-
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
Need help ID'ing this flintlock
- Thread starter TFLeader
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
matt denison
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,786
- Reaction score
- 14
1601phill said:VERY INTERESTING more photos of proofs and details and some history please
Possible Officers Fusil (british ) there are some military parts there .
My first thought was Officer's musket too (engraving on the lock, checkered wrist)-but- some things don't make sense either. Broken trigger guard and the point is missing on the butt palte return, the caliber is wrong. The muzzle end of the stock is rebated but no bayonet lug. No proof marks at the breech. !?! Military hardware but not a military gun so my guess is it is a restock using a mix of used parts as was quite common in the colonies.
An overall length picture would be very helpful to see the architecture and overall condition.
Ike Godsey
45 Cal.
laffindog said:1601phill said:VERY INTERESTING more photos of proofs and details and some history please
Possible Officers Fusil (british ) there are some military parts there .
My first thought was Officer's musket too (engraving on the lock, checkered wrist)-but- some things don't make sense either. Broken trigger guard and the point is missing on the butt palte return, the caliber is wrong. The muzzle end of the stock is rebated but no bayonet lug. No proof marks at the breech. !?! Military hardware but not a military gun so my guess is it is a restock using a mix of used parts as was quite common in the colonies.
An overall length picture would be very helpful to see the architecture and overall condition.
i would back that up. maybe the barrel was longer at the time it was restocked. to me the muzzle and its "out of the center" bore is NOT what a "old time gunshmith ould made, even thought with the missing proofs, this was maybe a private gun, made in military styles.
this, plus the missing lug and the shortnes of the stock-cutting at the muzzle end indicates it was cut back at a later time.
ike
Ike Godsey
45 Cal.
1601phill said:
not by the quality this lock is made.
india makes are crude, even in the old days.
that lock in the pics above is a ell made one.
No no no you miss understand the meaning of Anglo Indian ,complicated but here goes Anglo gun or parts that has been repaired ,recycled by the British or under their direct supervision in India 1700-?
Made in England service and repaired ,modified , updated in India by the British
Made in England service and repaired ,modified , updated in India by the British
Ike Godsey
45 Cal.
oh - ok. :surrender:
but anyway, its of british origin. so it is possible that it (or patterns like this) have been used in the colonies (or later in the US) as well.
does anyone know how much this little thing should cost?
but anyway, its of british origin. so it is possible that it (or patterns like this) have been used in the colonies (or later in the US) as well.
does anyone know how much this little thing should cost?
Ike Godsey
45 Cal.
again, may i ask what it should cost?
just to see how much i must spend on such an item, if i could get close to one...
to me (being not a shooter in the first place) this piece looks (with a little help) as a good serviceable item for reencatment...
ike
just to see how much i must spend on such an item, if i could get close to one...
to me (being not a shooter in the first place) this piece looks (with a little help) as a good serviceable item for reencatment...
ike
There is a bit of a mix of parts English and possibly a Dutch butt plate, could be a US build if that is were you are, after seeing the full length views I would lean to a Colonial US build but it could still be English . This is why were it was obtained from is important , it's a keeper either way . If it possible post some more back ground .The condition of the musket in the first photo's, dusty mortice , mix of parts is what lead me to the Anglo Indian path after seeing the last 2 photos the stock shape has a well made and look to it .
If it possible post some more back ground .The condition of the musket in the first photo's, dusty mortice , mix of parts is what lead me to the Anglo Indian path after seeing the last 2 photos the stock shape has a well made and look to it .After studying the photos closely Iwould say again an Officer's musket of English origin, you can see where the sheet end cap has been , the seperate bayonet lug has been removed, 1760s to 1780s nice :thumbsup: (not a high end gun but well made )( these took a smaller diferent bayonet than the Bess)
matt denison
54 Cal.
- Joined
- Aug 15, 2004
- Messages
- 1,786
- Reaction score
- 14
First I want to say she is a beauty and in very good condition for her age. You have a treasure.
I tend to agree with 1601phil, officer's musket with only one or two reservatioins. There are no proof marks at the breech and there should be on a British gun. The furniture is British, style is British. Most muskets that I have seen with checkeering like this were closer to Rev. war than F&I. Since Officer's muskets were privately bought and owned then almost anything goes - except I keep going back the the lack of proof/view marks.
I tend to agree with 1601phil, officer's musket with only one or two reservatioins. There are no proof marks at the breech and there should be on a British gun. The furniture is British, style is British. Most muskets that I have seen with checkeering like this were closer to Rev. war than F&I. Since Officer's muskets were privately bought and owned then almost anything goes - except I keep going back the the lack of proof/view marks.
