A cannon chainshot

[Will M]

Interesting projectiles and ferocious looking. Here is a 24 lb solid ball and marked so you know who sent it to you. Fired in 1760 at an island fort near Montreal.

[fernando]

Traditionally, the main objective of these devices was to breake and destroy the rigging and masts of enemy ships. However these projectiles were also used on land, where they had a devastating effect on cavalry and infantry.
According to the American historian, Albert C. Manucy, there is an account from the beginning of the 18th century, which mentions a failed attempt to use a shackle bullet, in which instead of inserting the two bullets into the same artillery piece, each of the two bullets was inserted into two different cannons, arranged side by side, with the chain partially from outside.
The objective of this experimental maneuver was to cancel the rotation effect characteristic of chained bullets and shackle bullets, so that the bullets would be fired in a straight line, with the chain stretched to the maximum. In this way, the firing would be more stable and accurate and, therefore, it would be possible to increase the effectiveness of this type of ammunition, as anti-infantry projectiles. However, this experiment was unsuccessful, as the artillery pieces were not able to fire at the same time, which caused the bullet that was fired first to revolve around the cannon that had not yet fired, wrapping itself in it and destroying it, having still catching and tangling with the current all the troops that were around.

[M ELEY]

Thanks, Will. That is a big ball, indeed! I had always assumed the broad arrow mark was just to let the Brits using it that it was from a foundry that was their own. I would agree that it would make an excellent 'calling card' to the enemy, though!

[M ELEY]

Hello 'Nando and good to hear from you. I remembered reading about this somewhere and the disasterous result! I do know that chain and bar were used against the Parlimentarians in one battle of the English Civil War and again against the Royalists. I haven't had time to look up the reference, but I'll try and find it in my notes.
Do you remember that movie I mentioned to you (and others on the Forum) a few years back called '1612', about the Polish invasion of Russia. There's a great scene involving the use of barshot against the Poles as they ride through the gate of the castle. Brutal! I don't know if it is historically accurate to that battle, though-

[adrian]

The piece measures approximately 12" long with each ball approx 8" in diameter.

8" diameter equates to a 68pr which were larger than guns carried by the English for example (except for the odd Carronade or two) so I assume that you mean some other measurement, 8cm dia or 8" circumference?

Would it be possible to see close up photos of the welds of several of the chain links please? They almost seem to be proud of the surface in the main photo, as one finds with modern factory welded links; is that build up corrosion or metal?
Also photos of the attachment of the links to the balls please - cast integrally or welded to the surface?

[adrian]

Here is a 24 lb solid ball and marked so you know who sent it to you.

That is a super example - the broad arrow only seems to appear on very early shot, quite why they went to the trouble is a mystery to me - why do so few have this? I have collected British muzzle loading projectiles, fuzes etc for nearly two decades and while old British cannon balls with provenance are not too difficult to find - museums, private collections, etc - any marked examples are rare.

[M ELEY]

Oops!!! Adrian, you are absolutely correct! Sorry, no math major! I meant 8 inches in total circumference (meaning literally wrapping my measuring ruler around it). It is only 2.5" tall, if you know what I mean. It's nearly exactly as big as my 2 lb cannonball (a common size for the American 'grasshopper' cannons from the Revolution. Likewise, the 2 pounder balls were used in some swivels). in simpler terms, the size of a small orange or tangerine. Thanks for that correction and I need to go back to shool!

The 12" length is correct, though-

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by adrian

Here is a 24 lb solid ball and marked so you know who sent it to you.

That is a super example - the broad arrow only seems to appear on very early shot, quite why they went to the trouble is a mystery to me - why do so few have this? I have collected British muzzle loading projectiles, fuzes etc for nearly two decades and while old British cannon balls with provenance are not too difficult to find - museums, private collections, etc - any marked examples are rare.

It does seen unusual as the shot was obviously an expendable item, so why add markings? I think it was more a matter of an attempt at marking anything considered Royal property and if not mistaken was in the reign of Henry VIII in his concerns over military weapons and supply. It does seem the 'broad arrow' was around considerable years before.
This was in fact marking of ordnance items in storage, rather than an 'in your eye' note. As you say, typically the projectiles are not marked, and the markings on cannon have key meanings aside from what is often perceived.