Afghan Pistol

[Ibrahiim al Balooshi]

Well I don't know if it is worth discussing but I would suggest if you look at the end of the 19thC you will find that the Kabul National weapons making arsenal not only leaked like a sieve but that quite accurate weapons making machinery mysteriously vanished and resurfaced in what we would term back street workshops which to thus day turn out reasonable modern copies. I recall a good discussion on the Machin Khana factory on library some time ago.
khanjar1 poses a question looking for picture evidence in Kabul chicken street main souk of evidence of the hundreds of old style pistols I claim to have seen there a few years ago...which if you know the place you would certainly not want to be seen taking photographs down there. However I found various clues on the web and one in particular from just one small shop in the same souk complex with a lot of weapons in it... there are hundreds of such shops in chicken street just like this ...I also show guns from Darra down the Khyber on the Pakistan side.
The Martini Henry pistol is interesting and a good explanation sits at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTvxFNRLbiw

[Fernando K]

Hello

To more of everything that has been written here, the cap of the stock is of modern weapon, and it is not seen which is the method of fastening Is it a screw? Normally it is held by a spring. In addition, the wood is simply fitted and not dug.

affectionately

[corrado26]

As far as I can see, all pistols in the fotos above are made in a typical British style of the East India Company and like these originals have their mounts made of cast brass which are much easierly to produce than iron mounts that have to be forged.
Quite obviously the pistol in question has except the lock and the barrel nothing British, neither the stock nor the mounts, so - and this is my last reply- why should this piece have been made in Afghanistan?
corrado26

[Jim McDougall]

Again, this has been a fascinating discussion, and as a virtual novice in the field of guns, I appreciate all the input and comments. I have through the years done occasional research concerning firearms, particularly those from India and Afghanistan which often included or course British.

The more I look at this one, the more it seems put together with varied components, but the terrible engraving on the lock seems far too poor to be either Irish (as I earlier suggested) or Liege. Either of these would never have had such poor quality lettering allowed, at least as far as I would think.

One thing I recall in material I read about the 'Khyber' copies of guns is that these were commonly produced often using bonified parts and elements of other weapons. That would account for a barrel which held the authentic British proof stamps. Why in the world a DUBLIN CASTLE lock would be coped in Afghan areas is puzzling as most locks there were variants of EIC locks.
But if any of the Dublin guns found their way via the constant movement of British troops in and out of the 'Raj' (they were produced in large number c. 1770s per Brooker) then it is possible that they would be subject to copy as well.
The Herbert name and those 'chop' marks are a puzzle as well, as these kinds of notes and marks were indeed systematically placed in guns in production...…..but not likely in Afghan shops. Again, I would return to loose parts being repurposed or used as components...….could this be the case?

While all of this supposition and analysis may seem irrelevant if this is indeed a 'tourist' or 'creative antique' ….the exercise, at least for me, has been informative and interesting. I do appreciate the observations and notes from those who have long handled firearms as well as the firsthand information on Afghan gunmaking shops. That adds good perspective to what I had read on them some years ago.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

...The Herbert name and those 'chop' marks are a puzzle as well, as these kinds of notes and marks were indeed systematically placed in guns in production...…..but not likely in Afghan shops. Again, I would return to loose parts being repurposed or used as components...….could this be the case?....

Indeed ...


.

[corrado26]

Fitting work marks show that all parts of this pistol belong together. They have been struck after dismantling the pistol for further processes and make sure that at the final assembly the right parts of a pistol find together again.

As you can see in post #24 there are different marks at the stock and the barrel, what is proof that these parts came from different pistoles, what was normal, when surpus parts have been in use to produce arms of a low quality.
corrado26

[fernando]

Originally Posted by corrado26

... Fitting work marks show that all parts of this pistol belong together. They have been struck after dismantling the pistol for further processes and make sure that at the final assembly the right parts of a pistol find together again...

The same principle, but used in a different timeline. Before precision technology appeared, parts were marked in their original assembly as to adjust (file) them to fit each other and, at a later stage, the system was used to assure that, after being dismounted, they could be correctly remounted when picking them from among many others that were disassembled in the same session, like in barracks armor depots or in war scenes. They say that Samuel Colt took advantage of this system to help convincing American (and not only) army authorities to commission his contracts; his guns were thoroughly marked part by part. In a humoristic (realistic ?) note, soldiers in the field got drunk while cleaning their pistols and would not discern which were the parts of each either's guns.

Originally Posted by corrado26

... As you can see in post #24 there are different marks at the stock and the barrel, what is proof that these parts came from different pistols, what was normal, when surplus parts have been in use to produce arms of a low quality...

The barrel in post #24 has nothing to do with the discussed pistol; was one of my collection to illustrate (*) how assembly marks were applied in the various gun parts, including barrels.

On a further note, suppose the barrel smiths make a series of barrels and sends them to the assembly workshop. As they have been made by hand, it is inevitable that they have millimetrical differences. So the stock smith files the wood here and there to match it with a determined barrel; and after that he marks the wood with the same mark that comes with each barrel ... and that's it.


.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Ibrahiim al Balooshi

Well I don't know if it is worth discussing but I would suggest if you look at the end of the 19thC you will find that the Kabul National weapons making arsenal not only leaked like a sieve but that quite accurate weapons making machinery mysteriously vanished and resurfaced in what we would term back street workshops which to thus day turn out reasonable modern copies. I recall a good discussion on the Machin Khana factory on library some time ago.
khanjar1 poses a question looking for picture evidence in Kabul chicken street main souk of evidence of the hundreds of old style pistols I claim to have seen there a few years ago...which if you know the place you would certainly not want to be seen taking photographs down there. However I found various clues on the web and one in particular from just one small shop in the same souk complex with a lot of weapons in it... there are hundreds of such shops in chicken street just like this ...I also show guns from Darra down the Khyber on the Pakistan side.
The Martini Henry pistol is interesting and a good explanation sits at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zTvxFNRLbiw

Thanks very much for the pics. It would be interesting to dig thru the guns shown but not probably a safe project for now..........
Stu