Author Topic: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece  (Read 12843 times)

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« on: November 06, 2011, 10:30:30 PM »
English fowling piece by Joseph Heylin, Cornhill, London, England.
Full stocked English walnut take-down converted to half stock with rib.
Flintlock with safety, converted to cap gun, marked Heylin.
Sterling hardware by John King marked for 1767, London.
Spanish barrel by Eudal Pous of Barcelona, 40", approx. 14 bore trumpeting out to 12 last 1 1/2" at muzzle, bottom of barrel with English proofs and mark of Joseph Heylin.





















































Offline smart dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6814
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #1 on: November 07, 2011, 01:21:17 AM »
Beautiful James,
Thanks for the photos.  John King seems to have made silver mounts for most of the best makers in London.  His work is always wonderful.

dave
"The main accomplishment of modern economics is to make astrology look good."

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #2 on: November 07, 2011, 02:09:11 AM »
Ordnance private proofs too. This is a great example of why the myth of the "Ketland proof mark" is just that, a myth.


Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #3 on: November 07, 2011, 02:25:49 AM »
Beautiful James,
Thanks for the photos.  John King seems to have made silver mounts for most of the best makers in London.  His work is always wonderful.

dave

You're welcome. I am a picture collector for deeper learning and I know there are a few others here also.  ;D
It's fun to share with kindred spirits.
It does appear King was supplying the best makers during this period and I have seen the same hardware as this on other guns.

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #4 on: November 07, 2011, 02:27:14 AM »
Ordnance private proofs too. This is a great example of why the myth of the "Ketland proof mark" is just that, a myth.



Very good point. Heylin used the ordnance private proofs on every firearm I have seen.

Offline smart dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6814
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #5 on: November 07, 2011, 05:25:59 AM »
Ordnance private proofs too. This is a great example of why the myth of the "Ketland proof mark" is just that, a myth.


Hi Joe and James,
Could you guys explain that to me?  Are ordnance private proofs where a private maker like Heylin paid the Tower to proof barrels?  Were those stamps mistaken as Ketland or other private proof marks?  Were there private proof houses?  I always thought that in London there was only the Tower or the Gumakers Guild proofing barrels and then outside that you had Birmingham.  I find this stuff to be fascinating.  Joe, I cannot wait for your book on Ketland.

dave
"The main accomplishment of modern economics is to make astrology look good."

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #6 on: November 07, 2011, 06:11:01 AM »
Here's the brief version:
In London...
Barrels were proofed by the Gunmaker's Company, a craft guild with quasi-legal authority that only covered Metropolitan London and (I think) some or all of the County of Middlesex - where London is located.
From some time in the middle of the 18th century to some time at the beginning of the 19th century (we do not have conclusive dates in either case) barrels could be submitted for proof to the Government proof house on Tower Wharf by civilians. Because they were not government property, they were marked with the two strikes of the "crossed scepters" device instead of one strike of that mark along with the "GR & crown" Royal Cypher (which is how government arms were marked). The cost for a proof was 3d, of which the proofmaster kept 1d. From this fund, a banquet was given for the proof house workers each year.

Outside the jurisdiction of the London Gunmaker's Company there was no legal requirement for proof anywhere in Britain until 1813. However, the custom was well established and customers expected to see proof marks so,

In B'ham...
There was at least one Private Proof house which probably began operations around the beginning of the 18th century. As early as 1717 the London gunmakers were complaining that the B'ham marks looked too much like theirs. They were right, as its pretty clear that the private B'ham marks were intended to be easily confused with London marks. The truth is, they regularly are to this day even by experienced collectors. We do not know who owned or operated the private B'ham proof house but the circumstantial evidence comes down strongly on the partnership of Farmer & Galton. These are the common "crowned V' and "crowned P" marks... sometimes seen, quite late, without the crowns, just the letters "V" and "P".

We think... this is still in the conjecture stage... that private proofing on Tower wharf stopped in London around 1804/5. We do not know if it was ever done in B'ham during the Napoleonic wars when there was a "satelite" proof house there.

The new proof house replaced private proof in B'ham in 1813 so all B'ham private marks pre-date 1813 while all B'ham proof house marks are 1813 and later.

The "Ketland proof house" story is attributable to the late H.B.C. Pollard and his 1926 "History of Firearms". Its much too long a story to relate here but I believe I've traced the origins of his honest mistake. The problem is that the story has been repeated ad nauseum for the past 80 years so its deeply entrenched in popular gun lore. This very fine Heylin gun is important to the story because it isn't a B'ham gun and it is much too early to plausibly be attributable to a proof house associated in any way with Thomas Ketland Sr... who was only 31 years old in 1767, had only been in business 7 years and was still in his original location on Litchfield Street.

jp
« Last Edit: November 07, 2011, 06:17:04 AM by JV Puleo »

Offline smart dog

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6814
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2011, 08:14:29 AM »
Hi Joe,
Thank you very much for that history.  It helps me understand those markings much better.  I surmise that you infer that the private Tower proof was mistaken as a Ketland proof mark?

Thanks again,

dave 
"The main accomplishment of modern economics is to make astrology look good."

Offline Mike Brooks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13167
    • Mike Brooks Gunmaker
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #8 on: November 07, 2011, 04:04:59 PM »
Nice one James, thanks for posting.
NEW WEBSITE! www.mikebrooksflintlocks.com
Say, any of you boys smithies? Or, if not smithies per se, were you otherwise trained in the metallurgic arts before straitened circumstances forced you into a life of aimless wanderin'?

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #9 on: November 07, 2011, 05:51:56 PM »
An interesting observation for me is that the wedding bands I have seen on Spanish barrels go all the way around where every English made barrel I have seen was just done on the visible side.

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 893
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #10 on: November 07, 2011, 07:29:42 PM »
Dave,

Yes. Pollard appears to have drawn his conclusion from limited and ambiguous sources. (Which were all that was available in the 1920s) His conclusion was logical although I think it ought to have been expressed a little less conclusively. This is a great failing with almost all of the early researchers. They expressed themselves as certain, which they may have been, but often based their conclusions on some very subjective reasoning. I think its a failing we all have, especially when we've devoted years to studying a subject, but it has mislead legions of later enthusiasts.

The worst effect, to my mind, is that the story was repeated in the official history of the B'ham proof house and has thus entered the realm scholarly research. It happened like this... The history of the proof house was being written by the proofmaster just before WWII. Unfortunately, this gentleman was killed in a road accident in about 1941. After the war, in 1946, the new proofmaster completed the job - but he was not an arms historian (and never claimed to be). He relied heavily on Pollard, even reprinting the page of badly identified proof marks from Pollards book as part of the official history. It is easy to see how all this could happen with only the best intentions. At the time, no one even knew that the Tower did private proofing. That fact doesn't seem to have appeared until Howard Blackmore's work in 1963.

Joe Puleo

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #11 on: March 22, 2012, 04:15:27 PM »
I was uploading some pictures and added a few for this gun for anyone interested.
















Offline Dr. Tim-Boone

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6534
  • I Like this hat!!
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #12 on: March 22, 2012, 04:43:56 PM »
Lovely Details!!   Thanks James.
De Oppresso Liber
Marietta, GA

Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others. – William Allen White

Learning is not compulsory...........neither is survival! - W. Edwards Deming

Online Jim Kibler

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4284
    • Personal Website
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #13 on: March 22, 2012, 04:46:53 PM »
Thanks James.  That looks like it was a pretty good lock.  Interesting that it has the stirup link.  Any idea when the link first showed up?  Also, what's the vertical line on the rear part of the bolster?

Jim

Offline Bob Roller

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 9301
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #14 on: March 22, 2012, 05:08:43 PM »
That lock mechanism minus the sliding safety looks like the Twigg.Also the bridle looks like someone had snapped the hammer with the lock off the gun.
I have seen and on occasion made new bridles for locks that were much newer than this one,mid 19th century types with broken bridles. That tells me they were using iron and not steel. Last year,I made a new "4 pin"bridle to replace the original which had the upper,forward post broken,probably from being"speed cocked" like I see so many do today and for what reason,I will never know.

Bob Roller

Offline James Rogers

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3106
  • James Rogers
    • Fowling Piece
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #15 on: March 22, 2012, 05:57:17 PM »
Heylin was certainly at the top of the heap in his "Hey"day ;D and this does appear to have been a pretty killer lock for it's time.

Jim, good catch on the bolster line. It is actually a bolster step that sits behind the side of the standing breech. it is in direct line with the little decorative "v" in front of the cock area in front. The standing breech was a little wider than the barrel in OD.

Offline Dr. Tim-Boone

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Posts: 6534
  • I Like this hat!!
Re: Joseph Heylin Fowling Piece
« Reply #16 on: March 22, 2012, 08:48:06 PM »
When studying Ben Griffin locks from early/mid 18th century It seemed that there was about half an inch along the top of the lockplate immediately behind the fence that was rounded over from the outside...at least the outer edge was rounded over.  The point where the rounded top ended and the flat stop for the cock to rest against began, looked like a V in the pictures.... is that perhaps how the face of the lock plate is shaped where we see the small "V"???

This crude drawing ids looking down at the top of the lockplate and trying to illustrate what I am talking about.....
Secondly this lockplate appears to have a "cut out to accommodate the standing breech on the inside of the bolster..Is that what you are describing??



De Oppresso Liber
Marietta, GA

Liberty is the only thing you cannot have unless you are willing to give it to others. – William Allen White

Learning is not compulsory...........neither is survival! - W. Edwards Deming