Djezail With East India company lock

RDGAC · 9th May 2012, 11:54 AM

My guess is that both locks are locally made; I don't think the quality looks high enough for a contemporary British lock, to be perfectly honest, though I'm always prepared to be wrong. The names on both are engraved none too carefully, and as AJ1356 remarks, the numbers used for the date look suspect. Also, I can't seem to find a "Loder" listed as a manufacturer of locks in my (very limited) reference material, though there is a Richard Loader working - in 1699. Having said that, the flaunched heart and date look better on #2, and I'd suggest that the cock is a replacement (judging by the peened-over tumbler square). So perhaps that 'un's the real article, with a replacement cock?

I'd also conjecture that the lower gun has the older stock - there looks to be hand polish there, and the cracks look good and nasty, the result of repeated hefty recoil. Pity someone's rubbed it up a bit vigorously. Oddly, both barrels could be old; ISTR that the more ornamented the barrel, the more likely it is to be old, and the chiselled muzzles are both similar (#1 especially) to one of mine, which is currently thought of as an Ottoman barrel of the 19th Century.

Not the most helpful chap, am I?

rickystl · 9th May 2012, 04:31 PM

Hi Cerjak! How have you been?
I'm pretty much in agreement with RDGAC. For sure, both locks were locally made. The markings on the locks are spurious. But, that is the most common for these Jezail's. Also note the quality of the screws. Not to European standards. The most often copied lock by the locals is the British 3rd Model Brown Bess lock, like yours.
The trigger guard on the first one looks like a much later addition. Note the screw heads are later style.
All that said, both barrels seem to be authentic older barrels with Ottoman influence as RDGA mentioned.
Richard G mentions the proper alignment of the vent hole with the pan. This is one of the first things I look for when considering a purchase.
Anyway, just my two cents worth. Thanks for posting these. There are not many of us that collect these type of guns. Rick.

Cerjak · 9th May 2012, 08:30 PM

Hi everbody and thank you for all for your good comments.
In my eyes the second is a good one and not for tourist but the stock had been to much cleaned .
Both have good and serious barrels ,for the lock I will remove and will take some pics from the second side.From the ioder lock the screw from the frizzen is very modern for the date is it strange the 1&7 seems good but I' m Aggree that the 8 is not so nice.
The Ramrod is a modern one and the first stock can't be very old .For the second one I guess it could be from the end of 19 th century.
Again sorry for my poor English I would like to tell more with more precision too..

Cerjak

RDGAC · 10th May 2012, 09:14 AM

Cerjak, photos of the insides of the locks would be great. I have been working on one of my Afghan locks recently, and even though the outside had spurious markings, they were so well done, I wasn't sure they were spurious until I got a good look at the inside. Pity they were, since I thought I might have some new and exciting transitional gun lock!

I agree about the barrels. Maybe it's just me, but I tend to reckon the heavier the better with jezail barrels, simply because I have read that this was exactly what their traditional barrel suppliers thought. Presumably it's thus more likely that a jezail with a big heavy tube has a real, old barrel.

I get the impression that newer jezail stocks are a bit thicker and heavier than the older ones, too, maybe to fit the inlays. I have 3 of my own, as you may know; all 3 have pretty thin stocks beyond the lock, mostly thinner than a contemporary European gun, but they also don't have any inlays. Anyway, that might suggest that #2's is the older again. The trouble is, of course, than #1 just might have been a good, thick stock that's recently been sanded.

These inlays, mind, can look very nice indeed. For instance: http://www.armscollectors.com/darra/afghanold.htm (scroll down to the bottom!)

Edited to add: And no apologies for the poor English. My French extends as far as "excuser-moi s'il-vous plait, do you speak English?"

Better with German, though: "Entschuldigen Sie, bitte, mein Herr; sprechen Sie Englisch?"

Jim McDougall · 10th May 2012, 05:12 PM

Interesting jezails, and as far as I can see the markings on the locks are indeed spuriously applied locally, however aside from from the poorly executed '8' and some other rather minor flaws they seem fairly well copied. The local artisan, quite probably from the Darra Khel region in Khyber or surrounding areas, even followed the characteristic long tail on the '7' typical of 18th century dates on these locks.
I would point out that the EIC heart is actually quartered not flaunched, as that feature is two semicircles opposed rather than the quartering. I recall discussions we had trying to determine more on these heart variations of the EIC, and the idea that perhaps the type of separation used with the letters might indicate time frame for these balemarks. It would appear that this was not the case necessarily in comparing with the nusimatic evidence which of course carries good examples of these on the coins.

It seems that the lack of incised border around the lock might be a consideration as well, as it seems this feature was typically seen on British locks. I am not really too sure about that detail on some of the India pattern or Windus muskets though, and am still trying to learn more on these fascinating guns.

As far as the jezails, regardless if rather newly made or not, they represent intriguing and exotic ethnographic weapons still carrying wonderful history in thier ancestry.

RDGAC · 11th May 2012, 10:11 AM

Jim, we did indeed. Temporary brain failure managed completely to miss the fact, as well as the difference between quartered and flaunched. I confess I'm still at sea when it comes to markings, to a great extent; guess that's the penalty of youth for you.

I agree that these aren't badly done duplications, especially around the tails. The problem area seems more the names than anything else. They look very much cruder than even the cheapest of European locks from the 18th Century that I've seen. Added to which, the screws are almost always a giveaway with these Afghan locks, as Rick noted.

Still, they can be very good. My latest has a very nicely replicated lock, the only problem being that it carries a rampant lion and a date stamp of 1811. The engraved border is very well done and the rampant lion itself, despite heavy pitting, is still quite clear and looks good. I find myself wondering if our friends in the Khyber have acquired a set of old EIC stamps from somewhere!

Jim McDougall · 12th May 2012, 03:49 AM

Thank you RDG!! and its great talking again. Im glad you keep these jezail mysteries coming. Frankly speaking of mysteries, Ive been adrift on the seven seas of markings mysteries for more years than I care to say, and for every remotely possible answer there are about a dozen more questions.

This thread got me going on these British locks and it seems that a lot of the complexities are addressed in a book by Goldstein and Mowbray titled "The Brown Bess" which covers them in great detail (I havent seen it but would love to have it if I could smuggle it into the Bookmobile). I think that the identification and authentication of these is plagued by the many rifts between the Board of Ordnance and the contractors for the East India Co. in administrative issues and the numbers involved. It certainly does seem possible that actual stamps used by these contractors might have ended up with some of these makers in Afghan regions, or may have been well duplicated. Some of the markings stamped in North African weapons can be pretty convincing, and incongruent contexts are the only giveaway often.

In the marks here, as mentioned the long tail 7 nicely complies with those typically seen on English locks, and actually even the oddly made 8 looks like one found on an authentically marked English lock. The only real test is probably to locate the makers initials on the inside of the lock. Apparantly these can often vary from the name on the outside as well.

Fascinating guns these jezails!!! and the mysteries in these locks.

All the best,
Jim

10th May 2012, 09:14 AM	#4
RDGAC Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: York, UK Posts: 167	Cerjak, photos of the insides of the locks would be great. I have been working on one of my Afghan locks recently, and even though the outside had spurious markings, they were so well done, I wasn't sure they were spurious until I got a good look at the inside. Pity they were, since I thought I might have some new and exciting transitional gun lock! I agree about the barrels. Maybe it's just me, but I tend to reckon the heavier the better with jezail barrels, simply because I have read that this was exactly what their traditional barrel suppliers thought. Presumably it's thus more likely that a jezail with a big heavy tube has a real, old barrel. I get the impression that newer jezail stocks are a bit thicker and heavier than the older ones, too, maybe to fit the inlays. I have 3 of my own, as you may know; all 3 have pretty thin stocks beyond the lock, mostly thinner than a contemporary European gun, but they also don't have any inlays. Anyway, that might suggest that #2's is the older again. The trouble is, of course, than #1 just might have been a good, thick stock that's recently been sanded. These inlays, mind, can look very nice indeed. For instance: http://www.armscollectors.com/darra/afghanold.htm (scroll down to the bottom!) Edited to add: And no apologies for the poor English. My French extends as far as "excuser-moi s'il-vous plait, do you speak English?" Better with German, though: "Entschuldigen Sie, bitte, mein Herr; sprechen Sie Englisch?" Last edited by RDGAC; 10th May 2012 at 11:53 AM.

11th May 2012, 10:11 AM	#6
RDGAC Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: York, UK Posts: 167	Jim, we did indeed. Temporary brain failure managed completely to miss the fact, as well as the difference between quartered and flaunched. I confess I'm still at sea when it comes to markings, to a great extent; guess that's the penalty of youth for you. I agree that these aren't badly done duplications, especially around the tails. The problem area seems more the names than anything else. They look very much cruder than even the cheapest of European locks from the 18th Century that I've seen. Added to which, the screws are almost always a giveaway with these Afghan locks, as Rick noted. Still, they can be very good. My latest has a very nicely replicated lock, the only problem being that it carries a rampant lion and a date stamp of 1811. The engraved border is very well done and the rampant lion itself, despite heavy pitting, is still quite clear and looks good. I find myself wondering if our friends in the Khyber have acquired a set of old EIC stamps from somewhere! Attached Images

9th May 2012, 11:54 AM	#1
RDGAC Member Join Date: Mar 2010 Location: York, UK Posts: 167	My guess is that both locks are locally made; I don't think the quality looks high enough for a contemporary British lock, to be perfectly honest, though I'm always prepared to be wrong. The names on both are engraved none too carefully, and as AJ1356 remarks, the numbers used for the date look suspect. Also, I can't seem to find a "Loder" listed as a manufacturer of locks in my (very limited) reference material, though there is a Richard Loader working - in 1699. Having said that, the flaunched heart and date look better on #2, and I'd suggest that the cock is a replacement (judging by the peened-over tumbler square). So perhaps that 'un's the real article, with a replacement cock? I'd also conjecture that the lower gun has the older stock - there looks to be hand polish there, and the cracks look good and nasty, the result of repeated hefty recoil. Pity someone's rubbed it up a bit vigorously. Oddly, both barrels could be old; ISTR that the more ornamented the barrel, the more likely it is to be old, and the chiselled muzzles are both similar (#1 especially) to one of mine, which is currently thought of as an Ottoman barrel of the 19th Century. Not the most helpful chap, am I?

9th May 2012, 04:31 PM	#2
rickystl Member Join Date: Jul 2010 Location: St. Louis, MO area. Posts: 1,630	Hi Cerjak! How have you been? I'm pretty much in agreement with RDGAC. For sure, both locks were locally made. The markings on the locks are spurious. But, that is the most common for these Jezail's. Also note the quality of the screws. Not to European standards. The most often copied lock by the locals is the British 3rd Model Brown Bess lock, like yours. The trigger guard on the first one looks like a much later addition. Note the screw heads are later style. All that said, both barrels seem to be authentic older barrels with Ottoman influence as RDGA mentioned. Richard G mentions the proper alignment of the vent hole with the pan. This is one of the first things I look for when considering a purchase. Anyway, just my two cents worth. Thanks for posting these. There are not many of us that collect these type of guns. Rick.

9th May 2012, 08:30 PM	#3
Cerjak Member Join Date: Jan 2012 Location: FRANCE Posts: 1,065	Hi everbody and thank you for all for your good comments. In my eyes the second is a good one and not for tourist but the stock had been to much cleaned . Both have good and serious barrels ,for the lock I will remove and will take some pics from the second side.From the ioder lock the screw from the frizzen is very modern for the date is it strange the 1&7 seems good but I' m Aggree that the 8 is not so nice. The Ramrod is a modern one and the first stock can't be very old .For the second one I guess it could be from the end of 19 th century. Again sorry for my poor English I would like to tell more with more precision too.. Cerjak

10th May 2012, 05:12 PM	#5
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Interesting jezails, and as far as I can see the markings on the locks are indeed spuriously applied locally, however aside from from the poorly executed '8' and some other rather minor flaws they seem fairly well copied. The local artisan, quite probably from the Darra Khel region in Khyber or surrounding areas, even followed the characteristic long tail on the '7' typical of 18th century dates on these locks. I would point out that the EIC heart is actually quartered not flaunched, as that feature is two semicircles opposed rather than the quartering. I recall discussions we had trying to determine more on these heart variations of the EIC, and the idea that perhaps the type of separation used with the letters might indicate time frame for these balemarks. It would appear that this was not the case necessarily in comparing with the nusimatic evidence which of course carries good examples of these on the coins. It seems that the lack of incised border around the lock might be a consideration as well, as it seems this feature was typically seen on British locks. I am not really too sure about that detail on some of the India pattern or Windus muskets though, and am still trying to learn more on these fascinating guns. As far as the jezails, regardless if rather newly made or not, they represent intriguing and exotic ethnographic weapons still carrying wonderful history in thier ancestry.

12th May 2012, 03:49 AM	#7
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,194	Thank you RDG!! and its great talking again. Im glad you keep these jezail mysteries coming. Frankly speaking of mysteries, Ive been adrift on the seven seas of markings mysteries for more years than I care to say, and for every remotely possible answer there are about a dozen more questions. This thread got me going on these British locks and it seems that a lot of the complexities are addressed in a book by Goldstein and Mowbray titled "The Brown Bess" which covers them in great detail (I havent seen it but would love to have it if I could smuggle it into the Bookmobile). I think that the identification and authentication of these is plagued by the many rifts between the Board of Ordnance and the contractors for the East India Co. in administrative issues and the numbers involved. It certainly does seem possible that actual stamps used by these contractors might have ended up with some of these makers in Afghan regions, or may have been well duplicated. Some of the markings stamped in North African weapons can be pretty convincing, and incongruent contexts are the only giveaway often. In the marks here, as mentioned the long tail 7 nicely complies with those typically seen on English locks, and actually even the oddly made 8 looks like one found on an authentically marked English lock. The only real test is probably to locate the makers initials on the inside of the lock. Apparantly these can often vary from the name on the outside as well. Fascinating guns these jezails!!! and the mysteries in these locks. All the best, Jim