A Crudely FAKED Wall Gun, in the Style of ca. 1500!

Matus · 11th May 2014, 04:47 PM

Hello Michael, all,

what has been stated here it sadly very true. There are both objective and subjective causes for such behavior. Speaking about auction houses, they want to make profit (which company doesn't?) and that says it all. However business ethics is something, what is long dead not only in this industry.
Subjectively, there are 2 dimensions - I want to have a nice piece, I am able to spend that money, so the easiest way is to "rely" on an auction house.
But as Michael said, people do it without knowledge (even without trying to gain the knowledge), because to study means to spend effort and time (a lot of). And then there are people, who buy items, find out later it's fake, so they want to get rid of it without loosing money on that piece... so the wheel keeps turning...

The earlier the pieces we are looking at, the more insight one must have. Not many people are willing to take this learning path...

Regards,
Matus

Matchlock · 12th May 2014, 08:04 AM

Absolutely, Matus,

Thank you for your great post, I'm all on your side!

Best,
Michael

Raf · 28th May 2014, 09:29 PM

Sorry to muddy the water on this one. Yes , the pan certainly looks Indian and the distressing / stamp on the hook is obviously spurious and recently added. But are we absolutely certain that their isn't a precedent for early Indian matchlocks (with or without hooks ) following directly of European patterns of the late 15 / 16 century ? The use of matchlocks in India is well recorded from C 1480 and by 1550 standards had been introduced regarding the manufacture and proof firing of matchlocks.

The reason for re raising this issue is that I posted the barrel from a faked up European style matchlock with a barrel which probably was Indian but with what I thought was an unusual termination to the breech . That is a large lug on the rear of the breech secured presumably to a stock by a transverse pin , not unlike it appears , the example above. Although I cant think of a precedent for it you could argue it might be a rational transition between the earlier spike or socket and the lug under the breech found on early European matchlocks , which survives in a smaller form on later Indian matchlocks.

My point being that once something is outside of the supposedly established European chronology we simply haven't a clue .

Matchlock · 29th May 2014, 08:08 AM

Hi Raf,

Fully agreed, basically.
In any expert analysis, we can but rely on facts generally known.
In other words:
The sky's the limit; all bets are off ...

It's just that I used to own two Indian matchlock muskets, a wall gun and two detached matchlock barrels about four decades ago, all of them preserved in fine original condition, and the barrels struck with a long row of an inventory no. from the Rajpur arsenal each.
Moreover, I have seen a number of those items at various auction viewings.

So please trust my being quite familiar with every little detail of those barrels, their peculiar form actually imitating the characteristic Nuremberg style of about 1510-20 - apart from the pan which, unlike the pans of early 16th c. German barrels, usually shows no provision for a pivoted cover on about 90 per cent of average arsenal quality Indian matchlock barrels.
The swiveling pan cover is a feature most often observed with finely made decorated specimens rarely ever emerging on the market. I remember noticing two or three of them in London sales catalogues, over quite a few years. When they are fitted with a swiveling pan cover belonging originally the latter is sometimes made of brass, again copying some German barrels of ca. 1525-30.

What is more, and definitely contrasting with their German paragons: Indian barrels are usually not sighted while German barrels usually feature both a rear sight and foresight, from about the 1470's:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...barrels+dating

The presence, position and shape of sights are further important dating criteria for barrels. They first appeared around the mid-15th c. starting with a raised rear fire shield behind the touch hole on top of iron barrels, incised with a small central slot for aiming (attachments). At about the same period there was just a very subtle small raised portion of the swamped muzzle that acted as the first preliminary stage of a foresight. On my earliest Nuremberg/Passau barrel of the 1460's, a very rare instance of a hog's back barrel (German: Schweinsrückenlauf), an edge instead on top of an octagonal barrel fulfills the function of both sights over all its length. My next-in-line Passau barrel, bearing the earliest known city mark of Munich according to Erasmus Grasser's design of 1477, together with the date 1481, is the second-oldest known dated handgun barrel in the world:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showt...t+dated+handgun

In the case of 'your' barrel, the tang, pan and cover (the finial of the latter imitating the German style of the 1630's), as well as the lug(s), all are spurious additions. Somebody obviously intended some gun to appear like an original German 'military' musket of Thirty Years type - at least to the inexperienced eye.

Attachments:
Author's photographs from the year 2000, picturing two different Nuremberg manufactured tinderlock arquebuses of ca. 1525-30, retaining their original brass pan covers; they once were part of the inventory of the former Pilsen arsenal, and are now preseved in the Západočeské muzeum v Plzni, in Pilsen, Czechia.
All of these guns, and there are still more than 200 of them!, probably never left Pilsen since they were delivered from Nuremberg workshops, almost 500 years ago ...
The bottommost image portraits the museum's curator, Dr. František Fryda, kindly holding the original ramrod of an arquebus for me to take close-ups of the engraved finial made of either staghorn or bone.

Best,
Michael

Matchlock · 29th August 2014, 03:40 PM

See this absolutely extreme case - no chance whatsoever!!!
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7518
See post no. 23 ff.!

Best,
Michael

28th May 2014, 09:29 PM	#3
Raf Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 252	Sorry to muddy the water on this one. Yes , the pan certainly looks Indian and the distressing / stamp on the hook is obviously spurious and recently added. But are we absolutely certain that their isn't a precedent for early Indian matchlocks (with or without hooks ) following directly of European patterns of the late 15 / 16 century ? The use of matchlocks in India is well recorded from C 1480 and by 1550 standards had been introduced regarding the manufacture and proof firing of matchlocks. The reason for re raising this issue is that I posted the barrel from a faked up European style matchlock with a barrel which probably was Indian but with what I thought was an unusual termination to the breech . That is a large lug on the rear of the breech secured presumably to a stock by a transverse pin , not unlike it appears , the example above. Although I cant think of a precedent for it you could argue it might be a rational transition between the earlier spike or socket and the lug under the breech found on early European matchlocks , which survives in a smaller form on later Indian matchlocks. My point being that once something is outside of the supposedly established European chronology we simply haven't a clue . Attached Images

29th May 2014, 08:08 AM	#4
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Raf, Fully agreed, basically. In any expert analysis, we can but rely on facts generally known. In other words: The sky's the limit; all bets are off ... It's just that I used to own two Indian matchlock muskets, a wall gun and two detached matchlock barrels about four decades ago, all of them preserved in fine original condition, and the barrels struck with a long row of an inventory no. from the Rajpur arsenal each. Moreover, I have seen a number of those items at various auction viewings. So please trust my being quite familiar with every little detail of those barrels, their peculiar form actually imitating the characteristic Nuremberg style of about 1510-20 - apart from the pan which, unlike the pans of early 16th c. German barrels, usually shows no provision for a pivoted cover on about 90 per cent of average arsenal quality Indian matchlock barrels. The swiveling pan cover is a feature most often observed with finely made decorated specimens rarely ever emerging on the market. I remember noticing two or three of them in London sales catalogues, over quite a few years. When they are fitted with a swiveling pan cover belonging originally the latter is sometimes made of brass, again copying some German barrels of ca. 1525-30. What is more, and definitely contrasting with their German paragons: Indian barrels are usually not sighted while German barrels usually feature both a rear sight and foresight, from about the 1470's: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...barrels+dating *The presence, position and shape of sights* are further important dating criteria for barrels. They first appeared around the mid-15th c. starting with a raised rear fire shield behind the touch hole on top of iron barrels, incised with a small central slot for aiming (attachments). At about the same period there was just a very subtle small raised portion of the swamped muzzle that acted as the first preliminary stage of a foresight. On my earliest Nuremberg/Passau barrel of the 1460's, a very rare instance of a hog's back barrel** (German: Schweinsrückenlauf), an edge instead on top of an octagonal barrel fulfills the function of both sights over all its length. My next-in-line Passau barrel, bearing the earliest known city mark of Munich according to Erasmus Grasser's design of 1477, together with the date 1481, is the second-oldest known dated handgun barrel in the world: http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showt...t+dated+handgun In the case of 'your' barrel, the tang, pan and cover (the finial of the latter imitating the German style of the 1630's), as well as the lug(s), all are spurious additions. Somebody obviously intended some gun to appear like an original German 'military' musket of Thirty Years type - at least to the inexperienced eye. Attachments: Author's photographs from the year 2000, picturing two different Nuremberg manufactured tinderlock arquebuses of ca. 1525-30, retaining their original brass pan covers; they once were part of the inventory of the former Pilsen arsenal, and are now preseved in the Západočeské muzeum v Plzni, in Pilsen, Czechia. All of these guns, and there are still more than 200 of them!, probably never left Pilsen since they were delivered from Nuremberg workshops, almost 500 years ago ... The bottommost image portraits the museum's curator, Dr. František Fryda, kindly holding the original ramrod of an arquebus for me to take close-ups of the engraved finial made of either staghorn or bone. Best, Michael Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 29th May 2014 at 10:05 AM.

11th May 2014, 04:47 PM	#1
Matus Member Join Date: Mar 2011 Posts: 35	Hello Michael, all, what has been stated here it sadly very true. There are both objective and subjective causes for such behavior. Speaking about auction houses, they want to make profit (which company doesn't?) and that says it all. However business ethics is something, what is long dead not only in this industry. Subjectively, there are 2 dimensions - I want to have a nice piece, I am able to spend that money, so the easiest way is to "rely" on an auction house. But as Michael said, people do it without knowledge (even without trying to gain the knowledge), because to study means to spend effort and time (a lot of). And then there are people, who buy items, find out later it's fake, so they want to get rid of it without loosing money on that piece... so the wheel keeps turning... The earlier the pieces we are looking at, the more insight one must have. Not many people are willing to take this learning path... Regards, Matus

12th May 2014, 08:04 AM	#2
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Absolutely, Matus, Thank you for your great post, I'm all on your side! Best, Michael

29th August 2014, 03:40 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	See this absolutely extreme case - no chance whatsoever!!! http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=7518 See post no. 23 ff.! Best, Michael