Author Topic: Help ID'ing antique fowling gun barrel (Read 14631 times)

rich pierce · « **on:** July 09, 2012, 04:41:54 AM »

I picked up this very nice octagon to round, 37" long, .69 caliber barrel. I know nothing about hallmarks and proof marks, etc. This one looks high end to me as the wedding ring and associated chased border go all the way around the barrel, underside as well. The barrel is 1.3" at the breech and tapers rapidly. Bore still sound though rough in the powder chamber. Anybody know country of origin and approximate date? I would guess late 1700's by the thickness of the breech and rapid taper but later based on the short length.

Avlrc · « **Reply #1 on:** July 09, 2012, 04:47:39 AM »

My uneducated guess would be Spain.

James Rogers · « **Reply #2 on:** July 09, 2012, 05:04:53 AM »

Spanish or made to be like one. Spanish barrels being turned have their rings all the around. Surprising to see just the barrel and have some of the gold still intact. The mark closest to the breech I believe is the location of manufacture and the next one up is the maker. You should be able to identify them fairly easily. I can't read them on my cell phone though.

mr. no gold · « **Reply #3 on:** July 09, 2012, 06:02:32 PM »

Spanish! You should be able to make out the initials of the maker, and possibly the city of origin, in the dome shaped cartouche. I cannot determine what they are from the photo, but can see them. It is a very high quality barrel that must have been on a extra fine fowler. Nice touch that much of the gold foil remains in the recesses of the marks. Nice find, and thank you for showing it.
Dick

rich pierce · « **Reply #4 on:** July 09, 2012, 06:44:36 PM »

STS is the best I can guess on the maker mark, Dick. Thanks for the ID!

Acer Saccharum · « **Reply #5 on:** July 10, 2012, 05:22:42 AM »

NICE!

Love the chiseling around the wedding band, Spanish, fo' sho'. The Turkish and Spanish barrels were prized for their quality. You'll see German jaegers with Spanish or Turkish barrels occasionally.

Yours looks un-messed with. Great find.

Tom

James Rogers · « **Reply #6 on:** July 10, 2012, 02:47:01 PM »

Ok Rich,
After getting home last night and looking at the marks on my PC, I believe your barrel to be by the famous Nicholas Bis of Madrid. There were two IIRC and the first was late 17th and early 18th century. Period books say he died in 1724 and the barrels he made in the former part of his life were most prized. I dont know much about the the other Bis and his time frame.
Keep in mind that 18th century writings also state that his barrels were counterfeited in Liege, Prague, Munich, and that one had to be very knowledgeable to distinguish the real Mccoy.

The maker mark should be a crown over NCI (first line) and BIS (second line)
The location mark closest to the breech should be a globular affair in center with a cross on top

Mike Brooks · « **Reply #7 on:** July 10, 2012, 03:29:30 PM »

Any sign the barrel ever had any lugs? If you look close you may be able to detect where a barrel band may have been.

Jim Kibler · « **Reply #8 on:** July 10, 2012, 04:11:02 PM »

A neat barrel for sure. So what are the thougts behind using the length and breech size as dating features in this particular case?

rich pierce · « **Reply #9 on:** July 10, 2012, 04:49:33 PM »

The barrel has a lug dovetail in the octagon section. I can't see differences in patina that might indicate bands. About a foot from the muzzle there's a spot on the underside where a lug may have been soldered in the past but it's not there now.

The profile with the fat and rapidly tapering breech section led me to think this might be a 1750's era barrel or even earlier. The length seemed to me to be more compatible with a later date, as I'd expect something in the 46-54" range for 1750's in an American fowling piece. My knowledge of European fowling pieces from different countries is minimal so I am just extrapolating in my head that there may have been some barrel length trends than spanned continents and cultures. I am not even sure whether it is a fowling piece barrel as the muzzle is not really thin, and thought perhaps it could be an officer's fusil barrel.

It appears to have a liner that is wrought iron. I can't remove the breechplug so can't tell if it is coned on the inside etc. The touchhole is about 0.065" and I removed the rust plug by spinning a 1/16" drill bit in my fingers.

Feltwad · « **Reply #10 on:** July 10, 2012, 05:39:23 PM »

What you have is a Spanish barrel ,the crucifix is the common mark for Madrid of the late 18th Century.Most of these barrels averaged 45 inches and in 14 gauge with the baluster turn highly chiselled ,the letters are the name of the maker which in some cases are split into two or three parts. The early English gun makers used these barrels which have the English proof marks which was the law for foreign barrels.
Feltwad

smart dog · « **Reply #11 on:** July 10, 2012, 06:08:09 PM »

Hi Rich and James,
A barrel by Nicholas Bis typically would have his mark as James described and below it a stamp showing a globus cruciger (cross on top of an orb). The orb and cross probably meant the same thing as British gunmakers claims of "gunmaker to the king". However, his barrels also usually had 3-4 acanthus leaf-like gold marks as well as the cross. I cannot make out anything in the stamp next to the breech. The makers mark could be "Bis" but the 3 crosses on the top flat and on the oblique flat don't fit the description for Bis. They might be orbs and crosses but I cannot tell. Apparently, Bis may have used a rectangular mark with a horse next to the breech early in his career. It almost looks like the gold is rubbed away in a shape that could be a horse on your barrel. The length of the barrel is consistent with some Spanish and Portugese barrels. It is almost 1 Vara (1.1 meters) long. If it is really Spanish and full length it likely will have 2/5s of the length octagon and 3/5s round. Why do I know all of this obscure info? I am in the process of faking a Spanish barrel for an English fowling gun I am building so I've done the best I can to research the details. I wish I could be more help but my list of Spanish and Portugese makers marks is not nearly exhaustive.

dave

James Rogers · « **Reply #12 on:** July 10, 2012, 06:32:50 PM »

I just did a search for Bis on ALR and found this thread. Some of the comments are interesting for this thread.
http://americanlongrifles.org/forum/index.php?topic=10514.0

James Rogers · « **Reply #13 on:** July 10, 2012, 06:40:06 PM »

Hi Dave,

As far as like markings other than the maker's and location marks, didn't they vary the other designs some? In researching my Pous barrel on the Heylin I found similar but different designs on other barrels. The ALR link I posted above also has a barrel with the Bis mark on it but the barrel itself is way different in design and looks much earlier if not a fakery.

As far as length and breech, this barrel looks very similar to the Eudal Pous, Barcelona barrel on my Heylin fowling piece. Mine is 40" with a 15"octagon.

rich pierce · « **Reply #14 on:** July 10, 2012, 08:02:48 PM »

Thanks guys. Looks like a 1750s to 1770s English fowling piece would be appropriate.

James Rogers · « **Reply #15 on:** July 10, 2012, 10:18:32 PM »

Quote from: rich pierce on July 10, 2012, 08:02:48 PM

Thanks guys. Looks like a 1750s to 1770s English fowling piece would be appropriate.

Most likely with a standing, hooked breech system? I do not recall seeing one with a straight tang.
Has anyone else seen a Spanish barrel on an English piece of that period without a hooked breech?

JV Puleo · « **Reply #16 on:** July 10, 2012, 11:46:04 PM »

A good many "Spanish" barrels are fakes made in the low countries... remember, Belgium was once the "Spanish Netherlands." 18th century Belgian gunmakers were intimately familiar with Spanish marks and recognized their appeal and market. I have a double with beautiful marks for Juan Santos - who died in 1721. So, I either have the oldest dateable side-by-side double, or I have a set of Belgian barrels with fake Juan Santos marks... I vote for the latter.

Its still a great barrel.

rich pierce · « **Reply #17 on:** July 11, 2012, 01:28:04 AM »

James, good point on the hooked breech. Certainly lower grade fowling guns traded here had standing breeches but that might be rare to non-existant with a barrel attempting to pass as high end-Spanish?

Mike Brooks · « **Reply #18 on:** July 11, 2012, 02:57:33 AM »

Likely never saw service in America,and if it was ever in england it would have Brit proofs. Nice barrel.

JV Puleo · « **Reply #19 on:** July 11, 2012, 03:17:56 AM »

Mike,
For this period "London" proof law only prohibited selling unproved guns in London and for about 10 miles around the city. There was no legal requirement for proof outside that area where it was perfectly legal to sell an unproved gun. But custom, and more often than not, customer demand, caused most barrels to be proved. Spanish barrels, or mock Spanish barrels, had a reputation for being the best so, with no legal requirement to prove them, I think most weren't unless they were being sold in the city and even there this could easily have been ignored. My side-by-side double has an English restocking from about 1790 and the crest of an Earl in the British peerage on the wrist so there is little doubt it was there and there isn't a trace of a British proof.

Most people apply the modern British proof law to the past when, in fact, it evolved over a long period of time. There was never any requirement of proof for export guns and as late as 1910 proof law didn't extend to British colonies.

smart dog · « **Reply #20 on:** July 11, 2012, 04:53:52 AM »

Hi,
Joe, thank you for that bit of knowledge about proofing. I learn something new every time you offer up those tidbits.

Rich, I am a little confused. Are you thinking of having the barrel stocked as a British gun with a Spanish barrel or are you thinking it was originally installed on a British-made gun? If the former, then it is more likely it would have a hook breech if stocked by a first quality British maker during the mid-18th century. Of course I am sure one could find plenty of exceptions. Alternatively, if you think it came from a British gun originally, what gives you that idea? It may never have been used on anything other than a nice Spanish gun, many of which had standard breech plugs.

With respect to Jim's question about length, size, and aging, I dug into my copies of Spanish Guns and Pistols by Neal and Espingarda Perfeyta. Neal states that Spanish barrels were usually about 42 inches early in the 18th century but many were made shorter during the latter part of the century. However, in EP the authors use an example of making a barrel about 1 meter in length to demonstrate portions and proper weight distribution. Although, given their descriptions of barrel making, the norm was clearly for making longer barrels but shorter barrels must have been made as well. The gunsmith manual was written during the last decade of the 17th century but published in 1718. Also both books note that first-quality Spanish and Portugese barrels have gold lined touch holes after about 1700.

dave

rich pierce · « **Reply #21 on:** July 11, 2012, 06:02:17 AM »

Dave, if you think you're confused, you're a minor leaguer compared with me, LOL. I just have a cool barrel and am wondering aloud where it came from, how it was stocked, and what might be done with it today, including just having it and studying it. Without evidence to the contrary, it may have always been on a Spanish gun as you suggested.

mr. no gold · « **Reply #22 on:** July 11, 2012, 10:32:49 AM »

Apparently there was an old myth that held that Spanish barrels were made from old horseshoes and nails that had been worn against the cobble and stone streets of the Spanish cities. The theory was that hard use on a hard surface thereby hardened the metal and made it superior for use in gun barrels. This supposedly made those barrels widely sought after, as they were thought to be the best. True? Probably not. But, if people believed that to be true, it could provide another reason as to why they were preferred. Also, with the Toledo blade industry, Spanish steel was highly ranked for weaponry and seemingly well known.
Dick

smart dog · « **Reply #23 on:** July 11, 2012, 05:42:37 PM »

Hi Dick,
The myth is true at least according to the treatise written by Spanish gunmaker Isidro Soler in 1795 and translated by Neal in his book on Spanish guns. However, the reason was not hardness but greater malleability of the iron. In addition, only horseshoes made of iron from the Biscayan region of Spain were acceptable. The iron ore from that region is exceptional (it still is) because of the high iron content and fewer impurities. According to Soler, 50 lbs of horsehoes were used to make a single 6 lb barrel. He describes how the 14 lbs of shoes went to the breech area, 12 lbs to the tapered octagon section, and 24lbs divided into 3 piles of 8lbs were used to make the round section of the barrel. The care and precision in barrel making described by Soler and by the 3 Portuguese brothers who wrote Espingarda Perfeyta clearly demonstrate why Spanish and Portuguese barrels were so esteemed. It was not a marketing ploy. They were probably the best smoothbore barrels in the world during most of the 18th century.

dave

Jim Kibler · « **Reply #24 on:** July 11, 2012, 06:57:39 PM »

I don't have a great deal of knowledge about Spanish barrels, but my gut feel is that this could be from as early as the 1730's or 40's. Perhaps even a little earlier. I have a Liege made gun from around 1735 having a barrel much the same overall pattern and size. It is 38.5" although I think it has been cut back a touch. Without specifically studying these barrels, my gut feel is that the overall pattern didn't change or evolve a great deal over time. Anybody have any thoughts on this?

News:

Author Topic: Help ID'ing antique fowling gun barrel (Read 14631 times)