#1
|
|||
|
|||
Musket Category
We have:
Brown Bess Flintlock Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Brown_Bess_Flintlock_Musket Charleville Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Charleville_Musket Jezail musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Jezail_musket Wheellock Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Wheellock_...eellock_Musket Japanese Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Tanegashima Kabyle Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Kabyle_Musket Matchlock Musket http://www.imfdb.org/wiki/Matchlock At least seven varios musket rages. May be useful to create the Musket Category? |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
I'd like there to be a specific category for Muskets. But right now I feel the "muzzleloader" category works just fine right now, given that pre-modern firearms went through several major innovations (from matchlock to wheellock to flintlock to percussion cap, etc.) but still fit well under the category of muzzleloader". Having so many categories with very few entries in each might not be amenable to the mods/admins either.
By the way, for the sake of accurate categorization, the Tanegashima wouldn't fit in the musket category, as it's an arquebus. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
The term "musket" is not that definitive and has been used differently throughout history and in different countries. If you wanted to split it simply on the smoothbore/rifled lines, there are a couple more reason why this wouldn't necessarily be a good idea.
Firstly, a main purpose of the categories is to help people ID unknown weapons, so if it is unknown they will not be able to tell if it is rifles or not to know if it is actually a musket. Secondly, you have the case of the rifled muskets which in some cases were indistinguishable or at least very similar to their smoothbore brethren, would these go in the musket category? Along with this you have the fact that a lot of replicas either have rifling when they shouldn't or vice versa which would technically mean they were in a different category. Lastly, a lot of the things that you have described as "muskets" (implying smoothbore) could also be rifled, including Matchlocks, Wheellocks, Tanegashimas, and Jezails as far as I have seen. If you aren't differentiating a Musket from a Rifle based purely on whether it has rifling, what criteria would you use for a musket? There are plenty of early cartridge rifles which as the time were described as "Muskets", should these go in this category despite the fact that this is not how they would be described today? |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
I think that's a category that really isn't needed. As pointed out by others musket is a very broad category and I think we're doing okay with what we've got.
|
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Couldn't we also say that mortars are muzzleloaders? There are a few modern muzzleloading rifles being manufactured today as well, but it's unlikely they will be featured in current media.
|
#6
|
||||
|
||||
Nope. That's an unnecessary distinction that will actually cause MORE confusion to the general public.
__________________
The trouble is, one requires a specific thing to understand Liam, that thing being "serious head injuries." (Evil Tim 09-09-2011) |
|
|