A rather rustic blunderbuss

fernando · 20th July 2012, 04:43 PM

This blunderbuss surely has one of the most rustic barrels i’ve ever seen; the type of those looking unreal. Certainly hand forged by a village blacksmith, it has signs of having been assembled with ‘rings’. A long shot would be that this was the famous horse shoe cannon construction. The walls are extremely thick; with an extremely irregular bore of circa 18 m/m, its breech section has a 47 m/m diameter. This gives a 15 m/m wall thickness.
All components in this blunderbuss appear to be Portuguese (hurray) apart from the lock, which is signed by (Edward) Edge, dated 176?, a period from when Edge and his son engaged in an ordnance contract.
Other rustic components are the barrel band, the ramrod (original?) and the counter plate screws, with their huge head, and the butt plate.
The trigger guard shows a more refined work, but also most probably of Portuguese origin.
The barrel length measures 42 cms. Total gun length 81 cms. With a weight of 5 Kilos (11 pounds), this is undoubtedly an unusually sturdy short blunderbuss.
When wondering (as usual) what would be the purpose of this example, one would easily exclude its carrying under the cloak of the servant for the defense of his master while walking across those dangerous village in the dark of the night; too heavy for that. Perhaps it served for domestic defense or stage coach guard.
One noteworthy detail is the width of the touch hole, with its 8 m/m opening; with such wall thickness, i hardly digest it was worn by intense use.
Any ideas, Gentlemen ?

.

fernando · 20th July 2012, 04:44 PM

One more

.

gbxfb · 20th July 2012, 09:12 PM

That's an interesting piece you have there Fernando. I was wondering if the lock might be by Richard Edge (senior and junior) who were working as Board of Ordnance contractors 1757 -1774. Reference:- De Witt Bailey.

I've seen quite a few touch holes that appear to have been reamed out rather than gas cut. As a general rule antique arms with a common breach even when in a good state of preservation tend to have touch holes rather larger than modern reproductions especially military pieces. This was possibly to improve ignition reliability at the expense of a reduction in breach pressure.

It's possible that a previous owner didn't trust the hoop construction barrel and was trying to reduce breach pressure, although 8mm is excessive by any standard and would reduce the effectiveness of the arm. With this enlarged touch hole the lock will self prime with almost any grade of powder if the frizzen is closed on loading. As a final observation the touch hole is not centered in the pan and its excessive size may just be a crude attempt to reach the ideal sunrise position!

I hope this has been of some help.

Best regards,
Simon.

fernando · 21st July 2012, 10:35 PM

Thanks a lot for your knowledgeable input, Simon.
Yes, i have found the information on the lock in an index made by J.E. & S.J. Gooding, published by Arms Collecting.com. I later double checked it in some other source out there. The precise contract period seems to have been 1760-1775, which in any case makes no difference in placing this lock under the Ordnance contract production. It is only possible that it was originally mounted in one of several thousand (Brown Bess) muskets which entered Portugal during the Peninsular War … and not only.
I have just checked a couple EDGE locks dated 1762. Comparing them with the present example, it appears that some components were replaced, namely the pan, the frizzen and its spring. Looking well to the present pan, i would say its configuration is somehow distinct; the original pan has both a different positioning and bowl shape, which could explain the touch hole off center situation.
Go figure whether the enlarged touch hole was an attempt to reach a better matching with the pan; in fact its widening is elliptical, giving it some ‘logic’. Or, as you suggest, to reduce the breach pressure; the barrel is indeed extremely irregular.
I wouldn’t go for the hoop construction fears; this barrel is so thick that it would relax any user, i would say.
But of course these are guessings from a non connoisseur

Thanks again for your precious technical enlightening.
P.S.
Would you say that this barrel could be any earlier than the lock ... so rustic it is?

.

Matchlock · 22nd July 2012, 01:38 PM

Hi 'Nando,

If the barrel is older than the rest of the gun the barrel tang must have been replaced as it is of characteristic 18th c. form, with the screw entering from the top.
I would also say that the buttplate shows the same rural rustic style as the barrel.

Conically widenened touch holes are known from Prussian flintlock muskets of the 1730's-80's; their purpose was to not have to apply priming powder to the pan: with the barrel loaded, and the frizzen closed, the musket was just put down on the ground a few times with the buttplate which caused a sufficient amount of powder to exit the touch hole and fill the pan.

Best,
Michl

fernando · 22nd July 2012, 05:52 PM

Thank you Michl,
Brilliant explanation for the touch hole; and a brilliant solution for the priming, too

.
... and a defined date for the barrel, assuming the tang is a contemporaneous setup, which i would admit so.
Danksche

.

Norman McCormick · 22nd July 2012, 06:53 PM

"Light the blue touchpaper and retire"

fernando · 22nd July 2012, 08:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

"Light the blue touchpaper and retire"

No need to retire, Norman; she won't burst

Matchlock · 22nd July 2012, 10:07 PM

Hi Norman,

I admit having to look up that cool saying:

"light the blue touch paper and retire immediately to a safe distance"

Best wishes,
Michael

M ELEY · 7th August 2012, 06:27 AM

Wow! Sorry I missed this great piece earlier, Fernando! I am NO expert on guns, but several things did jump out at me on this piece. The point, already discussed and pointed out, of the blacksmith quality of this piece (which, BTW, I find appealing rather than deterring) and the second is the wood used to make the stock. It appears to be wormy ash, if I'm correct? This type of wood was popular for pike shafts, particularly boarding pikes. I find it interesting that this piece was constructed so and leads me to suspect that it was perhaps made in one of the Portuguese colonies rather than the homeland? Why else would this blunderbuss on all accounts be as primitive as it is? Hard times and few materials meant rougher construction, as seen in the American colonies during the Revolution, Spanish colonial pieces, etc. Of course, I'd love to say that this could be a pirate piece (

) and it does strike me as colonial. Bluderbuss were popular sea weapons (used to discourage mutinies), although brass barrels were more typical.

spiral · 7th August 2012, 01:01 PM

Fascinating peace Fernando.

Wormy walnut rather than ash to my eye though.

Spiral

M ELEY · 7th August 2012, 01:24 PM

I do think you are right, Spiral. Walnut it is. Still, is this a common wood to use for stocks of this period?

Matchlock · 7th August 2012, 03:20 PM

Oh yes, 'Nando,

Walnut is the most commonly used wood for private guns throughout the late 17th to the 21st c., while military guns were mostly stocked in beechwood.

Best,
Michl

fernando · 7th August 2012, 06:32 PM

Thank you Mark, Jonathan and Michl; much obliged for your input.
Ironically the previous owner of this gun, despite being a man from the timber trade, didn't look at its stock with a keen eye. When i phoned him this morning, he didn't reject the ash probability but he favoured walnut.
He promised to have a professional look to it next time he comes around.
I appreciate your thoughts on this gun characteristics Mark. I see what you mean about its rusticity being of colonial provenance, but i would stand by a homeland work. Hard times also occurred over here during this period and blacksmiths in the interior of the country could admittedly used such simplicity methods, inherited from ancient traditions. Local blunderbuss production, by means of salvaged components, was a fashion in those days. I am rather surprised, and pleased, that this specific example appears to have all components consistent with eachother and typicaly Portuguese, instead of an 'international' clumsy cocktail, except for the lock, which is almost obliging.
Pity it doesn't seem to have belonged in a pirate gear, Mark

. But, who knows for sure ? A modest crew man wouldn't afford a luxury brass barreled piece, right

?

20th July 2012, 04:43 PM	#1
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	A rather rustic blunderbuss This blunderbuss surely has one of the most rustic barrels i’ve ever seen; the type of those looking unreal. Certainly hand forged by a village blacksmith, it has signs of having been assembled with ‘rings’. A long shot would be that this was the famous horse shoe cannon construction. The walls are extremely thick; with an extremely irregular bore of circa 18 m/m, its breech section has a 47 m/m diameter. This gives a 15 m/m wall thickness. All components in this blunderbuss appear to be Portuguese (hurray) apart from the lock, which is signed by (Edward) Edge, dated 176?, a period from when Edge and his son engaged in an ordnance contract. Other rustic components are the barrel band, the ramrod (original?) and the counter plate screws, with their huge head, and the butt plate. The trigger guard shows a more refined work, but also most probably of Portuguese origin. The barrel length measures 42 cms. Total gun length 81 cms. With a weight of 5 Kilos (11 pounds), this is undoubtedly an unusually sturdy short blunderbuss. When wondering (as usual) what would be the purpose of this example, one would easily exclude its carrying under the cloak of the servant for the defense of his master while walking across those dangerous village in the dark of the night; too heavy for that. Perhaps it served for domestic defense or stage coach guard. One noteworthy detail is the width of the touch hole, with its 8 m/m opening; with such wall thickness, i hardly digest it was worn by intense use. Any ideas, Gentlemen ? . Attached Images

20th July 2012, 04:44 PM	#2
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	One more . Attached Images

21st July 2012, 10:35 PM	#4
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	Thanks a lot for your knowledgeable input, Simon. Yes, i have found the information on the lock in an index made by J.E. & S.J. Gooding, published by Arms Collecting.com. I later double checked it in some other source out there. The precise contract period seems to have been 1760-1775, which in any case makes no difference in placing this lock under the Ordnance contract production. It is only possible that it was originally mounted in one of several thousand (Brown Bess) muskets which entered Portugal during the Peninsular War … and not only. I have just checked a couple EDGE locks dated 1762. Comparing them with the present example, it appears that some components were replaced, namely the pan, the frizzen and its spring. Looking well to the present pan, i would say its configuration is somehow distinct; the original pan has both a different positioning and bowl shape, which could explain the touch hole off center situation. Go figure whether the enlarged touch hole was an attempt to reach a better matching with the pan; in fact its widening is elliptical, giving it some ‘logic’. Or, as you suggest, to reduce the breach pressure; the barrel is indeed extremely irregular. I wouldn’t go for the hoop construction fears; this barrel is so thick that it would relax any user, i would say. But of course these are guessings from a non connoisseur Thanks again for your precious technical enlightening. P.S. Would you say that this barrel could be any earlier than the lock ... so rustic it is? . Attached Images

20th July 2012, 09:12 PM	#3
gbxfb Member Join Date: Nov 2011 Posts: 11	That's an interesting piece you have there Fernando. I was wondering if the lock might be by Richard Edge (senior and junior) who were working as Board of Ordnance contractors 1757 -1774. Reference:- De Witt Bailey. I've seen quite a few touch holes that appear to have been reamed out rather than gas cut. As a general rule antique arms with a common breach even when in a good state of preservation tend to have touch holes rather larger than modern reproductions especially military pieces. This was possibly to improve ignition reliability at the expense of a reduction in breach pressure. It's possible that a previous owner didn't trust the hoop construction barrel and was trying to reduce breach pressure, although 8mm is excessive by any standard and would reduce the effectiveness of the arm. With this enlarged touch hole the lock will self prime with almost any grade of powder if the frizzen is closed on loading. As a final observation the touch hole is not centered in the pan and its excessive size may just be a crude attempt to reach the ideal sunrise position! I hope this has been of some help. Best regards, Simon.

22nd July 2012, 01:38 PM	#5
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi 'Nando, If the barrel is older than the rest of the gun the barrel tang must have been replaced as it is of characteristic 18th c. form, with the screw entering from the top. I would also say that the buttplate shows the same rural rustic style as the barrel. Conically widenened touch holes are known from Prussian flintlock muskets of the 1730's-80's; their purpose was to not have to apply priming powder to the pan: with the barrel loaded, and the frizzen closed, the musket was just put down on the ground a few times with the buttplate which caused a sufficient amount of powder to exit the touch hole and fill the pan. Best, Michl

22nd July 2012, 05:52 PM	#6
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	Thank you Michl, Brilliant explanation for the touch hole; and a brilliant solution for the priming, too . ... and a defined date for the barrel, assuming the tang is a contemporaneous setup, which i would admit so. Danksche .

22nd July 2012, 06:53 PM	#7
Norman McCormick Member Join Date: Oct 2007 Posts: 1,575	"Light the blue touchpaper and retire"

22nd July 2012, 10:07 PM	#9
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi Norman, I admit having to look up that cool saying: "light the blue touch paper and retire immediately to a safe distance" Best wishes, Michael

7th August 2012, 06:27 AM	#10
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,070	Wow! Sorry I missed this great piece earlier, Fernando! I am NO expert on guns, but several things did jump out at me on this piece. The point, already discussed and pointed out, of the blacksmith quality of this piece (which, BTW, I find appealing rather than deterring) and the second is the wood used to make the stock. It appears to be wormy ash, if I'm correct? This type of wood was popular for pike shafts, particularly boarding pikes. I find it interesting that this piece was constructed so and leads me to suspect that it was perhaps made in one of the Portuguese colonies rather than the homeland? Why else would this blunderbuss on all accounts be as primitive as it is? Hard times and few materials meant rougher construction, as seen in the American colonies during the Revolution, Spanish colonial pieces, etc. Of course, I'd love to say that this could be a pirate piece ( ) and it does strike me as colonial. Bluderbuss were popular sea weapons (used to discourage mutinies), although brass barrels were more typical.

7th August 2012, 01:01 PM	#11
spiral Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Posts: 1,712	Fascinating peace Fernando. Wormy walnut rather than ash to my eye though. Spiral

7th August 2012, 01:24 PM	#12
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,070	I do think you are right, Spiral. Walnut it is. Still, is this a common wood to use for stocks of this period?

7th August 2012, 03:20 PM	#13
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Oh yes, 'Nando, Walnut is the most commonly used wood for private guns throughout the late 17th to the 21st c., while military guns were mostly stocked in beechwood. Best, Michl

7th August 2012, 06:32 PM	#14
fernando Lead Moderator European Armoury Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,642	Thank you Mark, Jonathan and Michl; much obliged for your input. Ironically the previous owner of this gun, despite being a man from the timber trade, didn't look at its stock with a keen eye. When i phoned him this morning, he didn't reject the ash probability but he favoured walnut. He promised to have a professional look to it next time he comes around. I appreciate your thoughts on this gun characteristics Mark. I see what you mean about its rusticity being of colonial provenance, but i would stand by a homeland work. Hard times also occurred over here during this period and blacksmiths in the interior of the country could admittedly used such simplicity methods, inherited from ancient traditions. Local blunderbuss production, by means of salvaged components, was a fashion in those days. I am rather surprised, and pleased, that this specific example appears to have all components consistent with eachother and typicaly Portuguese, instead of an 'international' clumsy cocktail, except for the lock, which is almost obliging. Pity it doesn't seem to have belonged in a pirate gear, Mark . But, who knows for sure ? A modest crew man wouldn't afford a luxury brass barreled piece, right ?