Gun in Alamo

[dave_person]

Hi Flintlock12,
Thanks for the great story and photos. Congratulations on getting your family heirloom back. It may be a British pattern 1777 short land musket made at Dublin Castle armory probably between 1777 and 1782. There was a later run of this pattern during 1792-1804. If the lock markings look stamped, it is likely the later production and if they look engraved it is the earlier period. Marking with Dublin Castle was ended in 1798. However, your musket has some curious changes. On yours, the ramrod was replaced as well as the forward lock bolt and the stock was filed down at the front of the comb. Also, yours has only 3 ramrod thimbles and the second has a flared collar like the front pipe that was first used on the "India" pattern 1793. Is the barrel 42" long or 39"? If the shorter length, it may be a pattern 1793 that someone put an earlier pattern side plate on. Or perhaps Dublin Castle continued to use the older plates regardless that ordnance changed the design to simpler "L" shaped plates.

We don't refer to Brown Besses as "models" anymore because British Ordnance never used that term and it does not convey the differences within "models". They are referred to as patterns, which align with the warrants citing the specifications. Regardless, Dublin Castle marked muskets after 1780 or so are very rare. The text caption posted with the musket on display contains some incorrect information. The Bess was not fired from the hip except perhaps by poorly trained and lead troops. It was shoulder fired, did not knock you over and break bones, and could hit what you aimed at up to 50 or so yards away with a standard military load.

Thanks for the story and photos.

dave

 

[Flintlock12]

Hi Flintlock12,
Thanks for the great story and photos. Congratulations on getting your family heirloom back. It may be a British pattern 1777 short land musket made at Dublin Castle armory probably between 1777 and 1782. There was a later run of this pattern during 1792-1804. If the lock markings look stamped, it is likely the later production and if they look engraved it is the earlier period. Marking with Dublin Castle was ended in 1798. However, your musket has some curious changes. On yours, the ramrod was replaced as well as the forward lock bolt and the stock was filed down at the front of the comb. Also, yours has only 3 ramrod thimbles and the second has a flared collar like the front pipe that was first used on the "India" pattern 1793. Is the barrel 42" long or 39"? If the shorter length, it may be a pattern 1793 that someone put an earlier pattern side plate on. Or perhaps Dublin Castle continued to use the older plates regardless that ordnance changed the design to simpler "L" shaped plates.

We don't refer to Brown Besses as "models" anymore because British Ordnance never used that term and it does not convey the differences within "models". They are referred to as patterns, which align with the warrants citing the specifications. Regardless, Dublin Castle marked muskets after 1780 or so are very rare. The text caption posted with the musket on display contains some incorrect information. The Bess was not fired from the hip except perhaps by poorly trained and lead troops. It was shoulder fired, did not knock you over and break bones, and could hit what you aimed at up to 50 or so yards away with a standard military load.

Thanks for the story and photos.

dave

Dave,

thank you so much for this information! The barrel is 42” and I would say the markings look engraved but I will study them later on today.

 

[OldMaineWoodsman]

Couple of things here...

You have the artifact back in hand. Place it in a safe location and handle it as little as possible. I would recommend not making any attempt to cock the hammer, pull the trigger, removing anything, or cleaning attempts.

Based on the images the stock looks very, very dry. This means it is fragile (based on it's age as well), and subject to cracking or worse.

First, contact the museum and ask for any artifact record. It may have important documentation and perhaps artifact condition reports from previous curators. A record may also contain information about previous conservation efforts. There may even be two records. One from the curatorial side, and one from the museum registrar (collections management). Since they returned the artifact to you, they should not be opposed to or have any reason not to provide you with any existing artifact historical records or at least copies.

Second, find a solid, reputable, appraiser who specializes in antique arms. Arrange for that person to perform a written, and thorough appraisal.

Third, with appraisal in hand, locate and contact a solid, reputable, conserver of antique arms. There is a difference between conservation and restoration. A conservator will take steps to treat the artifact to stabilize it and prevent further deterioration. The key here is preservation of a historical artifact.

This is where museum records could prove valuable. It will give the conservator clues or perhaps documentation of what has been previously done, correctly or incorrectly.

Restoration means bringing it back to it's original state/condition. I would not recommend this as not only will you kill the monetary value but you also destroy the historical provenance of it's originality.

Don't go half-way on this. The key is finding someone solid and reputable. It's going to cost some money, but worth it in the end. This is not a task for the local gun shop or the gun club expert. I know some have mentioned auction houses. There are some knowledgeable folks who work for them but remember their primary mission is making money out of any auction. Focus on someone who is interested in getting paid for providing a service to you. Just my opinion as a retired Museum Curator of Arms and Armor. Good luck.

 

[Flintlock12]

The curator informed me they use rennisance wax on all their artifacts in the Alamo. I ordered some and right now have the musket in my safe. I have reached out to an appraiser and sent him photos just to see what he says. I will probably do that a lot until I find someone I like. I intend on getting a wall show case to keep the musket in full time to honor it and a display showing it in the Alamo with an honor to my father. I wanted to basically put desiccant packs along the bottom of the wood/glass case to help maintain the moisture levels.

 

[OldMaineWoodsman]

And yes, the artifact description label from when it was on display was pretty bad. Sometimes it seems museum labels are written for entertainment rather than educating. It should be both. Depending on the size of the museum staff they should go through a vetting process before they are printed and displayed. Even that is not 100% fool-proof. In my organization, Historians originally wrote the labels, and not always with input from the Curators. Later, the Curators wrote the labels which were then reviewed, edited, and approved by the museum Director. Since everyone has their own writing styles, we were not always in agreement. On more than one occasion I looked at a finished label only to ask "Who changed that?"

I visited a rather large waterfowl museum that had a nice display of firearms. Just about every label was wrong or used incorrect terminology. Again, it depends on the size and or knowledge base of the staff.

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
Renaissance wax is very good and can used on wood, metal, and leather. Just use it sparingly and buff off any excess. A can will last many years. Make sure any appraiser understands Brown Besses. I would urge you to contact Erik Goldstein at Colonial Williamsburg Foundation and send him some photos. The 42" barrel is important because it confirms it is at heart a pattern 1777. I zoomed some of your photos and saw that it has 4 ramrod pipes not 3 as I previously thought. That is also consistent with the pattern 1777. However, the second pipe is clearly the type installed on India pattern muskets not the 1777. A possibility is that the British were desperate for guns in the 1790s to fight the French and they did make muskets from old parts at hand mixing patterns. Yours might be a late or war production 1777 by Dublin Castle that used later pattern ram rod pipes.

dave

 

[XVIIc Wheelock]

Having been to the Alamo dozens of times since a youngster back in the early 50's (4th generation Texan), I can vouch having seen many "loaner" firearms, different ones at different times in the Alamo display cases. In the 60's there were different rifles on display than the 50's and the same in the 80's. I think I have seen no less than 3 different "Ole Betsey's" and Old Betsey's" as labeled; early one being a flintlock and 2 others more recent percussion. The Mexican army left nothing of value after the battle and the only genuine Alamo (Presidio) artifacts are those that were excavated on the grounds over the century and up until the early 1990's after the battle. Somewhere in Mexico there still may be original firearms from the battle. Anything left after the Mexicans withdrew were taken by the folks living in San Antonio de Bexar, but not until Texas won its independence did the town come to be known as San Antonio. Texas became its own country (The only State in the Union) called the Republic of Texas, from 1836 until it agreed to join the United States in 1845. The Alamo was laid bare for a decade after the battle...so sad. Actual letter from Colonel Travis to Sam Houston..."VICTORY OR DEATH":

 

[Flintlock12]

Having been to the Alamo dozens of times since a youngster back in the early 50's (4th generation Texan), I can vouch having seen many "loaner" firearms, different ones at different times in the Alamo display cases. In the 60's there were different rifles on display than the 50's and the same in the 80's. I think I have seen no less than 3 different "Ole Betsey's" and Old Betsey's" as labeled; early one being a flintlock and 2 others more recent percussion. The Mexican army left nothing of value after the battle and the only genuine Alamo (Presidio) artifacts are those that were excavated on the grounds over the century and up until the early 1990's after the battle. Somewhere in Mexico there still may be original firearms from the battle. Anything left after the Mexicans withdrew were taken by the folks living in San Antonio de Bexar, but not until Texas won its independence did the town come to be known as San Antonio. Texas became its own country (The only State in the Union) called the Republic of Texas, from 1836 until it agreed to join the United States in 1845. The Alamo was laid bare for a decade after the battle...so sad. Actual letter from Colonel Travis to Sam Houston..."VICTORY OR DEATH":

during the meeting with the director, registrar, and curator, they said this is the only Dublin Brown Bess they’ve ever had. The other few are all tower Bess. They were very upset. Me and the director do not have a good relationship because of my fathers clause. She purposely did not give the bayonet with the musket because she said my father said in the contract “the gun” be returned to family. I got furious and looked at the curator saying you know damn well the bayonet is the part of the gun. There was no budging. So I took what I could get. I may take legal action eventually, but for now I’m stoked I had this victory for my family.

 

[Flintlock12]

Having been to the Alamo dozens of times since a youngster back in the early 50's (4th generation Texan), I can vouch having seen many "loaner" firearms, different ones at different times in the Alamo display cases. In the 60's there were different rifles on display than the 50's and the same in the 80's. I think I have seen no less than 3 different "Ole Betsey's" and Old Betsey's" as labeled; early one being a flintlock and 2 others more recent percussion. The Mexican army left nothing of value after the battle and the only genuine Alamo (Presidio) artifacts are those that were excavated on the grounds over the century and up until the early 1990's after the battle. Somewhere in Mexico there still may be original firearms from the battle. Anything left after the Mexicans withdrew were taken by the folks living in San Antonio de Bexar, but not until Texas won its independence did the town come to be known as San Antonio. Texas became its own country (The only State in the Union) called the Republic of Texas, from 1836 until it agreed to join the United States in 1845. The Alamo was laid bare for a decade after the battle...so sad. Actual letter from Colonel Travis to Sam Houston..."VICTORY OR DEATH":

my father donated it in 1980 so I’m sure the flintlock one you saw was this one.

 

[Flintlock12]

Hi,
Renaissance wax is very good and can used on wood, metal, and leather. Just use it sparingly and buff off any excess. A can will last many years. Make sure any appraiser understands Brown Besses. I would urge you to contact Erik Goldstein at Colonial Williamsburg Foundation and send him some photos. The 42" barrel is important because it confirms it is at heart a pattern 1777. I zoomed some of your photos and saw that it has 4 ramrod pipes not 3 as I previously thought. That is also consistent with the pattern 1777. However, the second pipe is clearly the type installed on India pattern muskets not the 1777. A possibility is that the British were desperate for guns in the 1790s to fight the French and they did make muskets from old parts at hand mixing patterns. Yours might be a late or war production 1777 by Dublin Castle that used later pattern ram rod pipes.

dave

Hey Dave,
Any help on how to contact him? I tried searching him. Maybe you have his email or number?

 

[XVIIc Wheelock]

Flintlock12 said: "my father donated it in 1980 so I’m sure the flintlock one you saw was this one."

I am sure Davys' original Ole Betsey (or Tick Licker?) was much more ""modern"" in its day, than your very rare and valuable 1780 Dublin Brown Bess!!! You are very fortunate and fight for that bayonet!

 

[OhioHawkeye]

during the meeting with the director, registrar, and curator, they said this is the only Dublin Brown Bess they’ve ever had. The other few are all tower Bess. They were very upset. Me and the director do not have a good relationship because of my fathers clause. She purposely did not give the bayonet with the musket because she said my father said in the contract “the gun” be returned to family. I got furious and looked at the curator saying you know damn well the bayonet is the part of the gun. There was no budging. So I took what I could get. I may take legal action eventually, but for now I’m stoked I had this victory for my family.

Yes, and if you have the funds do bring a halt to them trying to sell the bayonet. .. may be easier to offer her money for the displays?

 

[OldMaineWoodsman]

I'm disappointed to hear that. Without a Deed of Gift and the Temporary Loan paperwork they really had no other option but to return it to you.

Years ago we had a similar situation. The museum had in the collection a replica, commemorative musket that was presented to a somewhat famous General. He has long since passed. His son contacted us wanting the musket. Initially we offered to loan it to him. He wanted it permanently returned to the family.

Because it was presented to the General, and there are rules concerning gifts and what they can keep, it wound up with the museum. We had a case as technically it was government property but there also was no Deed of Gift.

After discussing with the Director and counsel, we made the decision to politely return it to the family. We are talking about something that happened in the 1960's, it was a replica, was not on display, had no plans to display it, and our new collecting plan specified that we don't collect commemorative firearms anyway.

In the end, it was better for the family, the collection, and reputation of the organization and museum.

Now as to the bayonet, don't spend your money getting it back. A polite, fact-based letter to Ted Cruz or Dan Crenshaw, preferably both and I'm sure you will get your bayonet back at no charge to you. Just a thought.

 

[Flintlock12]

Now as to the bayonet, don't spend your money getting it back. A polite, fact-based letter to Ted Cruz or Dan Crenshaw, preferably both and I'm sure you will get your bayonet back at no charge to you. Just a thought.

Oh wow I never thought of that. That is a good idea!!

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
I don't have a current contact for Erik. You might just send an e-mail contact request through the Foundation's web site. I have a friend who may have contact info directly for Erik since he worked in the gun shop at Williamsburg. Since there is no known direct connection with the Alamo or any regimental service or known history the value may fall between $3000-$5000. The altered comb, incorrect ramrod and replaced lock bolt will knock the value down and it still remains to see what exactly it is because it looks like a 1st production pattern 1777 musket from Dublin Castle but that second ramrod pipe is wrong for that model and only shows up on the later India pattern musket. So something is a little odd about it. When you get it lock closely at the lock plate. You should be able to see the "Dublin Castle" engraved on the tail in 2 lines. Then look under the pan near the frizzen spring for a stamp that is a crown over an arrow with the arrow pointed toward the flintcock. That indicates it was owned and issued by the British government. On top of the barrel at the breech, you should see two stamps. One will be a crown over GR and the other a crown over crossed scepters. Those marks will verify it is a government issued British musket. On the plus side, Dublin Castle pattern 1777s are rare but they also were more crudely made than those produced by the Tower.

dave

 

[Flintlock12]

Hi,
I don't have a current contact for Erik. You might just send an e-mail contact request through the Foundation's web site. I have a friend who may have contact info directly for Erik since he worked in the gun shop at Williamsburg. Since there is no known direct connection with the Alamo or any regimental service or known history the value may fall between $3000-$5000. The altered comb, incorrect ramrod and replaced lock bolt will knock the value down and it still remains to see what exactly it is because it looks like a 1st production pattern 1777 musket from Dublin Castle but that second ramrod pipe is wrong for that model and only shows up on the later India pattern musket. So something is a little odd about it. When you get it lock closely at the lock plate. You should be able to see the "Dublin Castle" engraved on the tail in 2 lines. Then look under the pan near the frizzen spring for a stamp that is a crown over an arrow with the arrow pointed toward the flintcock. That indicates it was owned and issued by the British government. On top of the barrel at the breech, you should see two stamps. One will be a crown over GR and the other a crown over crossed scepters. Those marks will verify it is a government issued British musket. On the plus side, Dublin Castle pattern 1777s are rare but they also were more crudely made than those produced by the Tower.

dave

I see the Dublin castle very faintly. Almost completely gone. And as far as the castle I can make out a line or two but it is also almost gone. As far as the barrel I don’t see much. I see two dips in the barrel over the breech where two stamps likely were. So are you saying this musket isa 1st pattern Bess rather than a 2nd?

 

[Flintlock12]

Hi,
I don't have a current contact for Erik. You might just send an e-mail contact request through the Foundation's web site. I have a friend who may have contact info directly for Erik since he worked in the gun shop at Williamsburg. Since there is no known direct connection with the Alamo or any regimental service or known history the value may fall between $3000-$5000. The altered comb, incorrect ramrod and replaced lock bolt will knock the value down and it still remains to see what exactly it is because it looks like a 1st production pattern 1777 musket from Dublin Castle but that second ramrod pipe is wrong for that model and only shows up on the later India pattern musket. So something is a little odd about it. When you get it lock closely at the lock plate. You should be able to see the "Dublin Castle" engraved on the tail in 2 lines. Then look under the pan near the frizzen spring for a stamp that is a crown over an arrow with the arrow pointed toward the flintcock. That indicates it was owned and issued by the British government. On top of the barrel at the breech, you should see two stamps. One will be a crown over GR and the other a crown over crossed scepters. Those marks will verify it is a government issued British musket. On the plus side, Dublin Castle pattern 1777s are rare but they also were more crudely made than those produced by the Tower.

dave

I see the Dublin castle very faintly. Almost completely gone. And as far as the castle I can make out a line or two but it is also almost gone. As far as the barrel I don’t see much. I see two dips in the barrel over the breech. Are you saying you believe this musket is a 1st pattern Bess rather than a 2nd pattern Bess?

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
It appears to be a pattern 1777 musket but I am not clear on when it was made. The first production period was 1777-1782. British government reissued the pattern again in 1792-1804 because they were desperate for arms to fight the French and they did not have enough of the latest pattern muskets (pattern 1793 "India") to issue. The India pattern musket was originally developed and used by the East India Company but orders were diverted to the British government because of that emergency. It was cheaper to produce than the pattern 1777 and it used a second ramrod pipe like yours. So it is possible yours is a second production of the pattern 1777 for which they used a later pattern pipe because that is what they had on hand at the time. Because firearms marked "Dublin Castle" were no longer issued after 1798, yours could have been made between 1792 and 1798. A close up photo of that second (from the muzzle) pipe would be helpful to make sure I am seeing what I think it is. The earlier production of the 1777s had a second pipe that had a straight taper widening toward the muzzle. This was called the "Pratt" pipe after its designer. Yours looks to be a shorter version of your front pipe with a flared collar. That was first installed on the India pattern muskets. As I wrote previously, the Dublin Castle was engraved on the first production run of the pattern 1777 but stamped during the second run. Unfortunately, your lock is so worn that you may not be able to tell the difference.

dave

 

[Flintlock12]

See if these pictures work

 

[Mad Michael]

Oh wow I never thought of that. That is a good idea!!

Please don't forget your US Representative, the US Representative where the Alamo is at if they are different. Also your State Senator and Representative. Make sure you explain politely that the materials had been removed from display, were on display as they had been donated: together; and they have no plans to display the bayonet. Post letters. After that get and injunction served to prevent the director, the board and the museum from selling said item. May have to offer to donate all or some portion of the value of the Bayonet to Museum, and you better be prepared to donate to whatever politician helps you. When fighting a similar battle I actually had the best luck from the state officials.