Author Topic: English Proof Marks (Read 11458 times)

Majorjoel · « **on:** March 24, 2013, 04:42:40 PM »

I am trying to put a possible date on the manufacture of this English trade gun. Any help as always will be much appreciated. Joel

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #1 on:** March 24, 2013, 05:37:26 PM »

A little less London, and a little more of the proofs, and view, marks would help. A little chalk rubbed into them will make them more readable too.

Hungry Horse

Majorjoel · « **Reply #2 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:05:43 PM »

nord · « **Reply #3 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:38:09 PM »

http://www.nramuseum.org/media/940944/proofmarks.pdf

Have a look... Brit Proofs.

smart dog · « **Reply #4 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:43:04 PM »

Hi Joel,
The only mark I can make out clearly is the Birmingham proof, which was adopted I believe in 1813.

Nord,
Unfortunately, the NRA list does not cover early British marks very well. The Birmingham proof house was officially granted their own proof in 1813.

dave

Majorjoel · « **Reply #5 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:52:44 PM »

Thank you guys, I have been having problems with photo bucket today but will get more pictures of this piece up when I can. The fellow I bought this from said it came out of the Mackinac straits area here in northern Michigan. He got it from a collector and was shooting it some several years ago. I know the Birmingham proofs but the center mark looks like a tomb stone with something in the middle. I'll get a close up soon.

Majorjoel · « **Reply #6 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:55:59 PM »

Majorjoel · « **Reply #7 on:** March 24, 2013, 06:59:08 PM »

Majorjoel · « **Reply #8 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:02:20 PM »

Majorjoel · « **Reply #9 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:05:45 PM »

Majorjoel · « **Reply #10 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:09:35 PM »

Majorjoel · « **Reply #11 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:13:39 PM »

Hungry Horse · « **Reply #12 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:32:00 PM »

This appears to be a very late chiefs grade trade gun. The proofs may be English style, but other parts of the gun do not look English. The lock is very crude for an English lock, and might be a replacement. The spider front sight, and scroll trigger guard, are uncommon on a standard grade trader. The rear entry pipe is not common on standard grade traders either. The triggerguard seems to have a bit of engraving on the bottom of the curled finial that would mark this gun as a special model as well. Is there any engraving on the buttplate return? Very interesting piece.

Hungry Horse

Majorjoel · « **Reply #13 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:56:30 PM »

Yes, Hungry Horse, there is engraving on the butt return as well as on the trigger guard bow, tail, and a pineapple finial forward. Also on the barrel tang which is notched out for a rear sight alignment. My photo's were taken in our dreary clouded northern MI endless winter so the details of engraving isn't coming out too well. The barrel is what looks like a patent breech to tang and is 37" long not counting the tang. It is attached to the stock with one barrel key aft and pinned toward the muzzle.

JV Puleo · « **Reply #14 on:** March 24, 2013, 07:59:48 PM »

Post 1813 Birmingham marks. The barrel had to have been made after that date.

Feltwad · « **Reply #15 on:** March 24, 2013, 08:56:33 PM »

Your gun seems to be trade gun which at a later date has had some parts replaced
The barrel which is of iron from what I can see of the proof marks is an imported barrel.
The mark next too the breech is the Flear de Lys this is associated with a number of Birmingham proofs
The middle one is a 1790 mark known has the Dupe Of Birmingham.
The top one is the earlist proof mark of the Birmingham Proof House of 1813
The star on the foresight is common on most imported barrels of the period and may have been made in Madrid
Feltwad

Bob Roller · « **Reply #16 on:** March 24, 2013, 10:27:53 PM »

Clever arrangement on that frizzen spring. It looks like the mainspring upper
limb pin is supporting it.That will certainly simplify making a frizzen spring for
that lock.

Bob Roller

smart dog · « **Reply #17 on:** March 24, 2013, 10:36:43 PM »

Hi Joel,
The flintcock looks like one from a Baker rifle.

dave

Bob Roller · « **Reply #18 on:** March 24, 2013, 10:44:25 PM »

One thing about that lock be it English or whatever. It has two screws in
the top of the bridle which is a lot better than just one.

Bob Roller

James Rogers · « **Reply #19 on:** March 25, 2013, 06:08:14 AM »

Joel,
See if the middle mark is like this minus the 1. Oops, I just saw where feltwad mentioned thiz.
http://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartDetail.aspx/1045/1/STAMP-KPM

Majorjoel · « **Reply #20 on:** March 25, 2013, 03:09:56 PM »

Thank you all for your input on this piece. Feltwad, the tombstone mark you call the Dupe of Birmingham? I keep running into this as a Ketland makers mark, but would sure like to learn more about the Dupe of Birmingham. Very interesting to find the London makers were spending $ on imported barrels for guns designed to go abroad for trade. I could almost imagine that these guys(of Birmingham) had their own hands into the Spanish barrel business like they kept close to our countries parts and supply business's. I wonder if the earlier high regarded Spanish barrels were a lot cheaper made and cost during the early to mid 19th century? The interests of the Crown always liked to be in control over the globe with such matters. As for the lock Bob and Dave, you both have a good eye for the details and I highly respect you both for this! Definately a mixed bag of parts here, but it does what it is supposed to do very well. There are a couple of symbols with numbers on the bridle and sear arm. It even has a working half cock notch. The plate looks to be old and has been in this mortice for a long time. I see a lot of build up gunk on the inside of the plate. Am always curious if there are more identifiers or markings under the crud. I will leave this one alone however. I removed the barrel this AM and checked out the hidden layout. Definately a very old stock with no repairs. I also discovered the butt plate and trigger guard are made of iron or steel. Lots of patina and old brass can fool me at times. I must be color blind!

JV Puleo · « **Reply #21 on:** March 25, 2013, 09:41:29 PM »

I'd really like to know what the supposed connection between the tombstone mark - of which there are numerous variations - has to do with the Ketlands. I've never seen anything in the primary documents to suggest this but I have seen plenty of those tombstone marks on guns marketed under a variety of names.

Two British authorities, Brian Godwin and John Evans, are currently working on a paper on the tombstone marks but they assure me that, while they can draw some conclusions, exactly what the mean remains a mystery.

Also, the crossed scepter "Ketland" mark (which is different and does not have the letters "BPC" and "V" included) is also a myth. The mark is actually the Ordnance Private proof mark used on guns proved for the trade at the Ordnance proof house. The Ketland connection is completely mythical, based on a mistake made by HBC Pollard back in the 1920s and repeated endlessly ever since.

boman · « **Reply #22 on:** March 26, 2013, 02:38:22 AM »

Joel, here's a good read on your proof marks
http://www.birminghamgunmuseum.com/media/The_Tombstone_Mark.pdf

according to this article your gun easily fits the 1813 to 1828 period when the combination of proofs were apparently used as they have never been found on a percussion equipped gun. There is also a Kentland pistol illustrated with "London" stamped on the barrel and the proofs seem to be a dead ringer for your barrel fwiw.

Steve

smart dog · « **Reply #23 on:** March 26, 2013, 04:27:29 AM »

Hi Steve,
Thank you for that link. Very valuable information.

dave

PPatch · « **Reply #24 on:** March 26, 2013, 06:01:27 AM »

Great link Steve, thanks!

dp

News:

Author Topic: English Proof Marks (Read 11458 times)

boman