View Single Post
Old 6th December 2015, 04:56 PM   #15
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,621
Default

WOW!! Great photos and Thread here. Thanks for Posting.

Estcrh: Some comments on the last two gun photos above.

First Photo: Since this gun with both matchlock and flintlock can be dated to at least 1683, does seem to offer evidence of the Ottomans use/experimentation with the miquelet flintlock early on. Almost a transistional piece. It also makes complete sense from a shooters perspective. A warrior could enter a battle with the flintlock primed, at full cock, and ready to fire. But also, the match cord could be lit and ready should the flintlock fail to ignite the priming charge due to a dull flint. The match cord could immediatly be lowered to fire the gun with little extra movement. Also, the flintlock with priming in the pan only (no load in the barrel) would be a quick and efficient way to lite the match cord before loading the barrel. So either or both systems could be used depending on the circumstances. Actually, a very clever system for the period. Super cool gun from both a shooters and historical perspective. Also, I note the ramrod construction for this piece is very similar to early European style matchlocks.

Second Photo: Another really interesting Ottoman gun. Similar to a pre-1650 style English fish tail butt stock. Also note the rear sight. Done in the European style, and positioned just ahead of the breech area like European matchlocks versus the "peep" style rear sight positioned at the rear of the breech as was common with most Ottoman guns.

Rick.
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote