Chapter V: Part 5

At the siege of Constantinople, by Mahomet II., stones were thrown weighing 1,200lbs.! The cannon employed could not be discharged more than three or four times a day. This siege was distinguished by the re-union of ancient and modern artillery; the small arms of the Christians discharged five, or even ten balls at the same time, as large as walnuts; and one piece made for the Turks, by Urban, a Dane, cast a stone bullet weighing 600lbs., which could be discharged seven times a day, but it ultimately burst. This gun was cast of brass at Adrianople, of stupendous and almost incredible magnitude; twelve palms is assigned to the bore. A vacant space before the palace was chosen for the first experiment, but to prevent the sudden and mischievous effects of astonishment and fear, a proclamation was issued that the cannon would be discharged on the following day. The explosion was felt or heard in a circuit of 100 furlongs, the ball was driven above a mile and buried itself a fathom in the ground. A carriage of thirty waggons was linked together to carry the gun along, and drawn by a team of sixty oxen; 200 men on both sides were stationed to poise or sustain the rolling weight, 250 workmen marched before it to smooth the way, and repair the bridges, and near two months were employed in a laborious journey of 150 miles. This enormous gun was flanked by two of almost equal magnitude, and fourteen batteries, mounting 130 guns, were brought to bear upon the place. The cannon were intermingled with machines for throwing stones and darts.

~Artillery of Scots 1496.~

~Breech-loaders.~

The Scots had a kind of artillery peculiar to themselves, called “Carts of War.” They are described in an Act of Parliament, thus “ilk Cart twa gunnis and ilk ane to have twa Chalmers and an Cumrand man to shute theme.” These were breech-loaders, and in 1471, the Barons were commanded to provide such “Carts of War” against their old enemies the English. (Plate 18, fig. 1.)

~Cannon named.~

It was not uncommon to give strange names to early cannon; thus Louis XII. had twelve brass ones cast in 1503, of enormous size, which he named after the twelve Peers of France; the Spaniards and Portugese christened theirs after their Saints, and the Emperor Charles V. had twelve when he went against Tunis, which he named after the Twelve Apostles.

~Cause of improvements.~

~Iron balls in England, 15th century.~

As a knowledge of the art of gunnery increased, great improvements took place with regard to projectiles; and balls of iron were substituted in the place of those formed of stone, being introduced into England in the sixteenth century.

~Iron guns cast.~

~Hand-culverines.~

~Organ-guns.~

Iron guns were not cast in this country until the year 1547, foreigners being generally employed to manufacture them. Both Henry VII. and Henry VIII. took great pains to introduce the art of gunnery into the kingdom; and to this end, had a number of Flemish gunners in their daily pay; in fact, it is said, that the latter monarch himself, invented small pieces of artillery to defend his waggons. The earlier species of field artillery, embraced among others, a small kind of ordnance called, “hand cannon,” or culverins, which were so light and portable, that they could be carried and served by two men; they were fired from a rest, placed on the ground; also “ribandequins” or organ guns; these latter consisted of a number of tubes, placed in a row, like those of an organ, and appear to have been of French origin, as were many of the improvements which took place about that period, including the invention of wall pieces, throwing leaden balls of ten to the pound.

~Mortars, Henry VIII.~

~Shells.~

~Varieties of cannon.~

~Queen Elizabeth’s Pocket-pistol.~

For mortars we are indebted to workmen of Henry VIII. as “one Peter Bawd and one Peter Vancollen, both the king’s feed men, devised and caused to be made certain mortar pieces, being at the mouth from eleven to nineteen inches wide, and also certain hollow shot of cast iron, to be stuffed with fire-work or wild-fire, for to break in pieces the same hollow shot.” And in the first year of Edward VI. the said Peter Bawd did make ordnance of iron of divers forms, as fawconet, fawkons, minions, sakers, &c. His servant, J. Johnson, did like make and cast iron ordnance cleaner and to better perfection, to the great use of this land. His son Thomas Johnson, in 1593, made forty two cast pieces of great ordnance for the Earl of Cumberland, demi cannon, weighing 5,000lbs. or three tons the piece. At Dover there is a culverine, presented to Queen Elizabeth, by the States General of Holland, and called Queen Elizabeth’s Pocket-pistol. It is 24 feet long, diameter of bore 4¹⁄₂ inches, weight of shot 12lbs.; it was manufactured in 1544, and is mounted on an ornamented iron carriage made in 1827, at the Royal Carriage Department, Woolwich Arsenal. (Plate 17, fig. 2.)

~Mons Meg.~

There is a large gun at Edinburgh Castle, called Mons Meg; it measures about 13 feet 4 inches in length, the diameter of the bore is about 1 foot 6 inches; it has a chamber about 4 feet long and 6 inches in diameter. (Plate 17, fig. 3.)

~Field-guns, 1554.~

The battle of Remi, in 1554, was the first action in which light field guns, having limbers, were used,--these guns accompanied the cavalry.

~Red-hot shot, 1580.~

Pere Daniel says that red-hot iron shot were used by Marshal Matignan, during the siege of la Fère, in 1580.

~Calibre, time of Queen Elizabeth.~

In a table of ordnance, given by Fosbrooke, as being a list of the guns used in the time of Elizabeth, and immediately preceding her, we find how little the calibres of iron guns have altered during the last two or three centuries, as these guns have all their antitypes among those of the present day.

~Origin of canister and grape.~

~Improved mode of loading, by Gustavus Adolphus.~

The beginning of the seventeenth century was an important epoch in the history of artillery; and much attention was given to this branch of the military profession, by Henry IV., of France, Maurice, of Nassau, and Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden. The former of these distinguished leaders, introduced new and improved forms and kinds of missiles; such as tin cases, filled with steel bolts or darts; canvas cartridges, containing small balls, and hollow shot or shells, filled with combustible materials. Gustavus Adolphus, introduced really serviceable field guns, of a lighter construction than had hitherto been made use of, and he also adopted the use of cartridges, with shot attached, so that these pieces might be discharged eight times before the musket could be fired six. It is said that he chiefly owed his victory at Leipzig, in 1631, to guns made of leather and coiled rope, over a cylinder of copper or gun metal. On the whole, the artillery of Gustavus was admirably organized; and he was the first who appreciated the importance of causing artillery to act in concentrated masses, a principle, now so fully recognized by all artillerists.

~Bombs at sea.~

Bombs were first used at sea, by the French, in the bombardment of Algiers, Oct. 28th, 1681, in the reign of Louis XIV.

~The largest gun.~

One of the largest cannon now existing is a brass one at Bejapoor, called “Moolik-i-Meidan,” or “The Lord of the Plain.” It was cast in commemoration of the capture of that place by the Emperor Alum Geer, in 1685. Its length is 14ft. 1in., diameter about 5ft. 8in., diameter of bore, 2ft. 4in., interior length of bore, 10ft.; length of chamber unknown; shape of gun nearly “cylindrical;” description of shot, _stone_. An iron shot for this gun, of proper size, would weigh 1600lbs. It is now lying in a dilapidated circular bastion on the left of the principal gateway of the city. The trunnions are broken off, and there is a ring on each side of it, as well as two Persian inscriptions on the top. It is placed on three heavy beams of wood, packed round with large stones. A number of _stone_ shot, of 2ft. 2in. in diameter, are scattered about. This gun is said to be the heaviest piece of ordnance in the world. It weighs about forty-two tons. An Italian of Otranto, who served in the Mogul armies under the title of Renni Khan, had it in his park of artillery, and used it at several battles, occasionally firing sacks of copper coins out of it. (Plate 18, fig. 2.)

~Gun at Moorshedabad.~

There is a remarkable gun near the palace of the Nawab of Moorshedabad, which measures 17ft. 8in. in length, 5ft. in circumference at the smallest part near the muzzle, while it is only 6in. in the diameter of the bore, and the foresight is at least four or five inches above the muzzle. After the battle of Khallissie, which was fought about 25 miles from here, it is supposed to have been buried under a tree. The tree, having grown since then, has forced the gun above the ground about three feet, where it now remains, partly encircled by the roots and trunk. It has no name; the natives call it “the gun in the tree.” It is made of cast iron, and is evidently of Indian manufacture, having Hindostanee inscriptions engraved on it, but no date.

~Size and expense of cannon, 1688.~

Bishop Wilkins says, “These Gunpowder instruments are extremely expensive, as a whole cannon commonly weighs 8000lbs., requiring 90 men, or 16 horses, with a charge of 40lbs. of powder, and a ball weighing 64lbs”.

~Length and weight gradually reduced.~

The length and diameter of cannon became gradually much reduced, experience having determined how much they might be diminished in weight without injury to their safety, or to the effects they were intended to produce.

~Horse artillery by Frederick the Great.~

Frederick the Great of Prussia made some improvements with regard to the calibre of field guns, and to him may be given the credit of the introduction of Horse Artillery.

~Guns bored.~

Guns, at this period, were cast hollow by means of a core, which was kept suspended in the centre of the mould, while the metal was being run in. Owing, however, to the great difficulty experienced in keeping this core in a perfectly true position, several artillerists deliberated whether guns, cast hollow or solid, had the preference, and investigations took place as to the possibility of boring the latter, the result of which was, that Maritz, who had a foundry at Geneva, informed the Court of France, in 1739, that he had discovered a method of boring guns and mortars which had been cast solid. He was at once invited to France, where, first at Lyons, and afterwards at Strasbourg, he secretly worked at boring pieces of ordnance, which, on trial, proved perfectly satisfactory.

~Guns of ice.~

In the year 1740, a curious experiment in artillery was made at St. Petersburgh, where guns were cut out of solid ice, from which balls of the same substance were fired repeatedly, without bursting.

~Improvements.~

~Axle-trees.~

~High limbers.~

~Reduction of windage.~

From this period, the science of artillery progressed rapidly, and various improvements were made in this arm of the service, such as the introduction of iron axle-trees, and high limbers for the carriages of field guns. The reduction of windage, (mainly owing to the invention of carronades), and the use of cartridges and elevating screws, which latter served to render the fire of artillery much more rapid and regular.

~Rifled ordnance 1774.~

The invention of rifled ordnance is claimed by a Dr. Lind and a Capt. A. Blair, late 69th regt. Experiments were made at Landguard Fort, 26th August, 1774, by which it was intended to prove that shot weighing 42lbs., in the shape of a pear, would do as much execution, fired out of an 18 pounder, with a third of the quantity of powder, as could be effected by round balls of the same weight, fired from a 42 pounder.

~Perforated and fluted shot.~

Sundry trials were also made with shot perforated through the centre, and spirally fluted on the surface, suggested by Professor Anderson, of Glasgow, in order to prevent the common aberration in the flight of shot.

~Leaden projectiles.~

~Breech-loading Rifled cannon.~

There were different modes of charging the rifled guns; one was, after the powder was put in, to take a leaden bullet something larger than the bore of the gun, and grease it well; in ramming it down with an iron rammer hollow at one end, the spiral threads of the rifle entered and cut into the bullet, and caused it to turn round in going down, and on being shot out, it would rotate on an axis coincident with its flight. Another mode was to charge them at the breech, where an opening for the reception of the powder and ball was afterwards closed up by a screw; but some barrels were screwed off at the breech-end to be charged, where they were made stronger than common.

~Congreve’s rockets.~

The adaptation of the rocket to the purposes of war, by Sir William Congreve, in 1806, introduced a new feature into the artillery of this and other countries.

~Mr. Monk’s improvements.~

Recently, at the suggestion of a Mr. Monk, of Woolwich Arsenal, a quantity of useless metal has been removed from before the trunnions, and the thickness increased considerably at the breech end, where alone it was wanted.

~Mallet’s monster mortar.~

The monster mortars recently constructed by Mr. Mallet, of separate compound hoops, must be regarded as a triumph of constructive skill. The shell is 30 inches in diameter, holding a bursting charge of 480 lbs., and weighing when charged 1¹⁄₂ tons (3,360 lbs.). Value of shell charged, £25. Weight, without bed, 42 tons. Weight of bed, 8 tons. Total, 50 tons.

~Cavalli’s and Wahrendorff’s~

In 1846, two rifled cannon were invented, one by Major Cavalli, of the Sardinian Artillery; and the other by Baron Wahrendorff, a Swedish nobleman. Both of these were iron breech-loading guns, having two grooves in order to give the requisite rifle motion to their projectiles.

~Experiments to test.~

Experiments were carried on at Shoeburyness, in 1850, with these guns. The deviations were always in the direction of the rotation of the projectiles; but they were so variable in amount that no allowance could be made for them in laying the gun with respect to the object. The Cavalli gun became unserviceable after having fired four rounds, by the copper ring or bouche imbedded in the metal of the gun at the bottom of the bore being damaged. The Wahrendorff gun stood well, the wedge resisting more effectually the force of the discharge than that of the Cavalli gun.

~Lancaster’s rifle gun.~

Mr. Lancaster’s novel invention of applying the rifle principle to cannon, may be described as “a two-grooved rifle in disguise,” having a “gaining twist,” the bore being an ellipse.

~Defects of.~

The chief defect in the Lancaster gun is the liability of the projectile to jam in the bore, both in loading and firing, the former rendering the loading difficult, while the latter endangers the safety of the gun. In consequence of several of these guns bursting, and also from the anticipated large range with great precision not being obtained from them, the Lancaster guns were removed from the service after the Crimean war.

~Sir W. Armstrong.~

Sir W. Armstrong submitted a proposal for his breech-loading gun to the Duke of Newcastle, then Minister at War, towards the end of 1854; his proposal being accepted, and a gun accordingly constructed, it was submitted to numerous trials, both at Shoeburyness, and near Sir W. Armstrong’s private factory at Newcastle. This gun is now made entirely of wrought iron, although the original one had a steel bore. It is a built-up gun, that is to say, it is composed of separate pieces, each piece being of such moderate size as to admit of being forged without risk of flaw or failure. By this mode of construction, great strength, and consequently, great lightness, are secured. The shell used combines the principle of the shrapnel and percussion shell, i.e., it may be made to explode either as it approaches the object, or as it strikes it. Moreover, it may be made to explode at the instant of leaving the gun, in which case, the pieces spread out like a fan, and produce the usual effect of grape or canister. Armstrong’s guns are now (1860) being employed in China.

~Whitworth.~

Mr. Whitworth’s rifled gun, with which experiments were lately made near Liverpool, is also a breech-loading piece, and of the following construction. The form of the bore is that of a hexagonal spiral, the corners of which are rounded off. The inclination of the spiral varies with the diameter of the bore, but is in all these guns very great, the projectiles being comparatively long.

~French rifled ordnance.~

Rifled ordnance were introduced into the French service just previous to the commencement of the late Italian war of 1859, and aiming at the greatest practical simplicity, the French government adopted only one nature of gun for field service, and one for siege purposes, both made of bronze. The French rifled cannon are muzzle loading, and those first introduced had two or three grooves, but the field pieces used in Italy had six grooves, their inclination being about one turn in 59 inches. A number of heavy cast-iron guns are rifled with two grooves, and have been placed on board French ships of war; and these, unless strengthened, could be used but with very small charges.

~Advantages of rifled guns.~

The advantages obtained by the successful employment of rifled guns--

Great accuracy of fire,
Long range,
Penetration,
Small charge,
Simplicity of equipment and ammunition,
Lightness of gun.

~Classification of artillery.~

Artillery may be classed under the several heads of field artillery (including artillery of position), siege artillery and artillery for the armament of garrisons, fortresses, and coast defences; its equipment is a combination of men, materiel, and horses necessary for these services.

~Three kinds of guns.~

All ordnance employed in the service, may be divided into three classes, viz., Guns, Mortars, and Howitzers.

~Carronades discontinued.~

Carronades may be considered obsolete, although a certain number are still supplied to the navy, and a few will be found mounted in some garrisons and coast batteries.

~Classification of guns and their uses.~

Guns are used for projecting shot and shell, horizontally or at very low angles, and as they are fired with large charges of powder, which are fixed for each nature of gun, very great strength and considerable weight are required in their construction. Guns are of two kinds, viz., (solid) shot guns, and shell guns. Some guns are also classed as heavy, medium, and light. Those generally employed for field service, are made of bronze or gun-metal; all guns of higher calibre, of cast-iron.

~Mortars.~

Mortars are short pieces of ordnance, used to throw shells at high angles (vertical fire), generally 45°, the charge varying with the range required; they are distinguished by the diameters of their bores. Mortars are made of cast-iron or bronze; the former being principally intended for garrisons, battering trains, the navy, &c., and the latter, which are of small calibre, and very light, are chiefly employed in sieges.

~Howitzers.~

Howitzers resemble guns in form, but are much shorter and lighter in proportion to their calibre, and are, consequently, fired with less charges of powder; shells and case are fired from them, but not solid shot.

~Use of Howitzers.~

~Superseded by shell guns.~

These pieces were originally introduced for the purpose of firing shells at low angles, and have constantly been found most useful both in the field and in siege operations during the wars of the last and present centuries. Since, however, the introduction of shell guns their utility has greatly decreased, for the shell gun possesses greater accuracy and range than the howitzer, those being in the present day of greater importance than small weight.

~Artillery from the East.~

The Germans claim the invention of cannon for their countryman, Bartholdus Schwartz, who is said to have discovered it in 1336, but seeing that fire-arms first became prevalent in Europe in those countries which mixed with the Saracens, we are constrained to lean to the opinion that fire-arms were not re-invented in Europe, but introduced from the East.

This part of our subject might be much enlarged, but we have merely attempted to give heads of information, which can be pursued by those who desire to do so. We must now leave it, in order to treat upon that more immediately interesting to officers of infantry, viz., the history of portable fire-arms.

* * * * *

The following extract from an account of the furniture of the ship, called the “Harry Grace de Dieu,” will give a good idea of the state of the ordnance at the time of Henry VIII.:--

_Gonnes of Brasse._

Cannons,
Di. cannons,
Culveryns,
D. culveryns,
Sakers,
Cannon perers,
Fawcons,

_Gonnes of Yron._

Port pecys,
Slyngs,
Di. slyngs,
Fowlers,
Baessys,
Toppe peces,
Hayle shotte pecys,

Hand gonnes complete.

Another account of ancient English ordnance in Queen Elizabeth’s time, mentions the following:--

Bombards,
Bombardilles,
Cannon royal,
Cannon,
Cannon serpentine,
Bastard cannon,
Demi cannon,
Cannon petre,
Culverin,
Basilisk,
Demi culverin,
Bastard culverin,
Sacar,
Minion,
Faulcon,
Falconet,
Serpentine,
Rabinet.

ETYMOLOGIES.

CANNON.--From the Latin word _canna_, signifying a tube or cane.

HOWITZER.--From the German word _haubitz_, (derived from _haube_, top of a furnace), in French, _obus_, or _obusier_.

CARRONADE.--From _Carron Ironworks_, near Stirling, where it was invented in the year 1774.

BOMBARD.--From the Greek word _bombos_, or noise.

BOMBARDILLE.--A smaller kind of bombards.

BASILISK.--The name of a snake.

CULVERIN.--From the French _couleuvrine_, from _couleuvre_, a snake.

SAKER.--From _Saker_, or _Sacre_, a bird of the falcon species.

FALCON.--From the _bird_ of that name.

CANNON PERERS.--_Stone-throwers_, from the French word _pierre_, a stone.

TOPPE PECES.--To be used in the tops, _i.e._, the stands on the ship’s masts.

NOTE.--The History of Artillery is mainly compiled from the
following:--“Engines of War,” by Wilkinson; “Ancient Armour and
Weapons in Europe,” by John Hewitt; “Military Antiquities,” by F.
Grose; “Critical Inquiry into Ancient Armour,” by Meyrick; “Elementary
Lectures on Artillery,” by Major C. H. Owen and Capt. T. L. Dames,
R.A.; and “Our Engines of War,” by Capt. Jarvis, M.P., Royal
Artillery.

HISTORY OF PORTABLE FIRE-ARMS.

~Form of early hand-guns.~

The earliest hand-guns differed in nothing but in size from the small cannon of the day: they consisted of a metal tube fixed in a straight stock of wood; the vent was at the top of the barrel; there was no lock of any kind. The barrels were short and made of iron or brass; they were occasionally furnished with moveable chambers. (Plate 19, fig. 1.)

~With trunnions.~

~Breech-loader.~

A specimen of hand-cannon of the early part of the reign of Henry VI., is made of iron, and furnished with trunnions, which from this specimen, appear to have been appropriated to small fire-arms before they were adopted for artillery. The breech is made of a separate piece and screwed on to the tube, on the further end of which is a sight. It was placed on a stock or club, and fired by hand with a match. (Plate 19, fig. 2.)

~Invented 14th century.~

That hand-guns were invented, though but rarely appearing, in the fourteenth century, seems very probable from several cotemporary evidences. An inquisition taken in 1375, at Huntercombe, (a place belonging to the Abbey of Dorchester) and now preserved among the records at the Chapterhouse, Westminster, states that one Nicholas Huntercombe, with others, to the number of forty men, armed with “haubergeons, plates, bacenettes, cum aventayles, paletes, lanceis, scutis, arcubus, sagittis, balistis, _et gonnes_, venerunt ad Manerium de Huntercombe, and there made assault,” &c. It appears very improbable that a body of men making a sudden attack upon an abbey manor-house, would be armed with any kind of “gonnes” except hand-guns.

~Bohemia 1340.~

~Lithuanians 1383.~

Mons. Mangeot states that “canons de fusil” were said to have been first invented in Bohemia, 1340, but that it is safer to fix the date at 1378, when mention is made of the “arquebuse à mèche” in Germany. In the year 1381, the inhabitants of Augsburg had thirty six arquebusiers, and in the following year they had portable fire-arms at the battle of Rosabecque. In 1383 the Lithuanians were acquainted with hand fire-arms, and used them at the siege of Froski. All these arms had straight stocks.

In the excavations of the Castle of Tannenberg, dismantled in 1399, there was found a hand-gun of brass, with part of the wooden stock remaining, and the iron rammer belonging to it.

An early mention of the hand-gun is that of Juvenal des Ursins, who tells us, under the year 1414, that they were used at the siege of Arras.

~Siege of Lucca 1430.~

~Said to have been invented in Italy.~

Billius, a learned and noble Milanese, who lived at the time, says that hand-guns were first used at the siege of Lucca, in 1430. The Florentines were provided with artillery, which, by the force of gunpowder, discharged large stones, but the Luccquese perceiving that they did very little execution, came at last to despise them, and every day renewed their sallies to the great slaughter of their enemies, by the help of _small fire-arms_, to which the Florentines were strangers, and which before this time were not known in Italy. Billius explains this by saying, “That besides darts and balistas for arrows, they invented a new kind of weapon. They carried in their hand a club, a cubit and a half long, to which were affixed iron barrels. These they filled with sulphur and nitre, and by the power of fire, iron balls were thus ejected.” (Plate 19, fig. 1 and 10).

~Scorpion.~

About this time the scorpion (afterwards a piece of ordnance) was a tube for firing gunpowder, held in the hand, and called by the English, hand-cannon, and also hand-culverines.

~Made of brass.~

From a roll of purchases for Holy Island 1446 is,--“bought 11 hand gunnes de ere,” from whence we learn that they were made of brass.

~Edward IV.~

~Harquebus invented.~

~Stock, &c., from cross-bow.~

~Match-lock. 1478.~

Hand-guns, or hand-cannons were used in the early part of the reign of Edward IV., and towards the close of it, we learn from Philip de Comines, that the harquebus was invented; this seems to have been an improvement on the hand-gun. The Latin word used for this weapon was arcusbusus, evidently derived from the Italian, arca-bouza, a bow with a tube or hole; to that people, therefore, are we to ascribe the application of the stock and trigger in imitation of the cross-bow. Hitherto the match had been applied by the hand to the touch-hole, but the trigger of the arbalest suggested the idea of one to catch into a cock, which having a slit in it, might hold the match, and by the motion of the trigger be brought down on a pan which held the priming, the touch-hole being no longer at the top but at the side. (Plate 19, fig. 9).

~Hand-gun improvements.~

~Sighted.~

The hand-gun was _cast_ in brass, and, as a tube, was of greater length than the hand cannon; a flat piece of brass, made to turn upon a pin, covered the pan which contained the powder; it had also a piece of brass fixed on the breech, and perforated to ensure the aim.

~Hand-guns in England 1471.~

~Made in England, 1474.~

The first introduction of hand-guns into England, we find, was soon after their invention in Italy; in the year 1471, King Edward IV., landed at Ravenspurg, in Yorkshire, and brought with him, among other forces, three hundred Flemings, armed with “hange-gunnes.” In 1474, he directed “all the bombs, cannon, culverines, fowlers, surpentines, and all other cannon whatsoever, as also powder, sulphur, saltpetre, stones, iron, lead and other materials, fit and necessary for the same cannon, wherever found, to be taken and provided for his use, paying a reasonable price for the same.”

~Harquebusiers.~

~Morat 1476.~

Arquebusiers, or harquebusiers, are mentioned as troops, by Philip de Comines, in these words, where he speaks of the battle of Morat, fought on the 22nd of June, 1476. “The said towns had in their army, as some that were in the battle informed me, 35,000 men, whereof fower thousand were horsemen, the rest footmen, well chosen and well armed, that is to say, 10,000 pikes, 10,000 halberds, and 10,000 harquebusiers.”

~Improvements.~

~Held to breast.~

~Bent butt.~

~Hackbutt.~

Hitherto the harquebuss had only a straight stock, but now it had a wide butt end, which might be placed against the right breast, and thus held more steadily. Many ancient pieces were held to the breast instead of the shoulder, which will account for their being so short in the stock. A notch was made in the butt for the thumb of the right hand, in order to hold the piece more firmly. When the butt was bent down or hooked as it was at a later period, it was called, from the German word Hake, a hackbutt, haggebut or hagbut, the small sort being denominated demi-hags.

~Mounted Harquebussiers.~

Philip de Commines mentions that there were at the battle of Fourniée, in 1495, German harquebusiers, on foot and on horseback. (Plate 19, fig. 6.)

~Arms in time of Henry VIII.~

The small arms in the time of Henry VIII., were hand-guns, haguebuts, demi-hagues and the pistol, and it was enacted, “that no hand-gun should be used, of less than one yard, gun and stock included, and the haguebut was not to be under three-quarters of a yard.” The demi-hagues were still smaller, and gave occasion for the origin of pistols, which were invented in the latter part of this reign, at Pistoria in Tuscany. The dag, dagger, or tache, differed from the pistol merely in the shape of its handle.

~Inconveniences of match.~

~Objections to fire-arms.~

~Rest.~

~Wheel-lock, 1517.~

~Used at Parma, 1521.~

~In England, 1530.~

~Serpentine and wheel.~

The match was a constant source of trouble to the soldier, both from the difficulty of keeping it alight in bad weather, and from the length of time it sometimes took to ignite the charge. It was therefore not without justice that many persons clamoured about this time against the introduction of fire-arms. They contended that upon no point, save that of penetration, was the harquebuss superior or equal to the long-bow; its great weight 16 or 18lbs. (seldom less than 12lbs.) obliged it to be supported by a rest, which had a kind of fork to receive the musket, and at the bottom a sharp metal spike, to strike into the ground; (Plate 19, fig. 5, 7, and 8). When the harquebuss was shouldered the rest was carried in the right hand, and subsequently hung upon it, by means of a string or loop. The difficulty of keeping the powder and match dry, the time taken to load, and its comparative inaccuracy, rendered it of low reputation. Nevertheless it held its ground, and the next improvement was the wheel-lock, by which a more instantaneous ignition of the charge was secured; it was invented at Nuremberg, 1517. It consisted of a little solid wheel of steel, fixed against the plate of the lock of the harquebuss or pistol; it had an axis that pierced it in its centre; at the interior end of this axis which went into the lock, a chain was fastened, which twisted round it on the wheel being turned, and bent the spring by which it was held; to bend this spring a key was made use of, into which the exterior end of the axis was inserted. By turning this key from left to right, the wheel was made to revolve, and by this movement a little slider of copper, which covered the pan with the priming, retired from over it; and by the same movement the cock, armed with a flint like the cock of a fusil, was in a state to be discharged on pulling the trigger with the finger; the cock then falling on the wheel, produced fire, and communicated it to the priming. The wheel-lock was first used at the siege of Parma, 1521, and was brought to England 1530. It was however complicated and difficult to repair, for which reason it could not always be depended upon, as is proved by some fire-arms of this description at the Tower, which are made with a serpentine, as well as with a wheel, both acted upon by the same trigger.

~Musket in Spain.~

~At Pavia, 1525.~

~Low Countries, 1567.~

The inconsiderable execution done by pieces of small calibre probably caused the introduction of the muskets or mosquet, which originated in Spain about the time of Francis I. They are said to have been first employed extensively at the battle of Pavia, 1525; but, if we believe Brantome, it was the Duke d’Alva who first brought them into use in the armies, when during the reign of Philip II., he went to take upon him the government of the Low Countries in the year 1567; but that only means, he brought them more into fashion than they were till that time, and that till then they were rarely used, at least in the field, on account of their cumbrous nature. A Spanish army of 10,000 men sailed from Carthagena, 27th April, 1567, _en route_ for the Netherlands, to do which they had to cross the Alps. It was a picked body of troops, of whom about 1,300 were cavalry. The Duke d’Alva formed them into three divisions, and dispensed with artillery, not wishing to embarrass his movements. Each company of foot was flanked by a body of soldiers, carrying heavy muskets with rests attached to them.

~Lephanto, 1571.~

At the battle of Lephanto 1571, fought between the Venetians and Turks, it is stated by the historian, that one chief reason why so few Christians were killed in comparison, was because the Turks used for the most part bows and arrows, whereas the former were supplied with muskets.

~Caliver.~

A lighter kind of musket was called a caliver or calliver, which was only a corruption of calibre, denoting that they were all of one guage, as the original harquebuses were not of any particular length or bore; the caliver was fired without a rest.

~Dimensions, 1621.~

Sir Thomas Kellie in his “Art Militaire,” published in 1621, says, “The barrel of a musket should be four feet in length, the bore capable of receiving bullets twelve whereof weigh a pound, previous to this some had carried ten to the pound.”

~Hand-mortar, 1594.~

~From butt of musket.~

~By hand.~

~From muzzle.~

The hand-mortar for throwing grenades are said to have been first used in 1594, and gave origin at a later date to the troops thence denominated, _grenadiers_. They appear to have been fired from the shoulder. (Plate 19, fig. 3.) In the reign of James II., a flint-lock-musket was adapted to fire grenades from the butt, the small of which was made to resemble a chambered mortar; the heel of the butt formed a cover, which opened with a spring on a hinge; the priming was put into the usual pan, and a small piece of metal moved so as to open a communication with the powder in the chamber. A rest was formed by a slender iron rod, about three feet long, and when not required let into the stock, in the place usually occupied by the ramrod, and turning upon a pivot placed a few inches in front of the guard-brass. The scouring rod is run through metal loops on one side of the stock. Afterwards grenades were thrown by hand, the musket being slung over the soldier’s back, and more recently experiments were made with an iron tube about four inches long, placed on the muzzle in the same manner as the bayonets.

~Match-locks and rest, James I.~

In the time of James I., part of the infantry were armed with calivers or muskets and rests, both of which were fired with match-locks, the soldier carrying the match lighted at both ends.

~Trickerlock, 1629.~

“A match trickerlock compleat,” occurs in a schedule of 1629. This was the adoption of what is now called a hair trigger, which was added to the former one, and gives a more instantaneous discharge. A tricker wheel lock of Charles I., a tricker match-lock of Charles II., and a tricker fire-lock of James II., are preserved in Sir S. Meyrick’s collection.

~Fowling pieces.~

The Earl of Albermarle in 1646, says, “It is very fit likewise that you have in each company six good fowling pieces, of such a length that the soldier may well be able to take aim and shoot off at ease; being placed six on each flank of a division of foot to skirmish with an enemy. These soldiers ought to have command, when they come within distance, that they shoot at officers only.” We have here plainly the origin of riflemen.

~Tin tube for match.~

~First fire-lock.~

Each musketeer formerly carried a tin tube, pierced full of holes, to contain the match, and prevent his being discovered; in wet weather it was necessary to carry it in the crown of his cap, to prevent it from being extinguished. One of the earliest attempts to overcome this difficulty is in the Arsenal, at Dresden, where there is an old _buchse_, with a piece of pyrites fixed opposite to the touch-hole, and which requires to be rubbed with a file, chained to it, until sparks are elicited sufficient to fire the powder.

~Snaphaunce.~

The next improvement upon the wheel-lock was the snaphaunce; a flat piece of steel, furrowed in imitation of the wheel, was placed on a steel post, which being screwed beyond the pan, was made moveable; the pan had a cover which required to be pushed off by the thumb, and the furrowed piece being then brought to stand over it, on pulling the trigger, the flint, which was substituted for pyrites, struck against it, and gave the spark.

~Flint lock.~

The next step in the improvement of the musket was the introduction of the flint-lock, now so well known, that I need not enter into the details of its mechanism.

~In France, 1630.~

~In England, 1677.~

~Earl Orrery’s opinion.~

It was used in France as early as 1630, but was not employed in the army until 1670 or 80, when it took the name of “fusil.” It was not employed in England until about 1677, and its advantages over the matchlock are thus described in a work addressed to King Charles II., in 1677, by the Earl of Orrery:--“First it is exceedingly more ready, for with the fire-lock you have only to cock, and you are prepared to shoot, but with the matchlock, you have several motions, besides if you fire not the matchlock as soon as you have blown your match, (which often, particularly in hedgefights and sieges, you cannot do) you must a second time blow your match. The match is very dangerous, either when bandoliers are used, or when soldiers run hastily in fight to the budge barrel, to refill their bandoliers. I have often seen sad instances thereof. Marching in the nights to avoid an enemy or to surprise one, or to assault a fortress, the matches often discover you, whereby you suffer much, and he obtains much. In wet weather, the rain deads the powder and the match too, and the wind sometimes blows away the powder, ere the match can touch the pan; nay, in very high winds, I have seen the sparks blown from the match, fire the musket ere the soldier meant it, and either thereby lose his shot, or kill some one before him. Whereas in the firelock, the motion is so sudden, that what makes the cock fall on the hammer, strikes the fire and opens the pan at once. Lastly, the quantity of match does much add to the baggage, it naturally draws the moisture of the air, which makes it less fit, and if you march without close waggons, it is the more exposed, and without being dried again in ovens is but of half the use which otherwise it would be of, and which is full as bad as the skeans you give the corporals, and the sinks you give the private soldiers, being rendered useless if damp; nothing of all which can be said of the flint, but much of it to the contrary.”

~Bows to be replaced by muskets, 1596.~

In a proclamation of Queen Elizabeth dated 1596, it is stated, “You shall bring with you all such furniture and weapon for footmen as you stand charged withall by statute, or have formerly shewed at other musters heretofore, changinge your billes into pikes, and your bowes into muskettes accordinge to our sayde former letters.”

~Muskets with two locks.~

~Match-lock preferred.~

~Match made of.~

In France, as late as 1702, when the flint had wholly superseded the pyrites, and the structure differed very little from our present musket-locks, an additional cock was attached to the end of the lock-plate, and a sliding cover placed over a hole in the hammer-seat, for the purpose of lighting the powder by a match, if the flint failed. The match was therefore from its simplicity, preferred from all others for a considerable period, and is still used by the Chinese, Tartars, Persians, and Turks, in some provinces either wholly, or partially. The match itself was made of cotton or hemp, spun slack, and boiled in a strong solution of saltpetre, or in the lees of wine.

~Iron ramrod 1740.~

In the time of Frederick the Great, (1740 to 1786), the invention of the iron ramrod by the Prince of Dessau, trifling matter as it seems, doubled the value of the fire of infantry. Prior to this the rammer had been made of wood, and was called the scouring stick.

~Dimensions, &c. of English musket, in 1800.~

~Charge.~

~Priming, 1st. mode.~

~Priming, 2nd mode.~

At the commencement of this (19th) century, the weight of the English musket and bayonet was, 11lbs. 4ozs., bayonet 1lb. 2ozs., length of barrel 3ft. 3-in., bore ·753-in., bullets 14¹⁄₂ to the pound. Charges of powder 6 drs., F.G. Every soldier was furnished with three flints for 60 rounds. Originally it had been necessary to put the priming into the pan from a flask, containing a finer grained powder, called “Serpentine powder,” but in the early flint-lock musket this was rendered unnecessary, as in loading, a portion of the charge passed through the communication hole into the pan, where it was prevented from escaping by the hammer. Latterly a portion of the cartridge was bitten off, and the pan filled with priming before loading.

~Objections to flint-lock.~

~Priming by detonation, 1807.~

~Experiments, 1834.~

~Advantages of percussion.~

~Reduced charge.~

~Reduced pull of trigger.~

The objections to the flint-lock were, that it did not entirely preserve the priming from wet. Sometimes the flint failed to ignite the charge, and it was necessary to change it frequently. Owing to these imperfections, in 1807, the Rev. Mr. Forsyth obtained a patent for priming with fulminating powder. The composition consisted of sulphate of potash, sulphur, and charcoal, and exploded when struck by any metal or hard substance. This composition was considered too corrosive, but was subsequently improved, and finally applied to the musket, in the form of the present percussion cap, which consists of chlorate of potash, three parts; fulminating mercury two parts; and ground glass one part. The experiments for Mr. Forsyth’s invention, commenced in 1834. Six thousand rounds were fired from each description of arm, and the experiments conducted in all weathers, six of each kind of arm being used. The result proved exceedingly favourable to the percussion principle, and may be briefly summed up as follows:--1st, out of 6,000 rounds from the flint-lock, there were 922 missfires, being 1 in 6¹⁄₂, whereas in the percussion musket there were only 36 misses in 6,000 rounds, or 1 in 166. With the flint-lock there were 3,680 hits out of the 6,000, and with the percussion 4,047 hits, being 7 per cent. in favour of the latter. To fire 100 rounds with the flint required 32 minutes 31 seconds, whereas the percussion occupied only 30 minutes 24 seconds. Another advantage of the percussion musket, was that it was capped _after_ being loaded. Hitherto a certain amount of powder had been allowed for priming, but as this vestige of the hand-gun could be dispensed with, a reduction of charge could be made; a total reduction however was made from 6 to 4¹⁄₂ drs., which caused a diminution of recoil. The 4¹⁄₂ drs. then recommended was known to be more than was necessary for the projection of the bullet, but an extra ¹⁄₂ dr. was retained to allow for the effect of damp or waste on service. In the course of these experiments, it was found that the considerable force required to pull the trigger might be advantageously reduced, and that increased accuracy would ensue, therefore the pull of the trigger was lessened to 7lbs.

~New model musket.~

The advantages of the percussion system having been satisfactorily shown, it was decided to convert a portion of the old flint-locks into percussions, and to establish a new model percussion musket for the English army.

~Percussion at Canton.~

The following anecdote illustrates the weak points of the flint-lock. During the Chinese war, a company of the 37th Madras Native Infantry had been detached to the left, when, the evening closing, the order was given to rejoin, and the whole were to retire upon Canton, and just as it was being carried into execution, a tremendous storm of wind and rain arose, making the air so dark, that no one could see 20 yards. The detached company retired sounding bugles and beating drums, which were drowned by the tempest, and they could not find the battalion. In a few minutes the enemy got between this company and the retreating force. The muskets would not go off, and several attempts of the enemy to close were with difficulty repulsed with the bayonet. In the meantime, the enemy contrived to fire off their own matchlocks, and some of the sepoys’ muskets of men who had dropped in the retreat, by applying matches to them. The square into which the company was formed, was thus being diminished, while the only return that could be made, was an occasional shot from a solitary musket, which the three officers of the company managed to clean out, under cover of great coats held over the muzzle. A company of Marines was dispatched for the 37th party, armed with percussion muskets, scarcely one of which missed at the first fire, and a few volleys sufficed to clear the way, and both detachments reached the camp in safety, with but little loss. This happened in the early part of 1841.

~Percussion introduced, 1842.~

~Sighted for 150 yards.~

After a “hang-fire” of about 200 years, a new pattern percussion musket was issued in 1842. Its weight was greater than that of the old flint-lock, being with the bayonet about 11-lbs., 6-oz., bayonet 1-lb., 0-oz., 8-drs., bore ·753, barrel 3-ft. 3-in., length, with bayonet 6 feet, length without 4-ft. 6³⁄₄-in., a block sight for 150 yards, and a percussion lock. For many years prior to 1839 no sight at all was thought necessary for the musket, the bayonet stud being sufficient, but which was totally obscured when fired with fixed bayonets. This arm continued as the approved weapon for our infantry without improvement until 1851, when the Minié rifle was partially introduced.

~Comparison with foreign muskets.~

~Brown Bess advocated.~

The English musket (1842) differed from all those in use on the Continent, in having, 1st, the least accuracy, 2nd, reduced range, 3rd, heavier, 4th, shorter, 5th, larger bore, 6th, greater windage, 7th, double the charge of powder, 8th, the greatest recoil, and 9th, the most expensive! _i. e._, as compared with those of France and Belgium, Prussia, Austria, or even with the old Sikh matchlock!! And yet a “stand up fight” was stoutly maintained for this most inefficient arm, by many military men, as may be seen from the following extract from a note in Part II., Vol. II., of the “Aide Memoire to the military sciences:”--“Erroneous ideas prevail as to the precise wants of the service with regard to the musket, and its proper qualities and utility in the field, as well as much exaggeration as to the defects of the new percussion musket of 1842, for the infantry of the line. It is stated that it is too heavy and of imperfect construction. Some prefer the French pattern, and others would lessen the weight and calibre still more, reducing also the windage: as, however, the new regulation has brought into use some hundreds of thousands of new muskets, and has been approved by the highest authorities, some considerations are necessary before a radical change can be effected beyond range and a nice accuracy of fire. 1st, What are the essentials for a musket for the infantry of the line? 2nd, The application of the musket to the infantry soldier. It is evident that the most essential points are strength, and facility of pouring into your enemies’ ranks a powerful fire. Troops do not halt to play at long bowls; a field of battle presents a series of movements for the purpose of outflanking or closing in upon your enemy, and when within two hundred yards, to deliver your fire with effect. Firing at 500 or 600 yards is the business of artillery, and, therefore, to fire at 300 or 400 yards is a misapplication of the musket, a loss of time, a waste of ammunition, and tends to make men unsteady in the ranks.”

~Brown Bess tried at Chatham.~

~Merits of “Brown Bess” illustrated.~

The shooting powers of the musket (1842) are stated in the report on Experimental Musketry firing carried on by Captain (now Lieut.-Colonel) McKerlie, Royal Engineers, at Chatham, in 1846, which concludes as follows: “It appears by these experiments, that as a general rule, musketry fire should never be opened beyond 150 yards, and certainly not exceeding 200 yards. At this distance, half the number of shots missed a target 11-ft. 6-in., and at 150 yards a very large proportion also missed. At 75 and 100 yards every shot struck the target, only 2-ft. wide, and had the deviation increased simply as the distance every shot ought to have struck the target 6-ft. wide at 200 yards, instead of this, however, some were observed to pass several yards to the right and left, some to fall 30 yards short, and others to pass as much beyond, and this deviation increased in a still greater degree as the range increased. It is only then under peculiar circumstances, such as when it may be desirable to bring a fire on Field Artillery when there are no other means of replying to it, that it ought ever to be thought of using the musket at such distances as 400 yards.” In fact, it has been stated that the probability of hitting one man with a musket ball at 500 yards would be as one farthing to the National Debt! On a recent occasion, at the Cape, 80,000 rounds were fired to kill 25 men!! To put a man “_hors de combat_” requires his weight in lead, and six times his weight in iron!!!

~Price.~

~Fastened by bands.~

~Bands unsightly!!~

~Supposed profit of large bore.~

Our musket cost £3, the French and Belgian £1 8s. 6¹⁄₂d. In foreign arms the barrel is fastened to the stock by bands, binding the two together, and thus adding greatly to their strength. This mode, although acknowledged to be infinitely superior for military purposes, by our Inspector of small arms, was condemned as unsightly!! The French musket, although three inches longer, is beautifully poised, being lightened forward. Our bore being larger was considered an advantage, as their balls could be fired out of our barrels, while our balls could not out of their muskets. It was generally thought that the greater weight of the English ball produced an increased range and momentum, but this was counteracted by the excess of windage.

* * * * *

~Various forms of early fire-arms.~

In former days small arms were made of various shapes and devices, and also combined with other weapons of attack and defence.

There is in the arsenal at Venice a matchlock containing twenty barrels, ten gun barrels, about 2¹⁄₂ feet long, and ten pistol barrels half that length. The match exploded a gun and pistol barrel together.

The Chinese of the present day make use of a species of matchlock revolvers, and also of another matchlock, consisting of several barrels, placed on a common stock, diverging from each other, and fired simultaneously. (Plate 4, fig. 4 and 5.)

~Shield fire-arms.~

~Breech-loaders.~

Soon after the invention of fire-arms, the boss, or spike, issuing from the centre of the targets or shields, was superseded by one or more short barrels, fired by a matchlock, and having an aperture covered with a grating above, for the purpose of taking aim. These barrels were loaded at the breech, the charge being put into an iron tube, or short barrel, which was pushed in at the end, and retained there by shutting down a lid or spring.