John,
No need to apologize on learning how the forum operates. We all had to learn how to do it.
I was finally able to find and go through my copy of “BRITSH MILITARY LONGARMS 1715 ”“ 1865,” by Dr. De Witt Bailey, the eminent British scholar on British 18th and 19th century military arms. I wanted to use this book to refresh my memory and especially because of the “Lovell” designed, military style, percussion locks on your top and bottom guns in the photos you showed. This style lock was not normally used by British civilian gunsmiths; unless they were making military style arms for the British Government or “for the trade,” or refitting or converting surplus military arms “for the trade.”
The period terms “To the trade” or “For the trade,” when speaking of British Arms; both meant selling gun parts, implements or complete guns and normally for civilian use, unless they stipulated it was for British or Irish Ordnance Boards. I have always found it to be a lovely descriptive term.
The fact that there are no significant markings on the barrels and locks of your guns, lowers their value compared to those properly marked in the period. Military barrels had “Touch,” “View,” and the “King’s/Queen’s Proof Marks. Civilian barrels always had similar, though slightly different “View” and “Proof” marks. Military Locks always had the “King’s/Queen’s Cypher” engraved or later stamped on the Lock Plates, For example, a Crown over the initials “G” and “R” for George Rex for the Kings George I-III and “V” and “R” for Victoria Regina, for Queen Victoria. Lock plates were often/usually marked as well as the British Broad Arrow Mark and usually the British Ordnance Board at the Tower or Dublin Castle in the 18th century. Military style locks, for sale or use by civilians, were almost always engraved or stamped with the Lock or Gun Maker’s name and in the case of those made for the East India Company, with the initials “E.I.C.” of some form as well.
When the British Ordnance Board sold out of date, damaged or surplus Government arms in the 18th/19th centuries; it seems the King’s/Queen’s Cypher on the Lock Plates were either removed or was expected to be removed by the Factors who purchased said arms. Other military markings may/would have been removed as well. However, the civilian Factors normally engraved or stamped their name/s or their company’s name on the Lock Plates before the Arms were sold “to the trade.” Further, even when the “King’s/Queen’s” Touch, View or Proof Marks were removed from the barrels; it was expected/demanded by law to have the barrels “re-proved” and stamped with the marks from the Civilian Proof Houses.
So it would have been extremely uncommon to downright nonexistent for period barrels and locks to have as few marks as on your two percussion guns, back in the period.
Now, Indian, Pakistani, Afghan and other gun makers copied British Arms during their period of use and continuing to this day. They would sometimes copy/forge the markings on the locks or barrels to sell them more easily or they may have not marked them at all. “Decorator” Guns that were often never meant to be fired, may also not have had copied/forged markings and the above foreign makers have made tons of such decorative pieces down through the years to this day. As I understand it, British Law does not require these barrels to be “proof tested,” if sold as decorative pieces only.
Thus, I am not entirely sure, but strongly suspect your two percussion guns are decorator pieces. To determine if the locks on those guns were otherwise real locks that had the engravings and/or stampings removed, one would have to check the strength of the mainsprings and at least take the locks off to check the internal parts. Real Lovell design, “Enfield Type” percussion locks had very strong mainsprings and high quality internal parts.
The barrels on your two percussion guns might be original barrels that were cut down and reused. The stock on the top percussion gun may be original military and then cut down, but one would have to get a better look at the buttplate.
The bottom percussion gun looks like it was or is rifled, due to having the rear sight. It may be an original rifle barrel that was reamed out smooth to be a shotgun/fowling piece in the late 19th/Early 20th century or later. Though the stock looks like it was modeled after the P 1839 Brunswick Rifle, it does not have the original patch box, so I think it is at least a later replacement. This gun is also interesting in that it has both a front sight and an additional bayonet lug for a socket bayonet on top of the front of the barrel. The brass nose cap on the end of the stock would held support a socket bayonet and keep the stock from splitting up front in use. However, this added bayonet lug on top of the barrel is not a common British Military item in the period.
What I suggest is have someone who is at least knowledgeable on 19th century British Guns take a look at your two percussion guns to see what parts may have been original, if any.
Gus