Please help id this musket

[Jacobus2]

Hi all-

This musket hangs on a wall in a family summer cottage built by my g-g-grandfather exactly 100 years ago:
http://imageevent.com/jacobus2/musket

Unfortunately its history has been lost to the family, so I am trying to learn more about the musket itself. Here is what I can tell you beyond what you can see in the pictures: Its barrel is octagonal and not rifled; I don't have calipers but it appears to be about .45 caliber. The barrel is just under 25", the entire musket is 53". It appears (to my untrained eye) that it might have been converted from flintlock to percussion. There is some engraving but no maker's marks that I could find. Are the curly maple stock and unusual trigger guard distinctive? Any information about its age, place of manufacture, original purpose, etc. would be greatly appreciated. Thank you!

 

[hawkeye2]

First it is not a musket. Musket is a name for a military arm, usually large caliber and more often than not a smoothbore.
You have a very fine looking piece there and I notice it has sights. Are you sure it doesn't have rifleing? Dirt and rust in the bore combined with wear can hide rifling. Of course there is a posibility that it is smoothbored, sometimes called a "smooth rifle"

 

[hawkeye2]

I just went back to the photos after rereading your post. Do you have a typo on the barrel length? It certianly is more than 25" long. In photo 2 it looks like there is a gap between the tail of the lock and the wood, replacement lock? Anothe photo of the breech area from a different angle showing the bolster and top of the lock plate would help too.

 

[Zonie]

Welcome to the Forum Jacobus2.

Please don't get upset by Hawkeye's correction.
A lot of people call any old muzzleloader a Musket.
Now that your a member of the Muzzleloadingforum I'm betting there are several things you can learn from us (even if some folks are pretty direct with their thoughts).

As hawkeye2 mentioned the word Musket usually is talking about a military gun, usually large caliber and often smoothbored like a shotgun.

Your gun looks to be a muzzleloading rifle sometimes called a Kentucky rifle or a longrifle.
If there are several grooves inside the bore it is a rifle.

The lock type is called Percussion because it is designed to hit a small brass or copper percussion cap which is placed on the nipple right under the nose of the hammer. This is what ignites the gunpowder.

Because Percussion guns were not commonly used prior to 1820 that would date your gun to sometime after that.
The roundness of the rear of the lockplate moves that date probably up to 1830 or later.

The deep crescent of the butt plate became popular in the 1840-1860 period just prior to the Civil War.

The stripes on the stock were painted on. This was commonly done on some of the less expensive guns in the 1800's. In fact, it was almost a trademark of a company called Leman (although I don't think that company made your gun).

The gun has "Double set triggers". These were common from back in the 1700's so that doesn't help date the gun and many of the rifles made back in those days had them.
They are intended to make shooting accurately very easy.

Usually the rear trigger is not really a trigger at all. It is the cocking device to deflect a heavy spring inside the trigger assembly.
The gun probably can be fired simply by pulling the front trigger but this probably takes some force.
With the rear trigger "set" a very light touch on the front trigger will release the lock to fire the gun.

As hawkeye2 mentioned it looks like the lock has been replaced. This would explain the gap between the mortice and the lockplate.
Replacing a lock is not uncommon.

All said you have a very nice longrifle. If you provide some photos of the left side of the gun, especially the area opposite the lock and the side of the butt of the stock it might help pin down where the gun was made.

 

[trent/OH]

I'd like for you to make sure it is unloaded. Many is the old wall hanger which is found to be loaded for the past century. Take a long, skinny dowel rod, or enough shotgun cleaning rod sections as needed. Slide the rod down the barrel all the way until it hits something solid(spiders, cheerios, and old hundred dollar bills won't feel solid). Mark the rod with a pen or pencil right at the muzzle. Pull the rod out and lay it alongside the barrel. If the rod didn't go all the way to the breech (Like an inch or two short of the nipple), then there's an obstruction in the barrel, and you should assume it is loaded until you can prove otherwise!

P.S.: Welcome to the forum!

 

[matt denison]

"As hawkeye2 mentioned it looks like the lock has been replaced. This would explain the gap between the mortice and the lockplate.
Replacing a lock is not uncommon."


Looking closely I think I can see evidence of a patch in the wood just forward of the drum. IMHO this gun may well have been converted from flint.

Nice old gun!

 

[matt denison]

Well, I keep looking at the gun and I want to rethink what I said in previous post. This ol' girl has "Percussion era" written all over her. Maybe a replacement lock but now I don't think it was ever a flintlock.

:surrender:

 

[Robby]

A better look at the bolster,maybe from the top, might help determine if it was flint originally, I think it was. The barrel looks swamped which would seem to put it more toward the flint era. I have to disagree with Zonie, the curl looks to be in the wood to me. All in all, its a very nice rifle(?) to my eye, no matter if it is in original configuration or not. Thanks for showing it.
Robby

 

[Trench]

The lock plate that is now on the rifle doesn't look like it was converted. I don't see any filled in holes from where the frizzen spring or frizzen would have been mounted. I agree that the lock on it is likely a replacement. The lock before it could have been a flint. We'll never know. :idunno:

 

[vtbuck223]

I'd call it a beauty! More pictures please...top of barrel in the area extending from the lock to the front sight...sidelock....toeplate...and end of barrel looking down the bore would be great...oh and the engraving you were talking about. Words are great but pictures....are better...not to mention "eye candy".

 

[Jacobus2]

Wow, what a great welcome to your community! Thanks for all the attention and information! BTW I am never offended to have my understanding corrected. I didn't realize until now the proper definition of "musket". I am not at the cottage now but I will try to have my son, who is, take some more pictures. In the meantime... I think all of the engraving is already visible in the second picture. Also, if you open one of the pictures, look at the bottom of the page to find the option for "Original". This will zoom into a 100% view of the picture and you can see a great deal of detail. You will be able to see, for example, details of the engraving and the wood striping. Thanks again for your interest!

 

[hawkeye2]

It was late at night and I was tired when I posted my previous replys so I didn't address a couple of things. I looked at the lock again and couldn't see where any holes had been filled as would have been the case if it had been converted. I agree with Trench there. The fact that the tail of the lock mortise is rounded would place it at the late end of the flint era and I believe Zonie has it pretty close in addition to giving you some good advise. The overall look of the piece says percussion, late 1830s to the Civil War to me and if the lock is retained by only one screw from the left I would say toward the later part of that time. The dark area above the lock and in front of the bolster also had me wondering but I now feel it may just be the grain of the wood. As stated several places additional photos would help. AND above all, trent/OH really caught me sleeping. The first thing any of should do is to check to see if it is loaded. No matter what it turns out to be you have a handsome piece in fine shape and you can be proud of it.

 

[Tumblernotch]

I think you may be right. That doesn't even look like maple to me. Looks like the beech stock that was on my Lorenz. Still a good looking rifle.

 

[Trench]

I zoomed in on the third picture and it does appear to have those characteristic "flecks" of beech in the grain.

 

[Robby]

Jacobus, Thanks for the heads up for the picture enlargement. Do you have any pictures of the cheek rest side, including the side panel?
Robby

 

[Jacobus2]

I can't take more pictures until next Summer but I added one more from last summer, #4, which does show the overall length in perspective and the cheek rest side of the lock (use Original at the bottom to zoom in).
http://imageevent.com/jacobus2/musket

The barrel length is 37" (not 25), and on close inspection I really cannot see any sign of rifling, the barrel looks quite smooth except for a few scratches.

 

[vtbuck223]

Is that just a single sidelock screw? Probably was always percussion...to my novice eyes... looks 1850-1870. A nice looking piece...but I don't know about that shirt?

 

[54ball]

Percussion, there is no groove or relief for flint cock above lock. Look close, real close.

 

[Tumblernotch]

I zoomed in on the third picture and it does appear to have those characteristic "flecks" of beech in the grain.

That's what caught my eye. Looks good though.