BLUNDERBUSS FROM YORK MAIL
 

Hello everybody,
Could someone tell me more about this blunderbuss.
I would like to know if it is a work from XVIII or XIX TH century and I will be happy if I could learn more about this weapon.
Thank you in advance
Cerjak

Hi Cerjak,

Congratulations: this is a very nice, sturdy and obviously historically remarkable English flintlock blunderbuss of ca. 1790; please note the shape of the lock parts and the sliding safety catch left of the cock.

The inscriptions, especially on the impressive muzzle face, suggest that it once was used by a postman of the Royal York Mail. Unfortunately I could not identify the proof marks.

Just imagine you were a late 18th-c. highway man trying to mind your 'business', and all of a sudden had to face this muzzle loaded with eight to ten musket balls - reading the inscription while the dog was cocked! :cool: :eek:

What bore is it?

Best,
Michael

Hola, Cerjak:

Tengo mas dudas que certezas.....Me parece que es una falsificación, o al menos, un trabuco al que se le ha agregado leyendas. YORK MAIL está punzonado con punzones completos,(cada letra) cuando lo habitual era que se fuera armando con punzones simples. Lo mismo para la inscripción HIS MAJESTIES MAIL, cuando lo habitual era HAPPY HE HE ESCAPES ME. El punzón que imita al punzón del Banco de Pruebas (London o Birmingham) no creo que perteneciera a un arma oficial, de la corona....

Es solo una opinión

Afectuosamente. Fernando K

Hello, Cerjak:

I have more doubts than certainties ..... I think it's a fake, or at least, a blunderbuss where inscriptions were added. YORK MAIL is stamped with loose punctions when it was usual to engrave continuous lettering. Same for the inscription HIS MAJESTIES MAIL, contrary to the usual HAPPY HE ESCAPES ME. The punction that imitates the Proof house marks (London or Birmingham), i do not think it belonged to an official crown gun ....

It's just an opinion

Affectionately. Fernando K

... And i am no linguist but, i guess it should be either His Majesty or Their Majesties, right ? :o
Probably the phrase was not written by an english speaking person ? :confused:
A nice blunderbuss, in any case :cool:

... And the lock doesn't have the slightest mark :confused:

Fernando see this link his majesties seems to be a correct english or was a correct expression long time ago
http://www.lukehistory.com/resources/yorkdec.html
Regards
Cerjak

See this other link it is old English ?
 

Yes, you are right.
It is old english for the possessive case; in the new morphology the ' replaced the e.

Interesting piece Fernando, The font used on the end of the muzle, bieng totaly sans serif dates post late 1870s when it first started to be used, as far as my observations have taken me. {other than on fake markings of course.} {But such font was still rare untill the 20th century.}.}

The "perhaps" older font used on top of the barrel is clearly done with individual stamps,

i have no evidence otherwise for york mail but as the average wood worker could afford stamps cut by an engineer of there entire name, I suspect York Mail could as well. {Especialy as many such stamps were actualy made in Sheffield, Yorkshire.}

I vote XXI century For the markings, I am not capable of dating the piece itself.

Spiral

A very nice and interesting piece, BUT those marks bother me. IF it is truely an English piece then it SHOULD BY LAW have English Proof marks unless it was made prior to 1630ish. The official Proof House was established around then and official marks started to appear.
The marks on this Blunderbus are not English IMHO unless they are some sort or local Armorers mark. Also it is unusual for the lock not to be marked.
Have you given any thought to this not being YORK UK, but (New)York USA? Don't forget that the Brits held sway there until 1776,and would no doubt have run some sort of mail service to their troops. British Proof laws did not (and still don't) have any meaning in the US.
Hopefully someone can identify the marks as I for one would like to know more about this piece.
As an aftertought, have you checked UNDER the barrel for marks? If you can safely remove it, then it might possibly give up some secrets. The other thing which concerns me a bit is the relatively unblemished lock. A look at the inside of that might also give up some secrets.
Regards Stuart.

Blunderbuss
 

Any blunderbuss displaying supposed Royal Mail ownership markings has to
be viewed with a large degree of scepticism, due to the significant boost
to its value granted by an authentic association. I am afraid that I don't
think that the Mail related script on this piece is remotely genuine, being
quite wrong stylistically and not particularly well executed.

The highly respected London gunmaker H. W. Mortimer was an early
contractor supplying arms for guards on Royal Mail Coaches circa 1783.
An example garniture of arms supplied by Mortimer can be viewed at the
National Postal Museum. Mortimer was a top quality gunmaker, and this
is reflected in the standard of the guns he supplied to the Crown, the
better to withstand the rigours of the Coaching service. I don't feel that this
blunderbuss exhibits the high standards of manufacture that would be
expected in a Government contract piece. The better quality English
makers from this period were justifiably proud of their workmanship and
took pains to carefully mark their products, and clear British proofs would
be present too.

Perhaps removing the lock and barrel from the stock as suggested
in an earlier post will shed some light on this gun's origins. Whilst the
general appearance suggests an English blunderbuss dating from the
1780s, I'm a little concerned about the the signs of artificial ageing
on the handrail stock and what looks like cold blue wash on the lockplate.
It's an uncomfortable fact that blunderbusses because of their value
and popularity are frequently spuriously marked and faked.

I hope that this has not disheartened you too much, but if you paid
a premium for this gun as a genuine Royal Mail piece you have good
grounds for the return of your money if it was auction or dealer purchased.

Best regards,Simon.

FWIW, I've seen examples of English-made knives dating to 1850-1860 with stamps using sans serif fonts (and have at least one I can think of), and have seen a file conversion with a similar stamp I would date a little earlier to ca. 1830.

Not that it makes that big of a difference, though I guess it would move a hypothetical window for the origin of the stamps a little closer to the age of the gun... :shrug:

Yes indeed; a sharp eye you got !

Maybe this is an Indian reproduction ...

m

Interesting if there genuine pieces! Can you share Photos of the knives & close ups of markings please!

Spiral

Sure thing! :)

Edward Barnes & Sons was a prolific maker who opened their shop in Sheffield in or around 1833, and were active until the end of the 3rd quarter of the century. However, by the time of the Civil War, it was common to find "Sheffield" stamped along with the maker's name and/or trademark, and there is no shortage of examples made in or around 1850 that were already stamped "Sheffield" along with the maker's name.

One note: I cannot speak with absolute certitude that this knife dates as early as I believe it to, and it is entirely possible that I am mistaken with regards to my date attribution. Furthermore, I have known more than one example contemporary to this knife - and even later - in which serif fonts were still used in the dye stamps.

I also have lying around somewhere an old Thomas Gill file knife, old enough to still employ an etched trademark, but with a "... Warranted ..." stamp that uses sans serif fonts as well, though it may take a bit of digging to find that one... ;)

One final note - if Wiki is to be trusted, the first documented use of the term 'sans serif' by a foundry in England to describe such a font was in 1830. If this is valid, one has to assume the font existed before the label which came into use to describe it...

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sans-se...tin_characters

:shrug:

Hi folks,

Are you sure that these posts on knives are placed in the right thread on a blunderbuss?! :confused:

Best,
Michael

That was just a "by the way". The topic remains unhurt !

Hi Michael,

I would humbly argue it is relevant in the context of the question surrounding the font type that appears in the stamp(s) used on the muzzle... While it is commonly accepted that such font types did not appear until the 4th quarter of the 19th century, there seem to be multiple examples of the use of such a font well before the 'accepted' timeframe... :shrug:

The presence of possible evidence supportive of an earlier (though surely uncommon) use of such a font type in dye stamps might prevent us from prematurely dismissing the stamps as inauthentic. ;)

That being said, I recently saw at auction two very well done fakes, including a pistol that incorporated an original barrel but with questionable (if not altogether spurious) markings...

Agreed, EspadaAncha, :)

Thanks!

I guess we would all like to see those two fakes you mentioned! How about posting them after the auction is over?

Best,
Michael

there is really a lot of knowing here! I think that afer an "autopsy" this blundesbuss will speak.
I will let you know
Thank you for your help
Very interesting comment ! I have learn a lot since I have joined this forum !
REGARDS

CERJAK

Hi Michael,

The auction took place either in December or January, and I think - "think" being the operative word ;) - I archived some photos of the piece or pieces in question. I'll search for them later today, and will definitely post them if I can find them... :)

Cheers,

Chris

Hi Chris,

With most auction houses, past sales can still be traced in their archives - so I really look foward to seeing those!

Best,
Michael

Hi Michael,

Being a small, regional house, I had assumed they didn't archive their past auction lots, but fortunately, I was wrong. :)

Here's the one I thought long and hard about, as I really *wanted* to believe it was legitimate, but the gestalt was off... way off. ;)

I am looking forward to hearing your thoughts... while sharp and pointy objects are well within my comfort zone, I am (overly) cautious about antique firearms. Someone such as yourself with far greater knowledge might pick up on clues that are invisible to me... :shrug:

Best,

Chris

Thank you, Chris,

Sadly I am not expert enough to really competently comment on this. 18th century Mediterranean miquelet guns are too far out of my range of expertise.

So please forgive me for not being able to utter any substantial cristicism on this item. Stylistically, I cannot trace out really dubious aspects.

Gentlemen, I know we have a few experts here - would you like to comment?

Best,
Michael

The wood for this pistol is for me very suspect ,it's like a new stock I have the same opinion about the barrel and lock ..
Cerjak

Thank you Cerjak & Michael for your thoughts, and Cerjak, I apologize for the digression from the stated topic of the thread: your beautiful blunderbuss. :)

New Wood ?
 

I am certainly no authority, but that is the first thing that struck me about this pistol also .

Gentlemen, I beg to differ. :)

I may not match your expertise in 18th century arms but over more than 35 years I have collected hundreds of 14th-17th century guns, related items and Gothic and Renaissance iron work, let alone completely dismantled many hundreds of 18th-19th items and passed expert opinions on them.

I cannot see any argument why the iron parts and the stock (the original polish was probably taken off the latter) should be fake. Who on earth should do that - and why? Imagine the price you can possibly get ...

Best,
Michael

Thank You laEspadaAncha, unfortuantly to my eyes the appaling fit of blade to guard & hilt to guard as well as the use of brass as a guard to me eye looks even without the late font looks to be more likely 1970s Pakistan made item, rather than 19th century Sheffield

Perhaps I am wrong though? :shrug:

I would recomend Bernard Levines forum on bladeforums for a more "solid" opinion though, Hes an ornery old chap but has a great knowledge of old Sheffield pieces. { As do one or two others there including a chap who now a collector was a cutler in Sheffield many decades ago.}

Spiral

Thank you Michael, the removal of polish certainly would change the appearance of the piece; so much patina lost !

Hi Spiral,

I would suggest visting my Bowie knife thread from a year or so ago for an additional example of a mid-19th century knife with a brass guard. However, if the guard (on the side knife I show above) is brass, it is a white brass alloy, and more likely, German silver with a tarnish. Regardless, both the guard material and form as found on this knife (pointed ovoid) were common for mid-19th century knives (the thread also has a photograph of this particular knife):

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=13612

For that matter, if you can find even a single example - just one - of a Pakistani knock-off (contemporary or otherwise) that exhibits the proper "U*S" trademark stamp used by Edward Barnes & Sons to market their knives to the abolitionist American market - and as present in this example - I would very seriously consider sending you this knife for free. ;)

I agree the fitment is less than optimal, though I have more than a few knives that exhibit similar less-than-stellar fits, and have handled more examples than I can remember over the last 20-25 years. Both the guard material and form are common for mid-19th century knives, the 'white metal' used in the grip was commonly used through the 2nd and 3rd quarter of the 19th century (though IMO it is not the best choice for a grip), the MoP rosettes are stylistically consistent with the period, and the knife retains it's original sheath, which is obviously of the same age of the knife.

I do in fact post on Bladeforums, as long before I could afford a decent sword I had been collecting American knives (while not made in the US, this knife was made for the American market), and I estimate I have more than 200 in my collection, from Revolutionary War side knives to LE folders made within the last quarter century.

As I regret having digressed from the original topic of this thread - and have already apologized for the same to Cerjak - I would invite you to PM me with an email address if you would like to continue the discussion about this particular knife, which I would be happy to do.

I will, however, leave you with a couple pictures of other Edward Barnes & Sons knives contemporary to my own, stamped in the same sans serif font.

Ironically, this first knife was posted on Bladeforums (over two years ago). Please note the similarities with regards to the thickness and pointed ovoid shape of the guard:

http://i256.photobucket.com/albums/h...on03/003-4.jpg

The etching on the above example reads, "For the Gold Searchers Protection," dating this knife's manufacture to the Gold Rush market ca. 1850.

This next example was made to commemorate General Zachary Taylor's victory at the Battle of Buena Vista in 1847. Please note the use of both a sans serif font as well as a 'footed' font on the reverse of the blade:

http://www.cowanauctions.com/itemImages/xx9616.jpg

Lastly, here is another example from Cowans, yet another Civil War era Edward Barnes & Sons knife that is stamped in a sans serif font. Please note the poor fit of the guard:

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/599...sons3x0754.jpg

There is overwhelming evidence that English cutlers were employing the use of a sans serif font by mid-century.

Provided evidence exists that foundries were producing dye stamps in sans serif fonts in 1850, one should at the very least consider the validity of the anecdotal evidence suggesting they were being produced as early as 1830 as suggested in the link in my last response, which is much closer to the lifecycle of this weapon than a date of post-1870.

I would therefore suggest that regardless of any perceived peculiarities regarding the execution and/or placement of the stamp(s) on the muzzle, that it might be premature to dismiss its validity for the use of the (sans serif) font per se.

Regards,

Chris

Cheers Chris I agree we shouldnt hijack this thread further, althought I must say that although I am always pleased to learn & admit errors, the pilling of one fake or {perhaps just radicaly missdated knife?} upon another doesnt realy answear the questian. {Athough the Cowans piece when one sees the badly dyed & even ground stag & single rivet, certaly never came from 19th century Sheffield.}

Someone puts a lot of sans serif "civil war" knives into Cowans for auction I notice.

Perhaps we should start a new thread on these pieces & markings?

But if you choose not to my email is spiraltwista@aol.com ;)

Regards,
Jonathan

Jonathan,

Wouldn't you think that if all these examples were "fake" as you (IMO erroneously) are so quick to claim, that maybe... just maybe, someone - just one person - might have gone on record stating as much?

The first example I posted was, as I wrote, originally posted on BF, and is from a museum-quality collection owned by an esteemed collector. Don't you think BRL would have chimed in if he had found the example to be anything less than authentic? When has he ever not?

Flayderman also shows multiple documented examples of pre-Civil War knives in his treatise on the Bowie knife (link here), made in Sheffield, for the American market, that clearly show the use of a sans serif font.

Once again - if you can find me one... just one example of a "fake" imported knock-off that executed the well-known "U*S" trademark as present and as it appears on my example, I will very seriously consider sending you the knife. For free. Of course, you will understand if I don't hold my breath, as such as example will not be forthcoming. ;)

Again, I believe the evidence in support of the use of sans serif fonts in England by the mid-19th century is insurmountable. Anyway, I will expand further in the new thread dedicated to this discussion, here:

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...779#post134779 :)

Regards,

Chris

The point of suggesting the new thread Chris was to stop the Hijacking. :shrug:

sorry Cerjak...

spiral

The relevance of the establishment of the use of a sans serif font, while I agree is deserving of its own thread, is nonetheless entirely relevant to this thread for the aforementioned reasons. ;)

This blunderbuss was a fake !
 

You was right and as usually Fernando your felling was good .
After had removed some screw now I have many evidences to confirm yours opinion that it was a XXI th Century production and you could see it with those photos .( sorry for quality but enough to see)
This afternoon I will send back to this auction company who had sold me as "royal mail Blunderbuss from the 19 th century from the city of York"
AGAIN THANK YOU !
CERJAK

Oh, it is a great thing you can have it returned and recuperate your money :)
Let's have a drink to that :eek: .

why not, as you know France it is the country of Champagne !!

Cerjak, I would like to thank you very much for your gentlemanly reception of the unfortunately very accurate assessment of this gun, which has has proven to be a modern commercial product. I am glad to hear that the auction company has taken a noble stance on accepting return, however I hope they will look further into providing more accurate descriptions in their offerings.
I also thank you for sharing detailed photos of the elements of this gun, which gives us all a very good lesson on the spurious items out there and what to look for. This item has also led to a fascinating discussion, as well as a great spin off on the very important topic of the use of serifs on stamped fonts, beautifully handled by Chris and Spiral.

Gentleman, an extremely impressive turn out on this, thank you all so much. I know Ive certainly learned a lot on these fascinating blunderbuss guns!

All the very best,
Jim