a seventeenth century matchlock ?

Matchlock · 24th February 2014, 07:13 PM

That's what I thought: the town mark ZEL and the Saxon coat-of-arms (in the 17th century, Zella belonged to Saxony while being part of Thuringia today), two marks that are identical on my musket and can be found on all guns from that Zella series, prove that this originally was a plain military musket of ca. 1645.

The riddle has been solved - sorry for the bad news, Raf!

As for the question mark in your title: yes, this once was a genuine 17th c. matchlock musket, the stock however prettified later-on, and in an earlier style than the rest of the gun.

Btw: the fire shield as well is a fantasy addition - please refer to the fire shield on my gun.

m

Matchlock · 24th February 2014, 08:45 PM

Here are close-ups of some of the Zella marks on the barrels of the group of 8 muskets in the Musée de l'Armée Paris.

m

Marcus den toom · 25th February 2014, 07:46 AM

Some years back Hermann Historica (auction 60, lot number 21) sold this matchlock gun. It had damages at the stock and some other defects (like the tang and serpentine which has been broken).
No expert as of yet on these weapons, but i think the auction labbeled it right as a German matchlock gun. It has the same kind of decorations as the Wheel lock carbine from suhl i used to own. So possibly suhl (not sure though

)
third image: the middle one is how it looked like, the others are just an attempt from my side to see how it might have looked like when restored.

Raf · 25th February 2014, 10:05 AM

Thanks for your contribution Marcus. A useful comparison since the quality , or lack of it , of the bone inlays is very similar. To say that this style of decoration died out in Germany in the early seventeenth century and in Holland by the 1630s may in principle be correct. However the products of the German armouries of the 1640s must have moved around Europe , some of which may well have ended up being decorated according to regional tastes. For example the detail below is from a Tschinke dated 1667.
Your example also illustrates my original point about the practicability or desirability of restoration of firearms in this state of advanced decay.

cornelistromp · 25th February 2014, 10:47 AM

There was a lively arms trade in the 16th and 17th centuries, I assume that the Petronel and muskets shown on 16/17 century Dutch paintings are mainly of German origin.

The typical Dutch style deer antler/ mother of pearl decoration was seen as early as the last quarter of the 16th century in the Netherlands.

See a German/Dutch Petronel 1579 in the Emden weapons rooms and compare this decoration with the one in post 1 and the musket in #2

One can assume with high probability that the decoration of post#1 is the orginal one done in the first half of the 17th century.

where this decoration has been done is not yet clear to me.

best,
Jasper

Matchlock · 25th February 2014, 11:47 AM

It is a fact that, in the High Baroque period of ca. 1700, no other country but Poland widely used a Renaissance style that had become outdated for almost 100 years (!) in order to embellish military firearms that were manufactured in Germany but, just as the style, had become obsolete long since.

The matchlock musket posted by Marcus in post #8 is all the more remarkable as it basically is a very early piece, of the period and type of the Dresden muskets, with highly decorated stock. We should closely study the shape of its lock mechanism with the long tiller trigger and the early serpentine, its barrel and stock.
Now what was wrong with that piece? Have a close look and you will notice it is too short: 149 cm overall length is not enough as to proportion when the standard length was 156 cm-160 cm. So the piece must have been shortened. Next, the back sight does not show the correct style; it should be a long tubular back sight chiselled as a bearded face. Finally, the screw entering the barrel tang from above denotes a complete fake as tang screws between ca. 1560 and 1700 always entered the stock from the underside!
Of course it was dated completely wrong 'ca. 1620' by Hermann Historica. 1580's-90 would be the correct date assiged to it but concerning what had been done to it - leave it alone! That's what I did.

I am proud to say that a fine specimen of that very same type of heavy (9 kg!) early matchlock musket of ca. 1570-80 is in my collection, the barrel struck with the Gothic minuscule p mark of the famous Munich gunsmith Peter Peteck who worked for the Electors of Saxony and the Emperor Charles V, and whose guns are preserved in world famous collections like the Met and the Real Armería Madrid!

Looking at the muskets Jasper posted we should keep in mind that they cover an early range from 1579 (the Emden petronel) to ca. 1625 (the long muskets with trigger guards), their overall and especially their decorative style being forerunners and totally incomparable with Raf's musket in discussion. Originally, there just never existed a decorated version of the latter!

m

Marcus den toom · 25th February 2014, 12:40 PM

Not a matchlock gun, but considering the discussion i post this carbine with a barrel from suhl. The decorations are in renaisance styl. the carbine however was without a doubt a later production since the barrel marking (suhler hen) was that of 1680's (if i remember correctly). So, as Michael pointed out, there are a lot of later productions which resemble the renaisance styl to meet the demands of Polish noble man.

25th February 2014, 10:05 AM	#4
Raf Member Join Date: Nov 2013 Posts: 252	Thanks for your contribution Marcus. A useful comparison since the quality , or lack of it , of the bone inlays is very similar. To say that this style of decoration died out in Germany in the early seventeenth century and in Holland by the 1630s may in principle be correct. However the products of the German armouries of the 1640s must have moved around Europe , some of which may well have ended up being decorated according to regional tastes. For example the detail below is from a Tschinke dated 1667. Your example also illustrates my original point about the practicability or desirability of restoration of firearms in this state of advanced decay. Attached Images

25th February 2014, 10:47 AM	#5
cornelistromp Member Join Date: Mar 2009 Posts: 1,060	There was a lively arms trade in the 16th and 17th centuries, I assume that the Petronel and muskets shown on 16/17 century Dutch paintings are mainly of German origin. The typical Dutch style deer antler/ mother of pearl decoration was seen as early as the last quarter of the 16th century in the Netherlands. See a German/Dutch Petronel 1579 in the Emden weapons rooms and compare this decoration with the one in post 1 and the musket in #2 One can assume with high probability that the decoration of post#1 is the orginal one done in the first half of the 17th century. where this decoration has been done is not yet clear to me. best, Jasper Attached Images Last edited by cornelistromp; 25th February 2014 at 11:00 AM.

25th February 2014, 11:47 AM	#6
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	It is a fact that, in the High Baroque period of ca. 1700, no other country but Poland widely used a Renaissance style that had become outdated for almost 100 years (!) in order to embellish military firearms that were manufactured in Germany but, just as the style, had become obsolete long since. The matchlock musket posted by Marcus in post #8 is all the more remarkable as it basically is a very early piece, of the period and type of the Dresden muskets, with highly decorated stock. We should closely study the shape of its lock mechanism with the long tiller trigger and the early serpentine, its barrel and stock. Now what was wrong with that piece? Have a close look and you will notice it is too short: 149 cm overall length is not enough as to proportion when the standard length was 156 cm-160 cm. So the piece must have been shortened. Next, the back sight does not show the correct style; it should be a long tubular back sight chiselled as a bearded face. Finally, the screw entering the barrel tang from above denotes a complete fake as tang screws between ca. 1560 and 1700 always entered the stock from the underside! Of course it was dated completely wrong 'ca. 1620' by Hermann Historica. 1580's-90 would be the correct date assiged to it but concerning what had been done to it - leave it alone! That's what I did. I am proud to say that a fine specimen of that very same type of heavy (9 kg!) early matchlock musket of ca. 1570-80 is in my collection, the barrel struck with the Gothic minuscule p mark of the famous Munich gunsmith Peter Peteck who worked for the Electors of Saxony and the Emperor Charles V, and whose guns are preserved in world famous collections like the Met and the Real Armería Madrid! Looking at the muskets Jasper posted we should keep in mind that they cover an early range from 1579 (the Emden petronel) to ca. 1625 (the long muskets with trigger guards), their overall and especially their decorative style being forerunners and totally incomparable with Raf's musket in discussion. Originally, there just never existed a decorated version of the latter! m Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 25th February 2014 at 01:06 PM.

24th February 2014, 07:13 PM	#1
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	That's what I thought: the town mark ZEL and the Saxon coat-of-arms (in the 17th century, Zella belonged to Saxony while being part of Thuringia today), two marks that are identical on my musket and can be found on all guns from that Zella series, prove that this originally was a plain military musket of ca. 1645. The riddle has been solved - sorry for the bad news, Raf! As for the question mark in your title: yes, this once was a genuine 17th c. matchlock musket, the stock however prettified later-on, and in an earlier style than the rest of the gun. Btw: the fire shield as well is a fantasy addition - please refer to the fire shield on my gun. m Last edited by Matchlock; 24th February 2014 at 08:40 PM.

24th February 2014, 08:45 PM	#2
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Here are close-ups of some of the Zella marks on the barrels of the group of 8 muskets in the Musée de l'Armée Paris. m Attached Images

25th February 2014, 07:46 AM	#3
Marcus den toom Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 534	Some years back Hermann Historica (auction 60, lot number 21) sold this matchlock gun. It had damages at the stock and some other defects (like the tang and serpentine which has been broken). No expert as of yet on these weapons, but i think the auction labbeled it right as a German matchlock gun. It has the same kind of decorations as the Wheel lock carbine from suhl i used to own. So possibly suhl (not sure though ) third image: the middle one is how it looked like, the others are just an attempt from my side to see how it might have looked like when restored.

25th February 2014, 12:40 PM	#7
Marcus den toom Member Join Date: Jun 2013 Location: Netherlands Posts: 534	Not a matchlock gun, but considering the discussion i post this carbine with a barrel from suhl. The decorations are in renaisance styl. the carbine however was without a doubt a later production since the barrel marking (suhler hen) was that of 1680's (if i remember correctly). So, as Michael pointed out, there are a lot of later productions which resemble the renaisance styl to meet the demands of Polish noble man.