• 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

Roanoke Colony Firearms

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Rich guys may have had wheellocks. It was smoldering match for Joe Average.
Funny you said that. I was watching the movie, The New World on Amazon Prime the other night. It's the story of Pocahontas, John Smith, John Rolfe, etc. One scene an Indian steals a hatchet and a colonist shoots him in the back with a wheel lock pistol. I was like "oh historical innacuracy". Then I looked up when wheel locks were invented, the 1500's. The movie was set in 1620, so there very well could've been some colonists who brought their personal wheel locks over with them.
 
Funny you said that. I was watching the movie, The New World on Amazon Prime the other night. It's the story of Pocahontas, John Smith, John Rolfe, etc. One scene an Indian steals a hatchet and a colonist shoots him in the back with a wheel lock pistol. I was like "oh historical innacuracy". Then I looked up when wheel locks were invented, the 1500's. The movie was set in 1620, so there very well could've been some colonists who brought their personal wheel locks over with them.
Better than Shogun, where it takes place in 1600 and the main character has a 1700s flintlock pistol.

What’s particularly surprising, is that potential evidence for the matchlock is only around 25 years before evidence for the wheellock and definitive evidence of the matchlock is only around 1500
 
It had to be ruff to fight with a Match Lock trying to keep the Match/Fuse lit and smoldering all the time plus having a bandolero of loaded rounds across your chest ready to go off with just a touch from the fuse , yea I’m in. LOL
 
It had to be ruff to fight with a Match Lock trying to keep the Match/Fuse lit and smoldering all the time plus having a bandolero of loaded rounds across your chest ready to go off with just a touch from the fuse , yea I’m in. LOL
I've read that soldiers used 1 mile of match cord each per year. One mile! I don't doubt this. Figure, a soldier on guard duty in a fort isn't going to wait until a bad guy shows up before he lights his match. I'm sure some probably could've gotten away with not keeping the match lit, say in situations where they would have time to get the match lit, say behind high stone walls etc. But for the colonist soldiers behind makeshift barricades, I don't doubt they'd keep the match lit at all times.
 
Last edited:
I've read that soldiers used 1 mile of match cord each per year. One mile! I don't doubt this. Figure, a soldier on guard duty in a fort isn't going to wait until a bad guy shows up before he lights his match. I'm sure some probably could've gotten away with not keeping the match lit, say in situations where they would have time to get the light the match, say behind high stone walls etc. But for the colonist soldiers behind makeshift barricades, I don't doubt they'd keep the match lit at all times.
In Europe, they would usually have 1 soldier out of every “x” amount with a lit match during marches and the such, so they could somewhat quickly ready themselves for combat. While skirmishing was always a common role for arquebusiers/musketeers, formation fighting was probably less of a problem for keeping your match lit, but then you are in a tight formation with 100 of your best buds, all with what are essentially grenades strapped across their chest. It’s not hard to see why the flintlock was such an upgrade in convenience!

Virginia and New England actually heavily discouraged the use of the matchlock, in favor of flint mechanism in the mid 17th century, understanding its disadvantage in combat against native warfare. If I remember correctly, Plymouth banned them for militia use, but I will need to find the source again.
 
I thought I had a pdf of the book saved, but I cannot find it. "Arms and Armor in Colonial America, 1526-1783", by Harold Leslie Peterson, claims that in 1677, Plymouth colony banned the use of matchlocks for the militia.

For Jamestown, this National Parks article lists that only 47 out of 1089 guns were matchlocks. The settlers seem to have phased it out on their own.
https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/hist...-armour-and-weapons-relevant-to-jamestown.htm
 
If I remember correctly, Plymouth banned them for militia use, but I will need to find the source again.
Yes. 1677 banned the use of matchlocks in Plymouth.
20240715_102655.jpg

William
 
Back
Top