Thomas Bland and Sons hammer shotgun

[Kon]

Hi there, just purchased a Thomas Bland and sons 12g hammergun. Can anybody help with dating the shotgun and find out its model (if any). 

Details

As far as I know the plural (son vs sons) begun at 1936. From the proof marks I can tell that is a pre 1954 shotgun so I narrowed the date between 1936 - 1954 (if I am right). The name T. Bland and sons appears on both sides of the action and on the top of the rib (no address). The serial number is 25697. The Birmingham proof marks on the barrels are the crowned BP NP and BV. Nitro proof also written. Left barrel marked "choke". Both barrels marked with 12c in a rombhus. Also on both barrels an indication of 1 1/8oz found. Right barrel marked bore size 13/1 left barrel marked 12. On the action's flat the is a capital B in a rombhus. 

Thank you!

[holloway]

Sorry can't help with the date but intrigued by the blacking over the stamp marks ,has it been painted as it looks like it is flaking off ?

[Kon]

Unfortunately the previous owner.... (you better sit first before you read it) spray paint it🙄. This is the reason I got it for a bargain price. I will reblue it of course along with a full restoration 

[JohnfromUK]

25697 is higher than the list for Thomas Bland given in Nigel Brown's British Gunmakers, Vol 3. where the highest number is 19066 from 1969, or in Boothroyd's Directory which again suggests 19000 as highest number.

Is there another T. Bland?  Thomas Bland signed guns both T. Bland & Sons - and Thomas Bland and Sons.  Could this be a gun made elsewhere retailed by Bland - (hence the out of series number?) - or does it have another history?

[Kon]

I really don't have a clue! I' ve purchased the gun just today. The only thing I know is that it was bought by the previous owner from an auction in the UK. The proof marks show definitely a Birmingham pre 1954 shotgun. Trying to dig in it's history and find out! 

[JohnfromUK]

Is the serial number repeated on other parts?  On English guns, it is usually on the forend iron, and the trigger guard strap in the hand area, and the barrels, the last often being on the tubes in front of the barrel flats.  Blands records are held by someone in the USA I believe, but I would expect those to align with the data in Brown and Boothroyd since they both quote that as their source.

[ditchman]

That gun looks like a Thomas Wild.....circa 1900-1930........lots of funny stuff was going on in them days......jobbing gunmakers working for Purdey used to build T Wild guns when things were slack............as i said lots of cross work was going about

[JohnfromUK]

18 minutes ago, ditchman said:

That gun looks like a Thomas Wild.....circa 1900-1930........lots of funny stuff was going on in them days......jobbing gunmakers working for Purdey used to build T Wild guns when things were slack............as i said lots of cross work was going about

Thomas Wild were with Rowland Watson from circa 1893.  Again the highest number recorded (circa 22700 in 1995) is too low .......

Thomas Wild was the son-in-law of Benjamin Watson (who founded Rowland Watson) and uncle to Rowland Watson himself.  (data from Nigel Brown: British Gunmakers, Vol 2)

[Kon]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

Is the serial number repeated on other parts?  On English guns, it is usually on the forend iron, and the trigger guard strap in the hand area, and the barrels, the last often being on the tubes in front of the barrel flats.  Blands records are held by someone in the USA I believe, but I would expect those to align with the data in Brown and Boothroyd since they both quote that as their source.

SN is repeated on action flats, barrels and trigger guard (photo 1 collage). I found a similar gun on Bonhams auctions with similar SN (photo 4 screenshot). I have already e mailed the USA guy

[ditchman]

what sets it apart and makes it look qual' is the definition of the shape of the hammers....i like that........

 

would be interesting to "put the history to bed".......

[JohnfromUK]

Maybe you will get some news from the USA.  I cannot explain the discrepancy in the numbering.  I will try and pm you a scan of the page from Brown.  (Not fair to publish someone's book!)

[Kon]

1 hour ago, JohnfromUK said:

Maybe you will get some news from the USA.  I cannot explain the discrepancy in the numbering.  I will try and pm you a scan of the page from Brown.  (Not fair to publish someone's book!)

Got an answer from USA. Woodcock Hill sold Blands name and records, but kindly passed my email to the new owner. So, I am waiting for an answer from him. 

Meanwhile, I keep finding online similar T. Bland shotguns with SN above 19000. Maybe he had other SN for export shotguns? Just wondering. 

[Woodbepigeonshooter]

I found it difficult to find anything about Bland and valuations, the USA connection probably explains it.

I have a Bland hammer gun 30 inch Damascus barrels and 2 and 3/4chambers which I hoped was a pigeon gun but not described in Holts when purchased although a recent trip to my rfd immediately called it a pigeon gun and valued it at £3k if rebrowned the barrels .

seems a lot but prices are all over when looking atGuntrader.

Sorry to high jack thread

 

[Gunman]

I would think this was a "bought in" gun rather than one made by or made for Bland's . It has the look of a pretty basic Birmingham Gun and the fact that the stamp on the action is " doubled "suggest it was stamped after it was hardened .

Post 1904 pre 1925 proof marks .

NB the description as a " sidelock " is wrong .It is not a sidelock in any form , this is purely sellers hype trying to make it sound something it is not .

 

[ditchman]

2 minutes ago, Gunman said:

I would think this was a "bought in" gun rather than one made by or made for Bland's . It has the look of a pretty basic Birmingham Gun and the fact that the stamp on the action is " doubled "suggest it was stamped after it was hardened .

Post 1904 pre 1925 proof marks .

NB the description as a " sidelock " is wrong .It is not a sidelock in any form , this is purely sellers hype trying to make it sound something it is not .

 

it would seem that way............

[Kon]

1 hour ago, Gunman said:

I would think this was a "bought in" gun rather than one made by or made for Bland's . It has the look of a pretty basic Birmingham Gun and the fact that the stamp on the action is " doubled "suggest it was stamped after it was hardened .

Post 1904 pre 1925 proof marks .

NB the description as a " sidelock " is wrong .It is not a sidelock in any form , this is purely sellers hype trying to make it sound something it is not .

 

Proof marks shown aren't in use until 1954?

[London Best]

5 minutes ago, Kon said:

Proof marks shown aren't in use until 1954?

After 1925 the chamber length would have been shown in inches, rather than  just 12C. 

[Kon]

3 hours ago, London Best said:

After 1925 the chamber length would have been shown in inches, rather than  just 12C. 

So, that said, I can narrow the date range between 1904 - 1925. Hence, this brings up another problem. From what I read, at least, the addition of plural on the name (sons instead of son) took place in 1936. 

[JohnfromUK]

41 minutes ago, Kon said:

From what I read, at least, the addition of plural on the name (sons instead of son) took place in 1936. 

I'm not sure where you get that?  Nigel Brown says;

"THOMAS BLAND (Est. 1827), 41 Whittall St., Birmingham 1862 - 66, 41/43 41 Whittall St., 1867-72, THOMAS BLAND & SONS (same address) 1872-C.1922.  Also in London from 1875 & Liverpool in 1880s.  London business moved to USA 1989."

[enfieldspares]

On 03/07/2021 at 18:46, ditchman said:

what sets it apart and makes it look qual' is the definition of the shape of the hammers....i like that........

 

would be interesting to "put the history to bed".......

What he says. Those are quality hammers.

[JohnfromUK]

Kon - I have pm'd you a scan of the Bland entry from "Boothroyd's Directory"

[Kon]

18 minutes ago, JohnfromUK said:

I'm not sure where you get that?  Nigel Brown says;

"THOMAS BLAND (Est. 1827), 41 Whittall St., Birmingham 1862 - 66, 41/43 41 Whittall St., 1867-72, THOMAS BLAND & SONS (same address) 1872-C.1922.  Also in London from 1875 & Liverpool in 1880s.  London business moved to USA 1989."

From Woodcock Hill website 

[JohnfromUK]

I have searched the listings (Guntrader as it is easy to filter by maker) and found 4 guns where (I think) I can reliably read the name as engraved from the photos and also list the serial number.  The lowest s/n was 14661 which if Brown is right is just pre 1900, one 168xx which again seems around 1900-1910 - and the others are around 183xx to 189xx.  These (from Brown) would date to 1940 to 1965.  One is T. Bland & Sons (168xx) - all the others are Thomas Bland & Sons.  None "Son" in the single.  Nothing is proved, but I do wonder if the Son/Sons change is reliable?

Incidentally, Brown lists S (Samuel) Wright and Sons as having been a trade supplier who supplied Thomas Bland (as well as many other well known names).  Wright's records list serial numbers from 1936 (s/n 512) to 1968 (s/n 6052) - so your number doesn't fit there - but it does confirm Bland's were 'buying in' as did very many well known names.

[ditchman]

2 hours ago, JohnfromUK said:

I have searched the listings (Guntrader as it is easy to filter by maker) and found 4 guns where (I think) I can reliably read the name as engraved from the photos and also list the serial number.  The lowest s/n was 14661 which if Brown is right is just pre 1900, one 168xx which again seems around 1900-1910 - and the others are around 183xx to 189xx.  These (from Brown) would date to 1940 to 1965.  One is T. Bland & Sons (168xx) - all the others are Thomas Bland & Sons.  None "Son" in the single.  Nothing is proved, but I do wonder if the Son/Sons change is reliable?

Incidentally, Brown lists S (Samuel) Wright and Sons as having been a trade supplier who supplied Thomas Bland (as well as many other well known names).  Wright's records list serial numbers from 1936 (s/n 512) to 1968 (s/n 6052) - so your number doesn't fit there - but it does confirm Bland's were 'buying in' as did very many well known names.

when you say buying in........does that mean they bought in functional guns ....is it termed "in the white".?.that were then "finished off by the resident gunsmith.........or varying degrees there of ?

[JohnfromUK]

5 minutes ago, ditchman said:

when you say buying in........does that mean they bought in functional guns ....is it termed "in the white".?.that were then "finished off by the resident gunsmith.........or varying degrees there of ?

I can’t answer that. I spotted a reference to Bland in the index, and turning to the page - it was a list of various ‘names’ to whom Wright supplied ‘guns’.  There were a number of well known names including Bland’s.