Dear All,
sorry for the late reply. I havenīt been at home the last days. Thanks a lot for the discussion gentlemen and for sharing your nice example, Raf.
I add some better images. I hope the following is somehow understandable, as my English became a bt rusty the last years.
On the lock / frizzen, there is no third face. Itīs just some decorative element, which from the side looks a bit like a face in this context. But the lock is, as far as I can judge it, in quite good quality and I cant find traces of alteratoins for a new lock on the wood.
The center screw is indeed drilled throug the would without a corresponding elemt on the lock plate. An there are some old alterations on the lock plate, one of them from the missing belt hook, the others I canīt attribute. On the other hand, there are no holes in the wood from older screws at another location.
In my eyes,
- the barrel definitively belongs to the shaft, although the tang screw is not "text book"
- the decorations and lock plate definitively belongs to the shaft
- as I canīt find any traces of altering or fitting in a new lock, I assume that also the lock belongs to the pistol from the beginning, although t
he decoratoins do not fit perfectly to the other elements.
I marked a round piece of the lock plate in the last image, which I thank was the point, deisgnated by the manufacturer of this element, for drilling a hole for the screw. It seems that it was never used.
As a conlcusion I think that, concerning the traces of age, all the parts belong together for a very long time / since its working life. Moreover I think it initially was assembled that way. Maybe the producer did not have another lock, so he fitted the screws to this one. I donīt know. But it seems that there have never been another lock on this pistol, followed by the traces (or non-existence of traces).
Kind regards
Andreas
|