Persian percussion gun repair.

[rickystl]

Hi Estcrh

I'm sure Richard and Philip are correct. They do indeed look more like a splice that came unglued. Glue does age.
In my case, a novice had attempted to glue the two pieces back together (using white Elmers glue or some such). Not only did it look horrible, they glued it together WITH THE ORIGINAL WOOD RAMROD STILL IN PLACE !! Took the gunsmith a whole day to get it apart. @#$%^&*

In your case, it is rather curious that the original maker installed an inlay so close to the spliced area. Also, is that a barrel wedge in both those slots ? Usually these would be left open to tie a leather sling through. The barrel bands holding the barrel in place.

Rick

[Philip]

These are not barrel wedges, just pieces of brass stuck in there probably by the guy who first tried to reglue the stock. The barrel is not fitted with tenons that would retain any wedged. The only attachment are the tang screw and the bands.

[ariel]

I know nothing about firearms and do not even search for them. I am into swords.
From what I see here, there might be different criteria for desireability between bladed and firearms.

This gun is not in usable condition at all , with firing mechanism broken, barrel not securely attached, gunstock unlikely to withstand repeat recoils etc, and still it is considered collectible and worthy of cosmetic repair.

A somewhat similar situation with a sword would be rusted through blade, broken handle and mangled guard. Few of us would invest money, time and effort to bring it up to a condition suitable only for wall hanging and devoid of any fighting potential. Such situation might be appropriate for a extremely rare excavated 1,000 - 2,000 years-old sword, but this is not a case with this gun.

Can you explain to me whether there is a difference of "collectability" criteria and tolerance margins between bladed and fire arms?

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

I know nothing about firearms and do not even search for them. I am into swords.
From what I see here, there might be different criteria for desireability between bladed and firearms.

This gun is not in usable condition at all , with firing mechanism broken, barrel not securely attached, gunstock unlikely to withstand repeat recoils etc, and still it is considered collectible and worthy of cosmetic repair.

A somewhat similar situation with a sword would be rusted through blade, broken handle and mangled guard. Few of us would invest money, time and effort to bring it up to a condition suitable only for wall hanging and devoid of any fighting potential. Such situation might be appropriate for a extremely rare excavated 1,000 - 2,000 years-old sword, but this is not a case with this gun.

Can you explain to me whether there is a difference of "collectability" criteria and tolerance margins between bladed and fire arms?

Ariel, people spend plenty of money restoring Japanese, Persian, Ottoman, Indian, Chinese swords etc but Philip might be able to inform us more about this.

As for the particular gun...Persian firearms in any condition are extremely rare. For me it is a thing of beauty, I am sure not everyone will agree.

[ariel]

Eric,
That was not my question. I do not doubt the rarity of this gun and do not question your decision to buy it.
I just wanted to learn and understand the criteria by which firearms are judged and why those are so different from bladed weapons. If you maintain that the conditions do not matter, this is a partial answer to my question.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

Eric,
That was not my question. I do not doubt the rarity of this gun and do not question your decision to buy it.
I just wanted to learn and understand the criteria by which firearms are judged and why those are so different from bladed weapons. If you maintain that the conditions do not matter, this is a partial answer to my question.

There is no difference, if you like something enough and you have the money and a person who can do the work.....take Japanese swords for example, $100 an inch to polish, and thats just the start, there are mounts, fittings, storage mounts. People pay thousands for restorations. Sometimes it is due the the rarity or value of the sword, sometimes it is just something a person wants to do. Guns are no different.

[ariel]

I definitely agree: restorations can be expensive. But it is the goal of restoration that is important: what does the new owner try to end up with?

A patinated katana with battle scars and absent or mutilated koshirae subjected to extensive restoration will in large measure lose its historical aroma , but gain its former functionality of a full-fledged battle ready status. Minimum history, maximum functionality.

Excavated bladed weapons are just stabilized, with pitting and rust preserved and some parts ( handles mostly) minimalistically fashioned from translucent materiel to expose the tang ( see Khazar swords in the Furussia collection). Maximum history, minimum functionality.

With heavily damaged weapons these two are mutually exclusive.

What was your vision for the gun?

[rickystl]

Originally Posted by Philip

These are not barrel wedges, just pieces of brass stuck in there probably by the guy who first tried to reglue the stock. The barrel is not fitted with tenons that would retain any wedged. The only attachment are the tang screw and the bands.

Hi Philip

OK. So someone just installed those brass wedge pieces not knowing the purpose of the slots. That's what I was guessing, and you just confirmed it. Thanks.

Rick

[ariel]

Not knowing diddly-squat about guns, I am asking about the tenons: any evidence that this gun was originally made for service? How good ( or bad) was the original repair? Is it serviceable now?

I know I sound stupid, but please bear with me.

[estcrh]

Originally Posted by ariel

any evidence that this gun was originally made for service?

Ariel, do you mean military service?