17thC Scottish Snaphaunce Musket

Norman McCormick · 9th July 2012, 04:45 PM

Hi Michael,
I was hoping you would come in with a detailed description. Having had more time to look at the piece I get the impression that the lock may not be the first that has been on this gun. The attached photo suggests to my untrained eye that a large washer or a larger headed screw/bolt was once there but this may be as a result of the screw/bolt being replaced rather than an attachment for a different barrel, as I can see no evidence of a trigger guard ever having been fitted to the stock it gives me more hope that the stock may originally be of Scottish origin rather than continental. I have sent photographs to Mr Jonathan Ferguson curator of firearms at the Royal Armouries who is going to confer with Mr Robert Woosnam-Savage who co-wrote a book on Scottish firearms so hopefully definitive information may be coming soon. Many thanks for your kind words and interest.
Kind Regards,
Norman.

P.S. When I think about it the composition could be any combination of lock,stock and barrel

Matchlock · 9th July 2012, 05:26 PM

Hi Norman,

Agreed: in the worst given case the item may be composite from three different main parts, and the brass-filled touch hole may conceal the fact that the barrel was converted to (and rebuilt from) percussion - in which case the lock cannot belong.
Also the crispness of the surfaces of barrel and stock differs greatly from that of the much better preserved lock, showing that the first two have seem much more use (and abrasion).

Telling from your lines, my intuitive initial premonitions seem justifiable.
From all I have learned in over 30 years of closest study is to be extremely careful as soon as an item does not look completely characteristic in all its single aspects; riveted screws or pins and crude alterations have become amber lights to me: the only explanation is that somebody intended to prohibit others from dismantling the gun for research - which is completely contradictory to the fact that all main parts of a gun must be easy to dismantle in case when cleaning or repair is needed.

On the other hand, you certainly did not overpay the piece, and some of the scans I attached show that trigger guards were used on both English and Scottish snaphaunce guns from the end of the 16th c.

Best,
m

Norman McCormick · 9th July 2012, 05:52 PM

Hi Michael,
Yes, I think it would be wise to 'hang fire' and first see what transpires with the Royal Armouries. There are some possibilities re the less used lock, it does show some scraping on the strike plate so it has been used albeit a little. After the 1715 rebellion and especially after the 1745 all weapons were proscribed by the victors and weapons were destroyed some being concealed and as you know older technology lasted a lot longer in Scotland than south of the border. Could have been little used and then hidden!! who knows time will tell I hope.
Kind Regards,
Norman.

Norman McCormick · 9th July 2012, 07:18 PM

Hi Michael,
Apart from the obvious the lock on this rifle is the closest in details I can see to mine. On a separate note, there are two small square holes, non identical, and two very small round ones in the rear of the butt. Are you aware of this style of butt occasionally having a separate buttplate maybe attached with hand made square nails, or could it have been a butt extension as we have these days for different sized shooters. Being a regular shooter I know just how important this sizing is. Just some thoughts.
Kind Regards,
Norman.

Matchlock · 9th July 2012, 10:25 PM

Hi Norman,

Butt plates did not normally appear before the 1580's on European military muskets, and they were made of very thin hammered iron attached not by nails but by tacks, with small, irregularly shaped but mostly rectangular heads.

Attached are details of a very fine German (Suhl) matchlock musket, ca. 1590-1600, overall length 1.67 m, weight 8.4 kgs, preserved in as-new condition; author's collection.

Only during the first half of the 18th c., butt plates got thicker and more figured, made of either iron or brass - depending on the material employed for the rest of the mounts.

Best,
Michael

fernando · 9th July 2012, 10:41 PM

Got it ?

9th July 2012, 04:45 PM	#1
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,632	Hi Michael, I was hoping you would come in with a detailed description. Having had more time to look at the piece I get the impression that the lock may not be the first that has been on this gun. The attached photo suggests to my untrained eye that a large washer or a larger headed screw/bolt was once there but this may be as a result of the screw/bolt being replaced rather than an attachment for a different barrel, as I can see no evidence of a trigger guard ever having been fitted to the stock it gives me more hope that the stock may originally be of Scottish origin rather than continental. I have sent photographs to Mr Jonathan Ferguson curator of firearms at the Royal Armouries who is going to confer with Mr Robert Woosnam-Savage who co-wrote a book on Scottish firearms so hopefully definitive information may be coming soon. Many thanks for your kind words and interest. Kind Regards, Norman. P.S. When I think about it the composition could be any combination of lock,stock and barrel Attached Images Last edited by Norman McCormick; 9th July 2012 at 05:22 PM.

9th July 2012, 07:18 PM	#4
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,632	Hi Michael, Apart from the obvious the lock on this rifle is the closest in details I can see to mine. On a separate note, there are two small square holes, non identical, and two very small round ones in the rear of the butt. Are you aware of this style of butt occasionally having a separate buttplate maybe attached with hand made square nails, or could it have been a butt extension as we have these days for different sized shooters. Being a regular shooter I know just how important this sizing is. Just some thoughts. Kind Regards, Norman. Attached Images

9th July 2012, 10:25 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Norman, Butt plates did not normally appear before the 1580's on European military muskets, and they were made of very thin hammered iron attached not by nails but by tacks, with small, irregularly shaped but mostly rectangular heads. Attached are details of a very fine German (Suhl) matchlock musket, ca. 1590-1600, overall length 1.67 m, weight 8.4 kgs, preserved in as-new condition; author's collection. Only during the first half of the 18th c., butt plates got thicker and more figured, made of either iron or brass - depending on the material employed for the rest of the mounts. Best, Michael Attached Images

9th July 2012, 05:26 PM	#2
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Norman, Agreed: in the worst given case the item may be composite from three different main parts, and the brass-filled touch hole may conceal the fact that the barrel was converted to (and rebuilt from) percussion - in which case the lock cannot belong. Also the crispness of the surfaces of barrel and stock differs greatly from that of the much better preserved lock, showing that the first two have seem much more use (and abrasion). Telling from your lines, my intuitive initial premonitions seem justifiable. From all I have learned in over 30 years of closest study is to be extremely careful as soon as an item does not look completely characteristic in all its single aspects; riveted screws or pins and crude alterations have become amber lights to me: the only explanation is that somebody intended to prohibit others from dismantling the gun for research - which is completely contradictory to the fact that all main parts of a gun must be easy to dismantle in case when cleaning or repair is needed. On the other hand, you certainly did not overpay the piece, and some of the scans I attached show that trigger guards were used on both English and Scottish snaphaunce guns from the end of the 16th c. Best, m

9th July 2012, 05:52 PM	#3
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,632	Hi Michael, Yes, I think it would be wise to 'hang fire' and first see what transpires with the Royal Armouries. There are some possibilities re the less used lock, it does show some scraping on the strike plate so it has been used albeit a little. After the 1715 rebellion and especially after the 1745 all weapons were proscribed by the victors and weapons were destroyed some being concealed and as you know older technology lasted a lot longer in Scotland than south of the border. Could have been little used and then hidden!! who knows time will tell I hope. Kind Regards, Norman.

9th July 2012, 10:41 PM	#6
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Got it ?