Arab? Musket

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Jon MB

Hello All.
I always assumed the extensions to the butt of these guns was related to either:

1) Balance when carried (possible counterwight to barrel),
2) Reloading with the butt placed on sandy/rugged ground ,
3) Possible use as a club.

Obviously over time the original function could have been forgotten and the feature have been maintained as something traditional.

Just a thought on the topic. Nice piece Markku, have a similar one.

#1 above is unlikely, as the barrel would be much heavier than the (added?)wooden pad.
#2 Why would a wooden pad be added to a wooden stock to avoid contamination by sand? The folds of the skin covering (often seen on these butts) would be more likely to harbor sand than a plain wooden stock.
#3 If the gun ended up being used as a club, the existing stock would be more than sufficient to knock a person out.
Certainly the original reason for the butt "pads" remains a mystery but I do not believe that the reason is any of the above ideas. Most likely as has been said in above posts, the butt is designed to "soften" the recoil, or is just a matter of taste.
Stu

[Victrix]

Yes probably to soften the recoil as the rifle butt is otherwise fairly narrow (but why convex and not concave?). In addition I notice that these rifles don’t have slings attached to them. So the buttpads may also help to prevent the butt from sliding out from under the bend of the arm when riding a horse or camel?

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Victrix

Yes probably to soften the recoil as the rifle butt is otherwise fairly narrow (but why convex and not concave?). In addition I notice that these rifles don’t have slings attached to them. So the buttpads may also help to prevent the butt from sliding out from under the bend of the arm when riding a horse or camel?

Hi Victrix,
Not all Middle Eastern guns have sling attachment rings, but the subject gun and also others shown in this thread do have rings on the side for attachment of a sling or retaining strap.
Stu

[Jon MB]

Originally Posted by kahnjar1

#1 above is unlikely, as the barrel would be much heavier than the (added?)wooden pad.
#2 Why would a wooden pad be added to a wooden barrel to avoid contamination by sand? The folds of the skin covering (often seen on these butts) would be more likely to harbor sand than a plain wooden stock.
#3 If the gun ended up being used as a club, the existing stock would be more than sufficient to knock a person out.
Certainly the original reason for the butt "pads" remains a mystery but I do not believe that the reason is any of the above ideas. Most likely as has been said in above posts, the butt is designed to "soften" the recoil, or is just a matter of taste.
Stu

Stu, in response to your points, (I see you have no doubt handled such pieces)
Point 1. The sizes of these additions vary. Either way the centre of balance would be shifted, which may or may not have been desired by the tribal users.
Point 2. If you look at the base of the stocks with the additions, they are often quite worn. Many examples are not fur covered.
Point 3. If you say so. Hard to know at this point.

'Taste' would here be a question of cultural norms related to weapons.

Elgood mentions absorbsion of recoil but does not elaborate, but it would be interesting to hear explanations from the tribal users of these weapons, or their decendants.

[kahnjar1]

Originally Posted by Jon MB

Stu, in response to your points, (I see you have no doubt handled such pieces)
Point 1. The sizes of these additions vary. Either way the centre of balance would be shifted, which may or may not have been desired by the tribal users.
Point 2. If you look at the base of the stocks with the additions, they are often quite worn. Many examples are not fur covered.
Point 3. If you say so. Hard to know at this point.

'Taste' would here be a question of cultural norms related to weapons.

Elgood mentions absorbsion of recoil but does not elaborate, but it would be interesting to hear explanations from the tribal users of these weapons, or their decendants.

Your points may well be right, and I am not saying that you are wrong. Simply that this issue is a discussion point, from which (hopefully) a valid reason for these butt extensions will appear.
Yes I have owned in the past a couple of these guns but stupidly sold them in a weak moment
In answer to your comments, I agree that the sizes do vary BUT they are only made of wood and weigh next to nothing in comparison to the barrel. Yes some are worn but then many old gunstocks show signs of wear. I would guess that these get rougher treatment than (for instance) a European gun. As far as use as a "club" goes I certainly would not like to have one aimed at my head. As you say it's hard to tell but I would not like to be on the receiving end!
Stu

[Jon MB]

Thank you Stu.