I know nothing about Russian rifles...but. I do know that the M1854 Austrian jaeger rifle and pistol originally had the rammer carried separately . The Jaeger bbl. was 28 inches long, octagonal and turned round the last 5 inches or so to receive the bayonet. Bbl held by wedges like yours. Generally a 29 inch bbl means cut down non military issue. But I think you may have the real deal. In what appears to be outstanding condition as well. A better pic of the muzzle end may tell the picture. Jaeger

 

Excellent. Very cool. Imagine if this one could speak (and if you had someone there to translate )...

Wonder if this saw service in the Crimean War....

 

Interesting. I'll try and take a closer picture of the end of the barrel. Like I mentioned, with the barrel profile changing I don't think it was cut down. It also has a "key" on the underside of the barrel tip that looks like it would hold a bayonet. It is unusual, especially for a military rifle , not to have the ramrod attached. I did some more reading and Tula arms produced sporting rifles as well, so perhaps this in not military? This rifle has a cool back story. It was found by a gentleman in the 1920's in an abandoned coal mine that shut down in the late 1860's in Pleasanton CA. It was in the gentleman's family for 100 years till I bought it from him. So, I'll post a picture and thanks for the info.

 

additonal pictures and questions

Here's a picture of the end of the barrel. Another questions since, I know very little about muskets. There is a brass cover on the stock that has a cavity underneath, about 3" long x 1" deep x 1' wide. What would be kept in there?

 

There is no doubt that that barrel was made to receive a bayonet. A patchbox like that in the US service would hold a take down tool/nipple wrench and possibly a wiper,and or ball puller, spare cone "nipple". Am not familiar with Russian nose caps but rifles of Austria and the German states had a nose cap rather than a front band. Calibers of those would run around .71 . These rifles would not have been issued to the rank and file but rather to elite Jaeger "hunter" units and maybe NCO's . If the rifle is in good condition are you going to shoot it? I would. I'm fixin to shoot mine. Let us see the rear site please. Can you tell if it ever had sling swivels? Jaeger.

 

Looks like a put-together gun by utilizing a modified flint lock from an older gun. Definitely not a Russian military gun.The first military percussion gun in Russia was the Littich (Liege) rifle model 1843, which had a back lock. The models 1845, 46, 47... 1858 also had back locks.

 

It appears to be a .60-70 ish caliber. Thanks for info about patchbox tools. As far as firing it, I would like to. . . the hammer seems to be a little misaligned with the nipple and there is a small chip in the hammer. Looks like it has been that way for years. I am wondering how hard it would be to have the hammer realigned or bent back into shape. I could take it to a gunsmith in the area but I am wondering if its better to leave it untouched. I am also cheap and wondering if I could do it myself if I was careful. I include a picture of the hammer. It would be awesome to shoot it, even without a projectile and just with black powder charge. Yes it has a hole thru stock near front grip area and one hole into butt like it would take a swivel in back and a pin thru the front for a sling. It appears that maybe the rear site is missing. I included a picture as well.

 

Thanks for posting. Here is some more info that might help identify this particular musket. on the bottom brass area behind the trigger guard is stamped "SAK 156" as best I can read. Most likely Crylliac lettering. On the brass part opposite side of musket from hammer/lock is stamped "156 1849 SAK". On the brass butt plate there is an eagle stamped into the brass with what looks like an "H" in it. At the back of the barrel where it meets the stock, it is stamped 1842. Maybe these additional marks will help out? This musket looks similar to several pictures I have seen of a Tula M1842 with the obvious differences. One other mark is behind where the barrel ends and the shoulder part is, its broken off but it looks like an oval about 1"long by 1/2" long was inlaid into the stock. There is a small piece of it remaining. I'l try and post some more pictures later. Thanks for your help. Other than the "Tula Arms book" I have had very little luck finding anything out about tula muskets of this area.

 

I've included several pictures of the markings , hoping that might make things more clear. Also included a pictures of a Tula M1842 that I found. Its definitely different but similar in several features.

 

99, Some civilian hunting arms of the period were made to take a bayonet. It certainly has a military look to it. I am afraid I have nothing more to add. As to further info on gunsmithing, shooting it, or further I.D. I would go to the NSSA web page and go to forums. There are thousands of members, all shooters and much knowledge on fire arms of the period. Seeing you have no rear site you might be better off selling it and buying a complete rig. An original rear sight would be unobtainium. I sold an original rear site for an Austrian M1854 jaegerstutzen for $200 several years ago. Bought a repro for $100. The last one he had. Made in a small run of ten by a retired NSSA machinist. As most of these had a zero of 200 yards,meters or schritts they shoot so high at 50 and 100 yards that a higher front site must be installed. I have had to due this to every rifle rifle or rifle musket I have ever owned . A labor of love to be sure.

 

Thanks for your comments. I will check out the NSSA page for more info. I haven't tried there yet. I agree that it looks military but perhaps it is civilian or a modified musket as was suggested. I bought the rifle for only $250 on a whim. . . couldn't let a piece of history like that pass me by. I love learning about the history and its story. I am torn between restoring to firing condition or just leaving it as it is. It would be fun to fire but as you mentioned it would probably need to be worked on and I may be better off buying a reproduction period rifle to fire. I have no idea what the musket is worth, I figure it was worth $250 to me so that's the value in my mind. Value is in the eye of the buyer.. . I'll check out the NSSA page. thanks

 

99, Be advised the NSSA are holding there national matches this weekend so you may not get much response before they get home tomorrow. Price wise I think you did well. I would have bought. Good luck, Jaeger.

 

Nice first I've seen!

 

It would appear that this musket is rare or as was before mentioned a put together musket of various parts. With the markings and matching serial numbers on various parts, I am inclined to believe that it was indeed a musket assembled at the Tula arms factory but perhaps a custom model. From reading the "Fine arms from Tula" book that was published in the 1970's, it mentioned that many of the Tula gunsmiths did side work/custom firearms on the side and were permitted to use the Tula factory and the pieces were stamped Tula. This piece doesn't have the fancy stuff of the high end custom firearms but perhaps it was a less expensive utility musket. I have been surprised how little I have been able to find out about this musket. I have posted on quite a few forums and pieced together some info but not as much as I hoped. Probably help if I spoke Russian, I bet there are plenty of folks over there who could shed some light on my mystery So. . . I appreciate everyone's help and if anyone has any other comments or info . . .

 

A matter of terminology: In this period, a musket was specifically a stoutly-built long-barrelled large-caliber smooth-bored bayonet handle for general use by infantry. Civilian smoothbores were of various sorts and descriptions with various names other than "musket". Rifles were just that - rifled rather than smoothbore and again in various sorts. The military rifle was a notably different class of weapon from the musket, rifled rather than smoothbore, generally shorter, often but not universally of a smaller caliber than the muskets, for use by specialist troops often with different designations - riflemen, Jaegers, tirailleurs, etc., and possibly by light infantry. In countries that used barrel bands rather than pins or wedges to hold the barrel, the musket would often have 3 bands while the rifle with its shorter barrel would often have only 2. The best-known examples might be the US M.1796-M.1842 muskets vs. the M.1841 "Mississippi" rifles, or British Brown Bess muskets vs. the Baker and Brunswick rifles or the slightly later P.1853 rifle-musket vs the P.1856 or P.1858 rifles.

With an almost-full-length-octagon barrel, this weapon was almost certainly not a cut-down a musket of any sort - I've NEVER seen an octagon-barrelled musket, and it would have been much too heavy for general service with a musket-length barrel - and the French-style under-the-barrel bayonet lug plus close similarity to other known military rifles strongly suggest that that is exactly what this rifle was: a military-issue rifle, by appearance, quite possibly originally flintlock later converted to percussion. I don't know much about Imperial Russian small arms except that they were often French-influenced (as were many other European countries' arms) so I don't know if this was a standard model, limited issue, or experimental, but it just screams "European military rifle" to me.

Regards,
Joel

 

I agree that it has a military "feel" but I haven't been able to match it with any known ( by known, I mean any that I could find) Russian military arms of the period. The lack of ramrod holder on the rifle is puzzling, especially for a military rifled musket of the period. I think it would be quite rare not to have this, but the stock obviously hasn't been modified as far as I can tell. The other difference is that all the other Russian military rifles of the period that I have seen were "banded" whereas this one is "pinned or wedged". So the mystery continues but I feel like I have learned more about it than I previously knew and some of my hunches seem to be confirmed. Thanks for your comments and insight.

 

just bought EXACTLY the same musket - so it is definitely not a parts gun.
Will post pics shortly and will try to go on russian "gunboards" website to get more info