One of the earliest firearms was a musket called a “matchlock”. It was a shoulder-mounted gun, which was fired by applying a lighted “match” to the powder in the pan.
These things must have been damn near impossible to use! How did you avoid setting off the powder when relaoding?
And what did you do if it rained?
A good crossbow would have been a lot more reliable-methinks!
Well, I’m sure it occasionally discharged while reloading, but I think it would be rare. After loading the charge and projectile, one would then add powder to the pan, making a connection (think fuse) between the powder in the barrel and the powder in the pan.
As for rain, well… you’re pretty much screwed. Wet powder won’t burn. But, in the end, the rationale that a semi-reliable firearm is better than more primitive weapons won out.
You’re in trouble with any powder-primed gun, be in matchlock or flintlock, when it rains, or if there’s spray. Read Cecil scott Forester’s Commodore Hornblower, where the good Commodore muses on guns aboard ship, upon finding that his wife has bought him a present of a pair of new pistols with sealed copper percussion caps. Their great advantage is that they’ll fire in rain or cleam, spray or not. In a shipboard melee, you could count on a misfire or two, and in heavy seas it would be remarkable if even one fired.
Or a longbow, which the English favored. Although requiring more training, the longbow’s rate of fire is much greater.
If you care for military science fiction, Baen Books publishes a couple of interesting series dealing the give-and-take decisions of which modern weapons to implement with limited techmnology.
In the “Assiti shards” series, a modern small town is hurled back to early 1600’s Germany and has to deal with the 30 years’ war.
David Weber/John Ringo (“March Upcountry”) tell about a future Marine company who crashed on a wet world and problems with gunpowder technology. All good reads, if you’re into that sort of thing.
I especially like Baen books (shameless plug) because they give away older ebooks free, and they have a lot of ebooks.
What the OP description omits is that on matchlocks, the lit match was lowered into the pan not by hand, but by a short lever known as a serpentine. By pulling a lever on the bottom of the gun (which eventually developed into what would be recognizable as a modern trigger), the match would touch off the priming charge in the pan, thus igniting the propellant charge in the barrel.
Prior to the development of the snaplock, firearms did have the problems that the OP asks about. The use of a priming pan meant that rain was catastrophic, and the weapon was not very maneuverable once loaded (at least as far as cavorting about on the battlefield as we see with modern weapons goes). It also meant that a firearm could not be kept in a ready-to-fire state, since the priming charge would undoubtedly get damp or knocked out of the pan.
Apparently they weren’t so good in the rain either: http://www.mazirian.com/balistarius/moments/greatMomentsInCrossbowHistory.html
1346: The Battle of Crécy
“The crossbows at issue were most likely of composite construction and, it has been shown, susceptible to dampness. Heavy rain the night before has been blamed for the failure of the Genoese crossbows”
Percussion cap represented a great advance in reliability, but even then, misfires were not unheard of, and they were still susceptible to dampness. In one well known incident, somebody attempted to assassinate President Jackson, attempting to fire two percussion cap pistols at him at close range before he was restrained (they also restrained Jackson, who was about to beat the crap out of the guy with his cane). Both pistols misfired, which was partially attributed to the would-be assassin having chosen a model of pistol which was infamous for being unreliable in damp conditions.
And longbows were no good in hot weather. What medieval armies did if it was hot and rainy at the same time is anybody’s guess.
Was not the “match” a piece of burning cord that was lit and kept smoldering before you fired the gun?
Why not?
Yes. A very slow burning fuse-like wick, held in place by what eventually came to be the hammer of a gun. I think you had to loosen clamps and move the wick if it burns too short.
If I recall, the advantage of having a gun, even one as tempermental as matchlocks, was that they penetrated body armor better than most stuff, at longer ranges (when they worked). Spelled the end of the mounted Knight.
Longbows were made of yew wood, because it is capable of storing considerably more strain energy than other woods and could therefore impart more force to the arrow. However, this property of yew wood degrades severely in hot weather - a yew bow cannot be used reliably above about 30 deg. Celsius, which didn’t matter in England or northern France but was a problem in the Mediterranean climate.
Most English longbows were made from Spanish yew (the yew tree grows abundantly all over the Mediterranean countries). The Spanish were happy to export yew wood to England since they knew the longbows made from it would not be used against them, and they couldn’t use it themselves.
This is why I’m a member of these boards!
Are you a historian, or is there any particular reason why you know this? What do tropical bowhunters use?
No, just an electronics engineer, but with an interest in all manner of useless information. I got this particular item out of a textbook on materials science, so I’m happy with its accuracy. It also said that composite bows made from tendon and horn were used in the Mediterranean and the Middle East. No idea what they use in the tropics, though.
As an aside, I recall see a (silent) film clip, of Imperial Chinese Army troops (ca. 1890), dressed in their medieval-era uniforms, firing CROSSBOWS at Japanese troops! probably the poor Chinese were slaughtered.
The procedure for matchlocks that I have seen was that the slowmatch (cord impregnated with nitre) was taken off the gun prior to loading and hung on a tall “fork” while the powder was handled. After loading and priming, the flash pan was closed to prevent accidental ignition and the slowmatch was then put into the serpentine. Then the flash pan was opened again and the musketeer used the fork to rest his gun for aiming.
The disadvantages of this procedure were probably just as obvious at the time as they are now. Flintlocks and wheelocks were just plain faster as well as safer.
Here’s a pointless tangential anecdote:
The relative safety of the flintlock meant that in the british army, the men who guarded the artillery powder wagons were some of the first to get them. The term used back then for the flintlock was the french “Fusil.” So the guys who got them were called Fusiliers.
Nice thread.
Anybody know where to find a (non-firing) matchlock replica?
I googled “matchlock replicas”. Got lots of hits.
http://www.osvaldogatto.com.ar/english/catalogo_ficha.php?item=93
Nice pictures in link. Price = “contact us”. (IOW, if you have to ask, you can’t afford it? heh)
It is difficult to find a replica that wouldn’t fire, but easy to find one’s that do.
http://www.historicenterprises.com/cart.php?m=product_list&c=24
Prices range from ~600-1200 for replicas and way over that for actual historic relics.