Why are Miquelets relegated to pre-flintlock?

[Clark Badgett]

From what I can find, they seem to have had a similar timeframe trajectory (+/-) as the French lock style.

 

[russellshaffer]

A good question. After all, they are pretty much just an inside out flintlock and they work the same way. I personally like to see all of the moving parts.

 

[Sam squanch]

Let’s ask Rudyard…..

 

[cyten]

AFAIK, the true French Flintlock we know was developed in the early 17th century. The Miquelet has been around since the mid 16th century. So, it was before the Flintlock.

 

[Clark Badgett]

AFAIK, the true French Flintlock we know was developed in the early 17th century. The Miquelet has been around since the mid 16th century. So, it was before the Flintlock.

Actually the Miquelet was a type of flintlock, along with the snaphance, Frenchlock and dog lock if one was to be technical. In that respect the padilla belongs in flintlock discussions since it may, or may not be the start of the system. No one really seems to be exactly sure just when they came about.

 

[Colonial Boy]

A good question. After all, they are pretty much just an inside out flintlock and they work the same way. I personally like to see all of the moving parts.

Same here and they make for a stronger stock.

 

[FlinterNick]

From what I can find, they seem to have had a similar timeframe trajectory (+/-) as the French lock style.

A lot of times writers in magazines lump the miquelete into a separate category because there were much earlier lock designs in other countries like Sweden, Russia, and the Ottoman Empire that are not inherently miquelete but are similar. While they were not all the same or as advanced as the Spanish style, they shared a similar concept and miquelete are often mistaken as an upgrade of a much earlier style lock For example a causack / Tatar snaplock really should be in its own category, but collectors and writers often lump them together segregated from Flintlocks as pre-true flintlock era locks.