• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

Early Dutch gun

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

Mike Brooks

Cannon
Joined
Jul 19, 2005
Messages
6,686
Reaction score
33
Tom Patton made mention of this gun this morning. I thought I'd post some pictures of it so we could "discuss" an early gun that probably saw service in colonial America.
Any comments or opinions?
pix3773804968.jpg

pix3773804921.jpg

pix3773805265.jpg

pix3773805093.jpg

I've got more pictures here if you want to look at them. >>>>POKE HERE
 
Nice. :hatsoff:

And they were effective, too. The Early Dutch guns were used to such effect that Early Dutch are now extinct on Wall Street and in Harlem were they once roamed in great herds. Back when that gun was created. Much more so than the later Elephant and Goose Guns. :winking:

Interesting tang to stock attachment. What year do you figure? 1730+/-? It has features I would normally associate with "Made in America". The "teat" on the lock plate & maple(?) stock.
 
Wow! Thanks for all the pix.
Looks like the lock is at least pre-1720. The pan has almost no fence and it has a hint of the old snaphaunce hump. Darn good shape. Could we call this a Dutch Barn Gun? Just kidding. I grew up in the Mohawk Valley of NY state and have Dutch ancestry there back into the 1600's so this is of great interest to me. Clearly it was stocked here in local curly maple and I am guessing around 1700-1720 for the parts (of course the gun could have been stocked from older parts at a later date, say up to 1760). The very long barrel indicates an early date as well. The smaller bore suggests it's not a "Hudson Valley Fowler" per se as those seem to be somewhat specialty guns made to lay down a huge volley of shot for sitting fowl. I was wondering if it would have the early trigger guard design often found on late 1600's Dutch "trade guns" but this one has iron hardware. For someone who could get ahold of a very long barrel, this style would seem to work for an early Dutch settler/trader type, a common man's gun.
How long is the lock?

Just noticed (reason for edit) that the bolt under the guard is probably the one that holds the tang down and the guard itself may just be held with a woodscrew not reaching the tang?
 
Just noticed (reason for edit) that the bolt under the guard is probably the one that holds the tang down and the guard itself may just be held with a woodscrew not reaching the tang?

That's what I thought it looked like also. As I said: "interesting tang to stock attachment". I don't recall ever seeing that done. Just the bolt head ahead of the trigger and inside the bow. No trigger plate or connection through the bow.

pix3773805343.jpg
 
Indeed, Stump. It looks like the guard may be held by a nail. Very cool, very long gun. Don't want to look for a ramrod that long, or a pice of wood that long, or pay for a barrel that long, though!
pix3773805265.jpg
 
I'm not sure this gun is a restock or if it's even a maple stock. looks like it could possibly be a tight grained euro walnut with a wavy curl.
I think it's probably pre 1700, possibly as early as the 1680's. The trigger guard seems to be surface mounted indicating a pre 1720's time frame at the very least. Anybody notice the trigger guard is made in three pieces? Anybody have any comments on the rear ram rod pipe? Odd to say the least.
The buttstock has had what the owner calls "professional retoration". :winking: All of the back 1/3rd of the butstock is black , so I'm assuming it has been rotted away and replaced or restored....you'll notice the worm holes disapear in the black section. Makes me wonder if it may have had a buttplate originally? Maybe not.
 
The bolt up from the bottom for the tang is not an uncommon thing to find on "utilitarian" guns. That 3 pc triggerguard is wild, man.

I can't see that it even has a lower rod pipe.... :hmm:

I can't tell what the wood is from the photos, but the worm holes HINT at it being european walnut. Them bugs just LOVE european walnut.

It's a very wild and very Dutch-looking lock.
 
Fatdutchman said:
It's a very wild and very Dutch-looking lock.

Wouldn't you expect round faced with a good banana, doesn't anyone else get a feeling that the lock doesn't quite belong to the gun?

Someone has bodged in a new frizzen spring, but why is the fixing bolt so far in front of the frizzen pivot? Not impossibly far forwards but it's just odd.
 
I was thinking the lock didn't look pre 1700, but I don't know what the Dutch were up to, really. :redface: I should, my Mom's root-folks were Netherlanders, and the settlements not to far east of this area were "New Amsterdam".

That litle Bedford finial is certainly an oddity on so early a lock. It just looks to flat and angular. No "bananna", like Robin says.

I did think the trigger bow was three piece, and it kind of looks later than the general style. But there is no shadow or depressions from an older original if that is the case. I wondered if the original was held by that up-shot tang bolt arrangement.

The long entry-pipeless pipe flange is certainly unique.

I like the muzzle, too. Octagonal to round in 3/8".
 
That litle Bedford finial is certainly an oddity on so early a lock. It just looks to flat and angular. No "bananna", like Robin says.
Let me push you in the other direction, and get you thinking "Snaphaunce". I believe this lock was around long before the banana shape became in vogue.
I talked to Tom Patton on the phone a little bit ago and the old goat clued me in on how early he thinks this gun may be.
I find it interesting this gun saw so much use that the pan has been eroded away.
 
I was wondering about the pan from the overhead vs. the side it almost looks like a thin metal is covering the well-pitted pan itself.

You're really getting out of my league to go back to shaphaunces . . . snaphauncers? Wouldn't the lock have then needed to be longer ahead of the pan for the seperate frizzen arm and pan cover?
 
If the lock started as a snaphance the frizzen spring bolt would be vertically under the frizzen pivot. They used to put an extra bridle between the two.
 
Plus a sideways sear, third cross pin and fixings for the cock catcher. OTOH it could explain the pan :hmm:
 
This lock was never a snaphaunce, but the next step in evolution, and is a true flintlock. In other words this is a flint lock in action, but the style is taken from the earlier snaphaunce.
I've seen snaphaunces with lock plates just like this, I'll see if I can dig up a picture tonight.
 
I thought the next step was the "English lock" with the same sideways sear and cock catcher, but having the pan cover as part of the frizzen. Then the flat faced doglock, then the true flinlock with half cock, round face and banana.

OTOH, as usual, I could be completely wrong :redface:
 
Mike Brooks said:
This lock was never a snaphaunce, but the next step in evolution, and is a true flintlock. In other words this is a flint lock in action, but the style is taken from the earlier snaphaunce.
I've seen snaphaunces with lock plates just like this, I'll see if I can dig up a picture tonight.
yes, that's it. Look at Hamilton's book on trade rifles and see the earliest Dutch locks. This lock looks pre-1700 to me. Pre-banana for sure.
 
I'm not much on Duych guns but judging from what the French were doing at the same time and the French/Dutch connection I think this could be circa 1750-60
 
Squire Robin said:
I thought the next step was the "English lock" with the same sideways sear and cock catcher, but having the pan cover as part of the frizzen. Then the flat faced doglock, then the true flinlock with half cock, round face and banana.

OTOH, as usual, I could be completely wrong :redface:

Actually you are wrong.The snaphaunce and wheelock were the precursers to the true flintlock which originated in France Ca. the 1630's and the snaphaunce was still used in England until about 1650 when, in response to the true flintlock,the English lock came into being. It retained the horizontal sear and generally used the dog catch as a safety device.Most snaphaunces were converted to flint and also utilized the dog catch.There was no dog lock as a distinct ignition system and it was almost never used on the continent.The so called dog locks found in America and England are simply converted snaphaunces with a dog catch.The problem is that any lock with a dog catch has come to be referred to as a dog lock. I saw a Ca. 1730 English fowler a few years ago in a major New England museum with a three screw flintlock and a dog catch.The English locks were flat faced with a dog catch and often a horizontal sear until 1684 when the Samuel Oakes pattern with it's round faced lock became popular.

The gun here is,I believe, a swan or goose gun made in the low countries or perhaps in the Sedan region of Northeast France.The lock configuration is one which is found as early as 1640 and continued until the mid 17th century when locks became round faced with parallel top and bottom and some had a slight banana outline.They also had a small teat in the center of the tail.Dutch locks were very similar and Hamilton {Fig. 6}shows a flat faced lock very similar on a restored Dutch gun.These locks seem to have occurred as both flat and round faced when found on guns from France and the low Countries.The present gun has a lock which would have been found on guns from the 1740's to the 60's. Lenk shows a number of these locks as being from France,the Sedan,Western Europe and the Low Countries. The outline is very much like the old snaphaunces and as stated above several are ahown by Lenk.There are also several guns and pistols with similar locks illustrated in the H.L.Visser collection of Dutch and related firearms.A lock almost identical to the one on the gun in question is also shown in the "Proceedings of the 1984 Trade Gun Conference" Part I,P.36,
Fig.27, Type V-A. That lock was found in a Senecaa site of the 17th century.The 73" barrel is not an extreme rarity in Dutch and Low country guns. Visser shows at least one with a barrel about a foot longer.

The plainess of the gun appears to indicate it's utilitarian purpose but I am frankly surprised at it's having a full octagon tapered barrel.The upward pointing tang screw is a feature commonly found on guns of this period and the wide 2 1/2" butt bespeaks it's earliness.This gun could have been restocked in this country but I suspect it will take testing to be sure.

Torsten Lenk,"The Flintlock
J.P.Puype, "The Visser Collection, Arms of the Netherlands"
Jan Piet Puype,"Proceedings of the 1984 Trade Gun Conference"Part I, Dutch and Other Flintlocks from Seventeenth Iroquois sites
T.M.Hamilton,"Frontier Colonial Guns"
S.James Gooding,"trade guns of theHudson's bay Company 1670-1970"

Tom Patton
 
Back
Top