Roanoke Colony Firearms

4692 · May 17, 2024

Hello,

I have always been fascinated by the "Lost" Roanoke Colony. I often think about the moxy that it would take to do what they did. On top of being a history nerd I also love firearms. I am interested in aquiring a reproduction of a firearm that they would likely have had during that time period. I've done a lot of research but have been unable to nail down a specific type. I'm including two photos of potential options. I've s

een reenactment videos with both types being used. Maybe it's possible both types would have been there. If anyone has an opinion on which would be a better option for historical authenticity, I would very much appreciate it.

TobJohn · May 17, 2024

4692 said:
Hello,

I have always been fascinated by the "Lost" Roanoke Colony. I often think about the moxy that it would take to do what they did. On top of being a history nerd I also love firearms. I am interested in aquiring a reproduction of a firearm that they would likely have had during that time period. I've done a lot of research but have been unable to nail down a specific type. I'm including two photos of potential options. I've sView attachment 320595 View attachment 320596een reenactment videos with both types being used. Maybe it's possible both types would have been there. If anyone has an opinion on which would be a better option for historical authenticity, I would very much appreciate it.

The bottom gun is attempting to replicate an Italian arquebus petronel, but is substantially off. Here is what the gun of that type looked like:

A painting from 1590 depicts drakes landing in California with some form of arquebus petronel:

the vast majority of European art depicting events from the 1570s-1580s, and produced within a couple of years of the event, show this type of arm. Other accounts and surviving examples are rarer because they were commonly restocked with a fishtail during the 1600s.

Here is a great thread on petronels:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18483

Here is a link to the Royal Armouries of an English issued German arquebus of the 1560s and sharing similar design elements.
https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-16003

Fishtail matchlocks, like your top example, are very archetypical of the first half of the 1600s. They did exist at this time, but were usually a lot larger and heavier.

Sam squanch · May 17, 2024

Rich guys may have had wheellocks. It was smoldering match for Joe Average.

Sam squanch · May 17, 2024

TobJohn said:
A painting from 1590 depicts drakes landing in California with some form of arquebus petronel

I hope he had his California assault matchlock permit!

TobJohn · May 18, 2024

Sam squanch said:
I hope he had his California assault matchlock permit!

only if it has a pistol grip and flash hider! I guess that could make petronels with cannon muzzles illegal in California!

I actually grew up pretty close to where Sir Francis Drake landed (hence my profile pic)

Sam squanch · May 18, 2024

I wonder how history would have changed if Drake started a big colony in California with a large army…..

TobJohn · May 18, 2024

Sam squanch said:
I wonder how history would have changed if Drake started a big colony in California with a large army…..

We’d all be speaking English in California and it would be part of the United States

BillinOregon · May 19, 2024

I am still baffled that so many of the petronels are fitted with sights, yet the paintings show them being fired from a "low" position in which sights could not possibly have been used. Something is off here.

TobJohn · May 19, 2024

BillinOregon said:
I am still baffled that so many of the petronels are fitted with sights, yet the paintings show them being fired from a "low" position in which sights could not possibly have been used. Something is off here.

Yes, it has really perplexed me. Most likely the artist taking liberties.

16th century artists seemed to have had a hard time understanding gun sights. There are paintings of earlier arquebusiers hip firing their snapping arquebuses, but that also makes no sense when they have sights and cheek stocks.

tenngun · May 19, 2024

Sam squanch said:
Rich guys may have had wheellocks. It was smoldering match for Joe Average.

Something that held true for James Town twenty years later, and even Plymouth a decade later

XVIIc Wheelock · May 19, 2024

TobJohn said:
Yes, it has really perplexed me. Most likely the artist taking liberties.

16th century artists seemed to have had a hard time understanding gun sights. There are paintings of earlier arquebusiers hip firing their snapping arquebuses, but that also makes no sense when they have sights and cheek stocks.

Seems to me that the artists of the day had never fired a weapon, maybe only seen a few and had no understanding that a hip fired weapon would have filled the eyes and nose full of burning pan primer powder, hence another advantage of using sights!

TobJohn · May 19, 2024

XVIIc Wheelock said:
Seems to me that the artists of the day had never fired a weapon, maybe only seen a few and had no understanding that a hip fired weapon would have filled the eyes and nose full of burning pan primer powder, hence another advantage of using sights!

I concur. The vast majority probably saw an army on parade, or had a couple models to base their art on, but never experienced combat or saw the weapons in action.

TobJohn · May 21, 2024

Speaking of matchlock historical detail in art, the Pavia tapestries where designed by an artist (Bernard Van Orley) who almost certainly never experienced warfare, maybe never even visited Italy, but managed to create art with an incredible amount of correct detail, and even vaguely understood gunsights!

I need to track down an art historian to ask about the process of how 16th century art was made. In particular, what resources they had in terms of first hand accounts and examples of soldiers and weapons. Bernard Van Orley was incredibly well connected with Hapsburg nobility, so he certainly had resources. It’s a strange how someone that was not a witness got so many little things right.

4692 · May 21, 2024

TobJohn said:
The bottom gun is attempting to replicate an Italian arquebus petronel, but is substantially off. Here is what the gun of that type looked like:
View attachment 320633

A painting from 1590 depicts drakes landing in California with some form of arquebus petronel:
View attachment 320634

the vast majority of European art depicting events from the 1570s-1580s, and produced within a couple of years of the event, show this type of arm. Other accounts and surviving examples are rarer because they were commonly restocked with a fishtail during the 1600s.

Here is a great thread on petronels:
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18483

Here is a link to the Royal Armouries of an English issued German arquebus of the 1560s and sharing similar design elements.
https://royalarmouries.org/collection/object/object-16003

Fishtail matchlocks, like your top example, are very archetypical of the first half of the 1600s. They did exist at this time, but were usually a lot larger and heavier.

Thank you so much for the information. I guess my only question is, does anyone make a firing replica that's even remotely accurate that you know of?

TobJohn · May 21, 2024

4692 said:
Thank you so much for the information. I guess my only question is, does anyone make a firing replica that's even remotely accurate that you know of?

This business looks to have built one:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063463063081&name=xhp_nt__fb__action__open_user

I haven’t purchased from them, so I cannot personally vouch for them.

On the matchlock and wheellocks Facebook page, there may be some other builders.

A word of warning: petronels are still up in the air on how to comfortably use them with human anatomy, so I would be cautious about spending a large amount of money on one, unless you really want it for the historical relevance/reenacting. I bought one from a friend of mine because I like the looks and wanted to try some experimental archeology to figure that problem out.

4692 · May 21, 2024

TobJohn said:
This business looks to have built one:
https://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100063463063081&name=xhp_nt__fb__action__open_user

I haven’t purchased from them, so I cannot personally vouch for them.

On the matchlock and wheellocks Facebook page, there may be some other builders.

A word of warning: petronels are still up in the air on how to comfortably use them with human anatomy, so I would be cautious about spending a large amount of money on one, unless you really want it for the historical relevance/reenacting. I bought one from a friend of mine because I like the looks and wanted to try some experimental archeology to figure that problem out.

You mentioned that a larger heavier version of the fishtail existed at the time and could have been there. Do you think it might be reasonable to say that option might be the right blend of historical enough but still able to be fired in a fun way?

TobJohn · May 21, 2024

4692 said:
You mentioned that a larger heavier version of the fishtail existed at the time and could have been there. Do you think it might be reasonable to say that option might be the right blend of historical enough but still able to be fired in a fun way?

Yeah and that it would be easier to find a stand in with a smaller or less historically accurate replica. Anybody that would know enough to tell the difference would also know enough to have a great conversation about matchlocks, lol! An additional question would be to what extent the English had muskets (opposed to calivers/arquebuses) in the 1580s, because the English were in the process of modernizing their army and muskets were still heavy specialized weapons.

Here is thread on an original fishtail musket from the same period, by a very accomplished arms maker, and part of the former Michael Trömner collection:\
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18212

4692 · May 21, 2024

TobJohn said:
Yeah and that it would be easier to find a stand in with a smaller or less historically accurate replica. Anybody that would know enough to tell the difference would also know enough to have a great conversation about matchlocks, lol! An additional question would be to what extent the English had muskets (opposed to calivers/arquebuses) in the 1580s, because the English were in the process of modernizing their army and muskets were still heavy specialized weapons.

Here is thread on an original fishtail musket from the same period, by a very accomplished arms maker, and part of the former Michael Trömner collection:\
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=18212

Thank you sir! You've been incredibly helpful.

TobJohn · May 21, 2024

4692 said:
Thank you sir! You've been incredibly helpful.

No problem, I am always happy for an opportunity to obsess over matchlocks.

deGheyn · Jun 26, 2024

This has been on my wish list too: Old Guard Petronel

Roanoke Colony Firearms

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

32 Cal

58 Cal.

69 Cal.

69 Cal.

58 Cal.

69 Cal.

58 Cal.

Cannon

58 Cal.

Cannon

45 Cal.

58 Cal.

58 Cal.

32 Cal

58 Cal.

32 Cal

58 Cal.

32 Cal

58 Cal.

32 Cal.

Similar threads

Join the conversation!

Join today and get all the highlights of this community direct to your inbox. It's FREE!