From what I know, this firearm seems to be the prototype of any such rifle. And to my knowledge these firearms were extremely inaccurate but were highly regarded as they had a greater firing rate compared to any such crossbow or bow. But, being such an antique it seems to be of interest- does anyone know where one can be found for purchase, like from a reliable source. I wouldn't want one blowing up in my face to say the least!
And another question- where did they originate? I have a knowledge of explosives coming from Asia, and Francis Bacon picked up on the subject in the 1200's I believe, but I have seen pictures of arquebus from Japan to western europe.
| Garrett Hazen wrote: |
| From what I know, this firearm seems to be the prototype of any such rifle. And to my knowledge these firearms were extremely inaccurate but were highly regarded as they had a greater firing rate compared to any such crossbow or bow. But, being such an antique it seems to be of interest- does anyone know where one can be found for purchase, like from a reliable source. I wouldn't want one blowing up in my face to say the least!
And another question- where did they originate? I have a knowledge of explosives coming from Asia, and Francis Bacon picked up on the subject in the 1200's I believe, but I have seen pictures of arquebus from Japan to western europe. |
You could look here: http://www.musketmart.com/
Most on this page are later muskets but a custom order could be made to conform to very early period archebus: An early 15th century one would differ from a mid-15th century or 16th century.
Matchlock continued in use until the late 17th century.
Accuracy might be " variable " and not as bad as you might be thinking if an archebus had a strait bore and used a closely fitting lead ball: Not that far from one might expect from a modern shotgun using slugs.
Later military muskets used in the 18th century used looser fitting " undersized ball " to make loading easier and faster for volley fire. Earlier periods put more emphasis on reasonable accuracy.
A crowbow might have a similar firing rate, as in, slow ! But a bow is much faster in rate of " fire " than an archebuse.
Instead of my going into a lot of background information here is a site that should give you an overview of the history of early firearms as well as some links to other sites and suppliers:
http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Campground/8551/index.html
Specifically this page to start: http://www.geocities.com/Yosemite/Campground/8551/arquebus.html
Hope this helps.
| Garrett Hazen wrote: |
| From what I know, this firearm seems to be the prototype of any such rifle. And to my knowledge these firearms were extremely inaccurate but were highly regarded as they had a greater firing rate compared to any such crossbow or bow. But, being such an antique it seems to be of interest- does anyone know where one can be found for purchase, like from a reliable source. I wouldn't want one blowing up in my face to say the least!
And another question- where did they originate? I have a knowledge of explosives coming from Asia, and Francis Bacon picked up on the subject in the 1200's I believe, but I have seen pictures of arquebus from Japan to western europe. |
Middlesex Village Trading Company at www.middlesexvillagetrading.com offers several interesting pieces including a matchlock. These guns seem to be well made and fired with reasonable loads would appear quite safe.
Regarding rate of fire, the arquebus, or any firearm that was a contemporary of the long bow, was inferior in rate of fire to the bow. As has been mentioned here several times before, one major advantage of equipping troops with guns as opposed to bows was the lower amount of training required.
Hand firearms originated in China and were probably contemporaneous with the first uses of gun powder. Shoulder fired arms probably originated in Europe in the 14th c. with matchlocks appearing some time in the 15th c.
Accuracy, as Jean mentions was dependent upon the quality of the gun and the ammunition as well as the care taken in loading. They could be as accurate as a smoothbore can be, but were handicapped by slow lock time, poor quality powder and ball and the skill of the shooter.
Something to consider with the Arquebus is the dissemination of them in the 15th. The first appearance of the firing mechanism is in the 1st decade but it is mounted onto a simple pole gun. It is a while before literary and artwork shows them again though. Most hand guns in the 15th even during the 2nd half in art are simple pole guns without firing mechanism, so the acquebus that everyone has in mind likely was not the most common firearm throughout the 15th perhaps only becoming more common than the pole gun at the very end. You really only see them in art or read them in accounts in the last 15-20 years of the century and it seems the simple pole guns were still being used.
The other is that it seems 2 or perhaps a little more shots per minute seems to be a good rate of fire for an acquebus. That’s about the same as one could get off for a large powerful crossbow. We have a crew using a ballista who can loose two a minute, though their are two of them. There are lower powered draw crossbows that can loose between 6-8 a minute at 300-400 pounds draw or so. Some guys in our group use 120 plus pound longbows and can loose 14-15 in a minute. My guess is if we practiced more on speed, which we do not, only really distance, they could get to 16 or maybe more no problem. One issue to consider is that people really did not time discharge of their weapons in the medieval period to the minute as it was such a hard increment to gauge. Most clock rang to the hour. The hourglass measures the same length of time. So keep in mind that from the historic account we really do not know exactly the rate of fire per minute of five minutes or any minutes only what we find from modern reconstructions and that one is usually faster than the other from historic accounts.
As far as where handguns come from. There are lots of arguements both ways. Most early chinese 'guns' seems to be different than what oen thinks of as handguns shooting. I'd look up D. Nicolle's Arms and Armour companion. A good few sections on fireamrs and their development. There are more indepth studied, Bert Halls weapons and warfare in the Rennss. that I think is probbaly the best though.
RPM
The other is that it seems 2 or perhaps a little more shots per minute seems to be a good rate of fire for an acquebus. That’s about the same as one could get off for a large powerful crossbow. We have a crew using a ballista who can loose two a minute, though their are two of them. There are lower powered draw crossbows that can loose between 6-8 a minute at 300-400 pounds draw or so. Some guys in our group use 120 plus pound longbows and can loose 14-15 in a minute. My guess is if we practiced more on speed, which we do not, only really distance, they could get to 16 or maybe more no problem. One issue to consider is that people really did not time discharge of their weapons in the medieval period to the minute as it was such a hard increment to gauge. Most clock rang to the hour. The hourglass measures the same length of time. So keep in mind that from the historic account we really do not know exactly the rate of fire per minute of five minutes or any minutes only what we find from modern reconstructions and that one is usually faster than the other from historic accounts.
As far as where handguns come from. There are lots of arguements both ways. Most early chinese 'guns' seems to be different than what oen thinks of as handguns shooting. I'd look up D. Nicolle's Arms and Armour companion. A good few sections on fireamrs and their development. There are more indepth studied, Bert Halls weapons and warfare in the Rennss. that I think is probbaly the best though.
RPM
I've written a blog post summarizing the things I've learned about the accuracy (or lack thereof ) of arquebuses and muskets--most of which I got from the discussions here in myArmoury:
http://l-clausewitz.livejournal.com/395313.html
as usual, it's mostly written as a reference for fiction writers, but it might still be useful for other audiences as well. And then, here's an excellent page about the history and development of early European firearms:
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~dispater/handgonnes.htm
http://l-clausewitz.livejournal.com/395313.html
as usual, it's mostly written as a reference for fiction writers, but it might still be useful for other audiences as well. And then, here's an excellent page about the history and development of early European firearms:
http://homepages.ihug.com.au/~dispater/handgonnes.htm
Page 1 of 1
You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
All contents © Copyright 2003-2006 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Full-featured Version of the forum