A tiny cannon for ID and coments

[fernando]

I wouldn't know on what tipology tis small cannon falls ... assuming i can call it a cannon.
We can say the previous owner didn't need to clean it so much ... despite most probably being full of rust.
Height 18 cms (7"). Diameter 7 cms (2 3/4"). Bore about 4 cms. (1 1/2").
Weight around 3,5 Kilos (7 pounds) ... the kitchen scale couldn't make it right.
A thin sleeve is lining the barrel, most probably a reinforcement (steel) to resist wear.
The seller says is portuguese, as he bought it in Portugal; i have no reason(or knowledge) not to beleive so. He also says it is from the 16/17th century, as it was the period this type was used, but i wouldn't know.
Coments on these particular assumptions and also in general will be so much welcome.
Fernando

[Atlantia]

Hi Fernando.

Do you think its a hand-cannon?

I've no experience of sleeved cannon barrels, but many barrels are made from a sheet which is rolled around a core (which is removed of course), I've only had experience of this on much later weapons, but the principal would be the same and oxidisation could certainly cause the inner layer to look similar to your piece.


BTW, I would think it was earlier if its a hand cannon.

[katana]

Hi Fernando,
interesting item, this picture of a hand cannon seems to also have that 'inner lining'

David

[fernando]

Hi David,
Fascinating !!!
Where did you find this ?
I beg you to tell a zillion things about it.
... Like dimensions ... age ... link or book ... and so on ?
Fernando

[Rick]

As long as there has been gunpowder people have used it for both celebration and war ; d'you suppose this could be a signal cannon of some sort ?
Imagine a reusable firecracker . ;)

[fernando]

... d'you suppose this could be a signal cannon of some sort ?
I would think so, Rick. I slightly remember reading somewhere that they used small cannons in fleet ships, to signal one another, like for transmiting or comanding tatic maneuvres ( as also for saluting ?), but i am not certain of the correct story and also if this is such specific thing. It appears they (mine)function/s on the upright position.
Let's see what David comes up with. The specimen he showed seems to be a similar implement ... providing, for a start, its dimensions are also reduced.
It certainly is also very old; we're talking centuries here, right ?
Fernando

[Rick]

Yes, centuries . :)

[Atlantia]

Hi again fernando,


Your cannon would have been in a long wooden handle.

Look at the swiss example about half way down this page:
hand cannon (http://images.google.com/imgres?imgurl=http://www.geocities.com/wolfram_von_taus/images/SHC.jpg&imgrefurl=http://www.geocities.com/wolfram_von_taus/Weapons.htm&h=137&w=640&sz=37&hl=en&start=90&um=1&tbnid=Yd_Nq9APvxTCbM:&tbnh=29&tbnw=137&prev=/images%3Fq%3Dhand%2Bcannon%26start%3D80%26ndsp%3D2 0%26um%3D1%26hl%3Den%26rls%3Dcom.microsoft:*:IE-SearchBox%26rlz%3D1I7DKUK%26sa%3DN)

[Atlantia]

I would think so, Rick. I slightly remember reading somewhere that they used small cannons in fleet ships, to signal one another, like for transmiting or comanding tatic maneuvres ( as also for saluting ?), but i am not certain of the correct story and also if this is such specific thing. It appears they (mine)function/s on the upright position.
Let's see what David comes up with. The specimen he showed seems to be a similar implement ... providing, for a start, its dimensions are also reduced.
It certainly is also very old; we're talking centuries here, right ?
Fernando

I thought of a signalling cannon, but its too basic IMHO.

[fernando]

Hi again fernando,


Your cannon would have been in a long wooden handle.

Look at the swiss example about half way down this page:


I don't think so Gene. Those are more primitive :shrug:
Fernando

[fernando]

I thought of a signalling cannon, but its too basic IMHO.

What do you mean, too basic ? Sure these things were basic, right ?
But let's see what knowledged members tell us about it ... plus what David will reveal about that picture he posted ;)
Fernando

[Atlantia]

I don't think so Gene. Those are more primitive :shrug:
Fernando


I'd have said yours was of this lineage?

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1060197/SHC_Berlin.jpg

[M ELEY]

I'm pretty sure its a signal cannon, as discussed. The time period mentioned seems right. Even some of the miniature cannons on carriages with wheels were signal devices for ships, as already pointed out. Nice piece, though!

[Atlantia]

Yeah I think you guys may be right, I think I'm too eagre to 'weaponise' it perhaps :-(
It does look very similar in size and shape to this one (albeit not bronze of coourse)

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2005-8/1060197/canon.jpg

[fernando]

Thank you Gene,
According to what i have observed in the mean time, there certainly are quite a few variations of these things, which makes a specific specimen be only identified against a rather similar item, or by someone who has seen ( or handled) so many of them, that he would feel safe to put a label on it.
In a way, the volume of this example seems not so distant from the ones of primitive hand cannons, like the Switz arquebus shown in your link. But then we would be talking 14th century, which decidedly is not the case here.
On the other hand, this to be a signal cannon, spreads within a family that gave the so called thunder mugs, which in implies in powder testers, saluting and also signal cannons. I have meanwhile seen pictures of "later" thunder mugs ( 1800's) and they were all more sophisticated, like some examples having a lip below the firehole for placing the charge ( no fuse in this case), other times a carrying handle and, most often a wider rimmed base, to keep the thing well upright.
So if in fact this is a signal (saluting) cannon, which untill contrary evidence i beleive it is, its rudimentary shape fits into the age atributed by the seller, XVI/XVII century.
By the way, where did you get the picture of this last example you showed ?
Fernando

[Atlantia]

Thank you Gene,
According to what i have observed in the mean time, there certainly are quite a few variations of these things, which makes a specific specimen be only identified against a rather similar item, or by someone who has seen ( or handled) so many of them, that he would feel safe to put a label on it.
In a way, the volume of this example seems not so distant from the ones of primitive hand cannons, like the Switz arquebus shown in your link. But then we would be talking 14th century, which decidedly is not the case here.
On the other hand, this to be a signal cannon, spreads within a family that gave the so called thunder mugs, which in implies in powder testers, saluting and also signal cannons. I have meanwhile seen pictures of "later" thunder mugs ( 1800's) and they were all more sophisticated, like some examples having a lip below the firehole for placing the charge ( no fuse in this case), other times a carrying handle and, most often a wider rimmed base, to keep the thing well upright.
So if in fact this is a signal (saluting) cannon, which untill contrary evidence i beleive it is, its rudimentary shape fits into the age atributed by the seller, XVI/XVII century.
By the way, where did you get the picture of this last example you showed ?
Fernando


Hi Fernando,

Thats what confused me, the lack of wide base, swivels or mounting system and the priming hole seeming to indicate a horizontal firing position.
The picture is from a shipwreck.....

http://www.robcar.net/en/news/nd2.php

Regards
Gene

[fernando]

Hi Gene,
Thanks a lot for the link.
For a start, i would say that cannon looks most similar to mine in shape and size. Mine being in iron, only contributes for it being from the discussed period.
It also seems to have the same kind of priming hole; all such similarity pleases me a lot, for it makes me more firm on the signal cannon assumption.
Concerning the firing position, i don't know, but you can load and plug the fuse holding it partly inclined and after bring it upright, when the hole is already sealed by the burning fuse :shrug:
Fernando

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
My knowledge of older firearms is limited but I am of the opinion that this must be a signaling mortar of some sort. A cannon that would be used to fire a projectile in any way effectively would have a much smaller diameter touchhole, even taking into account wear and tear and corrosion over the years, and probably a longer barrel to bore ratio. The size of the touchhole on this example would be more suited to, as you say, a fuse e.g. hemp impregnated with saltpetre or a thin tube filled with black powder. Hope this is of some assistance.
Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

Wise words, Norman :)
You must be quite right. I have just come to observe that the recipee for signal cannons (mortars) is powder, plug (no ball) and fuse cord.

Thenk ye ... or Moran taing ... or Tapadh leat ... or Gun robh math agad :o
... What a wide offer from the translating website :cool:
Fernando

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
You're most welcome, I'm a Lowland Scot and although I have old Irish and Western Isles ancestry ( Ulster, Isle of Mull and the Isle of Barra ) I don't, as they say, 'have the Gaelic'. I really appreciate your time and effort in digging up the Gaelic phrases but I too had to revert to an online dictionary for a translation from Gaelic to English!!!! In Scotland, as I suspect in many countries, the people in the North, South, East and West are separated by a common language, English in many varieties, except for the Gaels of course who are united by a common language. Anyhow it is nice when ones post is acknowledged in whatever language. My regards, Norman. :o :)

[katana]

Hi Fernando,
I think Atlantia may be right about your piece. It may be an 'optical illusion' but there appears to be evidence (on the surface of the iron) that bands once held the cannon to a handle (see pictures below). I know the general agreement is that this is a signalling 'device' (and it probably is) but if a 'maritime' item ..this would 'double-up' nicely as a grape shot/ 'shrapnal' hand cannon ...useful for clearing the 'decks'. Most Navys of the time, would not want to laden their sailing ships unnecessarily (little space and the excess weight would impede speed and manoeuvrability) so items tended to have a 'dual purpose' ....or in your cannon's case a 'duel purpose' ;)

Kind Regards David

[M ELEY]

David does have a good point about dual usage as both a signal mortar and mounted hand cannon. Ships did, as mentioned, have space issues when it came to armament. Small mounted swivel guns (miniature deck cannons) were popular for this purpose and likewise, some literature supports the fact that even larger mortars (the portable Coehorn, which fired an exploding shell filled with little grapeshot) made it on board ships. The reason I had initially questioned it as a hand-cannon was due to its short length. However, for shipboard use and "clearing the deck", it wouldn't need to be very long (same reason blunderbus were so popular; close-range spread of projectiles). One last comment, though. Is there any possibility that the band-pattern we are seeing might have been bands encircling the cannon to strengthen it? As items on a ship became worn, repairs were done to naturally extend their working life, if possible.

[fernando]

Thank you David and Mark
I take good note of your considerations, and will digest them whilst learning more about these interesting pieces. This particular one has suddenly appeared in a street market and caught me with an entire ignorance in this field. However it fascinated me at the first glance and i felt i couldn't leave without buying it ... after a little bargaining ;) . I can't say how many portions of fish and ships it cost me, as i am not updated with such dish price; the last time i bought it "in situ" was back in 1968 :eek: .
I will for the meantime register it in my collection inventory files as a signal cannon (canhão de sinais), but i will keep in my mind the door open for the hipothesis of it being a hand cannon (canhão de mão), or even a dual (or duel :cool: ) purpose implement.
While i was "composing" this post, i made a couple browsings on signal cannons and found that, until the XVI century navy signs were made by hoisting the sails in determined positions, or firing cannons. The system used by Vasco da Gama happens to be known: one shot was the order to carry on, two shots for turning, three shots for hoisting the "moneta" ( extra speed sail) and four shots for slowing down.
They just don't say whether Vasco da Gama used small pluged cannons, like my example, or the real combat pieces :shrug:
Further material will be most wellcome.
Fernando

[fernando]

Gentlemen,
I am about to "swallow some frogs" and take my hat to those who have sugested that this would be part of a hand cannon.
Just look at the following input, posted by a kind member from the Traditional Muzzleloading Forum:

By the size of it, it appears to be a barrel from a handcannon, I have 2 replica's of one's that were copied from a German example from the 1450's. This was mounted on a short pole 1' to 4' depending on the length of the barrel, mine has a 10" barrel on an 16" pole. The pole has a shallow groove cut in one side about 2" shorter than the barrel, it was then bound to the pole with 3 iron bands, The touchhole on top, you would then fire it with a length of slowmatch. The pole was generaly tucked under the arm to hold it. The metal appears to be cast iron, the thin metal liner was made to create a smoother bore and the iron was cast around it.I would suspect that it was made very early 16th century. I hope this is helpfull. .

It all sugests that i can now follow the right track, don't you Gentlemen think so ?
Fernando

[Atlantia]

Gentlemen,
I am about to "swallow some frogs" and take my hat to those who have sugested that this would be part of a hand cannon.
Just look at the following input, posted by a kind member from the Traditional Muzzleloading Forum:

By the size of it, it appears to be a barrel from a handcannon, I have 2 replica's of one's that were copied from a German example from the 1450's. This was mounted on a short pole 1' to 4' depending on the length of the barrel, mine has a 10" barrel on an 16" pole. The pole has a shallow groove cut in one side about 2" shorter than the barrel, it was then bound to the pole with 3 iron bands, The touchhole on top, you would then fire it with a length of slowmatch. The pole was generaly tucked under the arm to hold it. The metal appears to be cast iron, the thin metal liner was made to create a smoother bore and the iron was cast around it.I would suspect that it was made very early 16th century. I hope this is helpfull. .

It all sugests that i can now follow the right track, don't you Gentlemen think so ?
Fernando


LOL, I've never heard that expression before!! As a vegan I wouldn't encourage anyone to 'swallow a frog' ;-)

If it's a handcannon, it would have been a stubby fearsome little beast. I'd love to see one of the replicas the chap mentions being fired!!!

A proper little 'boom stick'!!

Nice find Fernando, great addition to your collection, very very unusual.

Regards
Gene

[M ELEY]

I agree-very nice find and especially for the age! It's nice to finally get confirmation on these from someone more knowledgible on them. These are always being listed as ships signal cannons. Pretty cool!

[BBJW]

I'd say this is probably a signal cannon. These small ones were often used to make noise to alert other ships in the dark or fog etc.

bbjw

[fernando]

I'd say this is probably a signal cannon. These small ones were often used to make noise to alert other ships in the dark or fog etc.

bbjw

Now you caught me, BBJW :confused:
I feel a bit dizzy with this sudden turning back to square one :eek: .
You mean you don't find consistence in the aproach made by the guy from Traditional Muzzleloading Forum ? (my post #24). Also the example shown by Gene in post #12, plus the fact that this particularly cilindrical barrel doesn't have a wider base to sustain it upright, as usually seen in signal cannons (thunder mugs and so), made me (and others) think this was a hand cannon (or mortar).
But of course this issue is still open for further coments and new evidence.
Could you BBJW, extend a bit your point of view ? Are you familiar with some of these things?
Thanks a lot.
Fernando

[fernando]

Some more examples of hand cannons.

[kronckew]

i feel it's a hand cannon myself, the rough bore would not be unusual after all these years of relative neglect and corrosion, probably was a bit more regular when 1st made & used.

they'd use pretty crude powder, grass wadding and convenient sized rocks for ammo, iron and lead shot is a much later application for sophisticated matchlock and later wheel locks when bores could be controlled better during mfg to reduce windage...

additionally, it was expected that the odd hand cannon or two would blow up (variance in powder quality, payload, corrosion due to poor cleaning, poor craftsmanship techniques, double loading*, etc. one reason fro a LONG stick. the bands not only held it to the stick, but kept some of the chunks of a burst barrel from zapping the shooter or those alongside.

the short barrel while not allowing maximum velocity, would give less chance of a shot sticking or jamming and blowing up the device, while still producing a satisfactory BOOM, smoke and such to frighten the horses, and if really lucky actually have the projectile hit and damage an armoured man.

of course my muzzle loading experience started with cap and ball rifled muskets & pistols, a much more modern approach.


*- one rather embarrassed yankee pvt. in the civil war was noted to have loaded his musket about a dozen times without actually firing it, each load rammed down on the previous one. luckily he DIDN'T remember to cap it before he pulled the trigger or it might have been less humorous... of course the confederates would never do such a thing :) , wastes ammo.

[fernando]

Much obliged for your comprehensive input, Wayne.
This gives me some self confidence, in my endeavour to change the type of stand for the piece. I started by making a square base, to put it upright, after the signal cannon assumption. I am now rehearsing a rectangular base with two forks, to relate its position to the later commonly agreed hand cannon posture.
... but i will not through away the first version ... just in case :shrug:
Fernando

[kronckew]

in the absence of direct evidence we can only go on opinions and assumptions, and can never be 100% sure. the lack of a base, like fatter mug signal cannons, and the size and the banding evidence suggesting it was strapped to a stock of some sort pushed the preponderance of the evidence in my mind. the signal cannon found in an old wreck that were similar in appearance also look larger and fatter in relation to their length, supporting a vertical use for them as opposed to yours, which would be more unstable set on end; something not desirable in a maritime usage...in either case this appears to be a rare and unusual addition to your collection. thanks for sharing it with us.

[BBJW]

Now you caught me, BBJW :confused:
I feel a bit dizzy with this sudden turning back to square one :eek: .
You mean you don't find consistence in the aproach made by the guy from Traditional Muzzleloading Forum ? (my post #24). Also the example shown by Gene in post #12, plus the fact that this particularly cilindrical barrel doesn't have a wider base to sustain it upright, as usually seen in signal cannons (thunder mugs and so), made me (and others) think this was a hand cannon (or mortar).
But of course this issue is still open for further coments and new evidence.
Could you BBJW, extend a bit your point of view ? Are you familiar with some of these things?
Thanks a lot.
Fernando

I have seen very similar ones for sale in old auction catalogs and Flayderman and Co. catalogs as signal mortars. At this point you could call it whatever you wanted to. If I have time to dig thru old catalogs and find a scanner before I go out of town I will post them.
Cheers
bbjw

[fernando]

...If I have time to dig thru old catalogs and find a scanner before I go out of town I will post them.
Cheers
bbjw

That would be great, thanks.
Fernando

[fernando]

This is the replica of a XIV century hand cannon at the Lisbon Military Museum ... where pictures are not allowed :cool:
The barrel has 27 cms. and is made of hot welded staves. The whole thing, barrel and pole, measures 1,24 mts.
The tag doesn't mention its caliber, but we can see it's quite a large one, close from my example, i would say. Also the touch hole is quite significant in size, meaning that after some shooting and degradation could well become as large as the one in my specimen.
The legend in the tag confirms that these things were handled by two men; one holding the pole under the arm and pointing the barrel mouth to the enemy lines and the "bota-fogo" (an expression that became legendary), a guy with the slow match, to detonate the device. Also as already aproached here, the accuracy of the shot was very limited, but the psichologic efect of the noise, the black smoke shadow and the smell of burnt sulphur, provoked in the spirit of medieval man the conviction that he was in the presence of devil's work.
Fernando

[katana]

This is the replica of a XIV century hand cannon at the Lisbon Military Museum ... where pictures are not allowed :cool:

Fernando

May I assume that you took the pictures ;) Naughty boy :D

Thats an nice example Fernando :cool: I would forget your display stands that you showed earlier. I would get a 'stock' made for it, it'll look great. But, then I'm biased....I'd rather 'see' this cannon as a weapon....than a signalling device. ;)

Regards David

[Atlantia]

May I assume that you took the pictures ;) Naughty boy :D

Thats an nice example Fernando :cool: I would forget your display stands that you showed earlier. I would get a 'stock' made for it, it'll look great. But, then I'm biased....I'd rather 'see' this cannon as a weapon....than a signalling device. ;)

Regards David

Couldn't agree more David,
Stock and bands are a must!

Gene

[fernando]

Couldn't agree more David,
Stock and bands are a must!

Gene

Is that so, Gene ?

Look what i managed :cool:

Fernando

.

[katana]

BRAVO FERNANDO :cool: ;)

Regards David

[Atlantia]

WOW!
Fernando. That looks just fantastic!
You must be very pleased with it? How long did it take you?
It's prefect, just right!
Congratulations.
Gene

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
I see you're all set for the 'Glorious Twelfth', a brace or two should be no problem with that bore!!! :D :D :D
My Regards,
Norman.

[fernando]

BRAVO FERNANDO :cool: ;)

Regards David

THANK YOU DAVID :cool: ;)

Fernando

[fernando]

WOW!
Fernando. That looks just fantastic!
You must be very pleased with it? How long did it take you?
It's prefect, just right!
Congratulations.
Gene

Thank you so much Gene, but i'm not that Gene-ious ;)

A one handed guy with a couple undecent tools could never make such a decent job :shrug: .
The carpenter, after i showed him a drawing and measures, must have taken less than two hours to turn the pole in mahogany, drill the ( barrel ) hole and cut it in half section.
Then i had to carve the half hole, here and there, to fit in the irregular barrel.
Back to the carpenter, to thin down the lower and side parts of the pole in its first half; it looked too bulky and perfect from the lathe, and this way it looks mor rustic. He used the vertical saw, to get an unfinished look.
Then three hours at the smith. I showed him a picture and had him to cut two strips of "black" iron, and beat them hard with a ball hammer, before bending them for the bands. The bands were fixed with screws, which had their heads cut off and criss crossed with a small grinder, to resemble rustic rivets. Then i told him to use a drop of sulphuric acid to darken the new heads.
Coming back home, i darkened the pole two hands of old fashioned vieux-chaine and covered it with liquid acid.
18 Euros for the carpenter, 30 Euros for the smith.
After all, the part that took longer was the carving of slight parts of the barrel bed, to fit it correctly, as i didn't have the correct means (and know how) to do it.
Now my whife is constraining for the adding of one more thing to the leaving/dinning room decoration; but she is brave ... she will stand it.
Fernando

[fernando]

Hi Fernando,
I see you're all set for the 'Glorious Twelfth', a brace or two should be no problem with that bore!!! :D :D :D
My Regards,
Norman.

Hi Norman
I don't know about your "Glorious Twelfth"; but i can say that, in our "Game Opening" day, the majority of the shooters are a greater bore than that of my piece :eek: .

All the best
Fernando

[Norman McCormick]

Hi Fernando,
So true, so true, I suspect it's the same the world over.
My Regards,
Norman.

[M ELEY]

Speaking of cannons, I missed out on this one the other week. Check out eBay item #170241460432. Seller said 1900? I'd say earlier, perhaps early 19th? What say you folks? Is this a signal cannon, small mortar, hand cannon, coehorn or ?

[M ELEY]

Any takers? I did notice this was a "private auction" with hidden buyers. I don't know much about these types of auctions, but I'm told they can be a little shady. Too bad, seems like an interesting piece...

[fernando]

Hi Mark
Such a pitty you didn't get it; very serious stuff ... so it looks.
Rather reinforced barrel, wide ( or worn) touch hole, large caliber ... meaning XIX century or even prior ? Not old enough to de considered a hand cannon, though ?
Also not a coehorn mortar ... It would need trunnions placed low, by the breech, for the rotation, right ?
It has a cascable, though ... was it moveable ?
I'm glad there are no experts around, to shut me up :eek: .
Fernando

[kronckew]

no trunnions, so likely not an aimable mortar or cannon, may have been strapped to a carriage of some sort, too big & too recent for a hand cannon. too short for much. s缠mall cannon were used for line throwing but would have had trunnions . small rail mounted anti-personnel cannon would have had trunnions to mount it on a swivel. my guess is a signal cannon for a larger ship.

coehorn mortar, trunnions on base
http://www.cannon-mania.com/images/Mortar/half-scale4.jpg

small swivel gun, trunnions again
http://www.cannon-mania.com/images/Swivel/Swivel2-m.jpg

this small late 18c - early 19c howitzer is close, but has trunnions again.
http://www.cannon-mania.com/images/RG/kh001.jpg


lyle gun (line throwing)
http://www.delmarvaodyssey.com/images/lyle-gun_bigg.jpg
trunnions again - this is a big lyle.

more traditional brass one in high polish
http://www.villagecraftsmen.com/pilyle08.jpg

here's the whole gubbins with the coast guard crew to service it.
http://i153.photobucket.com/albums/s231/kronckew/USCG/IMG_9862.jpg

aha! a trunnion-less one mounted on a fixed base!
http://bna.bircherinc.com/images/blog.giant.pepsisail.mortar.01.jpg
this is a signal gun used to start yacht races

note that 19-20c cannon of this type would have a lanyard operated percussion firing device threaded into it rather than a touch hole. removal would leave a larger hole than we'd expect for one fired by a slow match.
http://www.cannon-mania.com/images/Lyle/firing%20mechanism.jpg
one for a lyle gun

[M ELEY]

Thanks for responding, guys. Fernando, you sound like you're closer to expert than you let on! ;) Your comments are right on and that I didn't have the funds to get this cannon before the auction ended (got a nice boarding axe instead, though!)

Kronckew, thanks for posting all of these pics of some pretty cool cannons. That trunnion-less one in particular is interesting to see, as most either had them or were the older signal-types. I had never seen one without them until you posted this pic. I had thought deck gun, but of course they were all swivels, so your argument stands. Yes, in the early/mid-19th century, they started using a percussion firing system on deck cannons, ship signallers, and even on some swivel guns. I guess it was a lot easier than trying to use the old lit fuse.

[katana]

Hi,
I am beginning to think that the 'Austrian cannon' may have been cut down, below the trunnions. If you look at this picture there seems to be some machined surfaces, the deep pit looks like a 'casting flaw'. Perhaps the pitted face is evidence of an original fracture cause by stress....and then was cut at that point ???

The other picture is another cannon of unusual form :cool:

Regards David

[fernando]

What a bombastic proposition, David ... and quite a plausible one :cool: . That would solve the riddle and make the piece look more rational :) .
Then who ever made the job, must have also grinded the muzzle rim into that slightly conical shape; the other remaining "rings" have a paralel section ... if i make myself understood ... and if i'm not talking nonsense :shrug: .
Fernando

[kronckew]

http://i110.photobucket.com/albums/n89/jackierose_2000/martian-1.jpg

Where's the KABOOM? there was supposed to be an earth shattering KABOOM! (http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/gladius/boom.wav)

(sorry, the devil made me do it!)

anyway, that looks very plausible, those marks look very much like it's been sawn & ground a bit - hadn't noticed them earlier. nasty inclusion woulda blown anyways at some point...

[fernando]

...
The other picture is another cannon of unusual form :cool: .

Beautyful "cradle". I saw a similar one with those staves, the other day, at the Lisbon Military Museum. Very old stuff ... XV-XVI century?
Fernando

[M ELEY]

Thanks, David. I think you've got a very good point there. I still always seem to forget about cutting down weapons, as so many have been over the centuries. So it seems the Austrian cannon might have started life as a real mortar-type and in its working life, been cut down to more of a signal type. Interesting, still would have looked good in my collection next to the Brazilian pirate cutlass :rolleyes:

[M ELEY]

Another interesting cannon ended "early" on ebay -170248710723. Question is, is it authentic. Says in description touch hole is sealed? Rusted shut? Or maybe a cannon that was never finished for firing? Repro artificially aged? Opinions?

[fernando]

Amazing; you could either choose "16 century", "old" or "vintage" :confused: .
Isn't that a knock off ?
Fernando

[M ELEY]

Yeah, I'm leaning more toward "knockoff", the more I look at it. :shrug:

[Evgeny_K]

What do you think about this cannon ?

[fernando]

A very nice piece indeed. Surely a (signal) mortar and not a (hand) cannon , judging by its base and touchhole 'lip', both indicating this is a vertical firing device.
I wouldn't guess its age, due to my little knowledge but, it must be an ancient example, due to its overall look and specially the marks, which are often seen in old swords ... 16-17th century ?

[Evgeny_K]

A very nice piece indeed. Surely a (signal) mortar and not a (hand) cannon , judging by its base and touchhole 'lip', both indicating this is a vertical firing device.
I wouldn't guess its age, due to my little knowledge but, it must be an ancient example, due to its overall look and specially the marks, which are often seen in old swords ... 16-17th century ?

Thank you, Fernando!
I've already received the same opinion - it's a 18th century signal device.

[fernando]

I wouldn't question it being as 'modern' as from the 18th century but then, the marks, the so called 'sickle and the other, were inspired in a much earlier marking system ... or is it my optical ilusion :confused: .
(picture from the WALLACE COLLECTION catalogue)

.