Ethnographic Arms & Armour - View Single Post

Matchlock · 13th December 2009, 11:35 PM

David,

I cannot but point out the well known fact all Oriental guns were built after North European specimens the shapes and features of which kept retaining their old style almost unchanged for hundreds of years. As German portable guns were quite short I can see little logic in the thesis that Turkish copies should have been about double that length.

Still facts (defined as both actually surviving dated guns and closely datable contemporary sources of illustration) are all that matters to me. So I attach some scenes from a series of Brussels tapestries which I posted here earlier. They were made after watercolors painted 'live' during the Tunis campaign of the Emperor Charles V in 1535, and clearly depict snap tinder lock and matchlock arquebuses used by arquebusiers of both Charles V's forces and their North African colleagues.
While the 'modern' European guns are noticeably shorter and stouter (ca. 90 - 100 cm) those of the Turks still reflect a somewhat mor archaic German style. I do admit that the Turkish guns are a bit more delicate and also somewhat longer (ca. 120 cm overall I should say). The reason for this is doubtlessly that they were still copied after the German obsolete style of the 1520's.
This however is a length by far insufficient to astonish Tannhauser as highly unusual - and by no means these guns can they be estimated to measure 180 cm or more.

As long as all we can do is speculate about the actual measure of a 'palm' I suggest we better stick to the facts because they really show us about what measure palm could reasonably mean in this context.

What's even more: Even if palm meant a rather impressive length this could in all probability have affected only the length of the barrels and forestocks of the Turkish guns because human anatomy restricts the length of the buttstock of a portable gun to about 30 cm - thanks, Fernando!

So all we have to do is estimate the length of the Turkish barrels on these tapestries in relation to the length of their buttstocks which we may assume to be about 30 cm. This done, I should say that Turkish guns of the first half to the mid 16th century could not have exceeded an overall length of ca. 100-130 cm, depending on which of the pictures we choose.

Hope this clarifies.

Sorry for mixing up the terminology at one point, though; of course there was not such a thing as Turkish wheel locks.

Most of them were matchlocks until probably the mid 17th century when miquelets and snaphaunces seem to have come into fashion.

Best,
Michael

13th December 2009, 11:35 PM	#7
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	David, I cannot but point out the well known fact all Oriental guns were built after North European specimens the shapes and features of which kept retaining their old style almost unchanged for hundreds of years. As German portable guns were quite short I can see little logic in the thesis that Turkish copies should have been about double that length. Still facts (defined as both actually surviving dated guns and closely datable contemporary sources of illustration) are all that matters to me. So I attach some scenes from a series of Brussels tapestries which I posted here earlier. They were made after watercolors painted 'live' during the Tunis campaign of the Emperor Charles V in 1535, and clearly depict snap tinder lock and matchlock arquebuses used by arquebusiers of both Charles V's forces and their North African colleagues. While the 'modern' European guns are noticeably shorter and stouter (ca. 90 - 100 cm) those of the Turks still reflect a somewhat mor archaic German style. I do admit that the Turkish guns are a bit more delicate and also somewhat longer (ca. 120 cm overall I should say). The reason for this is doubtlessly that they were still copied after the German obsolete style of the 1520's. This however is a length by far insufficient to astonish Tannhauser as highly unusual - and by no means these guns can they be estimated to measure 180 cm or more. As long as all we can do is speculate about the actual measure of a 'palm' I suggest we better stick to the facts because they really show us about what measure palm could reasonably mean in this context. What's even more: Even if palm meant a rather impressive length this could in all probability have affected only the length of the barrels and forestocks of the Turkish guns because human anatomy restricts the length of the buttstock of a portable gun to about 30 cm - thanks, Fernando! So all we have to do is estimate the length of the Turkish barrels on these tapestries in relation to the length of their buttstocks which we may assume to be about 30 cm. This done, I should say that Turkish guns of the first half to the mid 16th century could not have exceeded an overall length of ca. 100-130 cm, depending on which of the pictures we choose. Hope this clarifies. Sorry for mixing up the terminology at one point, though; of course there was not such a thing as Turkish wheel locks. Most of them were matchlocks until probably the mid 17th century when miquelets and snaphaunces seem to have come into fashion. Best, Michael Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 14th December 2009 at 04:43 PM.