Keeping on the cannon path

Philip · 4th June 2010, 06:34 AM

Congratulations, Fernando, on another fine acquisition! What is supposed to be the locale of origin for this one? I am impressed by the proportions of the piece, noting the taper to the barrel, the expanded breech and the muzzle reinforce, and the way it balances on your display pedestal. There is something about its dimensions and shape that seem much more refined than the simple tubular form of the full-sized bombard cannons of there era, rather, it seems to foretell what direction cannon design was to take in the following centuries, down to the end of the muzzle-loading era.

I have a feeling that the "tail" was originally longer and came to a point, to be embedded in the end of a wooden shaft. In such case it was not crucial that the touch hole be oriented exactly at midpoint on any one face of the square-sectioned tail since this extension would have been buried in the wood anyway and thus not be noticeable.

To check to see if the bore is more or less a true cylinder: do you have access to balsa wood? If so you can shape a cylindrical piece the diameter of the bore at the muzzle. When you carefully tap it in, all the way to the breech, the end will be compressed into a taper or cone if the bore narrows towards the breech and the difference can easily be measured once the stick is removed.

M ELEY · 4th June 2010, 09:42 AM

Fernando, who is this mysterious fellow member of which you speak? (

)

Absolutely a beautiful piece, my friend. Green with envy again. Its amazing how these pieces have held up over the many centuries, considering the rough way they were used. I am assuming that this one had a heavy wooden framework that was stationary? Or was it possibly mounted on one of those frameworks that allowed for upward/downward movement. Too bad my finances are as they are. Otherwise, I too would seek out Michael's advice on landing an amazing piece such as this.

fernando · 4th June 2010, 05:31 PM

Dear Philip,
Thanks a lot for your input.
The origin is said to be Northern Europe; obviously i would like to have a more precise definition, but i am afraid i wil have to live with such one.
Alright, assuming that the tail was longer; could either just be a bit longer for the purpose you suggest, but also be a long tiller, to be held under the armpit, in the typical tiller gun manner. Well, in the field of giving wings to imagination, it could even have had its finial in the form of a ring, to be used by horsemen, tied to the chest, like the famous scopitus (sclopitus), as we see illustrated in several early firearms publications. Its barrel is a bit long and heavy for that, i suppose, anyway

.
I am expecting that Michael has a look at these pictures, to confirm his assumption that this is a so called tiller gun. He has seen zillions of these things, his eye is most experienced in this area.
I will keep in mind the balsa wood resource ; thank you for the hint. Meanwhile i have checked this bore with some devices i had at hand and it appears to be cylindrical. What happens is that some rust is located at the first third but, igoring that, the section at the breech looks as wide as the muzzle opening.
Best
Fernando

.

fernando · 4th June 2010, 05:46 PM

Hi Mark, thank you for your kind words.
I don't think this is a stationary weapon, but a portable one, more likely to be hand held; but let's hope that the mysterious fellow member (

) gives us some enlightening on the subject.
Anyway, i should have added its length in inches, to give a better idea of its dimensions to the inch people, that being 17".
My finances are not (never) better than mediocre, either. It is a question of option. I love these early things. To balance the budget, i am letting go a few pieces i like less.
Best
Fernando

celtan · 4th June 2010, 07:16 PM

Nando, the "monkey's tail" extension sometimes was just a metal extension with a loop, designed 2b inserted in the cascabel or rear prong: A separate piece, although sometimes it was fixed by soldering in place.

Your Falcon / Verso doesn't truly need a longer rear projection, its OK as it is.

There were all sort of contrivances made to be attached momentarily to the rear. Short wooden poles mated to the stump,for aiming and then removed after firing. This also protected from the blast coming out the vent/ oido/ fogon. Those early iron Falcones had the nasty habit to blow up like a fragmentation grenades when you least expected. The farther away the shooter, the safer he was.

These small cannons were sometimes carried on ship's wales, on tripod-like mounts, and even on thick vertical wood mount-stands. When smaller, there were even mounts designed to be inserted in a cavalryman's saddle!

Looking at the shape of the cannon, it wouldn't surprise me if the barrel was made in two sections, then soldered together ant the seam covered by that middle "reinforcing ring". The rear of the gun seems to have been similarly made. Heck, it boggles the mind, but what if it is threaded..?

Congrats on your new "child"! The table and support also make for a nice presentation...

: )

SuperManuel

Quote:

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi Mark, thank you for your kind words.
I don't think this is a stationary weapon, but a portable one, more likely to be hand held; but let's hope that the mysterious fellow member (

) gives us some enlightening on the subject.
Anyway, i should have added its length in inches, to give a better idea of its dimensions to the inch people, that being 17".
My finances are not (never) better than mediocre, either. It is a question of option. I love these early things. To balance the budget, i am letting go a few pieces i like less.
Best
Fernando

Matchlock · 4th June 2010, 09:45 PM

Hi folks,

O.k., with so many good guessers out there I admit not being exactly innocent in the case of Fernando's latest acquisition; I tipped him the wink where to get it.

As to the possible original shape and length of the tiller/stick I feel that everything has been said here, and very competently as well. That is true, too, for the way it was probably held. With 17" it is definitely shorter than my Spanish tiller gun (see attachments) but although its outer diameter is much wider, the weight of our two pieces is almost the same. I think Philip has presented a good choice of how that barrel could have been used and stocked originally. Thank you also for the idea of using balsa wood for measuring the bore, Philip!

May I add that if fired by one single shooter, and if the iron tiller was considerably longer and held under the armpit for firing, there was only one hand left to hold it; the other was used to put a piece of smoldering match, tinder or an igniting iron to the touch hole (please see the two sources of illustration attached: the smaller one of ca. 1450, the larger one dated 1468).

I, too, feel that this fine piece shoud be preserved in the condition as is; remember that nobody can tell for sure the way it looked like in its working life.

Best,

celtan · 5th June 2010, 01:33 AM

Hi Mike, how are you doing?

One thought that came to my mind is that Nando's cannon migh be part of one of those old mittralleuse devices which used multiple barrels, the kind you have portrayed already sometime ago, in this very same forum...

I routinely shoot a 20" Brass Verso, with a ~ 4 cm bore: it's heavy, and far from adequate as a hand weapon...

OTOH, perhaps the explosive power of XV C. BP gave much less of a kick, compared with that from XVIII C..?

Best-est regards y'all

M

Matchlock · 5th June 2010, 09:51 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Philip

To check to see if the bore is more or less a true cylinder: do you have access to balsa wood? If so you can shape a cylindrical piece the diameter of the bore at the muzzle. When you carefully tap it in, all the way to the breech, the end will be compressed into a taper or cone if the bore narrows towards the breech and the difference can easily be measured once the stick is removed.

Hi Philip,

Thank you for asking so many demanding questions in one single post that I have to work my way thru them step by step, so please forgive my being slow!!!

As to this quotation: according to my experience, it would be quite unusual to expect a tapering bore with a narrowed powder breech after ca. 1430. As I stated, though, your idea of testing the bore using balsa wood is just brilliant! Furthermore we should keep in mind that many medieval bores involuntarily deviate quite a bit from exactitude up to ca. 1500.

Actually, quite a lot of early barrels seem to have been re-bored on the occation of their re-use during the Thirty Years War (by the latest).

Best, and please do keep driving me to my limits,
Michael

Matchlock · 5th June 2010, 05:14 PM

Here is another possibility how your barrel could originally have looked like, of course with an iron rear extension instead of a wooden.

From Cod.icon. 222, Bartholomäus Freysleben, Inventarium von Büchsen und Zeug, 1495-1500.

Best,
Michael

fernando · 6th June 2010, 10:08 PM

Thank you all gentlemen, for making this develop into such great thread, which leaves me and my cannon full of joy

.
I have been weaving some considerations, after your various propposals.
The tail, Manuel, as you mention; indeed the berços had most times these devices detachable, to minimize problems of limited space aboard early ships.
These tails were then called over here 'rabos de ferro' (iron tails), but berços (breech loading falconets) appeared at a stage later than that of this cannon.
Thinking of Philip's sugestion, i confess i envisage hand cannon tails being more often of the socket form, having their wooden poles 'plugged' in; the other way round wouldn't be an harmonious and secure connection, to my view ... but i am a rookie in this area.
On the other hand, if the missing part was not so lengthy, and coming to a point in projection of its tapering angle, it would be improbable that it has been broken by accident.
If instead, and following Michael's later hints, it has been cut off, from being either a short tail or a long tiller, the reason would be its conversion, from a hand held piece into another type of gun; a stationary version, who knows which... a tripod stand cannon, a niche cannon, what else?
Definitely many long leaving weapons (and not only), ended up being sumitted to one or more modifications through their lives.
We are together, guys

.
Fernando

4th June 2010, 05:31 PM	#3
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Dear Philip, Thanks a lot for your input. The origin is said to be Northern Europe; obviously i would like to have a more precise definition, but i am afraid i wil have to live with such one. Alright, assuming that the tail was longer; could either just be a bit longer for the purpose you suggest, but also be a long tiller, to be held under the armpit, in the typical tiller gun manner. Well, in the field of giving wings to imagination, it could even have had its finial in the form of a ring, to be used by horsemen, tied to the chest, like the famous scopitus (sclopitus), as we see illustrated in several early firearms publications. Its barrel is a bit long and heavy for that, i suppose, anyway . I am expecting that Michael has a look at these pictures, to confirm his assumption that this is a so called tiller gun. He has seen zillions of these things, his eye is most experienced in this area. I will keep in mind the balsa wood resource ; thank you for the hint. Meanwhile i have checked this bore with some devices i had at hand and it appears to be cylindrical. What happens is that some rust is located at the first third but, igoring that, the section at the breech looks as wide as the muzzle opening. Best Fernando . Last edited by fernando; 25th August 2015 at 06:07 PM. Reason: spell

4th June 2010, 09:45 PM	#6
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Hi folks, O.k., with so many good guessers out there I admit not being exactly innocent in the case of Fernando's latest acquisition; I tipped him the wink where to get it. As to the possible original shape and length of the tiller/stick I feel that everything has been said here, and very competently as well. That is true, too, for the way it was probably held. With 17" it is definitely shorter than my Spanish tiller gun (see attachments) but although its outer diameter is much wider, the weight of our two pieces is almost the same. I think Philip has presented a good choice of how that barrel could have been used and stocked originally. Thank you also for the idea of using balsa wood for measuring the bore, Philip! May I add that if fired by one single shooter, and if the iron tiller was considerably longer and held under the armpit for firing, there was only one hand left to hold it; the other was used to put a piece of smoldering match, tinder or an igniting iron to the touch hole (please see the two sources of illustration attached: the smaller one of ca. 1450, the larger one dated 1468). I, too, feel that this fine piece shoud be preserved in the condition as is; remember that nobody can tell for sure the way it looked like in its working life. Best, Attached Images Last edited by Matchlock; 5th June 2010 at 03:29 AM.

5th June 2010, 05:14 PM	#9
Matchlock (deceased) Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: Bavaria, Germany - the center of 15th and 16th century gunmaking Posts: 4,310	Here is another possibility how your barrel could originally have looked like, of course with an iron rear extension instead of a wooden. From Cod.icon. 222, Bartholomäus Freysleben, Inventarium von Büchsen und Zeug, 1495-1500. Best, Michael Attached Images

4th June 2010, 06:34 AM	#1
Philip Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: California Posts: 1,036	Congratulations, Fernando, on another fine acquisition! What is supposed to be the locale of origin for this one? I am impressed by the proportions of the piece, noting the taper to the barrel, the expanded breech and the muzzle reinforce, and the way it balances on your display pedestal. There is something about its dimensions and shape that seem much more refined than the simple tubular form of the full-sized bombard cannons of there era, rather, it seems to foretell what direction cannon design was to take in the following centuries, down to the end of the muzzle-loading era. I have a feeling that the "tail" was originally longer and came to a point, to be embedded in the end of a wooden shaft. In such case it was not crucial that the touch hole be oriented exactly at midpoint on any one face of the square-sectioned tail since this extension would have been buried in the wood anyway and thus not be noticeable. To check to see if the bore is more or less a true cylinder: do you have access to balsa wood? If so you can shape a cylindrical piece the diameter of the bore at the muzzle. When you carefully tap it in, all the way to the breech, the end will be compressed into a taper or cone if the bore narrows towards the breech and the difference can easily be measured once the stick is removed.

4th June 2010, 09:42 AM	#2
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,184	Fernando, who is this mysterious fellow member of which you speak? ( ) Absolutely a beautiful piece, my friend. Green with envy again. Its amazing how these pieces have held up over the many centuries, considering the rough way they were used. I am assuming that this one had a heavy wooden framework that was stationary? Or was it possibly mounted on one of those frameworks that allowed for upward/downward movement. Too bad my finances are as they are. Otherwise, I too would seek out Michael's advice on landing an amazing piece such as this.

4th June 2010, 05:46 PM	#4
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Hi Mark, thank you for your kind words. I don't think this is a stationary weapon, but a portable one, more likely to be hand held; but let's hope that the mysterious fellow member ( ) gives us some enlightening on the subject. Anyway, i should have added its length in inches, to give a better idea of its dimensions to the inch people, that being 17". My finances are not (never) better than mediocre, either. It is a question of option. I love these early things. To balance the budget, i am letting go a few pieces i like less. Best Fernando

5th June 2010, 01:33 AM	#7
celtan Member Join Date: Sep 2008 Location: PR, USA Posts: 679	Hi Mike, how are you doing? One thought that came to my mind is that Nando's cannon migh be part of one of those old mittralleuse devices which used multiple barrels, the kind you have portrayed already sometime ago, in this very same forum... I routinely shoot a 20" Brass Verso, with a ~ 4 cm bore: it's heavy, and far from adequate as a hand weapon... OTOH, perhaps the explosive power of XV C. BP gave much less of a kick, compared with that from XVIII C..? Best-est regards y'all M

6th June 2010, 10:08 PM	#10
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Thank you all gentlemen, for making this develop into such great thread, which leaves me and my cannon full of joy . I have been weaving some considerations, after your various propposals. The tail, Manuel, as you mention; indeed the berços had most times these devices detachable, to minimize problems of limited space aboard early ships. These tails were then called over here 'rabos de ferro' (iron tails), but berços (breech loading falconets) appeared at a stage later than that of this cannon. Thinking of Philip's sugestion, i confess i envisage hand cannon tails being more often of the socket form, having their wooden poles 'plugged' in; the other way round wouldn't be an harmonious and secure connection, to my view ... but i am a rookie in this area. On the other hand, if the missing part was not so lengthy, and coming to a point in projection of its tapering angle, it would be improbable that it has been broken by accident. If instead, and following Michael's later hints, it has been cut off, from being either a short tail or a long tiller, the reason would be its conversion, from a hand held piece into another type of gun; a stationary version, who knows which... a tripod stand cannon, a niche cannon, what else? Definitely many long leaving weapons (and not only), ended up being sumitted to one or more modifications through their lives. We are together, guys . Fernando