Newsgroup: it.hobby.armi
Titolo: Archibugio o Tromblon...  (interessante ma lungo, in Inglese)

Qualcuno potrebbe indicarmi il termine tecnico "esatto" in Inglese o 
Francese per il nostro Archibugio?
Io ho trovato questi... che presumo suano esatti... ma non si sa mai...  :-)
 Italiano - Inglese - archibugio
n. arquebus, harquebus
 Italiano - Francese - archibugio
(storia) tromblon (m)
arquebus, harquebus
n
(Military / Firearms, Gunnery, Ordnance & Artillery) a portable 
long-barrelled gun dating from the 15th century: fired by a wheel-lock or 
matchlock Also called hackbut hagbut
[via Old French harquebuse from Middle Dutch hakebusse, literally: hook gun, 
from the shape of the butt, from hake hook + busse box, gun, from Late Latin 
busis box]
arquebus, harquebus
n
(Military / Firearms, Gunnery, Ordnance & Artillery) a portable 
long-barrelled gun dating from the 15th century: fired by a wheel-lock or 
matchlock Also called hackbut hagbut
[via Old French harquebuse from Middle Dutch hakebusse, literally: hook gun, 
from the shape of the butt, from hake hook + busse box, gun, from Late Latin 
busis box]
Arquebus
Japanese Tanegashima arquebus of the Edo period centre of the rack (teppo)
Example of an arquebusThe arquebus (pronounced /'?rk?b?s/ AR-k?-bus or 
/'?rkw?b?s/ AR-kw?-bus) (sometimes spelled harquebus, harkbus[1] or hackbut; 
from Dutch haakbus, meaning "hook gun"[2]), or "hook tube", is an early 
muzzle-loaded firearm used in the 15th to 17th centuries. The word was 
originally modelled on the German: Hakenbüchse, this produced haquebute. It 
then copied the Italian word: archibugio; which gave arquebuse (French), 
arcabuz (Spanish and Portuguese) and arquebus (English).[3] In distinction 
from its predecessor the hand cannon, it has a matchlock. Like its successor 
the musket, it is a smoothbore firearm, but it is lighter and easier to 
carry[citation needed].
It is a forerunner of the rifle and other longarm firearms. An improved 
version of the arquebus, the caliver, was introduced in the early 16th 
century. The word is derived from the English corruption of calibre as this 
gun was of standard bore, increasing combat effectiveness as troops could 
load bullets that would fit their guns (before, they would have to modify 
shot to fit, force it in, or cast their own before the battle).[4]
Heavy arquebuses mounted on wagons were called arquebus ŕ croc. These 
carried a ball of about 3.5 ounces.[5]
TerminologyIn the early 16th century, the term "arquebus" had a confusing 
variety of meanings. Some writers used it to denote any matchlock shoulder 
gun, referring to light versions as caliver and heavier pieces fired from a 
fork rest as musket. Others treated the arquebus and caliver synonymously, 
both referring to the lighter, forkless shoulder-fired matchlock. As the 
16th century progressed, the term arquebus came to be clearly reserved for 
the lighter forkless weapon. When the wheel lock was introduced, wheel-lock 
shoulder arms came to be called arquebuses, while lighter, forkless 
matchlock and flintlock shoulder weapons continued to be called calivers. In 
the mid-17th century, the light flintlock versions came to be called fusils 
or fuzees.[6]
Effectiveness
A collection of arquebuses from the Topkapi palace, Istanbul.As low-velocity 
firearms, the arquebus was used against enemies who were often partially or 
fully protected by steel-plate armour. Plate armour was standard in European 
combat from about 1400 until the middle of the 17th century. Good suits of 
plate would usually stop an arquebus ball at long range. It was a common 
practice to "proof" (test) armour by firing a pistol or arquebus at a new 
breastplate. The small dent would be circled by engraving, to call attention 
to it. However, at close range, it was possible to pierce even the armor of 
knights and other heavy cavalry, depending highly on the power of the 
arquebus and the quality of the armor. This led to changes in armor usage, 
such as the three-quarter plate, and finally the retirement of plate armor 
from most types of infantry.
MechanismThe arquebus was fired by a matchlock mechanism. It had a larger 
bore than its predecessors. From the middle of the 16th century, newer 
wheellock mechanisms were used instead of older matchlocks. The flared 
muzzle of some examples made it easier to load the weapon. The name 'hook 
gun' is often claimed to be based on the bent shape of the arquebus' butt. 
It might also be that some of the original arquebuses had a metal hook near 
the muzzle that may have been used for bracing against a solid object to 
absorb recoil. Since all the arquebuses were handmade by various gunsmiths, 
there is no typical specimen.
The trigger mechanism of an early arquebus most often resembled that of a 
crossbow: a gently curved lever pointing backward and parallel to the stock 
(see illustration of Spanish arquebusier below). Squeezing the lever against 
the stock depressed a sear which was in turn linked to the base of the 
serpentine that held the match. The serpentine then brought the match into 
the flash pan to ignite the priming, firing the weapon. By the later 16th 
century, gunsmiths in most countries had begun to introduce the short 
trigger perpendicular to the stock that is familiar to modern shooters. 
However, the majority of French matchlock arquebuses retained the 
crossbow-style trigger throughout the 17th century.
Firing sequence
Installing the weapon on its supporting stick
Aiming, hand on the trigger
The lock ignites the fuse
The main propellant is ignited, much smoke ensues
History
The Black Army of Hungary.
An arquebuser installing his weapon. The wooden flasks hanging from his belt 
each contain the ammunition for one shotArquebuses were a standard weapon of 
the "Divine Engine Division" ??? of the Chinese Ming army in the late 14th 
century. In campaigns to drive Mongols out of China a strategy combining 
cavalry and arquebuses was common practice. In 1387, the Chinese army 
developed a three-line method near the Burma border to destroy elephant 
formations of rebels. The three-line method allowed two lines to reload 
while the other would fire. Such tactics allowed a balance of mass firepower 
to compensate for poor accuracy with a reasonable rate of fire.
The first European usage of the arquebus in large numbers was in Hungary 
under king Matthias Corvinus (r. 1458-1490).[7] Every fourth soldier in the 
Black Army had an arquebus in the infantry, and every fifth regarding the 
whole army, which was an unusual ratio at the time. Although they were 
generally present in the battlefield King Mathias preferred enlisting 
shielded man instead as the gunmen were "not efficient in firing as the rest 
of the infantry; they do best from behind the pavises at the start of the 
battle or in sieges.".[8] The same applied for the primitive cannons as well 
as the bombards were ineffective in killing compared to siege engines when 
it comes to shooting stonebullets especially against a stone stronghold.[9] 
Arquebusiers were very effective against cavalry and even other infantry, 
particularly when placed with pikemen in the pike and shot formation, which 
revolutionised the Spanish military. An example of where this formation was 
used and succeeded is the decisive Battle of Cerignola (1503), which was one 
of the first battles to utilise this formation, and was the first battle to 
be won through the use of gunpowder-based small arms.
Arquebuses were used in the Italian Wars of the first half of the 16th 
century. Portuguese and Spanish conquerors also made use of the weapon 
overseas. Arquebuses were carried by some of the soldiers of Hernán Cortés 
in his conquest of Mexico in the 1520s, and arquebuses played an important 
role in the victories of Cristóvăo da Gama's small and outnumbered army in 
his 1541-42 campaign in Ethiopia. Arquebuses were also used in the Moroccan 
victory over the Songhai Empire at the Battle of Tondibi in 1590.
Arquebuses were introduced to Japan in 1543 by Portuguese traders (Fernăo 
Mendes Pinto), who landed by accident on Tanegashima, an island south of 
Kyushu in the region controlled by the Shimazu clan. By 1550, copies of the 
Portuguese arquebus were being produced in large quantities, and they were 
often seen on the battlefields all over Japan. Oda Nobunaga revolutionized 
musket tactics in Japan by splitting loaders and shooters and assigning 
three guns to a shooter at the Battle of Nagashino in 1575. (Popular records 
stating he used a Maurice-style three-line formation are incorrect according 
to onsite evidence.) While many believe that during the Sakoku the political 
power of the samurai led to muskets being banned in Japan, this is a 
misconception brought on by romantic views.[citation needed] In actuality, 
the Japanese were fully capable of manufacturing their own muskets[citation 
needed], and the shogunate even created several political positions to 
oversee their manufacture and inventory. These guns would be widely used 
during Hideyoshi's unification of Japan and later the Japanese invasions of 
Korea in 1592.
The arquebus compared to archeryThe arquebus was unable to match the 
accuracy of a bow in the hands of a highly-skilled archer. The arquebus did, 
however, have a faster rate of fire than the most powerful crossbow, a 
shorter learning curve than a longbow, and was more powerful than either. 
The arquebus does not rely on the physical strength of the user for 
propulsion of the projectile. This is makes it easier to find a suitable 
recruit. It also means that an arquebusier loses less of his battlefield 
effectiveness than an archer or crossbowman when he loses strength due to 
fatigue, malnutrition or sickness. The arquebusier also had the added 
advantage of frightening enemies (and horses) with the noise. Wind can 
reduce the accuracy of archery, but has much less of an effect on an 
arquebusier. Perhaps most important, producing an effective arquebusier 
required much less training than producing an effective bowman. During a 
siege it was also easier to fire an arquebus out of loopholes than it was a 
bow and arrow. It was also possible to load an arquebus (and indeed any 
smoothbore gun) with small shot rather than a single ball. Small shot did 
not pack the same punch as a single round ball but the shot could hit and 
wound multiple enemies.
An arquebusier could carry more ammunition and powder than a crossbowman or 
longbowman could with bolts or arrows. Once the methods were developed, 
powder and shot were relatively easy to mass-produce, while arrow making was 
a genuine craft requiring highly skilled labor.
Arquebuser arming his weaponThe arquebus was more sensitive to humid 
weather. At the Battle of Villalar, rebel troops lost the battle badly 
partially due to having a high proportion of arquebusiers combined with the 
battle taking place in a rainstorm which rendered the weapons 
nigh-useless.[10] Gunpowder also ages much faster than a bolt or an arrow, 
particularly if improperly stored. Also, the resources needed to make 
gunpowder were less universally available than the resources needed to make 
bolts and arrows. Bows do not really consume anything the way an arquebus 
consumes gunpowder. Finding and reusing arrows or bolts was a lot easier 
than doing the same with arquebus bullets. This was a useful way to reduce 
the cost of practice, or resupply oneself if control of the battlefield 
after a battle was retained. A bullet must fit a barrel much more precisely 
than an arrow or bolt must fit a bow, so the arquebus required more 
standardization and made it harder to resupply by looting bodies of fallen 
soldiers. Gunpowder production was also far more dangerous than arrow 
production.
An arquebus was also significantly more dangerous to its user. The 
arquebusier carries a lot of gunpowder on his person and has a lit match in 
one hand. The same goes for the soldiers next to him. Amid the confusion, 
stress and fumbling of a battle, arquebusiers are potentially a danger to 
themselves. Early arquebuses tended to have a drastic recoil. They took a 
long time to load making them vulnerable while reloading unless using the 
'continuous fire' tactic, where one line would shoot and reload while the 
next line shot. They also tended to overheat. During repeated firing, guns 
could become clogged and explode, causing pieces of metal and wood to break 
off, which could be dangerous to the gunner and even those around him. In 
this context it should be added that reloading an arquebus requires more 
fine motor skills and movements than reloading a bow or crossbow. This is a 
disadvantage in a combat situation since stress has a very negative impact 
on fine motor skills.
An arquebuser fires his weapon amidst the smoke produced by his neighbouring 
comradesFurthermore, the amount of smoke produced by black powder weapons 
was considerable, making it hard to see the enemy after a few salvos, unless 
there was enough wind to disperse the smoke quickly. (Conversely, this cloud 
of smoke also served to make it difficult for any archers to target soldiers 
with handguns). Prior to the wheellock, the need for a lit match made 
stealth and concealment nearly impossible, particularly at night. Even with 
successful concealment, the smoke emitted by a single arquebus shot would 
make it quite obvious where a shot came from - at least in daylight. While 
with a crossbow or bow a soldier could conceivably kill silently, this was 
of course impossible with an explosion-driven projectile weapon like the 
arquebus. The noise of arquebuses and the ringing in the ears that it caused 
could also make it hard to hear shouted commands. In the long run, the 
weapon could make the user permanently hard of hearing. Bows and crossbows 
could shoot over obstacles by firing with high-arcing ballistic trajectories 
in order to reach the enemy when the person or object had some frontal but 
no overhead cover (such as when troops are in melee with the enemy) - albeit 
with much less accuracy.
See alsoGun
Musket
Weapon
Musketoon
Pike and shot
References^ The free online dictionary by Ultralingua 4.49
^ Etymology of Arquebus.
^ The structures of Everyday Life (1981), F.Braudel, p392
^ 
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Encyclop%C3%A6dia_Britannica_Eleventh_Edition
^ This article incorporates content from the 1728 Cyclopaedia, a publication 
in the public domain. [1]
^ Harold L. Peterson (1965), Arms and Armor in Colonial America: 1526-1783, 
ISBN 0-486-41244X, p. 12-14.
^ Gy. Rázsó, 'The Mercenary Army of King Matthias Corvinus', in J. M. Bak 
and B. K. Kirily (eds.), From Hunyadi to Rákóczi: War and Society in Late 
Medieval and Early Modern Hungary (Brooklyn, NY, 1982). 125-40.
^ Ian Heath (1984). Armies of the Middle Ages, Volume 2. Cambridge, England: 
Wargames research Group. ISBN B001B3PZTG. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
^ E. Kovács Péter (2008). "MÁTYÁS IDEGEN ZSOLDOSSEREGE(A "FEKETE SEREG")" 
(in Hungarian) (pdf). Mátyás, a reneszánsz király. Budapest, Hungary: 
Officina Kiadó. p. 92. ISBN 9639705432. Retrieved 1 October 2010.
^ Seaver, Henry Latimer (1966) [1928]. The Great Revolt in Castile: A study 
of the Comunero movement of 1520-1521. New York: Octagon Books. pp. 325.
 This article incorporates text from a publication now in the public domain: 
Chisholm, Hugh, ed (1911). Encyclopćdia Britannica (Eleventh ed.). Cambridge 
University Press.
External linksHandgonnes and Matchlocks - History of firearms to 1500
Per "Spingarda"...
Hoepli:
 spingarda
[spin-gŕr-da] s.f.
ST Nel Medioevo, macchina da guerra a forma di grossa balestra per scagliare 
pietre
? Anticamente, pezzo leggero di artiglieria o grosso archibugio da 
cavalletto usato per difesa nelle fortezze
? Grosso fucile a canna lunga, di grande calibro, usato in passato per la 
caccia agli uccelli di palude
Per Spingarda ho trovato solo: Gun, Rifle.
Il che č un po troppo poco per una ricerca mirata. 


ciao 

 Francese per il nostro Archibugio?
blunderbuss