Dutch M1815 Musket.

Norman McCormick · 4th June 2019, 05:50 PM

Hi,
A Dutch M1815 No.2 musket dated 1819 with a later conversion to percussion. Butt stamped Delft 1845 and I presume this is the place and date of the percussion conversion. There were a number of manufacturers and I would be grateful if anybody could identify which one from the stamps in the photographs. I will photograph the stamps under the barrel if this would help. Here is an unconverted one in the Royal Armouries collection. https://collections.royalarmouries.o...ative-271.html

Regards,
Norman.

P.S. Here's a list of the Manufacturers.

* J Devillers: approx. 120,000 Nos.1 & 2
* Gebr. Malherbe: 52,000 Nos.1 & 2
* PJ Malherbe: 10,000 Nos.1 & 2
* MJ Malherbe de Goffontaine: 6,000 No.1
* JL de Loneux fils: 26,000 Nos.1 & 2
* P Lebens: 19,000 Nos.1 & 2
* J Walker (Birmingham): 8,000 Nos.1 & 2
* W&H Spangenberg: approx. 12,000 No.1

rickystl · 5th June 2019, 05:50 PM

Hi Norman

That is a nice 1815 Dutch musket. And appears in good condition. Sorry I can't help with the stamps/markings. But another Forum member will likely be able to lend his expertise.
It's obvious this was a well done arsenal conversion to percussion. So common with many of these muskets. And, it looks like a rear sight was added at the time of conversion.
Many details on this musket copied the original 1763/1777 pattern French muskets of this period. In fact, the original U.S. Springfield 1795 and later variations also copied the French musket. Even the original .69 caliber bore.
If my memory serves, Belgium was a prolific in manufacturing firearms and did many musket conversions for other European countries.

Nice piece, Rick

Norman McCormick · 5th June 2019, 06:50 PM

Hi Rick,
I'm pleased with the completeness of the musket, all the bits seem to be present and in reasonably good condition. The 69 calibre was a wee bit of a problem re ammunition for the ones that were used at Waterloo as the British guns were of a larger bore. I'll need to dismount the barrel I reckon to get some good makers marks and hope that one of our continental members can throw some light on the manufacturer. Thanks for your interest.
My Regards,
Norman.

Fernando K · 5th June 2019, 11:30 PM

Hello

In my opinion the barrel is not the original of flint. It does not present a plug covering the ear, nor a "masacote" or "bombeta" on the right side, nor on the upper part of the Barrel. The plate if it presents the remains of the bowl and the plug that covers the steel screw

Sorry for the translator. Affectionately

corrado26 · 6th June 2019, 08:15 AM

Here are fotos of an other M 12815/38UM Dutch infantry gun with all the same details as shown on the first one. In my opinion thie gun and its barrel in question is absolutely original.
corrado26

Norman McCormick · 6th June 2019, 01:35 PM

Hi,
This photo shows where the touchhole once was. It is quite difficult to photograph as the 'machining' has been well done but it is the shiny spot on the barrel and the small circular plug can be seen quite clearly with the barrel in hand. This would imply the barrel is a converted from flintlock as Corrado has suggested. The rear barrel plug may have been replaced at the time of conversion as mine has an integral rear sight on the plug.
Regards,
Norman.

Norman McCormick · 6th June 2019, 01:52 PM

Hi,
Here are some more photographs, barrel band, inside lock, and underside of barrel. A crown over G.B. seems to be marked on most pieces as well as crown over D and crown over possibly I.R. The British style broad arrow is puzzling.
Regards,
Norman.

corrado26 · 6th June 2019, 04:05 PM

The "GH" in the centre of the butt stamp stands for sub-inspector Johann Christian Heym of the Delft factory, this stamp says that the stock has been re-newed at Delft in 1840.
The crowned "D" at the brass rest of the pan stands for G.C.Dujardin (see Martens/de Vries, Nederlands Vuurwapens 1813-1866, p. 202 and H.L.Visser, Aspects of Dutch Gunmaking p. 383). Until 1840 the inspector's mark was also struck into the barrels, after this date this was stopped. But it looks as if the D-mark under crown has been struck at the barrel too though very faintly readable. This proofes that the barrel has been really converted from flintlock to percussion
corrado26

Fernando K · 6th June 2019, 04:35 PM

Hello

With all respect and without encouragement to discuss, but to establish the truth, the area that has been photographed, and that would correspond to the location of the touchole, is directly below the stamped crown, which would be too advanced. The "broad arrow" is just some brands with chisel to identify the operator who filed the barel, or inspection.

Sorry for the translator. Affectionately

Norman McCormick · 6th June 2019, 06:27 PM

Hi Guys,
Have photographed all the stamps I could find which might make things clearer. I'm not sure why there is an issue with the stamps on the top of the barrel near the old touchhole. Thanks for your continued interest.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S/ Corrado, many thanks for the info you've provided.

Norman McCormick · 27th March 2021, 06:18 PM

Hi,
Further to my previous post here is the information supplied by the Dutch military museum.

Normally the name of the manufacturer can be deducted from the butt stamp, but unfortunately, the original stamp was replaced by the Delft stamp at the time of the conversion to percussion in 1845. The letters GH in the middle stand for “geheel hersteld”, meaning: completely overhauled. The only way to find the manufacturer is with help of the controlstamps on the gun. Unfortunately, these are not all identifiable. I have checked your musket with examples from our own collection, and found ones that have the same stamps. These have been identified by us as being made by the Frères Malherbe (Malherbe brothers). Your gun was probably part of the 1819 contract for the manufacture of 3000 muskets no.1 and 3000 muskets no.2.

The literature does not definitively says that it is from Dujardin, but that it is possibly from Dujardin. Unfortunately, we have no contemporary lists of inspectors and their stamps. It is all based on names that are encountered in archives, connected with letters that we find on guns from about the same date that those names worked there. When looking in my documentation, I also encounter the crowned GB stamp that you have on various parts. That is probably from George Boussu who worked in Delft as an arms controller.

Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I would like to thank Mr Willemsen of the museum for taking the time to reply to my enquiry, as you know not all museum staff make the effort to acknowledge an enquiry much less take the time to give an answer.

4th June 2019, 05:50 PM	#1
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Dutch M1815 Musket. Hi, A Dutch M1815 No.2 musket dated 1819 with a later conversion to percussion. Butt stamped Delft 1845 and I presume this is the place and date of the percussion conversion. There were a number of manufacturers and I would be grateful if anybody could identify which one from the stamps in the photographs. I will photograph the stamps under the barrel if this would help. Here is an unconverted one in the Royal Armouries collection. https://collections.royalarmouries.o...ative-271.html Regards, Norman. P.S. Here's a list of the Manufacturers. * J Devillers: approx. 120,000 Nos.1 & 2 * Gebr. Malherbe: 52,000 Nos.1 & 2 * PJ Malherbe: 10,000 Nos.1 & 2 * MJ Malherbe de Goffontaine: 6,000 No.1 * JL de Loneux fils: 26,000 Nos.1 & 2 * P Lebens: 19,000 Nos.1 & 2 * J Walker (Birmingham): 8,000 Nos.1 & 2 * W&H Spangenberg: approx. 12,000 No.1 Attached Images Last edited by Norman McCormick; 4th June 2019 at 06:22 PM.

6th June 2019, 08:15 AM	#5
corrado26 Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Black Forest, Germany Posts: 1,204	Here are fotos of an other M 12815/38UM Dutch infantry gun with all the same details as shown on the first one. In my opinion thie gun and its barrel in question is absolutely original. corrado26 Attached Images

6th June 2019, 01:35 PM	#6
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Hi, This photo shows where the touchhole once was. It is quite difficult to photograph as the 'machining' has been well done but it is the shiny spot on the barrel and the small circular plug can be seen quite clearly with the barrel in hand. This would imply the barrel is a converted from flintlock as Corrado has suggested. The rear barrel plug may have been replaced at the time of conversion as mine has an integral rear sight on the plug. Regards, Norman. Attached Images Last edited by Norman McCormick; 6th June 2019 at 01:57 PM.

6th June 2019, 01:52 PM	#7
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Hi, Here are some more photographs, barrel band, inside lock, and underside of barrel. A crown over G.B. seems to be marked on most pieces as well as crown over D and crown over possibly I.R. The British style broad arrow is puzzling. Regards, Norman. Attached Images

6th June 2019, 04:05 PM	#8
corrado26 Member Join Date: Dec 2014 Location: Black Forest, Germany Posts: 1,204	The "GH" in the centre of the butt stamp stands for sub-inspector Johann Christian Heym of the Delft factory, this stamp says that the stock has been re-newed at Delft in 1840. The crowned "D" at the brass rest of the pan stands for G.C.Dujardin (see Martens/de Vries, Nederlands Vuurwapens 1813-1866, p. 202 and H.L.Visser, Aspects of Dutch Gunmaking p. 383). Until 1840 the inspector's mark was also struck into the barrels, after this date this was stopped. But it looks as if the D-mark under crown has been struck at the barrel too though very faintly readable. This proofes that the barrel has been really converted from flintlock to percussion corrado26 Last edited by corrado26; 6th June 2019 at 04:24 PM.

5th June 2019, 05:50 PM	#2
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,623	Hi Norman That is a nice 1815 Dutch musket. And appears in good condition. Sorry I can't help with the stamps/markings. But another Forum member will likely be able to lend his expertise. It's obvious this was a well done arsenal conversion to percussion. So common with many of these muskets. And, it looks like a rear sight was added at the time of conversion. Many details on this musket copied the original 1763/1777 pattern French muskets of this period. In fact, the original U.S. Springfield 1795 and later variations also copied the French musket. Even the original .69 caliber bore. If my memory serves, Belgium was a prolific in manufacturing firearms and did many musket conversions for other European countries. Nice piece, Rick

5th June 2019, 06:50 PM	#3
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Hi Rick, I'm pleased with the completeness of the musket, all the bits seem to be present and in reasonably good condition. The 69 calibre was a wee bit of a problem re ammunition for the ones that were used at Waterloo as the British guns were of a larger bore. I'll need to dismount the barrel I reckon to get some good makers marks and hope that one of our continental members can throw some light on the manufacturer. Thanks for your interest. My Regards, Norman.

5th June 2019, 11:30 PM	#4
Fernando K Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 669	Hello In my opinion the barrel is not the original of flint. It does not present a plug covering the ear, nor a "masacote" or "bombeta" on the right side, nor on the upper part of the Barrel. The plate if it presents the remains of the bowl and the plug that covers the steel screw Sorry for the translator. Affectionately

6th June 2019, 04:35 PM	#9
Fernando K Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 669	Hello With all respect and without encouragement to discuss, but to establish the truth, the area that has been photographed, and that would correspond to the location of the touchole, is directly below the stamped crown, which would be too advanced. The "broad arrow" is just some brands with chisel to identify the operator who filed the barel, or inspection. Sorry for the translator. Affectionately

6th June 2019, 06:27 PM	#10
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Hi Guys, Have photographed all the stamps I could find which might make things clearer. I'm not sure why there is an issue with the stamps on the top of the barrel near the old touchhole. Thanks for your continued interest. My Regards, Norman. P.S/ Corrado, many thanks for the info you've provided. Attached Images

27th March 2021, 06:18 PM	#11
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,596	Hi, Further to my previous post here is the information supplied by the Dutch military museum. Normally the name of the manufacturer can be deducted from the butt stamp, but unfortunately, the original stamp was replaced by the Delft stamp at the time of the conversion to percussion in 1845. The letters GH in the middle stand for “geheel hersteld”, meaning: completely overhauled. The only way to find the manufacturer is with help of the controlstamps on the gun. Unfortunately, these are not all identifiable. I have checked your musket with examples from our own collection, and found ones that have the same stamps. These have been identified by us as being made by the Frères Malherbe (Malherbe brothers). Your gun was probably part of the 1819 contract for the manufacture of 3000 muskets no.1 and 3000 muskets no.2. The literature does not definitively says that it is from Dujardin, but that it is possibly from Dujardin. Unfortunately, we have no contemporary lists of inspectors and their stamps. It is all based on names that are encountered in archives, connected with letters that we find on guns from about the same date that those names worked there. When looking in my documentation, I also encounter the crowned GB stamp that you have on various parts. That is probably from George Boussu who worked in Delft as an arms controller. Regards, Norman. P.S. I would like to thank Mr Willemsen of the museum for taking the time to reply to my enquiry, as you know not all museum staff make the effort to acknowledge an enquiry much less take the time to give an answer.