The Three Musketeers have swords. But Musket is a gun!

[KING]

Why are they called Musketeers (if they don’t have guns)?

[middleman]

They did.

[KING]

I see. Thanks.

[dropzone]

Because it would be tacky.

Some have asked why the Musketeers in Dumas’ writings did not carry muskets (a logical question). The answer lies in the strict code of ethics and honor that these men lived by. The king’s Musketeers were personal bodyguards, and were held to be the noblest and most renown fighters of their day, and for them to use a firearm instead of a blade would have been unthinkable, leaving the lesser ranks of Musketeers to kill their enemies from a distance.

The muskets of the early 17th century were so inaccurate and slow to load there wasn’t much use for them anywhere, especially in hand-to-hand fighting in town. Plus, while it it okay to kill or just scare off a peasant or Turk with a musket a gentleman would dishonor himself by using it on another gentleman.

[Alessan]

Remember, you never see those guys actually fight in wars. Perhaps the muskets are for the battlefield and the rapiers are for… personal use.

[Miller]

@Alessan

Remember, you never see those guys actually fight in wars. Perhaps the muskets are for the battlefield and the rapiers are for… personal use.

I believe you do see them at the seige of a Huegenot town, and I think they do use muskets in that scene.

However, I may have confused the books with one of the movie adaptations.

[Gorsnak]

@Miller

I believe you do see them at the seige of a Huegenot town, and I think they do use muskets in that scene.

However, I may have confused the books with one of the movie adaptations.

I too am remembering a scene from the book where they’re at a siege firing muskets.

[Dr.Rieux]

Yes, the siege of La Rochelle in the book and (at least) the 1974 movie.

[silenus]

And in the same movie, D’Artagnan is presented with a musket when he is made a musketeer.

They are trained musketmen, supposedly. Aramis says “Make every shot count, gentlemen!”

[Walloon]

The siege of La Rochelle, indeed. Chapter 42:

On reaching the foot of the bastion, there were still more than a dozen or fifteen of the enemy. A last discharge welcomed them, but did not stop them. They leaped into the ditch, and prepared to scale the breach.

“Now, my friends,” said Athos, “finish them at a blow. To the wall! to the wall!”

And the four friends [i.e., the Three Musketeers and D’Artagnan], aided by Grimaud, pushed with the barrels of their muskets an enormous side of the wall, which bent over as if swayed by the wind, and giving way from its base, fell with a horrible crash into the ditch. Then a fearful cry was heard, a cloud of dust mounted toward the sky, and all was over!

[Scissorjack]

Ah, realistic firearms usage at its very best. Dumas would have been right at home in Hollywood.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Case Sensitive

Ah, realistic firearms usage at its very best. Dumas would have been right at home in Hollywood.

Yeah, that book has a lot going for it; among its virtues nowhere resides realism :).

Daniel

[Walloon]

I should have pointed out that the muskets that they use in the siege of La Rochelle are not their own but arms and ammunition that they find at the site.

[Ethilrist]

Oh, so it’s like Doom: You have to kill the level boss before you can take his musket.

[JThunder]

I think the more important question is “Why don’t the Mouseketeers have mousekets?”

[Master_Wang-Ka]

Note also that the Musketeers – both in the book and the movies – were not rich. As I recall, one of them – Aramis, I think – had a lackey, a servant, whom he did not actually PAY.

The issue of arms and armament gets pretty murky, historically. Musketeers were considered minor nobility, persons of class and rank. Such persons were assumed to be able to provide their own arms and armament (hell, a knight had to provide his own horse). In point of fact, though, I don’t remember whether or not the French musketeers were provided with musketry or whether they had to scavenge their own.

The other thing we remember the Three Musketeers for is swashbuckling. Duels at the time COULD be fought with pistols – muskets being a bit cumbersome for such tasks – but a gentleman was expected to own a sword and know how to use it in that time period. ANY idiot could point and fire a pistol, but only a person of quality would have any skill with swords… and one does not duel with one below one’s social station; it belittles one.

[dropzone]

@Case Sensitive

Ah, realistic firearms usage at its very best. Dumas would have been right at home in Hollywood.

Considering their bulk, accuracy, and reload times muskets ca-1625 were probably more useful as battering rams.

[Left_Hand_of_Dorkness]

@Master Wang-Ka

Note also that the Musketeers – both in the book and the movies – were not rich. As I recall, one of them – Aramis, I think – had a lackey, a servant, whom he did not actually PAY.

I think they all had servants. Porthos was the most wealth-flaunting of them all, but he’s only rich on the outside, poor in fact, which forms the basis for a running gag near the beginning of the book.

In the book, the musketeers are pretty much charming thugs; their behavior is appalling, violent and thieving and bullying. I enjoyed the book, but I read it as a satire in parts.

Daniel