A unique bronze barrel wall gun (doppelter Doppelhaken), Nuremberg, ca. 1515-20

[cannonmn]

I was leafing through Essenwein, A., QUELLEN ZUR GESCHICHTE DER FEUERWAFFEN, Academische Druck u.v. Graz 1969, Tafel Band, and noticed drawings of some cannons cast by Peter II Mulich of Zwickau. They have rings of undulating flames at various places along the barrel, just like my hackbut. These cannons range in date from 1523 to 1529. This is interesting to me as it indicates a connection between my hackbut and these cannons. I wonder if my hackbut could have been made by Mulich, who may have used the flames as a kind of trademark? If not, were these rings of undulating flames significant somehow to Charles V or to the Holy Roman Empire? What is the connection indicated by these flames? I am posting two images here which I can do under the international doctrine of fair use for educational purposes.

[cannonmn]

This photo, found on the web, is dated 1940, at the time this cannon was taken from the Army Museum in Paris and moved to the City Museum in Zwickau. A drawing of this elegant cannon is in the previous post. I'd like to know if this is the only surviving Peter Mulich cannon. I've emailed the museum in Zwickau to ask if they can provide any better photos of this cannon. If anyone has any better photos of this gun, please post them here. There is apparently a photo of this gun in the book "Deutches Bronzegeschützrohre" which I don't have.

[cannonmn]

Here's an excerpt from a Google Book on the Elector Frederick which, although my German is poor, seems to clearly indicate Peter was involved in casting "buchsen." There are so many different terms for this general class of weapons that it is confusing to non-German-speaking researchers, and perhaps some Germans as well.

My latest question: Since now we know Peter II Mulich was a Feuerbuchsen-caster and not only a cannon-founder, are any other hackbuts/arquebus known which can be attributed to Peter Mulich of Zwickau (formerly of Nuremberg.)

Rr. 122o. Dienstverschreibung Herzog Johanns für sich und

seine Erben an P e t e r M ü l i c h als Büchsengiesser auf

Lebenszeit, besonders in Zwickau sich zum Giessen

gebrauchen zu lassen, mit jährlichem Gehalt von 5o Gulden

Landeswährung und ein Winterhofkleid aus der fürstl.

Schneiderei, vnd so er in vnser arbeith ist vnnd vnns

giessen wird sollen vnnd wollen wir Ime alle wege vom

centner Zu lohne geben wir denhalben gulden bei seiner

eigen Cost Kollen Feuer Helffe vnd getzeugk doch das wir

ime die speisse als kupffer tzin messing vnd was zum werk

die notturfft sein wird verschaffen Zu Weymar Suntag noch

michalis Anno 1 223. (4 Oct.).

Die durchlauchtigen Hochgeborene Fürsten, vnnd herrn, Herr

Johanns Fridrich der Mitler, Herr Johanns Wilhelm, vnnd

Herr Johanns Fridrich der Jünger, gebrüdern, Herzogenn zu

Sachsen und vnnsern gnedige Fürsten, vnnd herren haben

Peter Mülichen, Bürgers vnnd Büchsengiessers Zu Zwickau

schreiben, heren lossen vnnd Ihme dorauf anzuzeigenn

bevohlenn, das er binnen Zweyen Monaten, Zu Weymar, Im

Hofflager vidrumb annsuchen solte, Ihme alsdann doselbst

vff solche seine suchung, bescheidt gegeben werden, Dat.

Nevstadt ann der Orla, Dienstags nach Jubilate Anno liiij.

(17. April 1554).

Brief Peter Millich Bürger vnd Büchsengiesser datiert

Zwickau Donnerstag nach Jubilate (19 April.)

An die Fürsten worin er schreibt, dass er von Kurfürst

Friedrich und Herzog Johann auf Lebenszeit bestallt worden

sei «Welcher Dinst mit püchsen vnd glocken giessen vieler

schonen grosser vnd kleinen stücke, auch etlichen Zügen,

vnd schiessen Ich nhun gotlob Inn die 31 Jhar auch unter

Regierung des Kurlürsten Johann Friedrich E. F. G. geübten

Hern Vaters.

Schlechte schweren Zeiten «ist mir nhun In sieben Jharen

mein Jhar gelt vnd kleidung nit gereicht worden, er hätte

zur Antwort bekommen, er möge bessere Zeiten abwarten, aber

wie ich zu bequemer Zeit deshalb anregung Zuthun

entschlossen, Ist sein Churfürstl. gnaden verschieden mich

ein unglück dero ich doch durch treibung aus der stadt, vnd

entwendung des meinen vil erlitten, auch noch kein andern

hern, dann E. F. G. weiss vnd erkhenn, ist er dr Zuversicht

auch von ihnen die bestallung auf Lebenszeit anerkannt zu

erhalten, mit grossen vnd kleynen püchsen, glocken vnd

grabsteinen zugiessen vnd sonsten von allerley von messing

vnd kuppfer. Er will auch persönlich kommen, auch schöne

Kunst vnd muster mitzubringen vnd zuweysen, Darob E. F. G.

sondern gefallen haben sollen,

Von gottes gnaden Johanns Friedrich d. Mittler Herzog zu

Sachsen etc. Sontag Visitationis Mariae 1557. (4 Juli) thun

kund dass wir Peter Mülich von unsern Hofdienst gnediglich

verlaubt. Vnd aus sonderlich gnaden Im jehrlich die

Besoldung an geld als 4o gulden und auch seinen leib die

Sommer und Winterkleidung, und vor die Unterhaltung seiner

zwei pferde das ehr die abgehen hat lassen 2 Erfurdische

malder korn und ein erfurdischer malder gersten, und damit

er sich sambt seinem weibe soviel desto besser habe

zubehelffen. So haben wir hierüber ihm vnd itzigenn seinem

weibe vf ihr beider lebenn langk die Thanneck sampt dem

Ackerbau und wiesenwachs und anderen, wie er das biss doher

inne gehabt, Vnd Ime vff vnseren befehl eingeräumt und

gegeben ist worden, zuhaben, zunutzen und zugeniessen

gnediglich vrschrieben gut Thanneck, er soll es in baulich

wesen erhalten und darauf nichts vpffänden odr vrschreiben.

Nach seines und seines Weibes Tode soll es wieder vnserm

Ambte Eissenbergk wiederum heimkommen.

♦Rechnung von 1522 bis 1523 (B. b. 4312). icxxxv gulden dem

buchsngisser zu Zwickau von eyner feuerbuchsn zu giessen.

* Rechnung von 1523 bis 1324 (B. b. 4324).

1 gulden peter Mulich büchchsengisser zu Zwickau Seine

Jarbesoldung, Michaelis nechst felhaffig (?) gewest,

entricht zu weymer am Sambstag nach Simon et Jude anno

xxiii.

xcii gulten peter Mulich buchsengisser zu Zwickau an der

grossen Neuen Carthaun zugissen, hält lxxxiii Centner von

jed. iiii gulden hat hiruon ym oster vnd Michelsmarckt

negst unschynen iic gulden auch impfangen inhalts derselben

bucher Zcalt zu Weymer am Sambstag nach Simon et Judae

xxiiii.

*Ostermarkt 1524 (B. b. 4328).

ic dem buchssingisser zu Zwickau vff arbait.

* Michaelismarkt 1524 (B. b. 4323).

ic gulden dem buchssengisser zu Zwickau, hat ym Ostermarkt

negst auch soul (?) empfangen.

ic gulden für viii ff Zcin zubuss zur Neuen büchssen.

xli gulden xvii gl. ii pf. von der grossen büchssen ym

Schloss Zwickau, Zuschlagen vnd andere vnkost ....

vii gulden xiii gl. zulon Zweyen furleuten. welche die

Neuen büchssen von Zwickau biss gen Weymar fürgespannen.

♦Michaelismarkt 1524 (B. b. 4233).

ic gulden für xiii centnr Zcin Zcubuss zu der Neuen

buchssen Nickel Heynel Zu zwickav zalt.

xli guld xvii gl. ii pf. von der grossen buchssen in Schlos

Zwickau. »Ostermarkt 1525 (B. b, 4336).

xxv gulden dem buchsengiesser zu Zwickav Jar Zcins vff

lebenlang.

iicxlv gulden peter Mulich dem buchssengiesser zu Zwickau

von der Neuen Buchssen, basiliscus gnant, helt lxx center

von id. iiii gulden inhalts seiner quitanz zu gissenn.

ic guld demsselben buchssengisser von Neuem wieder vff

arbait.

Source: http://books.google.com/books?pg=PA2...zI&output=text

[Matchlock]

Hi John,

I'm afraid it's a bit too risky to narrow the possible founder of your barrel down to just one person who was active in Zwickau. Nuremberg and Augsburg were the great centers of early gunmaking and founding in the 16th c. The flames you mentioned are by no way characteristic of a specific craftsmen or workshop but originated from the Italian 15th c. Renaissance where they firstly symbolized a fire throwing dragon or serpent-like monster and, using this zoomorphic ornamentation, were employed to make look firearm barrels like embodiments of monsters breathing fire. Soon after that, the flames became common in all kinds of arts and crafts; e.g. the vertical slits in the Landsknecht trousers derived from these flame ornaments.

Best,
Michael

[cannonmn]

Michael, thanks again for your information. I do think there is something to be said for Peter II Mulich having used the rings of undulating flames as a trademark for his bronze cannons, as each one of the four for which drawings (including the one surviving specimen in bronze) have the same kind of decorative rings. Using decorative rings of evenly-spaced wavy (undulating) flames is I think a bit stronger evidence than just flames per se. Another thing to consider is that Peter II Mulich was indeed from Nuremberg, where his father had always practiced his trade, but he moved to Zwickau at some point in his career, apparently about 1520-23. However these are merely idle ramblings or at most "food for thought, and you are indeed the expert and I am but a slow-learning and somewhat impetuous student.

Two additional features of the "Schellenberg" hackbut may help tell us something. What looks like a proof-mark on the side of the flash pan seems to match some of those shown for Saxony in my 1943-dated two-volume Swedish-language set of Der Stoeckel. However the marks in the book are supposed to be much later than my gun, so who knows?

A final feature to consider which may help identify the maker is the very prominent iron core-pin, or chaplet, which goes through the breech vertically and is exposed most noticeably on top. Chaplets were always used to hold the cores in place while casting cannons in those days. Have you seen such core pins or chaplets in other bronze hackbuts?

Thanks again for sharing your incredible database and knowledge of these rare pieces.

[cannonmn]

I had my "Ulrich von Schellenberg" hackbut "shot" by an x-ray analyzer today to see what it was made of. I had always thought the metal would be similar to cannons, namely gunmetal, which is approximately 90% copper and 10% tin. Poor innocent, ignorant me! Here's what the analyzer came up with. The very high iron and lead percentages were quite a surprise. I wondered why there would be any aluminum at all, but some other things tested the same day which I know are antique, also showed around 3% aluminum. Go figure!

Test no. and ID:

#10-Bronze Hackbut ca. 1510, presumed to be bronze

Al – 3.62

Si – 7.24

P – 2.08

Ti - .33

Mn - .08

Fe – 17.23

Ni - .04

Cu – 24.68

Zr - .028

Sn – 5.16

Sb – 3.23

Ir – 2.84

Pb – 33.43

[cannonmn]

All I can think of is that the x-ray tester made a mistake. I had the operator shoot the machine at the muzzle of the hackbut to stay well clear of the small iron pieces nearer the breech. He shot several other objects I had, all either iron or steel, and the results on all of those seemed quite reasonable. I'm wondering if he had to change a setting on the machine to get a correct reading for a nonferrous object, and didn't do so? I didn't tell him the hackbut wasn't iron like all the other things. I'll have to ask him during the coming work-week.

[Matchlock]

Hi John,

This result does not puzzle me at all. Actually it represents what one should expect of early 16th c. bronzes; moreover it pefectly backs up metallurgic analyses of early-16th c. gun bronzes carried out in the 1960's, which I have menioned earlier on this forum. They even found traces of silver and other metallic components.


I think this is due to at least three different facts:

Firstly, raw ore in these ages could not be melted to be as pure as it can be today.
Secondly, all the knowledge on the reliability of bronze the founders then had was based merely on practical experience. I would imagine them them to have deliberately added traces of other sorts of metal because they believed - or had learned - that these additions would make the outcome more durable.
Thirdly, popular superstition played an enormous role in ages past. This means that people believed that certain substances just had to be added to whatever they were about to produce in order to ge a good result. It was magic make believe instead of today's hardheaded science that ruled over everday arts and crafts, including medicine and fireworks. When analyzing 16th-17th firework substances you e.g. find traces of urine - simply because it contained saltpeter - and various earths. People felt that that special mixture would guarantee a great outcome - and it obviously did.

Please also cf.
http://books.google.de/books?id=4Ozo...ronzes&f=false
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bronze_Age
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mining_...edieval_Europe

When I had the varnish of one of my Landsknecht arquebus of. ca. 1540 spectroanalyzed in the early 1990's traces of silver and even gold were discovered - in the dark brown lacquer on an almost 500 year-old gun stock!

Best,
Michael

[Matchlock]

After a couple of years I wish to add some more close-ups uf my huge Nuremberg wallgun (doppelter Dopelhaken) that this thread is about.

What I have not mentioned before: it is preserved complete together with its original wooden ramrod (wormed and repaired in places, rear end incomplete) retaining its blackened threaded iron finial (Setzerkopf) and the original scourer (Laufkrätzer)! The ramrod is seen resting on the left side of the heavy piece; it was broken into three separate parts when I bought it some 25 years ago.
The wooden muzzle plug is old but associated.
The originally swiveling pan cover is missing from the barrel.

The gun and ramrod were claimed by the previous owner to have been deaccessioned by the Princely Collections of Hohenlohe-Langenburg in Franconia in the 1960's. On attending their collections by special appointment I photographed two similar Nuremberg bronze wall pieces the better of which, dated 1525, I posted above in post #6.

m

[Matchlock]

Three more, showing details of the ramrod with its blackened iron finial retaining the original scourer.

m

[Matchlock]

Wow, 3,000 views of this thread is reason enough to say thanks!

This wall gun is a great historical piece and unique in any private collection worldwide.

I am very happy to have been able and hold it.


m

[Matchlock]

Two similar and contemoprary, but notably smaller Nuremberg barrels of wallguns, the first ca. 1520, the second with its shorter muzzle section ca. 1510-15, both struck with a Gothic minuscule p mark, which, when found on bronze barrels, can be safely attriuted to the Nuremberg founder Sebald Behaim whose name was pronounced Pehaim in his Franconian dialect.

The other prolific Nuremberg bronze foundry, that of Endres Pegnitzer, can be safely ruled out for marked barrels as he is known to have signed his barrels EPGM, for Endres Pegnitzer Goss Mich (Endres Pegnitzer founded me), the letters characteristically cast in high relief within a coat-of-arms.

In safe conclusion this means that for barrels unsigned and unmarked, either foundry of Behaim/Pehaim or Pegintzer may be held accountable while when a bronze/brass barrel is struck with a minuscule p mark, it should be attributed to the Behaim/Pehaim workshop.

Attached at bottom is a very fine but unsigned and unmarked Nuremberg wallgun barrel of ca. 1520-25, preserved retaining an unusually charming emerald green patina.


m

[Matchlock]

One more close-up of the rear section; as on most early-16th c. bronze barrels, the originally swiveling pan cover is missing while the riveted pin is preserved.

[Matchlock]

For early-16th c. Nuremberg barrels of arquebuses (small 'long' guns), please see

http://www.vikingsword.com/vb/showthread.php?t=15381

[Matchlock]

Another, similiar early-16th c. Nuremberg wallgun bronze/brass barrel is preserved in the George F. Harding collection, in The Art Institute of Chicago.

It seems from the photo that the pan has been removed from the right-hand side of the breech.

m

[Marcus den toom]

Incredible Michael, just came across this thread.
Any new information on these wall guns?

I found a very interesting website on hand cannons.
http://milpas.cc/rifles/ZFiles/Black...Matchlocks.htm

[Matchlock]

Hi Marcus,


And thanks for re-enlivening that old thread of mine. Yes, that's a highly important historic piece in virtually 'untouched' condition for 500 years! Imagine! Apart from the Germanisches Nationalmuseum Nürnberg and the privately owned Schloss Hohenlohe-Langenburg, where I took some of the images posted in this thread, they do not exist in any German, Austrian or Swiss museum or any private collection (except mine)!

Had I new information on such items I would post it right away.


The old site on early hand cannon has one big flaw: the tiny photos that cannot be enlarged!
How can anybody possibly design a site like that??!!! Grrrrrrr ....



Best,
m

[Marcus den toom]

I found a other bronze hackbut like yours. Sold trough Sotheby's but i can't find it anywhere.

[Matchlock]

I recall this one; it was mounted on the present 'carriage' in the 19th c., the Nuremberg barrel ca. 1515-20 but heavily overcleaned.

It cannot match my unique piece in any way.


m

[Marcus den toom]

Quit right Michael, but still you have to admit that the basic form is the same

Sadly, most museums care more about making there presentations as shiny as can be, instead of teaching the folks the facts. A simple photoshop artist could have made the same shiny barrel on paper

I found another haquebut (?) matchlock gun on the web, no other pictures though.

edit: wait a second, this is yours Michael?

[Matchlock]

Yes, Marcus,


I'm extremely proud to say that this indeed is my piece!

I ordered many extra images right before the auction from Tom Del Mar and then bought it, together with the unique combined matchlock and flintlock MONTECUCCOLI musket including its original long folding bayonet from the Stauffenberg collection in Franconia/Bavaria, where it was since it was made in 1666! This makes me only the second owner of the Montecuccoli piece after 350 years - imagine!!! Both pieces are in fine, virtualy 'untouched' and patinated condition. The Montecuccoli musket M 1666 is the one with the pierced butt in the second and third images attached.

The catalog description of the short brass-alloy barrel arquebus with the earliest kind of pre-petronel cherrywood full stock (German krummer Landsknechtkolben) was completely misreading the facts that the barrel is of Maximilian Landsknecht type, most probably cast in Maximilian I's foundry of Mühlau near Innsbruck in about 1495-1500 and struck with a characteristic Late-Gothic founder's mark, The gun obviously was restocked during the South German peasant wars (Bauernkriege) of 1525, and the primitive snap-tinderlock of that Early-Renaissance period was, obsolete by long then, 'modernized' in the High-Baroque period, when everything was badly needed that would still fire: at the end of the Thirty Years War, the 1640's, by re-using an older matchlock mechanism of ca. 1580-1600. I associated an original long tiller trigger to the gun and put it on my wall. Done!

I will post these two guns in separate threads when I can take good images in spring!
Till then, the images attached will have to do.


Best,
Michael

[Marcus den toom]

The pictures are good enough to make me go

I found a pile of pictures on the web, apparantly a nice overview site for all sorts of pictures and subjects.

http://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=handgonnes
http://www.pinterest.com/search/pins/?q=handgonne

[Matchlock]

Many of these photos are by me!

Michael

[Marcus den toom]

I also found this book on handgonnes, but i am not sure about its scientific accuracy
"Medieval Handgonnes: The first black powder infantry weapons, by Sean Mclachlan"

http://www.amazon.com/kindle/dp/B004...ext_eos_detail

[Matchlock]

It's not expensive but I have a copy and it was not worth it. The few photos of original pieces are from the Royal Armouries Leeds and are printed tiny.
As far as the 'Medieval' site is concerned: how serious can you expect a booklet to be when the title (!) page illustrates a true Medieval long gun next to a detached wall gun barrel of ca. 1600 when the Middle Ages were over for 100 years?!

m

[Matchlock]

Another, similar and simultaneous, Nuremberg copper alloy/bronze hackbut barrel, ca. 1515-20, is preserved in the collection at Grandson castle, Switzerland.
The pan is an inapt later addition.

For both temporary and stylistic comparison, I attached another, earlier, ca. 1500-10, of characteristic French make, retaining its original pan that never had a cover (!), fitted with trunnions and cast in high relief with a coat-of-arms, from the same museum.


m

[Matchlock]

CONGRATULATIONS TO THE RESPECTIVE BUYER (who may have been the same in both cases).

The first item is the most ridiculous and primitive mid 20th c. "Italian" piece made to fool the biggest fool ever.

Compared to that, Goofy's "blunderbusses" are purest gold; they, at least, are funny ...

The second item is the world's finest known Nuremberg cast brass, or "bronze", haquebut barrel, half a millennium old, unmatched, and once ordered by an important person of history:
Ulrich von Schellenberg,
whose extremely fine Katzbalger is preserved in the Vienna Habsburg Armory, at the Kunsthistorisches Museum Wien.

They both fetched the same price, in the land of ... whatsoever.

The consigner, and the auction house, succeeded in generating a truly Freudian slip, misspelling
"hackbutt", for haquebut/hackbut.
On second thought, though, they mave been right ...

The State of Austria could not afford to purchase that singular piece - not now, nor in years in come ...
Tu felix Austria ..?!


A very sad "Good Night",
from a very sad

Michael,
who did his very best to save that barrel
but had to quit,
or commit murder suicide ...

[Matchlock]

I bet the oldest item in the images is the wooden stand ...

Just look at the crispness of the drilled touch hole - a 15th c. barrel smith would just have punched the hole through the red hot barrel ...

Of course, that would have left a notable mold around the hole which, at the same time, would have held enough priming powder for the igniting iron to set off the load!

All this is so blatantly obvious that it seems just unbelievable.


m

[Matchlock]

.

[Matchlock]

Some samples of authentic Gothic majuscule and minuscule script attached.

Compared to them, the lettering on this barrel, intended to look "antique"; actually, it cannot be termed but the most primitive sham the author has ever come across.


Also note the various dents and scratches, plus the ridiculous "aged" surface condition.

23,000 USD.
Well done.
Have fun, everybody.



Michael Trömner