I get all that—but then why were they waiting for new pattern muskets made by Nicholson?
That is something I cannot speak to.
On a lighter note, I dug out Bailey's 2009 book,
Small Arms of the British Forces in America 1664-1815 Appendix V, Warrants for arms issued to regiments serving in North America.
First paragraph by Bailey:
"It must be stressed that the date of the warrant is only that, and no more. It does not indicate when the regiment actually received the arms, but only from what date they were authorized to receive them. Once on shore in America, regiments would have been rearmed from local (basically New York City) Ordnance Stores or, if actually on campaign, from the spare parts carried in the Artillery Train. Arms sent over in the name of the regiment would have gone into Ordnance Stores to replace those previously issued to the regiment. The date given under "Arrived in America" is the date on which the regiment went ashore, and there is sometimes considerable variation in these dates in contemporary sources."
Well, back to the drawing board!
Let me take a swag at Nicholson. Perhaps he had only one Long Land in his possession to serve as a Model Musket and thus by necessity had to make 12 copies to send out to the gunsmiths as a Model.
That approach was employed by the US Purveyor's office and after 1816, by the US Ordnance Dept with respect to arms Models contracted for with the various arms contractors.
This is
way off subject for this thread so I'll leave it at that.
