[model 649]

Morning all, I'm in the midst of helping out a very good friend of our family. I am trying to I.D. and get a guess at an approximate value of what I THINK is a Whitney Mississippi musket.:confused: I've spent a couple days looking at, photographing, and talking about this old relic. My friend has owned this gun about 40 years and he tells me that the ramrod and what appears to be a support or bolster below the nipple boss have been replaced (about 35 years ago). I can readily tell the ramrod is new but the brass piece was done pretty well. It really fits nicely. The wood is intact but seems to have shrunken away from the barrel and furniture. There is no bayonet and I don't see that there was ever a rear sight on the gun. The lock appears to be functional, stiffly, though. I understand the man who made up the ramrod and the brass piece below the nipple boss is no longer with us so I can't talk to him about the gun. I don't know anyone else with knowledge of these anymore so I ask you here. There is presently an offer for the gun but my friend has no idea if it is fair or not. I took a bunch of pictures (hopefully enough) with the hope of finding out more about it and maybe getting a better guess as to what it's worth. We don't think it's worth a ton because as near as we can tell there were some 70,000 made (if we have the type right), and it's not completely original in excellent shape. What do you all think? There are too many pix so I'll link it up here:
http://photobucket.com/albums/v179/HarryPorsche/Whitney%20musket/?sc=1
If you click on the pic it will give you the full-size image.

Thanks for any helpful knowledge,
Josh (and Harvey)

[Jim Watson]

I am not an expert but I have pored over Flayderman for a while.

Your musket looks like a Model 1822 flintlock made by Whitney in 1841, and converted to percussion by the "drum & nipple" method in the early 1850s. EXCEPT for the front band. I cannot find a picture of a Whitney or any other US musket or rifle of the period with that style of single front band. A long double band was standard. Maybe you have a replacement off something else, or it's just that I don't have enough references.

[Jim K]

Things are a little confusing on that model. Flayderman calls it the Model 1822, apparently based on the first contract date, but other writers call it the Model 1816 and make no distinction between the Whitney version and those of other contractors. In any event, it is from the second Whitney contract and is one of the last made under that contract.

What it is not is a Model 1841 "Mississippi" rifle, which was made as a percussion rifle, not a musket.

It is definitely a percussion conversion, probably by one of several private contractors. There may be (or have been) a mark on the drum. It may be rifled; many muskets were rifled at the same time they were converted to percussion.

The front band is, as Jim says, not original; it may be an altered original or from some other gun altogether. In any case, that old musket surely falls into the "if it could only talk" category.

Value is not high, primarily due to the conversion and the condition. I would guesstimate around $550-700 tops. Any proof of exceptional use or ownership would increase the value, of course. Those conversions were used in the Civil War, though they were not front line weapons, so any family papers indicating such use would add to the value.

Jim

[model 649]

Thank you very much, gentlemen. I have kept on digging and the gun is indeed an 1816. It was originally a flintlock which was converted most likely by a civilian. There is some research going on about wether it was used in the Mexican war by a volunteer. This one is actually a smooth-bore musket. Every time I handle it I get a shiver thinking about all the hands, miles and years on it. Turns out it may not be worth much at all, which isn't very surprising considering it's condition and the mismatched front band. The man interested in it may well get it for the cost of shipping it to him:D . My friend is a generous man (sometimes to a fault). I've known few people of his caliber in my life, and thank you again for helping me do this favor for him.
Josh

[Jim K]

I would not assume civilian conversion. When I said "contractors", I meant companies working for the government before or during the Civil War, when many old flintlock muskets were taken out of storage, converted to percussion, and issued to rear area troops, guards, and the like.

That hammer looks a lot like the standard hammer that was used. I did note that it doesn't quite mate with the nipple, but that is probably due to the drum having been moved at some point in time. There are marks on the hammer that look a bit like engraving (at least in the photo) and the military hammer would not be engraved.

Jim

[model 649]

This method of conversion is known as the "French" or "American", using a drum threaded into the former flintlock's flash hole(no bolt), with a percussion nipple threaded into the drum. As far as I can find out, it's civilian, common to guns released by the U.S. as being too old or not in shape for conversion. Apparently most U.S. conversions were to muskets with barrels having walls thick enough for to take rifling. The marks on the hammer do look like decoration, I agree. It may be a Mexican war veteran because of the stamping on the lock and barrel tang. Apparently there weren't any U.S. percussion conversions until after the Mexican war. The "kiss of death" as to the collectable value of this musket is the rust removal done to it apparently with Naval Jelly, which did more harm than good in this case. This has been a great assignment for me (I even learned a few things):p. Thanks, Jim. I am amazed at the amount of info on this stuff. Truly a well-researched vein of history.
Josh