Snaphaunce Lock for I.D.

[rickystl]

Hello all. Here is the latest addition to my lock collection. This Snaphaunce lock is in very good condition. All complete and in working condition. Does not appear to have been cleaned. No pitting what so ever. I'm confident this is a European lock. It has a couple of features not found on later Middle Eastern copies. And a better quality forging. The hammer and lail of the lock plate appear to be English (?). There are no marks of any kind. The top screw is a real mystery. Two sets of course threads. The bottom of the top screw has no threads and - for the momment - stuck in the bottom jaw of the hammer. Almost as if it were staked in?? Once I get the top screw released, maybe I'll have a better idea of how it holds the flint in the jaws. Anyway, my reference material for early European arms is very limited. Maybe one of you out there can better identify the origin of this lock. I do think it is both European and very early. Possibly dating to the very late 16th or very early 17th century. Your thoughts please. And thanks for looking. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi rickystl,

I guess you said about everything that can be said.
Though widely copied in the Arabian countries, this one definitely does look English. The turned jaw screw and especially the twofold breakthru ornament on the pan cover still reflect the early 16th c. Renaissance artistic taste, so I would suggest a date of origin of early 17th c., ca. 1610-30, which makes your snaphaunce mechanism quite rare and not without value. It was either mounted on a military musket with wide fishtail buttstock or on a pistol.

I attach some characteristic English snaphaunce guns of ca. 1580-1620 for comparison. The earliest of them still adopted the safety catch on the rear of the lock plate from the wheellock.

The puffer on top is of ca. 1600-10,
the heavy musket dated 1590, the steel missing; both photograhed by the author in the Tower of London in 1991, now preserved in the Royal Armouries Leeds;
the petronel with the downcurved buttstock dated 1584,
the inlaid pair of English pistols with the pear shaped pommels ca. 1615, preserved in the Kremlin Museum, Moskaw;
the plain English military musket with the fishtail butt ca. 1620, interestingly enough still equipped with a safety catch, preserved in the Real Armería Madrid.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Michael: Thank you so much for your response. And, THANKS for the really cool pics of very early specimens!!! Great to look at. The one notable difference with my lock is the wider frizzen face (battery). But the other features, like you say, are decidedly English. Hmmmm. The tumbler on this lock is not even worn. As well, the lock bolt threads show no evidence of having been mounted on a gun in the past. Under magnafication, I don't see any evidence of blasting, cleaning, etc. This is leading me to believe this lock was never mounted on a gun. Again, thank you so much for your imput. Rick.

[Fernando K]

Hola, Rick

La pieza que te falta es una tuerca (nut, female nut) que se enrosca en el tornillo que está fijo en la mandíbula inferior, y que cierra las mandíbulas. He visto esta solución en algunos chenapanes escoceses (scotish snapahunce).

Fernando K

Hello, Rick

The part that you need is a nut (nut, nut female) that is screwed into the screw is fixed to the lower jaw and closes the jaws. I've seen this solution in some chenapanes Scots (scotish snapahunce).

Fernando K

[rickystl]

Hi Fernando!!! Like some Scottish Pistols? That's very interesting. I've never seen this type of top screw before. I'll keep your recommendation in mind while I study it further this weekend. This lock is becoming very interesting. Again, thanks for responding. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

I do think it was mounted but only for a short time: the steel (it's not really a battery as with snaphaunces the pan cover is not an integral part of the steel) shows flint scratches.
Still it is in amazing condition!

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

For comparison:

One of the better quality North African early 19th c. snaphaunces.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Michael: You are correct on both counts. Don't know how I missed that?? The frizzen does show scratches, but not many. When did they refer to a frizzen as a "battery"? I thought it was during this early period? Maybe a little later in the Doglock period? Thanks, Rick.

[rickystl]

Michael: That Moroccan snaphaunce lock looks almost exactly like mine - even the frizzen - with the exception of the top screw on mine. Hmmmmm.
I have a couple of these guns. Wonder if it's actually a later Middle Eastern copy? It's just the quality of the forging on this one is definately better than the other dozen or so Moroccan locks I've seen. Also, the interior of the lock has the addition of a clamp that stabalizes the pan cover arm. What do you think? Thanks, Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

The term frizzen/battery is, according to Dr. Thorsten Lenk's The Origin and Development of the Flintlock, only associated with the true flintlock mechanism wich seems to have appeared for the first time in France in ca. 1615. As I said before, frizzen/battery defines the combination of pan cover and steel in one piece.

The English dog lock of the 1630s-40s definitely employed a fully developed frizzen.

As to your English snaphaunce mechanism: I didn't mean to trouble you at all! I'm still convinced it's English, and your definnition and criteria mentioned are absolutely correct!

Best from a cold and windy Bavarian night to a hot Missouri,
Michael

[rickystl]

Michael: Thanks again for your help. Been a fun Thread. From a HOT 102 degree F Midwestern U.S. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

Thanks too,
and best from another cold (16 degrees centigrade) and rainy Bavarian midnight,

Michael

[rickystl]

I sent these photos to Mr. Brian Godwin in the U.K. for his opinion. Brian is considered one of the foremost autorities on the Snaphaunce lock. Here is his response:
Hi Rick,

Many thanks for the images of your snaphance lock. In my opinion it is North African and absolutely typical of its type. As you rightly say, they do copy the English snaphance of the early 17th century but there are subtle and very characteristic differences. Among these differences are the lockplate, which is generally much narrower (as you point out); the frizzen face, which is usually much wider; and the presence of a pan cover guide or retainer fixed over the pan (your image 003 - I have never seen one on an English snaphance). Most importantly, almost every English snaphance I have examined, whether a plain or a highly decorated version, is very well made and each component is carefully crafted and fits together well. This is just not the case for the North African snaphance which, generally, varies greatly in quality between good and bad, but they are never as well made as the English original. Your lock looks to be in very good condition and none of the components appear to be missing. I’m not trying to be negative about your lock but there are huge differences between the North African and the original English made examples.

As your lock type copies the early 17th century snaphance it is very difficult to date but the most likely period is somewhere in the 18th or 19th century and it was almost certainly produced locally. The most likely area is Morocco, as you mention. Some have the part rounded type components while others have flat components. I would suggest that the marks on the hammer (cock) are accidental.
I hope you are not too disappointed. It would have been great if it had been an English snaphance but it seems so very few have survived and none have to light through my Website enquiries yet. The North African snaphance is still a fascinating mechanism and you seem to have a very good example of one.

The best literature on the North African snaphance is found in;

“Firearms of the Islamic World” by Robert Elgood, London 1995, and “The Snaphance Muskets of al-Maghreb al-Mqsa” by Jim Gooding, Canadian Arms Collecting Journal, 1996.

I hope this helps.

Regards,

Brian

Well, there goes my 15 minutes of fame In the back of my mind, I thought this might actually be a North African lock. Especially after one of the photos Michael sent me. It's just in the best condition I ever seen on or off a gun. As Brian says, too many differences. Anyway, I didn't pay much for it. It will make a nice addition to my lock collection. Thanks for looking. Rick.

[Fernando K]

Hola Rick

Queda pendiente resolver el misterio del tornillo en la mandíbula inferior. El experto Godwin tampoco se ha referido a él....

Hi Rick

It remains to solve the mystery of the screw in the lower jaw. The expert Godwin has failed to refer to it ....

Fernando

[Matchlock]

Hi Rick,

Sorry to hear this discouraging news but of course we have to accept Brian's expertise.

Nevertheless, could you please ask him about the unusual presence of the two round breakthrus, as well of the finely roped decoration on top of the combined fire screen and pancover stabilization? I know these features only from English mechanisms. See attachment.

I would not believe that it could be of African origin but then again, my range of information on these is limited.

Still it is a nice mechanism of good quality and preserved in fine condition.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Fernando - Hello!! You are correct. I will get back to Brian about the top screw. That is the biggest mystery of all.

Michael: Good points. I have two other Moroccan snaphaunce locks. Neither have the two holes in the pan cover guide or the fine roped detail. Also, notice on the inside of the lock there is a small arm and screw which stablizes the pan cover arm so it doesn't wobble. My other locks dont have that feature. I'll ask Brian about this also.

Thanks, Rick.

[rickystl]

Michael: The last set of four pictures you sent showing the better quality gun: Except for the top screw, the lock on this gun is almost identical to mine. Notice the curve on top of the frizzen, the more narrow lock plate, the hammer stop positioned higher on the lock plate, the design of the hammer stop, and even the two holes in the pan cover guide. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Thanks for pointing that out, Rick!

Still, the actual style is different, and so is the raised, roped sharp rim.

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

Originally Posted by Matchlock

The turned jaw screw and especially the twofold breakthru ornament on the pan cover still reflect the early 16th c. Renaissance artistic taste, so I would suggest a date of origin of early 17th c., ca. 1610-30#
Best,
Michael

Rick: as you will remember from my first reply, I too have always felt that the cock jaw screw backed up the theory of a British/European origin as well.

Best,
m

[rickystl]

Well, I got the top screw off. It's not a top screw at all. No idication that it ever had threads on it. But, I'm 90% sure I know what it is. It's an iron tip from a ramrod from a Moroccan gun!! What look like two sets of threads are not threads. The are straight cut to assist the shooter's grip while pulling the ramrod from the rifle. I've seen this design on iron ramrods on other Moroccan rifles. There are traces of threads in the lower jaw. I can see where the one end was cut and ground/filed and tapered. It was simply hammered into the lower jaw and the tiny tit on top of the hammer was bent slightly sideways to hold it all together. I bent the little tip straight again. Then a couple light taps with a hammer and it came apart. Amazingly, the patina of the "supposed" top screw matches the rest of the lock. So, what we have here is a lock in very good condition, thats missing it's top screw. Usually when a lock is missing a top screw, it's also missing the top jaw. My best guess is that someone used the original top screw on another gun. Well, unless others disagree, I think I've solved the top screw mystery (?). I must admit it was fun. Fortunately, I have a spare Moroccan "parts" lock that still has it's original top screw. I think I can clean up the threads in the lower jaw to accept it. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Oh, Rick, what a discouraging outcome ...

m

[rickystl]

Hi Michael. Well, after picking myself up off the kitchen floor from a fit of kicking and crying, I'm OK now However, I've located two original Moroccan "parts" locks, both styled after the English lock, and both have their original top screws!! I can get them both very cheap. I'm sure the patina wont be an exact match, but proper cleaning could make it close. I'll save this lock yet!!!
Actually, this has been a fun thread. Research, investigation, mystery, and contact with Brian Godwin. I'll report back after I fix the lock. Thanks again for all the assistance - and hand-holding!! LOL Rick.

[Matchlock]

Please see

http://www.ask.com/wiki/Snaphance


Best,
m

[Matchlock]

Please see also

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=snaphance

[Cerjak]

Hi rick

Yes it is morrocan lock from Moukala, see some pics from my collection

Regards
Cerjak

[Matchlock]

More on snaphance weapons:


http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=snaphance

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...ight=snaphance



m

[rickystl]

Hi Michael. Thanks for moving this thread up to a current date. I forgot to post an update for my lock.
I almost missed Fernando's post. Thanks. And thanks for the additional Links.
Hi Cerjak. That is a great example of a Moroccan, Afedali style long gun. Great condition. The lock on your gun is almost a clone of mine. Thanks for Posting your pics.

Update: As mentioned earlier in this thread, this lock was missing it's top screw. I have four other original top screws that I thought I might be able to use? However, who ever staked that ramrod tip into the lower hole of the hammer destroyed the threads. So, I had to re-thread the hammer and make a new top screw. Actually, the new top screw matches better than one of the originals would have, due to this lock being in such good condition. Anyway, here are some pics of the lock with the new top screw. Thanks for looking. Rick.

[Matchlock]

Good job, Rick,

May I suggest considering doing a bit of additional filing to abrase the traces of the lathe?

I would also think over replacing the missing top spur of the cock.

Best,
Michael

[rickystl]

Hi Michael. Those lathe marks show up more in photos than they do to the naked eye. But then, my eyes are getting older. Again, good catch Michael. That's an easy one to fix.
What looks broken on top of the hammer is actually not broke. That's all the longer they were on these Moroccan locks. You will notice this on other examples. It looks broke in the photos because whoever staked that ramrod tip had to bend it over to get it in place. However, I'll try to clean it up a bit. Thanks, Rick.