My first jezail

[Philip]

A great book to have is Ronald Lister's ANTIQUE FIREARMS: THEIR CARE, REPAIR, AND RESTORATION (NY: Crown Publishers 1963). There's nothing quite like it and it's a godsend. Unfortunately I don't think it's been reprinted. The author is British so copies may be more common, in the antiquarian book market, in the UK.

Based on info in the book, here's a suggestion on extracting that stuck copper brush. Find a long thin-walled metal tube just smaller than the bore, and of sufficient length to reach the obstruction and still allow a hand grip. Drill a transverse hole in one end, enough for a short metal rod to serve as a turning- and pulling-handle. On the business end, file four V-shaped notches on the periphery of the tube. Then make four small L-shaped cuts with a wire-saw or similar device at the bottom of each V. If you push the rod into the barrel and engage the bristles of the brush in the saw-kerfs in the tube, you might get enough of a grip on the thing as you slowly rotate and gently pull on the tube.

Now, on to the malfunctioning lock. What you have is severe wear on the tumbler notches and the sear nose. The full-cock notch needs to be carefully filed so that it has a square "step", not the rounded hump that's there now. The sear nose must also be shaped to mate with this indent precisely (carefully note the position of the two components when the lock is in a full cock position, to guide you in making the angles in the detent and on the nose just so.). The half-cock notch needs to be undercut slightly to allow the sear nose to lock into it. (there is a diagram on p. 150 of Lister's book).

If the hammer catches on the half cock detent as it falls, it means that the radius of the tumbler is worn out-of-true. Try and correct the sear nose and the full cock detent first, then work on the half-cock. By restoring the full undercut in the half-cock detent, you'll be filing the radius of the tumbler a bit smaller in the area between full and half cock (i.e., setting the radius closer to the axis-pin.) You can then dress down the radius below the half cock, reducing the diameter of the tumbler at that point (but not so far so as to compromise the undercut). This adjustment of the radius is usually enough to cure the "half cock grab" syndrome.

You might also want to be sure that the mainspring and tumbler move with out undue friction against the lockplate, or against the tumbler bridle. Minimize friction and the lock becomes "faster" and that helps prevent half-cock grab, too.

[RDGAC]

Philip, thank you very much indeed for that useful information, in particular for putting me on to Lister's book; surprisingly it seems it's relatively easy to get hold of a copy (I'm looking at one going for ten quid, used) and I have no doubt that it shall serve me well.

Regarding the tool you suggest, I'm not really very well equipped, and nor is work; we don't actually own a vice (nowhere to put it even if we had one; our behind-the-scenes areas are based in a three-story Georgian townhouse) and I've been pondering whether a small G-cramp would be strong enough to hold the mainspring in place, to allow me to remove the tumbler. Having buggered up the barrel I'm in no rush to do the same to the lock.

In any event, I think I can probably manage to scrounge up the materials you suggest; a small hacksaw and the like will doubtless not be expensive, allowing me to cut the way you suggest. Whether I can do it well enough to make it work is another matter, but I did buy this guy intending to learn about working on flintlocks, so I guess I'll have to learn by my mistakes. A thought occurred to me last night, too: would a long, hollow metal tube with a sharpened end be useful? My theory was that a good steel cutting cylinder might allow me to cut the copper strands and/or the fouling (or whatever it is, which was definitely starting to give under repeated jabbing with my auger), and permit the whole lot to drop out of the muzzle.

Regarding the lock. If a G-cramp is strong enough to hold the mainspring in the right position, what of the sear return spring (is this the correct term?) and the frizzen/pan lid spring? I'm not eager to do this and then find I can't get the bloody sear or frizzen back on the lockplate; speaking of which, I'm fairly confident that the cock is rotating pretty freely. There's a good, wide clearance between the two, and the cock certainly moves smoothly when the trigger is pulled, despite snagging on the half-cock notch.

Incidentally, it's good to see that I have a well-worn lock; it makes me very happy to know that this old beast has seen some serious use!

Edit: A thought that occurred to me over lunch is that the threads on this lock are, by and large, adequate at best. Indeed, as mentioned, the fore screw of the lockplate is dire, with the thread barely cut into its end, giving it very little purchase on the lock itself. Interestingly, however, the tang on this barrel is threaded into a small hole just above the plug, and seems to have been made fairly well (it certainly holds together, when suitably tightened); a later addition, perhaps. I'd suggest, as an explanation, that perhaps cutting the large, deep threads necessary for a threaded breech plug, with sufficient consistency in quality to form a reliable gas seal, was beyond the ability of most local metalworkers, if the evidence of their smaller screws is anything to go by. Indeed, the tang screw on this jezail is square in section for most of its length, and none too straight at that.

[RDGAC]

Herewith some photographs of the lock, courtesy the incredibly dimwitted works camera and a lot of patience. I've been test-firing the lock a couple of times, and discovered a couple of points:

1) Having removed, oiled and partly cleaned the cock, it moves smoothly and with a minimum of friction, so far as I can feel.

2) The half-cock notch appears to be both corroded and clogged with god-alone-knows what, but removal of some of this with a small steel pick has not improved results; the sear still grabs the half-cock, and halts the firing movement unless the trigger is kept depressed.

3) If the trigger is depressed, the gun will snap to half-cock and then discharge from there, albeit very quickly - the cock scarcely has time to slow down, but there are two distinct, audible clicks as the sear first releases from the full-cock position and then catches the half-cock notch, so far as I can tell.

No doubt I'm teaching my grandmother to suck eggs, but I hope that the photos show the asymmetrical wear on the tip of the sear itself and the very heavy wear on both the half and full-cock notches. I'm also concerned that the toe of the mainspring is barely being held in place by the tumbler in the "fired" position, which may explain why bringing the gun to the half-cock takes a surprisingly strong pull; certainly much more than the works percussion jezail's lock, which may of course be rather later and is now in better nick.

Edit: And, as promised and somewhat late, the pictures. In order:

1) Lock in full-cock position. 2) Lock in full-cock position, from bottom left and showing wear to notches and sear. 3) As #2 but from bottom of lock. 4) Lock in half-cock position. 5) Lock in fired position. 6) Lock overhead view, showing clearance between cock and plate, fired position.

[Jim McDougall]

Congratulations on this outstanding piece of history.....which is clearly every bit as rugged as the Khyber regions from which it came!!! This is all the better as it obviously has stories to tell.
Its fascinating watching you going through the disassembly and working on the restoration, and as a complete novice at guns, the information provided by Philip, is pretty amazing in the detail......this is probably why I know so little on guns!! way complicated, and me with zero mechanical skill.

What I do have is my ever present curiosity on markings, and this old balemark is amazing. The old heart topped by a 4 was the old East India Company 'balemark' , which was a merchants mark used to identify goods.
These were typically placed on the locks of guns as well. What is interesting is that the typical EIC balemark seen has the heart quartered, with the initials VEIC in the quarters (United East India Company, the V is seen as a U).
The configuration seen within the heart on this is the much older EIC balemark, interestingly applied with other than EIC initials. The 'I' character is not only applied flanking the 4 within, but in a five place sequence on the lock where 'TOWER' would have been.
The 4 was a key element of merchants balemarks as it was an often used cabbalistic symbol appealing for protection and good fortune and as such on the marks hoped for the best as materials were transported. The individuality of the markings and initials in them of course were identifiers.

What this signifies to me is that this lock was either faithfully reproduced by a native locksmith, interpolating symbols or characters that were known to him in interpeting the old markings seen on other early locks. As we have discussed, such markings were often seen by natives in thier own talismanic perspective, and as such must have been imitated with some of thier own application. Since this early form of balemark was from around mid to somewhat later 18th century, it sets the mind to wonder just how long this old flintlock was around.

I think there is far more to the story of this old 'camel gun' than we yet realize, and need to think more on it as this intrepid restoration continues.

Well done RDG!!!!!

All the best,
Jim