15 century arquebuse

Philip · 25th February 2016, 06:44 AM

Would it be expected to find a barrel hook on a gun that looks so small? I thought that these hooks were needed on much larger pieces, to brace the barrel and forestock against a parapet so that heavy recoil wouldn't bother the shooter. If I am mistaken, please advise.

fernando · 25th February 2016, 11:00 AM

But of course, Philip.
Thanks for openig our eyes

.

Marcus den toom · 25th February 2016, 11:52 AM

Hi Philip

it is true that hooked barrels where mostly those of heavier/larger pieces like the haquebuts. There are though also quit a few examples of smaller hooked guns, some of them recieved a hook at a later point in their lifes.

One piece in particular is worth noting, this matchlock arquebuse in the Musée de l'Armée in Paris (museum of arms). They have put a date of 1470-1500s on it but i think that the whole contraption is from at least after the 1500s and the lock has been replaced or at least the serpentine has been along with the original square screws/nails.
This as well could be a total historismus piece with just an original but heavy cleaned barrel (the barrel has been cleaned, but heavy pitting is left, while on the lock and trigger there is far less corrosive damage).

Good pictures is very important and also a good background wich we can find in this ever progressing forum

iskender · 25th February 2016, 06:06 PM

gentlemen, it would be interesting to see the touchhole of this barrel.the way of ignition looks suspicios to me ,i find nothing in the collection of Mr. Michael Trömner, which is very well documented in this forum and till now has been a great help for me,looking that way.the barrel itself and the hook (Haken) ,as seen from the ship, look gothic. i wish a good evening! iskender

Philip · 1st March 2016, 07:24 AM

Hi, Marcus
Thanks for informing me about the appearance of barrel hooks, and for posting the images of the small gun with sear-matchlock in the Musee de l'Armee. I agree with you that a dating of 1470-1500 seems a bit early for something like that. If it had the more primitive serpentine lock, maybe so. Also possible that the barrel may be that early, but the present lock gives it the impression of further on in the 16th cent., as you suggest. The less corroded appearance of the lock (compared with the barrel) also supports the idea that it might well be later.

It can be difficult to assess pieces which have been re-stocked; in the case of early firearms like this, I'm sure you've encountered all too many in museums and collections. You can see a somewhat larger gun with a tiller-stock and a matchlock quite similar to the example you posted in the Historisches Museum, Bern (inv. no. 2206), but that example has a reconstructed stock as well. Of course, wood decays and over the years, owners and curators have had restorers replace the irreparable or totally missing stock with what is thought to be the proper style. It was no doubt done with good intentions, for who wants to look at something incomplete or almost falling apart? But unless the work was carefully documented, we today can have doubts as to whether the component parts were really together since their working life, or may have been associated centuries after-the-fact from disparate pieces in a depot. If the replacement stock is really based on a badly-deteriorated original, do we know if the restorer had enough original left to properly model all the details of his copy?

25th February 2016, 06:44 AM	#1
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	a question Would it be expected to find a barrel hook on a gun that looks so small? I thought that these hooks were needed on much larger pieces, to brace the barrel and forestock against a parapet so that heavy recoil wouldn't bother the shooter. If I am mistaken, please advise.

25th February 2016, 11:52 AM	#3
Marcus den toom Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 540	Hi Philip it is true that hooked barrels where mostly those of heavier/larger pieces like the haquebuts. There are though also quit a few examples of smaller hooked guns, some of them recieved a hook at a later point in their lifes. One piece in particular is worth noting, this matchlock arquebuse in the Musée de l'Armée in Paris (museum of arms). They have put a date of 1470-1500s on it but i think that the whole contraption is from at least after the 1500s and the lock has been replaced or at least the serpentine has been along with the original square screws/nails. This as well could be a total historismus piece with just an original but heavy cleaned barrel (the barrel has been cleaned, but heavy pitting is left, while on the lock and trigger there is far less corrosive damage). Good pictures is very important and also a good background wich we can find in this ever progressing forum Attached Images

25th February 2016, 06:06 PM	#4
iskender Member Join Date: Jan 2016 Posts: 60	Hakenbüchse? gentlemen, it would be interesting to see the touchhole of this barrel.the way of ignition looks suspicios to me ,i find nothing in the collection of Mr. Michael Trömner, which is very well documented in this forum and till now has been a great help for me,looking that way.the barrel itself and the hook (Haken) ,as seen from the ship, look gothic. i wish a good evening! iskender

25th February 2016, 11:00 AM	#2
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	But of course, Philip. Thanks for openig our eyes .

1st March 2016, 07:24 AM	#5
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	Hi, Marcus Thanks for informing me about the appearance of barrel hooks, and for posting the images of the small gun with sear-matchlock in the Musee de l'Armee. I agree with you that a dating of 1470-1500 seems a bit early for something like that. If it had the more primitive serpentine lock, maybe so. Also possible that the barrel may be that early, but the present lock gives it the impression of further on in the 16th cent., as you suggest. The less corroded appearance of the lock (compared with the barrel) also supports the idea that it might well be later. It can be difficult to assess pieces which have been re-stocked; in the case of early firearms like this, I'm sure you've encountered all too many in museums and collections. You can see a somewhat larger gun with a tiller-stock and a matchlock quite similar to the example you posted in the Historisches Museum, Bern (inv. no. 2206), but that example has a reconstructed stock as well. Of course, wood decays and over the years, owners and curators have had restorers replace the irreparable or totally missing stock with what is thought to be the proper style. It was no doubt done with good intentions, for who wants to look at something incomplete or almost falling apart? But unless the work was carefully documented, we today can have doubts as to whether the component parts were really together since their working life, or may have been associated centuries after-the-fact from disparate pieces in a depot. If the replacement stock is really based on a badly-deteriorated original, do we know if the restorer had enough original left to properly model all the details of his copy?