Talk:Matchlock

Firearms Top‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Firearms, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of firearms on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FirearmsWikipedia:WikiProject FirearmsTemplate:WikiProject FirearmsFirearms articles
Top	This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale.

Military history: Technology / Weaponry

This article is within the scope of the Military history WikiProject. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the project and see a list of open tasks. To use this banner, please see the full instructions.Military historyWikipedia:WikiProject Military historyTemplate:WikiProject Military historymilitary history articles

This article has been checked against the following criteria for B-class status:
Referencing and citation: criterion not met Coverage and accuracy: criterion not met Structure: criterion met Grammar and style: criterion met Supporting materials: criterion met

Associated task forces:
/
	Military science, technology, and theory task force
	Weaponry task force

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Tag & Assess 2008

Article reassessed and graded as start class. --dashiellx (talk) 17:41, 6 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It says that the matchlock was used in Japan until the 1900's, Im not a gun expert, but it sounds kind of odd that they were used 500 years after they were invented?

   "The first dated illustration of a matchlock mechanism dates to 1475, and by the 1500s they were universally used. The technology was transported to India by Babur in 1526 and to Japan by the Portuguese in 1543 and flourished there until the 1900s.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galinkin (talk • contribs) 21:49, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind my last post, I researched it and the document was correct —Preceding unsigned comment added by Galinkin (talk • contribs) 21:58, 12 February 2010 (UTC)[reply]

"Japanese pistol" image

I don't think this pistol is intended to be used by a mounted samurai despite this being claimed at the museum. Compare with this image [1], which is an actual pistol used by samurai. Note the much simpler construction. I think the pistol in this image is actually a working, but non-combat-use gift piece. Also note the Mon (crest) on the barrel. It's a Nanatsu-boshi (seven stars) Mon and this Mon had been used by many clan including a branch of Matsudaira clan. So, it's quite likely to be an Edo era gift. --Revth (talk) 01:20, 1 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

recent content removal

It seems someone keeps removing the same content over and over again without explanation. Either give a proper reason or stop. Cold Season (talk) 06:20, 13 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Improved versions of the musket were transported to India by Babur in 1526"

The sources referenced for this claim ( [7], [8] ) seem a bit dubious. I can't attribute an author to either one of them, and these pages don't seem to cite any sources for their claims. Darthshak (talk) 05:48, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Have found a reliable reference ^[1] which states that Mughal musket technology was indeed superior to their European counterparts. There is also speculation regarding its origin :

The common Mughal soldier stuck, however, to his matchlock, which, in technical terms, was a descendant of the fifteenth-century matchlock that had reached India through Ottoman channels.

However, the statement is based on accounts of Mughal India provided by Francois Bernier and Jean-Baptiste Tavernier, who visited India during Shah Jahan and Aurangzeb's reigns respectively, much after Babur's rule. There is also evidence^[2] that many improvements to muskets had occurred "by Akbar's time". Again, it is not possible to attribute these to Babur himself. Darthshak (talk) 18:37, 14 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Gommans, J.J.L (2002). Mughal Warfare: Indian Frontiers and Highroads to Empire 1500-1700 (Warfare and History). Routledge. p. 256. ISBN 0415239893.
^ Schimmel, Annemarie (2006). The Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and Culture. Reaktion Books. p. 352. ISBN 978-1861892515.

First use of fire arms in Africa

Firearms were already widely used in North Africa before the Ethiopian-Adal War (1529-1543). I don't know the earliest instance but one such example is the Battle of Ridaniya on 24 January 1517 outside Cairo. Both sides (the Ottomans and the Mamluks) extensively used fire arms and cannons in that battle. You might want to revise this claim. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sndilek (talk • contribs) 11:29, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

a comment

@Revth now where is the Bajozutsu revolver for reference?!

@Cold Season content removal?! agree completely

"The Bajozutsu revolver was a Japanese three shot pistole of the Edo period and possibly invented at the same time, before the Americans and Europeans were in search of multi shot firearms." — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.73.223.119 (talk) 18:45, 29 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Citation absent for claim about the lever being mounted forward of the flash pan

"Most matchlock mechanisms mounted the serpentine forward of the flash pan. The serpentine dipped backward, toward the firer, to ignite the priming. This is the reverse of the familiar forward-dipping hammer of the flintlock and later firearms.[citation needed]"

It would be good to know if there is enough evidence to state historically that it was "most" matchlocks (at what place, at what time) which had the lever come down from in front of the pan, it was certainly some, by contrast with later designs where that essentially never happened. The reason for this is somewhat obvious. If you look at where the sparks fly with a flintlock, with the hammer rear of the pan and springing forward on firing, the sparks are mostly going forward and not towards the face of the shooter. Reversing the direction would be dangerous to the operator. With a matchlock, you're not using friction to generate sparks, so it doesn't matter if the "hammer" equivalent (the match) levers down from the front.

I did find a secondary source which says that in the case of dual-ignition matchlocks, i.e. where there is a matchlock method of ignition as a secondary source of ignition if a primary method fails, that the serpentine (i.e. the lever with the match) is usually mounted forward of the pan. That's described in the second main block of text I'm quoting below (after ...):

"The military matchlock musket and, in particular, the musket where a matchlock is used in combination with another lock mechanism to form a dual-ignition lock, although almost always being included in overviews of the firearms and arms and armour fields, have received relatively little focused systematic study by arms scholars. Important contributions on matchlocks are those of Hoff, Wilson, Gooding,1 the works by Darling published in the 1970s,2 the recent catalogue of a selection of matchlocks from the Royal Armouries prepared for an international exhibition in Oman,3 and recent work on Asian matchlock mechanisms.4 This brief review examines matchlock long arms with a lock mechanism permitting dual (two) forms of ignition — i.e. those with a back-up or reserve ignition system — these are to be distinguished from similar mechanisms permitting superimposed charge ignition.5

...

Triggers can be of three variants — lever and trigger or double triggers21 or single trigger.22 When a lever is used it is inevitably used to actuate a sear matchlock, this has the advantage that the dual mechanism is easy to lay out with the lock actions one behind the other in a series configuration as the primary matchlock serpentine usually falls towards the shooter The sear lever action also allows a precise ‘touch-off’ of the powder. Single trigger actions are particularly innovative.23"

Williams, D., & Godwin, B. (2014). Dual-Ignition Musket Locks Including a Matchlock — a Note on their Design and Utility. Arms & Armour, 11(1), 4–16. doi:10.1179/1741612414z.00000000028

I'm not including this as a citation since it's in reference specifically to dual-ignition matchlocks and not just "matchlocks." These are distinct concepts.

— Preceding unsigned comment added by YouAreNotASecondarySource (talk • contribs) 18:33, 17 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Gommans, J.J.L (2002). Mughal Warfare: Indian Frontiers and Highroads to Empire 1500-1700 (Warfare and History). Routledge. p. 256. ISBN 0415239893.

[2] Schimmel, Annemarie (2006). The Empire of the Great Mughals: History, Art and Culture. Reaktion Books. p. 352. ISBN 978-1861892515.

[1]

[2]