Afghan Jezail in York, UK

[Jim McDougall]

In looking at this jezail, it seems very much to be a 'Khyber gun', which is one of the native production imitations of various firearms produced in these regions, one of the best known being Darra Khel about 40km south of Peshawar. The lockplate shape does not seem to correspond to those of percussion cap weapons used by the British (I would defer to Ward's expertise on this of course), but the sharp rather than rounded back seems odd. The description of the lion of the East India Co. (post 1816 as noted) facing left and holding the sphere sounds correct, but the 'sans serif' numbers not correct for 19th century and indicative of more modern addition, certainly not 1817, which obviously would have been flintlock.
From what I understand, even arms used by EIC were government proved and would carry that mark on the lock.

Despite the fact that this seems to be one of the profusion of interpretations of earlier arms that were actually used in Khyber regions, and unclear of just how old it actually is, it would be interesting to learn more on its provenance as the circumstances of acquisition even as a souvenier can often be intriguing.

These were extremely historic guns, and the proficiency of the tribal warriors with them decidedly regarded by the British as noted by Kipling in the well known lines;
"...A scrimmage in a border station, a canter down some dark defile;
Two thousand pounds of education, drops to a ten rupee jezail."
from " Departmental Ditties and Barracks Room Ballads"

Thank you for sharing this gun with us here, and while it is good to see someone else as challenged by these new type cameras as I am , your eloquent descriptions are outstanding and concise.

All very best regards, and welcome to our forums !
Jim

[ward]

These guns were still being used against the russians when they invaded. They were fired at point blank range into the gas tanks of helicopters and other vehicles. They are also still being made for weddings. aks and other arms have replaced these over the last 30 years. The problem with dating a lot of afghan pieces is that older pieces are often incorporated into pieces as talismans or because styles are very very slow to change. I have a ammunition belt that was taken off a taliban fighter that has a modern russian ammo pouch on it besides the typical 19th century style so called sword hooks and a black powder powder flask. That piece was in military use less than 3 years ago.

[RDGAC]

Thankee for the kind words, Jim. I feel like writing a headline: "Pundits Astounded as Military History Degree Actually Proves Somewhat Useful"

To respond, I had my misgivings about what is left of the lock from the outset. The sans-serif numerals certainly didn't seem right; no specimen of British lock I've ever seen (in my, I should add, very limited experience) from that period had sans-serif numbers or letters, and this page here gave my suspicions a boost. Likewise, the lack of a border around the lockplate (which as I understand it was pretty much de rigeur on British locks) and absence of any visible proof markings seem indicative of a fake. I've very gently removed some of the lockplate rust with a soft cloth and WD40, and apart from another "8", stamped just below the former location of the nipple, can see nothing more than what I've described above. On better examination, the lion seems what I can only call ragged; it doesn't quite match up to illustrations and photographs I have seen of the EIC lion, and seems more crudely inscribed.

Regarding provenance, I had a quick phone conversation with the donor on Friday and gleaned that he had good reason to believe it to be genuine, and that its condition was probably the result of spending some time in his garage; the British climate has struck again. It's rather unfortunate, but what little he could tell me led me to the same conclusion as you - that this particular piece was produced in a location such as Darra, perhaps as a functional weapon, but not as long ago as the lockplate rather optimistically claims. He also said that the weapon has been in this country for between 10 and 15 years, at least. I'm afraid I can't give any more detail than that.

My own particular theory - if you'll excuse my boldness - is that this gun, perhaps, was assembled relatively recently; certainly within the last century or so. I'm going to go out on a limb, and suggest that the barrel may be rather older than the lock. The lock itself, I'd guess, was either made to fool a foreign buyer into thinking it had been captured from a converted European flintlock (e.g. a Pattern III Brown Bess), or perhaps stamped with these markings at a later date than its original manufacture, for the same purpose. Would an Afghan/Khyber gunsmith bother with such things if he were selling the weapon to one of his own kind? I understand the Darra chaps still put so much store by the stamp "V.R" that, on occasion, one can find guns stamped with the V.R. cypher that also say they were made in 1952!

Ward, I'll try to get some better pictures of the lock as soon as possible (and likewise of the rest of the gun). It may take some time as I work out how to use that infernal digicam, but I will, eventually, master it! Hopefully, anyway. Regarding treatment: by "pull" the barrel, I take it you mean dismount it from the furniture? I'm afraid I can't do that; in no sense am I even remotely qualified to dismantle a gun, at least, not if there's to be any hope of its re-assembly. I've already rigged up a home-made ramrod, with an auger (well, sawn-off corkscrew) superglued into a hole at one end, but attempts to get the steel corkscrew into whatever's down there have produced only corrosion stuck to the thread. As I understand it, this could mean a couple of things; it's possible that the de-activation was doubly ensured by pouring iron or steel down the barrel (although if so, how my paperclip is penetrating the touch-hole seems a bit of a mystery), but I'm told that Afghan fighters would put an awful lot of things down a Jezail; anything from lead balls to copper telephone wires hammered into slugs. If that is the case, I wonder if they might have used an iron ball. Not good for the gun, of course, but still.

[Jim McDougall]

Actually I put little stock with pundits, and it is the passion for the study of military history which is the determining factor rather than the degree itself. Clearly you have the powerful dimension of both

It seems you and I have been on very much the same page, and that particular link I found very useful as there is surprisingly little information is available in the limited resources on firearms I have. The one book I wish I had on hand on the British guns is "British Military Firearms" by the late Howard Blackmore, as well as another title by I believe, Brooker.

As Ward has well illustrated, tradition runs deep in these formidable regions, and through the millenia these warrior tribes have always proven virtually unconquerable as a whole. It seems quite plausible that these markings and working components were put together in good faith for use in these frontier regions in a traditional tribal sense. Through the centuries native armourers have copied European markings on blades and weapons as they believed the power imbued in the original weapons would be transferred to thier work through them. With the trade sword blades ,merchants often would focus on the markings emphasizing them to the buyers. As many of these markings were symbols of various form they lent well to native sensitivity to cross any language barriers and became presumed representative of power.

While the markings are clearly and instantly recognized by a westerner to be incorrect, such as the dates incongruent (i.e. VR in 1952; 1817 on a percussion lockplate) letters backwards and words misspelled, a native would not be aware of these errors.

Regardless of being a modern interpretation of a historic weapon, for those of us who study ethnographic weapons, it is exciting to know that many of these weapons are still used anachronistically in many cultures. We study the kaskaras and takoubas of the Sudan and the Sahara, still worn by tribesmen there. In the remote mountain villages of the Georgian Caucusus, Khevsurs still wore mail as late as the 1930's and fought with swords. In Saudi Arabia the Bedouin still wear swords and in some cases still have adhered to the old matchlock muskets.

Rather than seeing this rugged piece as a modern forgery as certainly some might claim, I see it more as an example of historic tradition alive and well in our modern times and perhaps fighting with descendants of the warriors who have used them for centuries.

All very best regards,
Jim

[ward]

Having the lock look like a standard trade lock does not mean it was a fake made for tourist. The smith that made the lock wants it as resellable to a wide population and would mark it as such. Taking the gun apart is up to you. It is not that big a deal mark the bands with chalk as you take them off and unscrew 1 screw. the barrel is then off. As I mentioned it is only 2 screws that hold the lock. If you want to see if the barrel is watered just move one of the bands a little and you can see if it is watered. I doubt that steel was poured down it. I have pulled many loads out of these guns. Mostly it is corroded shot, sometimes rocks glass lead balls and any anything else that happened to be laying around. I would strongly encourage you to have the piece unloaded. Black powder does not go inert but more unstable as times go by. people still bring back cannonballs paint them black and put them on a shelf. Once every couple years you will hear about one of these falling off and detenating. I have had one of the vietnamese flintlocks go off in my hands that had been loaded for 40 years.

[RDGAC]

Ward, I hate to sound dense, but what do you mean by "watered"? Also, I enclose herewith a photograph of the reverse of the lock. It does appear that the barrel is only held in place by one screw, through its tang, so it might well be relatively easy to remove the barrel for work; there is, however, another screw on the underside of the bolster around the lock, perhaps for holding the trigger mechanism in place? Still not been able to get a decent shot of the lockplate, unfortunately.

However, regarding the lock, I remain worried about dismantling that. I'm very good, as you can probably tell, at finding things about which to worry!

Jim, I hadn't really thought of it that way. It had occurred to me that the markings were important, of course, but the aspect of assumed "transfer" of the original weapons' capabilities, and the strength of the forces armed with them, had not. I sort of assumed that the markings were treated much like a proof mark, i.e. as a sign of good quality of manufacture. It is, I agree, good to know that such comparatively ancient weapons as these are still in use to this day; if nothing else, they and the people who make them represent a fascinating insight into the pre-industrial processes of manufacturing, and their products, almost unknown in the modern Western world.

[ward]

Watered means that the piece is damascus steel. Meaning it is a mixture of steel and iron and will show a pattern. As heavy as that barrel is I think it is possible. The contrast of the pattern is brought out by acid being used on the piece. People mainly use ferricc chloride now but just about everything under the sun has been used including urine.
regarding the barrel one screw at the tang should be all there is. The 2 on the other side of the lock should be there if not one is missing. I would not worry about a additional one near trigger you have no need to take it out. If you look thru the forum you should easily find some pics of other afghan pieces I have posted over the years. If not I can repost some

[Jim McDougall]

Jim, I hadn't really thought of it that way. It had occurred to me that the markings were important, of course, but the aspect of assumed "transfer" of the original weapons' capabilities, and the strength of the forces armed with them, had not. I sort of assumed that the markings were treated much like a proof mark, i.e. as a sign of good quality of manufacture. It is, I agree, good to know that such comparatively ancient weapons as these are still in use to this day; if nothing else, they and the people who make them represent a fascinating insight into the pre-industrial processes of manufacturing, and their products, almost unknown in the modern Western world.[/QUOTE]

















The markings found on weapons have long been a fascination of mine, and apparantly are drawing the interest of more collectors. In native cultures even where literacy is not prevalent, the keen understanding and perception of symbolism often transcends any language or educational barriers. The assumption of imbued powers through symbolism, in this case seen as strategically placed on weapons, reflects the power of ones faith and far exceeds the baser elements of business and marketing. This has been very much the case in virtually all cultures in varying degree, and there is a great deal of talismanic and amuletic virtue found in the markings and decoration of weapons in European nations from into the Middle Ages and probably earlier.
(see the thread at the top of these pages on early makers trademarks).

This is truly one of the most fascinating elements in the study of historic weapons, whether ethnographic or European, and the perspective in which even this seemingly modern gun should be perceived and described in a pertinant display, just as you have shown by your keenly placed interest in it. I really wish more museum staff, beyond the numbers who already do, would take your approach. If I may say so, very well done!!

All very best regards,
Jim