![]() |
![]() |
#12 | |
Arms Historian
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Route 66
Posts: 10,281
|
![]() Quote:
Thank you so much for entries from this resource. I must say that while have studied swords most of my life, firearms have always seemed to elude me, so this great discussion is quite a learning curve for me. Of the very few books I have on firearms, this reference by Howard Blackmore has been with me for well over 40 years, and he seems to have been one of the most highly respected firearms authorities (according to most of the arms figures I knew in the years with the Arms & Armour Society in Loondon). What puzzles me is that in his book (1961, attached pages) he shows items 25-30 as view and proof marks of PRIVATE Birmingham proof houses. You will note that #27 is a crown over V. There seem to have been others using a P. n "English Pistols and Revolvers" (J.Nigel George, 1938, p.94), the author notes the 'private proof houses were abolished in 1813, and "....a proof house similar to that of the Gunmakers of London was established at Birmingham. Arms that had undergone proof were now stamped with two marks, each in the form of two crossed sceptres surmounted by a crown, the first marked with the letter V, for viewed, the second with the letters BPC fr Birmingham Proof Co.". As the resource you show begins with 1813 with these markings, it would seem that Mark's pistol must have been viewed by one of the number of private proof houses. During the wars (Napoleonic and 1812) the volume of firearms processed through London and these proof houses was staggering. As previously noted, the constant break downs of flow of parts etc. with contractors was a frustration for makers, and it is easy to imagine that less costly and ready weapons from Liege would be resorted to, especally in the case for outfitting privateers. While most resources seem to focus on 1813+, the records of gun markings seem less abundant in the years prior, as well as remarkably inconsistent. As Mark has shown in the excellent entry from the National Maritime Museum, these sea service pistols were certainly in use early in the century. While the 'HMS Victory' association is surely spurious as they note, they do not dismiss the presence of these Belgian pistols in that period. For me, the evidence points to the period we have been suggesting, 1810-13 for this Belgian Sea Service pistol, and likely use on any privateer vessel for the British during these wars in that time. As for the anchor marking, just as with swords, these are by far not a prerequsite for naval weapons, and in my opinion were likely added privately in either zealous or hubris oriented character on other ranks arms. I cannot imagine why Liege would apply such a mark, as their arms were not intended to serve any particular branch. While these pistols seem to have been regarded as 'sea service', they were used widely by any number of military units in many countries through the century. |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|