Come and Take It! The Gonzalez Cannon

[fernando]

Esmeril is an artillery piece a little bigger than the falconet. Basicaly a bronze breech loader, its class name, in english emery (grinder) might be metaphoric ... or not. Remember that, in the beginning of artillery, in view of lacking typology standardized classification, names of beasts, birds and other were used to defined their dimension/caliber. When you talk 'actual' cannons, the esmeril is small stuff. In action during the XVI century, it is rather problematic to admit that esmeris were still in use during the Alamo saga, let alone a COME AND TAKE IT symbol.
Here are two versions, one (less usual) stocked and the other entire, the first 6 foot long and the other 5 foot. Calibers 3 cms. (just over 1") and 4,6 cms. (less than 2")

(Courtesy Armaria do Palacio dos Duques de Bragança)

.

[Jim McDougall]

Thank you Fernando, I knew you would have the answer, and I agree this must have been a metaphoric term long outdated but simply referring to a 'small gun'.
Naturally these swivel guns were relatively small, but effective in the close quarters of decks.

The dilemma remains, was this tiny cannon the one the Mexicans were so intent on retrieving? Why? If the dispute pertained to the larger bronze six pounder with more viable battle potential it would be understandable, but even in case of principle, this little gun does not seem likely.

However, the cannon depicted on the flag does have similarity to the small one noted, with oversize cascabel. It is believed the original flag did not have a star.
According to the story, the small cannon was abandoned and buried when the makeshift wooden wheels failed. It was not as if it was a huge item, only 2 ft. long and 69 pounds.

The only advantage to its credibility is that it was a cannon believed to have been at Gonzalez, and the place it was buried is in the right proximity, and the other larger cannon no longer exists. All that remains there is the apocryphal story of being found in a field and donated to church where it was melted down and cast into a bell.

[fernando]

Jim, it appears you have a long way to go to untangle this knot. Like the virtual COME AND TAKE IT cannon is not that small piece arguably called esmeril* but a six pounder which, according to period parameters, should measure 66 inches, weighing some 750 pounds, with a 3,5 " bore. To the extent that the COME AND TAKE IT piece exhibited in the Gonzales museum is the other vpiece of the puzzle.

*
As established, the esmeril is completely another thing, a breach loader with a distinct (slimmer) shape. Notwithstanging such 'practical' name attributed may not be serious obstacle; only a detail to help confusing things.



.

[Jim McDougall]

Well noted Fernando, and I have had some luck in finding a reference with more information "Cannons of the Texas Revolution" , James V. Woodrick, 2015.
Apparently at Gonzalez on October 2, 1835.

The actual cannon being contested was indeed a bronze 6 pounder which was loaned to the Gonzalez village in 1831 by the Mexicans. When it was ordered to be returned in 1835, the settlers buried it, and refused to give it up.
One of the wives created the now legendary flag which remains proudly flown across Texas with the cannon and the words "Come and Take It".

By September 29th other Texians were arriving in Gonzalez as the Mexicans had sent dragoons to retrieve the gun. The Texians then dug up the gun to prepare for battle.
At this time, a small iron artillery piece also arrived, it was the 'Esmeril' of 69 pounds , 21.5 " long and bore that fired 1/4 pound shot. It was not mounted until Oct 2nd. This gun had been captured by Brazoria volunteers at the Battle of Velasco in 1832.

It is noted that these small guns were made in Mexico until late 1700s.

It would seem that the term 'esmeril' was basically archaic and of course had become colloquial for a small gun of the swivel or deck gun form from the much earlier types. It seems some of these had been mounted as swivel guns in several fortifications, so more of a general term.

Mexican records note that the emeril was shot first and only once, the six pounder then shot twice.

In the march to San Antonio, apparently the esmeril had been mounted on a makeshift carraige which finally failed due to friction on the wheels and issues with the two oxen pulling it. It was abandoned along the road.

Meanwhile the bronze six pounder did make it to San Antonio, and to the Alamo. This brought the number of cannon at the Alamo to 24.
It is ironic that originally, Bowie was ordered to remove the guns from the Alamo, and destroy it.

However Bowie and Neill, the officer then in command there, decided that the Alamo was indeed strategic and that with all these guns it would be well able to be defended. Unfortunately, they could not know that they would not have adequate manpower to handle these guns; nor the ammunition and that there would be severe issues with faulty powder.

After the fall of the Alamo, the Mexicans removed the bronze guns (4) with the others buried, except 8 which were apparently dumped into the San Antonio river (these have never been found).
Of the four bronze guns ...the six pounder from Gonzalez was made into a church bell, the other three into commemorative small guns.

[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.