Author Topic: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle  (Read 5189 times)

Offline 120RIR

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 368
Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« on: April 02, 2017, 03:53:28 AM »
This is presently listed on an on-line gun site and I thought it was pretty interesting.  It's advertised as a Berks County rifle which to my novice eye certainly appears to be the case but I thought the conversion was pretty neat.  Apart from the brass/bronze hammer, the conversion is comparable to the "Belgian" style used by U.S. arsenals before the Civil War on old pattern 1816 (or 1822/23) flintlocks.  The bolster conversion seems to be the standard for Kentucky rifles but has anyone ever seen another like this? 










Offline Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #1 on: April 04, 2017, 04:14:55 AM »
This gun intrigues me.  I have poured through the literature and find no instance of bronze hammers used for Belgian conversions, not even by the Confederates.  In any case, this type of conversion was already in considerable disrepute well before the war and was not practiced by the CS government
  Best guess is that this rifle was in public stores (State or even a municipal government) and was altered according to the US practice between about 1850 and 1857.  Not surprisingly the rifle does not appear to have done any service as a percussion gun.  The Confederates did alter a number of Kentucky rifles for military purposes both in Tennessee and at Holly Springs, Miss. but this is not one of those.  It is a mystery.

Offline Hungry Horse

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5414
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #2 on: April 04, 2017, 03:54:52 PM »
My guess is that this gun was converted as seen, but with a steel hammer. This type conversion was pretty much Civil War specific. I  remember seeing only one other examples of a civilian gun converted this way, it is a high end rifle by Henry Deringer. I think the brass hammer was a twentieth century addition. A brass hammer wouldn't last very long without the hammer getting loose from brass distortion where it fits on the tumbler.

  Hungry Horse

Offline Mike Brooks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13235
    • Mike Brooks Gunmaker
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #3 on: April 04, 2017, 11:44:33 PM »
I suspect the hammer is painted gold. But, I was wrong once years ago......
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 Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #4 on: April 05, 2017, 03:44:05 AM »
I will know soon enough because I just bought it.  It is a military conversion which means this is a public property contract rifle.  It meets all the known and hypothetical criteria for a Model 1792 Contract Rifle, and some 137 are known to have been delivered to Sec. of War Knox by Berks County makers Angstadt and Figthorn.  As for the bronze hammer, the government made conversion hammers for only a couple of models of guns.  Oddball stuff sent by state's to federal armories for conversion were a real problem.  I have an idea where this hammer was cast and why, but I am going to keep my powder dry on this until I can consult further. Poo
Jim Leinicke

Offline Mike Brooks

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 13235
    • Mike Brooks Gunmaker
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #5 on: April 05, 2017, 02:36:19 PM »
Hi Jim, I was wondering who the "New Guy" was. ;)
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 Hlbly

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #6 on: April 05, 2017, 02:51:43 PM »
I have an attributed C. Beck that was converted using a brass hammer, and it is not a recent replacement. It has a square-bottom bolster like a lot of conversions done in Kentucky.

Offline Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #7 on: April 06, 2017, 11:04:13 PM »
Hi, Mike- I thought that was you.  Barbarians rule!  Anyhow, I have been off collecting Harper's Ferries and colonial stuff for years, but am round calling again and so getting into this stuff.  Fun!

Offline Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #8 on: April 06, 2017, 11:17:31 PM »
Round balling, not round calling!

Offline Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #9 on: April 06, 2017, 11:20:29 PM »
Hibly - Square bottom bolsters are also typical of Confederate State's alterations.
Jim

Offline JV Puleo

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 896
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #10 on: April 08, 2017, 06:47:04 PM »
I think it is extremely unlikely (meaning just about impossible) that this conversion was done by the government. The conversion program instituted in the 1850s relied on what was effectively a traveling machine shop (or more than one... the whole story can be found in Pete Schmidt's Volume II of US Military Flintlocks). Because arms were stored all over the country and the skills, jigs and fixtures needed to do the job were highly specialized, it was easier to send the machines to the armories than it was to send the guns back to a central location.

Only muskets made in 1821 and later and only in unissued condition were to be converted. On the eve of the CW, a small number of slightly earlier muskets were also done as well as some that had been issued but were still in new condition. The fact that they wouldn't even convert older M1816 muskets argues against taking the time to do a purely civilian rifle that whould have had no viable military use.
Also, when the government contracted out for conversions, at the beginning of the war, is was necessary to supply some of the contractors with older muskets because all of the "new" guns had already been converted.

Why this rifle was converted in this manner is anyone's guess. Mine is that the owner or gunsmith felt the direct connection between the cap and the charge was preferable to a drum & nipple but beyond the fact that it exists, I can't see what it has to tell us. I suspect it was done fairly late. No many people would have even seen the Belgian-style conversion until the early 1850s so, unless someone thought it up on their own - which is entirely possible - it would seem to date from the 1850s.


Offline Skirmisher

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 85
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #11 on: April 13, 2017, 03:54:14 AM »
Not wishing to beat this to death, but this is absolutely a military conversion for military purposes, probably done by a civilian contractor, but possibly done at a federal facility.  In any case, you have misinterpreted Schmidt.  He is describing the federal program for altering certain federally owned flintlock arms.  A totally different set of criteria applied to the huge stocks of state-owned arms in state arsenals, or to private armories owned by private uniform militia companies.  All of these were invited to have their flintlock arms altered at federal arsenals, for a price.  This led to unexpected problems due to a lack of hammers to fit pre-1822 patterns of Muskets, 1803 pattern rifles, and Kentucky -style rifles, of which there were many in state hands.  There is some interesting correspondence concerning assorted contract long rifles owned by Virginia.  Washington Arsenal declined to convert them, but offered to have them done at Harper's Ferry where hammers could be individually made and fitted.  Virginia agreed to the extra cost and the rifles were presumably altered.  Finally, when it was clear that Lincoln intended to invade the seceded southern states, there was a rush north and south to alter remaining stocks of flintlock arms of all types.  Contractors in Virginia, North Carolina, and Ohio are known to have done this type of alteration in 1861, and countless there were others.
The military style of the hammer, the presence of a military musket cap cone, and a bore reamed smooth all indicate this was a military job and this particular arm is very interesting to military collectors, even if it has only marginal appeal to long rifle fans.

Offline wildcatter

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 255
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #12 on: April 13, 2017, 04:56:27 AM »
Its certainly is an interesting rifle and looks to be in great shape! Thanks for pointing it out!

Matt
You have to play this game like somebody just hit your mother with a two-by-four.

Offline Shreckmeister

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
  • GGGG Grandpa Schrecengost Gunsmith/Miller
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #13 on: April 13, 2017, 03:25:31 PM »
 Interesting topic and great discussion. Can someone address the question of why the top edge of the lock plate  appears to be above what would be the normal location of a touchhole?
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

Offline Eric Kettenburg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
    • Eric Kettenburg
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #14 on: April 13, 2017, 05:58:14 PM »
I can just barely see what looks like a piece of metal dovetailed in place to fill what I assume would have been the remnants of the pan cavity when the remainder of the pan was cut away.  (This lock would have had an integrally forged pan.)

It blends in very well so the first impression what that it was done long ago - at the same time of the conversion.

I'd like to see more of the rifle - pictures of the cheek side etc.
Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government!

Offline JTR

  • member 2
  • Hero Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 4218
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #15 on: April 13, 2017, 06:33:22 PM »
Interesting topic and great discussion. Can someone address the question of why the top edge of the lock plate  appears to be above what would be the normal location of a touchhole?

Personally, I doubt the lock is original to the gun. And even if you take out the small piece of fill metal that Eric pointed out, there's still no room for a detachable pan and a touch hole. And as pointed out, this type of lock would not have had a detachable pan.

As for the gigantic brass hammer,,, military,,,, I wouldn't hold my breath...

Otherwise, it looks like a pretty nice rifle!
John
John Robbins

Offline Shreckmeister

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3754
  • GGGG Grandpa Schrecengost Gunsmith/Miller
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #16 on: April 13, 2017, 08:25:45 PM »
Intriguing statement by Skirmisher "I have an idea where this hammer was cast and why, but I am going to keep my powder dry on this until I can consult further."
It certainly looks like the identical form of military conversion hammer.  Anxious to hear the proposition.
Rightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will within limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add 'within the limits of the law' because law is often but the tyrant's will, and always so when it violates the rights of the individual.

Offline Eric Kettenburg

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4033
    • Eric Kettenburg
Re: Belgian Conversion Berks Co. Rifle
« Reply #17 on: April 13, 2017, 09:14:54 PM »
I'd have to withhold judgement on the lock originality vs. not, short of seeing it 'in the flesh' but other than the excessive sinking of the tail into the stock, at first glance it looks ok, proper period and fit etc.  There are a lot of these Northampton and Berks pieces with the locks inlet high and nose-down (to clear the barrel breech one would assume) and if you try to envision the typical depth to the pan cavity, it's really not that high and totally functional.  I've seen quite a number of them built this way and built many myself, there's no problem with function.

I do find the brass hammer pretty weird and frankly I doubt it would functionally hold up for very long.
Strange women lying in ponds, distributing swords, is no basis for a system of government!