Old flintlock conversion to percussion

M ELEY · 15th February 2021, 06:03 PM

[QUOTE=fernando]If it is a conversion work, is very well 'disguised', Mark.
Trying to get it back to flint is an option; which i wouldn' adopt myself.
It is admitable that a gun converted to percussion would not keep its original value but ... what the hell; it has an history, all the same.
I like the shadow of your elegant hands while taking the first picture

.

Well, you know I am a 'hand model', Fernando-

Fernando K · 15th February 2021, 07:13 PM

Hello

First of all, restoring this piece to flint implies having a cock (hammer) model and we don't know what it was like. Of course it is a careful conversion, the places where the frizzen spring was have kept their original design. I do not see the threaded holes of the screw of the frizzen and its spring, properly plugged, but it is a test of careful work. The presence of gold is not incrustation, but gilding on fire (an impossible practice today, due to its toxicity). It is not a dueling pistol, due to the profuse decoration. The English dueling weapons had little decoration and the French pairs were much later. For decoration, I lean towards France, sometime in the 18th century.

I would leave it like this, restoring the wooden box and cleaning. You can never go back to the original state.

Affectionately

adrian · 15th February 2021, 09:35 PM

I agree with all Fernando K's comments and I would also go further re the original configuration of this pistol to state that I think it has not been converted from flint. I see no sign of the holes that would have been filled on the face, and perhaps inspecting the rear of the lock, as well as the nipple lump attachment etc would determine this for certain. May I suggest that you look closely at the face for evidence, such as seen in the photo below that I have extracted from a book.

M ELEY · 16th February 2021, 02:53 AM

Thank you, Fernando K and Adrian, for your input. Adrian, you are correct that the lock on mine has no filled holes and the existing lock fits snugly. I guess the reason I thought perhaps a conversion is I've seen the 'nipple' cut into old locks and the cap holder on this one possibly looked 'added'. Likewise, the aging on the pistol, with it's wear and patina to the wood, made me suspect older. I guess in leu of this information, this must just be an early percussion pistol, perhaps 1820's?

Philip · 16th February 2021, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by adrian

I agree with all Fernando K's comments and I would also go further re the original configuration of this pistol to state that I think it has not been converted from flint. I see no sign of the holes that would have been filled on the face, and perhaps inspecting the rear of the lock, as well as the nipple lump attachment etc would determine this for certain. May I suggest that you look closely at the face for evidence, such as seen in the photo below that I have extracted from a book.

I must respectfully disagree. If it was made as percussion, why would there be that unmistakable shaped "platform" on the forward end of the lockplate that is of ideal shape to support a frizzen-spring which has since been removed? Also, I see a slight shadow and a partial arc where the frizzen spring screw would have been, it hints that this is a filled screwhole.

A general observation -- the proportions of the gun, and the relative crudity of the foresight and the end of the forestock suggest that the barrel had been shortened, possibly at time of conversion but not necessarily so.

The decoration on the breech and furniture, and the decorative carving on the buttstock, indicate that this pistol was quite a fine thing in its heyday. I agree with the consensus of opinion on the thread so far -- restoring it to flint is probably not a good idea, but a judicious cleaning and overall conservation work will improve it greatly and halt any ongoing deterioration.

fernando · 16th February 2021, 10:28 AM

After having admitted in my #3 that it could have been a subtle modification work, i had a second thought in that i looked at it as definitey being a conversion to percussion. But i didn't risk to post my uneducated guess and rather wait for the cavalry

.

Fernando K · 16th February 2021, 11:58 AM

Hello

One more thing; The plugged holes, although they were carefully treated on the outer surface, inside the lock they are not usually treated equally, and you can see the marks they have left. You would have to see the inside of the lock to see what is discovered ...

Affectionately

Raf · 16th February 2021, 12:19 PM

The critical issue in deciding whether this is an early conversion is the relationship between the percussion bolster and the barrel. Looking at image 4 it looks as if the barrel and bolster have been forged in one piece . In which case it definitely isn't a conversion. The only way to be sure is to dismantle it and look for any tell tale signs of brazing between the bolster and the barrel. If present then its almost certainly a skilful period conversion. Admittedly it is weird that a gunsmith would go to the trouble of removing a flashpan , carefully filling the holes and not re - shape the area where the frizzen spring fitted although they did add a bit of engraving in this area. If it isnt a conversion then a tentative theory might be that since period gunsmiths relied on supplies of components made by outworkers a part finished lockplate origionally intended for a flintlock was re purposed as a percussion lock .

The ethics and aesthetics of conversions back to flint is a grey area bordering on forgery. Probably justified where a high quality flintlock has been butchered by a provincial gunsmith with a crude drum nipple conversion or as sometimes seen a bad modern reconversion. Otherwise leave well alone .

Fernando K · 16th February 2021, 01:00 PM

Hello

Another question; the decoration from the middle of the lock, under the pump and up to the front of the plate has been interrupted, as if it had been carefully removed. If it were an original percussion plate, the decoration of scrolls and fire-gilding would cover the entire space. The decoration of simple stripes on the front and also on the cock (hammer) is not consistent with the rest of the decoration, and the eyes and the feathers of the hammer are reminiscent of English percussion hammers ...

Affectionately

16th February 2021, 10:28 AM	#6
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Following Filipe's observations ... After having admitted in my #3 that it could have been a subtle modification work, i had a second thought in that i looked at it as definitey being a conversion to percussion. But i didn't risk to post my uneducated guess and rather wait for the cavalry .

16th February 2021, 12:19 PM	#8
Raf Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 252	The critical issue in deciding whether this is an early conversion is the relationship between the percussion bolster and the barrel. Looking at image 4 it looks as if the barrel and bolster have been forged in one piece . In which case it definitely isn't a conversion. The only way to be sure is to dismantle it and look for any tell tale signs of brazing between the bolster and the barrel. If present then its almost certainly a skilful period conversion. Admittedly it is weird that a gunsmith would go to the trouble of removing a flashpan , carefully filling the holes and not re - shape the area where the frizzen spring fitted although they did add a bit of engraving in this area. If it isnt a conversion then a tentative theory might be that since period gunsmiths relied on supplies of components made by outworkers a part finished lockplate origionally intended for a flintlock was re purposed as a percussion lock . The ethics and aesthetics of conversions back to flint is a grey area bordering on forgery. Probably justified where a high quality flintlock has been butchered by a provincial gunsmith with a crude drum nipple conversion or as sometimes seen a bad modern reconversion. Otherwise leave well alone . Last edited by Raf; 16th February 2021 at 01:28 PM.

15th February 2021, 06:03 PM	#1
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,141	[QUOTE=fernando]If it is a conversion work, is very well 'disguised', Mark. Trying to get it back to flint is an option; which i wouldn' adopt myself. It is admitable that a gun converted to percussion would not keep its original value but ... what the hell; it has an history, all the same. I like the shadow of your elegant hands while taking the first picture . Well, you know I am a 'hand model', Fernando-

15th February 2021, 07:13 PM	#2
Fernando K Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 671	Hello First of all, restoring this piece to flint implies having a cock (hammer) model and we don't know what it was like. Of course it is a careful conversion, the places where the frizzen spring was have kept their original design. I do not see the threaded holes of the screw of the frizzen and its spring, properly plugged, but it is a test of careful work. The presence of gold is not incrustation, but gilding on fire (an impossible practice today, due to its toxicity). It is not a dueling pistol, due to the profuse decoration. The English dueling weapons had little decoration and the French pairs were much later. For decoration, I lean towards France, sometime in the 18th century. I would leave it like this, restoring the wooden box and cleaning. You can never go back to the original state. Affectionately

15th February 2021, 09:35 PM	#3
adrian Member Join Date: Mar 2012 Posts: 130	I agree with all Fernando K's comments and I would also go further re the original configuration of this pistol to state that I think it has not been converted from flint. I see no sign of the holes that would have been filled on the face, and perhaps inspecting the rear of the lock, as well as the nipple lump attachment etc would determine this for certain. May I suggest that you look closely at the face for evidence, such as seen in the photo below that I have extracted from a book. Attached Images

16th February 2021, 02:53 AM	#4
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,141	Thank you, Fernando K and Adrian, for your input. Adrian, you are correct that the lock on mine has no filled holes and the existing lock fits snugly. I guess the reason I thought perhaps a conversion is I've seen the 'nipple' cut into old locks and the cap holder on this one possibly looked 'added'. Likewise, the aging on the pistol, with it's wear and patina to the wood, made me suspect older. I guess in leu of this information, this must just be an early percussion pistol, perhaps 1820's?

16th February 2021, 11:58 AM	#7
Fernando K Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 671	Hello One more thing; The plugged holes, although they were carefully treated on the outer surface, inside the lock they are not usually treated equally, and you can see the marks they have left. You would have to see the inside of the lock to see what is discovered ... Affectionately

16th February 2021, 01:00 PM	#9
Fernando K Member Join Date: Apr 2010 Posts: 671	Hello Another question; the decoration from the middle of the lock, under the pump and up to the front of the plate has been interrupted, as if it had been carefully removed. If it were an original percussion plate, the decoration of scrolls and fire-gilding would cover the entire space. The decoration of simple stripes on the front and also on the cock (hammer) is not consistent with the rest of the decoration, and the eyes and the feathers of the hammer are reminiscent of English percussion hammers ... Affectionately