Early 17th Century Scandinavian Gun Lock

[rickystl]

Per Philip's mention, an early 17th Century Swedish snaplaoc, and a much later Baltic lock just for comparison.

Rick

[Philip]

Originally Posted by rickystl

Per Philip's mention, an early 17th Century Swedish snaplaoc, and a much later Baltic lock just for comparison.

Rick

Thanks for the pics. The Swedish lock is a snaphaunce, having a separate pan cover and frizzen. Looks like the pan cover is manually operated, isn't it? I don't see a pushrod linking it to the tumbler. A contrast to the more-developed automatic-opening systems (with internal mainsprings acting on tumblers) see on Scottish and Dutch snaphaunces (and thus on later Moroccan locks) or on the Central Italian alla fiorentina locks.

Appears that we are on different pages re the "Baltic lock". You show an interesting and rare early transition to the mature form -- is this a shooter's replica made by The Rifle Shoppe? ' Wonder who has the original prototype -- rare! Notice an essentially snaphaunce system (separate frizzen and pan cover), with external mainspring. And this lock has a pivoting matchlock style pan cover, not a sliding wheellock or snaphaunce type. A very interesting thing -- these Scandinavian locks came from a culture on the fringe of Europe, and appeared right when firearms technology hit the "cusp of change" several times within a short historical span.

What arms writers refer to as the Baltic lock is shown below ( from Robert Held's The Age of Firearms ,1957, p 83). It has an internal mainspring and tumbler much like that of the English flintlock, and a two-part sear with both arms activated by one V-spring which is identical to that of the "Roman" miquelet. Also, note that the lock illustrated here (and most of the originals in published photos) show the rotating frizzen secured by the friction of screw pressure, not by the small V-spring that your lock has.

Back to Fernando K's hypothesis that your lock is an historicism, I can't help but wonder why a reproducer of a later time would go through the trouble to design and make such an innovative feature such as that frizzen retaining system if he was mainly focused on copying something old, especially during Victorian times when the primary purpose of these reproductions was decorative.

The presence of slag inclusions in the lockplate metal is encouraging. Admittedly, the piece looks as though it had been strenuously cleaned in the past. Coming out of a source in Germany, it might be understandable. Back in college on a visit to Nürnberg, I was struck by the shininess of the breastplates on display in the armor hall of the Germanisches Nationalmuseum -- those things were bright! I hope the patina was retained on the posterior surfaces.

[Fernando K]

Hello

Regarding the lock presented by Rick, and according to the principle of parsimony, I must say that I think that it is not even a Victorian copy, but a modern one, as if someone had copied something, and at some point made some innovations. Thus, the ear that fixes the spring on the piece that makes the cover-pan, held by a pin, instead of a screw, and which interferes with the bait powder. In turn, the guarantor has been taken from older weapons, as we can see in some primitive wheel weapons

Affectionately

[Philip]

Originally Posted by Fernando K

Hello

Thus, the ear that fixes the spring on the piece that makes the cover-pan, held by a pin, instead of a screw, and which interferes with the bait powder. In turn, the guarantor has been taken from older weapons, as we can see in some primitive wheel weapons

Affectionately

Without seeing the component fully stripped down in full view, I can't rule out the possibility of it being a later replacement and/or alteration. However, from a functional standpoint, I don't think that the ear should interfere that much since the pan is fairly large and the ear and its pin doesn't take that much space. Also, the flint knocks the frizzen and pan assembly out of the way when striking sparks so the burning priming powder should have direct access to the touchhole at the moment of ignition.

What do you mean by "guarantor"? What is the original Spanish term, maybe I can look it up in my Spanish and Portuguese references so I know what you are trying to discuss.

[Fernando K]

Hello

Of course, I was not referring to the timing of the shot, but to the act of priming. The closure of the cover-pan is made on the bait powder, and the ear falls on the bait, preventing its complete closure.

The translator has translated the word "f i a d o r" as "guarantor"

As I have argued, it seems to me that it is a modern replica, and with this I end my comment. I don't want to be the one with the last word .....

[corrado26]

Looking at the absolutely flawless metal of the locks I think that Fernado K's statement that these are modern replicas is correct.

[rickystl]

Hi Philip

The Swedish lock is an exact replica made from castings from the original lock as the prototype. I show this only for comparison purposes. The lock is now mounted to an exact replica of the complete original gun from a private collection that was dated to the early 1600's. As you mentioned, it operates like a snaphaunce, but the pan cover must be manually moved to expose the priming powder. Likely a carry over from the matchlock.

Baltic Locks: Agreed. I'm also more familiar with the type you describe. The one I posted here is a mystery. I've never been able to trace the owner/maker. And it's the only photo I have. Found it in an obscure place having nothing to do with firearms. The matchlock pivoting style pan cover is interesting. I suspect it's not that old due to the screw head styles and the lack of lock plate screws. Don't know without further photos. Wish I owned it in any case. LOL

About the lock on the OP: The small nub and pin on the frizzen plate would in fact interfere with the priming powder, not allowing the frizzen to fully close - assuming you filled the entire pan with powder. But that was not usually done since it would often act to smother the vent hole of the barrel directing the "flash" upward instead of inward towards the main charge in the barrel. Thus iqnighting the priming powder, but not the main charge in the barrel. I know this to be true from my own shooting experience. For optimum shooting the pan would contain just a small pinch of powder. So in that instance, the small nub and pin would not interfere.
Anyway, the more I look at this lock, I am beginning to agree with Fernando K and Corado. As Philip mentions, it certainly not a Victorian era copy. Too much quality and expertise for just decoration. On the other hand, the lack of a trigger mechanism makes me think this lock was simply a styling exercise from some very skilled maker maybe 100 years ago. Hmmm. The threads on the screws are very well done. More like early 19th Century versus early 17th Century. The lock is definitely a forging, not a casting. While replica made not be the best term, it's probably good for discussion. In any case, it makes a novel addition to my lock collection. And I want to thank you all for your inputs. Here is an interesting quotation:

"According to M.L.Brown the first evidence of snaplocks was in the 1540's and in 1556 they were refitting German matchlock arquebuses to take them"

I'll start a new Thread on another lock I won at the same auction.

Rick

[Philip]

Originally Posted by corrado26

Looking at the absolutely flawless metal of the locks I think that Fernado K's statement that these are modern replicas is correct.

Two are definitely modern as noted below by Rick, the third is questionable per present discussion.