Middle eastern musket ID help

[rickystl]

Hi Blacksmith.
Thanks for all the additional photos. Don't know where to start. LOL Here are some additional observations:
LOCK: The lock, trigger, trigger guard, rear sight, and rear sling swival all appear to be from the French musket posted above. The trigger guard just engraved to suit local tastes. The lock even uses European pan head screws.
STOCK: That decorative wrist plate looks very similar to ones you see on Ottoman/Balkan style horse pistols, just larger. That long, brass muzzle cap is also something more likely to appear on Ottoman/Balkan style guns. Again, to suit local tastes. The brass butt plate being a locally made item.
BARREL: I believe this barrel started life as a European made item for use with a flintlock. The barrel being recycled with a locally made percussion bolster added. You can see the weld thread. The engraved brass overlays being added to the barrel, again for local tastes. The breech plug and breech look robust, and of European manufacture. I'm not sure about the barrel marks. The E with a circle around it may be a Belgium proof mark (?) It might be worth posting the barrel mark photos on the European Forum to see if anyone can identify them.
Overall, it is a very neat and interesting gun. Nice find.

SHOOTING THE GUN: If you decide you would like to shoot the gun, I would recommend you have the barrel inspected by an experienced muzzle loading, black powder (not modern) gunsmith for his opinion. I would have him remove the breech plug and check for plug to breech thread integrity. While the plug is out you can do a good cleaning and inspect the breech. As long as there is no deep pitting, the barrel (since it's smoothbore) can be burnished out smooth again. Also, get his opinion of the percussion bolster strength and the threads for the nipple. You will probably need a new musket size nipple. If the bolster threads for the nipple appear too worn or loose, the gunsmith can insert a new heli coil.

Rick

[BlacksmithingWitch]

Originally Posted by rickystl

Hi Blacksmith.

BARREL: I believe this barrel started life as a European made item for use with a flintlock. The barrel being recycled with a locally made percussion bolster added. You can see the weld thread.

Rick

With respect, im not sure i agree. The barrel profile seems to match that of the french musket pictured earlier too closely, and Im not sure what you mean by weld lines on the bolster. There is a very shallow rifling in the barrel upon cleaning, not super deep but enough of a twist that it cant be considered a random scratch pattern inside. If the lock, trigger guard and strap hardware are from a french musket and the barrel of that musket resembles mine in available calibers, shape and details such as the size of the "tang" that secures the breech to the stock, as well as the size and shape of the percussion bolster, then im more inclined to believe that the barrel too is of one such french gun that had been put into a new stock and decorated with gold and carving as per some owner's taste. I am suspecting heavily ottoman/balkan inspired origins, partially from the gold, partially from the rosette decoration on the stock and a smaller spiral rosette on the breach tang, and also for the fact that there was a charge of what I found out to be cut lead inside the barrel, oddly without powder (thankfully) and that sort of ammo was often used in ottoman areas in a bind. The butt plate, muzzle shield and other stock accents are all steel or iron, btw, although I do suppose one could confuse them for brass because they arent very clean in the photos and there was a rather impressive film of gunky oil on top of them making them appear yellow. And on the subject of metal, the inlays on the barrel seem to be gold, as theyre too soft and nonreactive to be brass. they werent tarnished the day i got it, albiet covered in gunk, and even after cleaning where one would see brass objects at the least start to take on a slightly deeper or darker appearance, it remains shiny. I even wiped a q-tip of strong vinegar on an unoiled section of decoration to be certain, and this is the solution i use to deliberately patinate brass. still nothing. So by my count that rules out most things except gold as being able to fit the bill. (plus it is VERY soft)

Thanks for your opinions on this piece im still trying to get to the bottom of it as its been very puzzling to me. I appreciate your theories

[kahnjar1]

http://damascus-barrels.com/Belgian_All_Proofmarks.html
Refer here. The barrel Proof Marks are Belgian so at least you now know where (at least) the barrel was made. See #2 and 3 above for the ELG mark.
Stu

[BlacksmithingWitch]

so Belgian seems like a given, could the lock be as well and based of of french counterparts? as it does seem a dead ringer for the sort of lock on the french musket posted above. Oddly enough, the lock has a proof mark with an F and crown, the plate opposite the lock for the bolt to anchor into has one with a crown and a very obvious W. I know virtually nothing as to the anthropology of firearms but could that indicate its two different guns brought together in a new stock? As far as the date, could the CH 43 on the breech plug be referring to 1843? Im sorry for all the questions im just a bit out of my familiar zone and trying to get to the bottom of this interesting piece.

[rickystl]

OK. Since the barrel shows shallow-groove rifling (possibly 3-groove?) I stand corrected. The caliber should measure about .69 (18mm). The French and Belgium muskets of the period were very similar. Parts coming from the same arsenals.
The latter photo showing the bolster seemed to look very different than the earlier photos. I guess that was because I was looking at it with the barrel out of the stock versus in the stock. And with the additional information on the barrel being shallow rifled, I would disgard my earlier theory of the barrel, and agree with you. The barrel was designed to shoot the .69 minnie ball of the period.
So, it appears the entire service musket was utilized and re-stocked (possibly due to a broken stock?) somewhere to suit Ottoman tastes. Possibly at one of the many gun making centers in the Balkans (?). The decoration and engraving seem to be done in a generic fashion. So it's difficult to tell wheather it was made for a specific individual, or just re-stocked in a shop for resale to anyone interested. This re-use of parts was very common throughout the Empire. The gun could have been assembled in India, Afghanistan, or any number of different locations. It's almost impossible to tell for sure. And most of these guns were never marked as to their final maker. But the utilization of Europen parts would likely have put a percieved increase in value to the purchaser. This re-use of parts was very common throughout the Empire.
Again, it's a very neat gun I would not mind having in my collection.

Rick

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by BlacksmithingWitch

so Belgian seems like a given, could the lock be as well and based of of french counterparts? as it does seem a dead ringer for the sort of lock on the french musket posted above. Oddly enough, the lock has a proof mark with an F and crown, the plate opposite the lock for the bolt to anchor into has one with a crown and a very obvious W. I know virtually nothing as to the anthropology of firearms but could that indicate its two different guns brought together in a new stock? As far as the date, could the CH 43 on the breech plug be referring to 1843? Im sorry for all the questions im just a bit out of my familiar zone and trying to get to the bottom of this interesting piece.

No need to apologise. This is what the Forum is all about, and how we all learn about our interests.
The letters surmounted by a crown are INSPECTORS MARKS. See #10 on the chart I gave you. Different Inspectors would likely be used for different parts as per their individual expertise. Note also that this mark was used between 1853 and 1877, so now you have a date span in which this gun, or at least the parts were made.
The other numbers are unlikely to be anything to do with dates. Simply (maybe) batch numbers. Remember that we are still talking INDIVIDUAL PARTS for individual guns, hand fitted. COLT was the only maker of the period to my knowledge,who made parts which would fit all guns of the same type without any further adjustment. In other words he could be regarded as one of the first "true mass producers" of guns.
Your comment regarding similarity to French locks is well founded. The 2 countries are side by side, and in fact many French guns were proved at the Liege Proof House. This one however, was not, as the Inspector Marks are not French.
Stu

[BlacksmithingWitch]

to remove any rust inside the barrel, would a plan of first plugging the barrel and carefully filling it with a vinegar solution, then wipe down with a fine copper bore brush, neutralize and then oil it to protect it work? ive often used vinegar to remove rust on parts though I wouldnt want to be too aggressive, and I certainly wouldnt use it on the outside of the barrel out of fear id strip patina away. its just the inside hasnt seen a good cleaning in years and im concerned about letting the rust in there continue to build up, and vinegar in my experience eats it away quickly without being strong enough to seriously affect the "healthy" metal. Ive tried a "patch" of steel wool and a normal solvent for gun bores which has helped but not to much extent.

[rickystl]

I've had good luck soaking the inside of the barrel with Kroil Oil and letting it sit for a week. And won't hurt the outside of the barrel.

Rick