Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 5th September 2016, 05:11 PM   #1
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by KuKulzA28
Thanks for the info guys, I'm intently awaiting pictures and Specs!

I will go the flintlock route because local laws forbid hunting with matchlock and I want to hunt with this Taiwanese style muzzleloader, but I will make it to match the simplicity of the Formosan style.
For "realism", would I want to be using flint held there with gum or pine pitch or birch tar, further tightened with rattan cord or rawhide?
If a Formosan in 1800s were to make a flintlock, would that be how they'd make it? A modification of the existing matchlock they're familiar with?

Ramrod... Now I won't pretend Seediq Bale is a historical source, but in the movie they show Seediq and Bunun braves using and holding ramrods. Was this a mistake or did some Formosans use ramrods? It seems if they did, they carried them instead of carving a groove under the barrel trough... ? I wonder if ramrods were actually nonexistent or just not considered necessary...

Stock, I can make it one piece or two piece and do a good job I think, amateur woodworker here, but I think carving wooden sheaths, knife handles, longbows, and dugout canoe has given me some skills....
If it's one piece and the grain doesn't bend into the grip (quite an extreme angle), I wonder if that's structurally acceptable because the arms bend to accomodate the recoil rather than the harder resistance from a shoulder stock?

Today yuanzhumin in Taiwan CAN hunt legally, they register and can use guns, almost always some primitive homemade firearm, many are making them with shoulder stocks now. However many are unregistered, hunters unlicensed, and hunting unregulated - I guess their ecological and social impact is just not damaging enough to really warrant heavy regulation. Taiwan, as y'all know went through pretty intense disarmament with that last two regimes and hunting is generally illegal for most people...

I live in Mass, I will definitely check out the Peabody museum gun.
OK. You live in MA. And you want to hunt using the gun. Yes, I think there are maybe two or three States that won't let you use a matchlock. I see the dilema now. Also, some States have a minimum caliber (for muzzle loaders) for hunting larger game such as whitetails, etc. (I think .40 or larger) (?) You might want to check that out if you haven't already.
FLINTLOCK LOCK: As we've noted, the Vietnamese lock has no top screw or top jaw. And the lock seems to be held to the stock with a horse show type nail on the rear, and the rear barrel band on the front. In other words, no screws. This was likely due to there not being any means to drill holes or make threads. And I would guess the situation in Tribal Formosa would be similar. Unless you can locate an original flintlock specimen in Taiwan (would be great!) you might consider using a similar architecture of flintlock as the Vietnamese example, with a lockplate closer to the matchlock plate on the Formosa gun ? Just a thought.
RAMRODS: Philip could easily be right that they were loaded with a very undersized ball and tapped on the butt a couple times. Maybe a piece of tow was rammed down afterward to help keep the ball from rolling forward? (I unloaded an Albanian long gun that was loaded just this way). I would think at some point a rod would be needed for cleaning the bore. Unless, the bores were not properly cleaned after firing (?) But if they did use rods, it is obvious they were carried seperately. And of course you would want to have a rod for loading and cleaning.
STOCK: From a strength stanpoint, I would think the one piece would be best. A good straight-grained hardwood. Would be interesting to know the most common hardwood utilized in Taiwan/Formosa. With your woodworking skills, it shouldn't be too dificult to duplicate the stock. Being a half-stock, with no ramrod hole to drill or groove in the bottom will simplifiy things.

This sounds like it will make any interesting project.

Rick
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 5th September 2016, 05:50 PM   #2
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,036
Default concessions to modernity

A couple of thoughts, pertaining to use of the replica gun today for hunting:
SIGHTS: I don't recall seeing any on the Peabody-Essex Museum example, and none of the Indochina highland tribal examples have sights either. The latter judging from all the Vietnam War souvenirs I've handled at gun shows. I suppose that tribesmen used to taking game at short distances with bows, or crossbows, would find sights all that necessary on a gun barrel used under the same conditions. Especially considering that the barrel was smoothbore and we are looking at the likelihood of undersized slugs loaded without a ramrod.

You may feel more comfortable aiming at your game animals with a sighted barrel -- how about an unobtrusive shotgun-type bead sight on your barrel? In fact you may want to check your state hunting regulations to see if there are any minimum requirements. In a SE Asian and Far Eastern context, there is no "across the board" rule when it comes to the dominant, majority-population cultures in the region. Malay muskets tend to have no sights at all. Lowland Vietnamese matchlocks have a blade or bead front and no rear. Chinese and Japanese guns have both front and rear.

MINIMUM CALIBER: The regs probably specify that, for larger game like deer and boar. Most of these aboriginal muskets have very small bores, they are reminiscent of early American "squirrel rifles" or some of the sporting wheellock guns of central Europe. So if you want to be an ethnographic purist, you'll be using the gun for small game (hey, rabbit and squirrel is delicious!), or you may want to tweak things and go bigger if you'd like to go after deer.

RAMROD: For sheer convenience and ballistic performance, I can't imagine doing without one and it's a pain to carry one separately in the field. How about making your stock to hold a rod under the barrel, you can always display the gun without it at home and the small hole at the front end won't be noticeable. In the other thread on Taiwanese matchlocks I did a post on ramrods and there may be ideas you can use. If the rod fits snugly enough and the length of the forestock gives it enough support, you shouldn't need ramrod pipes on the bottom of the barrel.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th September 2016, 05:44 PM   #3
KuKulzA28
Member
 
KuKulzA28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: between work and sleep
Posts: 731
Default

Thanks for the additional tips guys...

Talked with MassWildlife and read up on MA hunting laws... This firearm would fall into a weird category of being a muzzleloader pistol and because it doesn't have a shoulder stock, it is illegal to hunt with in MA.

But it is not illegal in neighboring states... Which now also opens up the possibility of hunting with a matchlock (probably more difficult due to match)... So, no longer restricted to flintlock though I'm not against it.

Scheduling a time with Peabody Essex Museum, excited to see this musket...

Hmmm…
I think I will make this .45 to meet requirements in most states, and I do think use a ramrod, just done in a way not to deviate too much from the aesthetic of the originals...

I am tempted to put sights on it, I don't have the lifestyle to allow me to get intimately attuned with and accurate with the firearm without sights at longer range... Then again, I can hit a deer with a longbow at normal hunting range so maybe it'll just take a little practice.

Last edited by KuKulzA28; 15th September 2016 at 05:54 PM.
KuKulzA28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 23rd September 2016, 07:56 PM   #4
varta
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Berlin-Paris
Posts: 37
Default

From the Qing Dynasty, the Han began to trade guns with the aborigines. Now, although the bolt-action rifles have replaced matchlocks from the seventeenth century, the aborigines continued to use them until the early twentieth century.

Last edited by varta; 24th September 2016 at 03:35 PM.
varta is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd October 2016, 01:06 AM   #5
KuKulzA28
Member
 
KuKulzA28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Location: between work and sleep
Posts: 731
Default

Hey y'all, so I contacted the Peabody-Essex Museum... looks like they're in a period of expansion and have cut down drastically on collection visits.

However, Gordon at the PEM has graciously taken some pics for me. I will of course be looking to schedule a visit regardless.

According to him:

"The matchlock rifle is described as follows in its original 1911 catalogue entry: "very long barrel, no trigger guard or sights, hammer lashed on. Short stock, varnished with black decorations, curves down like big pistol grip." Its dimensions are recorded as: length, barrel: 126.5 cm; stock: 26 cm; muzzle to butt: 149.5 cm. The work in question was donated in 1911 by a Rimpei Otsu or Taihoku, Formosa. A quick internet search suggests that Otsu served as the Superintendent of the Bureau of Aboriginal Affairs in the Government of Formosa during Japanese colonial rule. "
Attached Images
     
KuKulzA28 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 2nd October 2016, 04:57 PM   #6
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,633
Default

Hey!! Thanks for the pics. The gun is really different than I expected.
STOCK: Appears from the photos it's one-piece. But the severity of the bend and the length of the pistol grip are more than I expected. Wonder how they did this ?
BARREL: Appears from the photos that it is octagon at the breech and round - but not tapered - for the rest of the length.

I don't really see a pan on the barrel. And can't really figure out how the trigger/serpentine action works.

Please do keep us updated after your eventual visit. Building a copy could turn out most interesting. Thanks for the pics.

Rick
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 3rd October 2016, 05:18 AM   #7
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,036
Default pics don't tell whole story

Hey Ricky,
Can't believe this is the same gun I handled at the Peabody-Essex a decade ago. Seems to have deteriorated. It was once in functioning condition. Note that the serpentine is detached and of course the connecting cord is busted. Hard to determine from these low-res pics where exactly it was once attached. And yes, don't see any provision for a pan either. Looking through the images in Stone's GLOSSARY I see that they are very low-res and provide no further detail. The caption does, however, mention that the stock is held by one capucine, and by a key-bolt under the tang. The latter is a very interesting feature that these online images DO show, it's an ingenious solution in a culture without screw-cutting technology. I've seen some very similar barrel-attachment methods on some Malay and Sri Lankan guns. Let me call my buddy in San Diego and try and get him to take better pics of his example. He had a plumbing leak affecting a couple rooms of the house and things have been a mess this last month or so.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:50 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Posts are regarded as being copyrighted by their authors and the act of posting material is deemed to be a granting of an irrevocable nonexclusive license for display here.