cannon ball ID

fernando · 28th October 2013, 07:13 PM

During your browsing you may find these 'grenade launchers' or 'portable mortars'. They date from the 18th century, but i don't think they are the issue here.

.

thinreadline · 28th October 2013, 07:32 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fernando

During your browsing you may find these 'grenade launchers' or 'portable mortars'. They date from the 18th century, but i don't think they are the issue here.

.

No all your info is much appreciated , its an area I am very ignorant of , I am on safer ground with guns & swords etc !

M ELEY · 31st October 2013, 11:28 AM

Grenades vs mortar shells...this has always troubled me as well. Per Gilkerson, grenades were rarely smooth and often not even perfectly circular, because they didn't need to fit perfectly in the barrel. Mortar shells were more like solid shot in that they were supposed to be well formed and smooth, at least theoretically. Put one in the ground for a few centuries and it might not be so easy. I have what I think is a grenade in my collection, somewhat between the size bigger than a golf ball, but smaller than a tennis ball. It has a very small 1/4" hole and congealed powder inside. It isn't perfectly round, so I assumed grenade. Problem is, most resources claim grenades are larger than mine and with a bigger fuse hole. Hope to someday find a resource that shows other sizes besides what 'Boarders Away' lists.

Another controversy is with the brass grenade launchers. Some sources say that these rifle types were too short and too thin to be effective as launchers and that these guns were more likely for shooting off flares or fireworks.

kronckew · 31st October 2013, 06:42 PM

do a forum search here on 'mortar shell' and 'hand grenade'

these have been discussed here before. some interesting comments. some even might be mine

fernando · 31st October 2013, 08:18 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by M ELEY

...Another controversy is with the brass grenade launchers. Some sources say that these rifle types were too short and too thin to be effective as launchers and that these guns were more likely for shooting off flares or fireworks.

Speaking of which ...
This example is in exhibition in the Portuguese Royal Palace of Vila Viçosa armour collection.
For what it is worth, the text says that it is a XVIII century Spanish (?) portable mortar, with a 73 m/m mouth. Cast in bronze, with a chamber of much narrower section, with a support hook in the lower part. Silex lock a la French. It shot 'case' with multiple projectiles. It was used in ships and parapets.

.

fernando · 31st October 2013, 09:05 PM

I tell you Mark that i concur with your doubts in this issue and find the definition you quote (Gilkerson) rather hard to digest ... though admiting that such person will be an expert in the matter and i, an ignarus

.
I don't see why the distinction between a grenade and a shell would be their outer perfection.
I know that hundreds of 5 1/2" howitzer grenades were shot during the French invasions (1807-1814). I am trying hard to locate the illustration of one of these projectiles. On the other hand, i don't see any reason for the example i have shown above not be one of such things. Most howitzers were mounted in fortification lines around Lisbon and i got this one over there.
Despite its corrosion due to age, it looks rather spherical ... and the fuse hole is pretty narrow.
I would quicker assimilate that the difference between grenades and shells and even between mortars and howitzer typology, resides in their time evolution and origin.

M ELEY · 1st November 2013, 03:57 AM

Yes, just one of the many frustrating and foggy areas of naval collecting. I like the bronze gun for the 'Tops'. It would have done well against boarders.
I don't necessarily question Mr. Gilkerson, but I feel that his study concentrated particularly on one country's type of grenado from a specific time period (Great Britiain, ca. 1600-1750-ish). As we've seen on this forum, there were all manner of exploding shells around made in different materials (clay, stone, etc). Perhaps in the future, someone will do a more definitive and specific volume on said lobbed bombards.
Here's mine from an old link. As I said, it's smaller than the examples Gilkerson mentions, bigger than golf ball but smaller than a tennis ball, approx 2 1/4" tall with a hole the size of a garden pea (at this small size, I imagine just enough room for a wick with no inner core, as some do-
http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=hand+grenade

M ELEY · 1st November 2013, 04:02 AM

Thanks, Kronckew. Have looked them over again for reference, but you see my point with some of the smaller ordnance. Would a small sphere such as mine more likely be a grenade or a very small mortar shell? Did they make them this small??

28th October 2013, 07:13 PM	#1
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	During your browsing you may find these 'grenade launchers' or 'portable mortars'. They date from the 18th century, but i don't think they are the issue here. . Attached Images

31st October 2013, 09:05 PM	#6
fernando (deceased) Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: Portugal Posts: 9,694	Grenade definition I tell you Mark that i concur with your doubts in this issue and find the definition you quote (Gilkerson) rather hard to digest ... though admiting that such person will be an expert in the matter and i, an ignarus . I don't see why the distinction between a grenade and a shell would be their outer perfection. I know that hundreds of 5 1/2" howitzer grenades were shot during the French invasions (1807-1814). I am trying hard to locate the illustration of one of these projectiles. On the other hand, i don't see any reason for the example i have shown above not be one of such things. Most howitzers were mounted in fortification lines around Lisbon and i got this one over there. Despite its corrosion due to age, it looks rather spherical ... and the fuse hole is pretty narrow. I would quicker assimilate that the difference between grenades and shells and even between mortars and howitzer typology, resides in their time evolution and origin.

31st October 2013, 11:28 AM	#3
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,184	Grenades vs mortar shells...this has always troubled me as well. Per Gilkerson, grenades were rarely smooth and often not even perfectly circular, because they didn't need to fit perfectly in the barrel. Mortar shells were more like solid shot in that they were supposed to be well formed and smooth, at least theoretically. Put one in the ground for a few centuries and it might not be so easy. I have what I think is a grenade in my collection, somewhat between the size bigger than a golf ball, but smaller than a tennis ball. It has a very small 1/4" hole and congealed powder inside. It isn't perfectly round, so I assumed grenade. Problem is, most resources claim grenades are larger than mine and with a bigger fuse hole. Hope to someday find a resource that shows other sizes besides what 'Boarders Away' lists. Another controversy is with the brass grenade launchers. Some sources say that these rifle types were too short and too thin to be effective as launchers and that these guns were more likely for shooting off flares or fireworks.

31st October 2013, 06:42 PM	#4
kronckew Member Join Date: Mar 2006 Location: Room 101, Glos. UK Posts: 4,239	do a forum search here on 'mortar shell' and 'hand grenade' these have been discussed here before. some interesting comments. some even might be mine

1st November 2013, 03:57 AM	#7
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,184	Yes, just one of the many frustrating and foggy areas of naval collecting. I like the bronze gun for the 'Tops'. It would have done well against boarders. I don't necessarily question Mr. Gilkerson, but I feel that his study concentrated particularly on one country's type of grenado from a specific time period (Great Britiain, ca. 1600-1750-ish). As we've seen on this forum, there were all manner of exploding shells around made in different materials (clay, stone, etc). Perhaps in the future, someone will do a more definitive and specific volume on said lobbed bombards. Here's mine from an old link. As I said, it's smaller than the examples Gilkerson mentions, bigger than golf ball but smaller than a tennis ball, approx 2 1/4" tall with a hole the size of a garden pea (at this small size, I imagine just enough room for a wick with no inner core, as some do- http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showth...t=hand+grenade

1st November 2013, 04:02 AM	#8
M ELEY Member Join Date: Dec 2004 Location: NC, U.S.A. Posts: 2,184	Thanks, Kronckew. Have looked them over again for reference, but you see my point with some of the smaller ordnance. Would a small sphere such as mine more likely be a grenade or a very small mortar shell? Did they make them this small??