An early English dog lock musket

M ELEY · 21st November 2017, 06:54 AM

Here we have an English dog lock musket, ca. 1685-1715. This early flintlock type receded the Brown Bess and many argue that the safety mechanism (lock) was superior to it's successor.

Apart from it being a monstrous gun, the thing I like about it is its history. The dog lock musket started out life during the English Civil War. It was a lethal weapon to be sure, penetrating armor cuirass at close range. This musket was the so called 'long gonne' of the buccaneer era, where people like l'Olonais and Roc the Brazilian and Henry Morgan attacked coastal forts and sacked cities like Maricaibo. The dog lock was also a popular sea weapon, used by sailors and marines in the great tops for firing down on an enemy's deck. It was around during the time of the early settlements in North America, not quite cities yet, such as New Bern and Bath, NC (founded in 1710 and 1705, respectfully). Finally, it was the gun of the first settlers hunting elk, deer, and foul (I'm thinking about Thanksgiving turkey! Of course, this piece might ruin the breast meat-

).

M ELEY · 21st November 2017, 07:26 AM

Ahhh, the dog lock! Note the curlicue trigger and artful trigger guard with its arrow design. The musket is missing its back plate and the ramrod is a modern replacement.

fernando · 21st November 2017, 05:24 PM

Say Mark ...
Is it the 'misty' pictures or the doglock i acquired the other day is 'brighter' than that of yours ?

. Let us see what better pictures can tell us

.
Can you precise; Roc Brasiliano, l'Olonais, Bartolomeu Português ... were they still in action when these guns showed up ? I see them all pictured with cutlasses ... and apparently leaving in a slightly prior era. Perhaps those muskets/bunderbusses were up for their heirs ...

M ELEY · 22nd November 2017, 01:55 AM

'Nando, I'll have you know that I went to the esteemed Mr. Magoo Academy of Photography, thank you very much!

. Yes, I am no master with the camera.

I was unaware you recently got a dog lock! I've fallen behind on recent threads and will try to take a peak.

In regards to buccaneers, I did indeed mention the earlier chaps, so the second wave of Indies buccaneer infiltrators, De Graff, Van Hoorn and de Grammont are better suited to era. That being said, there are some sources that claim the dog lock dates back even earlier than I mentioned, to the 1630's.

As a sword lover over guns, I am happy to see the early portraits of the pirates with cutlasses and such. That being said, it was in fact the long guns that Morgan's and Jean Nau's men carried that took down the fortresses and settlements in Panama.The hangers/cutlass certainly helped with the close-up, hand-to-hand fighting.

Pukka Bundook · 22nd November 2017, 04:28 AM

Wonderful gun M. Congrats on finding such a rare best!

Now, I would really appreciate some good clear photos, taken with a camera.

Everything looks right, and something to be proud of.

Richard.

M ELEY · 22nd November 2017, 06:30 AM

Thanks for the interest, Richard. As I said, I am no 'gun person', so I would like to make sure everything is right with the piece. From what I can tell, it is legit, with a nice even patina, hand made screws/nails, aging to wood.

I've been looking at the locks on other specimens and the only thing different from the remarkably few I've been able to find is that mine has a frizzen spring. I've seen later guns with them, but wasn't sure they were around in this time period. I will try and take some clearer pics. The cheap digital camera I used is the pits. My daughter's smart phone might be better...

fernando · 22nd November 2017, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M ELEY

'Nando, I was unaware you recently got a dog lock! .

Well, not so recently Captain; but you have been there. Could it be that the mermaids stole a part of your memory ?

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=21281

M ELEY · 22nd November 2017, 12:45 PM

OMG, I really think I am losing my memory! I totally forgot about this piece! (sorry!). In my defense, I have worked 60+ hours this week! I guess I never imagined that I might own such a weapon, so my memories stem more towards the swords in other's collections. In any case, that is a spectacular piece and I'm glad you attached the thread here! The mermaids are glad as well-

rickystl · 22nd November 2017, 04:24 PM

Hi Mark.

OMG!! Congratulations !! A very early, and very rare, English doglock musket. Where did you find it ?? And, as Richard says, very deserving of some good photos. In that regard........if you want some assistance in taking photos, you are welcome to send the gun to me

I'll even pay the shipping both ways

Seriously, it's a wonderful aquisition. These are so rarely seen, especially in such complete condition. Some early observations:
The stock profile, and the overall large proportions put this gun in the time frame you first mention above. Probably not any latter. Notice the trigger guard is simply screwed unto the stock, with no inletting to the stock. A common feature. I can't tell from the photos here, but it could have been made without an iron butt plate. Would not surprise me.
LOCK: English doglocks seemed to have appeared since at least the 1640's, in various styles. The early doglocks I've seen had three lock plate screws securing the lock to the stock. This lock appears to have only two, but with a third small screw securing the tail of the lock plate from the lock side. Interesting. But what I first noticed was the hammer stop mounted on the outside of the lock plate. This is a feature seen on snaphaunce locks, which pre-date the doglock. See photo below. Which may suggest that the lock pre-dates 1680 as a transition type of lock. Or it could be that the lock maker simply wanted to keep this feature. Or maybe the lock is even older than the rest of the gun. But from these photos, it looks like the gun was all made together.

Again, Congratulations. A great find. Please post additional photos when you have a chance. Hopefully showing the lock internals. Would be most anxious to see them.

Rick

M ELEY · 23rd November 2017, 05:26 AM

Hello Rick and thank you so much for the good news on the gun. The story behind it was I picked it up at a very high end art and antiques gallery locally. It formally belonged to an English fellow who got it supposedly back in London through a Sotheby's auction. He also had excellent artwork and a piece of tassett armour from the Tower of London (with paperwork for the armor). I suspected that mine never had a butt plate, but was afraid to look foolish if wrong-

. I will work on taking better pics and posting them soon. Thanks again!
Mark

Marcus den toom · 23rd November 2017, 08:18 AM

Always liked these locks and found some interesting references.
Seems Rick is right on the money with the transition thesis...

http://www.minecreek.info/trained-bands/info-gzt.html

Pukka Bundook · 23rd November 2017, 02:03 PM

Mark,

When you take more photos, I'd love to see the lock work.

Congrats again!

Rick,
Is that a"TRS" lock? If so, on another thread could you show it all, both sides?

rickystl · 23rd November 2017, 05:22 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Marcus den toom

Always liked these locks and found some interesting references.
Seems Rick is right on the money with the transition thesis...

http://www.minecreek.info/trained-bands/info-gzt.html

Hi Marcus.

Thank you for the interesting reading. First time I have seen this.
Those photos showing two variations of the "English" lock, sometimes referred to as a Jacobean lock, although I don't recall why this reference.
The larger photo shows the retaining piece (the proper name escapes me at the moment) between the frizzen screw and the frizzen spring. This feature is also on Mark's lock.
The smaller photo shows one piece being used as both a frizzen spring and a hammer stop. Appears to be an attempt at simplification. Interesting.

I find these early transistion type locks very interesting. It's obvious there was alot of lock experimentation between about 1600-1670 from the wheellock to the French style flintlock.

Rick

rickystl · 23rd November 2017, 05:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook

Mark,

When you take more photos, I'd love to see the lock work.

Congrats again!

Rick,
Is that a"TRS" lock? If so, on another thread could you show it all, both sides?

Hi Richard.

Yes, it is a TRS English Snaphaunce lock. I would be glad to post it on a seperate Thread - if the Moderator will allow same. Even though it is an exact replica of an original, it's still a replica, and I don't know if the Moderater will allow it. Although he may allow an exception since it would be very difficult to locate an original lock for close viewing.

What say the Moderator ?

fernando · 23rd November 2017, 06:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickystl

... Yes, it is a TRS English Snaphaunce lock...Even though it is an exact replica ... I would be glad to post it on a seperate Thread ... What say the Moderator ?

In the context, i would say go ahead. But instead of posting it in a separate thread, why not posting it right here ?

rickystl · 23rd November 2017, 09:04 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fernando

In the context, i would say go ahead. But instead of posting it in a separate thread, why not posting it right here ?

Hi Fernando

Well, I didn't want to corrupt Mark's Thread here by going off in a direction of various transition locks from the 1600-1650 period. Thought it might be a topic for another discussion.
I have about four locks from this period. While all are exact replicas with the castings taken from original locks, they are still replicas. It might be of interest to the gun enthusiasts on the Forum to view some examples of lock making between the wheellock and what we call the true (French) flintlock periods. The problem is, these locks (as well as the guns) are so rare, it would be difficult to locate anyone who has them. LOL
But, I will leave the decision up to you. I can always send Richard a PM.

Thanks for considering.

Rick

M ELEY · 23rd November 2017, 11:04 PM

By all means, post my friend, as it adds to the knowledge of these pieces and to the discussion at hand. When I get the pics, I'll simply throw them in!

Philip · 24th November 2017, 07:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rickystl

Hi Marcus.

The larger photo shows the retaining piece (the proper name escapes me at the moment) between the frizzen screw and the frizzen spring. This feature is also on Mark's lock.
The smaller photo shows one piece being used as both a frizzen spring and a hammer stop. Appears to be an attempt at simplification. Interesting.

Rick

Rick, I think that connector piece can be termed a frizzen bridle since it provides a two-point support (in conjunction with the lockplate itself) for the pivot screw. It's analogous to the tumbler bridle on the mature French flintlock, and the cock bridle on a miquelet.

You might be interested in the article "The Snaphaunce Muskets of al-Maghreb al-Aqsa" by James Gooding, in ARMS COLLECTING, Vol. 34, No. 3. A very informative intro to the long guns of Morocco. The frizzen bridle is seen on all of the examples illustrated and I'm sure you may have detached locks from Moroccan guns in your collection which feature this component as well. Interesting also are the presence of the cock buffer and the large disc that caps the extremity of the priming-pan on these locks, just as seen on your repro English doglock from TRS. All these on a Moroccan lock strongly point to a Dutch antecedent (see Robert Held, THE AGE OF FIREARMS, fig 149, p 71 for photo of a snaphaunce 1590-1630 which is all but identical in form to the later north African version). Considering that arms development in England and the Netherlands was closely linked, it's not surprising to see similar features common to the (much later) dog-lock as well.

fernando · 24th November 2017, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M ELEY

By all means, post my friend ...

Now that you have a context and Mark's acquiescence ... and the moderator's Amen; shoot them, Rick

.

rickystl · 24th November 2017, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

Rick, I think that connector piece can be termed a frizzen bridle since it provides a two-point support (in conjunction with the lockplate itself) for the pivot screw. It's analogous to the tumbler bridle on the mature French flintlock, and the cock bridle on a miquelet.

You might be interested in the article "The Snaphaunce Muskets of al-Maghreb al-Aqsa" by James Gooding, in ARMS COLLECTING, Vol. 34, No. 3. A very informative intro to the long guns of Morocco. The frizzen bridle is seen on all of the examples illustrated and I'm sure you may have detached locks from Moroccan guns in your collection which feature this component as well. Interesting also are the presence of the cock buffer and the large disc that caps the extremity of the priming-pan on these locks, just as seen on your repro English doglock from TRS. All these on a Moroccan lock strongly point to a Dutch antecedent (see Robert Held, THE AGE OF FIREARMS, fig 149, p 71 for photo of a snaphaunce 1590-1630 which is all but identical in form to the later north African version). Considering that arms development in England and the Netherlands was closely linked, it's not surprising to see similar features common to the (much later) dog-lock as well.

Hi Philip.

"Bridle" That's the word I was searching my memory for. LOL Getting old I guess. If I recall, that bridle was used on French infantry muskets till it was discontinued in about 1735-40 I believe.

Yes, I have that article from James Gooding. I ordered it a few years ago from the Canadian Arms Journal. Strangely, it took almost a year for it to arrive. But agreed, it is probably the best intro to the Moroccan snaphaunce longarms I've seen. They basically operate the same as the original, early snaphaunce locks. The difference being the much more narrow lockplates on the Moroccan guns to accomodate the slim stocks. The hammers (cocks) followed either the Dutch or English style.

Rick

rickystl · 24th November 2017, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fernando

Now that you have a context and Mark's acquiescence ... and the moderator's Amen; shoot them, Rick

.

OK. Thanks. I'll start posting here.

Rick.

rickystl · 24th November 2017, 05:40 PM

This is an exact replica of an early English snaphaunce lock. The castings were taken from an original lock from a private collection. If my memory serves, the first reference to the snaphaunce lock was from about the 1570's. One difference between this original style, early lock and the latter Moroccan variations, is the extra large proportions of this lock. The lockplate measures just over 9.5 inches long by 1.5" wide. Part of the reason for it's large size may be that back in this period it was easier to forge larger parts than small.
This lock would have been fitted to a gun closely resembling the English matchlocks of the period. Or re-fitted to an existing matchlock.
These snaphaunce locks were made with only a full-cock position. The only "safety" feature being to leave the frizzen (battery) in the forward position, away from the stricking hammer, till the need was anticipated. However, on this lock, there is a clever additional safety feature added. There is a swinging bar on the tail of the lockplate, when positioned rearward, blocks the trigger bar from any movement. This way, the lock/gun could be kept in the full, ready position during transport. Must have been considered a big improvement back then.
Anyway, you can probably see the details in these photos. One of the earliest lock designs to succed the wheellock.

Rick

M ELEY · 24th November 2017, 09:09 PM

This one from an auction site,already sold...

http://www.ambroseantiques.com/flongarms/dog.htm

M ELEY · 24th November 2017, 11:58 PM

Here we go again. Some are better, some not so great. After these, if there are any specific views anyone wants, let me know!
Mark

M ELEY · 25th November 2017, 12:00 AM

Note the stock end doesn't look like it ever had a butt plate. The lock looks snug with the stock, no gaps and the metal patina matches the barrel. I know we discussed that the lock might be a replacement, but I don't think so. The whole piece appears to be made as one piece.

M ELEY · 25th November 2017, 12:02 AM

Pics...

M ELEY · 25th November 2017, 12:05 AM

The last, I promise! Unless more requested, that is-

Pukka Bundook · 25th November 2017, 02:28 PM

Rick,

Very good photos of the lock! Thank you for that.
First thing that struck me about it, is how Hard it looks. As in, case hardened.
Should be of course, but it looks like ceramic! Should wear very well if you stock it up.
Nice to see the 'simple' details. I want to make one at some time!

Did you get to try your toradar yet? Mine is getting better, but doesn't like patches.

Mark,

Thank you for the additional photos,...though some hurt my eyes!
Can't see any problems, maybe the odd screw replaced, nothing major.
Agreed it would never have had a buttplate.

Congrats again!

R.

M ELEY · 25th November 2017, 05:22 PM

Note that this musket isn't stamped. I know not all were, but is this any indication of where it was used? Wouldn't an English CW gun have the proper government marking? Export? To the Americas?

rickystl · 25th November 2017, 06:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M ELEY

This one from an auction site,already sold...

http://www.ambroseantiques.com/flongarms/dog.htm

Hi Mark.

Thanks for the Link. Notice the "general" stock profile on the one from the Ambrose site is similar to yours. He dates the piece to about 1650. Could be. But I would put it a bit closer to the 3rd Quarter of the 17th Century. Notice the common three screw lock. And the small exterior screw on the tail of the lock like yours.
But IMHO the lock on your's pre-dates the lock on the Ambrose gun. It's the best "transition" style of doglock I've seen. The really wide, flat pan and the very robust frizzen on your's is really neat. I was not refering that the lock on your gun was a replacement. The entire gun looks all made together. I was just saying it is possible that your gun was assembled maybe in the Third Quarter utilizing a lock that was already made sometime in the second-third quarter of the 17th Century. I do think your gun pre-dates the fourth quarter. It's certainly the earliest doglock I've ever seen.

Rick

21st November 2017, 06:54 AM	#1
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	An early English dog lock musket Here we have an English dog lock musket, ca. 1685-1715. This early flintlock type receded the Brown Bess and many argue that the safety mechanism (lock) was superior to it's successor. Apart from it being a monstrous gun, the thing I like about it is its history. The dog lock musket started out life during the English Civil War. It was a lethal weapon to be sure, penetrating armor cuirass at close range. This musket was the so called 'long gonne' of the buccaneer era, where people like l'Olonais and Roc the Brazilian and Henry Morgan attacked coastal forts and sacked cities like Maricaibo. The dog lock was also a popular sea weapon, used by sailors and marines in the great tops for firing down on an enemy's deck. It was around during the time of the early settlements in North America, not quite cities yet, such as New Bern and Bath, NC (founded in 1710 and 1705, respectfully). Finally, it was the gun of the first settlers hunting elk, deer, and foul (I'm thinking about Thanksgiving turkey! Of course, this piece might ruin the breast meat- ). Attached Images Last edited by M ELEY; 21st November 2017 at 07:23 AM.

21st November 2017, 07:26 AM	#2
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	More pics... Ahhh, the dog lock! Note the curlicue trigger and artful trigger guard with its arrow design. The musket is missing its back plate and the ramrod is a modern replacement. Attached Images

22nd November 2017, 01:55 AM	#4
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	'Nando, I'll have you know that I went to the esteemed Mr. Magoo Academy of Photography, thank you very much! . Yes, I am no master with the camera. I was unaware you recently got a dog lock! I've fallen behind on recent threads and will try to take a peak. In regards to buccaneers, I did indeed mention the earlier chaps, so the second wave of Indies buccaneer infiltrators, De Graff, Van Hoorn and de Grammont are better suited to era. That being said, there are some sources that claim the dog lock dates back even earlier than I mentioned, to the 1630's. As a sword lover over guns, I am happy to see the early portraits of the pirates with cutlasses and such. That being said, it was in fact the long guns that Morgan's and Jean Nau's men carried that took down the fortresses and settlements in Panama.The hangers/cutlass certainly helped with the close-up, hand-to-hand fighting. Last edited by M ELEY; 22nd November 2017 at 06:25 AM.

22nd November 2017, 04:24 PM	#9
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,623	Hi Mark. OMG!! Congratulations !! A very early, and very rare, English doglock musket. Where did you find it ?? And, as Richard says, very deserving of some good photos. In that regard........if you want some assistance in taking photos, you are welcome to send the gun to me I'll even pay the shipping both ways Seriously, it's a wonderful aquisition. These are so rarely seen, especially in such complete condition. Some early observations: The stock profile, and the overall large proportions put this gun in the time frame you first mention above. Probably not any latter. Notice the trigger guard is simply screwed unto the stock, with no inletting to the stock. A common feature. I can't tell from the photos here, but it could have been made without an iron butt plate. Would not surprise me. LOCK: English doglocks seemed to have appeared since at least the 1640's, in various styles. The early doglocks I've seen had three lock plate screws securing the lock to the stock. This lock appears to have only two, but with a third small screw securing the tail of the lock plate from the lock side. Interesting. But what I first noticed was the hammer stop mounted on the outside of the lock plate. This is a feature seen on snaphaunce locks, which pre-date the doglock. See photo below. Which may suggest that the lock pre-dates 1680 as a transition type of lock. Or it could be that the lock maker simply wanted to keep this feature. Or maybe the lock is even older than the rest of the gun. But from these photos, it looks like the gun was all made together. Again, Congratulations. A great find. Please post additional photos when you have a chance. Hopefully showing the lock internals. Would be most anxious to see them. Rick Attached Images

23rd November 2017, 08:18 AM	#11
Marcus den toom Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 525	Always liked these locks and found some interesting references. Seems Rick is right on the money with the transition thesis... http://www.minecreek.info/trained-bands/info-gzt.html Attached Images

21st November 2017, 05:24 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Say Mark ... Is it the 'misty' pictures or the doglock i acquired the other day is 'brighter' than that of yours ? . Let us see what better pictures can tell us . Can you precise; Roc Brasiliano, l'Olonais, Bartolomeu Português ... were they still in action when these guns showed up ? I see them all pictured with cutlasses ... and apparently leaving in a slightly prior era. Perhaps those muskets/bunderbusses were up for their heirs ...

22nd November 2017, 04:28 AM	#5
Pukka Bundook Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 803	Wonderful gun M. Congrats on finding such a rare best! Now, I would really appreciate some good clear photos, taken with a camera. Everything looks right, and something to be proud of. Richard.

22nd November 2017, 06:30 AM	#6
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	Thanks for the interest, Richard. As I said, I am no 'gun person', so I would like to make sure everything is right with the piece. From what I can tell, it is legit, with a nice even patina, hand made screws/nails, aging to wood. I've been looking at the locks on other specimens and the only thing different from the remarkably few I've been able to find is that mine has a frizzen spring. I've seen later guns with them, but wasn't sure they were around in this time period. I will try and take some clearer pics. The cheap digital camera I used is the pits. My daughter's smart phone might be better...

22nd November 2017, 12:45 PM	#8
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	OMG, I really think I am losing my memory! I totally forgot about this piece! (sorry!). In my defense, I have worked 60+ hours this week! I guess I never imagined that I might own such a weapon, so my memories stem more towards the swords in other's collections. In any case, that is a spectacular piece and I'm glad you attached the thread here! The mermaids are glad as well-

23rd November 2017, 05:26 AM	#10
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	Hello Rick and thank you so much for the good news on the gun. The story behind it was I picked it up at a very high end art and antiques gallery locally. It formally belonged to an English fellow who got it supposedly back in London through a Sotheby's auction. He also had excellent artwork and a piece of tassett armour from the Tower of London (with paperwork for the armor). I suspected that mine never had a butt plate, but was afraid to look foolish if wrong- . I will work on taking better pics and posting them soon. Thanks again! Mark

23rd November 2017, 02:03 PM	#12
Pukka Bundook Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 803	Mark, When you take more photos, I'd love to see the lock work. Congrats again! Rick, Is that a"TRS" lock? If so, on another thread could you show it all, both sides?

23rd November 2017, 11:04 PM	#17
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	By all means, post my friend, as it adds to the knowledge of these pieces and to the discussion at hand. When I get the pics, I'll simply throw them in!

24th November 2017, 05:40 PM	#22
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,623	This is an exact replica of an early English snaphaunce lock. The castings were taken from an original lock from a private collection. If my memory serves, the first reference to the snaphaunce lock was from about the 1570's. One difference between this original style, early lock and the latter Moroccan variations, is the extra large proportions of this lock. The lockplate measures just over 9.5 inches long by 1.5" wide. Part of the reason for it's large size may be that back in this period it was easier to forge larger parts than small. This lock would have been fitted to a gun closely resembling the English matchlocks of the period. Or re-fitted to an existing matchlock. These snaphaunce locks were made with only a full-cock position. The only "safety" feature being to leave the frizzen (battery) in the forward position, away from the stricking hammer, till the need was anticipated. However, on this lock, there is a clever additional safety feature added. There is a swinging bar on the tail of the lockplate, when positioned rearward, blocks the trigger bar from any movement. This way, the lock/gun could be kept in the full, ready position during transport. Must have been considered a big improvement back then. Anyway, you can probably see the details in these photos. One of the earliest lock designs to succed the wheellock. Rick Attached Images

24th November 2017, 09:09 PM	#23
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	This one from an auction site,already sold... http://www.ambroseantiques.com/flongarms/dog.htm

24th November 2017, 11:58 PM	#24
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	More pics... Here we go again. Some are better, some not so great. After these, if there are any specific views anyone wants, let me know! Mark Attached Images

25th November 2017, 12:00 AM	#25
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	More dog lock! Note the stock end doesn't look like it ever had a butt plate. The lock looks snug with the stock, no gaps and the metal patina matches the barrel. I know we discussed that the lock might be a replacement, but I don't think so. The whole piece appears to be made as one piece. Attached Images

25th November 2017, 12:02 AM	#26
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	More pics- Pics... Attached Images

25th November 2017, 12:05 AM	#27
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	Last ones- The last, I promise! Unless more requested, that is- Attached Images

25th November 2017, 02:28 PM	#28
Pukka Bundook Member Join Date: Jan 2007 Posts: 803	Rick, Very good photos of the lock! Thank you for that. First thing that struck me about it, is how Hard it looks. As in, case hardened. Should be of course, but it looks like ceramic! Should wear very well if you stock it up. Nice to see the 'simple' details. I want to make one at some time! Did you get to try your toradar yet? Mine is getting better, but doesn't like patches. Mark, Thank you for the additional photos,...though some hurt my eyes! Can't see any problems, maybe the odd screw replaced, nothing major. Agreed it would never have had a buttplate. Congrats again! R.

25th November 2017, 05:22 PM	#29
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,101	Note that this musket isn't stamped. I know not all were, but is this any indication of where it was used? Wouldn't an English CW gun have the proper government marking? Export? To the Americas?