| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| general-ike |
Posted - March 22 2004 : 8:46:19 PM
Hello all I am new so be gentle. I am looking for some info on a Brown Bess rifle made by the England's gumakers guild. It has a barbar lock and a RW richard wilson barrel. It has the first pattern arrangement but a 42in barrel. Can anyone point me to a web page or any other source for info? Thanks Ike |
| 10 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 26 2004 : 8:55:12 PM
No problem Ike, glad I could be of assistance. There are several good books by authors like DeWitt Bailey and Howard Blackmoore, that are loaded with information on the 'Brown Bess'. They are worth looking up...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| general-ike |
Posted - March 24 2004 : 5:43:40 PM
Thanks again Sgt.Munro, I greatly appreciate your help and info. Ike |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 24 2004 : 12:09:54 AM
quote:
Ike asks: Sgt Munro I was under the assumption, possibly incorrect, that the guild of England would fabricate a complete weapon, albeit from various manufactures, assembled to the Tower, that would then proof the weapon. Is this incorrect and did they only supply components?
No Ike, that is not incorrect (oops, a double negative), both methods were used in the procurement process. The contracts for components usually dominated the other because it helped 'share the wealth' in the 'Birmingham Trade' and it allowed for a ready supply of parts for weapons returned for depot level maintenance.
quote:
Ike asks: Sorry I forgot to ask an important question, when discussing barrel length I assume you measure from muzzle to the rear of the breach(if that is the correct term) not to the rear of the tang where the screw goes through.
You are correct on both questions, first that it is called the 'breach' and you do measure from that point to the 'crown' of the muzzle.
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| general-ike |
Posted - March 23 2004 : 11:07:58 PM
Sorry I forgot to ask an important question, when discussing barrel length I assume you measure from muzzle to the rear of the breach(if that is the correct term) not to the rear of the tang where the screw goes through. This is were I get the barrel measurement of 42 ins. pleas correct me if I am wrong!! Thanks Ike |
| general-ike |
Posted - March 23 2004 : 8:55:03 PM
Thanks all, Great info. I greatly appreciate all your insights. Some answers and some questions.
CT*Ranger no external lock date. It is an earlier version in that there is only one rear screw behind the gooseneck hammmer. No obvious signs of unused pins or shortened stock and barrel. The muzzle is a little shy of 4.5 ins beyond the stock with the bayonet stud. The stock and barrel have been together for a long time in that I am a liitle concerned about trying to drift out the pins and remove the stock. There seems to be no movment between the two. How many pins hold the stock to the barrel?
Sgt Munro I was under the assumption, possibly incorrect, that the guild of England would fabricate a complete weapon, albeit from various manufactures, assembled to the Tower, that would then proof the weapon. Is this incorrect and did they only supply components?
Sad that there is no good info availbale on the internet. Thanks again all for your help Ike |
| SgtMunro |
Posted - March 23 2004 : 1:01:31 PM
One thing that you might want to remember, is that the British Government was working under the old 'Ordnance Plan' of weapon procurement. That being contracts would be delivered equally thoughout the master gunsmiths of Birmingham, for different components. These components would be stored at The Tower, where repair of existing weapons, as well as the final assembly/fitting of new weapons would take place. The finished weapons would then receive the 'Broad Arrow' mark of government ownership and proof of pattern.
Ike, sounds like what you have is a transitional piece to the new Short Land Pattern of 1769. Before any of the Short Lands were issued, existing stocks of Long Lands had to be depleted first. In order to do so, while staying within the warrant requirements, the armoreers at the Tower had to modify existing barrels and stocks to reflect the new length. A master gunsmith could perform this, without it looking like the barrel was shortened.
I hope this helps...
Your Most Humble Servant,
|
| Seamus |
Posted - March 23 2004 : 06:31:35 AM
No, Ike, there is no internet source that I have found yet. You can find 'Lewis Barbar' references, but not too much, an occasional mention of his name an the tail of a lock, etc. |
| CT•Ranger |
Posted - March 23 2004 : 12:18:18 AM
Hmmmmm, that sounds interesting. Is the lock marked with a date? Is there any evidence that at one time it had a longer barrel, such as unused pin holes along the stock? I'll look through my books, if I find anything I'll post it. |
| general-ike |
Posted - March 22 2004 : 11:12:17 PM
Sir, you have me!! Thank you for your help!!! I mentioned the word rifle as a general term, my mistake it is in fact a musket (smooth bore). Like I said , I am new to this!!! From what I can see, and I am sorry for any errors ahead of time, the musket conforms to a Long Land pattern 1756 in every aspect except the barrel length which is not 46 in but 42 in. This includes the 6 in stepped rear butt tang, convex side plate, single screw straight form, gooseneck lock and proper upper ramrod piping . It appears to be a guild musket in that the lock is marked Barbar and barrel I believe is by Richard Wilson (RW). The barrel dimensions seem "odd" in that it is short land pattern length but the barrel has not been shorten/cut and the musket appears original by the patina and fit of components and not a recent assembly. Perhaps some type of transitional piece.
Thanks again for your help. Do you know of any internet source for general info related to the Brown Bess and the War for Independence Thanks Ike |
| Seamus |
Posted - March 22 2004 : 9:50:55 PM
Hello, Ike (one of my heroes!).........welcome to the Board. I believe you are confused in your terminology somewhat. Unless you have a rifled barrel, it will be a smoothbored musket (military gun) or a fowler (gentleman's gun...we call them shotguns today). Might it be a custom-made piece, for instance, an Officer's Fusil (musket), rather than a Brown Bess? Where did your information come from?
I found this about a Lewis Barbar, a gunmaker:
Lewis Barbar, one of the great innovating gunmakers of the early eighteenth century. The son of a James Barbar who emigrated to France after the Civil Wars, he was born in Poitou. He came to England in c. 1688 and entered royal service. After initial difficulties, he was made free of the London Gunmakers' Company in 1704. He was subsequently Gentleman Armourer to both George I and George II.
Lewis Barbar is first mentioned in the Boughton House accounts in an entry of 26 January 1710/11 recording the payment to him of £60.18s.0d. 'for pistols'. Regular payments continued to be made to him until his death in 1741, and then, until 1744, to the administrators of his estate, including many payments of interest on what were clearly considerable debts. In 1739 and 1740 a few payments to Lewis's son John (? an error for James) are recorded, and from 1743 until the 2nd Duke's death in 1749 to his other son James. Unfortunately, no details of the firearms concerned are given in the accounts.
Haven't found anything yet on Richard Wilson.....
|
|
![The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]](images/wwwboard.gif "The Mohican Board! [Bumppo's Redux!]")
