Southeast Asian caplock arm

[werecow]

Hah, yeah, I was looking at the wrong row header in the numerals table.

The first two characters might be letters; นพ.

[Ian]

Hi werecow. Yes, I think you are right about the first two characters.

.

[werecow]

FWIW google translate says that นพ translates to Dr..

[Ian]

Peter, could you provide a full length picture of this gun? Any mark on the barrel or lock? If no marks, I'm wondering if this is a locally made copy of a French or British gun from the 19th C. Interesting that you note a possible Japanese connection mentioned by the seller. There were Japanese groups living in Thailand during the 18th and 19th C, and earlier.

[Jim McDougall]

While I know little on firearms overall, it seems to me that (from what examples I can find online) the 'pistol butt' style, if you took away the 'stock' has a certain resemblance to a traditional Japanese matchlock.

There was of course certain Japanese presence in SE Asia. I recall years ago finding examples of Japanese katana among swords of India. It seems in many discussions, there have been mentions of Japanese throughout these regions.

[pbleed]

This is a snapshot of the the entire arm. I doubt that this arm is in any serious way linkable to Japan. I suspect that one or another of its previous owners felt it "looked" odd and Asian and so, "Japanese." It is unmarked save for embellishment to the brass inlay along the lower stock edge and lock counter-plate. It certainly looks not at all martial.And it does not look like a "primitive" or ethnographic weapon.

[Richard G]

It seems an exceptionally long lock, or are the photo's giving a distorted impression? It would be interesting to see what the other side looks like.
Best wishes
Richard

[Philip]

Originally Posted by pbleed

This is a snapshot of the the entire arm. I doubt that this arm is in any serious way linkable to Japan. I suspect that one or another of its previous owners felt it "looked" odd and Asian and so, "Japanese." It is unmarked save for embellishment to the brass inlay along the lower stock edge and lock counter-plate. It certainly looks not at all martial.And it does not look like a "primitive" or ethnographic weapon.

In many of your pics, the wood looks a bit dark. Have you taken the gun apart? I wonder what the color of the wood is on the protected interior surfaces. Having had it in hand, what does the density and texture of the wood feel like? What I'm trying to nail down is whether or not the stock could be of a timber other than European walnut. Such as some SE Asian variety of rosewood or mahogany, perhaps. Do you have any thoughts on the matter?

[Philip]

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

While I know little on firearms overall, it seems to me that (from what examples I can find online) the 'pistol butt' style, if you took away the 'stock' has a certain resemblance to a traditional Japanese matchlock.

There was of course certain Japanese presence in SE Asia. I recall years ago finding examples of Japanese katana among swords of India. It seems in many discussions, there have been mentions of Japanese throughout these regions.

I don't see any resemblance to a matchlock of any sort. This is a percussion-lock gun, the two mechanical systems don't have anything in common. The Japanese also didn't make side-by-side double-barrelled matchlocks (although they did make revolving three-barreled matchlock carbines, the manually-rotated barrel system resembling similar ones made in India.)

Chronologically, the 19th cent. heyday of percussion muzzle-loading guns is much later than the Japanese presence in SE Asia that you allude to.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by Philip

I don't see any resemblance to a matchlock of any sort. This is a percussion-lock gun, the two mechanical systems don't have anything in common. The Japanese also didn't make side-by-side double-barrelled matchlocks (although they did make revolving three-barreled matchlock carbines, the manually-rotated barrel system resembling similar ones made in India.)

Chronologically, the 19th cent. heyday of percussion muzzle-loading guns is much later than the Japanese presence in SE Asia that you allude to.

Thank you for the elucidation Philip, I'm afraid my unfamiliarity with firearms has been revealed. However, my working knowledge has some viability, and I know the percussion system was not around until 19th c.
The reason I used the word traditional was to note the 'matchlock' styling on some stocks I had seen were intended to note resemblance, though quite obviously much earlier.

I think you notes on the wood, and toward Richard's observation on the unusual lock length are interesting as are the suggestions of this gun being produced in the colonial sphere with Asian influencing.