Ethnographic Arms & Armour
 

Go Back   Ethnographic Arms & Armour > Discussion Forums > European Armoury
User Name
Password
FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old 25th July 2020, 04:07 PM   #1
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default Early 17th Century Scandinavian Gun Lock

Hello ALL

For you arcanine lock enthusiasts here is one of the more interesting, and curious locks I've seen. I won this lock (and two other different ones) in a German auction a couple months ago.
It's in virtually pristine condition. Appears the frizzen has never been struck. There are two threaded holes on the lock plate which tell me the lock was either mounted to a gun, or was prepared to, but never was done (?) Threads look to be in new condition. The Auction description was per the title above. The lock is unmarked. Beautiful chisel work throughout.
Usually these snaplocks are simple in design. But this one is quite innovative. One mainspring operates both the hammer and frizzen. The frizzen has a spring loaded safety feature and a sort of waterproof pan feature. The rear of the hammer has pin that acts as a hinge that doesn't fall off even when the top screw is removed. The square top screw looks like a carry over from the wheellock period. The lock is a forging and is in perfect working order with a strong spring. With the innovations, I'm hesitant to date this lock. But I'm guessing the first half of the 17th Century. We do know these Scandinavian snap locks remained popular for a longer period of time than expected.
Now here's the really curious part: The sear spring and sear catch are one piece. There is no trigger bar or mount for same on the lock plate. And there is no evidence there was one ever made. So how was this lock fired ? Hmmmm. Can you guys figure this out ? Since the lock looks like it was never in use, I wonder if this was just a styling exercise by some locksmith ? But then why bother making threaded holes for mounting ? The lock is certainly very high quality and well made. Picture heavy so you can view the many little details. Thanks for any help.

Rick
Attached Images
      
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 04:08 PM   #2
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

MORE PICS............
Attached Images
      
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 04:10 PM   #3
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

LAST TWO.........
Attached Images
  
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 04:23 PM   #4
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default sear details needed

Hey Rick,
This is quite remarkable. Am hitting the books right now but to address your question on how this thing was actuated when on the gun, please post a top view, looking straight down, of the sear spring / bar in relation to the lockplate. A bottom view from a similar direct vertical angle might be useful, too. Thanks!
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 06:09 PM   #5
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

Hi Philip

Thanks for your reply. See below......

First thought was that the top of the trigger (above a pivot) or an intermediate piece would wedge between the lock plate and the sear bar forcing it inward but it looks like the wedge might hit the portion of the sear going into the lock plate before it could move far enough to disengage it.

Maybe some strange horizontal moving ball style trigger ? Duno. LOL The last photo here shows the lock in the cocked position. You can see the sear catch protruding through the lock plate - like a snaphaunce.

Rick
Attached Images
   
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 06:31 PM   #6
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

What do you think of this...

Imagine a trigger similar to that used on all the later, mature flintlock designs, an L-shaped thing pivoting at the corner, with the horizontal arm moving up as the trigger itself is pulled backwards.

On the horizontal arm, there is an offset vertical wedge-like extension that fits in the V-shaped space between the inside of the lockplate and the end of the sear spring / bar unit. The offset is to bridge the space between the central axis of the stock, where the trigger hangs, and the interior of the lock recess, it's only a fraction of an inch.

As it moves upward, the wedge goes up with it and spreads the sear from the lockplate enough to withdraw the sear nose enough to release the tail of the cock.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 07:02 PM   #7
Fernando K
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 593
Default

Hello

With all due respect, it seems to me that it is a copy, or better yet, a forgery with some advances. The same pristine state certifies this, and the profuse decoration, The closing of the jaws is conical, and thus tends to expel the stone, rather than retain it. It would be necessary to use some detection methods, such as the passage of the screws, millimeters or witworth.
Regarding the guarantor, it ends in a wedge, and if a curved surface is put under it, it comes out

Sorry for the translator. Affectionately
Fernando K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 07:02 PM   #8
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default lock design and possible origin

What you have is a Norwegian or Swedish snap lock of exceptional workmanship and apparently late manufacture. Looks like it was intended for a sporting gun made for someone who could afford quality, and of somewhat conservative taste.

These snapping locks started out as snaphaunces sometime in mid- to second half of the 16th cent., with large external springs that powered the cock and retained the frizzen all-in-one. By the 17th cent., they evolved into flintlocks with a combined pan-cover and frizzen, the latter pivoting atop the pan-cover to provide a safety feature since the sear had no half-cock. In Norway and Sweden, the external mainspring remained the norm until quite late, whereas in the so-called Baltic lock, the spring and sear connection was entirely internal and the cock given a more graceful curved profile. Baltic locks were made in various areas in the region surrounding the Baltic Sea, including Russia.

The Swedish arms historian Rudolf Cederström points out 3 different designs of top jaw attachment which can be used as identifiers of geographic origin. The most common is the Swedish system, in which the underside of the rear of the top jaw is dovetailed into the corresponding area of the lower jaw (the cock body). Norwegian locks have a top jaw with a vertical tenon at the rear that slides in a mortise in the bottom jaw (same concept as on the miquelet locks of southern Europe). Baltic locks have a top jaw whose rear end is flared out and channeled into a U shape that rests over a corresponding curved part of the lower jaw.

Torsten Lenk, in his The Flintlock: its Origin and Development (English version ed. John F. Hayward, 1965) states that the Swedish style appeared on snaphaunce locks in the 16th cent., the Norwegian style in the 17th, with the Baltic style quite late in that century.

What you have is an anomaly. Note that its top jaw attachment is unlike any of the 3 above, it hinges on a horizontal pin. Also, it has a very sophisticated spring stop for the frizzen that positively locks it into place for firing. The innovative design and sophisticated manufacture suggest a time period very late in the 17th cent., possibly into the very early 18th. By then, of course, the mature version of the "French" flintlock had made solid inroads throughout northern and central Europe and was even produced in north Italy as well. By the 1670s or so, "early adopters" among well-to-do sportsmen would have been very familiar with the flintlock "alla moderna", so that's why I am suggesting that your lock was probably destined for a gun ordered by someone who was very fond of the old ways. After all, consider the enduring popularity of wheellocks in some niches of the German and Swiss markets, until the mid-18th cent.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 07:16 PM   #9
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fernando K
Hello

The closing of the jaws is conical, and thus tends to expel the stone, rather than retain it. It would be necessary to use some detection methods, such as the passage of the screws, millimeters or witworth.
Regarding the guarantor, it ends in a wedge, and if a curved surface is put under it, it comes out


I don't think that this observation is sufficient to condemn Rick's lock as a piece of historicism. Looking a several published examples in Lenk, op cit, and in H L Blackmore's Guns and Rifles of the World, you will see that the jaw faces do orient themselves at an angle as opposed to parallel (as one sees on miquelets, true flintlocks, and related mechanisms). The shape of the cock and jaw pretty much determines this. Images of those guns with period flints still in place indicate that the stone was shaped somewhat differently from the blade-like form of common gunflints of a later period. Of course thick leather or perhaps lead wrapping would be necessary to ensure a tight grip, as is necessary on other flintlocks as well.

I also note from other examples that the jaw faces do have very deep transverse grooves, rather like those on the jaws of modern channel-lock pliers or plumbers' pipe wrenches, rather than the little raised teeth that we're used to seeing on other flintlocks whose jaws are capable of closing with parallel force.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 07:23 PM   #10
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default jaw screw

Rick,
What are your comments on the head of the jaw screw? Needs a spanner wrench, just like on the dog of a wheellock.

For comparison, I see slotted drum-shaped screw heads on the Scandinavian locks published in the books I cited in other posts. And the classic Baltic lock has a ring shaped head, reminiscent of a miquelet.

The high-dome slotted screw heads on the other components look like an early style to me, maybe someone who knows Germanic guns better than I do might have some input.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 07:59 PM   #11
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

Hi Philip

Thank you so much for your comprehensive replies. You too Fernando K.

Trigger: It could be as you mention above, especially if this lock is later than originally suspected. But I'm starting to think along the lines of Fernando K.
What if a single, vertical trigger was used, with a shape at the rear of the trigger that resembles a smallish pin that is half flat/half round and tapers to a cone like shape ? And aligns with the far rear tail piece of the spring bar. As the trigger is pulled back, the semi cone shaped piece moves upward gradually enlarging against the spring bar and eventually moving it inward.
In any case, it seems the little tail opening at the end of the spring bar is key to opening. Otherwise there would be no need for the little tail. See pic below...

Rick
Attached Images
 
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 09:08 PM   #12
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

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

Rick
Attached Images
   
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 09:45 PM   #13
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default more about trigger

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickystl
Hi Philip



Trigger: It could be as you mention above, especially if this lock is later than originally suspected. But I'm starting to think along the lines of Fernando K.
What if a single, vertical trigger was used, with a shape at the rear of the trigger that resembles a smallish pin that is half flat/half round and tapers to a cone like shape ? And aligns with the far rear tail piece of the spring bar. As the trigger is pulled back, the semi cone shaped piece moves upward gradually enlarging against the spring bar and eventually moving it inward.
In any case, it seems the little tail opening at the end of the spring bar is key to opening. Otherwise there would be no need for the little tail. See pic below...

Rick


You and I have the same idea. A half-cone (or a wedge) that moves up and separates the tail of the sear bar from the lockplate (and thus withdrawing the sear nose) would perform the same function.

My description includes a right-hand offset between this cone/wedge and the trigger itself just for dimensional compatibility between the position of the trigger (aligned to the central axis of the stock) and the inside of the lockplate (a bit to the right, near the top of the lock recess where the lockplate would sit).

Last edited by Philip : 26th July 2020 at 12:29 AM. Reason: clarify verbiage
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 10:15 PM   #14
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
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.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Philip : 25th July 2020 at 10:21 PM. Reason: adding info
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 25th July 2020, 11:29 PM   #15
Fernando K
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 593
Default

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
Fernando K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 12:26 AM   #16
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
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.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 03:11 PM   #17
Fernando K
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 593
Default

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 .....
Fernando K is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 03:48 PM   #18
corrado26
Member
 
corrado26's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Black Forest, Germany
Posts: 849
Default

Looking at the absolutely flawless metal of the locks I think that Fernado K's statement that these are modern replicas is correct.
corrado26 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 05:26 PM   #19
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

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
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 09:01 PM   #20
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickystl
Hi Philip

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.
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"


Rick


Hi, Rick

Great that you provided a shooter's input as re the priming pan and its cover. It explains a lot in this case.

You also have the advantage of the piece in your hands, rather than just looking at pictures. Given what is known now, it might be interesting to mount this in a test stock, attach a shootable barrel, and construct a trigger for it based on what you and I have discussed, and find out how well this thing really works.

On the authenticity issue, have you thought of taking it apart, looking at mating and internal surfaces for out-of-place tool marks, rusting, etc. And those screws should be a dead giveaway: if Scandinavian locks predate the French Revolution (and hence the adoption of the metric system as a consequence) and come from a cultural area well outside the English sphere, then the screw diameters, TPI, and pitch should not match metric or English/American standards. Also, inspection of thread profile under magnification should tell you a lot since this is something that changed through history (illustrative explanations of this is online, I once saw a whole article on screw thread evolution, didn't save the URL but am sure it's easily google-able.)
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 09:05 PM   #21
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Oh, the quote you posted is spot on, have seen the same thing cited by other authors including Lenk, Blackmore, et al. A complete example believed to be one of those converted guns is in the Livrustkammaren, Stockholm (inv. no. 1341), published in Blackmore, Guns and Rifles of the World, photoplate # 134
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 26th July 2020, 09:07 PM   #22
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
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.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2020, 12:39 PM   #23
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

Hi Philip

Thread sizing is a good idea. I'll tend to that soon. That could answer some questions.
Meantime, take a look at this old photo sent to me by a shooter/collector friend.
Of course it's a wheellock, but notice the hatchet shaped trigger piece that would simply spread the sear bar inward when the trigger is pulled backwards.
He mentioned that it is believed this lock was from a wheellock/ax combination.

Rick
Attached Images
 
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2020, 02:27 PM   #24
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Thanks for providing this! The sear is designed just like on your lock. Did your friend provide any information on where this is from and when?

At this point, following up with the screws should help a lot on resolving the issue. Just because something looks very “fresh” in a photo isn’t enough to pan it. Remember that Spanish shotgun by court gunsmith Miguel de Zegarra I sent you pics of some years ago? Images of the detached lock inside and out look like it could have been made least week.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 27th July 2020, 02:52 PM   #25
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

Hi Philip

I made an inquiry to him and asked if he has ANY other information on this lock, reference book, etc. I should here soon.

Yes, notice the sear bar is designed the same. But my lock doesn't have ANY provision for mounting a trigger at all. That's why I've started to think the lock was more of a styling exercise, and never expected to fire. But then, why the lock bolt holes/threads ? Duno LOL

Rick
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2020, 05:59 AM   #26
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by rickystl
Hi Philip

I made an inquiry to him and asked if he has ANY other information on this lock, reference book, etc. I should here soon.

Yes, notice the sear bar is designed the same. But my lock doesn't have ANY provision for mounting a trigger at all. That's why I've started to think the lock was more of a styling exercise, and never expected to fire. But then, why the lock bolt holes/threads ? Duno LOL

Rick


But wouldn't the trigger rotate on a pin through the wood of the stock and thus not have to be attached to the lock itself? This is the case with virtually all guns with locks held by bolts to the side of the stock. The only contact with the lock components is where the edge of the trigger pushes (or pulls) the sear arm.
Philip is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 4th August 2020, 04:41 PM   #27
rickystl
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: St. Louis, MO area.
Posts: 1,533
Default

Hi Philip

Now that you mention it.......yes. The trigger itself may have just been pinned to the wood stock only. Could very well be the case.

The guy that sent me the pic above says he has more info. as soon as he gets a chance. It's his busy time of the year at the moment. Stay tuned.

It's certainly one of the more interesting locks in my collection.

Rick
rickystl is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 8th August 2020, 07:11 PM   #28
Raf
Member
 
Raf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Posts: 101
Default

The combined spring and primary sear is a feature of some of the earliest surviving Wheelock’s including of course Leonardo’s famous drawing. You are right that the trigger mechanism should be pinned to the stock otherwise it would not be possible to mount the lock in a functional firearm.
On the question of the spring locking of the rotating pan cover here is a Swedish lock of about 1630. There appears to be something going on with the mechanism on top of the pan cover which suggests a similar locking device. This is I think confirmed by Dell Mars description referring to 'a sprung swivelling fizzen '. From this one might infer that this (sensible) safety device was a feature of some early Baltic locks.
Attached Images
 

Last edited by Raf : 8th August 2020 at 10:53 PM.
Raf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 9th August 2020, 05:36 AM   #29
Philip
Member
 
Philip's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 755
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Raf
The combined spring and primary sear is a feature of some of the earliest surviving Wheelock’s including of course Leonardo’s famous drawing. .


This combo function is also seen on the Spanish patilla lock (aka miquelet). Of course that type of lock has a half-cock safety so a notched stud that performs that function is attached to a secondary sear arm which is also engaged by the trigger to withdraw the primary sear from full cock.

Another interesting parallel to the patilla is the activation of the cock itself -- via upward pressure of the mainspring against a projection (likened to the heel of a foot, patilla meaning "little foot"). In turn, this same arrangement was used to power the serpentine of the Bohemian Schnapp-Lunte which was the basis for the so-called Indo-Portuguese snap matchlock introduced throughout East Asia in the 16th cent.
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

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump



All times are GMT. The time now is 07:40 PM.


Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.0.3
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
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.