Tiny flintlock with weird hammer

[DaveM]

Thoughts are appreciated particularly regarding the lock hammer.  This is a tiny pistol but has the general proportions of a larger pistol.   The lock on this gun is only 3-5/8 inch long from end to end!

The lock is original - not sure it ever saw much use.  The hammer looks like some funky modern thing made in the 1960's or 70's - and maybe it is?  The hammer and jaws / jaw screw appear to be hand made.  A finely carved recess accept the bottom of the jaw screw, a feature I've never seen (the screw does not go through the bottom jaw).  The lock and hammer function nicely.  The hammer screw is nicely hand made and was clearly made for this hammer.  The hammer rests on the top edge of the lock plate in a recess of the wood stock that is very precise to the shape of the hammer  (in other words if the hammer is new it was perfectly shaped and placed).

Before I trash this hammer and look for a more appropriate period one, I thought I should double check to make sure this is not a funky original one!  Any thoughts on the matter before I look for another hammer?  I think the gun is french and pretty early.   There seem to be very faint traces of scroll engraving on the lock face.  There are unusual markings on the narrow of the hammer neck, that could be a tiny name mostly worn off, or could be just pitting.  Thanks
Dave

[Fullstock longrifle]

That is one strange hammer Dave, I've never seen anything like it before.  The pistol and the lock looks French to me and correct for the period, but the hammer doesn't seem to match the rest of it.  With that said, I think your smart using the cautious approach in reference to the hammer.  Somebody here might have pictures of ten other pistols with the same hammer on them.  One good thing though, if you replace the hammer, and later find out that its some strange original, you can put it back on with no damage to the lock.  No harm, no foul.

FK

[Collector]

If you look at the relationships of the cock and the frizzen, it's obvious that the cock, can't be original to this piece.  It fails in height and geometry miserably.  The cock looks like a "filler"/replacement, from a made in Pakistan tourist piece.  I'd not hesitate to replace it.

[doug]

    I would add that the jaws look too thick and the screw into the tumbler is much too large headed to be original in addition to the hammer being too tall as was mentioned

cheers Doug

[DaveM]

Thanks guys - your thoughts relative to hammer / frizzen geometry make sense and I'm sure that is the case.  I'll hold onto the old hammer anyway just in case.  Now the hunt for a nice hammer - may be tough to find one this small.

Dave

[Jim Kibler]

You have a nice French pistol.  Though not highly valuable, it deserves an appropriate cock.  It has already had a poor replacement.  My advice is to do what it takes to replace the current cock with an appropriate one.  You may be lucky and find a casting that will work or one that can be modified by filing or welding.  You may have to have a cock made.  No sense in replacing with something that's not quite right.  If you search online auction catalogues you will be able to find examples of what a correct cock would be for your lock.  Some places to look are Bonhams, Thomas Del Mar, Cristies, Herman Historica, Rock Island Auction etc.    

[DaveM]

Thanks Jim, I'll do my homework on the hammer style. 

Maybe you can help me with another question.  It could be shortened at the forestock, but I think it is possibly that this may have originally been made with the stock short of the muzzle and with a forward ramrod pipe attached to the barrel.  The rear barrel lug is original and rather bulky for this size barrel, and it is obvious to me that this barrel never had a similar forward lug or there would be evidence of it.  Also the barrel is original length and swamped and has traces of an attachment as shown in this photo.  In the barrel channel the stock at the muzzle appears to be nicely shaped in this shortened rounded fashion, all of which leads me to believe it MAY have always been a partial stock pistol.  My question is, have you seen any examples of a gun from this period with a pipe attached to the barrel like this?  I am thinking of doing a restoration of the forward pipe if I can find a similar example of how it was physically attached to the barrel.  Or if you think this had a forward barrel lug and was originally fullstock thoughts would be appreciated. 
Dave

[Jim Kibler]

I would have to believe the stock has been shortened.  I have a hard time imagining a pipe attached to the barrel with a method that would leave the marks shown.  It would be nice to see an overall view again, the previous photos of the entire pistol aren't showing up.

[DaveM]

Sorry, Jim - here you go.  Some better ones without the hammer.
Dave

[James Rogers]

Looks like a cut down holster pistol to me.

[Collector]

What is the purpose of that little 'notch,' in the fore piece of the stock?  In my limited experience, I've found that the gunmakers (American and foreign) didn't waste any time on 'finishing/polishing' ANY part/section of a barrel, that wasn't above the stock profile.  In contrast, the lower/bottom exposed surfaces, of this barrel, appear to be 'finished' to the same condition/state, that the upper sections of the barrel, that would normally be exposed, if it was full-stocked.

What is the depth of the ramrod channel from the 'lower' (and only) thimble into the stock?  This could be one of the 'coach' pistols that travelers carried, with an easily accessible ramrod, with a large 'shotgun' tip in the ramrod, that did not go to the tip of the barrel.  In other words, the ramrod was short, but adequate for a certain sized load.

The pistol looks better, already, without that funky looking cock!

[Jim Kibler]

Certainly some work was done to the bottom of the barrel to remove and clean up where the lug was.  It is very reasonable that the bottom of the barrel could have been finished up a bit as well.  With the evidence of the lug being present at one time, it has almost certainly had the stock cut back.  The only exception I could imagine is if the barrel were re-used.  Possible but not at all likely in my view.

[DaveM]

Thanks for your additional input - Just checked, and the ramrod channel does go the full depth of the barrel.  As far as the notch, I assumed it would be to reduce the possibility of splitting, though a hairline cracked developed anyway.  If the wood came to a point under the barrel (without a notch), would a split may be more prone to start? 

For perspective, the pistol is 11 inches overall with a 6-inch barrel of about 57 cal (not exact cal measurement). Maybe a coach or pocket pistol?  Underneath the barrel is definitely not as finished in the exposed part of the barrel, and the remaining pin lug is a different shape (shorter / fatter) than whatever the traces are for the fastener on the fore end of the barrel (the traces of fastener near the muzzle underneath seem longer more like the length of a ramrod pipe).  It also has a proof mark under the barrel maybe I'll try to get a picture of that tomorrow. 

I lean towards the theory that the stock was shortened, but other aspects as I study it argue against it especially the size and shape of the fastener or whatever near the muzzle under the barrel compared ot the remaining lug.  Also that the stock under the barrel in the channel nicely finished edge at this forward curved end - but maybe this is explained by someone taking care when shortening it.  I hesitate to restore the forestock till I figure this out.

[DaveM]

Here is the barrel proof (or part of one).  This might be a long shot, but does anyone have a good library of european proof marks that may recognize this?  Thanks
Dave

[blunderbuss]

The pastor of my church had a British flintlock pistol by Mabson and Labraun and the cock was missing. So I figured I'd make him one after all his preaching had kept me out of jail for 50 years.(and that took allot of preaching) The set of books ''Historical arms making technology'' has the golden mean diminutions for locks so I used that to get it in proportion.

[camerl2009]

hmm i just seen one of these hammers cant rember where

[DaveM]

Maybe you saw it on a doubtless gun.  I did have feedback confirming that the barrel mark is in stockel and is that of Nicholas Carteron, a famous barrel maker in St. etienne France.  He was born 1690 died 1764.

[DaveM]

I meant to say on a  souvenir gun, sometimes spellcheck does strange edits

[camerl2009]

no i seen new made locks with them hammers