The gun was then loaded, but several actions were still necessary before it could be fired. The match had to be returned to the serpentine and adjusted. The coal on its end had to be blown into activity. If the gunner was forced to wait any length of time before firing, he had to change the adjustment of the match continually to insure that it would strike the pan and also to prevent it from burning down to the serpentine and going out. If it did go out, he relighted it from the coal at the other end of the match which was kept burning for that purpose. [Illustration:_Three matchlock muskets. From left to right: An Italian musket, 1580-1610 believed to have been used at Plymouth before 1637 when it was sold to a nearby garrison house; German musket, 1600-1630; German musket, 1640-1670._] [Illustration: _Soldier blowing on his match to make the coal glow well before firing. From De Gheyn._] From this it may be seen that the matchlock was in many ways inferior to the Indian’s bow. Its chief advantage lay in the panic produced by the flash, smoke, smell and noise of the explosion of the charge. Also, a gun could be loaded with several bullets and wound a number of enemies at one time. The ball from a matchlock musket was superior to an arrow in the size of the hole it tore, the bones it smashed, and the amount of blood it spilled. The bow was superior in accuracy and rapidity of fire. Moreover, it was light and easy to carry while the gun was heavy and clumsy. The bow was constantly ready for use except perhaps during a long rain, while the slow-match required, in the best of weather, constant attention to keep it burning; and in dampness, rain, and wind, it was useless. The light from the match also prevented ambush at night, and the smell forestalled a surprise attack in the day time unless the foe happened to be up-wind. Although matchlocks were the dominant type of weapon brought over on the _Mayflower_, there were also a few flint arms. Modern authorities differentiate between the true flintlock and its more primitive or regional forms, the snaphaunce, the English lock, the so-called “dog” lock, the Baltic lock, and the miquelet. These distinctions are purely modern, however. The contemporary writers called all firearms which ignited the powder by striking flint against steel “snaphances.” Thus it is impossible to determine at this date exactly what form of flint arm is referred to in a given instance, and so a generic term must be used.