Arms and Armor of the Pilgrims, 1620-1692Peterson, Harold L. (Harold Leslie)
History
Arms and Armor of the Pilgrims, 1620-1692
Peterson, Harold L. (Harold Leslie)
Armor -- United States -- History; Pilgrims (New Plymouth Colony); Weapons -- United States -- History
Flint arms were much more efficient than matchlocks. They were faster,
more dependable, and less cumbersome. The powder in the priming pan
was ignited by striking a piece of flint held by the cock against a
piece of steel, called the frizzen or battery. The frizzen was poised
directly over the pan so that the sparks produced by the contact of the
flint and steel would drop into the powder. Flint arms could function
in ordinary dampness and even in a light rain. There was no match to
light and keep free from ash in advance of any expected action. And
since there was no match, there was no light or smell to betray an
ambush.
It is difficult to determine exactly when flint arms superseded
matchlocks as the standard military firearm at Plymouth. There were a
few flint arms in the _Mayflower_ in 1620, for flints are specifically
mentioned among the military stores on board. Miles Standish, a
professional soldier, naturally had the best weapon available. Edward
Winslow, in describing the first encounter between the colonists and
the Indians, noted that Standish with his “snaphance” and one or two
other Pilgrims, who were apparently equipped with flint arms, fired
at the Indians and held them at bay while a brand from the fire was
carried to the others so they could light their matches.
For the first ten years the supremacy of the matchlock was probably not
seriously threatened. From 1630 until the outbreak of King Philip’s
War in 1675, however, the change is plainly visible. There are more
references to matches than to flints in inventories and court records
until the beginning of the Pequot War, but the tales of snap-shooting
increase, and during the war the stories of ambushes and surprise
attacks throughout New England indicate that flint arms were becoming
more plentiful. In 1643 the Plymouth General Court ordered that every
soldier should be supplied with either a matchlock or a “snaphance.” By
1645 Governor William Bradford could report that the Plymouth troops
had been sent to a muster at Seacunk “well armed all with snaphance
peeces.” In 1645, also, while matchlocks were allowed for private arms,
the Plymouth General Court allowed only “snaphances” or “firelocks” for
Town arms.
With the coming of King Philip’s War, the era of the matchlock at
Plymouth was definitely past. The campaigns of that war, forays into
the wilderness, night attacks, ambushes, battles in the rain, and
encounters between individuals which required snap-shooting indicate
clearly that the “snaphance” was the principal weapon. In 1677, towards
the end of the war, the Plymouth General Court outlawed the matchlock
completely as an acceptable weapon. In abandoning matchlocks at this
time, Plymouth was years ahead of Europe where the clumsy firearm
persisted until after 1700.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account