Anyone recognize lock - very early Dutch? Brit? Composite?

[BradBrownBess]

Early Pre-Bess Bess for sale on a big auction house. All iron fittings. After research the consensus is the lock is a period Dutch Replacement perhaps. The lock fitting to stock is a little sloppy at the tail and the mortise is very heavily chiseled.
These pre 1730 Iron fitted Land Muskets are almost non existent - so no telling what may be done to one if even a part of one exists.

Here are some photos - notice the frizzen spring screw goes in from the back into a blind hole. Also notice the back of the plate where the main lock screws enter - the plate is raised 1/4 " - not flat to the plate. So consensus from my research and a few others opinions - its a Dutch period replacement.

Anyone recognize the BO stamp on the inside or perhaps the very intricate Crown over GR on the lock Tail Plate?

 

[BradBrownBess]

So more photos. The other similar muskets are in 2 museums - same markings - but NOT the lock.

 

[flintlock75]

That gun looks to be in very good condition for its age. It also looks virtually unfired, I would question its true age.

 

[BradBrownBess]

Photos make it look newer than is. It has cracks, filler in places, etc. Its all iron fittings and the whole gun was European Bright cleaned about 100 years ago as was the fashion - mirror shine. Many still do in the UK and other countries - patina being seen as undesirable. In the 1700's these guns were kept a mirror polish per direction - one could be disciplined for having a dirty firelock.

Tough one here - Before the 1730 Land Pattern Musket, Britain had no true ordinance system. That was just being developed. So flat Dog Locked Queen Anne Muskets were starting to transfer to into what would become the Brown Bess. Locks and whole muskets were ordered by the thousands from other countries - one being Dutch guns. Colonels muskets are known and were of excellent quality - Colonel Pocock had such weapons - Iron fittings - barrels marked to his regiments and companies.

Without taking the gun apart of going over it in hand with extensive magnification and several light sources - I could not say for sure what has and has not been done to the musket.

The lock I am about 95% sure is a period early 1700's Dutch lock - but that engraving I have never seen on any weapon - though its elegance and skill speak of Dutch/French work - British engraving being more chiseled and less refined.

The touch hole and pan line up perfectly leading me to believe it was not converted to Percussion at some point. Lots of powder burn around the hole and the breech.

**It very well could be a 100% complete fake - fakers are getting very good at their craft and its just wood and metal - but I wonder why someone would do an oddball like this.

 

[flintlock75]

Always hard to tell with a photo. During the F&I war muskets for the colonies were hard to get, many Dutch guns and parts were shipped to NA many were non functional and they stripped good parts to make working guns.
Maybe that is what this is.

 

[BradBrownBess]

Agreed - only time can tell what the story is. Paul Ackermann was curator at West Point Museum and knows that Pocock early bess intimately. He pointed out the lock differences for me (and the Dutch connection) and confirmed that the West Point gun is the same as the other known Colonel Pocock musket - The other two 1718 muskets were both made by Richard Wilson and are so marked R*W on their Barrels and WILSON on their locks. This one is somewhat of a gamble - it came from a collection of over 1000 guns and many were bitzers and not too much to crow about - but some gems.

 

[GREENSWLDE]

I didn't know There was a Colonel Pocock. In 1756 my ancester married one Sarah Pocock, the widow of a Birmingham gunmaker with premises on Dale End/Carrs Lane, where William Powell were later established. OLD DOG..

 

[FlinterNick]

Looks like an early Irish bess with a queen Ann style lock.

 

[BradBrownBess]

Opinions have been that lock is a Hanoverian German made replacement - I am in about 100% agreement on that. So far there are no direct opinions on what else is or is not original. Cool old piece though - but a bit of a mystery to all. The seller passed away and was a coin dealer - knew nothing about guns - he just liked them a lot as he had over a 1000. They are now being liquidated and its known that a lot were parts guns, some fakes, and some dogs - but some good ones too.

 

[Rudyard]

What ever happened to this musket , It looks right enough to me .Got to be a very rare bird to survive so long and so well .
Rudyard

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Opinions have been that lock is a Hanoverian German made replacement - I am in about 100% agreement on that. So far there are no direct opinions on what else is or is not original. Cool old piece though - but a bit of a mystery to all. The seller passed away and was a coin dealer - knew nothing about guns - he just liked them a lot as he had over a 1000. They are now being liquidated and its known that a lot were parts guns, some fakes, and some dogs - but some good ones too.

I don't think the lock is a "replacement".

It's a very early LLP, or just prior to the LLP Bess..."pre ordinance pattern". Note the unbridled pan.

I also noted there are no armorer acceptance stamp on the lock, and iirc The Crown started stamping the locks with the acceptance stamp with Queen Anne muskets, just before this was made.

BOTH the lock and the barrel show a GR stamp or engraving. SO..., I submit it's a musket made during the reign of King George I (reigned 1717-1727) This would explain the GR and the lack of the additional stamps, because..., at that time it was not uncommon for a Regimental Commander, having raised a regiment of his own, to go out of pocket to buy the regiment's muskets. Hence, they would not have had government stamps accepting the muskets, because they were the property of the Colonel, and not The King.

The problem with my idea..., is the musket is sporting a metal rammer..., a pre 1727 musket should've been fitted with a wooden rammer. I guess it could've been retro-fitted with a metal rammer at some point in its life, perhaps in the late 1740's....,

OR it's an export musket, and the "natives" wouldn't have known the dif between a real Bess, and a well made knock-off.

LD

 

[BradBrownBess]

Early musket - just not sure what is correct - added as part of its life - or added to fool. The barrel engraving has me suspect. In my books many early muskets with iron fittings had heavy iron ramrods - pre 1730 - some Irish sent muskets. But again - this is a "mystery gun" for the most part with no provenance other than it was in a huge collection of over 1000 guns for many years. So its probably an old musket with a lot of alterations over its life.

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
Brad's been in contact with quite a few knowledgeable folks and it is likely the markings on the tail of the lock are Hanoverian. George I was king of England and Elector of Hanover. He spent much of his reign as king in Germany. So the marks on the lock, which I believe is German made, do present a connection to George I . The barrel is marked Pocock C 3 No 17. There are 2 other surviving muskets that are very similar marked Pocock but they have early British Brown Bess style locks. Interestingly, all of these guns come from company 3 and the other 2 are numbered 22, and 23. So we have 3 extremely rare pre Brown Bess English muskets all from the same regiment and company. In my research, a regiment called Pocock only existed during 1720-1721, one year and was disbanded in 1721. John Pocock went off to command the "King's Own Regiment of Foot" in 1721. So now we have 3 muskets from one company in a regiment that only existed for one year. Why is there a German lock on one of those muskets? Moreover, if it is a replacement, it was done by somebody very skilled because the inside of the lock has cylindrical bosses for the lock bolts and the holes are blind. He would have to find a lock big enough to cover the old mortice and have those bosses located in exactly the right spots to line up with the bolt holes and the side plate. It seems to me a pretty daunting task but not impossible. But still, why put a German lock on it instead of a British lock like the other muskets? I do not think Pocock's regiment saw any service other than garrison duty in Ireland so it isn't likely the gun was lost in some battle in Europe. It is an enigma.

dave

 

[toot]

a beauty for Shure!!

 

[BradBrownBess]

One more piece to the puzzle - Morphy Auctions tried to sell it in Fall 2006 Auction - looks like it was pulled or passed. Had estimate then of 3000 - 5000. Sold price shows $0 - which usually means no bidders. Wish I could investigate it in hand myself - I believe the stock and Iron fittings to be early 1700s. The Morphy Auction listing said "Appears to be expert reconversion on lock - has replaced mainspring". Again - either a complete fake - a great old war horse that unfortunately may have been doctored - or some amalgamation of parts. Its listed on the auction sites - and bids are over 5000 plus 25% premium. Somebody will end up paying a lot for that musket - I would not doubt over 10K in today's market.

 

[BradBrownBess]

a Dealer bought this one and paid up - total price about 37K. I was in the game for WELL past my comfort level. Must be something good about it because the dealer is an author and collector for 30+ years - he was at the auction in person - it was obvious he was gonna go as high as needed to secure the gun.