PDA

View Full Version : What is the purpose of this small cannon?



cannonmn
04-24-2008, 03:54 PM
This came in today after much agony trying to get the seller to ship it, then having it bust through the paper-thin box he put it in and get lost in the FedEx system. Anyway here 'tis but I don't know exactly what it is. I think it could be a very late shipboard swivel gun, a monster model cannon, or a salute cannon. The pattern looks a bit like some ca. 1860-1870-ish British guns, or maybe even one of the Brooke Confederate guns, but I cannot find an exact match to the barrel-plus-4-hoop design, although I found may with barrel and 3 hoops or steps. If this is a monster model it may be a 1/10 scale for a 13-inch gun. But what do you think?

Specs:

Bore 1.3 in.
Nominal length 22 in.
Overall length 25.5 in.
Weight about 78 lbs.
Material-iron or steel?
Length over trunnions 9 in.
Trunnion dia: 1.5 in.
T. Length 2 in.
Basering diameter: 5.4 in.
Muzzle Dia: 2.6 in.
Marks: None discernable

http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in001.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in002.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in004.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in005.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in006.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in007.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in009.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in010.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in013.jpg
http://i17.photobucket.com/albums/b62/cannonmn/miscforumsetc/forums%2010/Unknownironmodel22in014.jpg

cannonmn
04-26-2008, 09:10 AM
Here's a short video of a large gun with the same basic profile, the 100-ton Armstrong gun at Fort Rinella, Malta. I'm thinking the small one was cast as some kind of presentation piece or shootiing reproduction, much like South Bend Replicas casts repro cannons patterned after Dahlgren, Parrott, etc. in this country. I'd guess it was cast in England where Armstrong was well-known.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3KcLu6_ ... re=related (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r3KcLu6_TLE&feature=related)

John Maderious
04-27-2008, 10:50 AM
I don't think it was made by the maker of the Armstrongs, which was the Royal Gun Foundry, Woolwich. Being a governmental entity the RGF would have no reason to try to sell little guns like this one, or use them for advertising, like South Bend or other private businesses might. And, it appears the "bands" are molded, rather than being shrunk on as was the Armstrong method. The Armstrongs had extensive proof and/or other markings. If this gun were ever proven, I assume I would have been so marked.
I am inclined to think this was an "insurance gun". My understanding is that for several decades in the mid-19th century insurance companies banded together at Lloyds of London offered reduced rates for insuring merchant ships if they were lightly armed. This was true all over the world, as the insurers insured ships worldwide. The idea was to arm them sufficient to repell boarders in the form of 3rd world natives armed with spears, but not arm them to the point of making them real prizes for serious military use. It is my understanding these guns were made by ship outfitters who slapped them together quickly to satisfy the insurers, not for serious work and the makers did not want to be associated with them, hence no markings. Eventually I believe the insurance companies came to realize the extra gunpowder, primers, etc. in the hands of untrained crews, not stored in proper magazines, who didn't want to use these guns since they were often unproofed and would most likely blow up, was more dangerous to the ship that the rare native boarding party. So, I believe there are many unproofed (and probably dangerous) little to mid-size guns out there which were probably used as ballast when the insurance companies sensibly abandoned that underwriting practice.
I am not an expert on this topic, however, and am ready to be corrected.
John Maderious, WBR 10223

cannonmn
04-27-2008, 12:42 PM
Thanks John. I've been collecting and studying insurance guns off and on for a while and much of what you wrote is true. My understanding differs only slightly.

Lloyd's required any ship they underwrote to be armed with either carriage guns and or swivels, and I don't know what the formula to determine the number or type was. I have read some admiralty claims proceedings which always determined the number and type of guns aboard at the time of loss as the first article of business, you can probably find some of those old papers yourself.

I have and have seen many insurance guns that had been proved and were so-marked, and many had maker's names, size gun, and weights as well. The most prolific maker of ins. gun was Bailey and Pegg of London. Ins. guns tended to be gunades due to ease of mounting on simple carriages as opposed to more complex carronade sliding multi-piece carriages.

I havent' put anything together on the carriage guns but I made a video for you-tube about "swivel guns." You can find it under my username there, "cannonmn." You will notice some of the swivels are marked also.

I think it is possible that the little gun I have is an insurance gun, but since its design is late 19th C. , I'm almost sure it would have been made with a fitting for a percussion lock, and it has none. The vent is funnel-shaped so that would not work with friction primers.

My latest thinking is that this thing is a small replica of the Fort Rinella gun, made by unknown foundry for unknown purpose, but likely something akin to SBR guns, only in the UK, and probably late 19th/early 20th C. But it isn't marked and can't talk so any reasonable possibility is still open I guess.

WABrewer
08-09-2008, 12:34 PM
This little piece appears to be a small, crude replica of an Armstrong or Brooke banded gun from around the American Civil War period. It does not show any connection with the 1870 Armstrong 450 mm (17.7 in) Rifled Muzzle Loading guns, AKA 100 Ton Guns. The 450 mm RMLs have no breeching ring. The vent runs in line with the bore out the center of the breech.

There were four of the 450 mm RMLs in British forts, two at Malta and two at Gibralter. One each survive today in Fort Rinella,at Malta, and in Napier of Magdala Battery, at Gibralter. Armstrong sold eight of these guns to the Italian navy earlier. This forced the British to buy the four guns to have guns of equal power at their important bases in the Mediterranean.

cannonmn
08-09-2008, 01:03 PM
Thanks.