Help us identify this flintlock pistol?

[VictoryRidgeCS]

Recently brought in, with virtually no information, no provenance.

Allegedly 17th Century
Possibly it was originally one of a pair of "dueling pistols"

There are no markings or proof-marks or anything to identify it at all. The wooden case is quite modern, but the pistol does seem to be a legitimate antique and not a reproduction.

All springs work, the sear engages and the trigger releases cleanly. It does spark. The touch-hole is clear. The bore is corroded but seems intact.

Pictures for those interested:

 

[tiriaq]

Most definitely not 17th century; 18th century Maybe 1750-1780.
European. If British there would be proof marks.
While any pistol could be used in a duel, that is not a dueling pistol. Might have been one of a pair.

 

[VictoryRidgeCS]

Most definitely not 17th century; 18th century Maybe 1750-1780.
European. If British there would be proof marks.
While any pistol could be used in a duel, that is not a dueling pistol. Might have been one of a pair.

Thanks Tiriaq.

It is my understanding that many if not most paired pistols of this type were/are incorrectly called dueling pistols, hence the quotation marks. Any help narrowing it down would be most helpful. Belgian? French? Italian? Help?

 

[UpperCanadaRebellion]

Can you take it down form the wooden stock? There may be important proof marks underneath that will help narrow it down.

But barring any markings, you may be down to making educating guesses based on features and styling.

 

[tiriaq]

Thanks Tiriaq.

It is my understanding that many if not most paired pistols of this type were/are incorrectly called dueling pistols, hence the quotation marks. Any help narrowing it down would be most helpful. Belgian? French? Italian? Help?

I don't think Italian.
The lack of a frizzen bridle and the single sear screw behind the c_ock suggest earlier, rather than later. By the later 1700s decent quality guns (which is what this one is) had bridled frizzens and the sear spring screw would be visible.
Getting the barrel out will involve removing the tang screw and two barrel pins. Care needed to avoid damage. There could well be proof marks on the bottom of the barrel.

 

[Shooting Centre]

Reverse Google Image search popped this up:
https://www.icollector.com/Dutch-Fl...about-1725-1750-showing-elaborate-s_i14158814
Trigger detail matches

 

[tiriaq]

Similar, although I would suggest earlier; particularly the sideplate. Rounded lock face, rather than flat. Yours could certainly be Dutch, along with the other possibilities. Holland had quite the firearm export trade, as did what is now Belgium.

 

[VictoryRidgeCS]

Can you take it down form the wooden stock? There may be important proof marks underneath that will help narrow it down.

But barring any markings, you may be down to making educating guesses based on features and styling.

While I certainly can take the barrel off, it is not something I am prepared to do on this particular gun. The pins in the stock are well covered with patina and varnish and who knows what else, I do not want to risk damage to the gun in this way. This is especially not worth it to us since there very well may not be any markings hidden by the wood at all. I will let any future owner take that risk upon himself.

 

[VictoryRidgeCS]

I don't think Italian.
The lack of a frizzen bridle and the single sear screw behind the c_ock suggest earlier, rather than later. By the later 1700s decent quality guns (which is what this one is) had bridled frizzens and the sear spring screw would be visible.
Getting the barrel out will involve removing the tang screw and two barrel pins. Care needed to avoid damage. There could well be proof marks on the bottom of the barrel.

Thanks for all of your input Tiriaq, I really appreciate it. It does definitely seem to be leaning toward Dutch from a further search of style and features, and narrowing the date was important to ensure we are selling this in the correct classification i.e. antique (not restricted).