That blunderbuss is well synthesised, unlike the ugly tourist gun. One further weakness is the inletting at lock and tang, which look somewhat worse than any original I have looked at (I am not an expert though). It makes me want to understand who made it and from what. The creation of charming copies for Victorian decorators is well known, and there are known past collectors who have had top-quality copies of rare guns built, ofttimes with no intent to deceive.
This one has to me the feel of a 1950s-60s faker, when top quality craftsmen were less likely to do this stuff and the 'distressed' look was a big part of making new craft furniture 'antique'.
The 'no makers mark on lock' and 'barrel stamp not square' is not at all definitive. We tend to see better-quality retailed pieces or known-quality military standards, but a body like the Cork Mail probably armed their guards from lower-quality trade suppliers, perhaps by tender. The makers would not necessarily pay a quality engraver to mark trade-sourced second tier locks. The Cork Mail stamp is done with old-looking individual letter stamps and reasonably well aligned though not perfect. Letter stamps are more what you would expect in smaller more remote or colonial organisations and consistent with the lower trade quality of the components.
The fly or die is also letter stamps but perhaps newer font, and is the worst feature on this gun I think. The inletting feels like the gun has been made up from two genuinely old but partial guns, and the cock clamp screw and other un-butchered screws are probably new-made.
Overall, I would give it house room if it were not priced too high or for a Cork historic exhibit. Its almost OK, but a fastidious collector or museum might decline to lower the tone of the collection with it.
Just my less-experienced opinion.
|