• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Early 1700's French "Woods Runner's" Long Arms?

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
You fellows really need to read Kevin Gladycs book on the subject.
Indians hated buck an ears, too heavy. They were also annoyed with French guns as the barrels blew up on a regular basis.
HA!

Went to Amazon to look at it and it appears I already bought a copy back in 2011! Now I have to go find it!
 
You fellows really need to read Kevin Gladycs book on the subject.
Sadly, the reality is that Kevin's book , while an excellent treatise on 'trade guns', is only for those from the St. Entienne armory.

Is is NOT the de facto bible for any and all fire locks sent over to New France, never mind those from the Tulle Armory ...
 
That time frame is early, and pretty poorly documented.
‘Trade guns’ weren’t really developed at the time. And the French were iffy on arming civilians.
Flintlock was still cutting edge. Just a few years before the British army and much of Europe was still using match locks.
Dog and snaphaunce were still popular. Did the French buy guns from the Dutch? I don’t know
Many guns that got moved on to the frontier were Sea service guns, similar to military but a little lighter.
The famous dragon on the northwest gun is in fact a sea serpent. And original style was Dutch and very common on sea guns.
This is a neat thread for little investigation on the subject
I’ll be following this with interest
 
Are these be replacements or were they still arming the citizens? Sounds like a lot of guns each year. Would soldiers be issued from these stores or where they issued guns while still in France?
I think these are totals for soldiers, citizens and the Indians combined. Soldiers often brought there fusils from France with them, but a few, very few were recruited from the colonists. and some replacements would be required. The militia were supposed to supply their own arms. But anyone w/o arms were issued such and charged for it.

The CdB were unlicensed traders and therefor wanted by the law. If they were successful traders they could afford almost any thing on the market except arms for the military.
 
May depend on how poor or wealthy the guy was. If poor, maybe a matchlock, or a crude flintlock conversion of same. Wealthy? The latest and finest offered by French gunmakers.
 
 1702: 600 hunting muskets with barrels 3’-9” for Canada and Acadia and 5 fine hunting guns for Indian Chiefs, to be provided from renewed 1696 contract for additional 5-years with Tulle. (Bouchard, Museum, p 9, 24)
 1702: Things needed for establishment of Mobile River.
2 fusils with their sheaths at 30L [each] (Brain).
 1702: Included in a shipment from France to merchant Martel in Quebec:
2 - very fine guns, brass furniture, 4-1/2 foot barrel, in fashion at 26L4s
3 - very fine guns, 3 foot 8 inch barrel at 16L2d
6 - very fine guns, flat lock at 14L4d
6 - very fine guns, at 13L8d
18 fine guns, brass furniture at 12L6d
5 - fine carbines, brass furniture at 10L8d
10 carbines, brass furniture at 10L8d
1 - pair of fine pistols, brass furniture at 30L
(Kent)
 1703: 600 hunting muskets with barrels 3’-9” for Canada and Acadia and 5 fine hunting guns for Indian Chiefs, to be provided from contract with Tulle. (Bouchard, Museum, p 9, 24)
 1703: 500 muskets sent by Navy [Canada] (Cassel).
 1703: Expenses for Mississippi included:
500 trade guns at 14L apiece (Brain).
 1704: 600 hunting muskets with barrels 3’-9” for Canada and Acadia and 5 fine hunting guns for Indian Chiefs, to be provided from contract with Tulle. (Bouchard, Museum, p 9, 24)
 1705: 600 hunting muskets with barrels 3’-9” for Canada and Acadia and 5 fine hunting guns for Indian Chiefs, to be provided from contract with Tulle. (Bouchard, Museum, p 9, 24)
 1705: 500 promised but only 139 muskets arrived [Canada] (Cassel).
 1705: Saint- Etienne succeeded in selling hunting guns for Canada, but the quality was so poor that Vaudreuil and Beauharnois asked the King that future shipments come from Tulle (Bouchard, Museum, p 12).
 1705-16: Correspondence with Tulle shows that production was concentrated on hunting muskets for Canada and later on Grenadier muskets (Bouchard, Museum, p 11).
 1706: 600 hunting muskets with barrels 3’-9” for Canada and Acadia and 5 fine hunting guns for Indian Chiefs, to be provided from contract with Tulle. (Bouchard, Museum, p 9, 24)
 1706: 361 muskets, rest of 1705 order [Canada] (Cassel).
 1707: 475 muskets [Canada] (Cassel).
 1708: First socket bayonets sent to New France was an order of 200 shipped aboard the Charente bound for Plaisance (Placentia, Newfoundland). (Goldstein).
 1708-45: For the years between. New muskets for recruits & small amounts for rest – no larger than 200 [Canada] (Cassel).
 1709: from the inventory of Marillac, a married soldier at Fort Pontchartrain, Detroit after his death, one carbine. (Kent).
 1711: Cadillac’s inventory at Detroit (Michigan Pioneer…)
3 large muskets, English make. 4 large muskets, French. 1 ditto, newly put together, without a trigger-guard. 2 ditto, spoilt. (Kent)
This is excellent information. Thanks Doc!
 
...Many guns that got moved on to the frontier were Sea service guns, similar to military but a little lighter...

Makes perfect sense considering a naval guy, Admiral of France, Gaspard de Coligny, was the instigator of the colonization expeditions to “La Floride".


...The famous dragon on the northwest gun is in fact a sea serpent...

Interesting take. Most would interpret it as a terrestrial dragon, but I can see the inference.
 
Last edited:
Makes perfect sense considering a naval guy, Admiral of France, Gaspard de Coligny, was the instigator of the colonization expeditions to “La Floride".




Interesting take. Most would interpret it as a terrestrial dragon, but I can see the inference.
Generally it’s called the dragon. However take a close look at it. There is no hint of feet or wings. That’s ok most dragons were historically represented snake like. However look along the body and you see fins and at the end a fish tail.
In earlier versions it is seen as more and more sea serpent like.
Compare it to oar fish
 
Generally it’s called the dragon. However take a close look at it. There is no hint of feet or wings. That’s ok most dragons were historically represented snake like. However look along the body and you see fins and at the end a fish tail.
In earlier versions it is seen as more and more sea serpent like.
Compare it to oar fish

Well, I never really looked at it closely, but now that I have, I have to agree - it's a sea serpent! This may lend credence to the argument that guns such as Le Fusil Marine Ordinaire, etc, were the predominate arms in the period we are discussing.
sp-nw-8-b_2.jpg


Clearly he has no legs - only fins and a tail.

Interesting that most literature, such as Reid's "Dragon Sideplate Chronology" [LINK], does not emphasize the sea serpent aspect.
 
Last edited:
We associate it with NWG, but in early versions it was very popular on all manner of civilian guns, and its sea serpent style is real visible. Was very popular on Dutch guns in late seventeenth and moving in to eighteenth century
 
Fusil Marine musket stocks recovered from the 17th century wreck of the La Belle clearly show dragon/serpent sideplate inletting [ LINK ]. This clearly puts that weapon in the time frame and vicinity of the colony at La Mobile.
 
Last edited:

Latest posts

Back
Top