Artillery (1857)

Add a subpage to this text

Read the help page for usage.

 

When ordering this article for The New American Cyclopaedia Charles Dana wrote to Marx on May 8, 1857: “Artillery should give the whole science and practice of that arm, and everything relating to it, with the single exception of what relates to the casting of guns, which will come under another head.”

As we see from Engels’ letter to Marx of July 11, 1857, he was going to start writing the article “Artillery”, as well as the article “Army”, immediately after finishing smaller articles beginning with A from Dana’s first requested batch. But busy with the “Army” and articles beginning with B, he did not begin “Artillery” till after October 19. On that day he wrote to Marx: “Now I set to writing ‘The History of Cannon’.” In subsequent letters (Engels to Marx, October 29 and November 15 and 17, and Marx to Engels, October 31, November 13, 1857 and January 23, 1858) the article in question was also called “The History of Cannon” or simply “Cannon”. Marx and Engels apparently did not expect that it could still be inserted in the respective volume of articles beginning with A. However, it was finished by the end of November and sent to New York on the 27th of that month, as can be seen from Marx’s notebook, and was therefore in time for inclusion in Volume II of the Cyclopaedia under its original title “Artillery”. Some of the sources Engels used when writing the article are mentioned in the text. The article “Artillery” in Encyclopaedia Britannica (Vol. Ill, Edinburgh, 1853) and German encyclopaedic publications were of great help to him. Engels’ notes on the calibres of guns used in the Prussian artillery, presumably compiled from a military reference book, are extant. p. 188

The invention of gunpowder, and its application to throwing heavy bodies in a given direction, are now pretty generally conceded to have been of eastern origin. In China and India, saltpetre is the spontaneous excrescence of the soil, and, very naturally, the natives soon became acquainted with its properties. Fireworks made of mixtures of this salt with other combustible bodies were manufactured at a very early period in China, and used for purposes of war as well as for public festivities. We have no information at what time the peculiar composition of saltpetre, sulphur, and charcoal became known, the explosive quality of which has given it such an immense importance. According to some Chinese chronicles, mentioned by M. Paravey in a report made to the French academy in 1850, guns were known as early as 618 B.C.; in other ancient Chinese writings, fire-balls projected from bamboo tubes, and a sort of exploding shell, are described. At all events, the use of gunpowder and cannon for warlike purposes does not appear to have been properly developed in the earlier periods of Chinese history, as the first authenticated instance of their extensive application is of a date as late as 1232 of our era, when the Chinese, besieged by the Mongols in Kaï-fong-fu, defended themselves with cannon throwing stone balls, and used explosive shells, petards, and other fireworks based upon gunpowder.

The Hindoos appear to have had some sort of warlike fireworks as early as the time of Alexander the Great, according to the evidence of the Greek writers Aelian, Ctesias, Philostratus, and Themistius. This, however, certainly was not gunpowder, though saltpetre may have largely entered into its composition. In the Hindoo laws some sort of fire-arms appears to be alluded to; gunpowder is certainly mentioned in them, and, according to Prof. H. H. Wilson, its composition is described in old Hindoo medical works. The first mention of cannon, however, coincides pretty nearly with the oldest ascertained positive date of its occurrence in China. Chased’s poems, about 1200, speak of fire-engines throwing balls, the whistling of which was heard at the distance of 10 coss (1,500 yards). About 1258 we read of fireworks on carriages belonging to the king of Delhi. A hundred years later the use of artillery was general in India; and when the Portuguese arrived there, in 1498, they found the Indians as far advanced in the use of fire-arms as they themselves were.

From the Chinese and Hindoos the Arabs received saltpetre and fireworks. Two of the Arabic names for saltpetre signify China salt, and China snow. Chinese red and white fire is mentioned by their ancient authors. Incendiary fireworks are also of a date almost contemporaneous with the great Arabic invasion of Asia and Africa.

Not to mention the maujanitz, a somewhat mythical fire-arm said to have been known and used by Mohammed, it is certain that the Byzantine Greeks received the first knowledge of fireworks (afterward developed in the Greek fire) from their Arab enemies. A writer of the 9th century, Marcus Gracchus, gives a composition of 6 parts of saltpetre, 2 of sulphur, 1 of coal, which comes very near to the correct composition of gunpowder.

The latter is stated with sufficient exactness, and first of all European writers, by Roger Bacon, about 1216, in his Liber de Nullitate Magiae, but yet for fully a hundred years the western nations remained ignorant of its use. The Arabs, however, appear to have soon improved upon the knowledge they received from the Chinese. According to Conde’s history of the Moors in Spain, guns were used, 1118, in the siege of Saragossa, and a culverin of 4 lb. calibre, among other guns, was cast in Spain in 1132. Abdel-Mumen is reported to have taken Mohadia, near Bona, in Algeria, with fire-arms, in 1156, and the following year Niebla, in Spain, was defended against the Castilians with fire-machines throwing bolts and stones. If the nature of the engines used by the Arabs in the 12th century remains still to be investigated, it is quite certain that in 1280 artillery was used against Cordova, and that by the beginning of the 14th century its knowledge had passed from the Arabs to the Spaniards. Ferdinand IV took Gibraltar by cannon in 1308. Baza in 1312 and 1323, Martos in 1326, Alicante in 1331, were attacked with artillery, and carcasses were thrown by guns in some of these sieges. From the Spaniards the use of artillery passed to the remaining European nations. The French, in the siege of Puy Guillaume in 1338, had guns, and in the same year the German knights in Prussia used them.

By 1350, fire-arms were common in all countries of western, southern, and central Europe. That artillery is of eastern origin, is also proved by the manufacture of the oldest European ordnance. The gun was made of bars of wrought iron welded longitudinally together, and strengthened by heavy iron rings forced over them. It was composed of several pieces, the movable breech being fixed to the flight after loading. The oldest Chinese and Indian guns are made exactly in the same way, and they are as old, or older, than the oldest European guns. Both European and Asiatic cannon, about the 14th century, were of very inferior construction, showing artillery to have still been in its infancy.

Thus, if it remains uncertain when the composition of gunpowder and its application to fire-arms were invented, we can at least fix the period when it first became an important engine in warfare; the very clumsiness of the guns of the 14th century, wherever they occur, proves their novelty as regular war-machines. The European guns of the 14th century were very unwieldy affairs. The largc-calibrecl ones could only be moved by being taken to pieces, each piece forming a wagon-load. Even the small-calibred guns were exceedingly heavy, there being then no proper proportion established between the weight of the gun and that of the shot, nor between the shot and the charge. When they were brought into position, a sort of timber framework or scaffolding was erected for each gun to be fired from. The town of Ghent had a gun which, with the framework, measured 50 feet in length. Gun-carriages were still unknown. The cannons were mostly fired at very high elevations, like our mortars, and consequently had very little effect until shells were introduced. The projectiles were generally round shot of stone, for small calibres sometimes iron bolts. Yet, with all these drawbacks, cannon was not only used in sieges and the defence of towns, but in the field also, and on board ships of war. As early as 1386 the English took 2 French vessels armed with cannon. If the guns recovered from the Mary Rose (sunk 1545) may serve as a clue, those first ship guns were simply let into and secured in a log of wood hollowed out for the purpose, so as to be incapable of elevation.

In the course of the 15th century, considerable improvements were made, both in the construction and application of artillery. Cannon began to be cast of iron, copper, or brass. The movable breech was falling into disuse, the whole gun being cast of a piece. The best founderies were in France and Germany. In France, too, the first attempts were made to bring up and place guns under cover during a siege. About 1450 a sort of trench was introduced, and shortly after the first breaching batteries were constructed by the brothers Bureau, with the aid of which the king of France, Charles VII, retook in one year all the places the English had taken from him. The greatest improvements were, however, made by Charles VIII of France.

He finally did away with the movable breech, cast his guns of brass and in one piece, introduced trunnions, and gun-carriages on wheels, and had none but iron shot. He also simplified the calibres, and took the lighter regularly into the field. Of these, the double cannon was placed on a 4-wheeled carriage drawn by 35 horses; the remainder had 2-wheeled carriages, the trails dragging on the ground, and were drawn by from 24 down to 2 horses. A body of gunners was attached to each, and the service so organized as to constitute the first distinct corps of field artillery; the lighter calibres were movable enough to shift about with the other troops during action, and even to keep up with the cavalry. It was this new arm which procured to Charles VIII his surprising successes in Italy. The Italian ordnance was still moved by bullocks; the guns were still composed of several pieces, and had to be placed on their frames when the position was reached; they fired stone shot, and were altogether so clumsy that the French fired a gun oftener in an hour than the Italians could do in a day. The battle of Fornovo (1495), gained by the French field artillery, spread terror over Italy, and the new arm was considered irresistible. Machiavelli’s Arte della Guerra was written expressly, in order to indicate means to counteract its effect bv the skilful disposition of the infantry and cavalry. The successors of Charles VIII, Louis XII and Francis I, continued to improve and lighten their field artillery. Francis organized the ordnance as a distinct department, under a grand-master of the ordnance. His field-guns broke the hitherto invincible masses of the Swiss pikemen at Marignano, 1515, by rapidly moving from one flanking position to another, and thus they decided the battle. The Chinese and Arabs knew the use and manufacture of shells, and it is probable that from the latter this knowledge passed to the European nations. Still, the adoption of this projectile, and of the mortar from which it is now fired, did not take place in Europe before the second half of the 15th century, and is commonly ascribed to Pandolfo Malatesta, prince of Rimia. The first shells consisted of 2 hollow metal hemispheres screwed together, the art of casting them hollow was of later invention.

The emperor Charles V was not behind his French rivals in the improvement of field-guns. He introduced limbers, thus turning the two-wheeled gun, when it had to be moved, into a 4-wheeled vehicle capable of going at a faster pace and of surmounting obstacles of ground. Thus his light guns, at the battle of Renty in 1554, could advance at a gallop.

The first theoretical researches, respecting gunnery and the flight of projectiles, also fall in this period. Tartaglia, an Italian, is said to be the discoverer of the fact that the angle of elevation of 45° gives, in vacuo, the greatest range. The Spaniards Collado and Ufano also occupied themselves with similar inquiries. Thus the theoretical foundations for scientific gunnery were laid. About the same time Vannocci Biringoccio’s inquiries into the art of casting (1540) produced considerable progress in the manufacture of cannon, while the invention of the calibre scale by Hartmann, by which every part of a gun was measured by its proportion to the diameter of bore, gave a certain standard for the construction of ordnance, and paved the way for the introduction of fixed theoretical principles, and of general experimental rules.

One of the first effects of the improved artillery was a total change in the art of fortification. Since the time of the Assyrian and Babylonian monarchies, that art had made but little progress. But now the new fire-arm everywhere made a breach on the masonry walls of the old system, and a new plan had to be invented. The defences had to be constructed so as to expose as little masonry as possible to the direct fire of the besieger, and to admit of a strong artillery being placed on the ramparts. The old masonry wall was replaced by an earthwork rampart, only faced with masonry, and the small flanking town was turned into a large pentagonal bastion. Gradually the whole of the masonry used in fortification was covered against direct fire by outlying earthworks, and by the middle of the 17th century the defence of a fortified place became once more relatively stronger than the attack, until Vauban again gave the ascendant to the latter.

Hitherto the operation of loading had been carried on with loose powder shovelled into the gun. About 1600 the introduction of cartridges, cloth bags containing the prescribed quantity of powder, much abridged the time necessary for loading, and insured greater precision of fire by greater equality of charge. Another important invention was made about the same time, that of grape-shot and case-shot. The construction of field-guns, adapted for throwing hollow shot, also belongs to this period. The numerous sieges occurring during the war of Spain against the Netherlands contributed very much to the improvement of the artillery used in the defence and attack of places, especially as regards the use of mortars and howitzers, of shells, carcasses, and red-hot shot, and the composition of fuzes and other military fireworks. The calibres in use in the beginning of the 17th century were still of all sizes, from the 48-pounder to the smallest falconets bored for balls of V2 lb. weight. In spite of all improvements, field artillery was still so imperfect that all this variety of calibre was required to obtain something like the effect we now realize with a few middle-sized guns between the 6-pounder and the 12-pounder. The light calibres, at that time, had mobility, but no effect; the large calibres had effect, but no mobility; the intermediate ones had neither the one nor the other in a degree sufficient for all purposes. Consequently, all calibres were maintained, and jumbled together in one mass, each battery consisting generally of a regular assortment of cannon. The elevation was given to the piece by a quoin. The carriages were still clumsy, and a separate model was of course required for each calibre, so that it was next to impossible to take spare wheels and carriages into the field. The axletrees were of wood, and of a different size for each calibre. In addition to this, the dimensions of the cannon and carriages were not even the same for one single calibre, there being everywhere a great many pieces of old construction, and many differences of construction, in the several workshops of a country. Cartridges were still confined to guns in fortresses; in the field the cannon was loaded with loose powder, introduced on a shovel, upon which a wad and the shot were rammed down. Loose powder was equally worked down the touchhole, and the whole process was extremely slow. The gunners were not considered regular soldiers, but formed a guild of their own, recruiting themselves by apprentices, and sworn not to divulge the secrets and mysteries of their handicraft. When a war broke out, the belligerents took as many of them into their service as they could get, over and above their peace establishment.

Each of these gunners or bombardiers received the command of a gun, had a saddle-horse, and apprentice, and as many professional assistants as he required, beside the requisite number of men for shifting heavy pieces. Their pay was fourfold that of a soldier. The horses of the artillery were contracted for when a war broke out; the contractor also found harness and drivers. In battle the guns were placed in a row in front of the line, and unlimbered; the horses were taken out of the shafts. When an advance was ordered, the limbers were horsed, and the guns limbered up; sometimes the lighter calibres were moved, for short distances, by men. The powder and shot were carried in separate carts; the limbers had not yet any boxes for ammunition. Manoeuvring, loading, priming, pointing, and firing, were all operations of great slowness, according to our present notions, and the number of hits, with such imperfect machinery, and the almost total want of science in gunnery, must have been small indeed.

The appearance of Gustavus Adolphus in Germany, during the 30 years’ war, marks an immense progress in artillery. This great warrior did away with the extremely small calibres, which he replaced, first, by his so-called leather guns, light wrought-iron tubes covered with ropes and leather. These were intended to fire grape-shot only, which thus was first introduced into field warfare. Hitherto its use had been confined to the defence of the ditch in fortresses. Along with grape and case shot, he also introduced cartridges in his field artillery. The leather guns not proving very durable, were replaced by light cast-iron 4-pounders, 16 calibres long, weighing 6 cwt. with the carriage, and drawn by two horses. Two of these pieces were attached to each regiment of infantry. Thus the regimental artillery which was preserved in many armies up to the beginning of this century, arose by superseding the old small calibred, but comparatively clumsy guns, and was originally intended for case shot only, though very soon it was also made to fire round shot. The heavy guns were kept distinct, and formed into powerful batteries occupying favorable positions on the wings or in front of the centre of the army. Thus by the separation of the light from the heavy artillery, and by the formation of batteries, the tactics of field artillery were founded. It was General Torstensson, the inspector-general of the Swedish artillery, who mainly contributed to these results by which field artillery now first became an independent arm, subject to distinct rules of its own for its use in battle. Two further important inventions were made about this time: about 1650, that of the horizontal elevating screw, as it was used until Gribeauval’s times, and about 1697, that of tubes filled with powder for priming, instead of working powder into the touchhole. Both pointing and loading became much facilitated thereby. Another great improvement was the invention of the prolonge, for manoeuvring at short distances. The number of guns carried into the field during the 17th century, was very large. At Greifenhagen, Gustavus Adolphus had 80 pieces with 20,000 men, and at Frankfort-on-the-Oder, 200 pieces with 18,000 men.

Artillery trains of 100 to 200 guns were of very common occurrence during the wars of Louis XIV. At Malplaquet, nearly 300 pieces of cannon were employed on both sides; this was the largest mass of artillery hitherto brought together on a single field of battle. Mortars were very generally taken into the field about this time. The French still maintained their superiority in artillery. They were the first to do away with the old guild system and enrol the gunners as regular soldiers, forming, in 1671, a regiment of artillery, and regulating the various duties and ranks of the officers. Thus this branch of s’ervice was recognized as an independent arm, and the education of the officers and men was taken in hand by the state. An artillery school, for at least 50 years the only one in existence, was founded in France in 1690. A hand-book of artilleristic science, very good for the time, was published in 1697 by Saint-Remy.

Still the secrecy surrounding the “mystery” of gunnery was so great that many improvements adopted in other countries were as yet unknown in France, and the construction and composition of every European artillery differed widely from any other. Thus the French had not yet adopted the howitzer, which had been invented in Holland and adopted in most armies before 1700. Limber boxes for ammunition, first introduced by Maurice of Nassau, were unknown in France, and indeed but little adopted. The gun, carriage, and limber were too heavy to admit of their being encumbered with the extra weight of ammunition. The very small calibres, up to 3 lbs. inclusive, had indeed been done away with, but the light regimental artillery was unknown in France. The charges used in the artillery of the times hitherto considered were, for guns, generally very heavy; originally equal in weight to the ball. Although the powder was of inferior quality, these charges were still far stronger in effect than those now in use, thus they were one of the chief causes of the tremendous weight of the cannon. To resist such charges the weight of a brass cannon was often from 250 to 400 times the weight of the shot. Gradually, however, the necessity of lightening the guns compelled a reduction of the charge, and about the beginning of the 18th century, the charge was generally only one-half the weight of the shot. For mortars and howitzers the charge was regulated by the distance, and generally very small.

The end of the 17th and beginning of the 18th century was the period in which the artillery was in most countries finally incorporated in the army, deprived of its mediaeval character of a guild, recognized as an arm, and thus enabled to take a more regular and rapid development. The consequence was an almost immediate and very marked progress. The irregularity and variety of calibres and models, the uncertainty of all existing empirical rules, the total want of well-established principle, now became evident and unbearable. Accordingly, experiments were everywhere made on a large scale to ascertain the effects of calibres, the relations of the calibre to the charge and to the weight and length of the gun, the distribution of metal in the cannon, the ranges, the effects of recoil on the carriages, &c. Between 1730 and 1740, Bélidor directed such experiments at La Fère in France, Robins in England, and Papacino d’Antoni at Turin. The result was a great simplification of the calibres, a better distribution of the metal of the gun, and a very general reduction of the charges, which were now between 1/3 Vs and 1/2 the weight of the shot. The progress of scientific gunnery went side by side with these improvements. Galileo had originated the parabolic theory, Torricelli his pupil, Anderson, Newton, Blondel, Bernoulli, Wolff, and Euler, occupied themselves with further determining the flight of projectiles, the resistance of the air, and the causes of their deviations. The above-named experimental artillerists also contributed materially to the advancement of the mathematical portion of gunnery.

Under Frederick the Great the Prussian field artillery was again considerably lightened. The short, light, regimental guns, not more than 14, 16, or 18 calibres long, and weighing from 80 to 150 times the weight of the shot, were found to have a sufficient range for the battles of those days, decided principally by infantry fire. Accordingly, the king had all his 12-pounders cast the same proportional length and weight. The Austrians, in 1753, followed this example, as well as most other states; but Frederick himself, in the latter part of his reign, again provided his reserve artillery with long powerful guns, his experience at Leuthen having convinced him of their superior effects. Frederick the Great introduced a new arm by mounting the gunners of some of his batteries, and thus creating horse artillery, destined to give the same support to cavalry as foot-artillery did to infantry. The new arm proved extremely effective, and was very soon adopted by most armies; some, as the Austrians, mounting the gunners in separate wagons as a substitute. The proportion of guns with the armies of the 18th century was still very large. Frederick the Great had, in 1756, with 70,000 men 206 guns, 1762 with 67,000 men 275 guns, 1778 with 180,000 men 811 guns. These guns, with the exception of the regimental ones which followed their battalions, were organized in batteries of various sizes from 6 to 20 guns each. The regimental guns advanced with the infantry, while the batteries were firing from chosen positions, and sometimes advanced to a second position, but here they generally awaited the issue of the battle; they left, as regards mobility, still very much to be desired, and at Kunersdorf, the loss of the battle was due to the impossibility of bringing up the artillery in the decisive moment. The Prussian general, Tempelhof, also introduced field-mortar batteries, the light mortars being carried on the backs of mules; but they were soon again abolished after their uselessness had been proved in the war of 1792 and ‘93. The scientific branch of artillery was, during this period, cultivated especially in Germany. Struensee and Tempelhof wrote useful works on the subject, but Scharnhorst was the leading artilleryman of his day. His hand-book of artillery is the first comprehensive really scientific treatise on the subject, while his hand-book for officers, published as early as 1787, contains the first scientific development of the tactics of field artillery.

His works, though antiquated in many respects, are still classical. In the Austrian service, Gen. Vega, in the Spanish, Gen. Moria, in the Prussian, Hoyer and Rouvroy, made valuable contributions to artilleristic literature.

The French had reorganized their artillery according to the system of Vallière in 1732; they retained 24, 16, 12, 8, and 4-pounders, and adopted the 8-inch howitzer. Still there was a great variety of models of construction; the guns were from 22 to 26 calibres long, and weighed about 250 times as much as the corresponding shot. At length, in 1774, General Gribeauval, who had served with the Austrians in the 7 years’ war, and who knew the superiority of the new Prussian and Austrian artilleries, carried the introduction of his new system. The siege artillery was definitively separated from the field artillery. It was formed of all guns heavier than 12-pounders, and of all the old heavy 12-pounder guns. The field artillery was composed of 12-pounder, 8-pounder, and 4-pounder guns, all 18 calibres long, weighing 150 times the weight of the shot, and of a 6-inch howitzer. The charge for the guns was definitely fixed at one-third the weight of the shot, the perpendicular elevating screw was introduced, and every part of a gun or carriage was made according to a fixed model, so as to be easily replaced from the stores. Seven models of wheels, and 3 models of axletrees, were sufficient for all the various vehicles used in the French artillery. Although the use of limber-boxes to carry a supply of ammunition was known to most artillerists, Gribeauval did not introduce them in France. The 4-pounders were distributed with the infantry, every battalion receiving 2 of them; the 8 and 12-pounders were distributed in separate batteries as reserve artillery, with a field-forge to every battery. Train and artisan companies were organized, and altogether this artillery of Gribeauval was the first corps of its kind established on a modern footing. It has proved superior to any of its day, in the proportions by which its constructions were regulated, in its material, and in its organization, and for many years it has served as a model.

Thanks to Gribeauval’s improvements, the French artillery, during the wars of the revolution, was superior to any other, and soon became, in the hands of Napoleon, an arm of hitherto unknown power. There was no alteration made, except that the system of regimental guns was definitively done away with in 1799, and that with the immense number of 6-pounder and 3-pounder guns conquered in all parts of Europe, these calibres were also introduced in the service. The whole of the field artillery was organized into batteries of 6 pieces, among which one was generally a howitzer, and the remainder guns. But if there was little or no change in the material, there was an immense one in the tactics of artillery. Although the number of guns was somewhat diminished in consequence of the abolition of regimental pieces, the effect of artillery in a battle was heightened by its skilful use. Napoleon used a number of light guns, attached to the divisions of infantry, to engage battle, to make the enemy show his strength, &c, while the mass of the artillery was held in reserve, until the decisive point of attack was determined on; then enormous batteries were suddenly formed, all acting upon that point, and thus preparing by a tremendous cannonade the final attack of the infantry reserves. At Friedland 70 guns, at Wagram 100 guns, were thus formed in line; at Borodino, a battery of 80 guns prepared Ney’s attack on Semenovka. On the other hand, the large masses of reserve cavalry formed by Napoleon, required for their support a corresponding force of horse artillery, which arm again received the fullest attention, and was very numerously represented in the French armies, where its proper tactical use was first practically established. Without Gribeauval’s improvements, this new use of artillery would have been impossible, and with the necessity for the altered tactics, these improvements gradually, and with slight alterations, found their way into all continental armies. The British artillery, about the beginning of the French revolutionary war, was exceedingly neglected, and much behind that of other nations. They had two regimental guns to each battalion, but no reserve artillery. The guns were horsed in single team, the drivers walking alongside with long whips. Horses and drivers were hired. The materiel was of very old-fashioned construction, and except for very short distances, the pieces could move at a walk only. Horse artillery was unknown. After 1800, however, when experience had shown the inadequacy of this system, the artillery was thoroughly reorganized by Major Spearman. The limbers were adapted for double team, the guns brigaded in batteries of 6 pieces, and in general those improvements were introduced which had been in use for some time already on the continent. No expense being spared, the British artillery soon was the neatest, most solidly, and most luxuriously equipped of its kind; great attention was paid to the newly erected corps of horse artillery, which soon distinguished itself by the boldness, rapidity, and precision of its manoeuvres. As to fresh improvements in the materiel, they were confined to the construction of the vehicles; the block-trail gun-carriage, and the ammunition wagon with a limber to it have since been adopted in most countries of the continent.

The proportion of artillery to the other components of an army became a little more fixed during this period. The strongest proportion of artillery now present with an army was that of the Prussians at Pirmasens—7 guns for every 1,000 men. Napoleon considered 3 guns per 1,000 men quite sufficient, and this proportion has become a general rule. The number of rounds to accompany a gun was also fixed; at least 200 rounds per gun, of which 1/4 or 1/5 were case shot. During the peace following the downfall of Napoleon, the artilleries of all European powers underwent gradual improvements. The light calibres of 3 and 4 lbs. were everywhere abolished, the improved carriages and wagons of the English artillery were adopted in most countries. The charge was fixed almost everywhere at Vs, the metal of the gun at, or near, 150 times the weight of the shot, and the length of the piece at from 16 to 18 calibres. The French reorganized their artillery in 1827. The field-guns were fixed at 8 and 12 lb. calibre, 18 calibres long, charge Vs, weight of metal in gun 150 times that of the shot. The English carriages and wagons were adopted, and limber-boxes for the first time introduced into the French service. Two kinds of howitzers, of 15 and 16 centimetres of bore, were attached to the 8 and 12-pounder batteries, respectively. A great simplicity distinguishes this new system of field artillery. There are but 2 sizes of gun-carriages, 1 size of limber, 1 size of wheel, and 2 sizes of axletrees to all the vehicles used in the French field batteries. Beside this, a separate mountain artillery was introduced, carrying howitzers of 12 centimetres bore.

The English field artillery now has for its almost exclusive calibre the 9-pounders of 17 calibres long, weight I/2 cwt. to 1 pound weight of shot, charge 1/3 the weight of shot. In every battery there are 2 24-pounder 5/2-inch howitzers. Six-pounder and 12-pounder guns were not sent out at all in the late Russian war.

There are 2 sizes of wheels in use. In both the English and French foot artillery the gunners are mounted during manoeuvres on the limber and ammunition wagons.

The Prussian army carries 6 and 12-pounder guns, 18 calibres long, weighing 145 times, and charged with V3 the weight of the shot. The howitzers are 5/2 and 6/2-inch bore. There are 6 guns and 2 howitzers to a battery. There are 2 wheels and 2 axletrees, and 1 limber. The gun-carriages are of Gribeauval construction. In the foot artillery, for quick manoeuvres, 5 gunners, sufficient to serve the gun, mount the limber-box and the off-horses; the remaining 3 follow as best they can. The ammunition wagons are not, therefore, attached to the guns, as in the French and British service, but form a column apart, and are kept out of range during action. The improved English ammunition wagon was adopted in 1842.

The Austrian artillery has 6 and 12-pounder guns, 16 calibres long, weighing 135 times, charged with 1/4 the weight of the shot. The howitzers are similar to those of the Prussian service. Six guns and 2 howitzers compose a battery.

The Russian artillery has 6 and 12-pounder guns, 18 calibres long, 150 times the weight of the shot, with a charge of 1/3 its weight. The howitzers are 5 and 6-inch bore. According to the calibre and destination, either 8 or 12 pieces form a battery, one-half of which are guns, and the other half howitzers.

The Sardinian army has 8-pounder and 16-pounder guns, with a corresponding size of howitzer. The smaller German armies all have 6 and 12-pounders, the Spaniards 8 and 12-pounders, the Portuguese, Swedes, Danes, Belgians, Dutch, and Neapolitans 6 and 12-pounders.

The start given to the British artillery by Major Spearman’s reorganization, along with the interest for further improvement thereby awakened in that service, and the wide range offered to artilleristic progress by the immense naval artillery of Great Britain, have contributed to many important inventions. The British compositions for fireworks, as well as their gunpowder, are superior to any other, and the precision of their time fuzes is unequalled. The principal invention latterly made in the British artillery are the shrapnel shells (hollow shot, filled with musket balls, and exploding during the flight), by which the effective range of grape has been rendered equal to that of round shot.

The French, skilful as they are as constructors and organizers, are nearly the only army which has not yet adopted this new and terrible projectile; they have not been able to make out the fuze composition, upon which every thing depends.

A new system of field artillery has been proposed by Louis Napoleon, and appears to be in course of adoption in France. The whole of the 4 calibres of guns and howitzers now in use, to be superseded by a light 12-pounder gun, 15 1/2 calibres long, weighing 110 times, and charged with 1/4 the weight of the solid shot. A shell of 12 centim. (the same now used in the mountain artillery), to be fired out of the same gun with a reduced charge, thus superseding howitzers for the special use of hollow shot. The experiments made in 4 artillery schools of France have been very successful, and it is said that these guns showed a marked superiority, in the Crimea, over the Russian guns, mostly 6-pounders. The English, however, maintain that their long 9-pounder is superior in range and precision to this new gun, and it is to be observed that they were the first to introduce, but very soon again to abandon, a light 12-pounder for a charge of 1/4 the shot’s weight, and which has evidently served Louis Napoleon as a model. The firing of shells from common guns is taken from the Prussian service, where, in sieges, the 24-pounders are made to fire shells for certain purposes. Nevertheless, the capabilities of Louis Napoleon’s gun have still to be determined by experience, and as nothing special has been published on its effects in the late war, we cannot here be expected finally to judge on its merits.

The laws and experimental maxims for propelling solid, hollow, or other projectiles, from cannon, the ascertained proportions of range, elevation, charge, the effects of windage and other causes of deviation, the probabilities of hitting the mark, and the various circumstances that may occur in warfare, constitute the science of gunnery. Though the fact, that a heavy body projected in vacuo, in a direction different from the vertical, will describe a parabola in its flight, forms the fundamental principle of this science, yet the resistance of the air, increasing as it does with the velocity of the moving body, alters very materially the application of the parabolic theory in gunnery practice. Thus for guns propelling their shot at an initial velocity of 1,400 to 1,700 feet in a second, the line of flight varies considerably from the theoretic parabola, so much so that with them, the greatest range is obtained at an elevation of only about 20 degrees, while according to the parabolic theory it should be at 45 degrees.

Practical experiments have determined, with some degree of precision, these deviations, and thus fixed the proper elevations for each class of guns, for a given charge and range. But there are other circumstances affecting the flight of the shot. There is, first of all, the windage, or the difference by which the diameter of the shot must be less than that of the bore, to facilitate loading. It causes first an escape of the expanding gas during the explosion of the charge, in other words, a reduction of the force, and secondly an irregularity in the direction of the shot, causing deflections in a vertical, or horizontal sense. Then there is the unavoidable inequality in the weight of the charge, or in its condition at the moment it is used, the eccentricity of the shot, the centre of gravity not coinciding with the centre of the sphere, which causes deflections varying according to the relative position of the centres at the moment of firing, and many other causes producing irregularity of results under seemingly the same conditions of flight. For field-guns, we have seen that the charge of V3 of the shot’s weight, and a length of 16-18 calibres are almost universally adopted. With such charges, the point-blank range (the gun being laid horizontal), the shot will touch the ground at about 300 yards distance, and by elevating the gun, this range may be increased up to 3,000 or 4,000 yards. Such a range, however, leaves all probability of hitting the mark out of the question, and for actual and effective practice, the range of field-guns does not exceed 1,400 or 1,500 yards, at which distance scarcely 1 shot out of 6 or 8 might be expected to hit the mark. The decisive ranges, in which alone cannon can contribute to the issue of a battle, are, for round shot and shell, between 600 and 1,100 yards, and at these ranges the probability of striking the object is indeed far greater. Thus it is reckoned that at 700 yards about 50 per cent., at 900 yards about 35 per cent., at 1,100 yards 25 per cent., out of the shots fired from a 6-pounder, will hit a target representing the front of a battalion in column of attack (34 yards long by 2 yards high). The 9 and 12-pounder will give somewhat better results. In some experiments made in France in 1850, the 8-pounders and 12-pounders then in use gave the following results, against a target 30 metres by 3 metres (representing a troop of cavalry) at: —

	500 met.	600 met.	700 met.	800 met.	900 met.
12-p'ders, hits	64 p. ct.	54 p. ct	43 p. ct.	37 p. ct.	32 p. ct.
8-p'ders, "	67 "	44 "	40 "	28 “	28 “

Though the target was higher by one-half, the practice here remained below the average stated above. With field-howitzers the charge is considerably less in proportion to the weight of the projectile than with guns. The short length of the piece (7 to 10 calibres) and the necessity of firing it at great elevations, are the causes of this. The recoil from a howitzer fired under high elevation, acting downward as well as backward, would, if a heavy charge was used, strain the carriage so as to disable it after a few rounds. This is the reason why in most continental artilleries several charges are in use in the same field-howitzer, thus making the gunner to produce a given range by different combination of charge and elevation. Where this is not the case, as in the British artillery, the elevation taken is necessarily very low, and scarcely exceeding that of guns; the range-tables for the British 24-pounder howitzer, 2 1/2-pound charge, do not extend beyond 1,050 yards, with 4° elevation; the same elevation, for the 9-pounder gun, giving a range of 1,400 yards. There is a peculiar short kind of howitzer in use in most German armies, which is capable of an elevation of from 16 to 20 degrees, thus acting somewhat like a mortar; its charge is, necessarily, but small; it has this advantage over the common, long howitzer, that its shells can be made to drop into covered positions, behind undulations of ground, &c. This advantage is, however, of a doubtful nature against movable objects like troops, though of great importance where the object covered from direct fire is immovable; and as to direct fire, these howitzers, from their shortness (6 to 7 calibres) and small charge, are all but useless. The charge, to obtain various ranges at an elevation fixed by the purpose intended (direct firing or shelling), necessarily varies very much; in the Prussian field artillery, where these howitzers are still used, not less than twelve different charges occur. Withal, the howitzer is but a very imperfect piece of cannon, and the sooner it is superseded by an effective field shell-gun, the better.

The heavy cannon used in fortresses, sieges, and naval armaments, are of various description. Up to the late Russian war, it was not customary to use in siege-warfare heavier guns than 24-pounders, or, at the very outside, a few 32-pounders. Since the siege of Sebastopol, however, siege-guns and ship-guns are the same, or, rather, the effect of the heavy ship-guns in trenches and land-defences has proved so unexpectedly superior to that of the customary light siege-guns, that the war of sieges will henceforth have to be decided, in a great measure, by such heavy naval cannon. In both siege and naval artillery, there are generally found various models of guns for the same calibre. There are light and short guns, and there are long and heavy ones. Mobility being a minor consideration, guns for particular purposes are often made 22 to 25 calibres long, and some of these are, in consequence of this greater length, as precise as rifles in their practice. One of the best of this class of guns is the Prussian brass 24-pounder of 10 feet 4 inches, or 22 calibres long, weighing 60 cwt.; for dismounting practice in a siege, there is no gun like it.

For most purposes, however, a length of 16 to 20 calibres is found quite sufficient, and as, upon an average, size of calibre will be preferable to extreme precision, a mass of 60 cwt. of iron or gun-metal will be more usefully employed, as a rule, in a heavy 32-pounder of 16-17 calibres long. The new long iron 32-pounder, one of the finest guns in the British navy, 9 feet long, 50 cwt., measures but 16 1/2 calibres. The long 68-pounder, 112 cwt., pivot-gun of all the large screw 131 gun-ships, measures 10 feet 10 inches, or a trifle more than 16 calibres; another kind of pivot-gun, the long 56-pounder of 98 cwt., measures 11 feet, or I7V2 calibres. Still a great number of less effective guns enter into naval armaments even now, bored-up guns of merely 11 or 12 calibres, and carronades of 7-8 calibres long. There is, however, another kind of naval gun that was introduced about 35 years ago by General Paixhans, and has since received an immense importance, the shell-gun. This kind of ordnance has undergone considerable improvement, and the French shell-gun still comes nearest to that constructed by the inventor; it has retained the cylindrical chamber for the charge. In the English service the chamber is either a short frustum of a cone, reducing only very slightly the diameter of the bore, or there is no chamber at all; it measures in length from 10 to 13 calibres, and is intended for hollow shot exclusively; but the long 68-pdrs. and 56-pdrs. mentioned above throw solid shot and shell indiscriminately. In the U.S. navy Capt. Dahlgren has proposed a new system of shell-guns, consisting of short guns of very large calibre (11 and 9 inches bore), which has been partly adopted in the armament of several new frigates. The value of this system has still to be fixed by actual experience, which must determine whether the tremendous effect of such enormous shells can be obtained without the sacrifice of precision, which cannot but suffer from the great elevation required at long ranges. In sieges and naval gunnery, the charges are as variable as the constructions of the guns themselves, and the ends to be attained.

In laying a breach in masonry, the heaviest charges are used, and these amount, with some very heavy and solid guns, to one-half the weight of the shot. On the whole, however, one-fourth may be considered a full average charge for siege purposes, increased sometimes to one-third, diminished at others to one-sixth. On board ship, there are generally 3 classes of charges to each gun; the high charge, for distant practice, chasing, &c, the medium charge, for the average effective distances of naval engagements; the reduced, for close quarters and double shotting. For the long 32-pdrs. they are equal to 5/16, 1/4, and 3/16 of the shot’s weight. For short light guns and shell-guns, these proportions are of course still more reduced; but with the latter, too, the hollow shot does not reach the weight of the solid one. Beside guns and shell-guns, heavy howitzers and mortars enter into the composition of siege and naval artillery. Howitzers are short pieces intended to throw shell at an elevation up to 12 or 30 degrees, and to be fixed on carriages; mortars are still shorter pieces, fixed to blocks, intended to throw shell at an elevation generally exceeding 20 degrees, and increasing even to 60 degrees.

Both are chambered ordnance; i. e. the chamber or part of the bore intended to receive the charge, is less in diameter than the flight or general bore. Howitzers are seldom of a calibre exceeding 8 inches, but mortars are bored up to 13, 15, and more inches. The flight of a shell from a mortar, from the smallness of the charge (1-20th to 1-40th of the weight of the shell), and from its considerable elevation, is less interfered with by the resistance of the air, and here the parabolic theory may be used in gunnery calculations without material deviation from practical results. Shells from mortars are intended to act either by bursting, and, as carcasses, setting fire to combustible objects by the jet of flame from the fuzes, or by their weight as well, in breaking through vaulted and otherwise secured roofs; in the latter case the higher elevation is preferred, giving the highest flight and greatest momentum of fall.

Shells from howitzers are intended to act, first by impact, and afterward by bursting. From their great elevation, and the small initial velocity imparted to the shell, and consequent little resistance offered to it by the air, a mortar throws its projectile further than any other kind of ordnance, the object fired at being generally a whole town, there is little precision required; and thus it happens that the effective range of heavy mortars extends to 4,000 yards and upward, from which distance Sveaborg was bombarded by the Anglo-French mortar-boats.

The application of these different kinds of cannon, projectiles, and charges, during a siege, will be treated of under that head ; the use of naval artillery constitutes nearly the whole fighting part of naval elementary tactics, and does therefore not belong to this subject; it thus only remains for us to make a few observations on the use and tactics of field artillery.

Artillery has no arms for hand-to-hand fight; all its forces are concentrated in the distant effect of its fire. It is, moreover, in fighting condition as long only as it is in position; as soon as it limbers up, or attaches the prolonge for a movement, it is temporarily disabled. From both causes, it is the most defensive of all the 3 arms; its powers of attack are very limited indeed, for attack is onward movement, and its culminating point is the clash of steel against steel. The critical moment for artillery is therefore the advance, taking position, and getting ready for action under the enemy’s fire. Its deployments into line, its preliminary movements, will have to be masked either by obstacles of ground or by lines of troops. It will thus gain a position parallel to the line it has to occupy, and then advance into position straight against the enemy, so as not to expose itself to a flanking fire. The choice of a position is a thing of the highest importance, both as regards the effect of the fire of a battery, and that of the enemy’s fire upon it. To place his guns so that their effect on the enemy is as telling as possible, is the first important point; security from the enemy’s fire the second. A good position must afford firm and level standing ground for the wheels and trails of the guns; if the wheels do not stand level, no good practice is possible; and if the trail digs into the ground, the carriage will soon be broken by the power of recoil. It must, beside, afford a free view of the ground held by the enemy, and admit of as much liberty of movement as possible. Finally, the ground in front, between the battery and the enemy, must be favorable to the effect of our arms, and unfavorable, if possible, to that of theirs.

The most favorable ground is a firm and level one, affording the advantage of ricochet practice, and making the shot that go short strike the enemy after the first graze. It is wonderful what difference the nature of the ground will make in artillery practice. On soft ground the shot, on grazing, will deflect or make irregular rebounds, if they do not stick fast in it at once. The way the furrows run in ploughed land, makes a great difference, especially with canister and shrapnel firing; if they run crossways, most of the shot will bury themselves in them. If the ground be soft, undulating, or broken immediately in front of us, but level and hard further on toward the enemy, it will favor our practice, and protect us from his.

Firing down or up inclinations of more than 5 degrees, or firing from the top of one hill to that of another, is very unfavorable. As to our safety from the enemy’s fire, very small objects will increase that. A thin fence, scarcely hiding our position, a group of shrubs, or high corn, will prevent his taking correct aim. A small abrupt bank on which our guns are placed will catch the most dangerous of his projectiles. A dyke makes a capital parapet, but the best protection is the crest of a slight undulation of ground, behind which we draw our guns so far back that the enemy sees nothing but the muzzles; in this position every shot striking the ground in front, will bound high over our heads. Still better is it, if we can cut out a stand for our guns into the crest, about 2 feet deep, flattening out to the rear with the slope, so as to command the whole of the external slope of the hill. The French under Napoleon were extremely skilful in placing their guns, and from them all other nations have learnt this art. Regarding the enemy, the position should be chosen so as to be free from flank or enfilading fire; regarding our own troops, it should not hamper their movements. The usual distance from gun to gun in line is 20 yards, but there is no necessity to adhere strictly to any of these rules of the parade-ground. Once in position, the limbers remain close behind their guns, while the wagons, in some services, remain under cover. Where the wagons are used for mounting the men, they too must run the chance of going into effective range. The battery directs its fire upon that portion of the enemy’s forces which at the time most menaces our position; if our infantry is to attack, it fires upon either the opposing artillery, if that is yet to be silenced, or upon the masses of infantry if they expose themselves; but if a portion of the enemy advance to actual attack, that is the point to aim at, not minding the hostile artillery which fires on us. Our fire against artillery will be most effective when that artillery cannot reply, i. e. when it is limbering up, moving, or unlimbering. A few good shots cause great confusion in such moments. The old rule that artillery, excepting in pressing moments of importance, should not approach infantry to within 300 yards, or the range of small arms, will now soon be antiquated. With the increasing range of modern muskets, field artillery, to be effective, cannot any longer keep out of musket range; and a gun with its limber, horses, and gunners, forms a group quite large enough for skirmishers to fire at, at 600 yards with the Minié or Enfield rifle. The long-established idea, that who wishes to live long must enlist in the artillery, appears to be no longer true, for it is evident that skirmishing from a distance will in future be the most effective way of combating artillery; and where is the battle-field in which there could not be found capital cover for skirmishers within 600 yards from any possible artillery emplacement?

Against advancing lines or columns of infantry, artillery has thus far always had the advantage; a few effective rounds of grape, or a couple of solid shot ploughing through a deep column, have a terribly cooling effect. The nearer the attack comes, the more effective becomes our practice; and even at the last moment we can easily withdraw our guns from an opponent of such slowness, though whether a line of chasseurs de Vincennes, advancing at the pas gymnastique, would not be down upon us before we had limbered up, must still remain doubtful.

Against cavalry, coolness gives the advantage to artillery. If the latter reserve their grape to within 100 yards, and then give a well-aimed volley, the cavalry will be found pretty far off by the time the smoke has cleared away. At all events, to limber up and try to escape, would be the worst plan; for cavalry would be sure to overtake the guns.

Artillery against artillery, the ground, the calibres, the relative number of guns, and the use made thereof by the parties, will decide. It is, however, to be noticed, that though the large calibre has an undoubted advantage at long ranges, the smaller calibre approaches in its effects those of the large one as the ranges decrease, and at short distances almost equals them. At Borodino, Napoleon’s artillery consisted principally of 3 and 4-pounders, while the Russians exulted in their numerous 12-pounders; yet the French small pop-guns had decidedly the best of it.

In supporting either infantry or cavalry, the artillery will have always to gain a position on its flank. If the infantry advances, it advances by half-batteries or sections on a line with the skirmishers, or rather in advance of it; as soon as the infantry masses prepare to attack with the bayonet, it trots up to 400 yards from the enemy, and prepares the charge by a rapid fire of case shot. If the attack is repelled, the artillery will re-open its fire on the pursuing enemy until compelled to withdraw; but if the attack succeeds, its fire contributes a great deal to the completion of the success, one-half of the guns firing while the other advances. Horse artillery, as a supporting arm to cavalry, imparting to it some of that defensive element which it naturally lacks altogether, is now one of the most favorite branches of all services, and brought to high perfection in all European armies.

Though intended to act on cavalry ground, and in company with cavalry, there is no horse artillery in the world which would not be prepared to gallop across a country where its own cavalry would not follow without sacrificing its order and cohesion. The horse artillery of every country forms the boldest and skilfullest riders of its army, and they will take a particular pride, on any grand field-day, in dashing across obstacles, guns and all, before which the cavalry will stop. The tactics of horse artillery consist in boldness and coolness. Rapidity, suddenness of appearance, quickness of fire, readiness to move off at a moment’s notice, and to take that road which is too difficult for the cavalry, these are the chief qualities of a good horse artillery. Choice of position there is but little in this constant change of places; every position is good so as it is close to the enemy and out of the way of the cavalry; and it is during the ebbing and flowing of cavalry engagements, that the artillery, skirting the advancing and receding waves, has to show every moment its superior horsemanship and presence of mind in getting clear of this surging sea across all sorts of ground where not every cavalry dares, or likes to follow.

In the attack and defence of posts, the tactics of artillery are similar. The principal thing is always to fire upon that point from which, in defence, threatens the nearest and most direct danger, or in attack, from which our advance can be most effectually checked. The destruction of material obstacles also forms part of its duties, and here the various calibres and kinds of ordnance are applied according to their nature and effect; howitzers for setting fire to houses, heavy guns to batter down gates, walls, and barricades.

All these remarks apply to the artillery which in every army is attached to the divisions. But the grandest results are obtained by the reserve artillery in great and decisive battles. Held back out of sight and out of range during the greater part of the day, it is brought forward in a mass upon the decisive point as soon as the time for the final effort has come. Formed in a crescent a mile or more in extent, it concentrates its destructive fire upon a comparatively small point. Unless an equivalent force of guns is there to meet it, half an hour’s rapid firing settles the matter. The enemy begins to wither under the hailstorm of howling shot; the intact reserves of infantry advance—a last, sharp, short struggle, and the victory is won. Thus did Napoleon prepare Macdonald’s advance at Wagram, and resistance was broken before the 3 divisions advancing in a column had fired a shot or crossed a bayonet. And since those great days only can the tactics of field artillery be said to exist.