A large 19th century flintlock pistol

[M ELEY]

Here is an overly large flintlock pistol made by ELG in Belgium. This type gun was popular with sailors and is listed in multiple publications as such. It has a large bore barrel and a lanyard wing at the butt. This feature allowed a sailor to attach a cord to his wrist so as not to lose it in the heart of battle on a crowded deck. I believe the wood is walnut? The 'ELG' mark is an early form pre-dating 1830 if I recall. There is a V under a crown mark and an indecipherable stamp to the barrel as well. Note the lack of ramrod, which was deemed pointless as no reloading in the melee of a boarding.
One question I have is whether there is any truth that these pistols were also used by British cavalry in Africa?? It is close to the size of their so-called howdah pistols. Horsemen would also have little opportunity to reload and not need a ramrod. :shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

This is an outstanding pistol!
From what I have found, these have been termed 'Belgian Sea Service' pistols and were made in Liege for export, with England being a heavy purchaser of them. The example I found has a 14" barrel, 25" overall, and .69 cal.
It has the same narrowing stock at end with no ramrod, and at all points seems identical.
The ELG stamp is of course Liege, and apparently was required to be placed n the barrel. used 1811-1892.

The crowned 'V' is the viewers mark , Gunmakers of London, and was placed on the lock for all guns either made there or any imports brought in.

These seem larger than the East India Co. flintlocks which were produced 1820-1840, being one of the last military flintlocks for England.

It is noted that these Belgian sea service pistols were known to have seen service in the War of 1812.

[Pukka Bundook]

V nice solid looking pistol.

According to my British books of proofs, this Liege proof marks is still in use for black powder muzzle -loaders.
The book says "used since 1968" But!.. of course that does not mean it wasn't in use Prior to 1968!... just that it Continued in use later than..
If it has English view marks, it should also have an English proof mark.

Would it be possible to show the marks please, M Eley?

British cavalry regiments used British Ordnance marked weapons, and British cavalry pistols by this time period had swivel rammers.

Thanks for showing!

R.

[Richard G]

I find it interesting it has no ramrod because there would be no time to reload in a melee, and yet there is a lanyard to stop you losing it in said melee.
I think I would have been inclined to dump the pistol once fired and grab something more useful.
Best wishes

[Fernando K]

Hi there

I ask if it is a V crowned, or a W crowned, because I have seen Belgian weapons with the W crowned, in the same place, the lock plate

Affectionately

[M ELEY]

Thank you gentlemen for all replying.

Jim, thank you for providing the caliber of the barrel, .69! A big barrel that could put down any mutiny! There is a pistol exactly like mine in the Greenwich Maritime Museum as used by the Brits...

Richard G, I would agree if in a land battle. But considering that all firearms were one-shot and melee combat on the deck made reloading almost impossible (these boarding actions were often completed or repelled in mere minutes!), I don't think it would be a poor choice. I also hate to bring up lagrage, as I know many point out this ruins the gun, but there are instances where this did take place. A smooth barrel such as this could fire whatever was crammed down the barrel (think 'partridge shot'), making a mess of a group of charging sailors. It is a very heavy piece and would have made a good club afterward, which sounds archaic, but think about the belaying pins and blunt cutlasses often used in such dust-ups.

Pukka, you bring up a good point! Really, with the exception of the EIC over the star mark, illegible small stamp and V(?) over crown, there isn't any other marking, so perhaps this wasn't an exported example?

Which brings us to Fernando K's question as to whether it is a V or W? The stamp isn't very clear. I guess it could be a W, meaning strictly a Belgian mark.

My question is if it is only Belgian marked, could it still be a sea service 'private purchase' weapon? Weapons carried by non-naval frigates and such didn't have ordinance marks, did they? I know that is the case for edged weapons/axes, but not sure about fire arms??? I'll have another look at that marking with a magnifying glass...

[Will M]

Very nice pistol. As for reloading it can be done in seconds but does require a ramrod. Air space in a barrel between charge and ball can burst a barrel.
Having a ramrod secured in your belt or holster works. If a ramrod is not tightly housed in the pistols stock it can quickly be removed/lost upon firing.
I do not think the lack of ability for the pistol to house a ramrod in the stock is done believing there is no time to reload. If this were the case many would choose a pistol with a ramrod, having the ability to fire again is what all firearms designers strived for.

[M ELEY]

You made a good point, Will, one that I had overlooked. I guess I had read somewhere that the lack of ramrod meant no need for one, but that does defy logic. Your comment that a ramrod could have just been carried separately makes total sense. I know of those Turkish pistols (which often served corsairs!) made both in the Mediterranean and in Turkey had a 'false' decorative ramrod that didn't actually come loose from the gun. These type pistols indeed had a separate and very distinctive rod carried separately.

[Jim McDougall]

It seems to me that in all the entries I have found, these flintlock pistols with the 'rounded off' terminus of the stock void of ramrod attachment, are stated 'Belgian sea service' . In some cases they are noted as Dutch.
Whatever the case, they were apparently produced in considerable volume and as I noted earlier, England was a key client in supplying her navy.

Most of the examples are dated from 1800-1820, and are described by well regarded dealers and auctions.

This is an interesting discussion on the dynamics of combat in which these were used and why the absence of ramrod. The purpose of these pistols was to create havoc and injuries amidst a mass of opponents, much as with the blunderbusses and deck guns.
This was the reason for the heft and large bore barrels, effectively 'scatter gun' tactics. These were most likely loaded with 'buck and ball', that is varying dimension shot, or whatever ball was available to create a barrage in a single shot (as Mark well describes as partridge shot).

Just as in a cavalry charge, once the gun was spent, it became either a bludgeon or was released. As with cavalry, these weapons would be better kept than lost so the lanyard was intended to keep the gun at hand, not inaccessible or lost overboard.

As Will has mentioned, the idea of reloading in haste or in a charge or melee is typically doomed to disaster. Also as he notes, in excessive movement etc. the ramrod could be lost, which is why later there were swivels designed that kept them attached on many percussion guns.

A very salient point Mark brings up, private purchase, as with merchant vessels would be exempt from many required markings.

Attached several other examples of 'Belgian Sea Service' pistols, in one instance in a pair, hence 'two shots' (a la' Blackbeard with his 'brace' of 'Queen Anne's'. ).

An analogy: my Caucasian percussion pistol, note the large ball butt for use as a bludgeon, the lanyard, and noticeably, no ramrod.
This was likely made in Liege as well.

[M ELEY]

Thank you for these great pics, Jim. I love that pistol with the butt cap you posted! As noted, I have seen multiple examples all listed as 'naval', which makes sense. I had a look at that mark and I'm almost 100% positive that it is a V and not a W under the crown. British private purchase, I'm assuming. British ships at this time were forming privateer vessels to attack both French (Napoleonic Wars) and American (War of 1812) shipping. Likewise, English ships needed defense against enemy privateers. Napoleon had already taken Denmark and even that nation had pirates out attacking English shipping!!

Some questions still remain, however. If Leige (Belgium) was the maker, could they still be selling to the Brits against Napoleonic France? Who controlled Belgium at the time? Would they be independent contractors and sell "to the enemy" anyway, much as some English cutlers sold to the colonists during the Revolution?

Here are some Leige markings, the earliest resembling a candlestick? Mine appears of the dating 1810. Of course, if this pistol was made after those two conflicts, it still would have been of use to 'discourage mutinies', or defend a frigate, tea clipper, etc, from hostiles in the ports of Indonesia, South Seas, etc.

[corrado26]

Some time ago I wrote an article on such a pistol used in the Persian Army,
mmay be some of you are able to understand the German text.

[M ELEY]

Fascinating article, Corrado! Unfortunately, my German is very limited. From what you mentioned about Persian usage in the army, this is some of what I've heard about this type pistol. It served in other branches of the military and Leige shipped them out to the Middle East and possibly Africa(this last part not fully substantiated, but reported by several sources). Did your gun have a stamp to indicate Persian Empire? Was the ELG of the earlier or later stamp?

[corrado26]

The "W" under a crown at the pistol in question stands for one of the Dutch kings William I-III who reigned one after the other between 1815 and 1890. So an exakt date of manufacture can not be stated.

The pistol in my article shows an mark "CD" under a crown which stands for Coquilhat & Digreffe, a Liège firm between 1853 and 1858. Over that the pistol shows the Perron-mark of Liège, so used since 1830. The lockplate shows a weak or badly cut mark of the arsenal of Isfahan/Persia, I added the same, but clearer mark of a same pistol and a British paget carbine. This means, that this pistol has been made at Liège between 1853 and 1858 under attendance of a Persian acceptance officer who stamped the lockplate befor it got hardened.

Very interesting is that lots of these pistols showed up between 1905 and 1925 in the catalogues of the US firm of Francis Bannermann, New York, where they have been offered at a price firstly of 3,50$ and lastly US$ 6,25.

[fernando]

...I had a look at that mark and I'm almost 100% positive that it is a V and not a W under the crown. British private purchase, I'm assuming.
Private purchase ... 'one' possibility; as not an official contract. I wouldn't see the Brits importing guns from Liege with their local oval mark ... and later missing their own proof marks. The (imprecise) V under the crown on the lock plate, to my humble view, would hardly be the British proof mark created around 1670. I dare say ir is the mark of a Liege lock maker ... or spurious suff ? :o

controlled Belgium at the time?
Napoleon controlled Liege in 1810.It was under his rule that the mark LG in the oval was created ... and strictly enforced.

... Here are some Leige markings, the earliest resembling a candlestick?
The famous Perron (meaning steps ... of a tower). It was Liege's own mark, but it had no such strict enforcement.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Bought a couple of these some time ago and they weren't in the best of condition.
Regards,
Norman.

P.S. More to come.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
The top one was Liege manufactured and the inspectors mark ,crown over H, would date it to between 1853/77. The hammer has obviously been broken at some time hence the brazed repair. If anyone could i.d. the other marks both on the barrel and the underside of the stock I would be grateful.
Regards,
Norman.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
The second one I believe to have been manufactured by local tribesmen most probably in Afghanistan. The lock has a date 264 (1264) equating to 1848. The workmanship is not as precise as the Belgian example e.g. half cock will not hold but all in all a serviceable pistol.
Regards,
Norman.

[colin henshaw]

Here is an overly large flintlock pistol made by ELG in Belgium. This type gun was popular with sailors and is listed in multiple publications as such. It has a large bore barrel and a lanyard wing at the butt. This feature allowed a sailor to attach a cord to his wrist so as not to lose it in the heart of battle on a crowded deck. I believe the wood is walnut? The 'ELG' mark is an early form pre-dating 1830 if I recall. There is a V under a crown mark and an indecipherable stamp to the barrel as well. Note the lack of ramrod, which was deemed pointless as no reloading in the melee of a boarding.
One question I have is whether there is any truth that these pistols were also used by British cavalry in Africa?? It is close to the size of their so-called howdah pistols. Horsemen would also have little opportunity to reload and not need a ramrod. :shrug:

Hi Mark

An interesting pistol topic, thanks for posting. Certainly your reasons for a lack of a ramrod make sense and are plausible. I can't comment about British Cavalry of the period, but certainly Russian Cavalry made use of flintlock pistols without attached ramrods. Here is an image of the Russian 12 bore M1809 flintlock cavalry pistol.

Regarding pistols in Africa (slightly off-topic) I can state that archaic flintlock pistols were used by Arab slavers/traders and their African allies in the latter half of the 19th century in Central and Eastern Africa. But whether these were with or without ramrods ... who knows ? Probably they used just whatever they could get. There is also evidence for old flintlock pistols being used by the Mahdists in the Sudan in the late 19th Century.

References :
The Royal Museum for Central Africa, Tervuren, Belgium
"Armies of the 19th Century, Central Africa" by Chris Peers
The Powell-Cotton Museum, Birchington, Kent

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Has anybody got any concrete sources for the use of these pistols in the early part of the 19thC specifically the Napoleonic Wars or as Jim has intimated the North American War of 1812. I was always under the illusion that they were in use from about 1830 although I can give no reason that I can remember for this allusion. The crowned V in Marks example would indicate a date of post 1853 as from what I can gather this was when the crowned letter mark was introduced. https://www.hunting.be/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/Belgian-Proof-Marks.pdf I am not convinced of the dealers intimations regarding the dating of these pistols.
Looking forward to your thoughts.
Regards,
Norman.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Mark,
Is it possible for you to dismount the barrel on your example in order to see the marks underneath.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

...Has anybody got any concrete sources for the use of these pistols in the early part of the 19thC specifically the Napoleonic ...
Hardly Norman; the French had their own style, a completly DIFFERENT THING (http://armesfrancaises.free.fr/pist%20mle%20an%20IX.html), as reported all over.

... The crowned V in Marks example would indicate a date of post 1853 ...
So, if this was a real Liege crowned V mark, do you find it normal that in 1853 they were still producing flintlock pistols ? maybe for some specific reason ?:confused:

[Will M]

Flintlock arms were made up to the 20th century. African colonies and such places where trade was limited sourcing percussion caps and cartridges could be difficult if not impossible. With flintlock arms all you need is BP. and your arm still usable.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
On my Liege pistol there is a crowned H and according to the proof mark list I attached a crowned letter was an inspection mark initiated in 1853.
As far as still producing flintlocks when better alternatives were available see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=23463&page=1&pp=30&highlight=birmingham I would suggest there was still a market for basic firearms in many parts of the world in the second half of the 19thc.
Thanks for your thoughts as always.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I see Will beat me to the same conclusion.

[fernando]

My bad; wrong perspective. I was influenced both by the approach on the Napoleonic period possibility and also thinking of flintlock guns out of their etchnologic evolution period as weapons having ceased production, in an European context; not minding they had, or even have, further use, an area i confess not being much of a fan.

[colin henshaw]

Hi Fernando,
On my Liege pistol there is a crowned H and according to the proof mark list I attached a crowned letter was an inspection mark initiated in 1853.
As far as still producing flintlocks when better alternatives were available see http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=23463&page=1&pp=30&highlight=birmingham I would suggest there was still a market for basic firearms in many parts of the world in the second half of the 19thc.
Thanks for your thoughts as always.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I see Will beat me to the same conclusion.

Yes, very true - there was a market for basic muzzle-loading firearms in Africa in the late 19th century particularly. However, as well as the specifically made lower quality "trade" guns, large amounts of obsolete flintlocks and percussion guns were shipped to Africa when they became outdated in Europe and breech-loaders and cartridges were introduced.

[CutlassCollector]

My Belgian sea service pistol is marked with the ELG - no crown and does not appear to have an inspectors mark.

With reference to the lack of a ramrod in some pistols. Pistols were of limited range and generally issued to seamen for boarding actions. The boarding party were probably handed a pistol previously loaded by the armourer and a cutlass and as has already been stated the chances of stopping to reload during a melee would be non-existent, even if they had been trained and carried the right equipment.

Lieutenant Green who fought at Trafalgar and went on to write a training manual for improving the weapons training of the crew noted that it was commonly reported that as soon as the sailors boarded they fired the pistol, chucked it at the enemy and then got to work with a cutlass.

He promoted reversing the grip after firing so that the barrel ran along back along the forearm of the left arm so it could be used as a guard to deflect cutlass blows to the head. It does not say how well that was adopted - my guess would be the sailors carried on throwing them away as as soon as they could.

[M ELEY]

Wow, this item did open up a can of worms! Apart from my wanting it to be an earlier piece, there are similar examples in the Greenwich Maritime Museum of these types with provenance to the time period originally suggested (ca. 1810 and on). I looked again at the mark on my pistol and although my pic of it wasn't so great, it is without question a V under crown and not a W, which was a Leige mark I assume?

In regards to private purchase, I have seen all manner of strange, one-off marks for these. I used to own a cutlass of the standard m1840 Brit pattern marked 'RN". The seller told me "Royal Navy"...don't think so! No other marking. I've seen a lot of m1803's with no marking whatsoever and listed as 'after-market' for private purchase frigates.

Thanks for those great pics of your pistols, Norman! The Arabic example was particularly interesting! Corrado's example was another fascinating piece from a Leige maker.

Thanks, Fernando, for the clarification of Napoleon's control of the region. It still befuddles me unless these pistols were used by French privateers or after-market private purchase. Or only for foreign markets?! (Sudan, Middle East)

Norman, a great suggestion. I am not a firearms collector, so usually leery about taking guns apart. This example, however, with its pin system makes it easy to remove. I'll get to it hopefully soon.
So...still no clear answers to me as far as these marks. My ELG looks like the earlier mark, but what is the significance of the V under crown. If not British but Leige, is this a post 1850 mark? :shrug:

[Jim McDougall]

From Blackmore, "British Military Firearms", 1962,
"...but with the end of the war the demand for arms dropped dramatically. The Birmingham branch was the first to suffer. In 1814 the staff was halved and in the following year Miller, the Inspector of Small Arms returned to London. Finally in 1818, the premises at Birmingham were closed".
p.272
In Appendix D, p.280, the marks of private Birmingham proof houses are shwn 25-30.
#27 is a crowned V.

In the detail on Marks pistol (OP) the Liege mark is shown as an oval ELG over star. This was the mark used from 1810-1853 in Liege.

In 1812 England was not only at war with France on the Continent, but with the American colonies in the war of 1812. The demand for arms was considerable and delays with contractors caused issues for makers. As the navy, according to Blackmore, often got the run of the mill weapons,it would not be surprising that imported pistols from Liege might have been brought n viewed at the Birmingham location.

The barrel mark was in use at Liege in 1812. The crowned V was in use at Birmingham in that year and at least until 1814.
The markings on this pistol would seem to correspond to the period of its use being contemporary to the suggestions of use in War of 1812, as well as Napoleonic campaigns. It seems quite possible these might have found use on privateers, if not on ships of the line.

[M ELEY]

Very nice example of your gun, David! Thanks for posting it for this discussion.

Great information, Jim! Thank you (and Mr. Blackmore!). The Birmingham angle makes perfect sense regarding an immediate need for private purchase and a quicker way to restocking the ship's defenses. I'm not disputing that this style of pistol wasn't around for a long time (quite amazing that it didn't change form much after nearly a century!). My main argument (and obviously from the records, others who study maritime artifacts) is that many of these pistols saw action during the mentioned events. Here's one from the esteemed London Museum collection-


https://www.diomedia.com/stock-photo-sea-service-pistol-image6852418.html

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Jim,
The ELG and star in a cartouche was used from 1810 until the present. I have attached a copy of London and Birmingham proof marks from The Worshipful Company of Gunmakers of the City of London and The Guardians of the Birmingham Proof House. This shows that a crowned V is a London proof and not Birmingham and if the gun was foreign made the V would be circled with the crown on top. All the charts I can find relating to Liege state that a crowned letter is the inspection mark from 1853 to 1877. I have also attached another chart with more specific dating.
Hope you are keeping well in this time of uncertainty.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

.. My main argument (and obviously from the records, others who study maritime artifacts) is that many of these pistols saw action during the mentioned events. Here's one from the esteemed London Museum collection-
https://www.diomedia.com/stock-photo-sea-service-pistol-image6852418.html
This is undoubtedly a private purchase, (not government contracted), right ?; the presence of a ELG* stamp and the absence of British proof marks on the barrel, make it clear. The engraving of the anchor 'could' have been done in Liege. Would you figure out what the two initials mean; the ship or the gun owner ?
I may be playing the fool but, as i never saw it being commented, and for one's perusal, the ELG letters mean ÉPREUVE LIEGE. The star was replaced in 1893 by a crown.

[fernando]

The ELG and star in a cartouche was used from 1810 until the present ...
Nothing more than a slight detail, if i may, Norman. As per my post 31#, the star was replaced by a crown in 1893 :o .

[Norman McCormick]

Nothing more than a slight detail, if i may, Norman. As per my post 31#, the star was replaced by a crown in 1893 :o .


Hi Fernando,
My post was in response to Jim's statement that the ELG star in an oval was from 1810 to 1853 thereby limiting pistols with this stamp to within those dates whereas the date range is in fact greater.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

Hi Fernando,
My post was in response to Jim's statement that the ELG star in an oval was from 1810 to 1853 thereby limiting pistols with this stamp to within those dates whereas the date range is in fact greater.
My Regards,
Norman.
As i said Norman, a slight (by the way) detail ... more for possible future aknowledgement ;)

[Norman McCormick]

http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/a%20a%20site%20belge%20gb.htm

Hi,
This may be of interest. The guns in question are described as 1815 pattern Dutch-Belgian Navy pistols.
Regards,
Norman.

[Jim McDougall]

Hi Jim,
The ELG and star in a cartouche was used from 1810 until the present. I have attached a copy of London and Birmingham proof marks from The Worshipful Company of Gunmakers of the City of London and The Guardians of the Birmingham Proof House. This shows that a crowned V is a London proof and not Birmingham and if the gun was foreign made the V would be circled with the crown on top. All the charts I can find relating to Liege state that a crowned letter is the inspection mark from 1853 to 1877. I have also attached another chart with more specific dating.
Hope you are keeping well in this time of uncertainty.
My Regards,
Norman.

Hi Norman,
Thank you so much for entries from this resource. I must say that while have studied swords most of my life, firearms have always seemed to elude me, so this great discussion is quite a learning curve for me. Of the very few books I have on firearms, this reference by Howard Blackmore has been with me for well over 40 years, and he seems to have been one of the most highly respected firearms authorities (according to most of the arms figures I knew in the years with the Arms & Armour Society in Loondon).

What puzzles me is that in his book (1961, attached pages) he shows items 25-30 as view and proof marks of PRIVATE Birmingham proof houses.
You will note that #27 is a crown over V. There seem to have been others using a P.

n "English Pistols and Revolvers" (J.Nigel George, 1938, p.94), the author notes the 'private proof houses were abolished in 1813, and "....a proof house similar to that of the Gunmakers of London was established at Birmingham. Arms that had undergone proof were now stamped with two marks, each in the form of two crossed sceptres surmounted by a crown, the first marked with the letter V, for viewed, the second with the letters BPC fr Birmingham Proof Co.".

As the resource you show begins with 1813 with these markings, it would seem that Mark's pistol must have been viewed by one of the number of private proof houses. During the wars (Napoleonic and 1812) the volume of firearms processed through London and these proof houses was staggering.
As previously noted, the constant break downs of flow of parts etc. with contractors was a frustration for makers, and it is easy to imagine that less costly and ready weapons from Liege would be resorted to, especally in the case for outfitting privateers.

While most resources seem to focus on 1813+, the records of gun markings seem less abundant in the years prior, as well as remarkably inconsistent.

As Mark has shown in the excellent entry from the National Maritime Museum, these sea service pistols were certainly in use early in the century. While the 'HMS Victory' association is surely spurious as they note, they do not dismiss the presence of these Belgian pistols in that period.

For me, the evidence points to the period we have been suggesting, 1810-13 for this Belgian Sea Service pistol, and likely use on any privateer vessel for the British during these wars in that time.

As for the anchor marking, just as with swords, these are by far not a prerequsite for naval weapons, and in my opinion were likely added privately in either zealous or hubris oriented character on other ranks arms.
I cannot imagine why Liege would apply such a mark, as their arms were not intended to serve any particular branch. While these pistols seem to have been regarded as 'sea service', they were used widely by any number of military units in many countries through the century.

[fernando]

It is naturally sensum communem that the Liegeois would not stamp the anchor or any other symbol in the lock plate of a generic (mass) production. What i have (only) suggested is, if the pistol in the museum was part of a private purchase, which all indicates it is, it would be nothing implausible that the client, a ship's captain or a sailing enterprise, would order a lot of such fireamrs for his/their crew and send along the technical drawing for the anchor to be engraved in the origin workshops. Otherwise, it is left to know where the client took the gun/s go be engraved elsewhere in England; he would certainly not require the job from the BO facilities.
Just a pitty the museum photo doesn't have macro opitions to visualize both anchor and the two initials with one's eye.
My humble perspective, this is :o.

[fernando]

http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/a%20a%20site%20belge%20gb.htm

Hi,
This may be of interest. The guns in question are described as 1815 pattern Dutch-Belgian Navy pistols.
Regards,
Norman.
An excelent link, Norman; i use it often to ID gunmakers. I happen to have a (bilingual) little book where Claude Gaier himself writes a synopsis on the Liege weapons making universe.
Fantastic guns shown in it; both Portuguese and Liegeoise

.

[Jim McDougall]

It is naturally sensum communem that the Liegeois would not stamp the anchor or any other symbol in the lock plate of a generic (mass) production. What i have (only) suggested is, if the pistol in the museum was part of a private purchase, which all indicates it is, it would be nothing implausible that the client, a ship's captain or a sailing enterprise, would order a lot of such fireamrs for his/their crew and send along the technical drawing for the anchor to be engraved in the origin workshops. Otherwise, it is left to know where the client took the gun/s go be engraved elsewhere in England; he would certainly not require the job from the BO facilities.
Just a pitty the museum photo doesn't have macro opitions to visualize both anchor and the two initials with one's eye.
My humble perspective, this is :o.

Naturally that is sensum communem that the Liege shops would not place anchors or any such defining symbol on the weapons they produced, as I have always thought of this arms center as producing a sort of generic assortment . The weapons they made were either imitations of other standing forms or heavily influenced by them. As such I had not thought that such commissions were engaged there.

Good point on the weapons once acquired being taken to engraver for markings or these kinds of motif/symbols as these specialized shops took care of such requirements. I often forget how many contractors and vendors were involved beyond the actual maker/retailer of the weapn.

[Jim McDougall]

http://www.littlegun.be/arme%20belge/a%20a%20site%20belge%20gb.htm

Hi,
This may be of interest. The guns in question are described as 1815 pattern Dutch-Belgian Navy pistols.
Regards,
Norman.


This is an excellent article Norman!!! Thank you!

This means that these familiar sea service pistols made in Belgium were well in use by this time (1815). Typically a 'pattern' or 'model' of a weapon type is given that designation as a result of an official order or regulation issued in that year and recognizing the form as distinct and standard.

This means that such a designated weapon has likely been in production and use already for an indeterminate period of time. The bureaucratic wheels in earlier times, incredibly, were even slower than today!
With Spanish weapons, especially in the colonies, for example, the sword colloquially termed the 'bilbo', was often regarded as a M1769, yet had been prior classed as a M1728. We cannot be sure exactly when these arming swords developed, but those years correspond to offical regulations issued.

With English swords, the M1821 swords for light cavalry(three bar hilt) and the 'heavy' with bowl hilt. While production of these began in that year, issues and complaints led to production halting 1824-25,with a hiatus until 1829. As a result these are deemed by many to be techncally 1829's while many call them 1821's.

With these pistols, that they existed as such well prior to 1815 seems to be the case, but it is good to see how they have been referenced in all these sources. The Liege factor is I think much overlooked in arms study, so this remarkably insightful discourse is outstanding!

[M ELEY]

Thanks to everyone for remarking on these interesting firearms. As I am not typically a collector of such, everything written here is food for thought with me.

Thank you, Norman, for that great posting on Leige production! It would seem that there are still questions on some of these pieces and more research needs to be done...but we are off to a good start here!

[Pukka Bundook]

There still appears some confusion over the ELG over a star in an oval.
This stamp is still used, or was as late as 1981 for muzzle -loading black powder arms.

The Crowned mark is for Definitive Black Powder and Military Proof.
This information from the booklet put out by the Worshipful Company of Gunmakers of the City of London, and The Guardians of the Birmingham Proof House.
My copy is from August 1981, so things May have changed since then!

Very best,
Richard.

[fernando]

Richard, this Liege marks universe is not an easy thing to decipher ... at least for me. I know that, in a simplistic manner, the final proof mark ELG * in an oval lasted until circa 1893, when it was added with a crown over the said ELG* in an oval, which lasted until 1920. Only that this crowned version had two sizes, depending on the type of gun.
I hope this helps ... a little.


.

[fernando]

Naturally that is sensum communem that the Liege shops would not place anchors or any such defining symbol on the weapons they produced ...As such I had not thought that such commissions were engaged there...
Jim, i will not further soak the thread with unrelated (or colateral) issues. I will therefore send you e-mail on the subject :cool:.

[Jim McDougall]

There still appears some confusion over the ELG over a star in an oval.
This stamp is still used, or was as late as 1981 for muzzle -loading black powder arms.

The Crowned mark is for Definitive Black Powder and Military Proof.
This information from the booklet put out by the Worshipful Company of Gunmakers of the City of London, and The Guardians of the Birmingham Proof House.
My copy is from August 1981, so things May have changed since then!

Very best,
Richard.


Thank you Richard for noting this, apparently the markings have a bit more dimension having these factors set the variation with black powder, nitro and other terms pretty much unknown to the firearms uninitiated (myself incl).

[Jim McDougall]

Jim, i will not further soak the thread with unrelated (or colateral) issues. I will therefore send you e-mail on the subject :cool:.

Well noted Fernando, and thank you for sending me details on activity in Liege where indeed certain weapon forms were commissioned and would have been marked at factory. Its always interesting to see the many aspects that surround a topic even when not directly on topic, the learning curve never ends!! :)

[M ELEY]

Just another interesting tidbit going on during the time these pistols started hitting the market. Hey, I gotta get in my pirate barb whenever I can, right!:D Just saying that these pistols, if funneled through Dutch channels, might have ended up in all manner of hands!


https://www.napoleon-series.org/military-info/battles/Denmark/c_danish.html

[corrado26]

here an intersting offer of the Bannermann catalogue of 1925

[M ELEY]

I've handled an old Bannerman catalog many years ago and actually took a tour on the Hudson, sailing right past the remnants of his castle complex. His catalogs actually contained a lot of amazing items on the cheap back in the day! Scottish swords, m1796's by the dozen! Even ethnographic stuff! You just don't see those kind of numbers today! If I could only step back in time- :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :p

[corrado26]

Don't forget: The last shirt has no pockets! :shrug:

[Pukka Bundook]

Dear Fernando,

The proof marks are as you show in the catatlog, but this does not mean that the earlier mark disappeared, it was merely retained for muzzle -loading arms, up to at least 1981.
The one you show in the photo is interesting, as it has the Crowned ELG mark, for military arms, Plus, the Crowned R for Rifled arms.
V good to see them both !

Kind regards,
Richard.

[fernando]

Dear Richard,

From a well established French house i could read in the original language what, being translated reads as follows;

The ELG marking is the regulatory hallmark of the Liège proofhouse. This punch has evolved over time. These three letters were inscribed in a vertical oval between 1811 and 1893 and then still (puis dans toujour) in a vertical oval but surmounted by a crown from 1893 to the present day.

By reading the term 'evolved' and 'still in a vertical oval but surmounted by a crown', i inferred that the previous symbol ceased being applied. I am ready to say that i was driven to the wrong conclusion, once you have different evidence.
All Belgian guns i have had would have been made before the 1890's.

[Pukka Bundook]

Dear Fernando,

It is difficult to resolve this my friend, when we both have different books that tell us different things. :-)
I do know I had a reproduction, and not very good quality musket, that had the ELG and star in the oval, and no crown, (Crowned would mean military arms my book says) The one I had was not military, and made possibly in the 1950's or 60's.

We will not fall out over this. It may be we have to accept that two sources tell us different facts. :-)

If I see this stamp on a reproduction arm, and can post it here, I will do so.

Kindest regards,
Richard.

Edited to say I fond this on -line.
It says exactly the same as the booklet put out by the Gunmakers Company Proof House, of London.

Very best,
Richard.

[fernando]

Dear Richard,
You are absolutely right in that we won't fall out over this intricate subject.
Yet finding the 'real thing' for everyone's perusal, would be useful... i believe.
As an ultimate move, i have e-mailed the Liege Museum Director, with hopes that he sends along an actual listing of Liege proof marks.Expecting it to be supported with a circumstancial text, given to the fact that, as my be seen in this LINK (http://gerardcox.blogspot.com/2014/06/deciphering-belgian-proof-marks.html), some of these marks had a different meaning depending on the dates they were used.


.

[Pukka Bundook]

"some of these marks had a different meaning depending on the dates they were used."

You are absolutely correct my dear friend.
I look forward to hearing of the information from the proof House.

Stay warm and safe. Here it is minus 40C again! (This is the same temp, (minus 40, if degrees F too. Both feel cold.) :-)
Up north it has been minus 72 degrees....

[fernando]

No reason to feel cold wih those sauna temperatures, Richard. The real thing is over here, with 13C (55F) :rolleyes: .
Stay safe, you too :cool: .

[corrado26]

half an hour ago:

[M ELEY]

You guys are killing me! We had only one day of snow here in the southern U.S. I am also hoping for some clarity on the Liege markings. I am still convinced that some of these pistols date to the period 1810 and later, per the original marking. We'll see...

[Jim McDougall]

half an hour ago:

Oh UDO!!! :)

[fernando]

half an hour ago:
Are there bears in your neighbourhood, Udo ? :eek:.

[Pukka Bundook]

Naaa, they went south for warmer weather..

[fernando]

...I look forward to hearing of the information from the proof House...
Claude Gaier, Director of the Liege Arms Museum, is deceased since the last January 3th.
Here the BIOGRAPHY (https://www.rtc.be/video/culture/mus-eacute-e/claude-gaier-erudit-liegeois-specialiste-des-armes-et-d-histoire-militaire_1507790_325.html#) of a great arms specialist.

PS
I have now sen t e-mail to the present museum curator.


.

[corrado26]

Are there bears in your neighbourhood, Udo ? :eek:.

No, just a joke!

[rickystl]

Interesting discussion on this pistol. Here is one that I own. The stock finish is almost completely worn off. Looks like someone was going to refinish it but never completed. But there is no evidence of later sanding. Also, it appears the lock and barrel were chemically cleaned sometime in the past.

I've always known this pistol by it's generic name of Belgium Navel Pistol, in use from about 1810 to 1835. I recall reading somewhere that this pistol was made by the thousands and sold everywhere. That Bannerman's early catalog had surplus still for sale probably attests to the quantity made.

Interesting the lack of a ramrod provision. My guess is that a separate loading rod suspended from a leather cord around the neck, was the thinking behind the pistol's design. But I may be wrong in that I've never seen what you might call a "European" type standardized loading rod for these pistols. Much like most of the pistols carried by troops in the Ottoman Empire. Combined with the use of pre-formed paper cartridges, re-loading is very quick. I can actually confirm this from a trial I did firing my pistol using this method. The separate rod around the neck is even more convenient than the later captured type ramrod.
On the other hand, as mentioned above, all of these pistols aboard a ship may have been loaded at the same time and then fired once during a ship-to-ship battle, and then used as a club or parrying piece.
The pistol is very robustly made. The front barrel wedge (versus a pin) is especially convenient. Just about every example I've seen is still, or can be easily returned to shooting condition today.

Rick

[rickystl]

Woops. Forgot the photos.....

[fernando]

Is that some mark, Rick ?

.

[rickystl]

Hi Fernando

Yes, I seem to recall it is. But can't remember. Been a while since I've handled/fired it. I'll check it out when I get home tonight.

Rick

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Rick,
Any chance of dismounting the barrel on your pistol and photographing any marks in closeup plus of course the marks Fernando has already mentioned.
My Regards,
Norman.

[corrado26]

and here is one with some marks

[corrado26]

another one with a tugra on its barrel

[corrado26]

and the next one with the mark of the Isfahan arsenal on its lockplate

[corrado26]

and last a same pistol with an unknown signature at its lockplate - could eventually be a year?

[fernando]

...I've always known this pistol by it's generic name of Belgium Navel Pistol, in use from about 1810 to 1835. I recall reading somewhere that this pistol was made by the thousands and sold everywhere. That Bannerman's early catalog had surplus still for sale probably attests to the quantity made...
Still you find dozens of them for sale out there, with their Liege marks ... one a gift for Captain Mark; the barrel engraved HMS ACHERON :cool: :D.

.

[fernando]

So Udo was faster ... but i've got the ACHERON ;) .

[M ELEY]

Ahh, the Achercon! If only it were not spurious! :mad:
I finally took the barrel off of mine, but the only marking on it was 'HK'...

[fernando]

... I have now sen t e-mail to the present museum curator...

... And here is the (roughly translated) answer:

You are right, such correct information is not always easy to find, given the scope and complexity of the subject. It has been five months since i took office and i still 'often swim'. Having said that, i highly recommend a very reliable and well done site where you should find everything you need. They have also just published an encyclopedia in six volumes on the Liège armory that i have already ordered. This site is HERE (http://littlegun.be/).
Hoping that this site will meet your expectations, please receive, Mr. Viana, the expression of my warmest regards.

Löic Servais
Conservator

[Rick]

Ahh, the Achercon! If only it were not spurious! :mad:
I finally took the barrel off of mine, but the only marking on it was 'HK'...

Kinda spurious I guess... :shrug:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Acheron

[fernando]

A bit of fantasy hurts no one. Here is the paddle sloop Archeron version, launched in 1838. Who knows the captain already had his Liege pistol and had its barrel engraved when he was assigned to this elegant vessel :cool: .

.

[M ELEY]

Kinda spurious I guess... :shrug:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HMS_Acheron

Of course, Rick! You bring up a good point; more than one Acheron! Which means the marking could be legit. I was thinking of THE Acheron of Nelson's era-

[fernando]

Of course, Rick! You bring up a good point; more than one Acheron! Which means the marking could be legit. I was thinking of THE Acheron of Nelson's era-
Nelson was in command of the HMS VICTORY by then (1805) when he was killed.
Reason why i took a shot at the paddler (post #78 ).

[Rick]

Of course, Rick! You bring up a good point; more than one Acheron! Which means the marking could be legit. I was thinking of THE Acheron of Nelson's era-

Hi Mark,
One never knows; eh? :)
The first Acheron appears to have been a lowly Bomb Ketch according to the list I consulted.
IIRC she was in the Royal Navy service from 1803 to 1805 when she was captured in the Med by the French.
A short career and one that predates the pistol's production date.

Still it would be a nice acquisition for a fan of the Movie.

[rickystl]

Is that some mark, Rick ?

.
Hi again Fernando.

No, that's the threaded hole for the mainspring screw.
It's been a while. So I took the barrel and lock off per Norman's request. I'll post what I found with photos below.

Rick

[rickystl]

OK. First the lock:

There are no markings on the outside of the lock. Here is what I found on the inside: In the center of the lock plate are the letters: FD FD gd L
The front inside of the lock plate has four intentional hash marks. And a series of small, round punch marks on the inside of the hammer and pan, as well as the pan cover of the frizzen. Maybe just assembly matching.
The first F could be something different as it's partially covered by the mainspring. (I guess I could take the mainspring off)

Rick

[rickystl]

And now the barrel:

On the bottom of the breech plug tang is the number 42.
On the left, rear side of the barrel, at the breech are two stamped letters I can't make out. But the ELC over the star inside the oval is there.
On the bottom of the barrel, about 2 inches from the breech is a similar mark posted by Corado above. Below that mark it looks like there are two stamped, separated letters I can't make out.

Rick

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Rick,
Many thanks for dismounting your pistol, unfortunately I am still in the dark re the various and differing stamps on this type of pistol. I am corresponding with someone in Belgium to try and get some more definitive information on the marks and of course will post the results if and when. Thanks again.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

... And a series of small, round punch marks on the inside of the hammer and pan, as well as the pan cover of the frizzen. Maybe just assembly matching...
I would say ... definitely !

[fernando]

Hi Rick,
Many thanks for dismounting your pistol, unfortunately I am still in the dark re the various and differing stamps on this type of pistol. I am corresponding with someone in Belgium to try and get some more definitive information on the marks and of course will post the results if and when. Thanks again.
My Regards,
Norman.
So Norman, the link in my post #26 is not useful. I confess i did not navigate into it.
Best
Fernando

[Norman McCormick]

So Norman, the link in my post #26 is not useful. I confess i did not navigate into it.
Best
Fernando


Hi Fernando,
Your link takes me to the same place as the link in my post no 35. I've been through the site and although it has good info it is not complete so I am still searching. Thanks anyway.
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

So bad; no wonder the actual curator is new on the job and didn't properly deal with my specific question; marks and their support text :shrug: .

[Pukka Bundook]

Rick,

The mark in your last photo of the barrel is the Belgian Provincial proof mark.
After 1968, this mark is for Optional Provincial proof. Of course your pistol pre-dates this! (EL in script.)
This mark can be seen clearly in my post # 53 on previous page.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Richard,
I take it this is the mark you are referring to.
My Regards,
Norman.

P.S. I've just read the whole of your post and of course it is the one you're referring to re your post no 53, I blame senility it's always a good get out clause. :o :)

[rickystl]

Interesting that most of these pistols you find today are still in good condition.
And there use seemed to have an abrupt end during the transition to the percussion era. I've never seen one that was converted to percussion. After about a 25 year run the pistol appears to have fallen out of favor with the various governments that purchased them creating a large surplus. There is hardly an antique gun auction today that doesn't have one or two for sale.

Rick

[fernando]

... There is hardly an antique gun auction today that doesn't have one or two for sale...
So true, Rick. However, contrary to what has been said here, i could swear i have read that these pistols were of fragile construction; could it be ?

[rickystl]

Hi Fernando

I have not read that anywhere, that I can remember. From a shooter's perspective, the locks, barrels, stocks and hardware are very solidly built.
Even the breech plug integrity to thick barrel wall is done well. Very much to European standards.

The only ones I've personally seen that are in lesser condition were due to latter, 20th Century neglect. Not many.

Rick

[fernando]

Rick, i have visited a zillion sources over this thread by the time; to find the one where i have (thought) i read mentioning such particular, would be like a needle in a haystack. Perhaps i have made some confusion; reason why i was asking if "it could be".
With the due respect for these specific pistols, it wouldn't be the first time that (some other) Liegeoise guns came buy with visible function weaknesses, s i had them in hand myself. But that is another story :shrug:.

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
With regard to the fragility or otherwise of these pistols. The Liege one I have has obviously had the hammer repaired and also many years ago I dry fired one of these with flint in situ of course and the hammer broke in two. Maybe the quality of metalwork varies as I suspect there were many smaller manufactories turning these out by the barrel load.
Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

Many many of pieces came out from Liege; the best ... and the worst. I have had both.



.

[M ELEY]

Hi,
With regard to the fragility or otherwise of these pistols. The Liege one I have has obviously had the hammer repaired and also many years ago I dry fired one of these with flint in situ of course and the hammer broke in two. Maybe the quality of metalwork varies as I suspect there were many smaller manufactories turning these out by the barrel load.
Regards,
Norman.

Interesting you mention this, Norman, going back to this gun's primary function. Private purchase weapons were always made on the cheap, often to be used only in a pinch and often at the cheapest price a merchant captain (or board of directors) could get by with. Thus, on private purchase swords we see surplus m1803's, mismatched blades, blacksmith quality sheet metal guards, etc. It seems likely the guns would also be treated similarly. The swords were rolled out literally in barrels to arm the crew and the pistols taken down from racks to do likewise. These were not 'tenderly handled' gentlemen's pistols. They were practically never used unless attacking an enemy or defending their ship, unlike a military pistol in the field which would see much more action. Mine is extremely sturdy and apart from one time when I pulled the trigger and the hammer fell off(having 'fired' it many times without the flint like a dummy), it has been fine and I just tightened the screw holding the hammer in place. :o

[Jim McDougall]

Interesting you mention this, Norman, going back to this gun's primary function. Private purchase weapons were always made on the cheap, often to be used only in a pinch and often at the cheapest price a merchant captain (or board of directors) could get by with. Thus, on private purchase swords we see surplus m1803's, mismatched blades, blacksmith quality sheet metal guards, etc. It seems likely the guns would also be treated similarly. The swords were rolled out literally in barrels to arm the crew and the pistols taken down from racks to do likewise. These were not 'tenderly handled' gentlemen's pistols. They were practically never used unless attacking an enemy or defending their ship, unlike a military pistol in the field which would see much more action. Mine is extremely sturdy and apart from one time when I pulled the trigger and the hammer fell off(having 'fired' it many times without the flint like a dummy), it has been fine and I just tightened the screw holding the hammer in place. :o


Capn, this is the best insight and perspective on the weaponry typically used on vessels yet, and literally describes the nature of the quality issues as well as reasons for it or lack therof. As we have discussed these pistols were often almost a 'one shot' deal, and became more of a bludgeon or projectile after the initial discharge. Obviously such weapons were inexpensive and suited the often limited budget of a vessel for such arms.
The unusual array of edged arms etc. reflects the use of various 'available' components often assembled by their armourers as well, and likely accounts for the anomalies you have often identified and discussed.

[M ELEY]

Hello Jim and thanks for your comments. I was just thinking about even the food that the sailors were subjected to as a reference to the penny-pinching involved in the navies and ships of the era. Pursers were often the most reviled crewmates on a ship, frequently known to skim off the top to pocket the extra money while serving tripe to the sailors! A little off-topic, I know, but the same principles were always in place! Much like today's industries, lowball the bid to get the biggest bang for the buck! :cool:

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Got a reply from the Belgian Military Museum. Not a Belgian service weapon, possibly a trade pistol and may have been used in the mercantile marine. Didn't get any info re the numerous stamps on these type pistols. Not really anything we didn't already know apart from maybe the definitive statement that it was not a Belgian service weapon. I asked if Belgian long arms of the first part of the 19thC were of the same bore as the pistol i.e. .69 as Dutch and French service issue muskets were and I thought there may have been some crossover with Belgian long arms and this pistol, didn't get a reply to this question. Hope this is of some use re this elusive pistol.
Regards,
Norman.

[M ELEY]

Thank you, Norman, for clarifying some of the questions with these pistols. I always thought it a little strange that a Belgian pistol made by a land-locked country would have a need for a naval pistol, barring foreign legion use. At least we know that these were absolutely for export and probably only used for private purchase via mercantile markets. As a 'private purchase' (i.e. cheaply-made!) and merchant-class, it explains why these guns are plain-Janes and not necessarily perfect. As a maritime collector, this doesn't distract from the interest for me in these types and the places they might have ended up! China Sea trade, clipper ships in Malay waters, mutinies in the South Pacific! Still very exciting stuff! ;)

[Norman McCormick]

I always thought it a little strange that a Belgian pistol made by a land-locked country would have a need for a naval pistol


AHEM!!!
:)

[M ELEY]

OPPS!!! :o That's what I get for not remembering my geography! In any case (!), NOT Belgian naval piece. As I have never really heard of the Belgian navy, just the sheer amount of these pistol-types is a statement as to the obvious exports of said item.

Now, a recap please of all known nations that actually used this type for their merchant ships? England we know for sure. France as well. Any Norwegian/Danish? They were certainly involved during the Napoleonic period.