Identify this musket....?
- Thread starter 1898guns
- Start date
Hard to tell with the gothic script but my guess would have been for Joseph Golcher on the lock plate. The proof mark combined with a drum for the nipple makes me think that the barrel has been salvaged from a late 1700s gun (flintlock). On the other hand the S stamp I think was done after 1868 to indicate a serviceable older barrel for public sale. The Golcher (Goulcher) family were lock makers unless I am mistaken and employed both in the UK and in the US. My guess is that the gun itself was made in the US
cheers mooncoon
cheers mooncoon
1803
Thanks for that excellent information and direction, both of you. Without that I would not have understood what I now have.....
I now believe I have a 1803 Harpers Ferry type 1, with a cap conversion. The type 1 was serialized, with 4000 being produced. Later Type 2 had no serial numbers. The stampings are a P with a small eagle and the other is US. The serial is 3080, and has the horizontal marks within the numbers that is characteristic of other known type 1 serialized rifles., plus the font is the same.
This is a truly historic rifle, and I think I will be able to track how it ended up where I found it via family tree starting in the USA. How many serial numbered type 1 1803 Harpers Ferry rifles are left out there, out of the 4,000? Is there a registry?
I still swear there may be an eagle on the Golcher lock - I am still weary about cleaning any of it on any level. I will say to near certainty that this is an otherwise original 1803 with the wood cut in and smoothed out around the new lock, but the rest of the rifle is definately a real 1803 except the cap conversion parts.
I have heard of 1803s that were converted by the Confederates for the civil war, and I have also heard of arsenal upgraded cap and ball 1803s that had been bored to .58, up from .54, to meet 1860s government standards - but I cannot place these scenarios on this rifle as the lock is a Golcher - and I have not measured the bore yet.
Seems to me that all the cap conversions I have seen on the 1803 have retained the original lock plate... but I guess there are a few reasons why someone would need to install a commercial lock, maybe due to breakage or perhaps was sold as a conversion kit - but this Golcher lock is so different from the Harpers lock it makes me wonder what is really going on here being that someone had to work the wood to make it right on the rifle.
I will have the rifle tonight and start looking closer at it......
Here is one for comparison:
http://www.collegehillarsenal.com/shop/product.php?productid=635
And an interesting link to Lewis and Clark using the 1st 1803s, article shows the type 1 stampings etc.
http://asoac.org/bulletins/97_carrick_1803.pdf
Thanks for that excellent information and direction, both of you. Without that I would not have understood what I now have.....
I now believe I have a 1803 Harpers Ferry type 1, with a cap conversion. The type 1 was serialized, with 4000 being produced. Later Type 2 had no serial numbers. The stampings are a P with a small eagle and the other is US. The serial is 3080, and has the horizontal marks within the numbers that is characteristic of other known type 1 serialized rifles., plus the font is the same.
This is a truly historic rifle, and I think I will be able to track how it ended up where I found it via family tree starting in the USA. How many serial numbered type 1 1803 Harpers Ferry rifles are left out there, out of the 4,000? Is there a registry?
I still swear there may be an eagle on the Golcher lock - I am still weary about cleaning any of it on any level. I will say to near certainty that this is an otherwise original 1803 with the wood cut in and smoothed out around the new lock, but the rest of the rifle is definately a real 1803 except the cap conversion parts.
I have heard of 1803s that were converted by the Confederates for the civil war, and I have also heard of arsenal upgraded cap and ball 1803s that had been bored to .58, up from .54, to meet 1860s government standards - but I cannot place these scenarios on this rifle as the lock is a Golcher - and I have not measured the bore yet.
Seems to me that all the cap conversions I have seen on the 1803 have retained the original lock plate... but I guess there are a few reasons why someone would need to install a commercial lock, maybe due to breakage or perhaps was sold as a conversion kit - but this Golcher lock is so different from the Harpers lock it makes me wonder what is really going on here being that someone had to work the wood to make it right on the rifle.
I will have the rifle tonight and start looking closer at it......
Here is one for comparison:
http://www.collegehillarsenal.com/shop/product.php?productid=635
And an interesting link to Lewis and Clark using the 1st 1803s, article shows the type 1 stampings etc.
http://asoac.org/bulletins/97_carrick_1803.pdf
It is not a M1803 rifle. Some parts from a M1803 were used. A gunsmith stocked them up, using the Golcher back action lock. Unless there are useful marks on the stock, it would be next to impossible to identify who assembled the gun. Very common to use salvaged parts to assemble a new gun. I would guess this was done in the 1840s - 1850s, and would be very surprised if the rifle had anything to do with any military use. It is an intereesting rifle. Be very gentle with any cleaning/stabilizing that you do.
OK I will concede that this rifle was built up with 1803 parts. It seems the rest of rifle was built solely out of 1803 parts though, with the exception of the lock and likely the stock.
I will argue that it is possible that this rifle has seen military service in the war of 1812. Although that is up for debate, if this is a parts assembled gun as you suggest, it is undeniable that the barrel itself was in a rifle at one point used during the war of 1812. OK I know that is plain cynical, but the fact is the rifle was located about as close to the battle of Cryslers farm as you can currently get without going underwater (The battle that saved Canada). The man who owned the rifle was an American that fled north with the Loyalists prior to the war. Later, during the war he is noted to have fought against the Americans. Family historians have documented much about the family, as they were residents of islands in the St. Lawrence that are now underwater as well. (now flooded due to the seaway project in the 1950s). I can't wait till I get it home. Thanks so far.
http://www.cryslersfarm.com/battle.htm
I will argue that it is possible that this rifle has seen military service in the war of 1812. Although that is up for debate, if this is a parts assembled gun as you suggest, it is undeniable that the barrel itself was in a rifle at one point used during the war of 1812. OK I know that is plain cynical, but the fact is the rifle was located about as close to the battle of Cryslers farm as you can currently get without going underwater (The battle that saved Canada). The man who owned the rifle was an American that fled north with the Loyalists prior to the war. Later, during the war he is noted to have fought against the Americans. Family historians have documented much about the family, as they were residents of islands in the St. Lawrence that are now underwater as well. (now flooded due to the seaway project in the 1950s). I can't wait till I get it home. Thanks so far.
http://www.cryslersfarm.com/battle.htm
It is entirely possible - even probable - that the rifle from which the parts were salvaged was used during the 1812 war. It might be interesting to research which US units were at Crysler's farm, see if any would have been armed with rifles, as opposed to muskets. The rifle itself was assembled long after the war. How long is the barrel? Any rifling left? Whoever made the rifle in all likelihood had the complete rifle with a stock broken beyond repair. Why the original lock, converted to percussion, wasn't used is anyone's guess.
Back in the '70s I saw a M1803 rifle which had been converted to percussion, with a shortened barrel, which had surfaced in Aylmer, southwest of London ON. Battle of the Thames?
There is no way that a flintlock or any front action stock was ever in that stock.
Back in the '70s I saw a M1803 rifle which had been converted to percussion, with a shortened barrel, which had surfaced in Aylmer, southwest of London ON. Battle of the Thames?
There is no way that a flintlock or any front action stock was ever in that stock.
OK that seems to set it straight. The barrel is 33 inches and the rifle is 49 inches. Those numbers are what they should be for an M1803, but that is not saying much, or is it? A quick inspection shows no rifling but it will need a better look tomorrow. Apparently 1803s have been seen with and without rifling. I am going to check into those units.....
Don't get me wrong - it is a very interesting old rifle. One of the "if only it could talk variety". Whoever did the stockwork was a professional. It is a nicely styled, well made rifle. Who were the gunsmiths who worked in that part of Ontario? Gooding's works might give some names.
Boolitcaster
CGN Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Interesting.
My family also came from the same area and shared the same history as UE Loyalists. One of the islands which was submerged had been named after a family member.
As well, I have a J Miller Rifle with a Golcher lock which was passed down to me. It probably shares the same history as your weapon.
My family also came from the same area and shared the same history as UE Loyalists. One of the islands which was submerged had been named after a family member.
As well, I have a J Miller Rifle with a Golcher lock which was passed down to me. It probably shares the same history as your weapon.
Mooncoon you were certainly on the right track. I got the rifle home today. No markings on the stock, barrel not rifled. The bottom of the barrel has the continuous octagonal all the way around condusive to the type 1 1803. Now that I have it home I will say it spent its life on Sheeks Island and possibly Barnhart Island (now US territory), it belonged to the family Raymond. Boolitcaster: what Island do you speek of, and what would the family name be? I have lots of historical artifacts and info from the "lost villages". I would also like to see your rifle if I could talk you into posting a pic.
I learned a lot here from you folks. I really hate to ask anyone this but seller wanted $300 and I gave him $280, thinking I got a good deal.. Am I in the ballpark or did I hit a home run?
I learned a lot here from you folks. I really hate to ask anyone this but seller wanted $300 and I gave him $280, thinking I got a good deal.. Am I in the ballpark or did I hit a home run?
Boolitcaster
CGN Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
Now that I have it home I will say it spent its life on Sheeks Island and possibly Barnhart Island (now US territory), it belonged to the family Raymond. Boolitcaster: what Island do you speek of, and what would the family name be? I have lots of historical artifacts and info from the "lost villages". I would also like to see your rifle if I could talk you into posting a pic.
It just so happens my last name is Barnhart.
It just so happens my last name is Barnhart.
Boolitcaster
CGN Regular
- Location
- Vancouver Island
I think it is possible that the perch belly stock could have been made by the same gentleman.
My rifle is a plains style halfstock in .45. The barrel is stamped J Miller.
My rifle is a plains style halfstock in .45. The barrel is stamped J Miller.
Locally at least you would be in the ball park considering the condition of the gun
cheers mooncoon
Boolitcaster: Are you pulling my leg, that is an extraordinary coincidence, I am going to message you!
Here is what the NFA museum in VA had to say:
Interesting images - Type 1 M1803 barrels are not that common, especially a later production example like this one. The contract for 4,000 rifles was finally fulfilled in 1807 and this barrel likely was manufactured around then. Harpers Ferry National Historic Site (part of the US National Park Service system - www.nps.org) may be able to more definitively date this barrel. The estimated survival rate for complete M1803 rifles is only about 2% and our staff has seen many more of the Type II rifles that the first variation.
Checking the issues to the American units at the battle may also be possible, but would require a great deal of digging in the US National Archives. Hampton or Wilkinson's period records might reveal the exact makeup of the US unit armaments, but as there were several US infantry regiments represented in part - it might not be as easy to tie this barrel to any specific unit.
Here is what the NFA museum in VA had to say:
Interesting images - Type 1 M1803 barrels are not that common, especially a later production example like this one. The contract for 4,000 rifles was finally fulfilled in 1807 and this barrel likely was manufactured around then. Harpers Ferry National Historic Site (part of the US National Park Service system - www.nps.org) may be able to more definitively date this barrel. The estimated survival rate for complete M1803 rifles is only about 2% and our staff has seen many more of the Type II rifles that the first variation.
Checking the issues to the American units at the battle may also be possible, but would require a great deal of digging in the US National Archives. Hampton or Wilkinson's period records might reveal the exact makeup of the US unit armaments, but as there were several US infantry regiments represented in part - it might not be as easy to tie this barrel to any specific unit.
