Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > Ethnographic Weapons
FAQ Calendar Today's Posts Search

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 10th December 2015, 12:12 PM   #1
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by eftihis
The first one looks a bit ottoman in design, what do you think? (the one with the goat hairy skin). The other looks like re-stocked ottoman barel?
Eftihis, the first one does have an Ottoman shape to it. The barrel you posted looks Ottoman to me, it seems to have all of the inlay removed.
Attached Images
  
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 10th December 2015, 03:14 PM   #2
Pukka Bundook
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
Default

David R,

I have heard exactly the same reason for the long usage of the matchlock in India.

Eric,
The photos you posted of the breeches at the bottom of page 1, show new 'tin' attached on some of the miquelet examples. This Must be to cover up the slot for the former matchlock serpentine. The new tin-work is not up to the standard of the rest of the gun, so must be there for this reason.
If I had one of these conversions, I'd be prying said tin up a bit and having a look!
Eftihis,
You barrel does look like a re-used Ottoman barrel, tired but still Ottoman. :-)
Pukka Bundook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2015, 11:13 PM   #3
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook
The photos you posted of the breeches at the bottom of page 1, show new 'tin' attached on some of the miquelet examples. This Must be to cover up the slot for the former matchlock serpentine. The new tin-work is not up to the standard of the rest of the gun, so must be there for this reason.
If I had one of these conversions, I'd be prying said tin up a bit and having a look!

When you compare the matchlocks to the miquelets there is a big difference in the locations of the triggers. The matchlock triggers are way farther back, if one of the miquelets were a converted matchlock there would have to be an empty slot were the matchlock trigger was previously located. The old matchlock trigger slot would have to be filled in or covered with a plate, seeing something like this would indicate a matchlock conversion I would think.
Attached Images
   

Last edited by estcrh; 15th December 2015 at 01:20 AM.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 14th December 2015, 11:25 PM   #4
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

A few more examples.
Attached Images
     

Last edited by estcrh; 15th December 2015 at 01:09 PM.
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 15th December 2015, 01:51 PM   #5
Pukka Bundook
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
Default

Eric,
Yes, the scear is further back on matchlocks, but took it for granted that many of these arms have inlays on the lower buttstock as well, and such could easily cover up the changed trigger position.

Richard.
Pukka Bundook is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th December 2015, 02:46 PM   #6
estcrh
Member
 
estcrh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2012
Location: USA
Posts: 1,492
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pukka Bundook
Eric,
Yes, the scear is further back on matchlocks, but took it for granted that many of these arms have inlays on the lower buttstock as well, and such could easily cover up the changed trigger position.

Richard.
I agree, there would have to be a metal cover plate or inlay etc to cover up the slot left in a matchlock conversion. You can barely see some inlay on the miquelet you thought may be a conversion so it could have been a matchlock at one time, unfortunately there are no direct images of this area. At least we know that if someone does have an Ottoman miquelet that is solid wood underneath were the trigger is located that is was not a conversion.

Here is an image of the one with the tin plate that you thought may be a matchlock conversion. I also checked the Ottoman miquelet that I own, it is not a conversion as it is solid wood underneath.
Attached Images
   
estcrh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 17th December 2015, 02:39 PM   #7
Pukka Bundook
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 803
Default

Eric,

Even on these that are Not conversions, the barrel could well be older, and re-stocked.
So difficult to pin down, and no good for me to generalise!

The one you show above with the tin plate;
It (the tin) certainly isn't original, but that's all I can say!
Pukka Bundook is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply


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 11:26 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.