[Michael Gaetano]

gah! I tried to embed the photo but it dind't work so I'll just attach it. This was just one of many museums and weapon museums I went to but as it was with school I was restricted by the rest of the groups interests.... or lack thereof :P gah can't attach cause it's tooooo big. Fine now I've got a photo bucket account and here we go.







there we go, sorry about crappy shots, camera died so had to use phone

Mike

[Shawn Henthorn]

Now that's different I wonder how practical it would be because the barrel of the flint-lock seems to be in the way of the foot loop of the crossbow.

[Kjell Magnusson]

Isn't that a wheellock?

[Colin F.]

[Dick D]

Nice weapon, althou I'll agree with Shawn that something is wrong here. Since the barrel is in the way they would have to flip the crossbow to load it instead of just leaning it forward. Also the gun barrel would be stuffed with dirt when strung on soft ground. Having a shorter barrel would solve this problem, but then again they might accidentally make a nice hole in their foot. Aside from that it could be an excellent weapon since its an life insurance when not having a loaded crossbow. Great pictures.

[George Hill]

[Nathan Robinson]

Combination weapons with this configuration aren't entirely uncommon. Having said that, let's not forget that the functionality of all combination weapons consists of a balance of concessions. Functionality, at least in the same sense as weapons of war, is not a primarily consideration. Combination weapons were created for many reasons, perhaps foremost as an item of curiosity or as a means to show the maker's ability. Looking at these things with the same eye and list of criteria as a weapon of war is likely not appropriate.

Regarding the stirrup and barrel length: if a crossbow is spanned using a belt hook, the stirrup is not on the ground at all. It is in mid-air and the foot is brought up to meet it. The span length would determine if the stirrup ever hits the ground.

[Allan Senefelder]

From what I understand, alot of combination weapons fall into two catagories, 1) hunting weapons , the most common combo is the hanger/hirschfanger and some sort of firelock with a short barrel, the idea being if some of the more formidable game (bear, boar ect.) aren't down for the count and therefore still dangerous when cornered (see the tines on both boar spears and swords to keep that nasty sucker from running rup the blade and running you or your hunting dogs down) your can unload into them for the coupe de grace, and 2) "Military arms". The prevailing theory that i'm aware of with these, and maybe some one can shead more light on this end of it, is that this familly of combo weapons ( more varied than the hunting catagory, combos including but not limited to, axe and gun, sword/rapier and gun, pole arm and gun, multiple barrel gun often with different locks, ie, wheel lock and dog lock ect.) was for the most part a mix of the very wealthy showing off what they could afford to have made and makers showing off thier skill. The exception or so thought goes is that the multiple lock gun combos while very expensive, were bought by the wealthy in case the primary ignition system didn't work so they had a back up.

If I were guessing i'd say that the above shown combo was for hunting as the crossbow while obsolete for war for the most part by the mid 16th century was still popular for hunting into the 18th century and the wheelock would serve as the "coupe de grace" if the critter wasn't down for the count on closer inspection. Just my guess.

[Allan Senefelder]

I should add that the batch of shields w/ matchlocks that Henry the VIII had made is an interesting annomly, as he from what I understand was a great fan of militatry innovation and bought rather than a single one (just one of these would have been VERY expensive at that time, hell it'd be expensive now) a larger batch of them obviously intending them to be used.

[Jean Thibodeau]

Maybe we tend to forget to look at it in this way but the musket and bayonet combination is a successful and practical combination of two weapon types: The spear/pike and the musket.

We usually think of the oddball and impractical combination weapons when this subject is brought up: Either too expensive, too fragile or too awkward and needing special training or discipline to be good for general issue.

If I was to invent or equipped a mid 15th century style force with a combination weapon of my imagining it would probably be an early style handgonne on a stick with an added axe blade similar to the A & A Hungarian axe useful for both chopping and thrusting.

Might have been a practical combination and accuracy wouldn't matter for mass volley use.

Anyway just a though.