Great article...

[M ELEY]

http://asoac.org/bulletins/91_benninghoff_spanish.pdf

Informative article on Spanish weapons used during the Am Revolution. Neumann's guide featured some pics of Spanish weapons here in the colonies during the period, but it's nice to substantiate their actual usage during the conflict.

[celtan]

Hi Marcos,

: )

Thanks for sharing the article, nice pics. I have never heard the term espingole, althought I have espingarda, a long arab musket used often by bedouins.

Progressively, as the full-sized Fusil (modern term) / Mosquete (earlier) lenght is decreased, the weapons change their name to Carabina, then to Tercerola (a shorter 2/3rds version of the carbine) , to the smallest sized Mosqueton.

The 1757 only differed from the 1752 in that it had brass trigger covers, stock's foot and bands, and an iron ramrod. Both used a french flintlock action, and both had large-ring hammer screws. Fusil is a more modern term for a musket/mosquete, not a different weapon.

The m1752 was based on the prior 1740s, and these on the m1722-24, all similar in appearance to the french m1717. The 1752-54 used the french flintlock action, the others the sturdier Miguelete.

All spanish 18th C. guns used the ringed hammer-screw, a vast advantage when changing the flints at the field. In the 1800s the spanish military guns generally adopted the French action instead, due to ample surplus availability after the Napoleonic Wars.

Once again, thanks for the link!

Best

M

Originally Posted by M ELEY

http://asoac.org/bulletins/91_benninghoff_spanish.pdf

Informative article on Spanish weapons used during the Am Revolution. Neumann's guide featured some pics of Spanish weapons here in the colonies during the period, but it's nice to substantiate their actual usage during the conflict.

[Jim McDougall]

Mark, thanks very much for the link, and this really is an excellent article.
Manolo, thank you for the annotations as well! Your knowledge on this field is always outstandingly represented in the helpful notes you add, and it really helps having a more accurate interpretation as we learn from articles like this.

As I learn more on colonial New Spain and its fascinating history, it is incredible to realize that the Revolutionary War in America was actually more of a 'world war' than a relatively isolated theater of war. While it is known than France was in degree involved and actually formally declared war on Great Britain later, it is seldom recognized that Spain also played a role in not only financial support in certain degree, but as can be clearly seen in this article, considerable supplies of weapons.

I think that Neumann's long standing key reference on weaponry of the Revolutionary War reflects the wide scope of international weaponry used during this period by the Colonial Forces, and this article does focus on the important detail concerning those of Spain.

Excellent link Mark, and great input Manolo!! Its good to see this field of study on Spanish Colonial history developing more interest.

All the best,
Jim

[M ELEY]

Thank you, Jim and Manolo, for your comments on the article. I happened to stumble across it quite by accident recently and I'm very glad I did.

Manolo, you mention that you've never heard the term 'espingole' before and I was wondering where this term could have derived from. It is used frequently when referring to deck-mounted swivel muskets and "fort guns" usually with an iron yoke for securing in place. I suspect that it is a corrupted adaptation of another term or gun, perhaps this espingarda you mentioned. Wall guns were extremely long, heavy guns, so perhaps they are named after the bedouin gun?

Jim, good to hear from you. I agree now in retrospect that Neumann was right on with including so many weapons from other countries (Dutch, German, Spanish, etc). It was another "world war" starting to brew, with America the fuse. Shocking to see just how much money the Spanish government invested in the little upstart colonies.

[celtan]

A world war it was. The Dutch, Portuguese and even some South-Asian Kingdoms became involved.

The British had 94 ships of the line (SOTL), with the best trained crews. The French had 52 and the Spanish 54. The Spanish had the better ships...and the most untrained crews. (Similarly to the Italians in WWII).

The Americans had a grand total of _5_ SOTL.

That's where the real advantage of having the Spanish and French ships laid. It caused the British to pull their units away from American coast, to protect England and the Caribbean island factories, thus preventing their literal mauling of the tiny American fleet. The convoys to help the British Forces could not be protected either.

The real worry to the Brits was the loss of the island factories in the Caribbean, of far more economic importance than the paltry 13 colonies. An Spanish Admiral captured a large British convoy (~60 ships) with provisions for Cornwallis. The blocking French ships prevented any other assistance from reaching him, after Cheasepeake Bay.

The Spanish and French had just finished the preparations for an invasion force to take the British Caribbean factories, which meant it was a good moment for King George to agree to terms. While Yorktown was a significant defeat, it was the Spanish-French invasion-to-be which truly motivated the end of the hostilities, then and there.

In fact, Jim. It was Spanish help that saved Washington at Valley Forge. The soldiers were deserting die to both lack of payment and supplies. The local merchants would rather sell to the British at good rates and in actual coin, not promisory notes. It was Spanish aid, both in supplies such as weapons et al, as in actual money transfers that saved the day. I have even seen (in Mt. Vernon?) Washinton's own musket, which just happens to be a Spanish M1757.

Even the French required assistance from Spain, they were utterly broke. Spain had to loan money, supplies and repair facilities for De Grasses's fleet. His guns burnt Spanish Black-Powder...and so did the Colonial fleet, whose ships were repaired in Spanish Ports from La Coruna to Mexico, Cuba, Puerto Rico, Santo Domingo and Colombia.

Well, I'm getting too deep into this subject, and perhaps this is not the right forum

BTW: Spain didn't do this out of love for their monarch-defiant (Dios nos proteja..!) American neighbours, it was all out of self interest, and as repayment to the Brits for the prior "7-years war"...

Best!

M

Originally Posted by Jim McDougall

Mark, thanks very much for the link, and this really is an excellent article.
Manolo, thank you for the annotations as well! Your knowledge on this field is always outstandingly represented in the helpful notes you add, and it really helps having a more accurate interpretation as we learn from articles like this.

As I learn more on colonial New Spain and its fascinating history, it is incredible to realize that the Revolutionary War in America was actually more of a 'world war' than a relatively isolated theater of war. While it is known than France was in degree involved and actually formally declared war on Great Britain later, it is seldom recognized that Spain also played a role in not only financial support in certain degree, but as can be clearly seen in this article, considerable supplies of weapons.

I think that Neumann's long standing key reference on weaponry of the Revolutionary War reflects the wide scope of international weaponry used during this period by the Colonial Forces, and this article does focus on the important detail concerning those of Spain.

Excellent link Mark, and great input Manolo!! Its good to see this field of study on Spanish Colonial history developing more interest.

All the best,
Jim

[fernando]

Hi guys,
Just a little note; the current term for a shoulder arm in Portugal is ESPINGARDA.
Nando.

[celtan]

Hi Nandin,

It actually makes more sense, espingarda doesn't sound arabic at all. In fact, my grandad in Galicia used to call me that, on account of my being tall and thin.

OTOH, it might be that the involvement in North Africa of both Spain and Portugal brought that word home from it being used there.

Regards

M

Originally Posted by fernando

Hi guys,
Just a little note; the current term for a shoulder arm in Portugal is ESPINGARDA.
Nando.

[M ELEY]

Hello M and N ( )

Espingarda from the Portuguese meaning tall/thin/long. Sounds right. Along with swival coehorns, these wall guns fascinate me. Thanks for commenting.

[celtan]

Just fired one today three times, with a 2 oz FFBP load...

Noisy!

: )

Originally Posted by M ELEY

Hello M and N ( )

Espingarda from the Portuguese meaning tall/thin/long. Sounds right. Along with swival coehorns, these wall guns fascinate me. Thanks for commenting.

[aiontay]

If I'm not mistaken, the westernmost battle of the American Revolution was a combined British/Chickasaw attack on the Spanish garrison at Arkansas Post in, of course, Arkansas.

[celtan]

I don't think so. There was a Chickasaw river attack on a Spanish Convoy in Missouri, under British auspices. Spain's american allies (The Kickapoo) made them pay heavily in blood for it. This was during the AR Wars.

There was raid _after_the War, at Port Arkansas. It was made by English colonists and their (n) american allies, the Chickasaw. The last were commanded by a englishman adopted into their tribe. In fact, the guy was under American employ, not England, when he did so.

I believe the AR's westernmost battle took place at St. Louis, and it also was a Spanish victory. When I say Spanish, that also includes the (n) american allies that fought beside them.

Best

M

Originally Posted by aiontay

If I'm not mistaken, the westernmost battle of the American Revolution was a combined British/Chickasaw attack on the Spanish garrison at Arkansas Post in, of course, Arkansas.

[fernando]

Hola Nelito

Originally Posted by celtan

... In fact, my grandad in Galicia used to call me that, on account of my being tall and thin. ...

He he he ...So we start getting acquainted with your format

Originally Posted by celtan

... OTOH, it might be that the involvement in North Africa of both Spain and Portugal brought that word home from it being used there ...

The term comes from the old french espringarde, a stone throwing ballista, via the italian spingarda.

Fernando

[celtan]

Holá Nando,

Muito obrigado!

: )


M

"Tall, yet no longer thin" : (

Originally Posted by fernando

Hola Nelito



He he he ...So we start getting acquainted with your format



The term comes from the old french espringarde, a stone throwing ballista, via the italian spingarda.

Fernando

[aiontay]

http://www.nps.gov/arpo/historyculture/upload/Colbert's%20Raid.pdf

[celtan]

Hi Alontay,

Yep, Colbert, that's the guy. Both him and his father were adopted by the Chickasaw.

In 1783, the British had already left the Colonies (Yorktown capitulation was in 81'), yet in paper, the war lasted until 83' with the Treaty of Paris.

Colbert was under the employ of the US Govt., who was already at odds with their Spanish neighbour due to final definition of frontiers and waterways travel. Most of the (n) americans were allied then to Spain, since American politics were inimical to their interests as separate peoples, and Spanish hands were less "heavy" (ie. controlling) than those of the Americans.

BTW, I'm an NPS VIP at the local Forts.

Best regards.

Manolo

Originally Posted by aiontay

http://www.nps.gov/arpo/historyculture/upload/Colbert's%20Raid.pdf

[aiontay]

The NPS document claims that James Colbert led a force of British, not American, partisans. Arrell Gibson writes in his book "The Chickasaws" that James Colbert was a leader of British forces during the Revolutionary War. As for James being adopted, well, I could ask his descendents since I know a couple of them. Clearly, he intermarried and had/has numerous Chickasaw descendents. I'm Kiowa and Chickasaw, and my family, though not related, had pretty close ties with some of the Colberts back in the 19th Century, although I don't say that with any particular pride since the Colberts are problematic bunch.

[celtan]

Hi Aiontay.

Then the NPS is plumb wrong.

Yes, he used to serve the Brits, but since they were no more, he found new "masters". Proof of this is that during the Arkansas Post attack he did not bother Americans, and in fact. many Americans were part of his troupe.

There's also a history recorded from one of his contemporaries, I can't recall his name, he was a (n) american, who actually mentions Colbert's American employ.

There were (at least) two Colberts, father and son, both served the Brits. I believe the one that lead the attack at Arkansas was the son. But I might be wrong.

Remember that we are talking about 1783, when Spanish and Americans were trying to control the Mississippi and frontier areas, and de facto England was out of the picture In theory, Colbert was still at official War with Spain, although the Paris Treaty was signed on January. Colbert continued with his depredations and attacks on the grounds he had not received notice. Even after receiving same, he continued doing so, although more circumspectly.

BTW: I know what you mean. Sometimes I wish that some members of my extended family would change their surname...

Best

M

Originally Posted by aiontay

The NPS document claims that James Colbert led a force of British, not American, partisans. Arrell Gibson writes in his book "The Chickasaws" that James Colbert was a leader of British forces during the Revolutionary War. As for James being adopted, well, I could ask his descendents since I know a couple of them. Clearly, he intermarried and had/has numerous Chickasaw descendents. I'm Kiowa and Chickasaw, and my family, though not related, had pretty close ties with some of the Colberts back in the 19th Century, although I don't say that with any particular pride since the Colberts are problematic bunch.

[M ELEY]

I like finding these freebies out there on the net. Not much new info here, but it does cover an interesting museum repair to an espada hilt and restoration procedures. If only all museums were as appreciative and preserving of their collections-

www.elpalacio.org/articles/espada.pdf