Matchlocks at sea?

[user 56333]

I've seen illustrations of Spanish "sea soldiers" from the 1500s carrying matchlocks, and I assume the same could be found on other countries ships during this period, given that matchlocks were the predominant firearm back then. So, I'd like to learn a bit more about how matchlocks were used aboard ships throughout history. For instance:

Were there ever any patterns of "sea service" matchlocks made?

Did matchlocks intended for shipboard use ever have brass fittings to better resist the salt water, the way that "sea service" flintlocks in later generations sometimes did?

Did matchlock-armed troops ever take positions on fighting tops to shoot down at the enemy deck, the way that marines in the flintlock generations did? Or were matchlocks considered too dangerous to shoot in close proximity to the rigging/sails?

Or really anything else related to the use of matchlocks at sea.

 

[TobJohn]

I've seen illustrations of Spanish "sea soldiers" from the 1500s carrying matchlocks, and I assume the same could be found on other countries ships during this period, given that matchlocks were the predominant firearm back then. So, I'd like to learn a bit more about how matchlocks were used aboard ships throughout history. For instance:

Were there ever any patterns of "sea service" matchlocks made?

Did matchlocks intended for shipboard use ever have brass fittings to better resist the salt water, the way that "sea service" flintlocks in later generations sometimes did?

Did matchlock-armed troops ever take positions on fighting tops to shoot down at the enemy deck, the way that marines in the flintlock generations did? Or were matchlocks considered too dangerous to shoot in close proximity to the rigging/sails?

Or really anything else related to the use of matchlocks at sea.

The Mary Rose sank in the 1540s with matchlock arquebuses and matchlock gun shields, so a good testament to their use in naval warfare
The type of gun:
Matchlock muzzle-loading musket Made in Gardone, Brescia - Royal Armouries collections
Ocean going ships in this period had a really tall front section and back section, so that they could be used like castle towers (the front deck of a boat is literally called a forecastle). That may have limited the need for them to shoot from the top of sails because they were already high up.

I recently finished 3 books on 1500s warfare and cannot totally remember what I learned from which one, so I may be slightly off, but I’m fairly certain galley warfare was a major place to use and develop arquebuses. Up until cannons became very powerful on ships, naval combat was mostly fought like floating forts attacking and storming each other in close combat. Because siege defense is were handheld guns developed the most at the beginning, they were a natural fit. I think I saw a claim that Lepanto (1571) had roughly similar galleys on both sides (with a small handful of extra powerful ones with the Christians) but the Christians used a lot of arquebuses, while the Muslims still had a large portion of bows. I am not sure how true that is, though.

For proper matchlock muskets, archeology of the Vasa (sank in 1628) has discovered 2 snap locks and one matchlock.
Search: owner?:"S-SMM-VM" text:"musket"

 

[user 56333]

Ocean going ships in this period had a really tall front section and back section, so that they could be used like castle towers

You're dead right. Those "front and back sections" are what we sailors call "forecastles and sterncastles", fyi

The high superstructure on ships in this era was a holdover from the medieval period, and you're dead right that soldiers would have been employed on the upper decks of both forecastle and sterncastle to use them like the battlements on a land castle would have been used. I guess I should have thought more about that before asking about fighting tops ... that's what comes of having my head in the 1700s for the last couple months

I had a look at the links you posted. It's too bad more of the guns hasn't survived to give us an indication of some of things I was asking about, like whether they used brass fittings at all. But that's to be expected of something that was sitting at the bottom of the sea for centuries...

I do know that brass-barreled cannons were used at sea during the 1500s, I've seen a culverin or two like that.

 

[TobJohn]

You're dead right. Those "front and back sections" are what we sailors call "forecastles and sterncastles", fyi

The high superstructure on ships in this era was a holdover from the medieval period, and you're dead right that soldiers would have been employed on the upper decks of both forecastle and sterncastle to use them like the battlements on a land castle would have been used. I guess I should have thought more about that before asking about fighting tops ... that's what comes of having my head in the 1700s for the last couple months

I had a look at the links you posted. It's too bad more of the guns hasn't survived to give us an indication of some of things I was asking about, like whether they used brass fittings at all. But that's to be expected of something that was sitting at the bottom of the sea for centuries...

I do know that brass-barreled cannons were used at sea during the 1500s, I've seen a culverin or two like that.

In the 1500s, plenty of guns had brass barrels. Procurement was so ad hoc that I would guess there was not any consistency to guns destined for naval service.

 

[Pukka Bundook]

Yes, Brass or bronze was quite commonly used.
In warfare on the sea, (to greatly simplify) soldiers were taken on board for the fighting, like marines in later times.
(Mr Tob, I like all the reading you are doing!! You learn Very fast!)
A goodly portion of these in the early to mid 1500's could Possibly have been mercenaries so the arms would be privately owned.
(This is supposition and no hard evidence!)
Grappling and close quarter fighting seems to have been the order of the day, and that is why so many died on the Mary Rose. The anti boarding nets were in place over the decks and the crew could not get out when she turned turtle.
It is recorded that this ship had a great deal more men on board in expectation of the coming fight, and that was a reason for her keeling over.

PS,
Am Not suggesting mercenaries on the Mary Rose, just the possibility of such in some lands at that time, as the Lendskneckts were at their high point about then.

Best,
R.

I like that you are using some illustrations dear to Michael's heart as well, John!

 

[TobJohn]

(Mr Tob, I like all the reading you are doing!! You learn Very fast!)

I like that you are using some illustrations dear to Michael's heart as well, John!

I have a lot of free time and love to learn lol. I just received that Graz armory wheellock book and it makes Dune look like a dime novel. Should keep me occupied for a while.

I having a growing appreciation why he always used certain ones, particularly the Pavia ones. I have them saved for quick reference.

 

[Pukka Bundook]

Michael would have loved talking to you Mr T!

 

[user 56333]

In warfare on the sea, (to greatly simplify) soldiers were taken on board for the fighting, like marines in later times.
(Mr Tob, I like all the reading you are doing!! You learn Very fast!)
A goodly portion of these in the early to mid 1500's could Possibly have been mercenaries so the arms would be privately owned.

In the case of Spain I believe their "sea soldiers" were just transferred from the regular army. I know that Spanish armed galleons during the 1500s would have two commanders aboard, one a naval officer and the other an army officer. The naval commander handled the sailors and the running of the ship, while the army officer handled the embarked soldiers and anything related to boarding combat.

Not sure how it was on ships of other countries of the period...

 

[TobJohn]

Michael would have loved talking to you Mr T!

Deeply unfortunate it was not possible. Just yesterday I was looking through one of his threads and wished I could ask him about the snapping matchlock imitating a wheellock he had.

 

[Pukka Bundook]

I seem to recall asking him about that lock John, but there is still lots I would Like to have asked!!

Crableg,
I believe it was the same arrangement in Britain at that time, with land soldiers taken on board..

 

[TobJohn]

In the case of Spain I believe their "sea soldiers" were just transferred from the regular army. I know that Spanish armed galleons during the 1500s would have two commanders aboard, one a naval officer and the other an army officer. The naval commander handled the sailors and the running of the ship, while the army officer handled the embarked soldiers and anything related to boarding combat.

Not sure how it was on ships of other countries of the period...

Capture of Malacca (1511) - Wikipedia
Here is a great account of an opposed landing using gunpowder weapons on both sides. The Portuguese discipline destroyed a much larger force. It’s almost all based on Portuguese accounts but there is a Malay source attesting to their own recent introduction to guns and lack of skill.

Two interesting notes on the Wikipedia article. The first is that both sides actually used very similar small breechloading cannons. The second is that the sack of the city mostly followed European siege rules when taking a city by storm.

 

[user 56333]

Were there any attempts in Europe at "waterproofing" matchlocks? The Japanese seem to have had an interesting contraption on some of their guns (image below), but I've never heard of anything like it in Europe. If such a device worked, I can see how it might have been an advantage for guys using guns in a nautical environment...

 

[cyten]

Like @TobJohn mentioned, the Vasa Museum in Stockholm has a wonderful collection of arms (and everything) recovered from the ship that sank in 1628. During my visit some 15 years ago, I recall matchlocks in various states of decay, none of them of discernible difference from the standard guns used at the time. I wish I had access to an old photobucket account that had tons of photos from it.

 

[BillinOregon]

Would the Graz Armory book mentioned above be the one written by Robert Brooker?

 

[TobJohn]

Would the Graz Armory book mentioned above be the one written by Robert Brooker?

Yes

 

[Flint62Smoothie]

It is recorded that this ship had a great deal more men on board in expectation of the coming fight, and that was a reason for her keeling over.

Yes, she was packed to the brim! But the other reason is, remember that the English King was 'putting on a show' prior to the battle and the Mary Rose had all her gun doors open - including the lower doors - but with full sail on, which is not how she'd be rigged for battle.

When she jibed, the hull naturally heeled, and water flooded in through the lower gun deck ports ... doh!

 

[user 56333]

Yes, she was packed to the brim! But the other reason is, remember that the English King was 'putting on a show' prior to the battle and the Mary Rose had all her gun doors open - including the lower doors - but with full sail on, which is not how she'd be rigged for battle.

When she jibed, the hull naturally heeled, and water flooded in through the lower gun deck ports ... doh!

The huge size of her superstructure may have also contributed to her heeling over so badly. The Mary Rose was quite a top-heavy ship, even by standards of the day.

 

[Yasha Hartmann]

Matchlocks were indeed used aboard ships throughout history, especially during the 16th and 17th centuries. Here are some answers to your questions:

• Sea service matchlocks were indeed made. In fact, there were different types of matchlocks that were specifically designed for use on ships. For example, there were boarding guns, which were short-barreled matchlocks used for close-quarters fighting, and there were also larger deck guns, which were mounted on swivels and used for firing at other ships.
• Matchlocks intended for shipboard use did not typically have brass fittings. In fact, matchlocks were known to be vulnerable to rust and corrosion, which made them difficult to maintain at sea. However, some matchlocks may have had iron fittings that were treated with oil or other substances to protect them from the salt water.
• It is unlikely that matchlock-armed troops took positions on fighting tops to shoot down at the enemy deck. This is because matchlocks were known to be dangerous to use in close proximity to the rigging and sails. Matchlocks produced a large amount of smoke when fired, which could obscure a shooter's view and also pose a fire hazard.
• However, matchlocks were still used in naval warfare in a variety of other ways. For example, they were used to board enemy ships, to defend against boarding parties, and to fire on other ships from a distance. Matchlocks were also used for signaling between ships, as they produced a loud report when fired.

 

[user 56333]

• Sea service matchlocks were indeed made. In fact, there were different types of matchlocks that were specifically designed for use on ships. For example, there were boarding guns, which were short-barreled matchlocks used for close-quarters fighting, and there were also larger deck guns, which were mounted on swivels and used for firing at other ships.

Interesting, are there any examples you could post a link to here, or any sources you can recommend to read about such guns?