mill. The three ingredients having been pulverized, are now fit for the

mixing process.

MIXING THE INGREDIENTS.

~Mixing and proportions.~

~Green charges.~

The ingredients are now weighed out very accurately, in the proportion of 75 nitre, 15 charcoal, and 10 sulphur, in 42lb. charges, viz., nitre, 31lbs. 8oz., charcoal, 6lbs. 4oz. 13drs., sulphur, 4lbs. 3oz. 3drs., and thoroughly mixed in a machine, which consists of a cylindrical gun-metal or copper drum, about two feet in diameter, with an axle passing through its centre, on which there are metal flyers, like forks. The machinery is so arranged that the flyers and drum revolve in opposite directions when in motion, at a rate of about one hundred revolutions per minute. Five minutes is sufficient for a thorough mixture. The composition is then drawn off by a slip into canvas bags the proper size to hold the 42lb. charges, which are tightly tied, and taken to small magazines. These are called green charges, and are now ready for the next process, incorporation.

THE INCORPORATING MILL.

~Incorporation.~

The Incorporating Mill consists of an iron or stone circular flat bed, about seven feet in diameter, fixed very firmly in the floor of the building which covers it, whereon two iron or stone cylindrical runners, from five to seven feet in diameter, fourteen to eighteen inches wide, and each weighing from 3 to 4¹⁄₂ tons, revolve. They have a common axle, and a vertical shaft passing through the centre of the bed is connected with this axle, and to machinery above or below, which communicates the motion. These runners are not equidistant from the centre, by which arrangement in their revolution every part of the composition on the bed is subjected to their action, which is threefold, viz., crushing, grinding, and mixing; crushing, from the weight of the cylinders; grinding, from the twisting motion which they are forced into from so large a diameter revolving in so small a circle; and mixing, from a combination of the two former motions. To prevent the powder from falling over the side of the bed, a wooden rim, about two feet in height, is placed at an angle of forty-five degrees with it, like the side of a funnel, and fitted closely all round its circumference. This is called the “curb;” and in the centre of the bed a gun-metal ring, or “cheese,” as it is termed, about two feet in diameter, and five inches high, concentric with the bed, prevents the powder working beyond in that direction. Moreover, two scrapers, or “ploughs,” connected by stays with the horizontal axle, revolve with the runners, one rubbing against the inner, and the other the outer circle. These ploughs are made of hard wood, shod with leather and felt, and their use is continually to disturb and rout about the composition, and keep it under the path of the runners, so that every part should get its share of incorporation. The houses or sheds which cover these buildings have hitherto been constructed of wood, with either corrugated iron or wooden roofing. The new incorporating mills in this factory, which are just completed, are built with three sides of strong three-foot brickwork, and the fourth side and roof of corrugated iron and glass. They are also placed in a line contiguous to each other, the alternate ones only facing the same way, so that an explosion from one would probably communicate no further, and the lighter parts of the building would blow away, leaving the rest entire. Most of the machinery in the factory is driven by water-wheels; the motive power of these mills is steam. A horizontal shaft, worked by the engine, passes underneath the entire length of the building in a cast-iron tank, and a bevel wheel on this shaft is geared into another one on the vertical shaft under the centre of each bed, which, communicating with the runners, gives the necessary motion.

~Water-tanks to prevent explosions.~

In order, as much as possible, to guard against any explosion spreading, above each bed, placed so as just to clear the runners, is suspended or balanced a copper tank, holding about forty gallons of water. On one side of the tank is fixed a small shaft, which communicates with similar cisterns over the beds of the mills on either side. The other end of the tank rests on a flat board, which is subjected to a great part of the force of an explosion. This consequently lifts, disengaging the support of the tank, the contents of which drench the bed which has just exploded, thereby putting out all fire, and cooling the machinery, besides having a similar effect on the mills right and left, preventing, by this means, any extension of fire.

INCORPORATING THE INGREDIENTS.

~Incorporation.~

~Mill cake.~

~Proof of mill cake.~

The charge is spread pretty evenly over the surface of the bed, and moistened with from four to six pints of distilled water; the quantity varying according to the state of the atmosphere; the runners are then set in motion, and run from seven to eight revolutions per minute for three and a half hours, during which time the powder is often routed up by a copper-shod spud, and watered slightly with a fine rose watering pot, according to the experience of the millman; at the end of this time the mixture is thoroughly incorporated, possesses all the chemical properties of Gunpowder, and is taken off the bed in the form of a cake, varying from a quarter to half an inch in thickness, and of a blackish-grey colour. This is called “Mill Cake,” and when broken, the fracture should exhibit the same uniform appearance, without presenting any sparkling or yellow specks; should this, however, be the case, it is a sign of the ingredients not being sufficiently incorporated. In this stage it undergoes certain proofs; samples of the cake are taken from every charge that is worked, dried in an oven, and granulated; half a drachm of this is fired in a vertical eprouvette, which it ought to raise 3.5 inches; and half an ounce is flashed on a glass plate. If very little residue or ash is left, it is an additional proof of its being well incorporated, and that the millman has done his work properly.

~Importance of incorporation.~

Incorporation is by far the most important process in the manufacture of Gunpowder; for, however carefully the other part of the fabrication is carried on, should there be a failing in this, the powder will be worth nothing.

~Object of manufacture.~

The great and ultimate object to be attained in the manufacture of Gunpowder is, to produce that which shall give equal results with equal charges; the greatest regularity should therefore be observed in this stage. The millman should have great experience; the runners and beds should be, as nearly as possible, the same size and weight, and driven at the same speed throughout the factory; at any rate, each charge should be worked to the same number of revolutions; the motion of the runners should also be as uniform as possible, which is very satisfactorily accomplished by each water-wheel being regulated by a governor.

BREAKING DOWN THE MILL CAKE.

~Breaking down the mill cake.~

~Object of mealing.~

The mill cake, after it comes off the bed of the incorporating mill, is placed in wooden tubs, and taken to small-expense magazines, and from there, in about twelve hours, to the breaking-down house; the object of the machine from which this takes its name, is to reduce the cake to a convenient size for the hydraulic-press box, and also that, by being crushed again to meal, it may get a more even pressure. It consists of a strong gun-metal framework, in which are fixed two pairs of fine-toothed or plain rollers, which revolve towards each other, working in spring collars, so that on any hard substance getting in by mistake, they would open, and allow it to pass through, thereby preventing the dangerous friction which would otherwise result. A hopper, or upright wooden funnel, capable of holding about 500 lbs. is fixed at one end of the machine, and an endless canvass band 2ft. 6in. wide, having strips of leather sewn across at intervals of four inches, passes over one roller at the bottom of the hopper, and one at the top of the machine. When set in motion, this conveys the cake from the hopper to the highest point of the band; it then falls through the first pair of rollers, and from thence through the second, passing in the form of meal into small wooden carriages underneath, which, as they are filled, move forward by a self-acting motion, making room for others. The mill cake thus broken down, is fit for the press.

PRESSING THE MEAL BY THE HYDRAULIC PRESS.

~Hydraulic Pressure.~

The meal is now subjected to very powerful pressure; and, in order to explain the way in which this is effected, a short description of the apparatus must be given. The principle of the hydraulic press is so familiar to most, that it will be unnecessary to do more than show how the power is applied (vide plate 2).

~Description of box.~

A very strong oak box, 2 feet 6 inches square, and 2 feet 9 inches deep, is constructed so that two of the sides of the lid will fall back on hinges, or form a compact solid box when screwed firmly together. Forty-six copper plates, 2 feet 5¹⁄₂ inches square, slide vertically into this box, and are kept five-eighths of an inch apart by two metal slips with corresponding grooves, which can be removed when necessary.

~Quantity pressed.~

~Amount of pressure.~

About 800 lbs. of the meal is put into this box while the plates are in the position we have described. When full, the slips are withdrawn, the plates being then only separated by the powder between them: the lid is now firmly screwed down, and the box turned over by an arrangement of pulleys, so that the plates which were vertical will now be horizontal. The present upper side is then unscrewed, and a travelling crane, moving on a rail overhead, is lowered till the claws attached to it hook on to two trunnions fixed on the sides of the box; it is now hoisted by means of a handwheel windlass, and the box being suspended, is pushed easily by means of the rail, and deposited in this position on to the table of the ram under the press block. The pumps are now set in motion by a water-wheel, and are allowed to work up to the required pressure, which is about seventy tons to the square foot; it is then conveyed from under the block in the same manner, and very easily unloaded. The press cake is then taken out in layers between each plate, resembling dark pieces of slate, about half an inch in thickness. After a day or so, this hardens so much as to be difficult to break, and the appearance of the fracture resembles that of the finest earthenware. Many important advantages are gained by this pressure, of which the following are the principal:--

~Reasons for pressure.~

First, the density of the powder is increased, which prevents it falling to dust in transport, or by rough usage. Secondly, its keeping qualities are improved, for it withstands the action of the atmosphere, and absorbs less moisture than a porous light powder. Thirdly, it produces more grain in the manufacture than mill cake; and a less proportion, consequently, is lost in dust. Fourthly, a closer connection of the ingredients is obtained. Fifthly, a greater volume of inflammable gas is produced from a certain bulk, than from a corresponding bulk of lighter powder.

~Disadvantages of pressure.~

The range, however, is lessened, from a greater quantity being blown out of a gun unignited; but this small loss is more than counterbalanced by the former advantages, and actually it is only perceptible in newly-made powder; for a light, porous powder soon loses its superior range from its absorption of moisture, while that of the dense powder remains unaltered.

GRANULATING THE PRESS CAKE.

~Mode of granulation.~

~Screening.~

The next process is granulation, or reducing this press cake into the proper sized grain for cannon, musket, or rifle powder. The machine which effects this is very beautifully contrived, and is entirely self-acting, obviating the necessity of any one being in the building while it is in motion. It resembles, in appearance and action, the breaking-down machine, except that it is larger, and is fitted with three pairs of toothed rollers, of different degrees of fineness, working in the same kind of collars already mentioned, so that, on any hard substance passing through, they would open accordingly, and thus prevent friction. At one end of the machine is a wooden hopper, or funnel, which is filled with the press cake. This is contrived so as to rise gradually by the motion of the machine, and constantly to supply an endless band, similar to the one described in the breaking-down house. When the cake arrives at the highest point of this band, it falls over, and is granulated between the first pair of gun-metal rollers. Under each pair is a screen, covered with 8-mesh wire. All that is not sufficiently small to pass through, is carried on to the next pair of rollers; and, in like manner, that which does not pass through the second screen is carried to the third pair. In addition to these screens, there are three oblong sieves covered with 8- and 16-mesh wire, and 56 cloth respectively, fixed under, and parallel to, each other, each being separated by about four inches of space, running at an incline just below the three pairs of rollers; these all lead to little wooden carriages placed on the opposite side of the machine, which are divided so as to collect the different sized grain as it passes down. To facilitate the separation and sifting of the powder, and to prevent masses of it forming and clogging up the wire, a shaking motion is imparted by a circular wheel attached to the framework of these sieves revolving against an octagonal one fixed to the machine. The grains which pass through each screen below the rollers fall on the upper one of these three last-mentioned sieves. That portion which passes through this, and is retained on the 16-mesh wire, is cannon powder; that passing through the 16-mesh sieve, and retained on the 56-cloth, is fine grain; and a board, running also parallel underneath, retains the dust that passes through the cloth.

~Chucks regranulated.~

The “chucks,” as they are called, or those grains that are too large to pass through these different sieves, are collected in the same way as the grain, and undergo the process of granulation again.

DUSTING LARGE-GRAIN POWDER.

~Object of dusting.~

~How performed for large-grain.~

~Glazed at same time.~

The keeping qualities of powder are very much improved by removing the dust, which quickly absorbs moisture from the atmosphere. This operation, for large-grain, is performed by cylindrical reels, about 8ft. 6in. long, and 3ft. 8in. in diameter, clothed with 28-mesh canvas, which revolve at the rate of thirty-eight times per minute. Those for large-grain are called horizontal reels, in contradistinction to those for fine-grain, that are called slope reels. Each is enclosed by a wooden case, to prevent the dust flying about the house. When the powder has run its time, one end of the reel is lowered. It then runs out into barrels placed to receive it. This entirely separates the dust, and imparts a fine black gloss, which is sufficient glazing for the large-grained powder.

DUSTING FINE-GRAIN POWDER.

~Dusting fine-grain.~

The fine-grain powder has a much greater proportion of dust when it leaves the granulating house than the large-grain, and it is found necessary, on this account, to use a different kind of reel. They resemble those for the former powder, except that they are covered with 44-mesh canvas instead of 28, and are placed at an incline which prevents their being choked up with the quantity of dust; each end is also open, and a continuous stream of powder, fed by a hopper, passes through while they revolve, and pours out at the lower end into barrels. This process is repeated a second time, which sufficiently frees it from dust.

GLAZING FINE-GRAIN POWDER.

~Glazing fine-grain.~

The fine-grain powder thus dusted, is then glazed for three hours in barrels capable of holding 300lbs. which are 3ft. 6-in. in length, and 2ft. 8-in. in diameter, revolving at the rate of thirty two times in a minute. By the mere friction of the grains against each other and the inside of the barrel, a glaze is imparted, presenting a fine polished surface to the grain.

~Object of glazing.~

Powder glazed in this way withstands the action of moisture to a far greater extent than unglazed powder, and in transport very little dust is formed.

STOVING OR DRYING POWDER.

~Drying.~

A drying-room, heated by steam pipes, is fitted with open framework shelves, on which rests small wooden trays about 3ft. long, 1ft. 6-in. in breadth, and 2¹⁄₂in. deep, having canvas bottoms; on each is spread 8lbs. of powder. This room holds about 40 barrels, or 4,000lbs., which remains in it for twenty four hours, and is subjected to a heat of 130° Fahrenheit for sixteen hours, communicated by steam passing through pipes arranged horizontally on the floor of the room. The temperature is raised and lowered gradually, otherwise the too sudden change would be likely to destroy the texture of the grain. The ceiling and roof are fitted with ventilators, through which all the moisture escapes, so that there is a constant current of hot air circulating through the room. It is of the greatest importance that the vapour should be carried off; for, if this is not effectually done, on the decrease of temperature, it would return to its liquid state, and form again on the powder.

FINISHING DUSTING.

~Final dusting.~

~Barrelling.~

The action of heat however produces a small portion of dust; both these powders, therefore, when they leave the stove, are reeled in horizontal reels, clothed with 28 and 44-mesh canvas respectively, for one hour and a half. This perfectly separates any remaining dust, and gives the finishing glaze to the large-grain powder. This is the final process, and the powder thus finished is taken to the barrelling-up house; weighed out into barrels holding 100lbs. each; marked L. G. (large-grain), and F. G. (fine-grain), as the case may be; and stored in magazines.

EXAMINATION AND PROOF OF GUNPOWDER.

~Desired properties of gunpowder.~

~Specific gravity.~

~Strength.~

~Purity.~

The great and ultimate object to be attained in the manufacture of Gunpowder is, not so much to produce that which ranges the highest, as one that shall be durable in its texture, not easily deteriorated by atmospheric influence or transport, and one with which equal charges shall produce equal effects. It should present uniformity in the appearance of its grains, which should be angular, crisp and sharp to the touch, not easily reduced to dust by pressure between the fingers, or dusty in handling; its specific gravity should not be under 55lbs. to the cubic foot, (that of Waltham Abbey is generally 58lbs.) taking water at 1000ozs.; its strength is tested by firing three rounds from an 8 inch mortar, throwing a 68-pounder solid shot with a charge of 2oz. this should give a range of from 270 to 300 feet. The distance however, varies considerably, according to the state of the atmosphere, and the density of the powder: for, the greater the density, the less the range in small charges. Half an ounce flashed on a glass plate should leave little or no residuum; should white beads or globules appear, it is a sign of imperfect incorporation.

PROOF OF MERCHANT’S POWDER.

The following are the different proofs merchant’s powder is subjected to:--

Lots of 100 barrels are sent in, marked with the number of the lot and the maker’s name on the head of each barrel. 25 per cent. of these are unheaded in the examining house; the Proof Officer then--

~If dusty.~

First, takes a bowl out of each barrel, and holding it about three feet above, pours it out quickly; should there be a good deal of dust, it is satisfactorily shown by this means.

~Firmness.~

~Size of grain.~

Secondly, it is handled and pressed between the fingers, to test the firmness of its grain; and should there appear to be any great difference in the proportions of different sizes to that laid down as a standard, it is sifted and compared accordingly, being rejected should the quantities fall short or exceed the sample in any great degree.

~Density.~

Thirdly, a barrel or two are selected, and the powder poured into a hopper, under which is placed a box very carefully constructed, so as to hold exactly a cubic foot. A slide is now withdrawn at the bottom of the hopper, and the powder allowed to run into the box in a continuous even stream until it is piled up; the hopper is then removed, and the powder struck off with a straight edge, level with the top of the box. The weight is now carefully taken, that of the latter being subtracted; should this not amount to 55lbs. it is rejected, as not being of sufficient density.

~Strength by range.~

Fourthly, samples are taken from every barrel, and lot for the firing proof.

Firing Proof.--An average of nine rounds of sample Waltham Abbey powder is taken, three rounds being respectively fired at the beginning, middle, and end of the proof, from the same kind of mortar before mentioned, with a charge of 2oz. An average of three rounds of each lot of the merchant’s powder is also taken; should it fall short by more than 1 in 20, it is rejected.

~Purity by flashing.~

Fifthly, to ascertain if any residuum or ash is left after ignition, about half an ounce is burned on a clean glass plate, and fired with a hot iron. The explosion should be sharp, and produce a sudden concussion in the air; and the force and power of this concussion should be judged by that of known good quality. Few sparks should fly off, nor should white beads or globules appear, as it would be a sure indication, as we have before explained, of insufficient incorporation. It is also subjected to a second proof.

~Purity by weight after exposure to damp.~

Second proof.--A sample of 1lb. from each lot, carefully weighed up, and a similar sample of the comparison powder, is exposed for three weeks in a box perforated with holes (called a damp chest), to the action of the atmosphere. This box is placed under cover, so that it is sheltered from the wet, but that the moisture can get to it. If, at the end of this time, there is a greater proportion of difference in range between them than one-twentieth, it is rejected. The pounds are also very carefully weighed up again, to ascertain the comparative absorption of moisture. This is called the hygrometric test.

REMARKS ON THE PROOF OF POWDER BY THE EPROUVETTES.

~By eprouvettes or pendulum.~

By comparing the results of the proofs by the eprouvettes with those furnished by the cannon pendulum (vide plate 1, fig. 2 and 3), it will appear that the eprouvettes are entirely useless as instruments for testing the relative projectile force of different kinds of powder, when employed in large charges in a cannon. Powders of little density, or of fine grain, which burn most rapidly, give the highest proof with the eprouvettes, whilst the reverse is nearly true with the cannon.

~Real use of eprouvettes.~

The only real use of these eprouvettes is to check and verify the uniformity of a current manufacture of powder, where a certain course of operations is intended to be regularly pursued, and where the strength, tested by means of any instrument, should therefore be uniform.

~Best proof, by service charges.~

The only reliable mode of proving the strength of Gunpowder is, to test it with service charges in the arms for which it is designed; for which purpose the balistic pendulums (vide plate 3), are perfectly adapted.

~Best proof for small arms.~

For the proof of powder for small arms, the small balistic pendulum is a simple, convenient, and accurate instrument.

~Common eprouvette.~

The common eprouvettes are of no value as instruments for determining the relative force of different kinds of Gunpowder.

OF THE SIZE OF GRAIN FOR GUNPOWDER.

~On size of grain.~

With regard to the particular size of grain for Gunpowder, I am confident great improvements might be made, both in obtaining greater regularity of effect and propelling force, by the adoption of a more uniform even grain. There are at present half-a-dozen different sizes in our cannon and musket powder; and I think it stands to reason, that the more equal the size, the more uniform will be the ignition of all the grains, and consequently the effect of the same charges will be much more regular.

OBSERVATIONS ON THE MANUFACTURE OF GUNPOWDER ON THE CONTINENT AND AMERICA.

It may not be uninteresting to have a slight knowledge of the method employed on the Continent, &c., for the production of Gunpowder.

~Proportion of the ingredients.~

The proportions of the three ingredients vary slightly all over the Continent and America, being as follows:--

SALTPETRE. CHARCOAL. SULPHUR. France } 75 12.5 12.5 Belgium } Russia 73.78 13.59 12.63 Prussia 75 13.5 11.5 Austria 75.5 13.2 11.3 Spain 76.47 10.78 12.75 United States 76 14 10

PRODUCTION AND PURIFICATION OF THE INGREDIENTS.

~Production and purification of the ingredients.~

The nitre is purified in a similar way to the new method employed at Waltham Abbey, though it is seldom obtained with so faint a trace of chlorides, owing probably to its being of an inferior quality, and of higher refraction when it is imported.

The sulphur is supplied to the manufactories in France in the form of roll sulphur, from Marseilles and Bordeaux, where there are very large refineries.

The charcoal is prepared from dogwood, alder, willow, hazel, and poplar, sometimes in pits, and occasionally in cylinders, as at Waltham Abbey. At Wetteren, and in some parts of France, it is distilled by the action of steam. The “charbon roux” taking its name from its brownish-red tinge, from being only partially burned, was used formerly more than now, as the powder made from it was found to injure and exert very pernicious effects upon fire-arms.

PULVERIZING AND MIXING THE INGREDIENTS.

~Pulverizing and mixing the ingredients.~

The ingredients are generally pulverized in copper drums, capable of holding 224 kilogrammes. Part of the charcoal is mixed with the sulphur, and part of the sulphur with the saltpetre. They are then put into separate drums, which revolve about twenty-five times per minute for three hours, and in which are about 500 gun-metal or bronze balls, the size of good large marbles. The ingredients are brought to the most minute state of division by these means, and are then mixed all together, for one hour, in similar drums covered with leather, containing wooden balls.

INCORPORATING PROCESS.

~Incorporation.~

The fine powder thus obtained is sometimes merely moistened, so as to form a stiff paste, and passed through rollers, the cake formed, being dried and granulated. The incorporating cylinders are used occasionally, but the more usual plan adopted on the Continent to effect this operation is the stamping-mill, which requires a short description. It is nothing more nor less than the pestle-and-mortar principle, each mill consisting of from six to twelve bronze or wooden mortars bedded in the floor of the building; they are the shape of the frustum of a cone, the mouth being much narrower than the base; the pestles, or stampers as they are called, are made of wood, shod with either very hard wood or bronze, on which project wooden teeth about twelve inches long; a vertical movement is imparted to them by a shaft worked by the water-wheel having similar teeth attached; in its revolution it raises the stamper about eighteen inches, which falls again as the projection is disengaged, twenty five times in a minute. This operation is carried on for twelve hours, during which period the charge (about 15lbs.) is moistened at intervals, and routed up with a copper-shod spud; at the end of this time the cake is taken out, and left to dry and harden; it seldom receives any pressure--although, in some manufactories, presses are being erected.

GRANULATING.

~Granulation.~

The cake is then granulated in sets of sieves fitting one into the other, having perforated zinc bottoms of different degrees of fineness, which are suspended from the ceiling of the room by ropes, an ash spring being attached to each box holding the sieves, the cake is put into the uppermost one with some gun-metal balls, and shaken backwards and forwards, which motion the spring facilitates; it is thus broken up into different sized grains, which are separated by passing through the several meshes.

The grain formed is then dusted in bags or shaking-frames covered with canvas, and then glazed in barrels.

STOVING OR DRYING.

~Drying.~

~Comparative merits of foreign and English gunpowder.~

In summer the process of drying is often performed in the sun, and in winter by the steam stove, in the following way. The powder is spread about three or four inches thick on a large canvas tray, under which is an arrangement of pipes, which convey the hot air forced by a fan through a cylinder heated by steam: it is considered to be sufficiently dried in from three to four hours, during which time it is occasionally raked about. In some manufactories it undergoes a further operation of being dusted, and is then barrelled up for use. Generally the great failure in the foreign manufacture is the neglect of the principal stage of the fabrication, viz. incorporation; with the old stamping-mill, it is quite impossible that the process can be carried out to the necessary extent. The Continental powder is usually very soft in its grain, dusty, and quickly absorbs moisture from the atmosphere; its density is below the English powder, on account of its never being subjected to pressure; consequently it is not so durable, and forms a good deal of dust in transport; a great amount of residue is generally left in the gun, and its strength, as a propelling agent, is far inferior to our powders. On being flashed on a glass plate, instead of producing a sudden concussion, like the sharp rap of a hammer, it burns more like composition, throwing off a quantity of sparks.

NEW RIFLE POWDER.

The following mode of manufacturing rifle powder, appeared in Garrison Orders at Woolwich, 31st December, 1859:

Composition in 100 parts:--

Saltpetre 75 Charcoal 15 Sulphur 10 --- 100

The charcoal to be prepared from dogwood, burned slowly in cylinders three hours. The composition to be worked under the runners for five and a half hours, and submitted to a pressure of about 50 tons to the square foot. The size of the grain to be that collected between sieves of 16 and 24 meshes. The grain to be glazed for five hours.

* * * * *

NOTE.--The foregoing, on the manufacture of gunpowder, is principally taken from an article in the Aide Memoire (1860), by Major Baddeley, Royal Artillery; Captain Instructor, Waltham Abbey.

ON MAGAZINES.

It is impossible to make powder magazines too dry, and every care should be taken to ventilate them as much as possible during dry weather, by opening all doors, windows, loopholes, &c. Magazines are generally made bomb-proof, and are furnished with lightning conductors. They are divided into chambers, and these again divided by uprights into bays. At Purfleet, which is the grand depôt for gunpowder in England, there are five magazines capable of containing 9,600 whole barrels each. Each magazine is divided into two chambers, and each chamber into 24 bays, and in each bay is placed 200 whole, 400 half, or 800 quarter barrels of powder. Total in the five Magazines, 48,000 barrels, equal to 4,800,000 pounds.

LIGHTNING CONDUCTORS.

_Principles and Instructions relative to their application to Powder Magazines, by_ SIR W. SNOW HARRIS, F.R.S. _Extracted from Army List for July, 1859._

1.--Thunder and lightning result from the operation of a peculiar natural agency through an interval of the atmosphere contained between the surface of a certain area of clouds, and a corresponding area of the earth’s surface directly opposed to the clouds. It is always to be remembered that the earth’s surface and the clouds are the terminating planes of the action, and that buildings are only assailed by Lightning because they are points, as it were, in, or form part of, the earth’s surface, in which the whole action below finally vanishes. Hence buildings, under any circumstances, will be always open to strokes of Lightning, and no human power can prevent it, whether having Conductors or not, or whether having metals about them or not, as experience shows.

2.--Whenever the peculiar agency, (whatever it may be), active in this operation of nature, and characterized by the general term Electricity, or Electric Fluid, is confined to substances which are found to resist its progress, such, for example, as air, glass, resinous bodies, dry wood, stones, &c., then an explosive form of action is the result, attended by such an evolution of light and heat, and by such an enormous expansive force, that the most compact and massive bodies are rent in pieces, and inflammable matter ignited. Nothing appears to stand against it. Granite rocks are split open, oak and other trees, of enormous size, rent in shivers, and masonry of every kind frequently laid in ruins. The lower masts of ships of the line, 3 feet in diameter, and 110 feet long, bound with hoops of iron half an inch thick and 5 inches wide, the whole weighing about 18 tons, have been, in many instances, torn asunder, and the hoops of iron burst open and scattered on the decks. It is, in fact, this terrible expansive power which we have to dread in cases of buildings struck by Lightning, rather than the actual heat attendant on the discharge itself.

3.--When, however, the electrical agency is confined to bodies, such as the metals, which are found to oppose but small resistance to its progress, then this violent expansive or disruptive action is either greatly reduced, or avoided altogether. The explosive form of action we term Lightning, vanishes, and becomes, as it were, transformed into a sort of continuous current action, of a comparatively quiescent kind, which, if the metallic substance it traverses be of certain known dimensions, will not be productive of any damage to the metal. If, however, it be of small capacity, as in the case of a small wire, it may become heated and fused. In this case, the electrical agency, as before, is so resisted in its course as to admit of its taking on a greater or less degree of explosive and heating effect, as in the former case. It is to be here observed, that all kinds of matter oppose some resistance to the progress of what is termed the Electrical Discharge, but the resistance through capacious metallic bodies is comparatively so small, as to admit of being neglected under ordinary circumstances; hence it is that such bodies have been termed Conductors of Electricity, whilst bodies such as air, glass, &c., which are found to oppose very considerable resistance to electrical action, are placed at the opposite extremity of the scale, and termed Non-conductors or Insulators.

The resistance of a metallic copper wire to an ordinary electrical discharge from a battery, was found so small, that the shock traversed the wire at the rate of 576,000 miles in a second. The resistance however, through a metallic line of Conduction, small as it be, increases with the length, and diminishes with the area of the section of the Conductor, or as the quantity of metal increases.

4.--It follows from these established facts, that if a building were metallic in all its parts, an iron magazine for example, then no damage could possibly arise to it from any stroke of Lightning which has come within the experience of mankind; e.g., a man in armour is safe from damage by Lightning; in fact, from the instant the electrical discharge in breaking with disruptive and explosive violence through the resisting air, seizes upon the mass in any point of it, from that instant the explosive action vanishes, and the forces in operation are neutralized upon the terminating planes of action, viz., the surface of the earth, and opposed clouds.

5.--All this plainly teaches us, that in order to guard a building effectually against damage by Lightning, we must endeavour to bring the general structure as nearly as may be, into that passive or non-resisting state it would assume, supposing the whole were a mass of metal.

6.--To this end, one or more conducting channels of copper depending upon the magnitude and extent of the building should be systematically applied to the walls; these conducting channels should consist either of double copper plates united in series one over the other, as in the method of fixing such Conductors to the masts of Her Majesty’s Ships, the plates being not less than 3¹⁄₂ inches wide, and of ¹⁄₁₆th and ¹⁄₈th of an inch in thickness, or the Conductors may with advantage be constructed of stout copper pipe not less than ³⁄₁₆ths of an inch thick, and 1¹⁄₂ to 2 inches in diameter: in either case the Conductors should be securely fixed to the walls of the building, either by braces, or copper nails, or clamps; they should terminate in solid metal rods above, projecting freely into the air, at a moderate and convenient height above the point to which they are fixed, and below they should terminate in one or two branches leading outward about a foot under the surface of the earth; if possible, they should be connected with a spring of water or other moist ground.

It would be proper in certain dry situations, to lead out in several directions under the ground, old iron or other metallic chains, so as to expose a large extent of metallic contact in the surface of the earth.

7.--All the metals in the roof and other parts of the building of whatever kind, should so far as possible have metallic communication with these Alarm Conductors, and in case of any prominent elevated chimney, it would be desirable to lead a pointed conducting tube along it to the metals of the roof; all of which satisfies the conditions above specified.

8.--Remark 1.--It is now proved beyond all questions, that the electrical discharge never leaves perfect conducting lines of small resistance, in order to pass out upon bad conducting circuits, in which the resistance is very great, that is an established law of nature; hence a stroke of Lightning upon such conducting lines will be confined to the Conductors as constituting a line of discharge of less resistance than any other line of discharge through the building, which can be assigned. The apprehension of “Lateral Discharge” therefore, from the Conductor, is quite absurd; and is not countenanced by any fact whatever; if any doubt could possibly exist, it would be now most completely set at rest by the experience of the permanent Conductors, applied to the masts of Her Majesty’s ships. In very many instances furious discharges of Lightning have fallen on the masts with a crash as if the ship’s broadside had been fired, and the solid point aloft has been found melted; in all these cases electrical discharge robbed by the Conductor of its explosive violence, has traversed the line of action to the sea, through the ship, and through the copper bolts, driven through the ship’s solid timbers, without the least damage to the surrounding masses, whether metallic, as in the case of the massive iron hoops on the lower masts, or not. Persons have either been close by or actually leaning against the Conductors at the time, without experiencing any ill consequence.

9.--Remark 2.--It has also been incontestably shown, that metallic bodies have not any specific attractive force or affinity for the matter of Lightning; metals are as little attractive of lightning as wood or stone. All matter is equally indifferent to Electricity so far as regards a specific attraction, hence the idea that metals attract or invite Lightning is a popular but very unlearned error contradicted by the most satisfactory evidence, and the whole course of experience; in short, we find that Lightning falls indiscriminately upon trees, rocks, and buildings, whether the buildings have metals about them or not.

10.--Remark 3.--A building that is hence clear, may be struck and damaged by Lightning without having a particle of metal in its construction; if there be metals in it, however, and they happen to be in such situations as will enable them to facilitate the progress of the electrical discharge, so far as they go, then the discharge will fall on them in preference to other bodies offering more resistance, but not otherwise; if metallic substances be not present, or if present, they happen to occupy places in which they cannot be of any use in helping on the discharge in the course it wants to go, then the electricity seizes upon other bodies, which lie in that course, or which can help it, however small their power of doing so, and in this attempt such bodies are commonly, but not always, shattered in pieces. The great law of the discharge is,--progress between the terminating planes of action, viz:--the clouds and earth, and in such line or lines as upon the whole, offer the least mechanical impediment or resistance to this operation, just as water falling over the side of a hill in a rain storm, picks out or selects as it were by the force of gravity, all the little furrows or channels which lie convenient to its course, and avoids those which do not. If in the case of Lightning you provide through the instrumentality of efficient Conductors, a free and uninterrupted course for the electrical discharge, then it will follow that course without damage to the general structure; if you do not, then this irresistible agency will find a course for itself through the edifice in some line or lines of least resistance to it, and will shake all imperfect conducting matter in pieces in doing so; moreover it is to be specially remarked in this case, that the damage ensues, not where the metals are, but where they cease to be continued, the more metal in a building therefore the better, more especially when connected by an uninterrupted circuit with any medium of communication with the earth.

Such is, in fact, the great condition to be satisfied in the application of Lightning Conductors, which is virtually nothing more than the perfecting a line or lines of small resistance in given directions, less than the resistance in any other lines in the building, which can be assigned in any other direction, and in which by a law of nature the electrical agency will move in preference to any others.

11.--It follows from the foregoing principles, that a magazine constructed entirely of iron or other metal, would be infinitely more safe in Lightning storms than if built with masonry in the usual way; metallic roofs for magazines, with capacious metallic Conductors to the earth, would be unobjectionable, and a source of security.

Metallic gutters and ridges having continuous metallic connection with the earth are also unobjectionable.

A good method of Conductors for magazines built of masonry, would be such as already described, regard being had to the position of the building, its extent, and most prominent points, also to the nature, state, and condition of the soil, whether it be moist or dry, alluvial calcareous, or of hard rock; we must also consider the extent, disposition, and peculiar position of the metallic bodies entering into the general structure of the building, whether the roof be flat, pointed, or angular in various parts.

The pointed projecting extremities of the two Conductors, one or more as the case may be, will be commonly sufficient; but, in buildings having tall chimneys or other elevated prominent points, at a distance from the Main Conductor, it will be requisite to guard such chimneys or other parts, by a pointed rod, led along them to the metals of the roof, or directly connected with the Main Conductors, by metallic connections.

12.--Pointed terminations of the Conductors in the air, are so far important that they tend to break the force of a discharge of Lightning when it falls on them. In fact, before the great shock actually takes place, under the form of a dense explosion, a very large amount of the discharge, which otherwise would be concentrated, runs off, as it were, through the pointed Conductor; but they have no other influence.

With respect to these pointed terminations, no great care need be taken about them, except that they should consist of solid copper rod, of about three-quarters of an inch in diameter, and about a foot in length, and be united by brazing to the conducting tube, elevated at such convenient height above the walls of the building as the case may suggest.

As a support to the Conductor, when raised above the wall, we may employ a small staff or spar of wood fixed to the masonry.

13.--Copper linings to the doors and window shutters of magazines are not objectionable, if requisite, as a precaution against fire; but they are useless as a means of keeping out Lightning; on the other hand, it is not easy to conceive a case in which the explosion of the gunpowder is to be apprehended from the action of Lightning on the doors or windows. Supposing, however, such metallic linings desirable as a precaution against common cases of fire, then the masses of metal should, according to the principles already laid down, have metallic communication with the general system of conduction in the building and the Main Conductor.

ON THE EXPLOSIVE FORCE OF GUNPOWDER.

~Advantages of Gunpowder~

The advantages of Gunpowder, as a propelling agent, over any other explosive material are, the comparative safety attending its manufacture and transport, and the gradual nature of its decomposition when compared with those materials, such as fulminating gold, silver, mercury, &c. &c. In gunpowder, the force resulting from the rapid evolution of gas in a confined space has sufficient time to overcome the inertia of the projectile, which is not the case with other explosive materials, the conversion of which gaseous products is so instantaneous that nothing can resist the intensity of their explosive action. Other advantages suggest themselves in the use of Gunpowder, such as the comparative cheapness of the ingredients composing it, and the ease with which they may be obtained; for the sulphur and saltpetre are very abundant productions of nature, and the charcoal can be manufactured cheaply and with great facility, and if care is taken in the process of the fabrication of powder, little deterioration will take place on its exposure to heat or moisture.

~Air & Steam as propellants~

Condensed air and steam have been used as propelling agents; but the great inconvenience attending their use quite preclude the possibility of adapting them to war purposes.

~Force of Gunpowder.~

As the force and effect obtained from Gunpowder is the foundation of all other particulars relating to Gunnery, we will briefly consider these points.

~Upon what the action of powder depends.~

The action of Gunpowder is dependent upon a purely chemical process. Mr. Robins proved that the force generated by the combustion of gunpowder, was owing to an elastic gas which was suddenly disengaged from the powder, when it was brought to a certain temperature, and further that this disengaged gas had its elastic force greatly augmented by the heat evolved by the chemical action.

~Ingredients are charged with a large volume of heated gas.~

The propelling power of Gunpowder is dependent on the rapid decomposition of the nitre into its component parts; the oxygen forms carbonic acid with the carbon in the charcoal, and the heat thus generated by ignition changes both this and the nitrogen into a large volume of heated gas. In a mixture of nitre and charcoal alone, the oxidation proceeds with comparative slowness; by the addition of sulphur, an augmentation of combustibility is gained, in consequence of its igniting at a very low temperature; the sulphur, also, by its presence, renders available for the oxidation of the carbon an additional amount of oxygen, viz: that which is united with the potassium, the latter being at once converted into sulphite upon ignition of the powder.

~Weight of gas evolved.~

~Volume of gas evolved.~

~Heat of gas evolved.~

~Pressure of gas generated.~

~Strength of powder not affected by density of air, but by damp.~

It appears that the weight of gas generated is equal to three tenths of the weight of the powder which yielded it, and that its bulk when cold, and expanded to the rarity of Common air was 240 times that of the powder; the barometer standing at about 30 inches. From this Robins concluded that if the fluid occupied a space equal to the volume of the gunpowder, its elastic force, when cold, would be 240 times the pressure of the atmosphere, when the barometer stands as above. Mr. Robins also considered that the heat evolved was at least equal to that of red hot iron, and he found by experiments that air heated to this temperature had its elasticity quadrupled, and therefore, that the force of gas from powder is at least four times 240 = 960, or in round numbers 1,000 times as great as the elasticity of the air measured by its pressure on an equal extent of surface. From the height of the barometer it is known that the pressure of the atmosphere is about 14³⁄₄lbs. upon the square inch, so that the pressure of the elastic gas generated by the combustion of the gunpowder upon the same area would be 14.75 by 1,000 or 14,750lbs. at the moment of explosion. He found that the strength of Gunpowder was the same whatever might be the density of the atmosphere, but that the moisture of the air effected it considerably, in fact that the same quantity of powder which would give a bullet an initial velocity of 1,700 feet per second on a day when the atmosphere was comparatively dry, would upon a damp day give no more than 1,200 or 1,300 feet.

~Velocity of gas~

The velocity of the expansion of the gas is a most important point, upon which depends, chiefly, the peculiar value of the substance as a propelling agent. Many of the warlike machines of the Ancients produced a momentum far surpassing that of our heaviest cannon, but the great celerity given to the bodies projected from guns by gunpowder cannot be in the least approached by any other means than by the sudden production of an elastic gas. Mr. Robins found that the flame of gunpowder expanded itself when at the muzzle of the gun with a velocity of 7,000 feet per second.

~Dr. Hutton’s calculation as to:--_Volume, Temperature, Pressure_.~

~Temperature~

~Expansion.~

~How to calculate expansion~

~Absolute force of gunpowder cannot be determined.~

It has been calculated that one cubic inch of powder is converted into 250 cubic inches of gas at the temperature of the atmosphere, and Dr. Hutton states that the increase of volume at the moment of ignition cannot be less than eight times; therefore one inch of gunpowder, if confined, at the time of explosion exerts a pressure of about 30,000lbs. being 250 by 8 by 15 = 30,000lbs. on the cubic inch, or 5,000lbs. on the square inch; and which at once accounts for its extraordinary power. The value of the temperature to which the gases are raised, on the explosion of the powder, has been variously estimated and it may be concluded to rise as high as will melt copper, or 4,000° Fahrenheit. All gases expand uniformly by heat, the expansion having been calculated with great precision, to be ¹⁄₄₈₀th for each degree of Fahrenheit. If therefore we take Dr. Hutton’s calculations of one volume of powder expanding into 250 volumes of gas at the temperature of the atmosphere, and if we suppose 4,000° Fahrenheit to be the heat to which they are raised on ignition, the expansion of gunpowder would be calculated. Thus, suppose the gas to be at 60°, the temperature of the atmosphere, we must deduct 60° from 4,000°, which will give 3,940, being the number of degrees remaining to which it is raised, hence

temp. vol. temp. vol. vol. 1 3940 1° : --- 3,940° : ---- = 8·2 480 480

that is, each volume of gas would at a temperature of 4000° be increased 8·2 in volume. Gunpowder when at the temperature of the air being expanded 250 times in volume; therefore 250 by 8·2 = 2,050 as the increased expansion for each volume of gas generated by the explosion of gunpowder at the temperature of 4,000° Fahrenheit. Lieut-Colonel Boxer calculates that the heat generated by good dry powder is not under 3,000° Fahrenheit. It appears with our present knowledge, the absolute value of the force of gunpowder cannot be determined. Still by careful and extensive experiments no doubt a near approximation to the truth may ultimately be arrived at, so that although much has already been done by various eminent philosophers, there is still more to be accomplished; and the importance of the subject ought to act as a stimulus to the exertions of those belonging to a profession the most interested in the question.

~Loss of velocity by windage.~

It has been found by experiments that in calculating the initial velocity of a projectile, one third of the whole force was lost with a windage of ¹⁄₁₀th inch with a shot of 1·96-in. and 1·86-in. in diameter. The bore of the gun being 2·02-in.

~Definition of ignition and combustion.~

By ignition we understand the act of setting fire to a single grain, or to a charge of gunpowder, and by combustion we mean the entire consumption of a grain or of a charge.

~Quickness of combustion.~

Upon the quickness of combustion mainly depends the applicability of gunpowder for Military purposes.

~Ignition by heat.~

Gunpowder may be inflamed in a variety of ways, but whatever be the method, one portion of the substance must in the first instance be raised to a temperature a little above that necessary to sublime the sulphur, which can be removed from the other ingredients, by gradually raising the compound to a heat sufficient to drive it off in a state of vapour. The heat required for this purpose is between 600° and 680° Fahrenheit.

~Progressive combustion.~

When a charge of powder is exploded in the bore of a gun, to all appearance there would seem to be an instantaneous generation of the whole force. But in fact it is not so, a certain time being necessary to the complete combustion of the substance. This gradual firing is of the utmost importance, for were it otherwise, the gun, unless of enormous strength, must be shattered in pieces, as well as the projectile; for in such a case, this great force being suddenly exerted upon one part only of the material, there would not be time for the action to be distributed over the particles, at any great distance, before those in the immediate vicinity of the explosion, were forced out of the sphere of action of the cohesive force, and consequently rupture must take place.

~Substances which have a more violent action than powder.~

The effect of such an action may be observed by exploding detonating powders, in which are contained chlorate of potash or fulminating mercury. The action of that peculiar substance the chlorite of nitrogen is still more remarkable. There is also another compound, containing three parts of saltpetre, one part of carbonate of potash and one part of sulphur, which when brought to a certain heat will explode with great violence, its destructive force being very considerable; and this is principally due to the rapidity of the evolution of the gas, for its amount is less than that produced from gunpowder, but the complete decomposition occurs in a much shorter time.

~In a damp state less quickly fired, and why.~

If gunpowder be in a damp state, the velocity of combustion will be less than when dry, and also a longer time will be necessary to ignite it, since the moisture upon its conversion into vapour, absorbs a certain amount of heat which remains latent, and of which the useful effects so far as igniting the powder is concerned, is entirely lost.

~Ignition by percussion.~

Gunpowder may be ignited by the percussion of copper against copper, copper against iron, lead against lead, and even with lead against wood, when the shock is very great. It is more difficult to ignite gunpowder between copper and bronze,[1] or bronze and wood than between the other substances. Again, out of ten samples which were wrapt in paper and struck upon an anvil with a heavy hammer, seven of grained powder exploded and nine of mealed.

[1] Bronze consists of 78 parts copper to 20 of tin. Bell metal--78 copper and 22 tin. Gun metal--100 copper to 8 to 10 tin. Brass--2 copper, 1 zinc and calamine stone, to harden and colour.

~Influence of shape of grain on ignition.~

If the part to which the heat is applied be of an angular shape, the inflammation will take place quicker than if it be of a round or flat form, on account of the greater surface that is exposed to the increased temperature.

~The form of the grain influences the velocity of the transmission of flame.~

If the grains are of a rounded form, there would be larger interstices, and a greater facility will be afforded to the passage of the heated gas, and therefore this shape is most favourable to the rapid and complete inflammation of each grain in the whole charge. On the other hand, particles of an angular or flat form, fitting into each other as it were, offer greater obstruction to this motion, and the velocity of the transmission of inflammation is thereby diminished.

~Effect of size on the velocity of transmission of inflammation.~

If the grains be small, the interstices will be small also, and the facility to the expansion of the gas thereby diminished. In the experiments with trains of powder, the increased surface exposed to the heated gas was found to more than compensate for the diminished facility to its expansion, and generally a train of small-grained powder laid upon a surface without being enclosed, will be consumed more quickly than a train of large-grained powder.

~Large grain best suited for heavy ordnance.~

But this is not the case in a piece of ordnance, a circumstance which amongst others will account for the diminished initial velocity given to the shot by a charge of small-grained musket powder, below that produced by the large-grained usually adopted for this service.

~Velocity of the transmission of inflammation of the charge.~

~Estimate of Mr. Piobert.~

When a number of grains of powder are placed together as in the charge of a gun, and a few of them are ignited at one end of the cartridge, a certain quantity of gas is developed of a temperature sufficiently high to ignite those in their immediate vicinity. This has also such elasticity as to enable it to expand itself with considerable velocity. Again, the grains which are so ignited continue the inflammation to others in the same manner. The absolute velocity of expansion of this gas is very considerable; but the grains of gunpowder in the charge offer an obstruction to this motion, the gas having to wind its way through the interstices, and consequently the velocity is considerably diminished, but it is quite clear that it must be very much greater than the velocity of combustion. Mr. Piobert estimates the velocity of transmission of inflammation of a charge in a gun at about 38 feet per second, and in all probability even this is much under the mark.

~Experiments made on this subject.~

Many experiments have been made by observing the velocity of transmission of inflammation of trains of powder under various circumstances, but they do not show us what would be the velocity in a confined charge. The velocity increased with the section of the train, and further when at the end first lighted, there was an obstruction to the escape of gas, as in the case of a gun, a much shorter time was required for complete inflammation.

~Time of decomposition depends upon form of grain.~

When the charge of powder in a gun is ignited the grains being enveloped by the heated gas, we may consider that each grain is ignited over its whole surface at once. If the grains of powder were of equal or regular form, the time each would be consuming, might be easily calculated, but since in ordinary cases they are irregular in form, although the grains may be of the same weight, the time necessary for their complete decomposition will be very different.

~Circumstances affecting combustion.~

The quickness of combustion will depend upon the dryness of the powder, the density of the composition, the proportion of the ingredients, the mode of manufacture, and the quality of the ingredients.

~Combustion of cubical grains considered.~

Were a cubical grain to be ignited upon its whole surface, the decomposition may be supposed to take place gradually from the surface to the centre, and the original cubical form to remain until the whole is consumed, the cube becoming smaller and smaller. If, then, the rate of burning be the same throughout, the quantity of gas generated in the first half portion of the time will evidently be considerably more than in the latter half, as in the latter case there will be a much lesser surface under the influence of flame.

~Elongated and cylindrical grains.~

If the form of the grain be elongated, then will the quantity of gas generated in a given time from a grain of similar weight to that of the cube or sphere, be increased, on account of the greater ignited surface, and consequently the time necessary for its combustion will be diminished. If it be of a cylindrical form for example, this time must be reckoned from the diameter of the cylinder, its length not influencing it in the least, although as we have seen, it enters into the consideration of the quantity of the gas generated in a given time.

~Large grain.~

In the ordinary large-grain powder, the majority of the grains are of the elongated or flat form, from whence considerable advantage is derived, particularly in short guns, since it causes the greatest portion of the charge to be decomposed before the projectile is moved sensibly from its original position.

~Mealed powder.~

If the charge be composed of mealed powder a longer time is found to be necessary for the complete combustion of the whole than in the case where the substance is granulated, and the initial velocity of a shot is reduced about one third by employing the substance in that state.

~The effect of granulating gunpowder.~

A piece of pressed cake weighing 1·06oz., was put into a mortar, and a globe of some light substance, placed upon it, and the powder being consumed after ignition without ejecting the ball from the bore of the piece. When an equal quantity was divided into seven or eight pieces, the globe was thrown out of the mortar; breaking the cake into twelve pieces; the ball ranged 3·3 yards; being further increased to fifty grains, it ranged 10·77 yards; and when the ordinary powder was used, the ball was projected 56·86 yards.

~Action depends upon size and form of grain.~

It will appear from the above remarks, that the force generated from the charge of powder in a gun, will be greatly influenced by the size and form of the grains composing it.

~Density of gunpowder.~

In order to obtain a gunpowder which shall possess a proper amount of force, it is necessary that the ingredients should be thoroughly incorporated, and the process of incorporation will in great measure affect the density of the grains. After going through the process, it is subjected to a certain pressure, in order that the substance in travelling may not be reduced to a fine powder, which would cause the velocity of transmission of inflammation to be diminished. But there is a certain point beyond which it would not be advantageous to increase the density, and this seems to vary with the size of the grain. With large-grain powder the action in a musket, or in guns with small charges, is greatest with a low density; while with very small grain, the highest velocities are obtained generally with the gunpowder of great density; but in heavy guns with ordinary charges, the large-grained powder should be of considerable density in order to obtain the greatest effect, though still it must not be too great.

~Advantages of glazing.~

The principal advantages of glazing are; first, that the powder so prepared, will in travelling, owing to the smaller amount of destructive force consequent on friction, produce less mealed powder; and secondly, that in a damp country like England, the glazing imparts a preserving power to the powder, as the polished surface is less likely to imbibe moisture than the rough.

~Disadvantages of glazing.~

~Experiments as to glazing.~

~Glazing less hurtful to fine grains.~

The disadvantages of glazing consists in its polishing the surface, and thus depriving it of those angular projections which cause the ignition and combustion to be carried on with greater rapidity, by rendering the interstices smaller, the consequence of which is, that there is not so much gas produced previously to the projectile leaving the gun, and in large charges a portion will be blown out unfired. There must be a limit then to glazing, which it would not be proper to exceed. At an experiment with glazed and unglazed powder, the ranges on the eprouvette were 75 for glazed, and 98 for unglazed. This loss of power, consequent on glazing, has caused it to be done away with in France and Russia. With fine grain powder it is not of so much consequence, as it is, to a certain degree, corrected by the size of the grain.

~Size of grain determined by size of charge.~

~Tight ramming bad.~

The rapidity with which a charge of gunpowder is consumed will depend not only in a certain degree upon the size of the grain, but on the manner in which the charge is put together, for if a charge is closely pressed, the gases meeting resistance in their endeavours to escape between the interstices, will not propagate the ignition so rapidly. With large charges, there exists a positive advantage for the grains to be rather large, so that the most distant parts of the charge should be reached by the gases as quickly as possible; whilst with that of a rifle, the charge being small, the fineness of the grain does not interfere with the quantity of the gas developed. Whence it may rationally be concluded that the dimensions of the grains should increase in proportion to the quantity of the charges into which they are to enter, that is to say, in proportion to the interstices. Ramming down a charge tightly must therefore interfere with the velocity of combustion.

NOTE--The foregoing on the explosive force of gunpowder was taken from Lieut-Colonel E. M. Boxer’s Treatise on Artillery.

FOULING.

~Produce of decomposed gunpowder.~

The produce obtained by the decomposition of gunpowder are the gaseous and the solid. The gaseous is chiefly nitrogen and carbonic acid. The solid is sulphur and potassium, mixed with a little charcoal, but the solid produce is nearly entirely volatilized at the moment of explosion through the high temperature.

~Fouling.~

Fouling is occasioned by the deposition inside the barrel of the solid residue proceeding from the combustion of the powder.

~Conditions of fouling depend on state of atmosphere~

One of the principal of these, namely, the sulphide of Potassa, is deliquescent, or attracts water from the atmosphere. Hence, on a clear day, when the air holds little moisture, the fouling does not attain that semi-fluid state it so speedily attains in a damp day, and it is not so easily removed, and tends to accumulate inside the barrel. Fouling may also be increased or diminished, according to the quality of the powder.

~Effects of Fouling.~

Fouling occasions loss of power from the increased friction, and causes inaccuracy in direction and elevation, by filling the grooves, and thus preventing the proper spiral motion being imparted to the projectile.

EFFECTS OF GUNPOWDER ON METALS.

~Difference of effect on brass and iron guns.~

The effect produced by Gunpowder on metals, in long continued and rapid firing, is very extraordinary. Several of the guns employed at the siege of San Sebastian were cut open, and the interior of some of the vent holes, which were originally cylindrical, and only two-tenths of an inch in diameter, were enlarged in a curious and irregular manner, from three to five inches in one direction, and from two to three inches in another, but the brass guns were much more affected than the iron. In December, 1855, there were lying in the arsenal at Woolwich several of the heaviest sea mortars, which had recently been used at the bombardment of Sweaborg, and the continuous firing on that occasion had split them into two nearly equal portions from muzzle to breech, a trunnion being with each half.

Heavy guns for garrisons, sieges, &c., are made of cast iron; guns for field purposes, where lightness is required, are made of gun metal.

~Difference of effect of brass and iron guns~

These guns are generally denominated brass guns. They can be loaded, properly pointed at an object, and fired about four times in three minutes, but they will not stand long continued rapid firing, or more than 120 rounds a day, as the metal, when heated, softens, and the shot then injures the bore. Heavy iron guns may be loaded, fired, &c., once in two minutes. They suffer more from the total number of rounds that have been fired from them, without reference to the intervals between each round, than from the rapidity of the firing. Four hundred and five hundred rounds per day have not rendered an iron gun unserviceable.

MISCELLANEOUS EXPERIMENTS.

The following experiments, extracted from Mr. Wilkinson’s “Engines of War,” serve to illustrate the capability of metals to resist the force of gunpowder, and may be of some practical utility, as well as prove interesting merely as matter of curiosity.

Experiment 1.--A piece about 5 inches long was cut off the breech-end of a common musket barrel. It was screwed at the part cut, and another plug fitted, so as to have two plugs, one at each end, leaving an internal space of about 3 inches. A percussion nipple was screwed into the end of one of these plugs. This being arranged, one of the plugs was turned out, and one drachm of gunpowder introduced. The plug was replaced, and the powder fired by putting a copper cap on the nipple, and striking it with a hammer. The whole force of the powder escaped at the hole in the nipple. Two, three, four, five, and six drachms were successively introduced, and fired in the same manner, without bursting or injuring the piece of barrel. At last, seven drachms forced out one end, in consequence of the screw having been carelessly fitted. This defect being repaired, Mr. Marsh, of Woolwich, repeatedly fired it with five drachms, merely holding it with a towel in his left hand, and firing it with a blow of a hammer. Six drachms of powder is the full service charge for a flint musket, and four drachms of a percussion musket; yet this immense pressure can be resisted by a cylinder of iron not more than one quarter of an inch thick, and not iron of the best quality.

Experiment 2.--A good musket barrel had a cylinder of brass, three inches long, turned to fit the muzzle, and soldered in, so as to close it air-tight. The plug, or breech-screw, was removed, and a felt wad was pushed in with a short piece of wood, marked to the exact depth the charge would occupy, to prevent the ball rolling forward. A musket ball was then dropped in, and a cartridge, containing three drachms of powder, was introduced. The breech being screwed in, left the barrel loaded. It was fired by a percussion tube, but there was no report. On removing the breech-screw, the ball was found to be flattened. A repetition of this experiment, with four drachms, produced a similar result, but the ball was rather more flattened. With five drachms, the ball was perfectly round and uninjured. Six drachms burst the barrel close under the bayonet stud; the ball escaped through the opening, disfigured, but fell close to the barrel. In these experiments the barrel always advanced, instead of recoiling, as usual.

Experiment 3.--Made at Woolwich Arsenal, with a Gomer mortar, the chamber being bored conically, so that the shell, when dropped in, fits closely all round, instead of being bored cylindrically, with a chamber in the centre. The mortar being laid at an angle of 45°, one drachm of powder was put into the bottom, and a 68-pounder iron shot over it. When fired, the ball was projected two feet clear of the mortar. A wooden ball, precisely the same diameter, but weighing only 5lbs., was scarcely moved by the same charge, and with two drachms of powder it was just lifted in the mortar, and fell into its place again. Here we find a weight of 68lbs. thrown to the distance of two feet by the same power which would not lift 5lbs., and the wooden ball scarcely moved by double the powder.

This proves that the firing of gunpowder under such circumstances is not instantaneous. In the first instance, the small quantity of powder had a large space to fill below the ball, and a heavy weight to move; therefore, could not stir it at all until the whole was ignited, when the force was sufficient to throw it forward two feet. In the second case, the first portion of gas that was generated by ignition of the powder, was sufficient to lift the lighter weight, just enough to allow all the force to escape round it before it had time to accumulate.

Experiment 4.--A cannon ball, weighing 24lbs., was placed exactly over the vent-hole of a loaded 32-pounder cannon, which was fired by a train of gunpowder, when the rush from the vent projected the 24-pounder ball to a very considerable height in the air, although the diameter of the hole was only two-tenths of an inch.

Experiment 5.--A most ingenious method of ascertaining the relative quickness of ignition of different qualities of gunpowder.

A gun-barrel mounted on a carriage with wheels, and moving on a perfectly horizontal railway, is placed at right angles to another short railway, at any convenient distance (suppose fifty feet, or yards); on the second railway a light carriage moves freely with any desired velocity, being drawn forward by means of a weight and pulleys: a cord is attached to the front of this carriage, which passes over a pulley at the end of the railroad, and is continued up a high pole or staff over another pulley at the top, at which end the weight is attached. A long rectangular frame covered with paper is fixed perpendicularly on the carriage, so that when it moves forward it passes across the direct line of the barrel, and forms a long target. A percussion lock is attached to the barrel, which is fired by a detent, or hair-trigger, and the wire which pulls it is disengaged at the same instant to admit of recoil. This wire is carried straight on to the target railroad, and fixed to a small lever, against which the front part of the target-carriage strikes as it is carried onwards by the weight. This constitutes the whole apparatus. When required to be used, the barrel is loaded with gunpowder accurately weighed, and a brass ball that fits the bore correctly: the weight is then disengaged, and the target moves quickly along, discharging the barrel as it passes, and the ball goes through it. With the same powder tried at the same time, the ball constantly goes through the same hole, or breaks into it. If the next powder tried be slower of ignition than the preceding, the ball will pass through another part of the target more in the rear; if quicker, more in advance; thus affording a means of ascertaining this important quality of gunpowder with considerable accuracy: the velocity of the target-carriage can be easily regulated by increasing or diminishing the weight which draws it forward. The differences in the distances between which the balls strike the target with different kinds of powder was frequently as much as ten or twelve inches; but it is not an apparatus commonly used, having been merely constructed for experimental purposes.

ON THE TIME REQUIRED FOR IGNITION OF GUNPOWDER.

Gunpowder like all other inflammable substances requires to be raised to a certain temperature, before it will ignite, viz., to a dull red heat, or about 600° Fahrenheit. If the heat passes with such rapidity through the powder, so as not to raise the temperature to the necessary degree, then the powder will not ignite, from the velocity of transit, so that it might be possible to calculate theoretically, the velocity that must be given to a red hot ball to enable it to pass through a barrel of gunpowder without causing explosion. The passage of electric fluid through gunpowder may be adduced in evidence of the ignition being dependent on the degree of velocity. The flame of all fulminating powders will pass through the centre of a box filled with gunpowder without igniting one grain of it. If a train of gunpowder be crossed at right angles by a train of fulminating mercury, laid on a sheet of paper or a table, and the powder be lighted with a red hot iron wire, the flame will run on until it meets the cross train of fulminating mercury, when the inflammation of the latter will be so instantaneous as to cut off all connection with the continuous train of powder, leaving the remaining portion of the gunpowder unignited. If on the contrary the fulminating powder be lighted first, it will go straight on and pass through the train of gunpowder so rapidly, as not to inflame it at all. Were a gun to be charged with gun-cotton and gunpowder, the latter would be fired out unignited.

EFFECTS OF ACCIDENTAL EXPLOSIONS OF GUNPOWDER.

Considering the combustible nature of the materials, accidents very seldom occur; when they do, it is more frequently in the process at the Mill while under the runners.

On one occasion at Waltham Abbey Mills, when the powder exploded, after having been two hours under the runners, the doors and windows of the Mills on the opposite side of the stream, were forced open outwards, and the nails drawn. A similar effect took place when the Dartford Mills blew up, January 1833, in consequence of an accident in the packing house. A window which had been recently fitted up in Dartford Town, about a mile and a half distant from the works, was blown outwards into the street, and a considerable quantity of paper was carried as far as Eltham and Lewisham, distances of eight and ten miles. The sudden rarification of the air may account for this circumstance, the atmospheric pressure being removed in the vicinity of the doors and windows, they were forced open outwards by the expansive force of the air contained within the buildings.

ON ANCIENT ENGINES OF WAR.

~War a painful topic.~

~Advantages of war being destructive.~

The Utopian may shrink from the contemplation of so painful a subject as War, the Moralist may raise his voice against the justice of it, but the practical philosopher can see very little chance of its cessation, and actuated with the very best intentions, will endeavour to render War as terrible as possible, well knowing, that as soon as certain death awaits two rival armies, princes must fight their own battles, or war must cease.

~First missile weapons, sticks and stones.~

~Javelin.~

~Sling.~

~Bow.~

~Arbalest.~

Man’s first rude attempts at missile weapons were doubtless limited to throwing sticks and stones by the mere aid of his hands; acts in which the monkey, the bear, and even the seal are very successful emulators. A desire of more successful aggression, together with increased facilities for the destruction of game and wild animals, doubtless soon suggested to man the use of projectiles more efficient than these. By a very slight change of form, the simple stick would become a javelin, capable of being hurled with great force and precision. An aid would suggest itself for casting a stone, by means of a fillet or band, subsequently called a sling, and next would be invented the bow, which, in process of time by subsequent additions would become the arbalest or cross-bow.

~Axes used as projectiles.~

It appears that axes have been used as _projectiles_: for Procopius, describing the expedition of the Franks into Italy, in the sixth century, tells us:--Among the hundred thousand men that King Theodobert I. led into Italy, there were but few horsemen. The cavalry carried spears. The infantry had neither bow nor spear, all their arms being a sword, an axe, and a shield. The blade of the axe was large, its handle of wood, and very short. They _hurl_ their axes against the shields of the enemy, which by this means are broken; and then, springing on the foe, they complete his destruction with the sword.

~Tomahawk used as a projectile.~

A hatchet or tomahawk is used as a projectile weapon by the North American Indians. The difficulty of throwing such a weapon with effect, would of course consist in causing the edge to strike the object aimed at. Now, such a hatchet as they usually make use of, if thrown by its handle, will revolve in a perpendicular plane about once in every three yards, irrespective of the force with which it moves. An Indian judges his enemy to be distant from him any multiple of 3 yards as 15, 18, 21, and strikes him full with the edge of his weapon accordingly.

~“Chuckur” or disk used as a projectile.~

A circular disk or quoit is in use in India amongst the Sikhs, particularly that sect of them called Akali, as a weapon, and in their warlike exercises; the species used in war have a triangular section, those thrown for amusement are flat with a sharp edge. A skilful man will throw one of these chuckers or quoits to a distance of a hundred and thirty yards, or more, with very considerable accuracy, the quoit being at no period of its flight above six feet from the ground. The sharpness of edge, combined with the rotatory motion of these quoits, and the difficulty of avoiding them, renders them formidable weapons in skilled hands. The Akali wear them on their turbans, of several different sizes and weights; a small one is often worn as a bracelet on the arm. Many of these fanatics took part in the last Sikh war, and severe wounds made with these weapons were by no means uncommon.

~Armour and fortifications.~

By the time portable weapons would have been brought to some degree of perfection, man’s increasing sciences and civilization would have led him to make armour, to build cities, and enclose them with walls. Now would arise the necessity for other projectiles of greater force, inasmuch as in the event of war, the armour should be penetrated, and walls, &c., would have to be demolished.

~Improved projectiles.~

~Change to heavy projectiles.~

~Catapulta.~

~Balistæ.~

~Sling principles.~

The transition from portable projectiles to those of a heavier class was obvious enough. Enormous javelins and darts were hurled by cross-bows of corresponding size, termed Catapultæ, (plate x.), and stones, &c., were thrown by Balistæ (plate ix. and xii); and secondly, instruments formed on the principle of the sling.

~Projectiles used with Catapulta.~

These machines threw not only large darts and stones, but also the bodies of men and horses. Athenæus speaks of a Catapulta which was only one foot long, and threw an arrow to the distance of half a mile. Other engines, it is said, could throw javelins from one side of the Danube to the other. Balistæ threw great beams of wood, lances twelve cubits long, and stones that weighed three hundred pounds.

~Millstones, &c., used in England.~

Our forefathers used to cast forth mill-stones. Holinshead relates that when Edward I. besieged Stively Castle, he caused certain engines to be made, which shot off stones of two or three hundred weight.

~B. C. 1451.~

~B. C. 809.~

~First mention of Artillery.~

The first intimation of trees being cut down “to build bulwarks against the city till it be subdued,” occurs in Deut. xx., 19, 20, but the earliest precise mention of Artillery is in 2nd Chron., xxvi, 15, where we are told that Uzziah “made in Jerusalem engines invented by cunning men, to be upon the towers and upon the bulwarks, to shoot arrows and great stones withal;” and Josephus relates that Uzziah “made many engines of war for besieging cities, such as hurl stones and darts with grapplers, and other instruments of that sort.” He must therefore be considered the inventor of them, and from that time they began to be employed in attacking and defending towns.

~Balistæ at Regium, B. C. 388.~

~At Motya B. C. 370.~

The earliest instances of projectile machines in profane history appear to be at the siege of Regium and Motya by Dionysius, where, having battered the walls with his rams, he advanced towards them towers rolled on wheels, from whence he galled the besieged with continual volleys of stones and arrows, thrown from his Balistæ and Catapultæ.

~At Rhodes B. C. 303.~

The next memorable instance is the siege of Rhodes by Demetrius Polyorcetes, who brought forward a newly invented machine, called Helepolis, (taker of Cities), with a variety of other engines, and employed 30,000 men in the management of them.

~Balistæ at Cremona.~

Tacitus mentions an extraordinary engine, used by the 15th Legion at the battle of Cremona, against the troops of Vespasian. It was a Balista of enormous size, which discharged stones of weight sufficient to crush whole ranks at once. Inevitable ruin would have been the consequence, had not two soldiers, undiscovered, cut the ropes and springs. At length, after a vigorous assault from Antonius, the Vittelians, unable to resist the shock, rolled down the engine, and crushed numbers of their assailants, but the machine, in falling, drew after it a neighbouring tower, the parapet, and part of the wall, which afforded the besiegers easier access to the city.

~Balistæ at siege of Jotapata.~

~Dead men and horses projected.~

Josephus relates that at the siege of Jotapata, “a stone from one of the Roman engines carried the head of a soldier, who was standing by him, three furlongs off;” that “lances were thrown with great noise, and stones, weighing 114lbs. troy, “together with fire and a multitude of arrows.” The dead bodies of men and horses were also thrown at this siege, and at that of Jerusalem, A. D. 70, to inspire terror.

~Form of Balistæ.~

The earliest form of Balistæ appears to have been a very long beam, suspended in a frame on a centre of motion, one end being considerably longer than the other. To the short end was attached a great weight, such as a chest filled with earth or stones. To the longer end a sling was affixed, in which, after being drawn down, a stone was placed, and on being suddenly let go, the long end flew up, and discharged the stone with great violence.

~Form of Catapultæ.~

Catapultæ were sometimes constructed to discharge a flight of arrows at once, by placing them on a rack, and causing a strong plank, previously drawn back, to strike against their ends. The more perfect engines of the Romans were all dependent on the elasticity of twisted cords made of flax, hemp, the sinews or tendons of animals, from the neck of the bull, or legs of the deer species, and ropes formed of human hair were preferred to all others, as possessing greater strength and elasticity. Catapultæ were immensely powerful bows, drawn back by capstans, levers, or pulleys, having only a single cord for the arrow, (plate x.), but the Balistæ had a broad band, formed of several ropes to project the stone, which was placed in a kind of cradle, like a cross-bow. (plate xii.)

~Balistæ at battle of Hastings 1066~

The Normans appear to have introduced a kind of Field-Artillery, consisting of instruments or machines, from which darts and stones were thrown to a considerable distance, as they occur at the battle of Hastings. They also employed arrows, headed with combustible matter, for firing towns and shipping.

~Fiery darts, A. D. 64.~

We read in the Scriptures of “Fiery Darts.” Ephns. vi., 16.

~Fire from Balistæ.~

Our ancestors derived the knowledge of some composition from the Saracens, which resembled Greek-fire, and was often thrown in pots from the Balistæ.

~Fire by Arabs commencement of 13th century.~

From a treatise on the “Art of Fighting,” by Hassan Abrammah, we learn that the Arabs of the 13th century employed their incendiary compositions in four different ways. They cast them by hand; they fixed them to staves, with which they attacked their enemies; they poured forth fire through tubes; and they projected burning mixtures of various kinds by means of arrows, javelins, and the missiles of great engines.

~Bombs of glass, &c.~

~Fire-mace.~

Vessels of glass or pottery, discharged by hand or by machines, were so contrived, that on striking the object at which they were aimed, their contents spread around, and the fire, already communicated by a fusee, enveloped everything within its reach. A soldier, on whose head was broken a fire-mace, became suddenly soaked with a diabolic fluid, which covered him from head to foot with flame.

~Bombs from Balistæ.~

Bombs were also thrown from Balistæ. An engine was constructed at Gibraltar, under the direction of General Melville, at the desire of Lord Heathfield, for the purpose of throwing stones just over the edge of the rock, in a place where the Spaniards used to resort, and where shells thrown from mortars could not injure or annoy them.

~Onager.~

Of machines formed on the sling principle, that called Onager (plates vii. and viii.) may be regarded as typical of all the rest. Its force entirely depended upon the torsion of a short thick rope, acting upon a lever which described an arc of a vertical circle. The lever had attached to its free extremity a sling, or sometimes it merely terminated in a spoon-shaped cavity. When bent back, it was secured by a catch or trigger, and charged with a stone. On starting the catch by a blow with a mallet, the lever described its arc of a circle with great velocity, and projected the stone to a considerable distance.

I shall now briefly describe some of the portable missive weapons which have been used by different nations.

~Javelin.~

~Arms of the early Romans.~

~Aid to projection.~

The Javelin, or dart, variously modified, is known under several names. The ancients were well acquainted with it. In the Scriptures, we have frequent notice of it; and the ancients instituted javelin matches. It would appear that the javelin used on horseback was about five feet and a half long, and headed with steel, usually three-sided, but sometimes round. The Roman Cavalry, after the conquest of Greece, were armed much like the Infantry, carrying swords, shields, and javelins with points at both ends. Sometimes, in order to launch it with greater force, it was not propelled by the unaided arm, but by the assistance of a thong fastened to its butt end; and we are informed that the Greeks and Romans projected darts and javelins by the assistance of a sling or strap, girt round their middle.

~Djereed.~

~Pilum.~

~Australian mode.~

~Harpoon.~

At the present time, a javelin, termed Djereed, is used with considerable effect by certain oriental nations, who invariably employ it on horseback. The Roman infantry possessed a weapon of the javelin kind, termed Pilum, every man of the legionary soldiers carrying two. The point of this weapon being very long and small, was usually so bent at the first discharge as to be rendered useless afterwards. With every improvement that the javelin was susceptible of, it never could acquire a long range; hence we find, that as Archery became developed, the use of the weapon declined. Amongst savage nations, the use of the javelin is very common, but the inhabitants of Australia have a manner of throwing it altogether peculiar to themselves, not throwing it while poised at the balance, but projecting it by means of a stick applied at the butt end. This contrivance accomplishes a great increase of range, but does not contribute to accuracy of direction. At short distances, the penetrating force of the javelin is considerable, as is learned from the act of harpooning a whale, a harpoon being merely a javelin.

THE SLING.

~Slings mentioned in Judges. B. C. 1406.~

~Slings used B. C. 1406.~

Means by which stones would be thrown by greater force than the hand, would naturally be resorted to; accordingly we find the sling ranks amongst the first of ancient offensive weapons. Numerous examples are mentioned in Scripture, as in Judges xx., 16, “Among all this people, there were seven hundred chosen men left-handed; every one could sling stones at a hair breadth and not miss;” and also that of David and Goliath, &c.

~Siege of Troy between 800 and 900 B. C.~

~Battle of the Granicus B. C. 334.~

~First Punic war 241 to 263 B. C.~

At the siege of Troy, the masses were organized into two kinds of infantry: one light and irregular, carrying horn bows, short darts, and slings; the other regular and heavy, armed with spears. At the battle of the Granicus, B. C. 334, Alexander the Great had in his army light infantry, consisting of slingers, bow-men, and javelin-men. The Carthagenians had slingers in their pay before the first Punic War.

~Slings common in Greece.~

~Slingers in Roman armies.~

The Sling was very common in Greece, and used by the light armed soldiers. Arrows, stones, and leaden plummets, were thrown from them, some of which weighed no less than an Attic pound. Seneca reports that its motion was so vehement that the leaden plummets were frequently melted!!! The Romans had slingers in their armies, for the most part inhabitants of the Islands of Majorca, Minorca and Ivica.

~Invention ascribed to Phœnicians and also to inhabitants of Balearic islands.~

Pliny ascribes the invention of slings to the Phœnicians, but Vegetius to the inhabitants of the Balearic Islands, who were famous in antiquity for using them. It is said, those people bore three kinds of slings, some longer and others shorter, to be used as their enemies were nearer or more remote; the first served them for a head band, the second for a girdle, and the third they always carried in their hands. In fight they threw large stones with such violence, that they seemed to be projected from some machine, and with such exactness, as rarely to miss their aim; being constantly exercised from their infancy, their mothers not allowing them to have any food, until they struck it down from the top of a pole with stones thrown from their slings.

~Materials of slings.~

~Slings with cup.~

~Staff-sling.~

The Latin for our English word farm is _fundus_, which originally signifies a “stone’s-throw of land,” or as much land as could be included within the range of a stone thrown from a sling. The materials of which slings were composed, were either flax, hair or leather, woven into bands or cut into thongs, broad in the centre to receive the load, and tapering off to the extremities. Slings have been made with three strings, with a cup let into the leather to hold the bullet or stone, and were called “Fronde à culôt.” In plate xiii, fig. 3, there is a representation of a slinger of the early part of the thirteenth century, whose weapon differs from that of the Anglo-Saxon or common sling, in having a cup for the reception of the projectile. Slings were sometimes attached to sticks to increase their power, as, besides the ancient cord sling, there appears in the manuscripts of the thirteenth century a variety of this arm; the “Staff Sling.” (plate xiii, fig. 2.) It seems to have been in vogue for naval warfare, or in the conflicts of siege operations.

~Force of slings.~

~Used for the English, A. D. 1342.~

~Bullets out of slings.~

The slings projected their missiles with such force that no armour could resist their stroke. Slings never appear to have been much used by the English, although Froissart mentions an instance of their having been used for them by the people of Brittany, in a battle fought in that province during the reign of Philip de Valois, between the troops of Walter de Manin, an English knight, and Louis d’Espagne, who commanded six thousand men on behalf of Charles de Blois, then competitor with the Earl of Montford for the Duchy of Brittany. Froissart says, that what made Louis lose the battle was, that during the engagement the country people came unexpectedly and assaulted his army with _bullets_ and slings.

~Slings at the siege of Sancere, 1572.~

~Range.~

~Slings last used, 1814.~

According to the same author, slings were used in naval combats, when stones were also sometimes thrown by hand.[2] Slings were used in 1572, at the siege of Sancere by the Huguenots, in order to save their powder. They were also used by the people of Brittany to such an extent against the Roman Catholic party, that the war was called “Guerre de Fronde.” With respect to the range of this projectile, it is said, that a good slinger could project a stone 600 yards. This seems doubtful. The most recent instance of slings being used in war, occurs in “Straith on Fortification,” page 121, and which contains an extract from the siege journal of Serjeant St. Jacques of the French Corps de Genie, who was most successfully employed with a small French garrison in the defence of the Castles of Monzowin, Arragon, against the Spaniards, 1814.

[2] It is stated by Sir Robert Wilson that at the battle of Alexandria the French and English threw stones at each other, during a temporary want of ammunition, with such effect that a Serjeant of the 28th Regiment was killed, and several of the men were wounded. Stones were thrown by the English Guards at the battle of Inkerman.

THE BOW.

~The bow almost universal.~

This weapon under some shape or other was employed by most nations of antiquity, but not always as a warlike instrument. Scarcely any two nations made their bows exactly alike. The Scythian bow we are told, was very much curved, as are the Turkish, Persian, and Chinese bows (plate iv. figs. 1 & 2) at the present day, whilst the celebrated weapon of our ancestors when unstrung was nearly straight.

It is now used among those savage tribes of Africa and America, to which fire-arms have not yet reached.

~Bows in Scripture.~

~Bows B. C. 1892.~

~B. C. 1760.~

~B. C. 1058.~

~Manner of drawing the bow.~

~First used by Romans.~

We frequently read of the bow in Scripture, and the first passage in which the use of the bow is inferred, is in Gen. xxi. 20, where it is said of Ishmael, “And God was with the lad, and he grew, and dwelt in the wilderness and became an archer.” But in the 16th verse it is said that Hagar his mother, “sat her down over against him, a good way off, as it were a _bow shot_; for she said let me not see the death of the child”:--this verse implies an earlier practice with the bow than can be adduced by any profane historian. In Gen. xxvii. 3, Isaac directs his son Esau: “Now therefore take I pray thee thy weapons, thy quiver and thy bow, and go out to the field, and take me some venison; and make me savory meat, such as I love, and bring it to me that I may eat, and that my soul may bless thee before I die.” The overthrow of Saul was particularly owing to the Philistine archers; and “David bade them teach the children of Judah the use of the bow.” The companies that came to David at Ziklag were armed with bows, and “could use the right hand and the left in hurling stones and shooting arrows.” (I. Chron. xii. 2.) The bow is of very high antiquity among the Greeks, whose bows were usually made of wood, but sometimes of horn, and frequently in either case beautifully ornamented with gold and silver; the string generally made of twisted hair, but sometimes of hide. The ancient Persians drew the strings towards their ears, as is the practice still with the English. The ancient Greeks, however, drew the bowstring towards their breast, and represented the fabled Amazons as doing the same, and hence the tradition of these people cutting off their right breasts, in order to give facility for drawing the bow. Until the second Punic war, the Romans had no archers in their armies, except those who came with their auxiliary forces. Subsequently they became more employed, although as far as we can learn, not by native troops, but by Orientals in their pay.

~Bows of Britons.~

~Bows of Welsh.~

~Bows of Anglo-Saxons.~

The early Britons had merely bows and arrows of reed, with flint or bone heads. Arrows were used by the Welch in Norman reigns, who were famous archers; their bows were made of wild elm, but stout, and not calculated to shoot a great distance, but their arrows would inflict very severe wounds in close fight. Their arrows would pierce oaken boards four inches thick. The bow was also a weapon of war among the Anglo-Saxons. The Salic law shows that both the sling and the bow were used by the contemporary Franks; and they even used poisoned arrows. The Anglo-Saxon bow was of the form of the Grecian, but it was only under the Normans that the bow became a master weapon; the Saxons principally using it, like the people of Tahiti of the present day, for killing birds.

~No bows in France A. D. 514.~

During the reign of Clovis, the French made no use of the bow in their armies, but it was employed during the reign of Charlemagne, who flourished in the end of the eighth century; as a Count is mentioned, who was directed on conducting soldiers to the army, to see they had their proper arms; that is a lance, a buckler, a bow, two strings, and twelve arrows.

~A. D. 1066. Harold shot with an arrow~

~Known by Danes and Saxons.~

~As a military weapon at the battle of Hastings.~

~Archery encouraged by statute.~

~Long bow in conquest of Ireland 1172.~

William the Conqueror was a skilful archer, and the battle of Hastings was decided by the bow, and we hear that Harold was shot with an arrow. Although the Anglo-Saxons and Danes were well acquainted with the bow from the earliest period, it appears to have been only employed for obtaining food, or for pastime, and we are perhaps indebted to the Norman Conquest for its introduction as a military weapon. The Normans at the battle of Hastings are said to have used the arbalest or cross-bow as well as the long bow. Ever after this, the bow became a favourite weapon. During the reign of Henry II., archery was much cultivated, and great numbers of bowmen were constantly brought into the field; and to encourage its practice, a law was passed, which freed from the charge of murder any one who in practising with arrows or darts, should kill a person standing near. This appears to be the first regulation to be found in our annals, and was probably founded on the old law of Rome. The English conquests in Ireland during the reign of Henry II. were principally owing to the use of the long bow in battle, which the Irish wanted. The Invasion of Ireland was headed by Richard de Clare, Earl of Pembroke, surnamed “Strong-bow.” His force was numerically very small, consisting chiefly of archers, and it is stated that such was the advantage their superior arms and military skill gave the invaders, that 10 knights and 70 archers defeated a body of 3000 Irish opposed to them, on their landing near Waterford.

~A. D. 1199.~

The exact time when shooting with the long-bow began in England is unsettled, our chroniclers do not mention archery till the death of Richard I.

During the reign of Henry III. there were among the English infantry, slingers, archers, and cross-bow men.

~Cressy 1346.~

~Poictiers 1356.~

It seems that the long-bow was at its zenith in the reign of Edward III., who appears to have taken great pains to increase its efficacy, and to extend its use. The terrible execution effected by the English archers at Cressy, and at Poictiers ten years after, was occasioned by British archers.

~Homelden 1403.~

The decisive victory over the Scots at Homelden was entirely achieved by them, and the Earl of Douglas found the English arrows were so swift and strong, that no armour could repel them; though his own was of the most perfect temper, he was wounded in five places. The English men-at-arms, knights and squires, never drew sword or couched lance, the whole affair being decided by the archers.

~Shrewsbury 1403.~

~Agincourt 1415.~

They again did terrible execution at the battle of Shrewsbury, in 1403, where Hotspur was slain, and the battle of Agincourt was their undivided conquest.

~20,000 bow-men 1455.~

~Bow preferred to fire-arms.~

~Bows at Isle of Ré, 1627.~

~Bows against Scots, 1644 to 1647.~

~Bows in William 3rd’s time.~

During the reign of Henry VI., the Parliament voted an army of 20,000 bow-men for service in France. The battle of St. Albans, 1455, seems to have been entirely won by the archers. Although fire-arms had attained no inconsiderable degree of perfection in the reign of Henry VIII., yet the long-bow was still the favourite weapon. Indeed, in the reign of Elizabeth, the musket was so unwieldy, and slow to charge and discharge, that the bow was considered superior by many. We find that Queen Elizabeth, 1572, engaged to furnish Charles IX. of France with 6,000 men, part to be armed with long, and part with cross-bows; and in the attack made by the English on the Isle of Ré, 1627, it is said some cross-bow-men were in the army. In 1643 a company of archers was raised for the service of Charles I.; and in a pamphlet printed in 1664, there is an account of the successes of the Marquis of Montrose against the Scots; and bow-men are repeatedly mentioned as in the battle. The Grenadiers of the Highland Regiments, in the time of William III., when recruiting, wore the old red bonnet, and carried bows and arrows with them.

The Highland bow was very short, and by no means powerful.

MERITS OF THE LONG BOW.

~Range of long-bow.~

~Accuracy of long-bow.~

The English could not accomplish more than 600 yards, except on a few extraordinary occasions; our modern archers not more than from 300 to 500 yards. The Turkish ambassador when in England in 1795, sent an arrow upwards of 480 yards; and there are two or three instances on record since archery has been merely a pastime, which have exceeded it by twenty or thirty yards. It is said of Domitian, that he would cause one of his slaves to stand at a great distance with his hands spread as a mark, and would shoot his arrows so correctly as to drive them between his fingers. Commodus, with an arrow headed with a semi-circular cutting edge, could cut or sever the neck of a bird. The story of William Tell, who struck an apple placed upon his child’s head, is well known, and generally regarded in the light of an historical fact. It is stated that Robin Hood could split a hazel wand.

~Penetration of long-bow.~

In a journal of Edward VI., His Majesty relates that 100 archers of his guard shot before him two arrows each, and afterwards altogether. The object aimed at was a well-seasoned deal board, one inch thick. Many pierced it quite through, and some struck in a board on the other side. The distance is not mentioned, but we know that Henry VIII. prohibited any one above the age of 25 to shoot at a mark at a less distance than 200 yards.

~Advantages of the long-bow.~

The long-bow was light, inexpensive, and unaffected by weather, as the strings could be removed. Moreover, 12 arrows could be fired with accuracy in one minute. Two feathers in an arrow were to be white, and one brown or grey, and this difference in colour informed the archer in an instant how to place the arrow.

~Disadvantages of the long-bow.~

Although arrows could be shot from a bow with far greater rapidity and precision than balls from a musket, yet in damp weather the bow and string might become so much relaxed that the efficacy of the instrument became much impaired. A side wind deflected the arrow exceedingly in its flight, and even against a moderate wind, it was difficult to shoot at all.

_Our Forefathers encouraged to acquire skill in archery by legal enactments, and by the founders of our public schools._

1ST. BY LEGAL ENACTMENTS.

~Henry 2nd from 1154 to 1189.~

We have previously stated that the first law encouraging the practice of archery was passed in the reign of Henry II.

~Richard 2nd from 1377 to 1399.~

An Act of Parliament was passed in the reign of Richard II., to compel all servants to shoot on Sundays and holidays.

~Edward 4th from 1461 to 1483.~

~Every man to have a bow.~

In the reign of Edward IV., an act was passed, ordaining every Englishman to have a bow of his own height, and during the same reign butts were ordered to be put up in every township for the inhabitants to shoot at on feast days, and if any neglected, the penalty of one halfpenny was incurred. The same monarch also passed an act, that bows were to be sold for 5s. 4d.

~Cross-bows prohibited by Henry 7th & Henry 8th.~

Henry VII. prohibited the use of the cross-bow, and Henry VIII., less than twenty years after, renewed the prohibition. He forbad the use of cross-bows and hand guns, and passed a statute which inflicted a fine of £10 for keeping a cross-bow in the house. Every man, being the King’s subject, was obliged to exercise himself in shooting with the long bow, and also to keep a bow with arrows continually in his house. Fathers and guardians were also commanded to teach their male children the use of the long bow.

~Encouraged by Philip and Mary.~

A statute of Philip and Mary mentions the quantity and kind of armour and weapons, to be kept by persons of different estates, viz:--“Temporal persons having £5 and under £10 per annum, one coat of plate furnished, one black bill or halbert, one long bow, one sheaf of arrows, and one steel cap or skull.”

~Prices fixed by Elizabeth.~

An act of Elizabeth, fixed the prices for long bows, at 6s. 8d., 3s. 4d., and a third sort at 2s. each bow.

~Encouraged by monarchs from Henry 8th to Charles 1st.~

~Proclamation by Charles 1st.~

Numerous statutes were passed to encourage archery in the reigns of Henry VIII., Elizabeth, James I. and Charles I. in whose reign the legislature interfered for the last time in 1633, when Charles I. issued a commission for preventing the fields near London being so enclosed, “as to interrupt the necessary and profitable exercise of “shooting,” and also a proclamation for the use of the bow and pike together:--“A. D. 1633.--Whereas in former tyme bowes and arrowes have been found serviceable weapons for wars, whereby great victories and conquests have been gotten, and by sundry statutes the use thereof hath been enjoined, &c. &c.--and we expect that our loving subjects should conform themselves thereunto, knowing the exercise of shooting to be a means to preserve health, strength and agility of body, and to avoid idleness, unlawfull disports, drunkenness, and such like enormities and disorders, which are too frequent among our people.”

2ND.--BY THE FOUNDERS OF OUR PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

~Estimation of archery by founders of schools.~

The founders of our Grammar Schools appear to have considered that the acquirement of skill in archery by their scholars was no less worthy of attention than their moral and intellectual improvement. They provided by their statutes sound learning and a religious education for all, but secured the removal of such as shewed no aptitude or disposition to learn. They also prescribed the amusements and exercises of the scholars, and prohibited such as were calculated to lead to idle and vicious habits. In fact, as true patriots, they understood how the sons of free men ought to be educated in youth, and that “a complete and generous education is that which fits a man to perform justly, skilfully, and magnanimously, all the offices, both private and public, of peace and war.”

~Harrow School, founded 1571.~

The founder of Harrow School, Mr. John Lyon, prepared a body of statutes to be observed in the management of the School. By one of these he limited the amusements of the Scholars “to driving a top, tossing a hand-ball, running, shooting, and no other.” By another he ordered:--“You shall allow your child at all times, bow-shafts, bow-strings, and a bracer, to exercise shooting.” On the entrance-porch to the Master’s house are two shields, the one bearing the Lion rampant, the other, two arrows crossed, an ancient device which had its origin in the design of the founder. This device is also impressed on the exterior of all books which are presented by the Head-Master as prizes to those scholars, whose improvement entitled them to such rewards. The practice of archery was coeval with the foundation of the School, and was continued for nearly two centuries. Every year there was a public exhibition of archery, when the scholars shot for a silver arrow. The last silver arrow was contended for in 1771.

~St. Albans School.~

At St. Alban’s Grammar School, one of the articles to be recited to such as offered their children to be taught in the School was,--“Ye shall allow your child at all times, a bow, three arrows, bow-strings, a shooting glove, and a bracer, to exercise shooting.”

~Wilton School.~

Sir John Dean, who founded, in 1558, the Grammar School of Wilton, in Cheshire, framed a body of statutes for the School. One of them provides:--“That upon Thursdays and Saturdays, in the afternoons, and upon holidays, the scholars refresh themselves, and that as well in the vacations as in the days aforesaid, they use their bows and arrows only, and eschew all bowling, carding, dicing, cocking, and all other unlawful games, upon pain of extreme punishment to be done by the Schoolmaster.”

~Dedham School in Essex.~

The Free Grammar School of Dedham, in Essex, was endowed in 1571, and confirmed by a Charter of Queen Elizabeth in 1574. Her Majesty’s injunctions to the parents of the boys who should attend the school at Dedham were:--“That they should furnish their sons with bows, shafts, bracers and gloves, in order to train them to arms.”

~St. Saviour’s School in Southwark.~

One of the statutes at the Grammar School of St. Saviour, in Southwark, decrees that “the plays of the scholars shall be shooting in long-bows, chess, running, wrestling, and leaping:--players for money, or betters, shall be severely punished and expulsed.”

~Camberwell School.~

A statute in the same words is found in the rules and orders framed for the government of Camberwell Grammar School, which was founded in 1615, by letters patent.

MEANS BY WHICH SKILL IN ARCHERY WAS ACQUIRED.

~An archer made by long training, &c.~

A successful archer could only be constituted by long training, strength, and address, we need not therefore wonder that the practice of the long-bow was not more copied by our neighbours, as the French pertinaciously adhered to the use of the cross-bow.

~Every man had arms.~

Etienne di Perlin, a Frenchman who wrote an account of a tour in England in 1558, says:--“The husbandmen leave their bucklers and swords, or sometimes their bow, in the corner of the field, so that every one in this land bears arms;” and it is also stated that all the youth and manhood of the yeomanry of England were engaged in the practice of the long-bow.

~Public matches.~

Public exhibitions of shooting with the bow continued during the reigns of Charles II. and James II., and an archer’s division, at least till within these few years, formed a branch of the Artillery Company. The most important society of this kind now existing is “The Royal Company of Archers, the King’s body-guard of Scotland.” The exact time of its institution is unknown, but it is referred by the Scottish antiquarians to the reign of their James I.

~Causes of bad shooting.~

Roger Ascham, in “Toxophilos,” states that the main difficulty in learning to shoot, arises from having acquired and become confirmed in previous bad habits; so that, “use is the onlye cause of all faultes in it, and therefore children more easelye and soner may be taught to shoote excellently then men, because children may be taught to shoote well at the first, menne have more paine to unlearne their ill uses than they have labour afterwarde to come to good shootinge;” and after having enumerated a long list of faults ordinarily committed, he thus proceeds to describe the secret of shooting straight with the long-bow.

~Shooting depends on the eye.~

~The hand obeys the eye.~

“For having a man’s eye alwaye on his marke, is the onlye waye to shoote straighte, yea, and I suppose so redye and easye a waye, if it be learned in youth and confirmed with use, that a man shall never misse therein. Men doubt yet in loking at the marke what way is best, whether betwixt the bow and the stringe, above or beneath his hande, and manye wayes moo. Yet it maketh no greate matter which waye a man loke at his marke, if it be joined with comlye shooting. The diversitye of mens standing and drawing causeth divers men loke at their marke divers wayes; yet they all had a mans hand to shoote straighte if nothinge els stoppe. So that cumlynesse is the onlye judge of best lokinge at the marke. Some men wonder whye in castinge a man’s eye at the mark, the hande should go streight. Surely if he considered the nature of a man’s eye, hee woulde not wonder at it. For this I am certaine of, that no servaunt to his maister, no child to his father, is so obedient as everye joynte and peece of the bodye is to do whatsoever the eye biddes. The eye is the guide, the ruler, and the succourer of all the other parts. The hande, the foote, and other members dare do nothinge withoute the eye, as doth appear on the night and darcke corners. The eye is the very tongue wherewith witte and reason doth speake to everye parte of the bodye, and the witte doth not so soone signifye a thinge by the eye, as every part is redye to followe, or rather prevent the bidding of the eye. This is plaine in manye thinges, but most evident in fence and feighting, as I have heard men saye. There every parte standing in feare to have a blowe, runnes to the eye for help, as younge children do to the mother; the foote, the hande, and all wayteth upon the eye. If the eye bid the hand eyther beare of or smite, or the foote eyther go forward or backeward, it doth so. And that which is most wonder of al, the one man lokinge stedfastlye at the other mans eye and not at his hand, wil, even as it were, rede in his eye wher he purposeth to smyte next, for the eye is nothing els but a certain windowe for wit to shoote out her heade at. This wonderfull worke of God in making all the members so obedient to the eye, is a pleasant thing to remember and loke upon: therefore an archer may be sure in learninge to loke at his marke when hee is younge alwayes to shoote streight.”

The following description of the English archer is from an ancient treatise on Martial Discipline:--

~Archer to wear easy dress.~

~Captains to see that bows &c., were in good order.~

~Twenty-four arrows to each man.~

“The yeoman hadde, at those dayes, their lymmes at libertye, for their hoseyn were then fastened with one point, and their jackes were long, and easy to shote in, so that they mighte draw bowes of great strength, and shote arrowes of a yarde long. Captens and officers should be skilful of that most noble weapon, and to see that their soldiers according to their draught and strength have good bows, well nocked, well strynged, everie stringe whippe in their nocke, and in the myddes rubbed with wax, braser and shuting glove, some spare strings trymed as aforesaid, everie man one shefe of arrows, with a case of leather defensible against the rayne, and in the same shefe fower and twentie arrows, whereof eight of them should be lighter than the residue, to gall and astoyne the enemy with the hailshot of light arrows, before they shall come within range of their harquebuss shot.”

~Encouraged from the pulpit.~

The subject of archery was not deemed, in those days, an unsuitable theme for the pulpit, as may be seen by the following extract from one of the seven sermons (the sixth) preached before Edward VI., within the preaching place in the palace of Westminster, on the 12th of April, 1549, by that patriotic reformer, Bishop Latimer. With honest, plain spoken words, in the midst of his discourse he breaks off--

~Training of Bishop Latimer.~

“Men of England, in times past, when they would exercise themselves, (for we must needs have some recreation, our bodies can not endure without some exercise), they were wont to goe abroad in the fieldes a shooting; but now it is turned into glossing, gulling, and whooring within the house. The arte of shooting hath bene in times past much esteemed in this realme, it is a gift of God that He hath geven us to excell all other nations withall, it hath been God’s instrument whereby He hath geven us many victories against our enemies. But now we have taken up whooring in townes, instead of shooting in the fieldes. A wonderous thing that so excellent a gift of God should be so little esteemed. I desire you, my Lordes, even as ye love the honour and glory of God, and entend to remove his indignation, let there be sent forth some proclamation, some sharpe proclamation to the justices of peace, for they doe not thier dutie, justices now be no justices, there be many good actes made for this matter already. Charge them upon their allegiance that this singular benefite of God may be practised, and that it be not turned into bolling, glossing, and whooring within the townes: for they be negligent in executing these laws of shooting. In my time my poore father was as diligent to teach me to shoote as to learne me any other thing, and so I think other men did their children. He taught me how to draw, how to lay my body in my bow, and not to draw with strength of armes as other nations doe, but with strength of the body. I had my bowes bought me according to my age and strength, as I encreased in them, so my bowes were made bigger and bigger: for men shall never shoot well except they be brought up in it. It is a goodly arte, a wholesome kinde of exercise, and much commended in phisicke.”

The following is another extract from the same sermon:--

~How estimated by the people.~

“I came once myself to a place, riding on a journey homeward from London, and I sent word over night into the towne that I would preach there in the morning, because it was a holiday, and methought it was an holidayes work. The church stood in my way, and I took my horse and my company, and went thither, (I thought I should have found a great company in the church,) and when I came there, the church door was fast locked. I tarryed there halfe an houre and more, at last the key was found, and one of the parish comes to me and said: ‘Sir, this is a busie day with us, we cannot heare you, it is Robin Hood’s day. The parish are gone abroad to gather for Robin Hood. I pray you let them not.’ I thought my rochet should have been regarded, though I were not: but it would not serve, it was faine to give place to Robin Hood’s men.”

PROOFS OF THE IMPORTANCE OF ARCHERY.

~By names of places.~

There is little at the present day in England to afford any adequate idea of the high importance, the great skill, and the distinguished renown of the English archers. Some few places still retain names which tell where the bowmen used to assemble for practice, as “Shooter’s Hill,” in Kent; “Newington Butts,” near London; and “St. Augustine’s Butts,” near Bristol. The Butts will be found applied to spots of land in the vicinity of schools, as for instance, the College School of Warwick.

The fields situated to the east of the playing-fields at Eton, and known by the name of “The Upper and Lower Shooting-fields,” were probably so named from the ancient exercise of archery on these grounds.

~Armorial Bearings.~

Many of the noble and county families of Great Britain and Ireland have the symbols of archery charged on their escutcheons; as, for instance, the Duke of Norfolk, the Marquis of Salisbury, Lord Grey de Wilton, the Earl of Aberdeen, the Earl of Besborough, the Earl of Portarlington, the Baronetal family of Hales, Sir Martin Bowes, and also on the arms of Sydney Sussex College, in Cambridge, and the seal of the Sheffield Grammar School.

~Government brand.~

The mark or brand used by the Government of the present day, to identify public property, is an arrow-head, commonly called “The King’s broad arrow.”

~Surnames of families.~

There are also existing families which have derived their surnames from the names of the different crafts formerly engaged in the manufacture of the bow and its accompaniments; as, for instance, the names of Bowyer, Fletcher, Stringer, Arrowsmith, Arrow, Bowman, Bowwater, &c.

~National proverbs.~

If reference be made to our language, there will be found many phrases and proverbial expressions drawn from or connected with archery; some suggesting forethought and caution, as “Always have two strings to your bow;” “Get the shaft-hand of your adversaries;” “Draw not thy bow before thy arrow be fixed;” “Kill two birds with one shaft.” To make an enemy’s machination recoil upon himself, they expressed by saying, “To outshoot a man in his own bow.” In reference to a vague foolish guess, they used to say, “He shoots wide of the mark;” and of unprofitable silly conversation, “A fool’s bolt is soon shot;” and as a proof of exaggeration, “He draws a long bow.” The unready and unskilful archer did not escape the censure and warning of his fellows, although he might be a great man and boast that he had “A famous bow, but it was up at the castle.” Of such they satirically used to remark, that “Many talked of Robin Hood, who never shot in his bow.” Our ancestors also expressed liberality of sentiment, and their opinion that merit belonged exclusively to no particular class or locality, by the following pithy expressions, “Many a good bow besides one in Chester,” and “An archer is known by his aim, and not by his arrows.” To these may be added, “Testimony is like the shot of a long-bow, which owes its efficacy to the force of the shooter; argument is like the shot of a cross-bow, equally forcible, whether discharged by a dwarf or a giant.”

MILITARY AND POLITICAL CONSEQUENCES OF SKILL IN THE USE OF THE BOW.

~Commenced at the battle of Hastings.~

~Achievement lasted through a period of 500 years.~

~England had a voluntary army.~

From the time of the battle of Hastings the English archers began to rise in repute, and in course of time proved themselves, by their achievements in war, both the admiration and terror of their foes, and excelled the exploits of other nations. The great achievements of the English bowmen which shed lustre upon the annals of the nation, extended over a period of more than five centuries, many years after the invention and use of fire-arms. England, therefore, in those times, possessed a national voluntary militia, of no charge to the Government, ready for the field on a short notice, and well skilled in the use of weapons. Hence sprung the large bodies of efficient troops which at different periods of English history, in an incredibly short time, were found ready for the service of their country. These men were not a rude, undisciplined rabble, but were trained, disciplined men, every one sufficiently master of his weapon to riddle a steel corslet at five or six score paces, or in a body, to act with terrible effect against masses of cavalry; while most of them could bring down a falcon on the wing by a bird-bolt, or with a broad arrow transfix the wild deer in the chase.

~Archers defeated men-at-arms.~

~Value in sieges.~

Before the simple weapon of the British archer, itself but a larger form of the simplest plaything of a child, all the gorgeous display of knighthood, the elaborated panoply of steel, the magnificent war-horse, the serried ranks, the ingenious devices of tacticians and strategists, at once gave way; nothing can withstand the biting storm of the “cloth-yard shaft.” It was equally efficacious in the field and in the siege. The defender of town or castle could not peep beyond his bretèche or parapet, but an English arrow nailed his cap to his head. In a field, provided the archers were, by marsh, wood or mountain, secured from a flank attack, they would bid defiance to any number of mounted men-at-arms. Their shafts, falling thick as hail among the horses, soon brought them to the ground, or threw them into utter disorder; then the armed footmen advanced and commenced a slaughter which was scarcely stayed but by weariness of slaying; the archers meantime continuing their ravages on the rear of the enemy’s cavalry by a vertical attack, prolonged, when the ordinary supply of their quivers had been exhausted, by withdrawing them arrows from their slain enemies, to be sent forth on new missions of death:--here is encouragement for our modern marksmen who are armed with a far more deadly weapon.

~Opinion on English archers by Napoleon III.~

~Destroyed the prestige of cavalry.~

~Estimation of infantry by continental nations.~

The most complete and philosophic digest, which relates to the system of British archery, considered from a military point of view, is that given by the present Emperor of the French in his treatise “_Sur le Passé et l’Avenir de l’Artillerie_.” That the British victory at Cressy was wholly attributable to the prowess of British archers, is well known; not so well, a circumstance pointed out by the Emperor of the French, that thenceforward, and in consequence of that victory, the prestige of cavalry declined. Now, there is a political, no less than military significance in this lowering of the esteem in which cavalry had previously been held. Horsemen were gentlemen, and infantry men of inferior degree. Whenever and wherever British archery were _not_ brought to bear, horsemen were omnipotent, and infantry of little avail. During the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries--the golden age of archery in this land, when yeomen or archers were in such high repute,--France and continental nations generally, treated foot soldiers with disdain. The Emperor of the French, in his systematic book just adverted to, mentions several examples where foot soldiers were ruthlessly cut down and ridden over by their own cavalry--the men-at-arms; not that the infantry fought ill, but that they fought too well. They were slaughtered lest the men-at-arms should have no scope for the exercise of their skill.

~Archer a yeoman.~

~Political results.~

English men-at-arms never sullied their fame by cruel acts like these; not that they were better at heart: seeing that human nature is everywhere, and under all circumstances, pretty much alike. English infantry, mainly composed of archers, were far too valuable to be thus used. They bore the first brunt of battle, and not unfrequently decided it. At the time when every other foot soldier in Europe was the merest serf, the British archer was a yeoman. He had a fixed heraldic rank; the first of low degree. He was above the handicraftsman, however skilful,--above the merchant--taking his rank immediately after the gentry. The excellence of British archery, then tended to bring about a political result; helping to establish that middle-class which, ever since its consolidation, has been one of the sheet-anchors of our glorious constitution.

THE ARBALEST, OR CROSS-BOW.

~Cross-bow, modification of long.~

In process of time a modification of the bow was invented. In place of the original instrument, a much shorter and stiffer bow, usually of steel, was placed transversely in a stock, bent by a lever, and discharged by a trigger, after the manner since used for a gun.

~Invented in Crete or Sicily.~

The cross-bow, or arbalest, called in Latin, arcus balistarius, or balista manualis, and in French arbalèt, is said by some to be of Sicilian origin; others ascribe its invention to the Cretans. It is supposed to have been introduced into France by the first crusaders, and is mentioned by the Abbé Suger in his life of Louis le Gros, as being used by that Prince, in the beginning of his reign, which commenced in the year 1108.

~To England by Saxons.~

Verstigan seems to attribute the introduction of this weapon into England to the Saxons, under Hengist and Horsa, but cites no authority in support of that supposition. In a print representing the landing of those generals, the foremost of them is delineated with a cross-bow on his shoulder, and others are seen in the hands of the distant figures of their followers, landed and landing from their ships.

~The Normans got cross-bows from Italy.~

It would appear that the Normans derived the cross-bow, with its name, from Italy. In Domesday Book mention is made of Odo, the arbalester, as a tenant in capite of the king of lands in Yorkshire; and the manor of Worstead, Norfolk, was at the time of Domesday survey, held of the Abbot of St. Benet at Holme, by Robert the cross-bow man. The names show them to have been Normans, and these instances are sufficient to prove the introduction of the weapon, though the few that may have been used at the battle of Hastings might occasion its not being represented in the Bayeux tapestry.

~No cross-bow among Romans.~

The absence of the cross-bow in early Roman monuments leaves it a matter of doubt, whether an arbalester would not simply mean the engineer of a catapult. There is no mention made of the hand cross-bow in very ancient authorities.

~William II surnamed Rufus, from 1087 to 1100~

The cross-bow has been used in England (at least, on hunting excursions) in the time of Rufus, for Wace tells us, that “Prince Henry, going the same day to New Forest, found the string of his cross-bow broken, and taking it to a villain to be mended, saw an old woman there, who told him he should be king.”

~Henry I, 1100 to 1135.~

~Cross-bow in war.~

During the reign of Henry I. the cross-bow seems to have been principally used in the chase. The projectile was in form of a short arrow, with a pyramidical head, called a quarrel, (plate 14, fig. 2 and 4). Simeon of Durham speaks of it in the time of Henry I. thus:--“He raised a machine from whence the archers and cross-bowmen might shoot.”

~Genoese celebrated for the use of.~

The Genoese were at all times most celebrated for the skilful management of the cross-bow. The success which attended the Christians at the siege of Jerusalem, 1100, is attributed principally to the mechanical talents of this people.

~Use of forbad.~

The use of the cross-bows was general in Italy in 1139, for at that time Pope Innocent II. particularly forbad them. The German Emperor Conrad did the same, as we learn from William de Dole, who lived in the latter part of the 12th century, they not being looked upon as a fair weapon.

~Richard I from 1189 to 1199.~

~Siege of Acre~

~Universal in Crusades.~

~Richard killed by.~

It is said of Richard I.:--“Truly he revived the use of this kind of shooting, called cross-bow shooting, which had long since been laid aside, whence he became so skilful in its management, that he killed many people with his own hand.” It is supposed that Richard I. first used the cross-bow as a weapon of war at the siege of Acre. In every action, however, of which we read in the history of the second crusade, as well as the third, in which Richard participated, cross-bows, as well as other bows, are repeatedly noticed. It is stated that he was killed by an arrow, said to have been shot from a cross-bow at the Castle of Chaluz.

~Genoese cross-bow men.~

~Mounted Arbalists 1225.~

From the beginning of the 13th, and until the middle of the 15th century, cross-bow men are uniformly mentioned as part of the Genoese troops. From Justinius we learn, that in 1225 “Twenty Arbalestes mounted, and one hundred on foot, with cross-bows of horn, were then employed in the army of the state.”

The cross-bow man was an essential component of the host during all this period. He was in the van of the battle.

~Battle near Damietta 1237.~

In the battle near Damietta, in 1237, “more than a hundred knights of the Temple fell, and three hundred cross-bow men, &c., &c.”

~Campaign in Italy 1239.~

The Emperor Frederic, in 1239, giving an account of his Italian campaign to the king of England, writes: “After we had, by our knights and cross-bow men, reduced all the province of Liguria,” &c.

~Genoese 1245.~

~Treatment of.~

Five hundred Genoese cross-bow men were sent against the Milanese in 1245, and these unfortunate men being placed in front of the line, were taken prisoners by the enemy, who, to revenge themselves for the havoc done by their bows, cruelly punished each with the loss of an eye, and amputation of an arm.

~Cross-bows at Cressy 1346.~

There were 15,000 Genoese cross-bow men in the front rank of the French army at the battle of Cressy, 1346.

~At siege of Le Roche de Rién.~

The next year we find that Charles, Earl of Blois, had at the siege of Le Roche de Rién no less than 2,000 in his army.

~Corporation of Arbalisters 1359.~

The “Corporation des Arbalestriers de Paris,” in 1359, consisted of two hundred members. In 1373, their number, as fixed by a royal ordinance, was eight hundred. They were not bound to serve beyond the limits of their district without the consent of the Provost of Paris. There were both foot and mounted cross-bowmen in this body.

~Cross-bow encouraged by Edward III.~

~No English in wars of Edward III.~

~Genoese mercenaries.~

Edward III., though he wished principally to encourage the long-bow, could not help seeing the advantages which might be derived from the cross-bow, from the accuracy of its shot, and its convenience on horseback. It does not appear that, in the long wars of Edward with the French in this century, cross-bowmen were raised in England, though they were supplied by Genoese contractors on various occasions for service at sea. In 1363 the king caused public proclamation to be made, in order to encourage its use.

~Matches.~

There were also matches made in different parts of Europe, at which prizes were given to the most skilful cross-bowmen.

~Mounted cross-bow men in France 1373.~

In the list of the Grand Masters of the Arbalesters of France under Charles V., in 1373, appears “Marc de Grimant, Baron d’Antibes, Captain-General of Arbalesters, both foot and horse, in the service of the king.” And a similar notice occurs in the reign of King John, Baudoin de Lence being Grand Master; but it would appear that the mounted cross-bowmen were retained in much smaller numbers than the foot.

~“Pavisers.”~

During the reign of Edward III. cross-bowmen seem first to have been protected by “Pavisers,” (plate 15), or men who held before them a large shield called a “Pavise.”

~Pavisers by English 1404.~

On the attack by the French and Spaniards upon the Isle of Portland in 1404, the English formed pavisers to protect themselves from the cross-bow bolts, by taking the doors from their houses, and fixing them upright by props. Under this cover the archers plied their arrows.

~Cross-bow not esteemed by English.~

~Forbad by Henry VII 1508 & 1515.~

~Forbad by Henry VIII 1535.~

~Decline of cross-bow.~

The English never had much esteem for the cross-bow in the field. Among the 10,500 men led out of England by Henry VI., in 1415, there were only ninety-eight Arbalesters, of whom eighteen were horsemen; nevertheless, Henry VII. found it necessary to prohibit the use of the cross-bow in 1508, and, seven years after, another statute was passed, renewing the prohibition. This interference, however, of the legislature does not seem to have produced the intended effect, for in less than twenty years later the use of the cross-bow had become so prevalent, that a new statute was judged requisite, which inflicted on every person that kept one in his house, the penalty of twenty pounds. It is from this period, therefore, that we may date the decline of the arbalest in this country, as these statutes produced by degrees the reformation sought for. Not a single cross-bow man is to be seen in the paintings belonging to the Society of Antiquaries, nor at Cowdray House, representing the battles of Henry VIII., and painted at the period; and, to give a finishing blow, another statute soon followed, still more decisive.

DESCRIPTION OF CROSS-BOW.

~Description.~

The ancient cross-bow, which differed in many particulars from those of late times, is thus described by Father Daniel, who formed his description from one or more then before him.

The cross-bow was an offensive weapon, which consisted of a bow fixed to the top of a sort of staff, or stock of wood, which the string of the bow, when unbent, crossed at right angles.

~Stock.~

~Trigger.~

The handle or bed, which was called the stock of the cross-bow, had towards the middle a small opening or slit, of the length of two fingers, in which was a little moveable wheel of solid steel; through the centre of it passed a screw that served for an axis; this wheel projected a little beyond the surface of the stock, and had a notch, or catch, which stopped and held the string of the bow when bent. In the opposite side of the circumference was a much smaller notch, by the means of which the spring of the trigger kept the wheel firmer, and in its place; this wheel is called the nut of the cross-bow. Under the stock, near the handle, was the key of the trigger, like that of the serpentine of a musket; by pressing this key with the hand, to the handle of the cross-bow, the spring released the wheel that held the string, and the string by its motion drove forward the dart.

~Back-sight.~

~Fore-sight.~

Upon the stock below the little wheel was a small plate of copper, which lifted up and shut down, and was fixed by its two legs, with two screws to the two sides of the stock; this was a back-sight; it was pierced above by two little holes, one over the other, and when the plate was raised, these two holes answered to a globule, which was a small bead, no bigger than that of a chaplet, that was suspended at the end of the cross-bow by a fine wire, and fastened to two perpendicular columns of iron, one on the right, the other on the left, and this little globule, answering to the holes in the plate, served to direct the aim, whether for shooting horizontally, upwards, or downwards.

~Cord.~

The cord or string of the bow was double, each string separated by two little cylinders of iron, equi-distant from the extremities of the bow and the centre; to these two strings in the middle was fixed a ring of cord, which served to confine it in the notch previously mentioned when the bow was bent. Between the two cords in the centre of the string, and immediately before the ring, was a little square of cord, against which was placed the extremity of the arrow or dart, to be pushed forward by the cord.

~Bent by hand.~

~By foot~

~By pulley.~

The smaller cross-bows were bent with the hand; the larger ones were at first bent by the soldier placing his foot in a stirrup, attached to the end of the bow; a cord was then fixed by one end to the butt of the stock, the other end being fastened to a waistbelt. A pulley, running upon the cord, was hooked to the bowstring, and the bow was then bent by raising the body and keeping the leg firm.

~By moulinet.~

The cross-bow was afterwards furnished with the moulinet and pulleys, (plate 13) which after the bow had been bent, could be removed for the discharge; these consisted of an iron cylinder in a frame of the same metal, made to turn by two moveable handles in opposite directions, and having a cap likewise of iron to fit on the butt end of the stock. On each side of this cap was a small pulley, the wheel of which was one inch and a half in diameter, having attached to one of its arms a strong cord that passed thence round an equal sized wheel, returned over the first, and then went round one double in diameter, situated beyond the second, and so passed to the cylinder of the moulinet, by winding which, the power required to bend the bow was lessened to one fourth. Attached to the arms of the greater wheels was a double claw, made to slide on the plane of the stock, which, catching hold of the bowstring, drew it up to the nut. An improvement of the moulinet was, that the handles of the cylinder were both made in the same line, instead of being one up and the other down.

~By windlass.~

At a later period the cross-bow was bent by a windlass, which consisted of a bar of iron, shaped at its end into a claw, and having teeth the whole length of one edge. This slipped through an iron box, containing a wheel, the cogs of which fitted the teeth of the bar, and as a handle was fixed to the axle, on turning it the string was wound up. This apparatus was attached by a loop, which slipped over the stock, and was kept in its place by two iron pins, that projected from the side, and then, when bent, it could be easily removed.

~By steel lever.~

Another mode of bending the cross-bow was by means of a steel lever, called the goat’s-foot lever, which was moveable. This was formed of two legs, a catch and a handle, all acting on one pivot. The legs were applied to the projecting pieces of iron on each side the stock, and then the purchase was very great.

~Latch.~

~Prodd.~

There were two principal varieties of cross-bows, viz., the “Latch,” with grooved stock, for “quarrels,” and the “Prodd,” for bullets. (Plate 14, fig. 1 and 2.)

~Dimensions and form of latch.~

~Quarrels viretons.~

In the reign of Henry VI. the stocks of cross-bows were made of hard wood, ornamented with ivory. They were about three feet three inches long, the bow of steel, about two feet eight inches from end to end, weighing in all about fifteen pounds. The length of the groove for the quarrel about one foot four inches. The arrows discharged were called both quarrels and viretons, (plate 14, fig. 2 and 4,) some with feathers, others without. The vireton is a French name; the feathers being set on a little curved, made it spin round as it passed through the air.

~Arquebus or barrelled cross-bow.~

~Slit in tube.~

~Fired leaden balls.~

It is stated by Captain Panôt, that the Arquebus was in use before the invention of powder, and was but an improvement on the arbalest, or cross-bow. The Arquebus, like the cross-bow, had a stock, upon which was fixed a tube, intended to receive the projectile. This tube was split, for the passage of a cord, which was held back by a kind of sheave or pulley, which communicated motion to the projectile, on the trigger being pulled. In general, leaden balls were fired from the arquebus. The barrelled cross-bow was suggested by the “balista grossa de arganellis,” which was furnished with tubes for ejecting Greek fire.

~Repeating cross-bow.~

In the United Service Museum, Whitehall, there is a cross-bow of Cingalese manufacture. It strings itself, and discharges two arrows each time in rapid succession, until the magazine is exhausted, which contains twelve arrows, and may be replenished in a moment.

~Range in Henry V.~

It is evident that the different sizes and various powers of cross-bows occasioned a great diversity in the distance of their range. Thus, in Henry 5th’s time the range of the cross-bow is stated to have been forty rods (220 yards), and it never appears to have been more powerful than at that period.

~Range in Elizabeth’s.~

M. de Bellay says that the cross-bowman will kill at 100 or 200 paces, which gives a great range to the arbalests of Elizabeth’s time.

Sir John Smith, however, in his observations, not long after this, very much contracts the distance of their shot, for he says that “a cross-bow will kill point-blank between 40 and 60 yards, and, if elevated, 120, 140, or 160 yards, or further.”

The former probably alluded to the prod, the latter to the latch.

COMPARATIVE MERITS OF THE LONG AND CROSS BOW.

How inefficient the cross-bow was found, when opposed by English archery, appears in every page of the histories of the fourteenth century.

~Why long-bow superior.~

The superiority of the long-bow mainly depended upon the strength and skill of the archer, while a greater amount of accuracy at shorter ranges could be had out of the cross-bow, with much less training; and the success of the English archers when opposed to cross-bowmen may be mainly ascribed to the more “rapid” fire of the former.

~Celerity the great advantage of the long-bow.~

It is generally conceded that the long-bow could deliver at least six shafts while the cross-bow discharged one; and, “with such odds against them, it became impossible for the bravest and most expert troops, whether at Cressy or elsewhere, to make a stand against their opponents”.

~Cross-bow best on horseback.~

On the other hand, the cross-bow was decidedly a more convenient weapon on horseback than the long-bow.

COMPARATIVE MERITS BETWEEN BOWS AND EARLY FIRE-ARMS.

The invention of gunpowder, and its application to artillery and small arms, did not produce that sudden change in the art of war, or in weapons, that might, on a first consideration, have been expected. Many of the old soldiers were much divided in their opinion of the superiority of fire-arms, nor does it appear that the government of those days were decided upon it, as the strongest statutes for enforcing the practice of archery were enacted after their introduction.

~Long-bow preferred in Edward III.~

Joshua Barnes, in his life of Edward III., observes, that “without all question, the guns which are used now-a-days, are neither so terrible in battle nor do such execution nor work such confusion as arrows can do; for bullets, being not seen, only hurt where they hit, but arrows enrage the horse, and break the array, and terrify all that behold them in the bodies of their neighbours. Not to say that every archer can shoot thrice to a gunner’s once, and that whole squadrons of bows may let fly at one time, when only one or two files of musqueteers can discharge at once. Also, that whereas guns are useless when your pikes join, because they only do execution point-blank, the arrows which will kill at random may do good service even behind your men of arms.”

~Long-bow the favourite in Henry VIII.~

Although fire-arms had attained no inconsiderable degree of perfection in the reign of Henry VIII., yet the long-bow was still the favourite weapon.

~Merits balanced in Queen Mary’s reign.~

So indifferent were the ministers of Queen Mary respecting them, that in her ordinance respecting armour and weapons, the alternative is left to the choice of the people, whether they should find a long-bow and sheaf of arrows, or a haquebutt, in every case where they were by law charged with the latter.

~The lighter ammunition of the harquebus an advantage.~

In the reign of Elizabeth, the musket was so slow to charge and discharge that the bow was considered superior by many; and Mons. de Bellay states that if archers and cross-bowmen could carry their arrows, &c., as easy as harquebusiers do their ammunition, he would prefer the former weapon over the latter.

~Arrows make more severe wounds than bullets.~

The effects of arrows sticking in horses, are said to have been frightful. This can be easily imagined. A fire-arm bullet can be shot quite through a horse without causing the animal to show one sign of anguish. He goes steadily on his previous course, and makes no sign. However fatal of necessity, a fire-arm bullet gives no immediate pain. Not so the arrow. Planted never so lightly in a horse’s neck or flank, the animal grew furious. Starting off into a wild gallop to escape the barbed sting, the animal had no respite for his agony. The wilder the pace, the greater the pain. Far from the serried squadrons where he fain would be, sore against his will, rushed the mail-clad knight. Plunging and rearing, the steed would throw him at last, amidst the dead and dying; himself to die.

Though comparatively few men or horses were killed by arrow wounds at once, few, nevertheless, recovered. The barbed arrow-head was immeasurably more dangerous, imbedded in the flesh, than a mere lump of lead. Hundreds of men, hale and well to-day, have had fire-arm bullets imbedded in their flesh for years. Not so in the time of archery. The arrow-head must be extracted, or mortification came on, and soon a cruel death. Neither was the surgical process of extraction often happy in the results. It would not be easy to extract a barbed arrow-head even now, with all the appliances of modern surgery at hand.

~Arrow wounds more fatal.~

Another fatal consequence of arrow wounds on the field of battle was this: men wounded thus were rarely taken prisoners. Arrows were expensive ammunition. The battle over, detachments were sent out to collect them; and the collection was not done too tenderly. To regain an arrow seemed a far more meritorious act than to save the life of an enemy. The throat of many a wounded wretch was mercilessly cut, that he might be quiet whilst the arrow was being extracted.

~Bows useless in wind.~

~In rain.~

The defects of archery were these:--the ammunition was expensive, and when lost, not easily replaced. The flight of arrows is never correct on a windy day, from whatever direction the wind may blow. Rain relaxes the bow and bowstring, so that archery then is of little use. All these are serious defects; but there was another of more importance still. When the archer’s ammunition was all expended, he was nearly powerless. A sword, indeed, he carried, for close fighting; and each archer stuck into the ground before him a sharp pointed stake as a protection against cavalry.

~Hand-gun most penetration.~

~Silent discharge in favor of bows.~

The great advantage of the hand-gun was from its penetration, as no armour could keep out balls, but the _silent_ discharge of the cross-bow rendered it superior in the pursuit of timid animals, and the prodd has continued in use to the present day, for the purpose of killing deer, rooks, and rabbits.

NOTE.--The articles on ancient Engines of War, and upon the Bow, are principally taken from the following works, viz:--“Military Antiquities,” by F. Grose, Esq.; “A Critical Inquiry into Ancient Armour,” by Sir S. R. Meyrick; “Ancient Armour and Weapons in Europe,” by John Hewitt; “Projectile Weapons of War,” and “Report of the Rifle Match at Wimbledon Common,” by J. Scoffern, M. B.; “Engines of War,” by H. Wilkinson, and “The Long-Bow of the Past and the Rifle for the Future,” by H. Britannicus.

HISTORY OF ARTILLERY.

~Fate of nations depends on arms.~

There is no subject more intimately connected with the history of the world, from the remotest antiquity than the history of Arms, the fate of nations having always depended either on the superiority of the Arms employed, or on the superior discipline or dexterity of those who used them, wholly independent of the numbers by which they were opposed.

~Artillery includes all war-engines.~

Before the introduction of gunpowder, all kinds of weapons, both offensive and defensive, were included in the term “Artillery,” which has since become restricted to the larger kinds of fire-arms, such as guns, mortars, howitzers, rockets, &c. Thus we find in the I. Saml. xx., 40, “And Jonathan gave his artillery to his lad,” when speaking of bows and arrows. Again, in the 20th, Henry VIII., a patent was granted to Anthony Knevt and Peter Mentas, “to be overseers of the science of Artillery;” and in an enumeration of the different species of Artillery, printed in 1594, are reckoned “long-bows, cross-bows, slur-bows, stone-bows, scorpions, and catapultas.”

~Definition of Artillery.~

The root of the word “artillery,” is the Latin word “_ars_,” an “art.” It has been fantastically derived from the Italian _arte di tirare_, the art of firing. In the fourteenth century the science of war-engines was called _artemonie_, and its productions _artillerie_, from the old French word _artiller_, “to employ art.” Some writers state that the word “artillery,” is derived from _arcus_ “a bow,” the earlier species of artillery being termed _arcualia_.

~First invention unknown.~

~Names of gun--from old machines.~

It is difficult to determine with any degree of accuracy the epoch at which gunpowder and its resultants, fire-arms, were first employed for the purposes of war in any part of the world; and this difficulty is increased, at least, as far as regards Europe, from the fact, that the first engines of war, depending on the use of gunpowder, were named after the old machines for throwing darts, stones, &c.

~First mention of guns.~

The earliest account which we have of gunpowder, where it is mentioned as applied to fire-arms, exists in a code of Gentoo Laws, and is thought by many to be coeval with the time of Moses. The notice occurs in the Sanscrit preface to the Code of Gentoo Laws, translated by Halhed, at page 53, viz:--“The Magistrate shall not make war with any deceitful machine, or with poisoned weapons, or with _cannon or guns_, &c.” Halhed observes: “It will no doubt strike the reader with wonder to find a prohibition of fire-arms in records of such unfathomable antiquity, and he will probably hence renew the suspicion, which has long been deemed absurd, that Alexander the Great did absolutely meet with some weapons of this kind in India, as a passage in Quintus Curtius seems to ascertain.”

~Greek fire, earliest European combustible.~

~Gunpowder known before in China.~

~Chinese explosive shell.~

~Early Chinese cannon.~

The Greek fire seems to have been one of the earliest attempts in Europe at the manufacture of a military combustible; but there is some reason to believe that the Chinese had become acquainted with the nature of gunpowder long before the introduction or invention of the aforenamed substance; and they appear to have been the first who took any steps in its manufacture, or in that of weapons of war resulting from its use. Amongst the machines constructed by this extraordinary people, was one called “the thunder of the earth,” which is thus described by M. Reinaud; and M. Favé: “A hollow globe of iron was filled with a bucket of gunpowder, mixed with fragments of metal, and was so arranged, that it exploded on the approach of an enemy, so as to cause great destruction in his ranks.” The “impetuous” dart of the Chinese, was a round bamboo, about two and a half feet in length, lashed with hempen cords to prevent its splitting, and having a strong wooden handle fixed to one end, thus making its entire length about five feet. This was then charged with powder of different kinds, arranged in layers, over which were placed fire balls, which being thrown to a distance of thirty or forty yards by the discharge, consumed any combustible materials they might come in contact with.

~Guns in China, 618 B. C.~

A late writer, M. Paravey, has in a great measure established the fact, that gunpowder and fire-arms were known to the Chinese long before the Christian era; and it is mentioned in Chinese writings, that in the year 618 B. C., a gun was in use, bearing this inscription, “I hurl death to the traitor, and extermination to the rebel.”

~A. D. 757.~

Guns are said to have been constructed in China, in 757 A. D., for the purpose of throwing stones of the weight of from ten to fourteen pounds to a distance of 300 paces. Whatever doubts may exist as to the earlier history of artillery among the Chinese, it is almost beyond question, that cannon were extensively used by them in the beginning of the 13th century, as we have access to various reliable accounts, establishing this fact.

~Artillery at Saragossa, A. D., 1118.~

~At Niebla, A. D., 1157.~

Condé, in his history of the Moors in Spain, states that artillery was used by them against Saragossa in 1118 A. D., and that in 1157, A. D. they defended themselves in Niebla, against the Spaniards, by means of machines, which threw darts and stones, through the agency of fire.

~Used against the Moguls, A. D. 1232.~

In 1232 A. D. cannon throwing stone shot were used against the Moguls, and during this war, certain machines were also employed, which being filled with powder, and ignited at the proper time, burst with a noise like thunder, and whose effect extended for the space of half an acre round the spot where they exploded.

~Cannon bearing date 1258 found in France.~

A small brass cannon is said to have been found at the bottom of a deep well of the Castle de Clucy, in France, with the date 1258 upon it.

~Cannon used against Cordova, A. D. 1280.~

~Iron shot, 14th century.~

In 1280 A. D., cannon were used against Cordova, after which period, they are frequently mentioned in the records of Spain. Iron shot appear to have been first used in that country in the beginning of the 14th century.

~Cannon used by Arabians, 1312.~

Cannon are described by Arabian authors as early as 1312.

The first mention we have of the use of fire arms, after this period, is in the life of Robert Bruce, by John Barbour, Archdeacon of Aberdeen, in which certain engines termed, “crakeys of war,” are spoken of, as having been used by Edward III., in his campaign against the Scots, in 1327.

~Cannon in France, 1338.~

It is generally believed that cannon were commonly employed in Europe since 1338, as they were used by the French in that year to demolish some castles.

~Siege of Algesiras, 1342 to 1344.~

Gunpowder is said to have been used at the siege of Algesiras by Alphonse of Castile against the Moors, 1342 to 1344.

~Cannon at Cressy, 1346.~

Edward III. had four guns at the battle of Cressy, 1346. Froissart mentions these guns in one of his manuscripts, now preserved in the library of Amiens. A free translation of the passage referred to would run as follows: “And the English caused to fire suddenly certain guns which they had in the battle, to astonish (or confound) the Genoese.” Vilani, a Florentine historian, also confirms this statement, as well as a passage in the chronicles of St. Denis, which speaks of the use of cannon by the English at Cressy. An ancient manuscript also mentions the existence of gunners and artillerymen, whom Edward III. employed when he landed before Calais in 1346, and the several stipends each soldier received. The sentence runs thus: “Masons, carpenters, engineers, gunners, and artillerymen, the sum of 12, 10, 6, and 3 pence per diem.”

~Cannon of two kinds.~

~Used by the Black Prince, 1356.~

~At St. Valery, 1358.~

The first fire-arms appear to have consisted of two kinds; a larger one for discharging stones, called a bombard, (plate 18, fig. 3) and a smaller for propelling darts and leaden balls, both of which were used in 1356, by the Black Prince, to reduce the castle of Romozantin; and two years later, the artillery of St. Valery did great execution among its besiegers.

~Cannon made in England, 1377~

Cannon were made in England in the fourteenth century, and Richard II. commissioned Sir Thomas Norwich to buy two great and two small cannon in London, or in any other place; and also 600 balls of stone for cannon and for other engines, to be sent to the Castle of Bristol.

~Cannon at St. Malo.~

When the English unsuccessfully besieged St. Malo, 400 cannon are said to have been used, but these are supposed to have been of the smaller kind, called hand cannon, or culverins, which were carried by two men, and fired from a kind of tripod or rest fixed in the ground.

~Cannon general.~

~Bombards made of iron.~

~Bronze.~

~Leather, rope, &c.~

~Wood.~

From this period, cannon were used in all the offensive and defensive operations of war; though a considerable time elapsed before it became a really serviceable arm for field operations. The earlier kinds of cannon were called bombards or bombardæ. Those first employed were clumsy, (plate 16) and ill contrived, wider at the mouth than at the chamber. They merely consisted of bars of iron, arranged in such a manner that their internal aspects should form a tube. The bars were not welded together, but merely confined by hoops. They were also made of iron bars over a cylinder of copper, strengthened by iron hoops, driven on red hot, and others were entirely composed of copper. Bronze was also employed in the manufacture of artillery, as well as thin sheets of iron rolled together; and guns made of leather, and coiled rope, over a cylinder of copper or gun metal, were also introduced, and continued in use for a considerable time. Guns also appear to have been made of wood.

~Rope mortar at Venice.~

In the arsenal at Venice there is an ancient mortar, constructed of leather and rope, used in the siege of the island of Chioggia, near Venice, against the Genoese, 1380. The shot is of stone, 14in. in diameter.

~Cannon of paper.~

It has been heard recently, that the Chinese constructed their cannon of prepared paper, lined with copper.

~Field cannon to keep up with army, 1380.~

As early as 1380 it is said the French were able to procure for the invasion of Italy, a great number of brass cannon, mounted on carriages, and drawn by horses, instead of oxen; these pieces threw balls of from 40lbs. to 60lbs. in weight and could always keep pace with the army. (Plate 18, fig. 1, 3, and 4.)

~Large cannon 1400.~

A cannon taken at the siege of Dien in 1546, by John de Castro, and now in Lisbon, is 20 feet 7in. in length, 6 feet 3in. in diameter in the middle, and threw a ball of 100lbs. A Hindostani inscription on it states that it was cast in 1400.

~Bolts and quarrels shot, 1413.~

~Red-hot iron balls used at Cherbourg, 1418.~

~Slow to discharge.~

Bolts and quarrels were shot from cannon in the reign of Henry V.; these were succeeded by stones, as he ordered in 1418, “labourers to make 7,000 stones for the guns of different sorts from the quarries of Maidstone.” We learn from Elam’s life of Henry V., that when an English army, commanded by the Duke of Gloucester, besieged Cherbourg in 1418, the besieged discharged _red-hot_ balls of _iron_ from their cannon into the English camp, to burn the huts. So much time elapsed between the loading and discharging the great guns, that the besieged had sufficient time to repair at their leisure, the breaches made by the enormous stones, &c., thrown from them.

~Cannon at Meaux, 1422.~

Five wrought-iron bombards are preserved in the “Musée de l’Artillerie,” at Paris; which were, it is said, abandoned by the English, at the town of Meaux, in 1422.

~Cannon cast, 1450.~

About the middle of the fifteenth century, the ancient method of constructing cannon was exchanged for that of casting. A hard or mixed metal was invented called “font metal” or bronze, and cannon were then cast in one piece, and instead of fanciful names, they began to be indicated by the weight of their ball, as at present.

~Siege of Constantinople, 1453.~

~Small guns with several barrels.~

~Large brass gun, cast at Adrianople.~

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