Come and Take It! The Gonzalez Cannon

[midelburgo]

In this book,

La organización naval de los estados mediterráneos y en especial de España durante los siglos XVI y XVII. By Francisco-Felipe Olesa Muñido.

There is a artillery compilatory table at page 318 of the first volume,

where an "esmeril" is described as a bronze minor weapon without servers firing lead ammunition (or lead with an iron core) of 1/2 to 1 pound of weight, 2-3cm diameter, 40 calibers in length.

Data comes from Jorge Vigon, History of the Spanish Artillery, first volume around page 118. I have it as well, but the table is easier to check.

What I find interesting to mention is that an "esmeril" is a flint. I thought this was related to a stone ammunition, but probably that was not clever because of the wasting of the tube. If it is related to a spark system, Rainier Daenhardt says Portuguese were using those already in the 1530s.

I understand that a gun with the characteristics of the first gun with servers in Fernando post, will fall in the mentioned table under "cerbatana".

About the original brass buried gun, there is something wrong. I believe a six pounder of 6 feet will weight much more than 100lbs. The iron cannon resembles a Scottish carronade. Maybe something from a barge.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

In this book,

La organización naval de los estados mediterráneos y en especial de España durante los siglos XVI y XVII. By Francisco-Felipe Olesa Muñido.

There is a artillery compilatory table at page 318 of the first volume,

where an "esmeril" is described as a bronze minor weapon without servers firing lead ammunition (or lead with an iron core) of 1/2 to 1 pound of weight, 2-3cm diameter, 40 calibers in length.

Data comes from Jorge Vigon, History of the Spanish Artillery, first volume around page 118. I have it as well, but the table is easier to check.

What I find interesting to mention is that an "esmeril" is a flint. I thought this was related to a stone ammunition, but probably that was not clever because of the wasting of the tube. If it is related to a spark system, Rainier Daenhardt says Portuguese were using those already in the 1530s.

I understand that a gun with the characteristics of the first gun with servers in Fernando post, will fall in the mentioned table under "cerbatana".

About the original brass buried gun, there is something wrong. I believe a six pounder of 6 feet will weight much more than 100lbs. The iron cannon resembles a Scottish carronade. Maybe something from a barge.

Thank you so much! this further detailed information on these guns is so valuable as these are insights from resources far from access here.
Very well noted on this curious term, which seems to be a colloquially used reference to these small guns of Mexican origin.

I had seen esmeril translated as 'emery' which seemed odd, then Fernando noted the loosely applied term 'grinder' which added to conundrum. Adding the 'flint' description of course adds another facet.

With all of this and now realizing there were two cannons at Gonzalez on October 2, 1835 in the notable conflict with Mexican dragoons who were there to retrieve their loaned gun.
The gun they were after was a SIX pounder, of 6 foot length weighing 700 pounds, and of bronze (often the term brass is used incorrectly).

What has completely fouled the mix is the small esmeril which arrived in Gonzalez that day, and was indeed fired in the brief conflict.
Actually this gun had been captured in a battle in 1832 and had been spiked so a new touch hole was drilled.
This gun was of such small size and bore (1/4 pound) it would be inconsequential in any sort of siege or notable combat.

It was noticeably uncharacteristic as far as cannons go, the cascabel was oversized, its shape was more of tube. It seems remarkable that it seems to be the likeness shown on this fabled flag, which is claimed to have been fashioned from the wedding dress of one of the wives. This was then termed the 'old cannon flag' and seems to have been confined to Gonzalez.

When the makeshift carriage was made using handmade boards from local trees to transport it, the 'tube' seemed unusually small in such large mounts and was rather laughed at. Why such an elaborate rig was needed to transport a 70 pound gun being pulled by two oxen seems odd. To make matters worse, the friction from the wheels and final failure of the rig, along with the two oxen being spent rendered the effort useless. With this the gun was buried, as per it seems a standard practice with guns being put out of service in these contexts.

This gun, found in 1936, was placed unceremoniously in the post office in Gonzalez where it was perhaps literally used as a doorstop until the 1960s. At this point local gun collectors began to associate it with the 1835 'battle' and that it may be the famed 'cannon' of Gonzalez.

There is no doubt of the conflict in Gonzales over 'a cannon' in 1835, but the fact that there were apparently TWO cannon, not just one has confused the matter. To compound this, according to the accounts of the actual full sized six pounder of bronze which was one of four later used for metal content thus no longer extant eliminates actual examination possibility.
What remains is the apocryphal history of the small cannon now on display in Gonzalez, which seems logistically improbable as a combat weapon, but profoundly powerful symbolically.

It would seem that the confusion from the misunderstanding of the term esmeril as applied to the cannon in Gonzalez is the issue, as there is no way this term would be applied to a full size 700 pound cannon, six pounder.

[Jim McDougall]

In looking further at this small artillery piece from Gonzalez termed the esmeril, I looked into the Battle of Velasco June 25,1832. In this the Texians defeated a Mexican force who had built a small log stockade on the Brazos river. It mentions a small 'swivel' gun, and this seems to be the gun brought to Gonzalez by the Texian militia.

I was wondering why this was mounted on a relatively large wheeled carraige, and it would seem likely it might have been for better position in aiming as it was to be mobile and not fixed in position.

Why would such a small gun have been such a deterrent? As the Texians did not have ammunition, they cut up horseshoes, nails etc. to be fired a langrage, which can do terrible damage fired into a mass of men. That followed by musket fire would have had notable effect. The OTHER gun, a six pounder was fired twice, and also it would seem with langrage.

I found that three other esmerils were from the Alamo (again the Gonzalez one never made it). Apparently one of the Alamo esmerils was British made.

In the march to San Antonio and the Alamo, a conflict along the way became the Concepcion battle, where a six pounder known as the 'Gonzalez cannon' was fired. The imprecise references often used in these accounts note a 'four' pounder when referring to the Gonzalez cannon, but the evidence shows it was indeed a six pounder. There is a record of 121 balls , six pounder made for this gun in late October 1835.

[fernando]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

... I understand that a gun with the characteristics of the first gun with servers in Fernando post, will fall in the mentioned table under "cerbatana"...

The caption in the previously posted example clearly define it as an esmeril. Perhaps the author was wrong ... or not. Maybe not so easy to figure out which is which among the universe of early gun variations. On the other hand, cerbatana, in Portuguese zarabatana, is basically a blowgun; go figure.
Easier to take into account is the difference in size betweeen a 1/4 pound shot and a six pound... for what matters.


.

[midelburgo]

I took a shot of the table at the Olesa Muñido book. This is only for XVI and XVIIth centuries.

[fernando]

Excelent material; will safe to my files.

[Jim McDougall]

Originally Posted by midelburgo

I took a shot of the table at the Olesa Muñido book. This is only for XVI and XVIIth centuries.

Im with Fernando! very valuable material! Thank you so much! will also add to my files!
While 16th and 17th c. these guns were often in use far longer than just generations, which was why they were so valued.

[fernando]

Not to forget that, Portuguese typologies of this period (and not only) had plenty (most) gun types coinciding with those from Spain but also had different ones, both only with a different name and others with different characteristics. A pity i don't know of a source where they are all listed in one table.
There was the 48 pounder bronze LEÃO (lion), the IV century stone shot CÃO (dog) larger than the Berço and no curved tail, the CAMELO (camel) and the CAMELETE, equivalent to a 1/3 stone shot Cannon, the stone shot ÁSPIDE, equivalent to half bastard culverin, the ESPERA (wait) equivalent to 1/3 cannon, the impressive ESPALHAFATO (great fuss) also denomitaded TOURO (wild bull) that threw a 92 Kilos (over 200 pouds) stone ball. And so on ...
Despite the of Portuguese arsenals patrimony was devastated by Acts of God (1755 earthquake), and 'borrowed' by dominating powers, one of the greatest bronze cannon collections in the world is kept in the pateo of the Lisbon Military Museum and also in its galeries.

[fernando]

If i may still assault Jim's thread, this is the Vasco da Gama room in the Lisbon Military Museum, where all the types mentioned in my previous post (and more) are exhibited.


.

[LouG]

Gentlemen---In reading your most interesting posts, I gather that what we call a "culverin" is termed in Spanish a "culebrina", and if so, these "culebrinas" (based on the Olesa Munido page posted by Midelburgo) were made in a range of sizes, small as well as large. I mention this because the books on artillery I have here all describe a culverin as a big gun; but a particular episode of 1590 concerning a Spanish military action in present-day New Mexico seems to preclude the possibility that the culverins involved were big, heavy pieces. So the specific question is: in Spanish military parlance of the late XVI Century, a "culebrina" could be as small as a falcon, correct?

[fernando]

Welcome to the forum, Lou . The section on the left of thr chart that encompasses culverins is more a generic for guns basic typology. In fact, and as you may see in the 'class' column, culverins and half culverins are long barreled pieces with a significant reach. Also you may see in the chart that a (legit) culverin is over four times heavier than a falcon.
As per the term, culverin in English, Colubrina in Spanish and Portuguese and Couleuvrine in French, derive from the Latin term for Cobra (snake). As you well know, in an early stage artillery pieces were given animal names.