Looking for Forum

[fernando]

Would anyone please indicate some Web Page or Forum specialized on flintlocks, namely British?
I have acquired a Queen Anne type pistol and i would like to consult such specialists about.
Thanks in advance.
fernando

[rand]

Good question Fernando,

Just looked at frequently asked questions and saw no guidelines posted about that. I have just startd posted here again in the last couple weeks and assumed all antique arms and armor, which would include firearms but i do not know. Have some Islamic firearms I would like to discuss also and want to know what forum would be acceptable. Guess this would include canons too..... Would that include catapults and bows too? I know we have discussed edged weapons from the bronze age to about WWI which is from a bronze Persian sword to a Caucasian kindjal

I anxiously await the answer on this one.

rand (the patient one)

[kai]

Firearms as well as any odd pieces are ok AFAIK - they have been occasionally discussed here already. Military issue pieces won't qualify as ethnographic - I don't think we have been overly strict with old military sabers/etc. though...

I'm sure more knowledgeable folks will also point you to additional sources if needed - just give it a shot!

Regards,
Kai

[katana]

IMHO Ethnographic weapons surely include all 'projectile' types as well (bows, slings, catapults and firearms)
As to the question of military pieces and their relevance to Ethnographic weaponry......many cultures had to fight Colonial rule. The interesting thing is many of these cultures adopted variants/styles of colonial weaponry. Surprisingly this happened in reverse to,

[fernando]

One thing is the input, the other is the output.
Certainly the posting of the most varied items in the Forum has been more accepted by the moderators than the response obtained by the members at large. We know that for some of them the definition of ethnographic is equivalent to tribal ... pass the definition of tribal.
One may come up with a less gentilic specimen, just en passant, not meaning this is the Forum nourishment, but certainly not injecting it as a sin. However the noise of silence makes the balance pends to a determined side, which tastes are well defined.
Firearms postings usually find little response over here. Fans of this area seem to be posting elsewhere, which is a pitty, as this is a unique Forum.
Here goes my "Queene Anne", not necessarily for historical or technical discussion, but for sharing its elegance with those interested in these things.
I wish i could find here the answers to my questions.
All the best to all.

[ariel]

Personally, I dislike firearms intensely: carried them far too much in the past.
I do not collect them, do not intend to buy them, do not read about them and do not have anything to add to the discussion about them.
Having said that, I have no objection to the idea of people posting threads on antique firearms. As a matter of fact, it would only add to the combined expertise and the diversity of this Forum.
Perhaps, Firearms could become a separate sub-Forum, akin to the Kris. I am all for it.

[fernando]

Naturally each one has his own opinnion, we were all made to be different.
This is an Ethnographic Arms and Armour Forum.
In the assumption that firearms are dislikeable because we have carried them far too much in the past, i personaly don't see any difference between them and edged weapons, as the purpose is or has been precisely the same ... just a question of time or context. Active firearms, same as active white arms, are forcingly and deeply comdemnable. One basic reason i see for contemplating old weapons, fire or edged being not different, is to remind us what we should hate to use, to stop man being the only species that hunts its own kind. Some other reasons woul be consumism and aesthetics, simple or mechanicaly animated. Its a question of taste.
With all respect.

[Jim McDougall]

I'm glad Fernando posted this, and I think it is indeed a valid subject whether ethnographic weapon or not as it is in degree associated. Just as with edged weapons, the weapons of colonial powers often diffused into native armouries and if nothing else, even the firearms are interesting from historical perspective.
I fail to see what possible connection there is between negative associations with the guns of today and historical weapons of yesteryear. I do not particularly 'like' guns either as a result of unfortunate personal experience, however I do very much enjoy the 'history of weapons' overall.

Getting to the question, probably one good source would be the 'antique and military swords forum over on SFI. The guys over there seem to be equally involved in one degree or another with a wide scope of weaponry, and I am sure many would have certain knowledge on guns of this period. One of the best sources, if you ever can find them, are auction catalogs, as far as simple identification. As far as books, "British Military Firearms" by Howard Blackmore (I do not recall date) has excellent information, however it would seem your pistol is private issue.

The 'Queen Anne' period is a highly romanticized period, mostly for its associations with the 'golden age' of piracy, and your pistol certainly seems to handsomely represent the time, an extremely nice example.
I hope this will be of some help
All the best ,
Jim

[Bill M]

I have no problems with the postings of firearms. They are as ethnographic as edged weapons. Fernando put it very eloquently.

Just to put this pistol in perspective, could you give us an overall length?

[Rick]

A pistol is nothing more than a sophisticated tool for throwing a stone .

[rand]

The title arms and armor forum sort of says it all. The same type of metalwork done on a sword was done on a firearm as was done on armor. Its all intertwined and all parts of the of arms and armor are needed to fully explain a reason or progression of use. Its a cause and effect ralationship...

Glad you are here Fernando... And I look forward to reading the posts on your fine pistol.

Am curious, what questions do you have about your pistol?

rand

[Chris Evans]

Feranando,

What a wonderful pistol - I bet it wasn't cheap.

My attitude to weapons in general is that they are implements of survival. Without them we would have no way to hunt of defend ourselves. Firearms and edged weapons are all all armaments. That said, I think that Ariel's suggestion of a subforum for antique firearms is a good one.

Cheers
Chris

[josh stout]

If you had said "Queen Anne" and "antique" to me I would have thought of furniture. It is neat to see the same style in a pistol. For me, that is the useful part of looking at related items from a particular time and place. It allows one to see continuity of themes from a particular culture, which then allows better identification of other artifacts.
Josh

[fernando]

It just came to my mind that one specimen i would like to have in my collection would be the donkey jaw bone with which Samson killed one thousand Philistines. Certainly an unusual resource weapon as also an ethnographic one .
According to what i have learnt in the last couple days, the Queen Anne pistol pattern has indeed comenced before Queen Anne reign, but was nick named after this Monarch due to having achieved its popularity during such period. It looks lyke style and decoration ( baroque and rococo ) were adapted by British gunsmiths from XVII century French basis.The actual name of this pattern was "turn off pistol". Apart from the screw barrel ( breech loading "forced" bulllit ), other characteristics would be the shape of the stock, usually with a dragon ( lion?) mask in the butt, and the absence of a stock fore end. Further references would be the cannon shape of the barrel and the inverted peculiar frizen spring. This specimen of mine appears not to have a turn off barrel, but a ramrod instead, which is not so often seen but still a variant of these pistols. Eventually a famous gunsmith ( James freeman 1710 ) has once come up with one of these, which was referred to as a night pistol. The intention was to load it with buck shot, to avoid a precise aim with solid shot in the dark of the night. This would eliminate the need for a screw barrel, using a ramrod instead. I don't think this would necessarily apply to all ramrod version "Queen Annes".
The total length of this example is close from 9" and the barrel measures 4 1/2". The caliber rounds the .50".
My great question, the one i am eager to have solved at short term, is its genuinity, on what touches origin. I have paid a considerable amount of money for it . Then somebody told me this is a knock off, based on the fact that the gunmaker's name is omitted and there are no proof marks visible. A good quality piece, but still a knoff off, basicaly of Belgium provenance. This being true, the value of such imitation woud be some 60% of the original British stuff, which would be a disaster, considering what i have paid for it. However the opinnion i had about the knock off possibility is not founded on a fully solid basis. For example, i have read that the fact of only having as a mark the sole word LONDON, could either be a foreign imitation trick or also the several indiscriminated British regional gunmakers resource to increase the image of their products. So i give it so far the benefit of the doubt.
Any coments towards this dilemma, good or bad, will be most wellcome.

[Berkley]

there are no proof marks visible

Thank you for adding this information – I kept looking for proof marks in the pictures and thought it strange that I saw none. The following information may be useful to you; however, attempting to determine the authenticity of an antique firearm from a photograph is not something I would venture to do.

The practice of proving firearms apparently started in 1637 when a royal charter was granted to the gunmakers’ guild of London which authorized them to have the final authority in the testing of all firearms…. If you find the letters “VP” on a gun that has been sold in the British Empire, it means “Viewed and Proved.” The first step, called “Viewing,” consists of tests to see that all parts have the necessary tolerance, that they are assembled properly, and that the gun functions well mechanically. At the end of this process, the letter “V” is stamped on the gun. Next, heavy charges are fired to see if the gun is safe; if it is, it is regarded as “proved” and the “P” is stamped.

Gun Collecting, Chapel, Charles Edward; “Identification”, pp.140-141.

The first Charter of Incorporation of the London Gun-makers’ Company possibly did not confer the powers which rendered gun-barrel proving at the Company’s house imperative, but the second charter, granted in 1672, gave powers of searching for and proving and marking all manner of hand guns, great and small, daggs and pistols, and every part thereof, whether made in London or the suburbs, or within ten miles thereof, or imported from foreign parts, or otherwise brought thither for sale; and a scale for proof was thereby established.

The Gun and Its Development, Greener, W.W., “The Proof of Guns”, p.288.
The absence of any proof marks is, therefore, at least a cause for concern. (It should be noted that the marks might be other than the "VP" referred to above, and might include variants of "GP", "BP", or other combinations, depending on the place and date of manufacture and proving. The letters would be in script typeface, surmounted by a lion rampant or royal crown).
Berkley

[Jim McDougall]

Excellent information Berkeley!!! and thank you so much for citing the references. I think its most helpful when details are addressed as you have done.
Best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Thank you Berkeley
Your quotations are most interesting, and almost coinciding with the references i read in my little book "The Standard Directory of Proof Marks" by Gerhard Wirnsberger, translated by R.A. Steindler. We can read here that a first Royal edict was issued in 1631 and not in 1637 as often stated, permitting the association or guild of ( seven ) gunsmiths, charging them with the responsability to keep the arms of citizen's militia in shootable condition. They were granted the right of inspection, and each such arm was marked with a crown over "A" stamp. On March 1637 gunsmiths banded together and founded the pompously named "Worshipfull Company of Gunmakers of the City of London", replacing the not less pompously named "The Master, Wardens and Society of the Misterie of Gunmakers of the City of London". The original Worshipfull Company consisted of 125 gun makers, of which 63 were London citizens. They had the powers to search for unproofed firearms, and even confiscate them, in case the owner didn't want to test them. It was also forbidden to sell arms that did not bear the crown over "A" mark.
The obliging mark at this time was the crown over "A" for the Gunmakers Company, as well as the crown over "GP" for the proof mark. In 1670 the Crown over "V" was added. During the 18th century these marks were seen together, with the barrel maker name between them. Crossed scepters, rampart lions and crowns followed as arm and barrel proof marks for long time.
However other countries, Belgium included, have their history on marks, and those should appear according to the same rules. However exceptions make the rules, and there are arms with so many different stories. Somebody has just sugested that my piece could have been made in raw condition in Belgium for a British order, and be decorated and finished at the destination, with the intentional erasing of the original proof marks ... one of so many probabilities. I have meanwhile dismounted the barrel ... not the whole mechanism, which is rather complex for me. No marks in the interior though .
My dilemma continues.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Fernando,
I must say this pistol you have posted is, as always with your items! most interesting and I am learning quite a lot on these firearms from your continued research and Berkeleys notes. I just received the current Bonhams catalog from London and item #422 is a flintlock 'turnoff' pistol by North, Royal Exchange, London c.1750. While the pistol is in most regards similar with longer barrel, what is most interesting is the same style silver wire foliate scrollwork on the butt.
Edward North is listed as Master of the Gunmakers Company in 1753 and 1758, and armourer to the Honourable Artillery Company. He is also shown as furbisher of arms to London bankers. Perhaps this smaller gun was made as a protection pistol for one of these bankers in the smaller size and as you note for a 'night pistol' . Sort of a pocket shotgun?
I wish I could scan the photo to post, but the scrollwork is compellingly like that seen on this North pistol. The auction took place July 25,2007 at Bonhams www.bonhams.com

Incidentally, what does the term 'turnoff pistol' mean"?

I hope this helps.

All best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Hi Jim
Thanks a lot for your ( allways simpathetic ) input.
Turn off barrel, or screw off barrel.
It means that the barrel is not an entire piece, but divided in two sections. The advantage is that, when you screw it off, almost all cilindrical part comes out, leaving a chamber just after the breech, where you can place a bullit a little wider than the actual barrel bore ( caliber ) increasing the shooting pressure and therefore improving the direction accuracy. When bullits are ramed through the barrel muzzel, they have to be narrower than the actual bore, for a couple reasons ( this difference being called vento=wind ) decreasing the said pressure and consequent precision.
I hope i made myself understood.
Kin regards
fernando

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Fernando,
Thanks so much for the explanation, I really appreciate better understanding these terms.
Best regards,
Jim

[Berkley]

Jim,
Here is a little pistol which illustrates several points that Fernando has raised. This is a screw-barrel or turn-off barrel pistol opened to show the position of the ball. As Fernando says, this forms a tight seal in the bore by using an oversized lead ball of greater than bore diameter, which eliminates the “windage” necessary to push a ball down the barrel from the muzzle with a ramrod, and makes a relatively high-powered small pistol. This particular pistol is of later manufacture, common design, and decidedly inferior workmanship to Fernando's elegant example. Although marked “London”, it in fact has Birmingham proof marks. It is also marked H Nock, although that famous London maker would not have turned out anything of this rough quality. (In any event, he died before the Birmingham proof house was established). In short, it’s an English pistol that was intentionally mismarked when made to deceive the original buyer with a spurious claim of greater quality than it possessed, or as Fernando says, "increase the image of the product".
Berkley

[Jim McDougall]

Outstanding Berkley!! Thank you so much for the excellent presentation!
I know that I very much enjoy learning more on early firearms, a topic I admittedly have always sidestepped in studying weapons.
Nicely done and much appreciated.

All best regards,
Jim

[fernando]

Excelent,Berkley.
The clearest way to show it.
Eventualy the examples i have within this area, would not be good for such demonstration.
One has a similar shape and decoration, although of poorer quality, without any maker or proof marks, but with a fix barrel.
The other is a Liege marked one, with a screwing facility that is stuck and, despite all reasonal efforts, i could never unscrew it. I think this happens often with this system or, at least, i have already came across with a few cases in the Net.

[fernando]

Although not entirely an idiomatic expression,the term sympathetic used in this context might sound unfamiliar to those who are used to see it envolved with clinic language .
We have a second and surely more popular use for this term in Portuguese ( and other Latin languages ).
What i mean about Jim postings is that they are pleasant and fair ...as well as peacemaking .
fernando

[Jim McDougall]

Fernando,
Thank you so much indeed for the very kind words!! and again for the information that has developed on this thread on a fascinating weapon.
All the best,
Jim