Fusil or fowler?

[debnal]

I just got this gun from Morphy's auction. It came out of the house of Admiral John Thomas Duckworth of the Royal Navy who fought in the Revolutionary War and was his gun. Since I collect weapons from the Rev War that are identified as to who used them, it fit into my collection.  It was listed as a fowler by the auction description. As I looked at it I noticed that it was full of military motifs. They are on both sides of the butt and at the back of the lock plate. Also, it has a 33 inch barrel that is rather short. But, it is not fitted for a bayonet or sling swivels. So, my question is- Is it a fusil or a fowler, or does it even matter?
Al

[James Rogers]

Very nice piece! What is the bore size and is the muzzle area of the bore relieved? Also, how thick is the wall at the muzzle? At first glance it appears to be a neat birding piece made with the owner in mind or purchased off the peg with the owner in mind.

[smart dog]

Hi Debnal,
I would say it is a sporting gun and not military.  You ask a good question and one that I've grappled with as well.  Currently, I accept Joe Puleo's conclusions that a true Officer's fusil will have sling swivels and be cut back for a bayonet.  The naval motifs might simply be the custom decoration commemorating the admiral's career.   David Collumbell was a fine London maker working until the late 1760s and maybe a little later.  Your gun likely was made before the AWI and I suspect during the 1760s.  It is a very nice piece and I would love to see more photos.

dave

[WESTbury]

Al,

I don't know if it really matters that much at all. It's a great acquisition in any case. Perhaps it was special ordered by the Admiral at some point in his career as a personal arm. A relatively short barreled arm is a handy weapon to have on a crowded ship. I would say that if there are not any signs it had been shortened at some point to it current configuration, it was never a "conventional" fowler.

I checked out the catalog description and did not see Jim Kochan's initials. Usually Jim leaves a sign that he did the cataloging. It may be fun to find out his opinion.

Kent Johns 

[debnal]

Thanks for your questions.
The bore size is .75 caliber. The wall of the barrel is fairly thick.
In regards to Puelo's thoughts on fusils, you have to think that maybe a Naval officer's gun would not need to accept a bayonet or have sling swivels, as it would be used in close quarters on a ship.
I just have never seen a fowling piece that has military motifs.
I talked to Jim about it and it gave him pause that it was loaded up with military motifs.
Al

[James Rogers]

If the bore is cylinder all the way thru and is thick walled it could certainly be considered a civilian carbine for ball. As far as the motif, I still think it is a civilian piece either made to order or purchased with the owner's naval connection in mind. I have seen several of these of similar bore size and length.

[smart dog]

Hi,
I own a fowler with military motifs on the butt plate and have seen scores of fowlers with engraved stands of arms.  It was a popular series of motifs.  I've also seen quite a few officer's fusils with similar decoration.   I don't think the engraving is any definite indication of military use except the owner may have a military connection.  How well do you thinks all that wire inlay would hold up during rough service aboard a military ship? 

dave

[alex e.]

I am really interested in the top,long barreled gun!

[WESTbury]

  How well do you thinks all that wire inlay would hold up during rough service aboard a military ship? 
dave

I don't know that any officer above the rank of lieutenant ever got into any kind of hard service in any naval organization.
Capt Jack Aubrey being the exception.

[debnal]

Alex,
The top gun is a fowler made in Rhode Island that is identifed on the side plate to Peleg Roads who fought in the battle of Rhode Island. It was the very first gun that Bill Guthman bought. I think it has just about the finest stock architecture I have ever seen. The forestock is so slim that with the barrel out, it would break in a stiff wind.
Regards,
Al

[Mike Brooks]

All the decoration, mounts, wire and engraving are pretty common for the period. The length isn't, I suspect a cut off, but James may be on to something.

[smart dog]

Hi,
The other question is: As an Admiral, commodore, or even captain, why would he be fighting with a fusil?

dave 

[debnal]

I have removed the barrel. It is tapered and flared and the breech end looks original so I think it is it's original length.
During the Revolutionary War, Duckworth was a lieutenant so a fusil/fowler/carbine would have been appropriate.
Al

[WESTbury]

One other consideration is that it possibly never went to sea at all. British naval small arms of the period had either brass furniture or blackened iron furniture as with the Sea Service long arms.

Does the iron furniture show any signs of being exposed to a salt water environment?

[debnal]

The whole gun is well used. It is not pristine as you might expect if it were a fowler that might have been used very little. But there is no brass and no black paint.
Al

[James Rogers]

Hi,
The other question is: As an Admiral, commodore, or even captain, why would he be fighting with a fusil?

dave

Hi Dave,

I personally believe this gun was intended for nothing but sporting use and not having any military association at all.

[Avlrc]

Congratulations on your acquisition, very nice, lovely.   But I like the one above it most,  long fowling pieces are just so pleasing to look at and hold.

[Mike Brooks]

Hi,
The other question is: As an Admiral, commodore, or even captain, why would he be fighting with a fusil?

dave

Hi Dave,

I personally believe this gun was intended for nothing but sporting use and not having any military association at all.

DITTO. The most interesting thing about it is the length of the barrel, very uncommon.

[Pukka Bundook]

Ditto Mike and Smart Dog.

Sporting guns that were short are not seen as often as longer pieces from this time period, but are not rare and were made for covert shooting.
A gentleman's military career in general did not interfere with his sporting shooting, and sport-shooting was a real passion amongst many.  (Guns used very hard)

I see this gun has been made for the late owner, and decorated accordingly, but in no way at all do I see it as  being used aboard a ship, ...unless for shooting seagulls as a way of passing the time!
Sporting guns of this period are Very often decorated with a stand of arms.  V common and no military connection.

It Does look a Lovely example, and I too would like to see more details!!

Congrats, Al, Very fine piece.

Richard.

[Marcruger]

Regardless of the category, that gun was quite the catch.  Thank you for sharing it with us.  The wire inlay brings Mark Silver and Ed Wenger to mind.  God Bless,   Marc

[Pukka Bundook]

Marc,

When I first saw the wire-work, It came to me that this may have been executed by the same person as worked   for William Bailes.

[JV Puleo]

Could be. Wire inlay was a specialty "sub-trade." There is an interesting book on the various trades aimed at parents for sons c.1760? (I have it at home but don't remember the exact date or title). In any case, one of the trades listed is "gun stock inlayer" or a similar name. I'll see if I can find it tonight and post a page or two.

[smart dog]

Hi,
Apparently Admiral Duckworth was born in 1748.  As best I can determine, David Collumbell either died or ceased production in 1765 so Sir John must have ordered this gun (if bought new) when he was no older than 17.  Collumbell was apprenticed in 1712 and clearly had a very long career.   

dave

[James Rogers]

Hi,
Apparently Admiral Duckworth was born in 1748.  As best I can determine, David Collumbell either died or ceased production in 1765 so Sir John must have ordered this gun (if bought new) when he was no older than 17.  Collumbell was apprenticed in 1712 and clearly had a very long career.   

dave

In addition, he information that provides the birthdate of Duckworth in 1748 also reports him beginning naval service as a midshipman at eleven years of age. If factual, I gues he actually could have bought the arm prior to Collombell's departure from the London gunmaking scene.

[Mike Brooks]

Could be. Wire inlay was a specialty "sub-trade." There is an interesting book on the various trades aimed at parents for sons c.1760? (I have it at home but don't remember the exact date or title). In any case, one of the trades listed is "gun stock inlayer" or a similar name. I'll see if I can find it tonight and post a page or two.

So was engraving. In fact so was just about everything else. Collumbell probably had very little to do with this gun other than sell it.