Markings For a 1728 French Musket?

[Tacksman45]

Does anyone have any advice about what stamped markings a French 1728 Musket might have had? Were there, or could there have been any fleur de lis markings anywhere on the musket? And did they have any inspection or proof marks, or any marks when they were decommissioned and sold to private purchasers?

Thanks as always!

 

[dave_person]

Does anyone have any advice about what stamped markings a French 1728 Musket might have had? Were there, or could there have been any fleur de lis markings anywhere on the musket? And did they have any inspection or proof marks, or any marks when they were decommissioned and sold to private purchasers?

Thanks as always!

Hi,
My references are limited for French guns but there would be at least the fleur de lis crown on the lock plate in front of the flintcock. The crown likely would have an S on the left and an E on the right representing St. Etienne arsenal. Below the crown might be initials such as "CN" for Charles Nichols or "PG" for Pierre Giraud who were contractors. On the left oblique barrel flat at the breech is stamped the fleur de lis crown below which are double script "L"s indicating Louis XV, and some mark indicating the control stamp. On the few early French muskets I've examined closely enough to see the barrel marks, the stamps were so shallow that I could never make out anything other than the crown. Neumann describes one control mark as a heart stamp. On the top flat of the barrel are again the contractors initials. If you do an internet search you may find some examples that have visible marks.

dave

 

[crankshaft]

Search Morphys Auction....online, they have some antique Frenchys , maybe you can see some stamps

 

[FlinterNick]

Most French muskets are dated on the tang ‘m1728’

Dave is spot on with most French markings. They limited to a few; the heart was a proof marking for barrel thickness. The French were very concerned with barrels wearing down quickly.

I’m working on parts for a 1763 charleville and 1774 pattern.... historically most of these made it to the Continental Army and were marked by Congress as surcharged US on the lock plate tail and Butt stock. Following the war many of these guns were still in service all the way through 1795 and were marked by the states for which the militias held them. French guns captured by the British would have been marked with tower and a broad arrow either on the breech or the lock.

 

[dave_person]

Hi,
According to Didier Bianchi in his book on French military small arms (Vol. 1), the French arsenals did not start engraving the model number on the barrel tang until the model 1746, which was a significant upgrade to the 1728.

dave

 

[FlinterNick]

Hi,
According to Didier Bianchi in his book on French military small arms (Vol. 1), the French arsenals did not start engraving the model number on the barrel tang until the model 1746, which was a significant upgrade to the 1728.

dave

I think some other 1717 and 1728 patterns were engraved like the officers guns musketoons, and carbines. Those could have been customized.

 

[Tacksman45]

Hi,
My references are limited for French guns but there would be at least the fleur de lis crown on the lock plate in front of the flintcock. The crown likely would have an S on the left and an E on the right representing St. Etienne arsenal. Below the crown might be initials such as "CN" for Charles Nichols or "PG" for Pierre Giraud who were contractors. On the left oblique barrel flat at the breech is stamped the fleur de lis crown below which are double script "L"s indicating Louis XV, and some mark indicating the control stamp. On the few early French muskets I've examined closely enough to see the barrel marks, the stamps were so shallow that I could never make out anything other than the crown. Neumann describes one control mark as a heart stamp. On the top flat of the barrel are again the contractors initials. If you do an internet search you may find some examples that have visible marks.

dave

Is the Fluer de lis crown a crown with three fluer de lis? Is there just one double script "L" below the crown on the barrel?

Thanks!

 

[Flintlock1640]

Of the ones I have had over the years the script L often stands alone. The barrel marks are almost always light so you might only see the two digit date. I have a model 1772 dragoon that has a fleur de lis inspection stamp on the side of the stock. I believe most were marked this way but the marking seldom survived.

 

[Flintlock1640]

These are the markings included in Boudriot's drawings.

 

[FlinterNick]

Not all French guns are dated. Infantry Muskets before 1746 were not dated, some other carbines and fusils were dated at the request of the officer. Standard dating began with the 1754 Charleville and 1763 Charleville, however the 1766 Charleville subsequent to the 1763 project were not dated because they were considered a correction of the 1763 pattern, which is why they're often referred to as the 1763/66 or light model 1763.

 

[Flintlock1640]

I've never really seen anything written on the rules for marking these patterns but it seems like barrel tangs could be dated with the origin of the pattern as well as the current pattern. I have seen early AN IX's with 1777 tangs as well as a 1774 with a 1770 tang. Of course this could be simply recycling older unused parts. The 1728, 46, and 54 were the same pattern, just updated (similar to the 1777 Corrige AN IX). The 1763 was a new pattern (includes the 1766 and the 1766 modified (often incorrectly called the 1768) and the 1777 was a new pattern (1777, AN IX, 1816 and 1822).

 

[FlinterNick]

Hi,
According to Didier Bianchi in his book on French military small arms (Vol. 1), the French arsenals did not start engraving the model number on the barrel tang until the model 1746, which was a significant upgrade to the 1728.

dave

The 1746 was an unusual design, my opinion. The French arsenals removed the pan bridal as a cost saving measure, at the cost of making the musket less functional. The sling system of the breech was changed out as it was complicated to both manufacture and service and the barrel bands were slimmed down, almost paper thin if you ever see an original. The 1754 Charleville musket was a perfection of both the 1728 and 1746 patterns, the lock was stronger and the bands were improved. The basic problem of the stock being delicate remained until the 1763 pattern.

 

[FlinterNick]

I've never really seen anything written on the rules for marking these patterns but it seems like barrel tangs could be dated with the origin of the pattern as well as the current pattern. I have seen early AN IX's with 1777 tangs as well as a 1774 with a 1770 tang. Of course this could be simply recycling older unused parts. The 1728, 46, and 54 were the same pattern, just updated (similar to the 1777 Corrige AN IX). The 1763 was a new pattern (includes the 1766 and the 1766 modified (often incorrectly called the 1768) and the 1777 was a new pattern (1777, AN IX, 1816 and 1822).

Collectors often refer to an improved and update 1766 Charleville as a 1768 pattern, the improvements were mainly a reworked stock and added a third band spring. Adding the third band spring reduced the guns weight by almost 1/2 a lb mostly due to the foreshock being slimed down and the third band being made smaller. The buttstock was reshaped too with a reduced comb. The later 1770 and 1773/74 patterns would go on to have their buttstocks reduced until the 1777 pattern would create a stock that didn't have a rail comb.