![]() |
|
|
|
|
#1 |
|
Member
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: CHRISTCHURCH NEW ZEALAND
Posts: 2,810
|
Hi Jim,
You mention Penang as having a connection to EIC. Here is a little history linking the two through Charles Cornwallis https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Charle...ess_Cornwallis Particularly relevent is the section on the CORNWALLIS CODE. Also some pics of Fort Cornwallis in Georgetown, Penang taken when we were there a few years back. Hope this is of interest. Stu |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
|
Jim: Again, thanks for starting this super interesting Thread. And thanks for your research. Most helpful.
LOCKS: Every flintlock lock I've examined on a Jazail of Afghan origin was either a genuine EIC lock or a locally made copy. (Although I now recall seeing one with an unmarked European lock that I believe was from Belgium). It's likely the EIC Armories would have spare locks in their inventory to replace broken/worn locks on their muskets. While the British were known for keeping good records, it is conceivable that many of these spare locks found their way into Afghan hands one way or the other. LOL It would seem that the Afghan gunsmiths/customers considered the India pattern Brown Bess lock and trade variants to be the "standard" for building Jazails (?) Even the locally made copies attempt to stylistically copy the same lock. Also, as mentioned above, we can't exclude the probability of exporting the locks only for sale/trade in the Region. BARRELS: The barrels on Afghan made Jazails seem to originate from regions elsewhere. Persia, Sindh, even Ottoman. I've even seen one with a Northern Indian style Torrador barrel. One common theme was the re-use of older barrels from different regions. You even see this on better quality Jazails. Here is another good example from my collection: Also in unmolested condition, this Jazail is heavily decorated with pierced brass and punched iron mounts. The genuine EIC lock is marked HIRST (another prolific British maker) and dated 1799. The lock plate and hammer are flat versus round faced. The most interesting feature is the barrel, which is chiseled and fluted. The barrel (probably Persian) is much earlier than the rest of the gun. There is a Persian style makers stamp on the top breech of the barrel that looks like it was originally gold filled (now missing).I need to study this gun further. Rick |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
|
SOME MORE PICS...........
|
|
|
|
|
|
#4 | |
|
Member
Join Date: Jun 2013
Posts: 2,145
|
Quote:
The same barrels are on the abufitila Omani matchlocks and according to Elgood they are Persians... |
|
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,650
|
Rick, this topic has indeed become totally fascinating with this thread, and thanks to you and the guys who have brought your experience, examples and expertise into these pages. For me it has been an entire learning curve, and actually it was my goal to learn more on these after I finally found one!
I hoped that this discussion would not only become a kind of resource for material and observations on these guns, but increase awareness of them in the collectors field, and that has definitely been achieved thanks to you guys. It does seem like the character of these jezails indeed represents that of 'frontier weapons', that is arms which are often, if not typically, assembled with composite components and locally made elements bringing them together. With the formidable reputation of the jezail itself as a deadly weapon with the skills of both the artisans crafting them and the tribesmen using them, it would seem the British locks became the standard for that particular element. While the locks themselves seem to have been in abundant supply, the tribal armourers of course learned to duplicate the markings of British EIC locks in degree. Naturally these were more crudely applied and unawareness of the proper associations of the markings' purpose led to incongruent combinations such as VR (Queen Victoria) with 1815 date or similar pairings. It seems like even when markings were worn off, there were even attempts to 'touch them up'. It is as if the markings themselves carried some sort of imbuement to the power or quality of the weapon. As you have noted, the possibility of export of these locks into these regions by vendors dealing with the EIC for specific trade with tribal groups is a distinct possibility. There were many instances of such 'private enterprise' with arms in India before and during the 'Raj', and while most weapons filtered through government channels for forces there, there are many cases where items were sent there outside these administrative venues. I agree with Kubur, this example you have posted with the wonderfully marked lock, the maker who seems well represented in these, and especially that fantastic barrel!! This example perfectly illustrates the kind of comprehensive quality of these guns quintessentially !! ![]() Stu, thank you for that link.....I had no idea of Cornwallis involved with EIC. Naturally we know him well in the US from our Revolutionary War history but totally unaware of his extended career into EIC. |
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
|
Hi Kubur
Very observant of you. LOL I feel confident that the barrel started life mounted to an Omani matchlock. It's style and proportions are identical. I need to remove the lock and study the area around the vent hole. The Omani matchlock barrels had their priming pan mounted integral with the barrel. There should be evidence of the original priming pan having been cut off/removed for reuse with a flintlock. Again, more evidence of reuse of a barrel from a different gun from a different location. Meantime, here is one more from my collection. The lock on this one is another genuine EIC lock marked WRIGHT, and dated 1803. The barrel is somewhat of a mystery. It reminds me somewhat of the Torador style barrels from Northern India, but lacks the swollen breech area common with those barrels. At some point, the barrel looks like it was subjected to a harsh chemical cleaning. Which probably erased any evidence of damascus pattern. Too bad. I'll have to take the barrel off and study the breech plug area to confirm my initial guess. But I do have a latter period munitions grade Torador with a broken stock that has a very similar barrel. I need to study this gun further also. The trigger guard and front sling swivel (which would have been made from horn in this instance) are missing. As well, the wood ramrod is a modern replacement. Yet another project. LOL Rick |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,650
|
Rick, you have a truly amazing collection, and your observations and insights are great as I try to learn more on these Afghan guns. As noted, with the EIC locks invariably used on these, it is important to understand as much as possible on the dynamics of EIC supply and how these components filtered into Afghan armorers hands.
It would seem that a primary source of many guns and components were probably attained during the First Anglo-Afghan war 1839-42 where forces of primarily EIC native troops and numbers of British units invaded Afghan regions. There were staggering numbers of the EIC guns about, particularly in the disastrous retreat from Kabul to Jallalabad, where over 4000 troops (and over 12,000 civilians) were killed or died in the trek through terrible winter conditions. Only one medical officer survived. The weapons from these forces must have provided huge numbers of parts as well as others supplied in subsequent years. While we assume that many of the locks on these jezails were often misjoined and duplicated by native tribal armourers, while it seems that in actuality there may have been certain curious alignments in the production of the India pattern guns before they even got to India. Apparently the lock plates themselves were fashioned by makers in the Wolverhampton area of Birmingham, while hammers etc. were produced by other vendors. Then the entire guns were assembled by other producers and proved. With these dynamics it is easy to see where certain anomalies might occur, and trying to set exact dates for changes very difficult. One thing emphasized was that the EIC weapons seemed to have carried a higher quality standard, for example using the bun type hammer screw which strengthened the shaft of the tumbler. Putting together these kinds of particulars I think will be important to better understanding the locks used in these jezails, and apparently reused over generations. |
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
Member
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
|
Hi Jim
Thanks for your kind comments. One thing I find amazing is the volume of original (non-tourist) specimens still available today. They show up at auctions and websites all over North America and Europe. This, along with other reference material leads me to believe these Afghan style Jezails must have experienced a sort of renaissance type period along the frontier. Maybe from about 1790 to say 1860 in both flintlock and eventual percussion variations. We then see the use of the 1853 British Enfield style rifled muskets and their later Snider conversions, and eventually the Martini-Henry (of which many local copies were made). The locally made flintlock locks on most I've examined generally copy the Third Model British/EIC lock pattern. The percussion locks somewhat copy the British Enfield pattern percussion locks. The fact that locally made copies of these locks were made would appear to be evidence that the local demand for these Jazails exceeded the supply of readily available British/European made locks. Rick |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|