Company . a commercial company not beholding too but supportive of the Crown .
And yes I've used the old spelling but then I'me old ! incidently I have an Ordnance Bess with the same I over 20 mark plus a further 1 above it man or company? 20th of foot? No idea . but mention it in passing Regards Rudyard

 

[Abbl]

Thank you for all the responses.
The owner told me he had found it in a barn ( in Belgium) in the 1950's.

Would it be a good idea to replace the frizzen by a reproduction and polish the metal?

I will take more pic's this weekend outside.

It certainly had a hard life. The treads on the bolts have string on them to fit tight in the holes.

 

[Canute Rex]

Abbl, I would recommend that you do as little as possible to this antique. The point is not to make it look new - it has a history, and that should show. Do what you need to stabilize it, to prevent further corrosion or damage to the wood. Don't polish anything. If you put a new frizzen on it I'd recommend browning the frizzen rather than polishing everything around it.

 

[Rudyard]

Good advise looks like pan eroded away & if you can use an original steel ( Frizzen) do they turn up . Since the Ordnance purchased Company muskets even those at sea outward bound for India E I Coy arms are to be found with only surcharge marks. Found in Belgium? dated 1814 Bit of a stretch but any where near Waterloo? or Qatre bra however its spelt . Not got that amount of abuse if so. That's years of abuse as it sits now . Only unit with number one is First Foot Guard defenders of Hugamont but I believe they had New land Ordnance muskets .
Rudyard

 

[FlinterNick]

The problem with the third model Brown Bess is that you have India Pattern Brown Bess’s and Tower Pattern Third Models and each has 3-4 variants. The earliest Third Model was patterned around 1771 by the East India Company and has most of the same features of any third model including a smaller trigger guard, no wrist plate and shorter butt tang.

Sometimes a late second model can be confused for a third model. These had around 40” inch barrels with a smaller lock and heavier furniture and a wrist plate. These are pretty rare finds.

 

[toot]

This is a East India Company' Windus pattern' musket 1771 to 1818 The Lion isn't dancing he's Rampant /Regard holding a crown There is no' Hammer' on this one only the **** that is correct for that date . these where made for the company but with the press for arms the Ordnance first bought company muskets then adopted the pattern as it was simpler & cheaper to produce .the Lion replaced the former quartered heart mark in 1790 or so . The Example Mr Krewson shows is the later' New Land 'style stocking post 1819 the ring neck **** comes in in 1813 being adopted earlier by Ordnance . All these where made in England non in India if restocks & modifications would occur & many got botched about & copied by Native gunsmiths whether by the Company or by the ' Native States rulers' The friendly Maharaja's . Nepaul is an exception sort of close but no cigar. in terms of standard.

The Raj didn't extend to Nepaul rather they where respected allies . Still are . .What happened to the hammer or' frizzen' if you persist. No idea but looks like its had a rough trip but the price was right ..Cocks don't normally lean over the barrels .. looks like it has a tale to tell . Oh if British regiments serving in India required new arms then yes the Company supplied their own patterns . Just a good as Govt arms . Think of the East India Company as a well armed Hudsons Bay Company . a commercial company not beholding too but supportive of the Crown .
And yes I've used the old spelling but then I'me old ! incidently I have an Ordnance Bess with the same I over 20 mark plus a further 1 above it man or company? 20th of foot? No idea . but mention it in passing Regards Rudyard

it is called the dancing lion by many people right ore wrong? he Shure looks to be dancing. JMHO.

 

[TFoley]

Rudyard has used the correct heraldic terminology for what appears to be a 'dancing' lion. He also uses the word 'gardant' which means that the face of the lion is looking at you [think of the word 'regard']. If he was looking to his front - ie, the left of his image - it would be called 'passant' [think of 'going by']. All the descriptive terms used in heraldry are Old French, including the colours.

If you want to call it a 'dancing lion' then you go right on ahead.

But it is incorrect.

 

[Grenadier1758]

Many people may call that stamping a Dancing Lion, but @Rudyard is correct. Its correctly and properly called a Rampant/Regard by the definitions of heraldry.

 

[Rudyard]

Many people call these muskets' third or second models' ect but it is our modern term and gives but a broad definition but not the period one used .Then they are really vaige and record such as 'carbines extra ordinary with the catch on the nose ' Which fits the second pattern Elliott but others like the Royal Forester as well .far as I can recall only the Royal Forrester's locks where 'extraordinary ' plus the 1776 ML Tower rifle & Fergusson's and others. We are greatly endetted to such as Howard Blackmore, De Witt Baily & David Harding and others for the endless hours they spent reaserching all this good stuff in the Public records office and such like records going back the William the third & beyond ( flat faceted edges viz 'extraordinary') . The first & second pattern Elliott had round face locks if the first 1760 Elliott had no nose catch being full stocked and had in some cased a small dog catch. Simple isn't it ? Errr no. The Company's way was to refer to the current officer in charge. General Lawrence's pattern, Cootes ,Pattern ,Windus Pattern ect up to the Bakers series lock & major style charges with much more modern look following the trend set by the Ordnance New Land pattern's. Then it might be 'Muskets flint for Bengal 'or some such. First I heard of any' Dancing Lion ' Toot.
Regards Rudyard