|  22nd December 2014, 06:20 AM | #10 | 
	| (deceased) 
				 
				Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking 
					Posts: 4,310
				      | 
				  
 
			
			
	Quote: 
	
		| 
					Originally Posted by Marcus den toom
					
				 Thank you Michl, but i still have doubts about the interpretation of this mark. It might just be my perspective beeing a bit off.. but i can see either a crude 1592 (especially the 5 and 9 are vague) or ISE with the E not in good shape. 
     The question is if you should read this as other mark SUL? The SUL are stamped within a square and are raised, the ISE is in the same manner. 1592 would be stamped without a boarder/sqaure around it and stamped inwards.
      
     I have no knowledge (beeing 0-5%) on how stamps where made in those days.. i do know it is more common for dates to be stamped inwards without a boarder to highlight them.  
     Tomorrow there will be a good day to learn a new fact on firearms i feel... Michl, fire away     
     ps is that musket you fired/flashed by any chance the Montecuccoli?       |  Good morning, Marcus,
 
 The thing about that spurious date 1591 is dead easy: it was done very dilettantely by some fool who neither knew what cyphers looked like 400 years ago nor could he strike them with a sure hand; all that obviously happened only in the 20th century.
 
 Morten, leave that wheellock carbine of your friend's alone. It is complete rubbish: the lock, stock and trigger guard all are modern replicas ; such wheellocks were built in large numbers in Spainfrom the 1970's-1980's:
 
  
 One certain Spanish guy still produces them.
 
 The barrel of the specimen on your photos is just some old flintlock barrel.
 
 
 Best,
 Michl
 
				 Last edited by Matchlock; 22nd December 2014 at 07:26 AM.
 | 
	|   |   |