Matchlock Pistol

[corrado26]

In my photo archive I discovered pictures of a matchlock pistol that had marks on the lock and barrel. The barrel shows a snake, as known from Peter Danner from Nuremberg. The lock mark with the letters "L and B" could be interpreted as being made by Lorenz Beheim, also from Nuremberg, if the pistol actually came from this period, which I assume is not the case. I would be happy to hear other opinions.

[Fernando K]

Hello
It looks like a reproduction to me. I couldn't say what time it was made, but I stop at the plate of the key (lock). It seems cast to me, the decoration with a burin would have shown the sharp edges, and here they are rounded. The central decoration does not respond to any drawing, and this is most evident in the area of ​​the builder's name. A punch would have left the edges inclined, or rounded, and here they present a 90 degree angle.
Also, look at the trigger guard, it has no space, or very little, to put your finger in and a lot of space behind it. I don't see combs for a drumstick on the pistol.
On the other hand, only the Japanese were able to use the matchlock pistol; there is not a single example in any museum or private collection, due to the difficulty of carrying a lit matchlock.

[fernando]

If Udo doesn't mind, i will second Fernando K. In fact, i hesitated to be the first one to suggest that this pistol looks so ...unreal !

[Raf]

The barrel shows a snake, as known from Peter Danner from Nuremberg. The lock mark with the letters "L and B" could be interpreted as being made by Lorenz Beheim, also from Nuremberg.

I think your point is that Lorenz Beheim, is too early and Peter Danner , could not have made something this incompetent. The lock plate shape with the pan integral to lock would argue 1620/40s but its not a form normally seen . It looks as if the flashpan is a separate component with an extension below the pan screwed onto the lock from the inside . The serpentine is rather inelegant. For me the metalwork has a blurred look to it which you would associate with a casting rather than hand chiseling or engraving.

If the makers mark is supposed to refer to Lorenz Beheim , occupation. gunmaker; cannon founder; armourer; pewter caster. Date of birth. 1487, then this is an association that might have appealed to a nineteenth century forger. Forgers sometimes aim to succeed by filling out the gaps in history where there is no known precedent. Van Meegeren forgeries of Vermeer were initially successful because he created a series of religious pictures in the style of Vermeer for which there were no direct comparisons.

[corrado26]

Thank you very much for the informative information about this more than strange pistol, which appears to be quite old due to its condition, but is not. If I remember correctly, I discovered and photographed the pistol during the preparations for the Sotheby's auction at Marienburg in 2004 and it was clear to me even then that this was a piece of historicism. However, to this day I am completely unaware of the meaning of the whole thing: it cannot be a forgery, as this requires an original, which never existed. But the fact that a gunsmith would use time and valuable materials to create something that never existed is more than puzzling.

[CutlassCollector]

Forgive me if this is obvious, as my knowledge of firearms is limited, but am I correct in thinking, that even if it is a replica/forgery it is functional?

The cover for the pan is thumb operated to open it quickly and can even be screwed down to keep the powder dry. Or carried for short periods with the match lit.

The trigger would not operate a sear as we would normally expect but would instead move some sort of internal lever that pulled the match holder down onto the pan. Hence the space for a finger at the front and a long slot at the back to accommodate that movement.

It seems, as Udo has already said, a huge amount of work on the stock and the mechanism, to be just a display piece.

[corrado26]

In Harold L. Peterson's book "Old Firearms" you can find a foto of a wheellockpistole made by Le Page in 1829. It is said that it probably has been made for target shooting because of the smooth acting wheellock without influence of the aiming process.
Perhaps the matchlockpistol in question has been made for the same purpose?

[Raf]

[ it cannot be a forgery, as this requires an original, which never existed. But the fact that a gunsmith would use time and valuable materials to create something that never existed is more than puzzling.[/QUOTE]

That was my point. Good forgers sometimes succeed by making things for which there is no direct president. A nineteenth collector might have questioned why European matchlock pistols are never seen so would have been delighted to find this rare example. It reminds me of the dubious inaccurate engravings one sees in nineteenth century histories from which it may well have been copied. Objects from any period have a kind of handwriting which is usually the give away to when they were produced. Victorian collectors valued historical weapons as works of art and had little interest in plain functional examples hence forgeries emphasise the decorative and exotic. A good example is the writhen sword recently discussed. Also nineteenth century collectors did not have access to the information we have today so more likely to be taken in by fantasy pieces that today we would see as implausible . To return to Van Meegeren after his forgeries were unmasked people asked why was it that nobody had noticed that the facial architypes in his paintings looked remarkably like pre war film stars.

[Fernando K]

Hello everyone

It has been hinted here that this gun could be target shooting. It lacks sights, and the grip does not seem to be for precision shooting.

On the other hand, it has been said that the forger lacked a model. There are numerous wheel guns with ball-shaped butts, profusely decorated. They are also found on hunting wheel rifles, cases covered with hunting motifs, such as dogs, hares and rabbits, and floral decoration. The floral motifs of this specimen are not a copy, and its design is removed to represent something that is not seen in any specimen, indefinite.

Affectionately