Jump to content

D. Nippes marked Percussion Musket 1840


Recommended Posts

Folks,

I am sharing with you a riffle I picked up in Ohio about four years ago.

 

This 69 caliber smooth bore was produced or modified by Daniel Nippes. The lock plate is marked D. Nippes below the hammer :

Mill

Creek

PA

1842

 

The barrel tang is stamped "1841" and the barrel top is marked:

US

JH

P- inside a circle

 

The stock has two burned in initials on the left side "EB and 'WAT". If my memory is correct this is a Captain William Anderson Thornton who was assigned to inspect Nippes contract muskets.

 

There is also the letter "P" stamped on the trigger guard below the rear screw and the metal butt plate is stamped "US"

 

Does anyone know what "EB" stands for?

 

Regards to all,

Jeff

 

post-13283-0-02085300-1454361861.jpg

post-13283-0-02466900-1454361876.jpg

post-13283-0-19621100-1454361892.jpg

post-13283-0-72632700-1454361912.jpg

post-13283-0-62672300-1454361930.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks David!

 

Dunmore1774- the conversion was done by Daniel Nippes of Mill Creek Pa in 1841 for a US Army conversion flintlock to percussion contract.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Folks,

I am sharing with you a riffle I picked up in Ohio about four years ago.

 

This 69 caliber smooth bore was produced or modified by Daniel Nippes. The lock plate is marked D. Nippes below the hammer :

Mill

Creek

PA

1842

 

The barrel tang is stamped "1841" and the barrel top is marked:

US

JH

P- inside a circle

 

The stock has two burned in initials on the left side "EB and 'WAT". If my memory is correct this is a Captain William Anderson Thornton who was assigned to inspect Nippes contract muskets.

 

There is also the letter "P" stamped on the trigger guard below the rear screw and the metal butt plate is stamped "US"

 

Does anyone know what "EB" stands for?

 

Regards to all,

Jeff

 

 

Here is a shot of my Nippes that never made it back to be converted to percussion.

 

post-6022-0-60849900-1454382134.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

The "EB" is probably Elizur Bates. I think the "Waters" name attached to him in a response above is a typo from his inspector's initials appearing on guns made by Waters.

The musket was both made and altered by Nippes. He had two contracts in the late 1840s to alter model 1840 muskets to percussion and mount a Maynard tape priming system that screwed onto the lockplate. It has been removed from this musket but the peculiarly shaped hammer it used is still there.

Nippes still had some 300 muskets he had not finished from a contract for 1840 pattern muskets when he got the contract to do the alterations, so he converted them and the government shipped back another 700 muskets of his make to fulfill the contract. He also received a second contract for a thousand more. Apparently not all the guns sent back to him were his. The conversion turns up on other maker's guns as well. But, that explains why he is working on guns he made and shipped out several years earlier.

I am cribbing most of this from George Moller's "American Military Shoulder Arms."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Steve- thank you very much for the great summary of this Nippes firearm. In your opinion does the low volume produced/modified make this arm more rare and thus increase the value. I would like to leave my family heirs as much information as possible should The Lord call me home.

Kind Regards,

Jeff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Flayderman (9th ed.) puts these Nippes Maynard conversions at $2,000 in good condition and $3,750 in fine condition. The problem is that this one lacks the Maynard tape priming unit, which is what makes them valuable. He puts a Nippes 1840 flintlock that has simply been converted to percussion (not with the Maynard system) at $575 in good and $800 in fine. I would think the musket is much closer to these last numbers. A collector will find it interesting, but will have little hope of ever finding the unit to mount on the gun.

Flayderman's 9th edition is somewhat old, of course, but I think it's probably pretty accurate in today's market. (Others may differ on that.)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 5 years later...

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...