16th/17th century chain shot

[M ELEY]

Here goes...
The piece measures 13" long total, ball diameter 11", bar length alone is 6", and bar is 4 1/2" wide. In my defense, this piece is unmarked, made of forged iron with balls braised to the bar. forging flaws are evident. Patina is chocolate brown. A 2 lb and 4lb cannon ball in pic for comparison. The only thing that didn't come out well in the pics is the roundness of the balls. The pics make them look more ovoid, but in real life they are as round as any of the other artillery shot I have. My argument is that this is what barshot looked like toward the mid/late 19th c. Easier to make than the hand-wrought square barred type of the previous century-
Dumbells were typically marked, cast as one piece, just as often made of steel than iron, and didn't have bars this thick or long.

[Matchlock]

Hi Mark,

Very interesting additions, thank you!

Yeah, mid-19th c. would also be my guess.

Best,
Michael

[M ELEY]

Thanks, Michael. And thank you for starting this discussion and much of the materials herein. Hopefully, I can acquire an older piece at a later time, but in the meantime, I love coming back to this thread. Perhaps this one might be added to the 'Sticky' section?

[fernando]

Hi Mark,
I would adventure to suggest, within the whole of my ignorance, that your item might not be a barshot; i don't know, the proportions of the bar (thickness+length) in relation to whole setup ... the way it is connected to the balls. But don't pay much notice to my impressions .
I like that solid shot wooden base, by the way .

[M ELEY]

Ahh yes, the solid shot on the wooden base...it came from a land far, far away-

I see your point on the construction and in the end simply need to continue doing research on this puppy. It is not absolutely proven to be a barshot, nor is it absolutely proven not to be a dumbell (I must say, though, that it probably is one or the other versus a third option of counterweight, machine part, etc).

The best proof I had that it was mid-19th was the last site I listed which, unfortunately, is no longer accessible. That gent sold a number of cannons from all age and nationalities and had barshot EXACTLY like mine listed as 19th c. His site wasn't above some controversy, though, being a seller after all (some of his lanaka appeared more modern and poorly cast to be original), sooooo....hopefully, I'll run across a Civil War artillery expert someday who will finally end the speculation.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by M ELEY

....hopefully, I'll run across a Civil War artillery expert someday who will finally end the speculation...

I have registered in a Spanish Naval History forum in purpose to ask details on palanquetas, namely their cross section profile; but no answer so far .
http://todoababor.mforos.com/1556314...0-palanquetas/

[kronckew]

i posted a copy of the US artillery manual for the civil war period on the forum before. it mentions bar and chain shot only in passing, for naval use. it goes into great detail on all other civil war era projectiles, their wooden sabot, the tin bands used to hold same to the shot, pre-made cartridges, etc. etc. worth doing a search for & reading it.

Linky to Gibbon Artillery Manual of 1863

the full 1862 army ordinance manual, scanned, is available thru google books as a .pdf if interested... it's too big to attach here. (19MB) it has sections not only on artillery, but small arms and horse saddles, and tackle, swords and bayonets, etc. and also tables on ballistics and on 'foreign' ordinance.

Linky to google books ord. manual (click the .pdf item upper left to download)

[fernando]

Originally Posted by fernando

I have registered in a Spanish Naval History forum in purpose to ask details on palanquetas, namely their cross section profile; but no answer so far .
http://todoababor.mforos.com/1556314...0-palanquetas/

I have got an answer from a word keeping Spaniard. Not much of a help for your case, though; but a great article on XVII ships artillery;
http://www.aammb.cat/9034%20galeon%2...artilleria.pdf

.