Would like help with identifying rifle approx. date

[WildEagleSC]

I just recently picked up this rifle Itis smooth bored. It is full stocked with a round barrel with london stamped on it it also has 2 crowns with crossed swords on it can anyone help me figure out just what I have found? Thanks oh yeah its 59 to 60 cal .roughly 20 guage im thinking

Theese are the photos for the smoothbore that I was trying to identify the lenght of the barrel is 47 3/8 inches the lenght of the rifle is 62 1/4 inches. I havent taken the rifle apart It seems to me this was maybe a Ketland officers fusil but the gun is plain and the officer fusils ive seen dont seem to be full stock. I do believe it to be an early flintlock converted to a precussion cap. Hope this helps you all help me. Thanks :hmm:
http://s1239.photobucket.com/albums/ff501/WildEagleSC

 

[JV Puleo]

Its not a rifle and never was. A Birmingham (England) made export fowler sold through the Thomas Ketland firm. Those are Ordnance Private proofs and probably pre-date 1805. Thousands were sold here between about 1795 and the 1820s though I am certain yours pre-dates the War of 1812.

The Ketland officer's fuzees are a fantasy... the common and grossly mistaken attribution given by dealers and collectors anxious to make a nondescript fowler or trade quality musket into something sexy. These export guns do not come close to rising to the level of workmanship that would have been acceptable in a true "officer's" gun... Also, in 40 years of collecting information on the Ketlands I have never seen even a picture of a gun that could creditably be considered an "officer's fuzee." That said, the W. Ketland firm did list them in their wholesale price list though thus far there is no evidence they ever sold them. It is unlikely that any of the Ketlands actually made anything, at least after the 1770s. The "Philadelphia" Ketlands were B'ham export merchants on a grand scale and arms were only one of their commodities. They were actually much bigger in the wholesale liquor business.

 

[matt denison]

That's a very nice gun in remarkable condition for its age. I agree that the Officer's designatioin is often a fantasy description. Although a nice piece it doesn't say "officer's gun" to me. I have too often seen run of the mill guns at gun shows with a tag that says "officer's gun" or "officer's fusil" on it. The local pawn shop has an old musket displayed with a tag "Officer's Fusil". When I questioned the owner about it he argued with me then finally admitted that he was really just trying to sell it and thought officer's fusil sounded better than calling it a musket.

 

[Stumpkiller]

I came across this - no idea of the accuracy.

William Ketland traded in Birmingham from ca.1780, in London from ca.1785. He died in 1804, and the company traded in both cities until it ceased business in 1831.(Kit Ravenshear - KETLAND & Co., Man at Arms,vol.10,no.5,1988)

. . . the Ketlands had shipped tens of thousands of locks to the US, over a period 50 years.

and also

The second Ketland firm - "W. Ketland" and "W. Ketland & Co." functioned from about 1802 to 1831 although William Ketland died in 1804 and no one named Ketland, except his widow, participated in the company.

 

[JV Puleo]

The late Kit Ravenshear's research is fairly dated now... we know much more about the Ketland's than we did when he wrote that. WK did not go into business until 1802 and the W. Ketland firm was run by James and William Allport. Kit thought the Allports had been employees of WK but it turns out that James was his partner.

The gun is question is a product of the Thomas Ketland firm... WK was a partner until 1802... the bit about his going into business with his grandfather is incorrect. There is no evidence that the grandfather was even in the gun business.

That article was researched close to 30 years ago. With the advent of the internet, and more importantly the huge increase in the popularity of genealogical research, there is much more information readily available than Kit had access to.

He was a friend of mine and I loaned him some material for that article.

 

[WildEagleSC]

Thanks for the information guys. Was this gun a flintlock converted to flintlock if so would or could I convert it back or leave it alone? And where would i look for parts if i did convert it back. Thanks again :hmm:

 

[JV Puleo]

It was flint... in my opinion, reconversion is nothing more than vandalism. You don't know, nor do I, exactly what it looked like and why in the world would anyone think that a group of new parts is somehow more historical than a modification made during the working life of the gun - it probably spent most of its working life as a percussion gun.

 

[Va.Manuf.06]

It was flint... in my opinion, reconversion is nothing more than vandalism. You don't know, nor do I, exactly what it looked like and why in the world would anyone think that a group of new parts is somehow more historical than a modification made during the working life of the gun - it probably spent most of its working life as a percussion gun.

Well said. :hatsoff:

 

[JV Puleo]

Thanks VA... Its always good to know that other thoughtful collectors agree with this stand.

I should have said "nothing less than valdalism".
A few words on that are in order. About 99% of reconversions are instantly recognizable as such. This is particularly true with guns like this one because virtually everyone who mucks with them makes the same mistake... and no, I'm not saying what it is on an open forum because I don't want to help anyone pursue that end. The sad truth is that misguided "restoration" is rapidly depleting the supply of untampered with antiques, so much so that the waters are now very muddy regarding what is real and what isn't. I refuse to have a reconversion in my own collection and I will not use them as illustrations in my work.

I would actually like to have some really good photos of that gun for my Ketland book. I don't have any of the inexpensive export fowlers.

 

[WildEagleSC]

Its hard to get any real good pictures of the dang thing its so long. :idunno: I would love to send you any you pictures you would want.Im realy not interested in keeping it, it wont fit in my gun cabinet.Hate someone to steal it,Let me know what pictures you would like or if you know someone in the S.C, area that could get the pictures you need... My favorite part of the gun is the hand whittled wooden ram rod. :surrender:

 

[suzkat]

JV, From reading several of your postings, I believe you are an expert in this field and I was wondering if you have published any books on the english guns/
fowlers of this era. If not, and you have the time and inclination, it would be a wonderful preservation of the history. If you have, let me know the titles as I would like to read more.

 

[JV Puleo]

I have an article on the Ketlands coming out in a future issue of Man at Arms. When? I don't know. Its a 10 page article so its hard to find the space. Its a preview of the book I'm working ... tentatively titled something like "The Ketland Family and the Anglo-American Arms Trade." I probably won't include "Anglo-American" in the title since lots of folks won't know what that means. I'm hoping to have a huge amount of previously unpublished data on the import of British guns to America between 1792 and 1830... I already have a large amount.

I edit and write gun books for a living so you've probably already seen or read my work, though not been aware of it. Some time in the future, probably the distant future, I'm thinking of doing something on the New England Rifle.