help with proof marks

I recently picked up a Geo Fisher double barrel that has laminated steel barrels and was wondering if anyone has more expertise on proof marks than i do. I was trying to date it.
 

Attachments

  • 1494884167472.jpg
    1494884167472.jpg
    20.5 KB · Views: 103
  • 1494886136518.jpg
    1494886136518.jpg
    20.4 KB · Views: 78
The single oval is the marking for a muzzle loading gun proved with a standard load (black powder) rather than a proof load. This was done with very light guns that could be damaged beyond repair by firing with a regular proof load. The "perron" mark is used on guns that passed black powder proof.

The "R" in that position is probably an inspector's initial (with an asterisk) but could also indicate (with a crown) proof of a rifled barrel. The "L" is the mark for voluntary proof of an unfinished barrel. That would be consistent with the standard load proof of a light gun. (They had the unfinished barrel proved to keep from the expense of finishing a barrel that might well blow.)

Jim
 
There are several lists out trying to date Belgian inspector marks, but they're not very reliable, often spanning several decades. Laminated barrels and black powder only proof dates your gun to 1880 ± 20 years.
 
The 'E' over the 'LG' is a British and Belgian BP rifle proof mark used from 1811-1892. Said to be put on handguns after 1924 and on barrels exported that were not finished.
Until W.W. I, there were hundreds of shops building stuff around Liege for British sellers.
I think the '18' and whatever else is with it(too small) is about the choke. Also seen as the bore diameter in millimeters from 1810 to 1893.
http://www.nramuseum.com/media/940944/proofmarks.pdf
"laminated steel barrels" equals Damascus. Not considered safe to shoot with any ammo. Despite what you seen on the internet.
 
The Liege proof mark "E L G" in an oval is not British and never was. The confusion arose when someone posted an erroneous picture of a page showing Belgian proofs, but with a page break error making it look like they were British.

The Liege proof rules are too lengthy to be quoted here, plus there seem to be errors and contradictions in all lists, even the official ones put out by the Belgian government.

Jim
 
Back
Top