Brown Bess Regiment marks

[Longknife]

Can someone ID these Regiment markings? Thanks, Ed

[smart dog]

Hi Ed,
If the markings are the standard ones applied by British ordnance, the top number is the company # and the bottom is the musket # also called "rack" number.  With that 2 number "fractional" form  the regiment number would be on the barrel. Sometimes the regiment was engraved on the thumb plate but the form would usually be the regiment #on top with a company letter indicator in the middle and the rack number on the bottom.  If those markings were not applied by ordnance, perhaps if the gun was reissued etc., then it may not be clear what the numbers represent.

dave

[WESTbury]

Would love to see the rest of the musket. Is it a Long or Short Land?

Regimentally marked Bess's are rare. Many were scrubbed of their regimental markings, both on the barrel and wristplate, when they were returned to stores.

[Longknife]

[WESTbury]

Ed,

Thanks for posting the additional photos. Great markings on the barrel and lock. The Crown over Broad Arrow on the lockplate show that it is a British Ordnance system musket rather than one from Liege. The Pratt flared mouth second pipe indicates it is either a Pattern 1777 or Pattern 1779-S musket. It looks as though the Storekeepers is still present on the buttstock to the left of the "ID" letters.

Nice dark color on the barrel and lockplate indicates it has not been played with for many, many years.

[Longknife]

Here is the History of this musket as sent to me by present owner:

"""This rifle (correction by me, "musket" ) hung in my family's clothing store in Maine for many years. According to the legend, an "Indian" came into the store and traded the rifle for clothing."""


In my research with the known history, if the top number is the British regiment then this musket could have been used in the 4th Kings Own Regiment of Foot, that served in the Rev war.

 The 4th King's Own were ordered out to North America in Feb 1774 and arrived in late summer. They were in the 1st Brigade in Boston with the 23rd and 47th regiments, under Brigadier Lord Percy. The Grenadier companies from the Boston based regiments were formed into separate battalions, as were the light companies. These battalions fought at Bunker Hill.
By 1776 the Grenadiers of the 4th were part of the 1st Grenadier Battalion under the command of Col Meadows, and the Light Company was part of the 1st Light Battalion under Brigadier-General Leslie. The battalion companies were in the 1st Brigade commanded by Major-Gen Robinson. These units went to Charleston in June and then New York. In the battle of Brooklyn on 27th August 1776 the Grenadiers and Light Battalions took the brunt of the onslaught suffering 167 casualties. At another action at Haarlem on 16th Sept, the Light Battalion took many casualties along with the 42nd regiment.

In 1777, the Light Company took part in the battles at Brandywine on 11th Sept, and Germantown. The 4th, with a strength of 354, was in Vaughan's Brigade in Clinton's First Division for the expedition to Philadelphia. In 1778 the strength of the 4th was down to 295.

Here is the compete history of the 4th

https://www.britishempire.co.uk/forces/armyunits/britishinfantry/4thkingsown.htm

There is a 12 th Regimate of foot  but that unit never saw American soil,,,, Any opinions?...Thanks, Ed

[WESTbury]

The 4th King's Own were ordered out to North America in Feb 1774 and arrived in late summer. There is a 12 th Regimate of foot  but that unit never saw American soil,,,, Any opinions?...Thanks, Ed

Ed,

As you mentioned above the 4th Regiment of Foot left England in early 1774 and arrived in America on 9 June 1774. By June 1774, the Regiment had arms issued under two warrants one dated 12 Dec 1764 and a second dated 23 Mar 1774, before leaving England. The 432 muskets & bayonets issued in 1764 were without a doubt, Long Land Patterns. Those issued in March 1774 could have been Long Land Pattern or possibly Pattern 1769 Short Land Pattern.

An additional 282 muskets were issued under a warrant dated 30 Aug 1775 because the Regiment had been augmented. These additional muskets could have been either Long Land or Short Land Pattern 1769. A fourth warrant, dated 8 May 1779 for 112 muskets came with new recruits who were sent to the West Indies arriving on 4 Nov 1778.

As the percussion altered Bess belonging to the present owner is either a Pattern 1779 or a Pattern 1779-S, I doubt that the musket was ever in the possession of the 4th Reg of Foot during the American Rev War.

All of the info I presented above is in Appendix V page 308, of De Witt Bailey's Small Arms of the British Forces in America published in 2009 by Mowbray Publishing.

[smart dog]

Hi Ed,
Let me repeat that the "4" on thumb plate may not be the regiment.  It may mean 4th company musket number 12. Without the proper 3 number or number and letter combination indicating regiment, company, and rack number, the markings cannot be interpreted.  Most regiments had 8-10 companies so it is very unlikely the numbers mean 4th regiment 12th company.  Much more likely they mean 4th company musket # 12, regiment unknown.

dave

[mr. no gold]

Maybe I missed it but what is the barrel length? Nice gun and I love the hammer! Good history with it, too. All of us would like to find one like this. Thank you for showing it around here on the Forum.
Dick

[Longknife]

Well I was hoping!!!!!!!!!!!!! Thanks for all the info , you guys are great!  NG, The barrel is 42 inches. Thanks again,,,Ed

[Pukka Bundook]

Longknife,

Have you had the barrel out of the stock?

I was wondering if it had been shortened at some time.
Reason being, is that the maker's mark on the barrel is Possibly that of Thomas Gregory.   I say Possibly, because his maker's mark is TG with a star over.
Your mark is imperfectly struck, and in my books (Blackmore) this is the only close mark I can see.

Thomas Gregory was 'Son of Nathan, Free of Gunmaker's Company, by patrimony, 1706. Elected Assistant, 1723, Master, 1729.
Gunmaker to East Indian Co, 1717 to 32'.

If this Is his stamp, then barrel was re-used and likely shortened. if shortened, there would be old and possbly filled areas where the original lugs were.

No expert on these things, so this is just a possibility.

[WESTbury]

Reason being, is that the maker's mark on the barrel is Possibly that of Thomas Gregory.   I say Possibly, because his maker's mark is TG with a star over.

Another possibility is Joseph Grice who manufactured barrels 1773-1783, which corresponds with part of the production period of the 1777 and 1779-S Pattern Short Land.

[smart dog]

Hi Ed,
Can we see the side plate?  That could help a lot.  By the way, there is an example of a pattern 1779-S Pratt supplied musket shown on page 136 of Goldstein and Mowbray's book "Brown Bess".  The thumb plate is very much like yours with an identically engraved  "4" over "23"  meaning company 4 musket #23.

dave

[mr. no gold]

Ed, come to think of it, there may be a name in the ramrod channel. It was struck in with a die; Pratt did it and apparently so did most contract makers. I have a similar musket that has the name 'Tucker' in the channel. He was a contract maker in the late 1770s, along with Pratt and others. You might want to slide the ramrod out and examine the channel with a bright light. If there it would be toward the rear of the channel.
Dick

[Pukka Bundook]

Reason being, is that the maker's mark on the barrel is Possibly that of Thomas Gregory.   I say Possibly, because his maker's mark is TG with a star over.

Another possibility is Joseph Grice who manufactured barrels 1773-1783, which corresponds with part of the production period of the 1777 and 1779-S Pattern Short Land.

West,
Grice is a much more likely name, but I can't find a makers mark for him.
He can't have the same initials in the same font with the same star above, that's for certain, but as my books mainly cover London,  I will go with Grice being the more likely.  (But I'd like to see a maker's mark for him!)

[Longknife]

Here are some more pics.

[Longknife]

This musket is not in my possession and i have to e-mail owner to get the pics I want. I just became aware that there is a very old splice on the forearm between the second and third thimbles,,,

[mr. no gold]

Thanks for the extra photos, Ed. That forearm repair appears to be a period replacement. The Abner Howe fowler in the library has the same type of forearm replacement and seems to be typical for a NE broken gun. The glue bubbles are from the animal glue used to secure the joint. This is a great musket and may well have been used in the Rev. War. The fact that it 
came out of an Indian family could mean that it was used by their ancestor in the War, (that individual having been armed with it by the British in that conflict?). Some additional research might bring out more information. The marks in the RR channel appear to be assembly witness marks. The stocker's mark, if present, may have been on the missing original forestock.
Dick
 

[backsplash75]

Is that a faint 28th Regt engraved on the barrel to the right of the Tower proofs?  If so, DWB has them getting " new pattern" muskets from Dublin castle in 1770, plus a September 1778 request for 100 stands to replace worn out arms in 1778, so I guess this gun likely post dates service in America.

Per wikipedia:

 The regiment was sent back in North America in May 1776 and took part in the Battle of White Plains in October 1776 during the American War of Independence.[2] It also fought in the West Indies and helped take Saint Lucia in 1778, but was captured by the French on Saint Kitts in 1782 and interned until the end of the war.[2] In 1782, renamed the 28th (North Gloucestershire) Regiment of Foot

[smart dog]

Hi Ed,
The photo showing the side plate helps a lot.  It is a pattern 1777 short land musket.  The marks in the ramrod groov are just production marks that link all the particular parts.  Now for the $64 question: can you tell if the crown and GR on the lock, and TOWER are engraved or stamped? 

dave

[WESTbury]

Dave,

I believe that those lock markings are engraved. The stamped markings on the locks of the Pattern 1793 Short Lands, not to mention the cast rounded and foreshortened side plates, are much different. See The Brown Bess by Mowbray and Goldstein page 144.

Kent

[smart dog]

Hi Kent,
I cannot tell clearly from the photos but I think you are right.  That implies the lock is from production during 1777-1782.

dave

[Longknife]

Hi Ed,
The photo showing the side plate helps a lot.  It is a pattern 1777 short land musket.  The marks in the ramrod groov are just production marks that link all the particular parts.  Now for the $64 question: can you tell if the crown and GR on the lock, and TOWER are engraved or stamped? 

dave

You tell me!?

[WESTbury]

You tell me!?
[/quote]

Why don't you look on Gunbroker under the heading of Brown Bess, There are at least two or three 1809 Pattern Bess muskets having stamped lockplate markings.

[smart dog]

Hi Ed,
Thanks for those close ups.  I think it is engraving, therefore the musket was made during a time it could have been issued to British troops fighting in the Rev War.   I believe Backsplash75 is correct that there are markings for the 28th regiment on the barrel.  I  believe the it is musket #12, 4th company, 28th regiment of foot.  According to Bailey, there was a major shipment of muskets to that regiment stationed in the West Indies in December, 1778.  Those could have been pattern 1777 muskets and this might be one.  Perhaps, after they were captured by the French in 1782 and interned, the musket was turned over to Americans by the French and somehow found its way to Maine.

dave