Dragon (firearm)

A dragon is a shortened version of blunderbuss, a firearm with a short, large caliber barrel which is flared at the muzzle and frequently throughout the entire bore.[1][2] Dragons were typically issued to troops such as cavalry, who needed a lightweight, easily handled firearm.[3]

A pair of early dragons from Poland fitted with the miquelet lock
A dragon, found at a battlefield in Cerro Gordo, Veracruz, Mexico

Etymology

The term dragon is taken from the fact that early versions were decorated with a carving in the form of a mythical dragon's head around the muzzle; the muzzle blast would then give the impression of a fire-breathing dragon.[2]

History and description

Early dragons were short wheellock firearms. It is called a dragon because the muzzle is decorated with a dragon's head. The practice comes from a time when all gunpowder weapons had distinctive names, including the culverin, serpentine, falcon, falconet, etc.[4] The dragon was effective only at short range, lacking accuracy at long range.[1][2]

In Indonesia, the weapon is called a tarkul,[5] where it was one of the most well-known weapons among sailors, merchants and pirates of the archipelago. Tarkul initially used wheel-lock mechanisms. Tarkuls were used in the wars between kingdoms, by sultans in the Philippines against Spain, by the Brunei army against King Brooke, and in the Naning War of 1831 in Malacca. Around 1530, the tarkul advanced with the use of flintlock technology and since then has been more recognized as a pistol in the West.

gollark: Abusing floating pointer™ technology?
gollark: Are you casting things to floats too much?
gollark: Well, it's obvious, the file named fisible is unknown and something something unk random number equals other random number.
gollark: Also, laws are often about complicated issues which people have no idea about. Now, frequently the politicians will have no idea about them too, but in general having dedicated people able to take lots of time to learn about the issue is better than random people with lots of other stuff to do. Although it has other downsides.
gollark: I don't think I agree, having direct input would expose it to the whims of whatever random controversy has happened *more*.

See also

References
  1. Sibbald Mike Lier (1868). The British Army: Its Origin, Progress, and Equipment. Cassell, Petter, Galpin. pp. 33, 302–304.
  2. George Elliot Voyle, G. de Saint-Clair-Stevenson (1876). A Military Dictionary. W. Clowes & Sons. pp. 43, 114.
  3. Charles Francis Hoban (1853). Pennsylvania Archives., page 324, from a letter dated March 7, 1778
  4. p. 333, Bismark
  5. https://id.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tarkul

Further reading
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.