• Friends, our 2nd Amendment rights are always under attack and the NRA has been a constant for decades in helping fight that fight.

    We have partnered with the NRA to offer you a discount on membership and Muzzleloading Forum gets a small percentage too of each membership, so you are supporting both the NRA and us.

    Use this link to sign up please; https://membership.nra.org/recruiters/join/XR045103

recreating 1625

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Have a read of "Further notes on the Invention of the Flintlock" by John F Hayward in the book "Art, Arms and Armour"

Hayward discusses Lavin and Gusslers article, agrees with them and adds a bit more evidence.

The guts of the argument is that the gun supposedly from 1615 by Marin le Bourgeois has an identical cast figure to that on a gun by Duclos dated 1636. The type of lock on the Bourgeois gun is earlier than that on the Duclos gun, but Hayward disputes wether an identical casting would be used on two guns 20 years apart. He also discusses another gun supposedly by Jean le Bourgeois, but in fact signed PB -Pierre le Bourgeois,(died 1627). he states the the gun might not have been made for Louis XIII in 1615 because it's a man sized gun and the king was still a child in 1615.

So anyway, if you wanted to be safe you would say the flintlock was invented between 1620 and 1630 :)

But I would love to here if theres any more recent evidence than 1980 too
 
Mike, Thanks for your compliment but you know when you're infallible and a sex symbol to boot it's awfully hard to be humble.
Tom :blah: :thumbsup:

Uh-oh, may be time to pull out the chest waders. It's gettin' pretty deep in here now....
:crackup: :crackup:
 
Russ, I'm not familiar with Brown but I think we can all agree that the true flintlock came into being sometime between 1610 and 1638 which is,I believe, close enough for government work.What no one mentioned is the fact that,while fusils{flintlocks} were comiing over as early as the 1660's,the military especially in France was still using matchlocks and pikes in warfare.
Tom Patton
 
Ahhhh, that's probably why Lenk had so much trouble finding 1620 flintlock examples, but illustrates several from the 1630s-40s! I re-scanned Lenk last evening to reassure myself that he had said 1610-1615 for the Louis XIII flintlock (and he did)--did not have the later reference. At the same time as the early flintlocks were being made, matchlocks, wheellocks and snaphaunces were also being made. It should be pointed out that the more complicated mechanisms were largely the property of royalty or the upper class. A common man in Canada in the 1620-50 period, if he owned a gun at all, would most likely have had a matchlock as both I and Okwaho previously said, which was the common military gun then. I also recommend reading Eccles "The Canadian Frontier" for a good history of the period and references to coureurs de bois. Certainly by the 1680s, flintlocks were more common.
 
Paulnfld There is a movie called Black Robe about missionary work in Canada early 1600. Don't watch it with little kids. Matchlocks were used. I know Hollywood don't alway get thing right but it is a good story. :winking: Rocky
 
The Black Robe{1991} is an Australian/Canadian film set in 1634 New France and is the story of Father Jean Laforgue, an idealistic young French Jesuit,who sets out to minister and convert the Hurons. He is escorted up the St. Lawrence river by Algonquins. I don't know what tribe but suspect them to be Abenakis They are are attacked and captured by Iroquois{probably Mohawk}warriors but escape to reach the Hurons.This is at the beginning of the Beaver War period when the the Iroquois Confederacy later{Ca.1669} wiped out the Huron Confederacy which scattered with some becoming Wyandots based on the traditional Huron name of Wendat.While there are some problems with the dress of the Iroquois,overall it's a great movie showing the upheaval of the area and the time.I haven't read the novel by Brian Moore who adapted the screenplay but plan to.This movie has become a cult movie for 17th and early 18th century reenactors and students of this period in Canadian history.And yes,given the early time frame,the firearms would have been matchlocks or an occasional snaphance or wheelock.You are also correct in that it's not a movie for children but it's certainly one of my favorites.
Tom Patton
 
So if for arguements sake, I decided on 1645 what type/ model flintlock would be acceptable for this year. Regardless of wether nobility or not
 
You can get a gun fired with flint and steel,either snaphance,wheellock,or early flintlock that would be totally and utterly correct for New France in 1645. It would cost you about$5-6,000 and would be ready in about 2-3 years.Virtually everything and I mean VIRTUALLY EVERYTHING would have to be hand made.However Leonard Day makes several nice English and Dutch guns of the 1635-1670 period for under $1,000.00 which would fit your needs very well.These guns represent earlier lock types converted to flint which is perfectly correct.I have known Leonard for several years and he is a fine fellow and a fine gun builder,his turnaround time is very reasonable.You can reach him at 3 Kings HWY,Westhampton,Ma.01027 {413}527-0184. Give him a call and discuss your needs and wants with him.I have seen thse guns and I believe you will be satisfied.
Tom Patton :imo:
 
Like Henry said, the only right flintlock available for the period would be the TRS 677.

They have two early pistol locks that might work for a very light carbine TRS 626 and 627.

if you wanted a snaphaunce, the TRS 579 or 525

if you wanted a wheellock, the TRS 629

Plain wheellocks did make it to Canada I think... I seem to recall I saw an excavated lock in the museum at Montreal a few years back. The problem is, they were expensive, and if they broke you have to throw them out because there would have been few people skilled enough to fix one in New France.

TRS say examples of the 626 have been excavated from Seneca villages in upper NY (but don't provide any dates)

Matchlocks were by far the majority as far as infantry use goes, but the Cavalry had had wheellocks since they were invented, and later snaphaunces, especially from 1620 onwards, because they were cheaper.
also, see THIS THREAD
 
Here's what you're looking for in a gun of the period.. They ain't real pretty.....
>>>>POKE HERE<<<<
The trigger guard on that gun is just about as wrong as you could possibly put on a gun of that era.:shake: But, otherwise it looks like just the ticket.
 
Mike, the only feature I find wrong on the guard is the elongated front finial. Dutch guns have been found with two types of guards. One has a bow more like a French gun and the other more like a ladle.I looked at Hamilton {"Colonial Frontier Guns" and "Early Indian Trade Guns 1625-1775" where the Dutch material is shown as Types M and N.Most of the material is shown both places but some material is not.These guards have been shown in both iron and brass but the salient feature shared by all of them is the extremely short front finial which is only about an inch or so and usually ends as does the rear finial with a three lobate end.Some of them have a reverse curve at the rear at the rear tang which holds it approx.5/8 in.away from the stock.This feature plus the fact that the bow is wide and dished like a spoon makes this a distinctive and easily recognized trigger guard.These features which aren't shown in Colonial Frontier Guns do appear as Type N in Early Indian Trade Guns.I'm not sure where Leonard got the guard shown on the Track gun but I will find out.Incidentally the four lobate ended side screw washer can be found in Frontier Guns Figure 4.I note that Leonard offers this gun as a kit for $595.00 and complete for $875.00. It's called the Dutch Trade Gun and is essentially a snaphance converted to flint.Pretty nice gun.
Tom Patton
 
I agree with your assesment of the gun Tom. A 1765 era trigger guard on a 1650 gun gives me the willies is all. :p ( back to the acorn issue again it seems)I suppose some scenario could be concocted as to how the original was damaged and this one put on sometime in the 1770's or past, but then you can't use it for 1650 era stuff..... A plane iron strap bent into the appropriate shape would have been an excellent choice in my opinion.
At any rate, other than that trigger guard it's an excellent and attractive gun that could be correctly used for a very early period with a little modification. And, you can't beat the price. ::
 
I like it better also although I think the rail is too far from the stock and I would prefer to have the three lobe ends on the guard.Also I wonder about the dog catch on that bellied lock.The bellied lock derives from the Dutch wheel lock and was was either copied from Dutch examples or imported into England from the low countries A number of these locks have been found in Indian archealogical sites.The dog catch is extremely rare on French arms and is rare in American sites.For an excellent discussion of these locks I recommend "The Proceedings Of The 1984 Trade Gun Conference" Part I "Dutch and other Flintlocks from Seventeenth Century Iroquois Sites" by Jan Piet Puype.See also "Flintlocks Of The Iroquois 1620-1687 by Joseph R. Mayer,M.D.,F.R.M.{1943}
Both of these were put out by The Rochester Museum & Science Center,Rochester ,N.Y.but are now out of print. The Trade Gun Conference is obxiously the later but I had a chance to get a copy of Dr. Mayer's little book and use both.You can never have too many quality source books.
Tom Patton
 
In my opinion, that guard belongs on a german gun, but it beats the hell out of a guard with an acorn finial on it! :haha:
 
I recently found copies of both volumes brand new on Ebay for $25. I'm not sure of the vendors name, but I believe he's from the Lancaster, PA area.

Eric
 
Back
Top