A BRIEF HISTORY OF

A BRIEF HISTORY OF W FIREARMS W from Their Origins in the Middle Ages To the End of the 19TH Century F. L. W atkins FOLUM P ENTERPRISES Urbana, Illinois A BRIEF HISTORY OF W FIREARMS W from Their Origins in the Middle Ages To the End of the l9TH Century Dedicated— To Deane Geiken: Archer, Gunner & Authenticity Maven An earlier and vastly different version of this publication first appeared as a handout for a seminar on medieval gunnery held in the fall of 1993 in the Barony of W ürm W ald (Urbana-Champaign, Illinois) A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS from Their Origins in the Middle Ages To the End of the 19th Century Copyright © 1993, 1994 Folump Enterprises All Rights Reserved. Printed in the U.S.A. First Printing—July 1994 ISBN 1-55680-179-3 F. L. Watkins FOLUMP ENTERPRISES Urbana, Illinois Published by Folump Enterprises 805 East Green Urbana, IL 61801 www.folump.com 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 - 98 97 96 95 94 WIntroduction W WOrigins of Gunpowder W Gunpowder promised to be the invention that was going to decisively and irresistibly change, and eventually revolutionize, traditional methods of combat. —Lilane and Fred Funcken, Arms and Uniforms: — T he Age of Chivalry, Part 2 lack powder, the earliest explosive, was a mixture of “about 75 parts powdered potassium nitrate or sodium nitrate, 15 parts charcoal, and 10 parts sulfur.”1 T he invention of gunpowder changed the course of world history: t is difficult, in a pamphlet of this size, to do anything more than introduce the readers to the history of gunnery. For this reason, we have consciously concentrated on only certain aspects of gunnery. Primarily, we have dealt with the development of the technology, concentrating on when innovations were made. O ur focus has been on W estern Europe and North America. Though we have, by necessity, spoken at length of military history, we have only touched on the equipment, uniforms and insignia. W hile we have attempted to be thorough about the origins of artillery, we have chosen to emphasize the development of hand guns. W e have seen many instances of ignorance among the general public and even among reenactactors concerning the development of firearms. T his is obviously a pamphlet designed for the neophyte in an effort to introduce them to the history of a confusing and misunderstood phenomenon. For persons familiar with this history, we hope only to place the history in a concise and easily understood order and to compare various theories put forward. A bibliography is provided for those persons wishing to investigate further the history and development of gunnery. —F. L. W atkins Urbana, Illinois July 1994 I B Gunpowder weapons had three conspicuous effects. First, artillery reinforced the trend toward the national professional army, since only a wealthy central government could afford it....Second, small arms made the armored knight obsolete, not so much because his armor did not stop musket balls as because the new musket infantry was cheaper to arm and equip and more flexible to employ...Third, the curtain-walled castle was superseded by the low-profile, thick-rampart fortress, capable of absorbing the shock of heavy cannonballs and furnishing a good platform for defensive artillery but ill adapted to service as a private residence.2 Ironically, its origins are shrouded in mystery and contradictions. W e should dismiss out of hand here the possibility that gunpowder and ordnance were known and used in antiquity. Various mistranslations and confusion of terms has permitted the proliferation of a variety of theories about ancient use of gunpowder. These theories are, of course, unsubstantiated and may be easily dismissed.3 It is generally supposed that the Chinese invented gunpowder sometime in the first millennium, but this is not universally accepted. Chinese history refers to pao, which exhibits few of the qualities of an explosive.4 T here are those who ascribe the invention of gunpowder to Arabs, and others who say that these earlier explosives were—like the fabled Greek Fire—not gunpowder at all, so that gunpowder was actually invented in Europe. If the manufacture and use of gunpowder was learned rather than developed by Europe, its route remains elusive. The cinematic attribution to Marco Polo is unfounded. The Gies, who assert the Chinese invention of gunpowder, echo O rientalist Joseph Needham by proposing three possible routes of transmission: from missionaries to China, from the Arabs and from Russia.5 Some have suggested that Arabs learned of its manufacture from the Mongols and passed it on to the Europeans. There is, however, no way to prove or disprove any of these theories. A Brief History of Firearms 7 It seems most likely that gunpowder was discovered independently in Europe, whether it had been discovered elsewhere or not. The inventor has been listed, variously, as Berthold Schwartz, Albertus Magnus and Roger Bacon. Schwartz, a l4th-century monk, was accredited with the invention of gunpowder from the 15th through 18th centuries. Since gunpowder had been used in military endeavors since the early 14th century, Schwartz’s attribution was cast into doubt. A statue of him describing him as the inventor of gunpowder was later changed so that he was described as inventor of cannon, which is equally dubious. In fact, there are doubts “about his existence at all, outside the realms of legend.”6 Magnus’s De M irabilus M undi, book of magical formulations, contained a description of gunpowder. Not only was this formula apparently added by a later hand, but Magnus’s book itself was predated by Bacon’s De M irabili Potestate Artist et naturas (On the Marvelous Power of Art and Nature) in 1242 and Opus M ajus in 1268. In De M irabilibus, Bacon included an anagram for the formula of gunpowder (it is supposed that this was done in the form of an anagram since the Second Council of the Lateran had, in 1139, laid under anathema any person who made fiery compositions for military purposes). In the later volume, Bacon was more forthright, since the volume was specifically commissioned by the Pope.7 It is worth noting that Bacon did not assert to have discovered gunpowder himself and, instead, “refers to its use in ‘diverse places,’ implying that such a composition was common knowledge and he was merely reporting a wellknown fact of life.”8 By the start of the 14th century, however, there is little doubt not only that the existence of gunpowder was widely known but that practical implementation and usage of the substance were beginning. WFirst European Firearms W here appears to be little doubt that the C h i n ese wer e employing some sort of incendiaries for fireworks and signals before 1000 CE , although this may not have been gunpowder. Even if the Chinese did invent gunpowder, they did not invent firearms.9 The first military use of gunpowder, though, came around the start of the 14th century. The Arabian madfaa was a deep wooden bowl or a bamboo tube (possibly reinforced with iron rings) which was filled with powder. A projectile was place atop—not within—the madfaa.10 The first cannon—the pot de fer—had been invented no later than the first quarter of the 14th century. It was an iron bottle with a narrow neck. Powder filled the bottle, and an iron arrow was wrapped with leather and rammed into the neck. The powder was ignited by thrusting a white-hot wire through a small touch hole near the bottom of the bottle. “The first undoubted reference to guns is an order by the Council of Florence, in 1326, to prepare iron bullets and cannon of metal for the defense of the Republic.11 About that same time, the pot de fer, which was also known as the vasa—was first illustrated in a 1325 manuscript, De Officiis Regnurn, by W alter de Millemete, the chaplain of Edward III.12 Funcken, after dubiously attributing the invention of cannon to Chinghiz Khan in the 13th century, goes on to note that T They did not appear in Europe until the beginning of the 14th century and were first reported in Italy (in Tuscany, to be exact), and later in the south of Germany. These weapons were also encountered in Flanders, in 1314, and a few years later, between 1321 and 1326, in England and in France. It would be pointless, however, to try and establish any sort of order of precedence in what was probably one of the earliest occurrences of the “arms race” in Europe. W hat is beyond question is that the western nations armed themselves with cannon more or less simultaneously.13 A Brief History of Firearms 9 In 1322, Edward II employed ordnance at the Battle of Leylade;14 and, in 1327, Edward III used “Crakys of war” against the Scots.15 Again, uncertain terminology confuses the issue, and the terms may merely have been referring to siege engines. H owever, cannons were almost certainly used at the Battle of Crecy in 1346: The van of the impatient French knights rode down the “fainthearted rabble” of their own men. W hilst knights and Genoese were mixed up in confusion, the English archers poured their arrows into the helpless target. At the same time a new sound was heard—the explosion of cannon. The flash and bang of these primitive guns was probably as terrifying to the men who worked them as to the enemy. No one knows what damage, if any they did. But they played their part in a great victory.16 In the beginning, the guns were stationary. The idea of a permanent wheeled carriage was still to come, and ordnance was strapped to immobile objects or buried in the ground. For this reason, the cannon—generally known as bombards—were most commonly used in sieges.17 The early use of arrows was superseded by the use of stone cannonball. Stone cannonballs were to be used for over two centuries, since the powder could not summon sufficient force to efficiently discharge iron cannonballs18 although various forms of metal shot—including an early form of grapeshot—were being experienced with by the end of the 14th century.19 Early guns seemed to do little beyond frightening the enemy. Accuracy was nearly impossible, and the safety of the pieces was dubious. In addition, the early guns could not match the power of a trebuchet.20 The guns tossed rather than hurled the projectiles, and a projectile that struck an armored soldier landed with no more force than if it had been thrown by hand. It would bounce off, perhaps denting the armor. Powder was so crude that the pieces had to be cleaned between each shot, and archers made a variety of jokes at the expensive of the gunners.21 At the end of the 14th century, gunpowder had still to prove its true value. H owever, many people recognized the potential of the weapon. In the course of the 15th century, “the improvement of gunpowder weaponry into the effective firearms...conferred on Europeans an advantage that... was nevertheless significant in their sudden confrontation with the rest of the world.”22 WRefinement of Gunpowder W E arly black powder was a volatile and poorly mixed substance that was made in a variety of strengths according to a variety of formulae. Reid notes that The gunpowder used in these early guns varied from country to country, perhaps even from city to city...The proportions of saltpeter to sulfur and charcoal recommended by fourteenthcentury writers varied from 6:1:2 (Marcus Graecus, c. 1300) to 22:4:5 (Montauban, c. 1400). Even the least effective gave a massive expansion of gas on ignition. A pound (.45 kg) of black powder produces about forty cubic feet (1.1 m 2) of gas on combustion, hence the need for the thick-walled chambers even at an early date.23 Ingredients often separated—“sulfur at the bottom, carbon at the top, and saltpeter in the middle24—rendering the powder useless until it was remixed. Other times, dampness and wind reduced the powder’s potency. Still other times, the mixture was so unstable that the mixtures exploded unexpectedly. It took some time to develop the proper formula and a method of mixing the ingredients. In the 1420s, however, the invention of “corning” enabled a dramatic improvement in the quality of the gunpowder. In the process of corning, or granulation, “the powder, damped by vinegar, brandy, or ‘the urine of a wine-drinking man,’ was passed through a sieve, forming coarse granules, not only safer to handle but more reliable in action.”25 Corned powder was more powerful than the previous powder, making its use dangerous in many of the hoop-and-stave cannon. It could be safely used only in the thickwalled handguns and cast brass guns.26 Slow Match—hemp or flaxen rope that had been chemically treated to more or less smolder consistently—was developed by the end of the 14th century. Perhaps not coincidentally, the first hand guns came into use at that time. The use of the slow match was considered safer and more easily controlled than the use of white-hot poker or length of rod. 12 WWorkers W ecause of the technical expertise required in the use of gunpowder, one might say that gunpowder marked the beginnings of a professional paid army. The gunsmiths sprang from the guild systems. They were not, for the most part, in fealty to a lord but were, instead, professionals who offered their service to pay. Although crews and gunners were hired and conscripted, the men who fabricated the cannon were often the only ones who knew how to mix the gunpowder and, because of the instability of the early gunpowder, were apt to mix it in the field.27 These master gunners were generally in the direct employ of city-states of sovereigns and were expected to be able not only to craft the guns and the powder but to be able to shoot the weapons, to train others, to lead attacks or defenses and to oversee fortifications. By the mid 15th century, the master gunners were, by and large, literate, since the extent of knowledge about gunpowder had far surpassed what could be remembered by a single man. A number of books on the science of gunnery began to produced during this century. W hile these books devoted most of their attention to the physical aspects of gunnery, they did not neglect the spiritual. It was commonly thought that men who spent so much time working with such infernal devices had to consciously resist the lure of Satan and that such a man “should never forget his Christian responsibilities.”28 These master gunners were civilians and were as “temperamental as emotional actresses.”29 They were apt to change sides without notice and, if their positrons were overrun by the enemy, were more apt to be employed rather than imprisoned or killed by the enemy H enry VIII established the first permanent artillery force in England H e appointed a bellfounder, H umphrey W alker, master gunner at the Tower of London, and hired a number of foreign artillery specialists, such as Peter Baude and the Arcanus brothers, in an effort to make the English B A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS independent of imported artillery.30 Even so, men had to be hired and trained in times of war to actually work the ordnance, and civilian teamsters were hired to transport the weaponry. It was not until 1716 that the first permanent British artillery was formed as part of the professional army.31 Gustavus Adolphus, the innovative 17th-century King of Sweden, created the first modern army in the 17th century, when he built up an army of highly mobile, lightly armed soldiers. H e helped to develop strategies and tactics that took advantage of firearms and took away his men’s body armor, replacing it with cuirass and helmet only.32 W ith the development of a permanent professional army, artillery was removed from the private sector. Even so, it continued to be an elite. Early on, there had apparently developed a difference between the artillery and the infantry, and the infantry was never as highly esteemed as the artillery. 14 WEvolution of Artillery W hese early cannon were made of a variety of materials, including iron and bronze. Although many were cast as a single piece, similar to the techniques used in bellfounding, th e technology was “too crude to produce heavy-calibre weapons.”33 Largercaliber weapons were constructed in much the same way that a cooper constructed a barrel: T ...after about 1370 cannon began to made of iron longitudinal strips or iron sheets forged into tubes and with hoops heat-shrunk over them. This method of manufacture became increasingly common, especially for large cannon.34 They were often as dangerous to the gunner as to the enemy, since the strength of both gun and gunpowder varied extensively. The smaller cannon were quickly replaced by huge guns, called bombards, which tossed larger stones at the enemy. The accuracy of the guns was enough that they became very valuable in sieges. The huge stones could bring down the walls of any castle. Eventually, as powder was refined, the cannon grew smaller again since a smaller projectile fired with greater force could produce the same result was a larger projectile fired with lesser force.35 These early cannon were generally muzzleloading. But by the end of the 14th century, a type of breech-loading cannon had been invented. A replaceable breech shaped like a modern beer mug was fitted onto an openended cannon barrel. Although this speeded up reloading, the ill fit allowed gases to escape, wasting quite a bit of the explosion’s force.” By the end of the 14th century, specific carriages were being used for cannon. T hese carriages were often called “great trunks,” since “they were little better than trunks of trees.”36 Although wheeled carriages were soon developed, they were uncommon until the mid-15th century. Cannon were generally transported on wagons,37 although a wheeled “ribaudequin” had A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS been developed in the mid-l4th century. It consisted “of a number of small barrels mounted on a tiller with a wooden shield for the gunners.”37 Trunnions—“round projections from each side of the barrel at the point of balance, which enabled the barrel to be elevated, mounted, and unmounted more quickly.”39—were in general use by the second half of the 15th century and in the course of this century, enough different sorts of cannon were developed that a table of approximate sizes were produced: Bombards could weight up to 10,000 lbs. and could hurl a stone ball up to 7 cwt. The next size was the “veuglaire” or “fowler,” about eight feet in length from 300 to (rarely) several thousand pounds, often breech-loading. The “crappaudine” was smaller, from four to eight feet long, whilst the often long-barrelled culverines and serpentines were the smallest....Mortars appeared towards the end of the 14th century. For two and a half centuries, artillery held an unimportant position on the field of combat. The cannon were immobile, not always reliable and not at all suitable to the strategy and tactics of the time. During all this time, however, technological improvements were being made in artillery.41 As more and more became known about artillery—as we begin to speak of the science of artillery—it became obvious that larger and larger ordnance was not the only answer. The increase in performance did not always justify the cost of these gigantic pieces, and they could not always be transported easily or even at all. In the 16th century, technological advances in metallurgy and casting allowed smaller, safe cannon to be cast out of iron, and cannon became faster and less expensive production of cannon.42 Even so, cast iron did not immediately replace bronze ordnance. As late as the Second W orld W ar, bronze guns were still being used by the Italian Army.43 In 1515, the battle of Marignano between the French and the Swiss proved a turning point in history and had been called the first great modern battle. In the battle, the Swiss, using pikemen, were defeated by the French who employed carefully orchestrated artillery.” By the close of the 16th century, the leading nations of Europe had restricted their artillery to a maximum of six or seven different calibers: H eavy cannon Cannon moyane Great culverin Bastard culverin Culverin moyane 18 cm 15 cm 12 cm 9 cm 6 cm A Brief History of Firearms Falcon Falconet Mortar 15 4 cm 3 cm 35 cm45 W hile some nations neglected the development of artillery, others—such as G ermany—were introducing many technical improvements. This is not to say that artillery suddenly assumed an overwhelming importance upon the field. Artillery was used sporadically if at all until the early 17th century, when the Swedish King Gustavus Adolphus revamped his army as we have noted earlier. Among his innovations was the introduction of so-called “leather” guns. These were light ordnance consisting of a metal tube bound with wire and encased in leather. Mounted on caissons, they could be drawn by a single horse and could fire many times without bursting. These leather guns could be fired even more rapidly than the muskets of his musketeers.46 Eventually, G ustavus changed to cast iron, but the guns remained much light.47 T he concept of a cartridge—a previously assembled charge—was pioneered by Gustavus, although cartridges never really become commonplace until the end of the next century.48 Most gunners continued to use the old method of loading the cannon with loose powder and shot. Gustavus understood the importance of the artillery. H owever, with his death, artillery once again faded into obscurity.49 Among the other innovations that came about in the 17th century was canister shot and the coehorn mortar—in which the barrel length was about twice that of the bore diameter—which was developed in the Netherlands but which was quickly adopted elsewhere. It was during this century, also, that the concept of aiming for a target was devised. Many of the technical innovations had to do with figuring out elevation, size of the charge and other incidentals which had not really been considered previously.50 O ne of the reasons that artillery was relatively unimportant was because most medieval and renaissance rulers did not have the economic ability to create, outfit and maintain a permanent artillery corps. W hen war ended, the artillery was generally disbanded, and there are entire periods during which ignorance of artillery seems prevalent. H ogg notes that the artillery rarely belonged body and soul to the Army....A limited number of professional gunners were retained, together with a number of guns, and when war broke out this cadre was augmented by a scratch collection of labourers and drivers to serve under the gunners. A great difficulty lay in the fact that these 16 A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS reinforcements were hired civilians rather than soldiers, and when things got too hot for them, they frequently decamped, leaving guns and gunners to manage as best they could. Sooner or later this misfortune befell most armies, and sooner or later the fact was accepted that the expense of forming a permanent corps of artillery simply had to be borne. In this way the entire force, gunners, drivers, fireworkers, mattrosses and other peculiar incumbents were subject to the same military discipline and imbued with the same martial spirit as the rest of the Army.51 It was, therefore, only in the 18th century that artillery began to assume a position of preeminence on the battlefield. In fact, artillery seemed to have vanished entirely from England for a generation. Although it had been used, poorly, during the Civil W ar, its reappearance with W illiam of O range in 1688 excited no little excitement. The W ar of the Spanish Succession saw the skillful use of artillery by the Duke of Marlborough, although his fall from grace after the war ended that resurgence. The resurrection of Gustavus’s artillery tactics by Frederick the G reat, along with Frederick’s own innovations such as the horse artillery, saw the beginning of artillery’s ascendence.52 This ascendence, however, proved to be a slow and sometimes tedious process, as demonstrated by Benjamin Franklin’s recommendation during the American Revolution that the artillery be disbanded and replaced by a corps of archers.53 During the years 1770 to 1850, artillery and its use assumed a new importance upon the battlefield.54 It was during this time that scientists applied themselves toward the theories and application of artillery, and such other innovations as rifled ordnance and breech-loading artillery were being experimented with. The technological innovations of this and later periods are well documented elsewhere, along with the changes in tactics and strategies that the new equipment occasioned To take the time and space to go into detail would be specious at best. Persons who are interested in the development of artillery during this time are urged to look elsewhere at books designed specifically to deal with the subject matter. There is no way we can do the subject justice in the space permitted here. It is enough here to note that by the close of the 19th century, the technological advances and changes in military strategy had proven the importance of the artillery. 18 WEarly Hand Cannon W n the course of early development of firearms, innovators seemed to attempt both large and small extremes. Since cast firearms were necessarily small, hand can n on were an early innovation. T hese early handguns were primarily used by the lower ranks, due to “the aversion felt by knights towards a weapon which overturned all the rules and values of medieval warfare.”55 Yet, “in 1364 the town of Perugia in Italy bought 500 small guns which could be carried in the hand, and in 1386 ‘handguns’ are mentioned in the English Royal Accounts for the first time.”56 here were two early versions of hand guns. The first was merely a smaller version of a cannon, with a depression on the butt end into which a stake or pole was inserted. The other; which became known as a culverin, was a short barrel that was mounted onto a wooden stock. Lighter culverins could be handled by a single shooter, but two shooters generally manned the larger guns. O ne would bold and aim the piece; the other would apply the slow match to the touchhole. If a single gunner manned a gun, he would have to hold the gun in a single hand and look away from his aiming so that he was certain to hit the touchhole.57 From the beginning, the hand guns enjoyed some very real advantages over the weapons they were to succeed, the bows and crossbows. The hand guns could be constructed quicker and at less expense. Bullets were easier to produce than arrows, and the weapons themselves required no special care or maintenance.58 T he handguns were, once the shooter had been trained, easy to use, since it did not require the strength that bows did. They also had the penetrative power of a longbow at a dose range.59 Though their lack of accuracy and their restricted range—about 50 meters at the end of the 14th century—were major drawbacks, the effectiveness of a volley was being recorded in the first half of the 15th century.60 I A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS By 1411, the serpentine matchlock had been invented. An S-shaped lever maneuvered a slowmatch into a pan of powder. Gunners could now use both hands to steady the gun and could continue aiming the gun since the level automatically lowered the slow match into the pan. The butt was designed to be placed against the chest while firing, and the result was an overall increase in the accuracy of the handguns.61 By the 16th century, this increase in accuracy enabled handguns to first be used for hunting. By the end of the century, the matchlock had evolved from a solid, onepiece lever to a spring-loaded mechanism in which “the rear lever and the match-holder were made separately but were connected by a spring-loaded lever. Pressure on the rear lever lowered the match-holder gently into the pan against the action of the spring. This prevented the match accidentally swinging into the pan when the gunner was not ready.”62 The first matchlocks were German and became known as hakenbüsche—hookgun—because of the shape of the mechanism This became “arquebus” in France and “arcebuse” or “harcebus” in England.63 In the 16th century, the arquebus was joined by the musket. This was a Spanish innovation and was, in the beginning, a larger and longer version of the arquebus, designed to pierce armor at a long distance. It was too heavy to be held and aimed by the shooter, and a forked rod was often used to steady the gun as it was being fired.64 The musket took its name from either the Italian moschetto (sparrowhawk) or the Spanish mosca (sparks).65~ About this same time, the caliver was invented. Calivers differed from an arquebus in that all of them were drilled to the same diameter (caliver comes from the word caliber), so that an entire company could use bullets interchangeably. Previously, each piece had a special mold which was sized specifically to that piece. After a time, the term arquebus was used to describe a heavier matchlock, while the caliver was a lighter wheellock. The term “culverin” no longer described a hand gun but was instead used to describe a size of cannon.66 In the first half of the 16th century, German guns developed longer butts which could be rested against the shoulder. Guns more closely resembled modern firearms.67 In the second half of the 17th century, bayonets were first developed. The first bayonets were so-called plug bayonets, whose tapered hilts were designed to be stuck into the muskets’ barrels, effectively turning a musket into a pike. The first external bayonet was apparently developed in France toward the end of the century, and the concept of an advancing enemy able to fire their muskets without removing the bayonets caught the English by surprise during their first encounter.68 A Brief History of Firearms 19 For some time, plug bayonets continued to be favored since military authorities feared that the external bayonets would cause their men to waste ammunition. Matchlocks depended on the match, and this caused a number of drawbacks. O ften, to ensure that the shooter had a lit match, both ends of a match would be lit. This, in itself, constituted a greater danger to the shooter, since he was that much more visible at night. Since the slowmatch burned continuously, there was always a danger that a spark would explode powder prematurely. For this reason, the match was usually removed from the match-holder during the loading process and either held in the shooter’s left hand while the right hand did the reloading or placed on a linstock at a distance away from the free powder.69 The first half of the 16th century also saw the development of small leather or wooden bottles on a bandolier, each with enough powder for a single charge. This was not only quicker than reloading from a powder horn but was safer, since it prevented the gun from being overloaded. These bottles later came into common use; shooters generally carried several of them, and they came to be nicknamed “the twelve apostles.” Ironically, there were many who complained about the use of these powder bottles, since they often clattered in the wind. This clattering not only could announce a surprise attack but also kept the bearer from hearing commands.70 Slowly, they were replaced by cartridge boxes which held paper-wrapped cartridges. Each cartridge contained the powder and bullet for the shot, while the paper itself was used as wadding.71 This changeover, in England, was not completed until after the formation of the regular professional army around 1660. As armor was abandoned, the need for the more powerful musket lessened. Matchlocks decreased in size and, at the same time, discarded the distinctions between size. In the end, only the term “musket” was retained to describe the firearm.72 After about 1530, when Francis I created the first musketeer units, the matchlock was widely used as a military gun. The matchlock had its disadvantages, but it was cheap and relatively effective. Though the wheellock and, later, the flintlock were more efficient, matchlocks were used more or less universally for the next three centuries.73 It is worth noting that illustrations will generally show a variety of styles of handguns in use at the same time. It stands to reason that an earlier style would not be discarded, but some theorize that earlier styles were still being manufactured even when new innovations were in common use.74 WWheellock W he next innovation in gunnery came about early in the 16th century. The handicap and danger of requiring an already burning substance has been remarked up before, and many saw the value of a selfigniting system. The first such system was known as a wheellock. The wheellock was an adaptation of a contemporary tinder-lighter, in which a spring moved a steel disk against a flint. The wheellock mechanism was simple. A clockwork spring was wound tight and, when released, turned a grooved steel disk. A hammer which held a piece of pyrites or, later, a flint, was cocked against the disk. The resulting sparks would be thrown into the pan, hopefully igniting the charge in the barrel.75 Traditionally, the wheellock was invented by Johann Kiefuss of Nuremberg in 1517. Its predecessor included the so-called M önchsbüche (monk’s arquebus) of the early 15th century. An illustration of a primitive wheellock can be found in the notebooks of Leonardo da Vinci, and some are quick to give him credit for the idea. H owever, not only did he not claim such credit, the illustration could have been made at any time up until his death in 1520.76 The wheellock had its disadvantages. It was extremely expensive (roughly 1500 francs in 1580, while the matchlock would have cost only 350 to 400 francs).77 The spark did not always ignite the charge. The spring mechanism was so delicate that the lock usually bad to be dismantled and cleaned after only three shots, if the spring itself was not broken. wheellocks were generally reserved for the elite troops since it was justifiably feared that average troopers would routinely over-wind the mechanism and break it.78 It was about this time that combination weapons became popular. These combination weapons might combine a wheellock and a war hammer, on the assumption that the weapon could still be used after it had been fired (or if it developed that the weapon could not be fired).79 H owever, the wheellock was far safer than the matchlock, since there T A Brief History of Firearms 21 was no need for the slowmatch. It could be hid beneath a cloak (and was, therefore, outlawed or restricted by statute in some countries).80 W heellocks made guns viable for the cavalry and also became popular civilian sidearms.. Interestingly, the wheellock never gained any popularity outside of Europe. WFlintlock W uring the course of its p o p u l ar i t y, t h e wheellock underwent many changes to become more efficient. H owever, a more efficient—and ultimately, less expensive—weapon continued to be sought. Around the end of the 16th century, in Scandinavia, an early flintlock known variously as the Baltic Lock, the snapbaunce (Dutch for snapping hen, in imitation of the lock’s action) or the snaplock was developed.81 Its action was the reverse of the wheellock. Instead of flint being laid on steel, which was then moved against the flint, the snaphaunce held the flint in the jaws of a cock. The cock was then snapped down onto a rough piece of steel positioned over the frizzen pan.82 The most serious drawback to the snaphaunce was the necessity to reveal the priming pan by manually pushing dear the pancover at the time of firing. If the pancovcr remained dosed, the gun could not fire.83 The early 17th century saw several technological advancements in the snaphaunce system. The English lock combined the frizzen and pan cover into a single piece; it was not popular outside of England and was quickly replaced when the true flintlock appeared in England in mid-century.84 The Miquelet or Mediterranean lock, was distinguished by an exterior mainspring but may have been developed after the development of the true flintlock.85 The first true flintlock did not appear until around 1612 in France.86 Developed by the French gunsmith, Marin le Bourgeoys (although he was almost certainly not its inventor), its improvement on the basic snaphaunce principle was to become the standard method of ignition for the next 250 years.87 This development marked the ascendancy of French gunmakers over the previously dominant German (who remained committed to the wheellock). The flintlock gun differed from the snaphaunce in that the steel and pan cover were joined into a single piece. In addition, the priming pan was automatically uncovered: D Le Bourgeoys...produced an L-shaped piece of steel, usually known as the frizzen. Fitted above the pan the lower and smaller A Brief History of Firearms 23 arm of the L-shaped piece served as the cover whilst the longer arm served as the steel. The frizzen was held in place by the tension of a small frizzen spring. As the cock swung toward the flint scraped down the long arm of the L so producing the sparks. At the same time the impact was sufficient to make the frizzen pivot upon the screw situated at the end of the short arm so uncovering the priming powder to receive the spark.88 The flintlock did not appear to be produced outside of France for another two decades but then began to be diffused throughout most of Europe. The snaphaunce continued to be used, despite later developments, in North Africa and North Italy until the 20th and 18th centuries respectively.89 The flintlock did not become truly popular for some time because of its expensive and its frequent misfires. During the English Civil W ar, matchlocks remained the primary gun, but flintlocks were used to guard powder trains. By the start of the 18th century, though, matchlocks were no longer being used. Flintlocks had become more efficient and less expensive. They were preferred for sport shooting and hunting.90 And in 1703, the Brown Bess first appeared in a form that would not significantly change for almost a century and a half.91 The Brown Bess became a widely imitated military weapon that was, typically, a long-barreled (40 to 60 inches), large caliber (.65 to.80), smoothbore flintlock musket. It was easily loaded from the muzzle (3 to 5 rounds per minute), heavy (8 to 12 pounds), with a stud on the end of the barrel for its bayonet. An indication of accuracy is the fact that virtually none of them were ever equipped with a rear sight. Although the ball it fired could theoretically carry for some 300 yards, the average long arm provided little accuracy past 80 yards, and was not very effective against mass troops beyond 150 yards.92 The Brown Bess reportedly received its name from a rumor that the basic design of the musket had been finalized during the reign of Queen Elizabeth and, conversely, from the “acid-bath pickling process (the equivalent of bluing a gun today), which left the unfinished iron barrel a uniformly brown color, about the only characteristic that distinguished the Brown Bess from contemporaneous Continental military muskets.”93 There were other flintlocks in common use throughout the 18th century, of course. The carbine was a shorter-barreled shoulder weapon with a .65 caliber barrel that was commonly used by cavalry.94 The fusil, which was a “lighter, shorter, and of smaller caliber than the regular shoulder weapon” that was essentially an officer’s weapon.95 The blunderbuss was a civilian weapon that originated in the Netherlands in the 24 A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS middle of the 17th century. It was an anti-personnel version of a hunting shotgun and featured a “short, thick barrel with a trumpet-shaped muzzle for easy loading. The barrel was usually brass and fired a couple of ounces of slugs chopped out of sheet lead.”96 The development of the American rifle—known variously as the Pennsylvania and the Kentucky rifle—began with the introduction of German rifles to North America by German emigrants in the early 18th century. The German rifles were long, heavy and had deep rifling. Rifling had long been experimented with. It is a series of grooves on the inside of the barrel designed to give a spin to bullets as they left the barrel and to thereby increase their accuracy. In the case of the German rifle, a bullet was the same size as the barrel and fit so closely that it literally had to be hammered into the barrel. By 1720, the American rifle had appeared. It was as long as the German rifle but considerably lighter. The bullet was smaller than the barrel and could be seated easily with a leather patch that kept it in place.”97 Early American rifles closely resembled their European counterparts, but changes quickly turned it into something vastly different.98 The use of the rifle in the American Revolution has been vastly overstated, since most American armies used the Brown Bess or the French Charleville muskets. H owever, the American rifle was to assume a paramount importance among civilians because of its accuracy. Military strategy of the time ensured that the military muskets would remain inaccurate: There was a great deal of room for improvement in firearms, even given the metallurgy and fabricating techniques available at the time. yet fundamental improvement in weaponry was precisely what the system could not stand. Really accurate small arms used by troops out in the open, lined up like so many day pigeons, would have meant almost immediate slaughter.99 Even after the invention of percussion ignition in the early 19th century, the flintlock continued to be used by soldier and civilian alike.100 O n the frontier, where percussion caps might not be readily available, it was common sense to retain your flintlock.101 The Brown Bess continued to be used by the British Army until 1840. After the perfection of the percussion system, many of the flintlocks saw a second life after being converted to percussion ignition, and it said that flintlocks were still being used, mainly by militia, during the American Civil W ar. H owever, before the end of the first half of the 19th century, the flintlock “was little more than a relic.”102 26 WPercussion W ercury fulminate is an u n st able ch em ical compound that requires nothing more than a sharp blow to produce an explosion. In the 18th century, unsuccessful experiments attempted to replace gunpowder with mercury fulminate; but it was not until the start of the 19th century that a Scottish clergyman, Alexander Forsyth, came up with the idea of using mercury fulminate not as the propellant but to ignite gunpowder.103 The result was the first percussion firearm: an awkward device known as the scent bottle. The scent bottle—so called because it resembled a small perfume flask—held a quantity of fulminate and was attached to the side of a firearm, connected by a hole to the barrel. Much of the mechanism mimicked the flintlock, so that a hammer descended upon the scent bottle much as the hammer of a flintlock descended upon a frizzen. The differences were that the hammer was now solid, and the scent bottle contained a spring mechanism which, when struck by the hammer, impacted with the fulminate. The resulting explosion ignited the powder in the barrel.104 Forsyth’s invention, which was patented in 1807, worked but was overly complex. It was designed primarily for sport, although Forsyth also saw military applications and attempted to convince the British military to use the system. W hile the British military chose not to, beyond a very limited experimentation, Napoleon saw the benefits of the system and attempted to purchase percussion pieces for his own armies. Fortunately for Britain, Forsyth refused to sell to the French.105 O ther gunsmiths soon began to experiment with safe and effective ways of applying the fulminate to the touch hole, which kept Forsyth busy for the rest of his life with lawsuits against people who infringed upon his patents. After much experimentation, it was determined that the most practical was the copper percussion cap. It has been asserted that Joshua Shaw, an English artist living in Philadelphia, devised the system for his own use. H is firearm had a small steel nipple which protruded from its barrel. A small hole passed through the nipple and into the powder chamber. Upon the nipple, Shaw placed a percussion cap, originally steel, M A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS then pewter and finally copper. This system was perfected by 1816 and came into general use by the 1820s.106 By 1825, most English sportsmen used percussion arms, but the military—wary of the price of replacing their flintlock muskets—lagged behind in many countries. In England, the government conducted a test in 1834 in which flintlock and percussion firearms were tested against each other. After firing six thousand rounds, the percussion cap misfired only about thirty-six times while the flintlock misfired almost a thousand times. Even after this experiment, the British military did not convert to percussion firearms until after an 1841 fire in the Tower of London destroyed several thousand flintlock muskets. They were replaced by percussion muskets.107 Nor did the United States military quickly convert to percussion. Aside from the expense of replacing or converting thousands of flintlocks, many feared that soldiers would drop or lose the percussion caps in battle. H owever, in 1842, the United States followed the lead of Britain and officially abandoned the flintlock, using Shaw’s percussion system and converting many of the military flintlocks to percussion.108 Among the civilian contractors hired to produce the guns was Eli W hitney, who devised the revolutionary idea of mass-manufacturing gun parts.109 A certain Doctor Meynard—a dentist—devised a priming system made up of a paper tape containing fulminate pellets, similar to the caps in toy cap guns. This ignition system was used in the Sharps carbine, a successful breechloader that was adopted by the British arm and which was used by Union snipers during the American Civil W ar. It is from the Sharps rifle that we obtain the word, “sharpshooter.” The Sharps was ideal for western use because of its short barrel. It handled a variety of calibers from.36 to.52, employing a linen or paperwrapped cartridge. The trigger guard acted as a lever which lowered the breechblock exposing the chamber. W hen a paper or linen cartridge was inserted, the breechblock was dosed, thus shearing off the end of the cartridge and exposing the powder. W hen the trigger was pulled the hammer hit the percussion cap which exploded and the ignition of the powder fired the weapon. A skilled shooter could fire from four to five shots a minute.110 The Confederates employed the Terry Carbine, a breechloader which used percussion caps for ignition and whose breech mechanism was not as strong as that of the Sharps.111 About this same time, the Minié ball was invented by the French. It A Brief History of Firearms 27 was a bullet of the shape with which we are familiar, whose base was designed to expand when its charge was ignited. The expansion caused the walls of the bullet to engage the rifling of the barrel. The result was a bullet that was more easily loaded than the old patched ball and which was both more efficient and more accurate when fired.112 W ith the appearance of percussion ignition and this new bullet, “circumstances were now ripe for the rapid development of modern firearms.113 WCartridges W he idea of a cartridge was not new. W hat was new was the idea of incorporating primer and explosive into a single unit.. In 1828, the needle gun was developed by Johann Nikolaus Dreyse by placing a fulminate primer in the base of the powder charge. Several years later, Casimir Lefaucheux devised a breech-loading gun that used a similar concept.114 Nor was the breech-loading firearm a new concept. There had been attempts to devise breech-loading firearms from almost the beginning of gunnery. In all instances, the experiments failed, and muzzle-loading firearms continued to be preferred. The major difficulty with breechloading firearms was “the escaping gases at the breech causing loss of velocity and accuracy.115 In 1860, Smith & W esson produced the first rimfire cartridge, which incorporated the primer, charge and bullet in a single metallic unit. T he cartridges with a raised rim around the end that contained the fulminate. The hammer struck against the rim of the cartridge and produced the ignition.116 A side benefit was that the metal cartridge sealed the barrel against the escape of gas, increasing the efficiency of the breech-loader. The rimfire cartridge was well used during the 1860s, although muzzle-loading percussion weapons far outnumbered the breechloaders. The rimfire cartridge was made of a copper alloy that had to be thin enough to be crushed by the hammer’s blow. If the cartridge was not crushed, or if the fulminate was poorly distributed around the rim, there was no ignition. Although the rimfire cartridge was an improvement over the linen and paper cartridge, it had too many hangfires. These defects were remedied by the center-fire cartridge that was invented by Colonel E. M. Boxer in 1866.117 By the 1870s, the center-fire cartridge had been adopted and was, in fact, the modern cartridge as we know it, with “a metal case, central primer and a shaped bullet.”118 As soon as metal cartridges were invented, the possibility of mechanically loaded magazines became obvious. The earliest version was made in 1849, but the first successful versions were the 1860 Spencer and the 1860 H enry rifle. The Spencer carried seven bullets in a metal tube housed in the rifle’s butt, and the breech block was operated by the trigger guard acted as a lever, in much the same manner as the Sharps rifle T A Brief History of Firearms 29 operated. Since the bullets were nose to base, any sudden impact on the butt was liable to set off one or several shells simultaneously.119 The H enry carried fifteen cartridges in a tube under the barrel. The cartridges were fed into the breech one at a time by a mechanism operated by swinging the trigger guard forward and backward. T his system became the basis of the W inchester repeater.120 The H enry had been manufactured by the New H aven Arms Company, which was what O liver F. W inchester renamed the Volcanic Repeating Arms Company when he purchased it in 1857. In 1866, after the introduction of an improved H enry, the firm became the W inchester Arms Company.121 Despite the successful use of the H enry and the Spencer by Union volunteers during the Civil W ar, the United States Army rejected the idea of authorizing repeaters when adopting breech-loading rifles in 1872. The Army chose the Springfield, which was a single shot breech-loader,122 and the W inchester enjoyed a great success by directing its sales to civilians.123 Black powder was and remains notoriously dirty and fouling, creating an overwhelming screen of smoke around a shooter and refusing to fire when damp. This was especially difficult on repeating firearms, and fully automatic firearms were not practical until the development and popularization of so-called smokeless powder in the second half of the 19th century. Smokeless powder, which was originally known as “gun cotton” since it was made by dissolving cotton in nitric acid, is far less fouling and four to five times as powerful as black powder.124 Smokeless powder was not used in rifles until 1892, when the United States military adopted the KragJorgensen.30 caliber bolt action rifle.125 It was smokeless powder that made possible automatic and machine guns that were to gain such importance in the early 20th century.126 But for all intents and purposes, with the successful development of the centerfire cartridge, the modern firearm had been invented. Those changes that have occurred in the century and a half since had been technological and cosmetic. The basic idea has not changed. WPistol W hile there were apparently a few matchlock pistols that had been made as early as 1460,127 the wheellock could be reproduced in any size. It was the first firearm that could effectively be made “small enough to be carried in the pocket or attached to the belt; the pistol had arrived. The name ‘pistol’ is usually taken to derive from the town of Pistoia in Italy where these weapons first became popular.”128 The pistol was especially popular for the cavalry, since it was not practical to hang a lit matchlock from the saddle; however, wheellocks were otherwise little used by the military because of their expense.129 Cavalry pistols were generally about three feet long and often had heavy balls on the butts of their only slighted curved stocks; there remains a controversy about whether these were so that the pistols might be used as maces when discharged or whether they were to help the shooter maintain his grip. In England, two-foot-long pistols were often referred to as “dag” as a contraction of the term “demi-hagbutt” (half-arquebus)130 and were outlawed by statute.131 By the end of the 16th century, most pistols had become snaphaunces, since this lock was cheaper than the wheellock.132 W hen flintlocks were developed early in the next century, they retained the advantage of being less expensive than wheellock pistols.133 Flintlock pistols, like their predecessors, were relatively inaccurate except at dose range and saw little military use except among officers, the cavalry and sailors. The pistols were popular, however, among civilians. T hese civilian pistols were made to fit into pockets and were generally employed at dose range.134 In the mid-18th century, dueling pistols first appeared to supersede the sword. Dueling pistols were not designed to be aimed and therefore lacked even rudimentary sights. These dueling pistols were often sold in pairs, in elaborate cases, with all of the accouterments. Even after percussion pistols became available, flintlocks were preferred for dueling.135 Eighteen-inch horse pistols became popular in the 18th century, and other flintlock pistols came with barrels from seven to ten inches long.136 W A Brief History of Firearms 31 Most of these flintlock pistols were muzzleloaders. O n some, such as the Queen Anne, the barrel actually unscrewed for reloading.137 In the late 17th century, there were some pistols which were breechloading. The breechlocks of these pistols invariably loosened and rendered the guns impractical.138 The development of percussion ignition made pistols much handier and effective. As a result, there was a noticeable increase in the use of them among civilians. Many flintlock pistols were converted to percussion, and a wider variety of pistols came into being as well, including the Derringer, a very small pistol with a limited range, and the “pepperbox” pistol, which was a multi-barreled revolving pistol.139 There had been experimental revolving weapons—both long arms and side arms—since at least the 16th century. There were at least a few practical revolving wheellocks which proved to be too heavy to be practical. H owever, the main difficulty was the escape of gases between the chambers. It was Elisha Collier who overcame the difficult problem of leaking gasses by fitting the chamber on to an extension of the barrel. In order to be rotated the cylinder had to be drawn back manually and turned until the next chamber was in alignment, when the force of the spring compelled this chamber to fit tightly over the end of the barrel. This ensured that the gas should not leak into the remaining chambers.140 Collier’s 1811 revolver was a flintlock. The development of the percussion cap simplified many of the problems he had to overcome. A patent for a revolving percussion pistol was granted to Captain Artemus W heeler in 1818. H owever, the most effective muzzle-loading revolver was designed by Samuel Colt in the 1830s.141 Colt devised a single-action mechanism in which cocking the hammer turned the revolver and locked the cylinder into position. The weapon was then fired when the trigger was pulled. In a double-action mechanism, pulling the trigger cocked the hammer, turned the cylinder and fired the weapon. Robert Adams, Colt’s great British rival, used the double-action mechanism. As a result, his revolvers were more complicated and less reliable.142 During the Mexican W ar, Colt’s revolvers first began to replace singleshot pistols as military handguns. In 1848, Colt’s improved .44 caliber third Model Army revolver was first manufactured. This was later called the 32 A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS dragoon pistol, thanks to it being issued to United States Dragoon regiments.143 In 1850, Colt began to make the model 1851 navy revolver, which continued to be manufactured until 1873. No other percussion revolver approached it in popularity during the 1850s and 1860s, and it is the classic style for pistols used in the American W est. Its popularity faded only after the introduction of the Smith & W esson .44 American revolver and then the.45 Colt.144 The first breechloading revolver which was designed and built to use metal cartridges was the Model O ne Smith & W esson. it was a seven-inch .22 caliber with seven chambers. It was manufactured from 1857 to 1860.145 In the years following the Civil W ar, a wide variety of revolvers were offered to the public. O f these all, the Colt .45 1873 was the most favorite.146 Ironically enough, the military found a use for single-shot pistols even after the development of a practical revolver. The United States Military used single-shot pistols as late as 1871.147 Smokeless powder enabled the development of automatic and semiautomatic pistols. Despite the prophecies of fans of clip-loaded pistols, however, revolvers retain their popularity even to today. 34 WNotes W 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 20. 21. 22. 23. 24. 25. John Quick, Dictionary of Weapons & M ilitary T erms, p. 63. Frances & Joeeph Gies, Cat hedral, Forge, an d Waterwheel, pp. 249–250. Ivan V. H ogg, A History of Artillery, p. 10. Kenneth Allen, T he Story of Gunpowder, p. 12. Gies, pp. 206–207. H ogg, p. 13. Ibid., pp 11–12. Ibid., p. 23. Gies, p. 208. Edwin Tunis, Weapons.: A Pictorial History, p. 67. A.V.B. Norman & Don Pottinger, English Weapons & Warfare: 449–1660, p. 99. H ogg, p. 15. Lilane and Fred Funcken, Arms and Uniforms: T he Age of Chivalry Part 2, p. 99. H ogg, p. 15. R. J. W illkinson-Latham, Discovering Artillery, p. 3. Allen, pp. 16–17. Ibid., p. 19. Funcken, Part 2, p. 34. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 5. Ibid., p. 3. Tunis, p. 68. Gies, p. 240. W illiam Reid, T he Lore of Arms: A Concise History of Weaponry, p. 46. Norman & Pottinger, p. 142. Gies, p. 247. 26. 27. 28. 29. 30. 31. 32. 33. 34. 35. 36. 37. 38. 39. 40. 41. 42. 43. 44. 45. 46. 47. 48. 49. 50. 51. 52. 53. 54. 55. 56. 57. 58. 59. 60. 61. Norman & Pottinger, p. 142. Gies, p. 208. Reid, p. 52. Tunis, p. 76 Norman & Pottinger, p. 151. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 7. Allen, p. 38. Ibid., p. 34. C h r i st o p h er G r avet t , M edieval Siege Warfare, p. 63. Ibid., p. 52. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 4. Ibid., p. 4. Gravett, p. 52. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 6. Gravett, pp. 52–53. H ogg, p. 26. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 6. H ogg, p. 27. Allen, pp. 26–27. Funcken, Part 2, p. 96. Allen, p. 38. Tunis, p. 96. Ibid., p. 109. H ogg, p. 31. Tunis, pp. 96–97. H ogg, p. 32. Ibid., pp. 32–33. Ibid., p. 37. W ilkinson-Latham, p. 16. Funcken, Part 2, p. 40. Norman-Pottinger, p. 100. Tunis, p. 74. Funcken, Part 2, p. 40. Terence W ise, M edieval Warfare, p. 103. Funcken, Part 2, p. 41. H oward Ricketts, Firearms, p. 10. 62. 63. 64. 65. 66. 67. 68. 69. 70. 71. 72. 73. 74. 75. 76. 77. 78. 79. 80. 81. 82. 83. 84. 85. 86. 87. 88. 89. 90. 91. A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS Norman & Pottinger, p. 143. W ise, p. 102. Tunis, p. 80. Lilane and Fred Funcken, Arms and Uniform: T he Age of Chivalry Part 3, p. 99. Tunis, p. 81. Norman & Pottinger, p. 167. Tunis, p. 94. Ricketts, pp. 10–11. N orman & Pottinger, pp. 202–203. Ibid., p. 192. Funcken, Part 3, p. 14. Ricketta, p. 11. Funcken, Parti, p. 10. Reid, p. 67. Claude Blair, “Further Notes on the O rigins of the W heellock,” Arms and Armor Annual Volume One, p. 29. Funcken, Part 3, p. 12. Norman & Pottinger, p. 169. Ibid. Reid, p. 67. W ilkinson, p. 14. Ricketts, p. 28. Frederick W ilkinson, Antique Guns and Gun Collecting, p. 15. George C. Neumann, T he History of Weapons of the American Revolution, p. 6. Ricketts, p. 33. Ibid., p. 32. Tunis, p. 94. W ilkinson, p. 15. Ibid., p. 14. Neumann, p. 12. Robert L. O’Connell, “Brown Bess,” M ilitary H istory Quarterly, 1:4, W inter 1989, p. 68. 92. 93. 94. 95. 96. 97. 98. 99. 100. 101. 102. 103. 104. 105. 106. 107. 108. 109. 110. 109. 110. 111. 112. 113. 114. 115. 116. 117. 118. 119. 120. 121. 122. 123. 124. 125. 126. 127. 128. 129. 130. Neumann, p. 14. O’Connell, p. 68 Neumann, p. 36. Ibid., p. 38. Tunis, p. 94. Ibid., p. 102. Reid, p. 147. O’Connell, p. 69. Ricketta, pp. 84–85. E rnest. L Reedstrom, Scrapbook of the American West, p. 97. O’Connell, p. 69. W ilkinson, p. 20. Reid, p. 169. Ricketts, p. 77. Tunis, p. 111. Ricketts, pp. 84–85. Reedstrom, p. 155. Tunis, p. 112. Reedstrom, p. 155. Tunis, p. 112. Reedstrom, p. 98. Ricketts, pp. 93–94. Tunis, pp. 112–113. W ilkinson, p. 21. Reid, pp. 190–191. Reedstrom, p. 98. W ilkinson, p. 23. Reid, p. 226. W ilkinson, p. 23. Reedstrorn, p. 100. Tunis, p. 119. Reid, p. 208. Tunis, p. 120. Reedstrom, p. 100. Tunis, p. 120. Reedstrom, p. 160. Reid, p. 231. Funcken, Part 3, p. 14. W ilkinson, p. 13. Norman & Pottinger, p. 169. Funcken, Part 3, p. 16. A Brief History of Firearms 131. Tunis, p. 82. 132. Norman & Pottinger, p. 192. 133. 134. 135. 136. 137. 138. 139. 140. Reid, p. 108. . Neumann, pp. 150-151. Ricketts, pp. 62–63. Tunis, p. 106. Neumann, p. 151. Ricketts, p. 48. Tunis, p. 113. . Ricketts, pp. 87–88. 35 141. Reid, p. 177 142. Ricketts, pp. 91–92. 143. W illiam C. Davis, Weapons of the Civil War, p. 28. 144. Charles H anson, Jr., “The G u n s, ” T he B ook of Buckskinning, p. 95. 145. Tunis, p. 118. 146. Reedstrom, p. 104. 147. Tunis, p. 118 WBibliography W Allen, Kenneth. T he Story of Gunpowder. W ayland: H ove (1973) Cowley, Robert (Editor). M ilitary History Quarterly. Vol.1, No.4, Summer 1989. Davis, W illiam C. Weapons of the Civil War. Mallard Press: New York (1991) Funcken, Lilane and Fred. Arms and Uniforms: T he Age of Chivalry Part 2. Prentice H all, Inc.: Englewood Cliffs (1981) Funcken; Lilane and Fred. Arms and Uniforms: T he Age of Chivahy Part 3. Prentice H all, Inc.: Englewood Cliffs (1982) Gies, Frances & Joseph. Cathedral, Forge, and Waterwheel. H arper Collins: New York (1994) Gravett, Christopher. M edieval Siege Warfare. Osprey Publishing: London (1990) H eld, Robert (Editor). Arms and Armor AnnuaL Volume One. Follett Publishing Company: Chicago (1973) H ogg, Ian V. A History of Artillery. H amlyn: London (1974) Neumann, George C. T he History of Weapons of the American Revolution. Bonanza Books: New York (1967) Norman, A.V. B. and Don Pottinger. English Weapons & Warfare: 449-1660. Dorset Press: New York (1979) [Original title: Warrior to Soldier 449-1660] Q uick, John. Dictionary of Weapons & M ilitary T erms. McGraw-H ill Book Company: New York (1973) Reedstrom, Ernest L. Scrapbook of the American West. Caxton Printers, Ltd.: Caldwell (1991) Reid, W illiam. T he Lore of Arms: A Concise History of Weaponry. Facts on File Publications: New York (1976) Ricketts, H oward. Firearms. Octopus Books: London (1964) Scurlock, Bill (Editor). T he Book of Buckskinning. Rebel Publishing Company: Texarkana (1981) Tunis, Edwin. Weapons: A Pictorial History. W orld Publishing: New York (1954) W ilkinson, Frederick. Antique Guns and Gun Collecting. Chartwell Books: London (1974) W ilkinson-Latham, R. J. Discovering Artillery. Shire Publications: H averfordwest (1987) W ise, Terence. M edieval Warfare. H astings H ouse Publishers: New York (1976) 38 WAppendix: Procedures W The following are approximate actions only, designed to indicate the differences between the various ignition systems for firearms. In practice, there are many variations and specifics which cannot be covered by these general descriptions. T hese procedures should not be used for instruction in the actual firing of any firearm. Hand Cannon 1. The powder, shot and wadding is placed into the barrel and rammed home. 2. A small amount of finer powder is placed into the touchhole. 3. Slow match or hot wire is applied to the touchhole, igniting the powder. Matchlock 1. The match is detached from the lock. 2. The powder, shot and wadding are placed into the barrel and rammed home. 3. A small amount of finer powder is poured into the pan and the pancover is replaced. 4. The match is replaced, and the pancover is removed. 6. The trigger is depressed, lowering the slowmatch slowly into the pan, igniting the powder. Wheellock 1. The powder, shot and wadding are placed into the barrel and rammed home. 2. A small amount of finer powder is poured into the pan. 3. The lock is wound using a key. 4. The cock holding pyrites is lowered into the pan. 5. The trigger is depressed, releasing the wheel, which spins against the pyrite, casting sparks into the pan, igniting the powder. Snaphaunce A BRIEF HISTORY OF FIREARMS 1. The powder, shot and wadding are placed into the barrel and rammed home. 2. A small amount of finer powder is poured into the pan. 3. The steel striking surface is lowered into the pan. 4. The trigger is depressed, bringing the cock holding the flint onto the steel striking surface, casting sparks into the pan, igniting the powder. Flintlock 1. The powder, shot and wadding are placed into the barrel and rammed home. 2. A small amount of finer powder is poured into the pan. 3. The L-shaped pan cover and steel is placed over the pan. 4. The trigger is depressed, bringing the cock holding the flint onto the steel striking surface, pushing it forward and allowing the sparks to strike the pan, igniting the powder. Percussion 1. The powder, shot and wadding are placed into the barrel and rammed home. 2. A percussion cap is placed over the nipple which leads to the barrel. 3. The trigger is depressed, bringing the hammer down onto the percussion cap, cause it to explode and ignite the powder in the barrel. Cartridge 1. A pre-made cartridge, containing primer, powder and shot, is placed into the breech of the weapon. 2. The trigger is depressed, bringing the hammer against the primer on the bottom of the cartridge, causing it to explode and ignite the powder in the cartridge. W A n O verview of the D evelopment of Firearms W