Help IDing some British and European firearms

[RDGAC]

Not as yet, Fernando. Gonna get some done tomorrow, but for now I was more seeking literary recommendations from you disgustingly knowledgeable chaps.

[RDGAC]

Righto, some pictures for your collective pleasure, so to speak. The upper pistol is the one I suppose to be the elder. Overall length 14.5in (approx); 10in barrel of .625in bore at muzzle, severe wear on lower right quadrant of the barrel wall (looking from the muzzle) which suggests that this may have been closer to .60 when made; has a foresight, with backsight channel cut into the tang.

Fully stocked in dark wood (age patination?), possibly walnut/hazelnut (don't know my woods), carved extensively including beneath barrel and on grip; some cracks present on several areas. Large, scroll-tipped trigger offset to the right, apparently intentionally as its slot has also been carved right of centre; large trigger guard with extensions to end of lock bolster forward and ~0.4in short of the large, rounded butt with metal cap, the langets of which extend to ~0.5in short of the lockplate tail. Ornamental scrollwork on the upper part of the grip and the reverse of the lock area.

Flintlock with etched border on plate and cock, all parts present externally except upper jaw of cock. Remains of upper jaw screw now within threaded part of the cock itself; frizzen spring is also very loose with 5-10 degrees of rotation clear of the lockplate possible about its screw. Mechanical condition unknown, as the lockplate screws are very stiff and I don't want to damage them, which prevents any inspection.

[fernando]

Hi RDGAC. Are these the initials for "Research & Development Grants Advisory Committee" ? ... just kidding .

Very nice pistols.

Well, the only Bayley i find in comprehensive Boothroyds revised directory (ISBN 1-57157-157-4) can't be the one, as he has been in business between 1873-1898 (Thomas Bayley - Birmingham). This appears to be a bit late for flintlocks production and yours has indeed all signs to be late 18th/early 19th centuries... in my humble opinion.
Concerning the other name, the earliest Richard in this directory is Wiliam Richard, who founded his firm 1801 in London. This could (could) be your man.
Let's see if other members have further data on those two gunsmiths.
And by the way, try and make a close up picture of both lock plates, even if faded. I notice that the name "Bayley" has more letters (Bayleys Co?); these little details are often important to distinguish things.
Check also for proof marks on the barrels, near their breeches; British guns practicaly always have proof marks ...Birmingham, London, even both; this helps dating and confirms their origin. But i bet you know all about this .

[Matchlock]

Hi RDGAC,

The one signed Baily can be closely dated to the last decade of the 18th c.; according to my records, only two London gunmakers are in close selection:

- Isaac (most probably), Whitechapel Rd., 1783-91
- James, Mansell St 1804, 1790-1810

The Richards pistol is of earlier date, 1760's, and seems to have been made for hunting (saddle pistol). The fore end cap is missing (originally probably of horn).

There are many Richards listed in the most comprehensive reference work on Gunmakers: Eugen Heer, Der neue Stockel, 3 vols., Schwäbisch Hall, Germany, 1979; vol. 2., pp. 1039f. The two in the inner circle are

- John, London, 1760-1821
- Thomas, Birmingham, 1747-1779+, who is also recorded for his silver
mounts

Please look for silver hallmarks and proof marks.

Best,
Michael

[RDGAC]

Egad, replies! Well, without further ado, the second pistol and the smaller of the two; some close-ups for you chaps. Plus, a new and better photo of the upper pistol's lockplate, which I read as saying "Bayley & Co.", and anm illustration of the barrel toward the breech end. I can find no proof marks at all, but haven't yet pulled the barrel on this weapon (or indeed either of them), so hidden marks might yet await us.

[RDGAC]

And the Bayley gun. Michael, if you can see any traces of the hypothesised horn end cap in the two photos above of the Richards pistol's muzzle, please point them out. Part of the deal here is that I get both the pleasure of handling these weapons and the chance to learn more about them.

[Matchlock]

Proof and hallmarks are never inside or on the underside of anywhere.

I marked both the Birmingham proof mark in its pre-1813 version and the place of the missing fore end cap.

m

[RDGAC]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

Proof and hallmarks are never inside or on the underside of anywhere.

I marked both the Birmingham proof mark in its pre-1813 version and the place of the missing fore end cap.

m

Indeed, I have never known a mark designed to be seen by the user to be hidden; nonetheless, when uncertain I find it sensible not to discount possibilities based only on what I know. Not a few times have I been caught out by that habit. The supposition may appear foolish but is generally the result of my desire to eliminate it. Cautious should be my middle name...

Anyway, thanks for marking the two things you did. Oddly I can't see much in the way of physical evidence for an end cap, save a very small protrusion just forward of the stock and ever so slightly proud of the barrel surface. Anything in particular to look for?