Look closely at the 4th foto. One can see a screw head with a burred slot. The paint is intact on top of the burred metal. The burring action would have produced blank metal at this point.
I therefore deduce that the paint at least is not original. No surprise after a century!
However, the fact that the paint is of later date does not provide decisive evidence about the originality of the metal underneath. It could have been used - repainted - and used again.
If you also come to the conclusion that the paint is not original, then it would not be harmful in the antique-original sense to remove the paint in very small areas to reveal the markings. Although markings are the most obvious features for fakery!
That leaves us with the standard question: does the wear pattern look believable?
As Jim pointed out, we have no objects available for comparison, and the present set of photos leave me with a “could be???” feeling.
More close-ups of the wear points please!