|
01-30-2022, 09:22 PM | #3 | ||||||
|
Hi Bob,
It's unquestionably a large, deeply struck, S under a crown. I would post a photo of it if I could. There are 2 deeply struck symbols about 1 inch up from the barrel flats that appear similar to the ones on Mr. Brunner's Rudd gun. |
||||||
01-30-2022, 10:30 PM | #4 | ||||||
|
Yeah, the stamp doesn't look like a BP, but I'm pretty sure it is. The marks on the Rudd as well. Take a look at this image. The first proof mark in the third row from the top is the Birmingham black powder provisional proof. It looks more like an S when deeply struck. If you take a look at pictures of barrel flats from that time period on the net you'll see some that give a clearer image of the stamp. I could be wrong though. I've got 2-3 dozen British guns from that time period with those marks. The BP provisional proofs on some are clear, and others look like an S or are pretty much unreadable.
|
||||||
01-30-2022, 11:28 PM | #5 | ||||||
|
Here is a better chart with the date ranges on it. On shotguns Birmingham used the second in the string of marks as the provisional black powder proof. I don't recall seeing that mark anywhere other than the first inch or so of the barrels.
edit: Not that it should matter on your British gun, but the French (St. Etienne) black powder superior definitive proof mark, the German shotgun proof mark, and the Danish proof on Sjogren shotguns were all crown over S at different times. |
||||||
01-31-2022, 08:02 AM | #6 | ||||||
|
It seems we have a mystery here. The mark does not match up to any of the proof marks in the above chart. In fact, the "S" is about the same size as the crown, looking similar to the size ratio of the 1904-1925 marks.
|
||||||
|
|