Leather Cannon? Curiosa

Anandalal N. · 27th August 2009, 01:49 PM

Dear Jim,

The following are some references that could merit further research:

Memoirs of the Duchess D'Abrantes Vol VII, London (1835) Note to page 358 states that the arsenal of Saltzburgh contains some specimens of leather cannon.

Napolean of the Other World - A Narrative Written by Himself, London (1827) refers to the first leather cannon employed by the Venetians against the Genoese.

Life of Oliver Cromwell by Rev. M. Rusell LLD, Vol II (1836) refers to "a traine of artillerie of some field-pieces and leather cannon ..."

What we do not know is whether these leather cannon refer to the same type of artefact that we are discussing.

Your Edinburgh reference does recount that the cannon was fired three times without the smallest apparent injury to the leather suggesting that one would normally expect to see some injury to the leather hence fired in the leather chamber and not within a leather covered metal chamber.

Best Regards.

Jim McDougall · 27th August 2009, 07:30 PM

Yup, look like we're onto something.......never really thought much on leather for cannon.....but I likes leather !!!

All the best

kisak · 27th August 2009, 09:36 PM

Doesn't look like they'd survive for long once put into use, but on the other hand, one-use-only weapons see some use with present day armies.

Michael Blalock · 27th August 2009, 10:56 PM

Perhaps these cannons were solely for ceremonial use, to fire off a small amount of powder for a salute or warning. Hence their imitation of large European cannons.

dennee · 31st August 2009, 05:12 AM

It's possible that these were Tibetan guns, as a couple were captured by the Nepalese in the war of 1855-1856. The Chinese were not involved in that campaign.

Of course, in the earlier war of 1791-1793, the 10,000-strong Chinese army had marched a long way just to reach Tibet, entering in winter from what is now part of Qinghai, and crossing over high passes in several places, including when they later entered Nepal along with 7,000 Tibetans. They were undoubtedly familiar with the shortcomings of leather guns, still, carrying many larger field pieces and ammunition over that distance and in those conditions may have been prohibitively difficult. Of course, such conditions would always apply for the Tibetans themselves, who often had little more than muskets and jingalls, but they did have a number of field pieces in the early nineteenth century.

27th August 2009, 01:49 PM	#1
Anandalal N. Member Join Date: Dec 2008 Posts: 84	Dear Jim, The following are some references that could merit further research: Memoirs of the Duchess D'Abrantes Vol VII, London (1835) Note to page 358 states that the arsenal of Saltzburgh contains some specimens of leather cannon. Napolean of the Other World - A Narrative Written by Himself, London (1827) refers to the first leather cannon employed by the Venetians against the Genoese. Life of Oliver Cromwell by Rev. M. Rusell LLD, Vol II (1836) refers to "a traine of artillerie of some field-pieces and leather cannon ..." What we do not know is whether these leather cannon refer to the same type of artefact that we are discussing. Your Edinburgh reference does recount that the cannon was fired three times without the smallest apparent injury to the leather suggesting that one would normally expect to see some injury to the leather hence fired in the leather chamber and not within a leather covered metal chamber. Best Regards.

27th August 2009, 07:30 PM	#2
Jim McDougall Arms Historian Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Route 66 Posts: 10,192	Yup, look like we're onto something.......never really thought much on leather for cannon.....but I likes leather !!! All the best

27th August 2009, 09:36 PM	#3
kisak Member Join Date: Jul 2008 Location: Stockholm Posts: 182	Doesn't look like they'd survive for long once put into use, but on the other hand, one-use-only weapons see some use with present day armies.

27th August 2009, 10:56 PM	#4
Michael Blalock Member Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: dc Posts: 271	Perhaps these cannons were solely for ceremonial use, to fire off a small amount of powder for a salute or warning. Hence their imitation of large European cannons.

31st August 2009, 05:12 AM	#5
dennee Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: College Park, MD Posts: 186	It's possible that these were Tibetan guns, as a couple were captured by the Nepalese in the war of 1855-1856. The Chinese were not involved in that campaign. Of course, in the earlier war of 1791-1793, the 10,000-strong Chinese army had marched a long way just to reach Tibet, entering in winter from what is now part of Qinghai, and crossing over high passes in several places, including when they later entered Nepal along with 7,000 Tibetans. They were undoubtedly familiar with the shortcomings of leather guns, still, carrying many larger field pieces and ammunition over that distance and in those conditions may have been prohibitively difficult. Of course, such conditions would always apply for the Tibetans themselves, who often had little more than muskets and jingalls, but they did have a number of field pieces in the early nineteenth century.