Can anyone identify this makers/merchants name?

[Larks]

and possibly help me to read and understand any identifiers and learn more about this pistol? (An incredibly thoughtful and generous birthday gift from my wife )

All that I understand (or think that I understand) at this stage is that the barrel stamp is a London “Viewers” mark and that, based on the lock and ornamentation, it possibly dates anywhere from 1730’s to 1790’s........or later......???

My measurement of the bore suggests that it is .62 caliber (just under 16mm), length overall is 372mm and barrel length is 217mm.

It’s difficult to get one clear picture of the name engraved on the lock but I’m hoping it may jump out immediately to a more experienced eye:

 

[Larks]

 

[Whitworth]

Can't help but nice gun.

 

[Larks]

 

[bobthemotorcycle]

Lay some paper on it and rub with pencil lead and see what shows up.

 

[SDSmlf]

and possibly help me to read and understand any identifiers and learn more about this pistol? (An incredibly thoughtful and generous birthday gift from my wife )

All that I understand (or think that I understand) at this stage is that the barrel stamp is a London “Viewers” mark and that, based on the lock and ornamentation, it possibly dates anywhere from 1730’s to 1790’s........or later......???

My measurement of the bore suggests that it is .62 caliber (just under 16mm), length overall is 372mm and barrel length is 217mm.

It’s difficult to get one clear picture of the name engraved on the lock but I’m hoping it may jump out immediately to a more experienced eye:


View attachment 85260

View attachment 85261

View attachment 85262

All you need is a piece of old chalkboard chalk like they used when many of us were in school to bring out the engraving. Both the following photographs were taken at about the same distance with the same camera and lighting (handheld, so slight difference). Difference is that before the second photograph chalk was rubbed into the engraving. Believe you can see that one is significantly easier to read than the other. No other adjustments or funny business between the two photographs.

 

[Larks]

Thanks guys, I had tried the rubbing with various thickness of paper and a couple of different pencils but without much success so I didn’t bother including any of the photos, I’d also tried talcum powder but not chalk - I’ll give that a go directly.

These are as good as I could get with the rubbings:

 

[Rudyard]

Ketland & Co nice pistol c 1790s . Where In QLD ? Ime in NZ . Welcome to the Forum
Rudyard

 

[SDSmlf]

Thanks guys, I had tried the rubbing with various thickness of paper and a couple of different pencils but without much success so I didn’t bother including any of the photos, I’d also tried talcum powder but not chalk - I’ll give that a go directly.

These are as good as I could get with the rubbings:
View attachment 85281

View attachment 85282

Unless the stamping or engraving is clear and pronounced to begin with, all I have gotten from rubbings is smudgy paper. Just what I’ve experienced.

 

[Larks]

Ketland & Co nice pistol c 1790s . Where In QLD ? Ime in NZ . Welcome to the Forum
Rudyard

Thankyou Rudyard, I really appreciate that - I can see it now that you point it out (particularly with the chalk idea) - I’ve been completely stabbing in the dark trying to decipher it over the last few weeks and was getting nowhere trying to research it myself.

I’m in South East Queensland, in the hinterland just outside of the Gold Coast. Yourself? North or South island?

 

[Larks]

Is there anything else that you can tell me about it from the photos? What it actually is? Someone tried to tell me they thought it was a Heavy Dragoon pistol but I don’t see that - though it seems that there are varying examples of what a Heavy Dragoon pistol should look like (possible for the sake of marketing??). The examples that I’ve seen at least have a side plate opposite the lock..... but I am very new to this and so far my research is entirely dependent on what I can find on the web and responses from libraries in the UK and Brisbane.

 

[Larks]

I had read this article before without realising the significance to my pistol, but re-reading the Ketland history in Joseph Puleo’s really interesting article:
http://www.researchpress.co.uk/rppublishing/rplibrary/rpl008-ketland-guns-in-america.pdf
(now that I know that it is a Ketland marked lock/pistol?) I now think that what I thought was a London View mark might instead be a Birmingham Private Proof mark:

Also rather nice to read elsewhere that Joseph Puleo suggests in regards to Ketland Lock markings: "It is usually engraved on the better quality guns and is stamped on cheap export guns and on export locks"

 

[Rudyard]

Dear Larks

I'me
near Nelson top of the South Island , Your Toowoomba , Warrick way ?. I use to go up to Surat to hunt on a station. & once sailed an old Corvette from the Commonwealth Sugar Refinnery wharfe Ex' HMAS 'Gladstone ' as fireman .
I don't believe the pistol is a Dragoon or any service pistol Wm Ketland & Co dates 1802 to 1807 and 1808 1831 gun & pistol maker at Whittall Street Brum according to Bailey & Nies book . Though the style is rather old fashioned so where some customers tastes . I have an old lock he seems to like refinements & its geometry is brilliant . There are a raft of Ketlands only one listed as ' & Co' its possible a newer lock was fitted but unlikley its a nice pistol chose what .
Rudyard

 

[Larks]

Thanks Rudyard. I’m actually at Wongawallan - much closer to the Gold Coast. I know Nelson - I have close friends from my Darwin days who own a lovely fishing lodge down on the Motueka River - Stonefly lodge.

I’ve been reading up more on the Ketland family this afternoon and I hadd thought it more likely to be a Thomas Ketland senior firearm than a William Ketland. From what I am starting to understand so far from Joseph Puleo’s information (but am happy to be corrected if I’m reading it wrong) the engraved script markings indicate a Thomas Ketland (senior) firearm whereas his sons Thomas Ketland (junior) and William Ketland stamped their names (rather than inscribed) and included their respective initials stamped into their firearms.

Also that Thomas Ketland (senior) markings were "usually engraved on the better quality guns and is stamped on cheap export guns and on export locks"

Does that sound correct?

 

[Notchy Bob]

That's a beautiful pistol, and it appears to be in very good condition. I would also like to commend @Larks for his photography, for taking the time and trouble to make the images clear and uncluttered.

I know very little about these guns. This one has several features that interest me. One is the hammer screw, which actually appears to be a nut screwed on to a threaded shank. Is that correct, and was this common?

Another interesting feature is the silver "spider" front sight. I've seen images of these on "Chief's Grade" trade guns, but this is the first one I recall seeing on a pistol.

Finally, there is what appears to be an iron ramrod. I'm sure this would have been strong and practical in use, but it looks as if it would add substantial weight to the barrel end of the weapon in carrying and shooting. Also, pistols would likely be carried muzzle-down, unlike muskets with iron ramrods, which would generally be carried muzzle up. It seems the weight of the rod might contribute to loss. Do we think that rod is original to the pistol?

In any event, that is a fine old pistol, and we appreciate the opportunity to view it!

Notchy Bob

 

[Larks]

Hi Bob. The rod does appear original and it sits firmly with no sign of wanting to fall out no matter how I handle it (not that I’m knocking it about ridiculously to try and dislodge it) and it feels quite balanced as it is. I’m surprised how little weight there actually is in the barrel end compared to my more modern pistols.

But you’ve got me interested in researching that hammer nut further - I don’t see too many in a quick five minute search of flintlock pistols of the era......but I will keep looking. So far this is the only one that I have found: (linked from here Flintlock Revolver from Elisha Collier)

 

[Dave Fox]

This area isn't my forte, so naturally I'll wade in in the full majesty of my ignorance. The frizzen screw is supported by a bridle, so at least second half of the 18th Century. Also interesting, the subject of screws having come up, the frizzen screw appears to enter from the back of the lock, rather than the more usual face...or has been peened.

 

[Rudyard]

Dear Larks Mr Pulios information is very extensive .I've gone primeraly on Bailey & Nie's book as to the' & co' style but The firm seem to have numerous associations as it suited them .I have a India Pat musket stamped Ketland & Allport on the stock . I would still be inclined to believe the ' Old fashioned' styles where made long after the leading lights of the trade where putting out the latest styles. I have an article by De Witt Bailey on this subject it was printed in the MLAGB Journal' Black Powder 'Ile find it .Re 'bun nut 'this feature was taken up by the East India Company on their post 1818 Bakers series arms if likely found earlier , We know the Ketland's where innovative but a gun might be repaired even to a new lock. Ketland used a roller that bore on the tumbler being fitted to the tip of the main spring on my original lock looking much the same as your .Mindfull of De Witts article I stocked it in conservative style to a much older but sound barrel by Alonso Martinez who since he died in 1720 has to be a three hundred year old barrel .I stocked them to put them into context rather than be' floating parts' though did bowl a bunny just to try it out .Well that & I like rabbit stew .
Regards Rudyard

 

[Larks]

This area isn't my forte, so naturally I'll wade in in the full majesty of my ignorance. The frizzen screw is supported by a bridle, so at least second half of the 18th Century. Also interesting, the subject of screws having come up, the frizzen screw appears to enter from the back of the lock, rather than the more usual face...or has been peened.

Thanks Dave, this really is the side of thing that I’m interested to learn more about in arms of dating flintlocks - the subtle variations to parts that give hints to the timeline: To my uneducated eye the lock looks very similar to any other that I’ve looked at and, to be honest, other than the curl to the frizzen roller (?? - the toe piece that roles over the frizzen spring??) I still can’t see much in the way of differences with other locks around the frizzen screw. When you say it is supported by a bridle - what are you referring to as the bridle?

In regards the screws being peened I had wondered the same - whether they had been peened as a crude repair (because the screw heads were stripped by someone who couldn’t remove them) or perhaps nutted from the other side. Everything sits properly in place so whatever it is, by repair or design, it works.

I have been contemplating removing the lock to study it. It does look like it has been removed sometime in the not too distant past as there’s no real “patina” of age around the timber to metal interface. Unlike the barrel which, although it looks like it has been removed (or attempted to be removed) at some stage given the bruising around the pins, it looks more firmly bedded in the timber - as if it hasn’t been disturbed in quite a long time.

 

[Notchy Bob]

This area isn't my forte, so naturally I'll wade in in the full majesty of my ignorance. The frizzen screw is supported by a bridle, so at least second half of the 18th Century. Also interesting, the subject of screws having come up, the frizzen screw appears to enter from the back of the lock, rather than the more usual face...or has been peened.

Thanks Dave, this really is the side of thing that I’m interested to learn more about in arms of dating flintlocks - the subtle variations to parts that give hints to the timeline: To my uneducated eye the lock looks very similar to any other that I’ve looked at and, to be honest, other than the curl to the frizzen roller (?? - the toe piece that roles over the frizzen spring??) I still can’t see much in the way of differences with other locks around the frizzen screw. When you say it is supported by a bridle - what are you referring to as the bridle?

I think Dave's reference to the "bridle" is the support arm on the outside of the lock, which comes off the pan and projects over the frizzen spring. The frizzen screw, on which the frizzen pivots, is supported at both of its ends. This Late Ketland style lock by Jim Chambers has a "pan bridle":

Compare this to this Chambers Early Ketland lock, which does not have the pan bridle or support arm:

The frizzen screw is only supported on the threaded end. The bridle arrangement is considered stronger (and a later development), but if the screw is robust, the bridle-less design works well enough, without the frizzen wobbling, and it is a lot easier to clean in there without the bridle.

Many locks that have pan bridles are designed with the frizzen pivot screw coming in from the back, as your Ketland lock appears to have. This Siler lock illustrates that well. This view of the outside of the lock shows just the tip of the screw's shank:

This view of the back side of the lock shows the head of the frizzen pivot screw:

It does look as if the end of the frizzen pivot screw on your pistol has been peened. I have not seen that before.

Also, thanks to @Rudyard again, for a term new to me: "bun nut." The name makes perfect sense! I don't know if I have never seen one before, or just failed to notice. If I see another one, I'll know what to call it!

Notchy Bob