A cut-down M.1816 Musket

[Archer68]

Hello guys,
I´ve purchased recently this Model 1816 Musket made by Harpers Ferry. I still waiting for delivery, that´s the reason, why I have no better pics.
It should be a so called Type III Musket - because of the year of manufacturing (1836).
The condition should be fine - so far - but..... the musket seems to be cut down.
The seller tells me, that the total lenght is 50 inch / 127cm - that means the musket is missing nearly 7,8inch or 20cm!!!
The alteration seems to be done very professional.
Even the barrel-bands are - in my opionion - set down towards the breech.
But.... there´s no bayonet-lug!!!
I know, cut-down muskets are not uncommon. And I even knew possible reasons for this.
My question is, could this be a musket for a "special purpose" such as artillery or pioneers?
Or was the musket simply cut down by an hunter or shooter long after the military "life" of the musket?
I can deliver better pics as soon as I get the musket.

p.s.
please excuse my bad english, but it´s not my native language.

[WESTbury]

Hi,

Before you buy any U.S. Military flint muskets, invest some money in George Moller's or Pete Schmidt's books that cover the subject very thoroughly. The barrel length should be 42" for an original.

 

[Archer68]

Thank´s for your hint. Yes.... I know, that the musket was cut down in the past.

[Archer68]

Here´re now better pics:



Some smal parts with markings:


The barrel:



The lock:




The obviously removed bayonet-lug:


The only stamp in the stock:


The ramrod is also cut-down. The tip was cut-off and became newly welded



Barrel-markings:


Upper-Band:


And the trigger-guard:

[Clowdis]

I am not the smoothbore expert but this one certainly looks factory to me. If not it was certainly done by someone with a lot of expertise. You need to research this one.

[Daryl]

Looking sat the "weight" of the muzzle (thickness), I'm surprised this one didn't 'go back' to H. Ferry for rifling
and conversion to caplock. Or, were those that did 'go back' keep their flint ignitions?

[WESTbury]

The trigger guard-bow is the type used at Springfield and Harpers Ferry from 1823 through the second or third calendar quarter of 1829. In the latter months of 1829 both US National Armories began phasing in the Model 1828 trigger guard-bow.
 

[Archer68]

I am not the smoothbore expert but this one certainly looks factory to me. If not it was certainly done by someone with a lot of expertise. You need to research this one.

Yes... that´s the question. Who has done this alteration, and what was the purpose? Is that even an alterartion or was the musket produced in this lenght...? For sure, it was done long ago. In my Opinion in the service time of the musket. What does the number "2" means? It can be found on some parts. Striking is also the fact, that there´s no Date at the barrel tang and no "US" at the but plate.....

[WESTbury]

Yes... that´s the question. Who has done this alteration, and what was the purpose? Is that even an alterartion or was the musket produced in this lenght...? For sure, it was done long ago. In my Opinion in the service time of the musket. What does the number "2" means? It can be found on some parts. Striking is also the fact, that there´s no Date at the barrel tang and no "US" at the but plate.....

This particular musket was very probably altered to its present form long after it was manufactured, possibly by a private gunsmith or even a civilian who wanted a shorter firearm for hunting. Obviously, the front barrel band has had the original brass front sight replaced by an iron sight. The lock has been reconverted to flint. The fact that the date and "US" are not present is not unusual due to over cleaning at some point. Although, there is the possibility that the breechplug tang date was removed during the reconversion of the barrel. The number "2" is merely a component matching stamp during the original assembly of the musket at Harpers Ferry.

[Archer68]

If´ve done some research for my own. I find out that the middle barrel band is from an german Mauser rifle M. 71/84. This band also does not fit correctly to the musket. Now... I even think this piece has seen over the last 180 years many owners and many of them left some personally alterations on the musket - long ago after the service. But, It is what it is and even in this condition such a gun is in europe hard to find. Most of the US-arms came in 1871 to europe - as france fight against the german states. Many civil-war rifles even today came from france, like most of the springfield rifles and even some spencers. It is a possibility, that even this piece came from this source. We will never know.
How can you tell, the lock is reconverted to flint? Are there any hints for this? Can you show me? The bore does not seems to be reconverted - in my opinion.

[WESTbury]

How can you tell, the lock is reconverted to flint? Are there any hints for this? Can you show me? The bore does not seems to be reconverted - in my opinion.

The fit of the brass pan as shown in your photo of the interior of the lock is a dead giveaway. Harpers Ferry and Springfield Armory were held to very rigid quality standards.
Photos below are of an early production 1819 dated Harpers Ferry M1816 that I once owned. The fit between the brass pan and the lockplate front and rear bolsters has no gaps whatsoever. Type III U.S. M1816 Flintlock Muskets in original condition are exceedingly rare. It is almost impossible to find one in the U.S.

[Archer68]

I wouldn't have noticed that at all. Thank´s for the explanation. Yes.... there is a gap between the brass and the iron. O.K. still a nice wallhanger.  :'(

[WESTbury]

I wouldn't have noticed that at all. Thank´s for the explanation. Yes.... there is a gap between the brass and the iron. O.K. still a nice wallhanger.  :'(

Archer'

You do have a nice "wall-hanger" and probably hard to find in Europe. For some reason, Harpers ferry longarms are more desirable in the U.S. than Springfields.

[jruff5585]

I have a 1848 Springfield and 1849 Harpers Ferry used by the Confederate Texas volunteers cavalry. They look pretty close to yours. I'm going to do a write up them soon or latter

[Archer68]

I have a 1848 Springfield and 1849 Harpers Ferry used by the Confederate Texas volunteers cavalry. They look pretty close to yours. I'm going to do a write up them soon or latter


Very nice. I would preciate more pics. Are there any stamps indicating the confederate use?

[JV Puleo]

Most of the US-arms came in 1871 to europe - as france fight against the german states. Many civil-war rifles even today came from france, like most of the springfield rifles and even some spencers. It is a possibility, that even this piece came from this source.

The arms American arms shipped to France in 1871 are fairly well documented in the Watson Squire papers (though these have never been published). Squire was a Remington in-law and the only person outside the immediate family to own stock in the company. Remington acted as the purchasing agent for the French government so virtually all the purchased arms passed through their hands. I have read through the collection and there were no converted flintlock muskets.

Since it has been reconverted and shortened I suspect that was done at the same time to make a handier gun for sporting purposes. If it were shortened for school use, which is another possibility, it would have a bayonet lug. I don't think it was ever a short, flint musket.

[jruff5585]

Very nice. I would preciate more pics. Are there any stamps indicating the confederate use?
[/quote]

I never had these rifles apart to look.

[Archer68]

....... If it were shortened for school use, which is another possibility, it would have a bayonet lug. I don't think it was ever a short, flint musket.

Thanks for the informations about the delivery of weapons to france. Now....there was a bayonet-lug, but it was obviously removed.



We will never know what happens in which period with this musket, but in my opinion a hunter or sportshooter wouldn´t need a complicated cut down three band musket. A hunter would easy cut off the stock to sporterize the gun to make them handier. But..... we will never know the truth.

[WESTbury]

I do not know what that round object inserted into the barrel is, but it certainly has no relationship to the original bayonet lug. They were rectangular. about 1/4" long and brazed into the barrel.

[Archer68]

I do not know what that round object inserted into the barrel is, but it certainly has no relationship to the original bayonet lug. ......

Yes, you´re right. But that's not the original muzzle either.

[JV Puleo]

Another possibility is that, when sold as surplus, it went to one of the Belgian arms dealers supplying the African trade. This happened quite often. I've even seen a letter from a Belgian dealer to the Springfield Armory asking to buy a quantity of Whitney flint muskets. (They had to be Whitney's...presumably because whoever the customer was already had some and recognized them as being better than the run of the mill trade musket. Not being able to read the markings, they may have attributed some magical quality to them or simply demanded the same as they already had.) This was in the 1870s or 80s. The armory didn't know what to do about it so they forwarded it to Francis Bannerman who wrote back something like "what am I supposed to do with this?" They replied that they didn't have any and though he might. If so, and it remained in Europe for some reason, it may have been converted to percussion later. The colonial powers couldn't stop the arms trade so they tried to limit it to muzzleloaders, often flintlocks.

[WESTbury]

I do not know what that round object inserted into the barrel is, but it certainly has no relationship to the original bayonet lug. ......

Yes, you´re right. But that's not the original muzzle either.

Far from it, for sure!
Below is a link to a RIA auction showing an 1841 dated H.F. Type III M1816 from Moller's collection. The musket may be in original condition. This particular musket was in the C. Meade Patterson collection auctioned by Conestoga Auction Co. in Nov 1999, Lot#361.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/84/186/harpers-ferry-1816-type-iii-flintlock-musket-with-bayonet

[OLUT]

Below is a link to a RIA auction showing an 1841 dated H.F. Type III M1816 from Moller's collection. The musket may be in original condition. This particular musket was in the C. Meade Patterson collection auctioned by Conestoga Auction Co. in Nov 1999, Lot#361.
https://www.rockislandauction.com/detail/84/186/harpers-ferry-1816-type-iii-flintlock-musket-with-bayonet
[/quote]

As an aside, it is interesting to note that RIA did not mention the replaced top jaw and jaw screw that was stated in the Conestoga Auction ... I guess description writers choose what they wish to include

[WESTbury]

As an aside, it is interesting to note that RIA did not mention the replaced top jaw and jaw screw that was stated in the Conestoga Auction ... I guess description writers choose what they wish to include

Quite frankly, I doubt that they know enough about the correct component configuration of any of these U.S. Muskets, to pick those details up.

[Archer68]

As an aside, it is interesting to note that RIA did not mention the replaced top jaw and jaw screw that was stated in the Conestoga Auction ... I guess description writers choose what they wish to include

I didn't notice that either. Could be french parts.