A large 19th century flintlock pistol

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
With regard to the fragility or otherwise of these pistols. The Liege one I have has obviously had the hammer repaired and also many years ago I dry fired one of these with flint in situ of course and the hammer broke in two. Maybe the quality of metalwork varies as I suspect there were many smaller manufactories turning these out by the barrel load.
Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

Many many of pieces came out from Liege; the best ... and the worst. I have had both.



.

[M ELEY]

Originally Posted by Norman McCormick

Hi,
With regard to the fragility or otherwise of these pistols. The Liege one I have has obviously had the hammer repaired and also many years ago I dry fired one of these with flint in situ of course and the hammer broke in two. Maybe the quality of metalwork varies as I suspect there were many smaller manufactories turning these out by the barrel load.
Regards,
Norman.

Interesting you mention this, Norman, going back to this gun's primary function. Private purchase weapons were always made on the cheap, often to be used only in a pinch and often at the cheapest price a merchant captain (or board of directors) could get by with. Thus, on private purchase swords we see surplus m1803's, mismatched blades, blacksmith quality sheet metal guards, etc. It seems likely the guns would also be treated similarly. The swords were rolled out literally in barrels to arm the crew and the pistols taken down from racks to do likewise. These were not 'tenderly handled' gentlemen's pistols. They were practically never used unless attacking an enemy or defending their ship, unlike a military pistol in the field which would see much more action. Mine is extremely sturdy and apart from one time when I pulled the trigger and the hammer fell off(having 'fired' it many times without the flint like a dummy), it has been fine and I just tightened the screw holding the hammer in place.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by M ELEY

Interesting you mention this, Norman, going back to this gun's primary function. Private purchase weapons were always made on the cheap, often to be used only in a pinch and often at the cheapest price a merchant captain (or board of directors) could get by with. Thus, on private purchase swords we see surplus m1803's, mismatched blades, blacksmith quality sheet metal guards, etc. It seems likely the guns would also be treated similarly. The swords were rolled out literally in barrels to arm the crew and the pistols taken down from racks to do likewise. These were not 'tenderly handled' gentlemen's pistols. They were practically never used unless attacking an enemy or defending their ship, unlike a military pistol in the field which would see much more action. Mine is extremely sturdy and apart from one time when I pulled the trigger and the hammer fell off(having 'fired' it many times without the flint like a dummy), it has been fine and I just tightened the screw holding the hammer in place.

Capn, this is the best insight and perspective on the weaponry typically used on vessels yet, and literally describes the nature of the quality issues as well as reasons for it or lack therof. As we have discussed these pistols were often almost a 'one shot' deal, and became more of a bludgeon or projectile after the initial discharge. Obviously such weapons were inexpensive and suited the often limited budget of a vessel for such arms.
The unusual array of edged arms etc. reflects the use of various 'available' components often assembled by their armourers as well, and likely accounts for the anomalies you have often identified and discussed.

[M ELEY]

Hello Jim and thanks for your comments. I was just thinking about even the food that the sailors were subjected to as a reference to the penny-pinching involved in the navies and ships of the era. Pursers were often the most reviled crewmates on a ship, frequently known to skim off the top to pocket the extra money while serving tripe to the sailors! A little off-topic, I know, but the same principles were always in place! Much like today's industries, lowball the bid to get the biggest bang for the buck!

[Norman McCormick]

Hi,
Got a reply from the Belgian Military Museum. Not a Belgian service weapon, possibly a trade pistol and may have been used in the mercantile marine. Didn't get any info re the numerous stamps on these type pistols. Not really anything we didn't already know apart from maybe the definitive statement that it was not a Belgian service weapon. I asked if Belgian long arms of the first part of the 19thC were of the same bore as the pistol i.e. .69 as Dutch and French service issue muskets were and I thought there may have been some crossover with Belgian long arms and this pistol, didn't get a reply to this question. Hope this is of some use re this elusive pistol.
Regards,
Norman.

[M ELEY]

Thank you, Norman, for clarifying some of the questions with these pistols. I always thought it a little strange that a Belgian pistol made by a land-locked country would have a need for a naval pistol, barring foreign legion use. At least we know that these were absolutely for export and probably only used for private purchase via mercantile markets. As a 'private purchase' (i.e. cheaply-made!) and merchant-class, it explains why these guns are plain-Janes and not necessarily perfect. As a maritime collector, this doesn't distract from the interest for me in these types and the places they might have ended up! China Sea trade, clipper ships in Malay waters, mutinies in the South Pacific! Still very exciting stuff!

[Norman McCormick]

Originally Posted by M ELEY

I always thought it a little strange that a Belgian pistol made by a land-locked country would have a need for a naval pistol

AHEM!!!