IMA ordnance items

[Double D]

John,

Do you realize that this is sounding more and more like you have ax to grind, than a warning to the brethern about a possible fake?

[cannonmn]

John,

Do you realize that this is sounding more and more like you have ax
to grind, than a warning to the brethern about a possible fake?

I realize that many years of cannon firing has severely diminished my auditory acuity, but I only hear one grinding wheel grinding and it isn't mine.  I think the folks here are in general a lot more perceptive than some others realize. I recommended a vetting of this object which was immediately rejected by the poster quoted above, and more verbiage was added which I take to be merely pot-stirring and not a serious attempt to get to the bottom line here, which is: Is the device shown an antique or not? If no one else wants to do an in-person, hands-on vetting with experienced folks as I recommended, then we'll need many macro-photos of the outside, all round, and the inside of the disassembled lock.  I think doing some serious analysis of the exact lock in question beats the heck out of the insinuations or allegations, whatever, that seem to be creeping out as this topic progresses, there is no need for that, let's stay on topic and focus on the object, not each other, OK?

[shred]

...and anybody that doesn't believe experts can be fooled or wrong should read the bit in Malcom Gladwell's "Blink" where he describes the Getty Kouros situation....

[Double D]

the Getty Kouros situation....

Great Comparison!

[Ex 49'er]

...and anybody that doesn't believe experts can be fooled or wrong should read the bit in Malcom Gladwell's "Blink" where he describes the Getty Kouros situation....

So, If it walks like a duck, and sounds like a duck and even looks like a duck;
it could be a Chicken, instead!
 
 
Or a cannon!   

[Starr 2011]

 Cannonmn should learn that if you are in a hole it’s best to stop digging.
 
His recent comments regarding the qualifications of Nicolas Hall require correction.
 
Hall joined the staff of the Museum at Tower of London in 1972. Around 1988 he organised the Museum of Artillery at Fort Nelson, where he is now full time Curator of Artillery. He has long been known as a remarkably helpful source to all interested in the history of guns, great and small - including me.
 
It is safe to say Nicolas Hall knows something about ordnance and ordnance artefacts.
 
Starr

[cannonmn]

Good info, thanks.  No, I never stop digging.  Here's his page with some of that and some more.  I wonder if anyone told him he's been quoted in public and exactly what he's on record as saying (or writing?)  Wonder if he'd be happy with his quote under the circumstances?
http://www.royalarmouries.org/what-we-do/research/research-staff/nick-hall

[cannonmn]

Would any of our England-based members be able to get ahold of Nick Hall and ask him to post a brief explanation here on how he knows that cannon lock is authentic?  After having learned more about him I see that he should know what he's talking about and of course I deeply regret ever questioning that.  But I think he could do us a great favour (like that Anglo spelling?) by giving us the details, what to look for, etc.

[Double D]

John,

What  is your point?

IMA has posted a notice on their website that there is some question as to the authenticity of this lock...I am sure in direct response to your multiple posts around the internet about it.

You have made your point.

What more do you want from them?

If you question Nicholas Hall's opinion perhaps you should discuss it with him yourself.

[cannonmn]

Anytime an opportunity presents itself to learn from someone with more knowledge about such obscure subjects as authenticity of cannon flintlocks, we should take advantage of it.  That type of valuable minutiae simply isn't available in any books that I know of, so if we could get some pointers it'd really be great.  Any kind of rules of thumb established over time by folks involved in the field can be very valuable to us especially when trying to evaluate real vs. fake.  The more ya know the better, wouldn't you agree, Doug?

[cannonmn]

I contacted Nick Hall and got two cordial replies, both of which ended in a long "standard" disclaimer stating that the info was for recipient only etc.  Therefore I cannot quote directly here.  However let me say, as a very indirect interepretation, that he has no comment on the lock itself, and would not comment on something he hadn't examined personally.  He regrets his other comments, supposedly quoted here, may have been mis-interpreted.
 
I suggest we leave Nick out of this discussion beginning now, as he's limited in what he can say due to his official position etc., and definitely does not want others quoting him in online discussions.

[cannonmn]

I now think the four locks I bought a few years ago, all from same person, are reproductions.  I didn't pay more than a reproduction would cost for any of them.  He swore they were antiques, and when I posted photos on the forum, some others thought they were also.
 
While I don't know for sure, four indentical cannon flintlocks from the same source has to create some suspicion, especially when priced the same as reproductions.  So my feeling now is that they are reproductions.
 
Does anyone see any significant difference between this lock (one of the four identical) and the IMA lock. aside from the markings?  (if slideshow here requires a password, use "attack.")
 
  http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums50/?action=view&current=301dfa98.pbw

[Cannoneer]

Does anyone see any significant difference between this lock (one of the four identical) and the IMA lock. aside from the markings?  (if slideshow here requires a password, use "attack.")

I saved the IMA lock photos to my photo file, then went back and forth comparing that lock with the lock shown in cannonmn's slideshow; and it appears to me like these locks show a pronounced similarity to each other.

[KABAR2]

Does anyone see any significant difference between this lock (one of the four identical) and the IMA lock. aside from the markings?  (if slideshow here requires a password, use "attack.")

I saved the IMA lock photos to my photo file, then went back and forth comparing that lock with the lock shown in cannonmn's slideshow; and it appears to me like these locks show a pronounced similarity to each other.

Originals and the Reproductions will have a similar appearance, both were hand made and more than likely simular casting tecniques were used,  I would think those being made now are being sand cast from wood models the same way they were originally there may be slight differances in internal finishing the only way to tell would be to disassemble, another item to look at are the screws the modern one will use a current thread design were as the original will be different, a look at the top jaw screw when removed would tell a lot.... also the inner faces of the cock and the top jaw may also give clues...... it might also be possible to tell if things were chemically aged with acids...... 

[Cannoneer]

John,
I thought that you were asking about the general appearance of these possibly questionable locks (IMA’s and your four), and I’d say that it’s reasonable to conclude that there’s a very close resemblance (shape, placement of screws, etc.). It might also be reasonable to conjecture that counterfeits that came from the same source are going to be very similar to each other, perhaps more alike than the original that they were meant to copy; and that begs a question about the original lock. My memory isn’t that clear on past dicussions of your locks. Do you know of existing genuine locks that these supposed reproductions were intended to duplicate?     

[cannonmn]

Here's a link to the olld thread on the repro (?) locks.  Post no. 13 has some drawings of a lock of this type.  http://www.gboreloaded.com/forums/index.php/topic,191655.msg1098963963.html#msg1098963963

[Cannoneer]

Thanks, now I remember those drawings, and I'm sure I have those saved. I was just searching for past threads and came across your video of a bronze gunnade type swivel gun where you also showed a British cannon lock marked (it sounds like) Sherwood: Do you still have that lock? 

[cannonmn]

Do you still have that lock?

yes
 
uh-oh, if I'm reading his mind correctly he's gonna want pictures.

[Cannoneer]

You got it. Does that one look a lot like the four unmarked locks that you bought?

[cannonmn]

The Sherwood-made lock I have is different enough in design from the "fake" that I picked another one, a Russian lock of the same design as the "fake."  Here's a slideshow with them side-by-side.  Shiny lock is the "fake" and has a modern lanyard attached in the photos.  I have no doubt that the Russian lock is authentic.  I guess it was made at Tula Arsenal in 1838.  Gotta go now, see what you can figger out, if anything,  looking at these two.  Use password "attack" for the slideshow.
 
http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/Forums61%20120114/Cannon%20Flintlock%20Comparison/?albumview=slideshow

[cannonmn]

The most obvious difference between the real one and the repro locks is that, at least in all the repros I've seen, the flame path is incomplete.  If you look at the flashpan, there's no hole to conduct the flame of the priming powder into the cannon's vent.

[Cannoneer]

I guess it was made at Tula Arsenal in 1838.  Gotta go now, see what you can figger out, if anything,  looking at these two.  Use password "attack" for the slideshow.

Thanks for the pics. It's not that I thought I could make any discoveries if I could see a known British lock, I'm just curious to see one that's the spitting image of the reproductions. The Russian lock is a near twin, so I assume that just like many nations adopted the artillery form of another, Russia took great inspiration from the design of English locks. Truth be known, I'd also like to save some pictures of the Sherwood cannon lock for my photo file.

[cannonmn]

OK now I see what you mean, when I went into the "lock locker" to look for the Sherwood when you first asked the question, I found one with that mark but it was different, I think a carronade lock with a curved "web" support underneath to fit the breech contour.  But yr latest question made me go back and look at the "flintlock swivel gunade" video and sure 'nuff there's a Sherwood lock that resembles the repro and the Russian lock.  So back to the lock locker to look again...
 
Pix will be forthcoming, perhaps a side-by-side of the Russian and the Sherwood (I'm sure I'll find it,) but may take some time. 

[cannonmn]

Found Mr. Sherwood, hiding in the instrument locker, no idea how he got there but now he's back in the lock locker.  Meanwhile, here's a slideshow of Sherwood vs. Tula, with Sherwood on top when they are over-and-under.  Use password "attack." 
 
The only difference I can see other than marks is that the Sherwood lock has a larger-diameter dome nut than the Tula.  Both these locks are noticeably thicker overall (deeper?) than the fake locks.
 
Someone please tell me the meaning of the stylized "T" (?) stamped into the Sherwood lock above the name "Sherwood."
 
http://s17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/Forums61%20120114/Cannon%20flintlocks%20Sherwood%20vs%20Tula/?albumview=slideshow

[Cannoneer]

Thanks for posting your comparison photos of the British Sherwood and Russian Tula locks.

I know a little about fine art engraving, and I'd say that the crown and GR mark on the IMA lock definitely show aspects of hand done incised lines, as opposed to a simple stamped mark; and for an armory to dedicate that amount of time and added expense to mark cannon locks seems highly unlikely to me.

[Double D]

Hand cut is exactly how it was done.

[IvarForkbeard]

Thanks for posting your comparison photos of the British Sherwood and Russian Tula locks.

I know a little about fine art engraving, and I'd say that the crown and GR mark on the IMA lock definitely show aspects of hand done incised lines, as opposed to a simple stamped mark; and for an armory to dedicate that amount of time and added expense to mark cannon locks seems highly unlikely to me.

We once again come to the "Why use carved stone balls instead of cast iron" argument. 300 years ago it was cheaper to have someone with a deft hand "chase" a mark in than to make hardened steel punches.

[cannonmn]

... and as we go along here, particularly if you tuned in late, we don't want to lose sight of the fact that in England, cannon flintlocks were made by contractors who marked them with their names only.  The government (apparently) then made its mark, whether to indicate ownership or acceptance, by stamping on a very small, stylized letter "T" near the contractor's name.  No authenticed English cannon flintlock is known that has the marks seen on what folks in this discussion are calling "the IMA lock."

[Double D]

... and as we go along here, particularly if you tuned in late, we don't want to lose sight of the fact that in England, cannon flintlocks were made by contractors who marked them with their names only.  The government (apparently) then made its mark, whether to indicate ownership or acceptance, by stamping on a very small, stylized letter "T" near the contractor's name.  No authenticed English cannon flintlock is known that has the marks seen on what folks in this discussion are calling "the IMA lock."

Before you said you had never seen a lock with the marks like the lock IMA is offering.  Now you are saying there is no known authenticated lock with  the marks.  Which is it?  You haven't seen one or there has never been one authenticated.

If one hasn't been authenticated what is your reference to that. I bought the Blackmore book when you referenced it, what book do I have to buy now.  This is getting expensive.

I know for the rifles and other small arms their are number of references to marking and Marking protocol.  A lot of this is covered in the List of Changes.  Although, I believe the LoC covers just the land armies.

[Cannoneer]

DD,
I saw the firearm photo when you first posted it, and I’m not questioning the fact that Britain practiced a policy of placing detailed identifying marks on their firearms (and certainly cannon) in that era. I just doubt that the same effort would be given to marking cannon locks.