Queen Anne pistol ... or the like

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

If this pistol was made in England, or for that matter in Liege, it would have DEFINATELY have been proved.

Not so fast, Stu ... just kiding .
Just read the attached page of The Standard Directory of Proof Marks, with emphasis on the part stressed by a red rectangle. Actualy this was not where i've learnt about Liege mark evading (or lack of consistence), but only a confirmation of some observations made by an "expert" somewhere in the Net. Note we are talking about this piece being from the end XVIII century period.
Perhaps you wish to review your considerations on the subject ... or not.
Again this doesn't mean my pistol is Belgian, but it certainly leaves that door open.
Best
Fernando

[kahnjar1]

Hi Fernando,
This is getting away from the original thread which discusses the beautiful pistol you have. I agree with the comments that proof was not made mandatory until 1810, but the first proof mark (the Perron) was introduced in Belgium in 1672 for inspection/proof of breeching systems. It was not used on revolvers. France had proof marks from 1782, so they are not new!
The problem remains as to origin of your pistol. Have you removed any of the screws to see if they are hand cut or machine cut. This might narrow down the age somewhat. I think we agree that flint ignition was superceded around 1830 so they would be earlier than that. The other comment I would make is that although they are marked LONDON, I don't think that they are of English manufacture for 2 reasons. One is lack of proof marks but they other is that they don't appear to have an inset escutcheon, on which the owner would normally have his name/initials engraved.
THE PLOT THICKENS!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

... the other is that they don't appear to have an inset escutcheon, on which the owner would normally have his name/initials engraved ...

When wire inlay was used (a trend that increased towards the second half XVIII century), several Queen Anne pistols did not have the classic estucheon (thumplate), but eventually a simulation in the same place, designed with the silver wire decoration, like in my example. Only that connoisseurs claim that Britsh inlay was a finer work ... but that is very contingent, as we know.
Fernando

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by fernando

When wire inlay was used (a trend that increased towards the second half XVIII century), several Queen Anne pistols did not have the classic estucheon (thumplate), but eventually a simulation in the same place, designed with the silver wire decoration, like in my example. Only that connoisseurs claim that Britsh inlay was a finer work ... but that is very contingent, as we know.
Fernando

Agreed but if this WAS English made then it would/should have the silver escutcheon.
Fernando, I did have another thought, and that is that very occasionally there was a mark/name INSIDE the lock plate OR on the side of the tang. I have seen the odd pistol with this. Might be worth a look.
Stu

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

Agreed but if this WAS English made then it would/should have the silver escutcheon ...

Look here ... all English.

How many words is (are) a picture/s worth ?

Fernando

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by fernando

Look here ... all English.

How many words is (are) a picture/s worth ?

Fernando

OK I SURRENDER !!

[fernando]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

... there was a mark/name INSIDE the lock plate OR on the side of the tang ... Might be worth a look...

That's what i did in the first place, although i was sh... scared, due to this type of actions having a mechanism rather different than usual.
... Not the slightest mark .

Fernando