PLATE XXXV*Milanese Armour of King Philip IV.A. F. CalvertThe year 1554, which saw the production of some of the above suits, probably witnessed the delivery of another to King Sebastian of Portugal, which is preserved in the Royal Armoury at Madrid, and is perhaps the most magnificent in the whole collection. The details of the backplate, pauldrons, and arm defences are shown inPlate XX.*,p.232. It is the work of Anton Pfeffenhauser of Augsburg, and undoubtedly his masterpiece; as an example of repoussé work it places him upon an equality with the best German masters of his time. “Mythological figures are embossed upon the bands traversing the backplate; designs symbolical of Power, Victory, Peace, and Navigation are represented on the pauldrons, back and front, while the coudières display the four figures of the cardinal virtues.” It is essentially a pageant suit, as is also the one presented to Philip III., when prince, at the age of seven. It is a half-suit of Italian workmanship, formed in gilded iron and decorated with figures, masks, &c., all embossed and damascened (Plate XVIII.*, p.196). Another, presented to the same monarch in his childhood, is represented inPlate XIX.*, p.212, and is believed to be the work of Lucio Picinino of Milan. The decoration is less profuse but quite as beautiful as in the preceding example. A piece of Spanish armour made at Pamplona in Navarre in 1620 is shown inPlate XXII.*, p.240. Mr. Calvert states: “It is of steel-plated iron and of extraordinary thickness.… A curious feature is the seven indentations made by the bullets of an arquebus, and each set with silver pearls. These marks do not say much for the quality of the metal, which is 10 millimetres thick. The backplate, which is only 3 millimetres thick, has been perforated by a bullet. The arms are defended by espaliers reaching to the elbow, where they meet the cuffs of the gauntlets.”Plate XXI.*, p.236, is a suit of Milanese make, early seventeenth century, intended for war purposes, and absolutely devoid of ornamentation. An example of Flemish armour of 1624 is represented inPlate XXIII.*, p.268; it was sent by the Infanta Isabel Clara Eugenia to Philip IV. The ugliness of the breastplate and the huge rivet-heads upon the pauldrons are strongly suggestive of the “boiler plate” armour prevailing in England at the same period.Plate XXXV.*is a suit presented by the Cardinal Infante Ferdinand to Philip IV., and exhibits the lames of plate inserted in the gousset of the coudière, similar to the Henry VIII. foot armour in the Tower. It is of Milanese make, and decorated with vertical bands of medallions, &c.Fig.445.—Globose breastplate (Burgundian). (Tower of London.)A second example of armour of Spanish make is given inPlate XXXVI.*; it was fabricated at Pamplona for the Duke of Savoy in 1620, and is decidedly an improvement upon the suit shown inPlate XIX.*, p.212, which came from the same locality. It is worthy of remark that Spain, with all its vast resources of the finest iron ores in the world, did not become a centre for arms and armour. She was undoubtedly able to supply her own requirements, and in the wars against the Moors these were of no mean order, but no distinct Spanish “School” was evolved similar to the German or Italian. The excellent quality of her swords attained world-wide reputation, and the blades of Toledo, Bilbao, and Seville are justly famous. No town in France achieved special success in armour or arms, although many were active in the production. Burgundy was chiefly noted for its eccentricities, the breastplate illustrated inFig. 445furnishing an example, though many inventions, such as the burgonet, emanated from that warlike district, while its hand-gun men of the fifteenth century were the best in the world. Holland and Belgium have always enjoyed a reputation for arms, and Netherlandish weapons and defences were in great demand. The overwhelming superiority of Italian products must not be ascribed solely to one town, Milan, for many others were famous, such as Pisa, Verona, Lucca, Mantua, and Brescia, while Florence became a serious rival to Milan in the latter part of the sixteenth century. In Germany, Augsburg and Nuremberg probably were the most renowned for armour, but Cologne bore pre-eminence for weapons.PLATE XXXVI*Armour of Duke of Savoy, 1620. Made at Pamplona.A. F. CalvertCHAPTER XIXTHE INTRODUCTION OF GUNPOWDER AND ITS INFLUENCE UPON ARMOURPLATE XXXVII*Double Breech-loading Cannon, in Bronze, used in Spain from the end of the Fifteenth Century.A. F. CalvertThe invention of gunpowder and its use in propelling missiles from tubes was the signal for the abolition of armour, as we have indicated, though the struggle for supremacy between the two lasted for considerably more than a century. The Eastern nations are generally credited with the discovery of the properties of a mixture of saltpetre, carbon, and sulphur so far as their use in fireworks is concerned, but it was undoubtedly to the Western nations that the knowledge and application of the propelling nature of the mixture were due. The first authentic account of its use for military purposes must be ascribed to the seventh century, when, under the name of Greek fire, it was used at the defence of Constantinople by the Byzantine emperors against the invading Saracens. The true Greek fire, however, is supposed to have contained more ingredients than the three which constitute gunpowder proper, viz. resin and naphtha, the latter being in excess, and this mixture appears to have been so inflammable and so difficult to extinguish that the terror excited by its use was out of all proportion to the destruction that it wrought. It was propelled from balistæ, projected from tubes, and carried by means of arrows which bore tow steeped in the composition, while its use in a besieged town to pour down upon assailants was probably the most efficacious. Its composition was fora long time kept secret, but the knowledge gradually spread, and during the later mediæval period its use was not unknown in England (Fig. 337). Gunpowder proper was used for the first time in the Spanish wars with the Moors in the twelfth century by both combatants; and the secret of its composition was discovered by Roger Bacon in the thirteenth century, probably from the translation of manuscripts. Schwartz, a German Frank, perfected it about a century later, and its first use in England occurred in the wars against the Scots by Edward III. in 1327, when the cannon were denominated “crakeys,” a diminutive from “crake,” the first name of the composition, which may be a corruption of “grec.” At the siege of Cambrai in 1339 cannon were in use, and they are specifically mentioned by Froissart. After that time their use became general, and in 1346 many were in operation at the battle of Creçy, the gunpowder being imported from abroad until the reign of Elizabeth, when English powder-mills were established in the country. The word artillery had been in use to denote projectile-throwing weapons anterior to the use of gunpowder, and became eventually the term by which the larger kind of firearms was designated. The construction of the first cannon was, as might be inferred, of the rudest possible description. Pieces or bars of iron were arranged longitudinally so as to form a rough tube, around which iron hoops were placed to hold them together. The powder and ball were in a separate case, open at one end to allow of the exit of the ball; this case was inserted in one end of the tube and secured by a stirrup arrangement pivoting upon two projections on either side of the tube, which fell over the open end and prevented the case from being blown out when the discharge occurred. The powder was fired by the insertion of a red-hot wire. The cannon was fixed down to a piece of timber which rested upon a similar piece: at the breech end of the cannon the two planks were hinged together, and by the insertion of wedges in the front between the timbers the piece could be elevated. Other contrivances almost as crude as that described were introduced in order to overcome the difficulties of taking aim. The projectiles were at first made of stone, and subsequently of lead or iron, or stone coated with lead. It must not be supposed that the introduction of such weapons created the profound consternation which a few contemporary writers have led us to suppose; the general impression produced was, in fact, one of contemptuous indifference, and it was only after many improvements had been effected that cannon began to be taken seriously. The earliest were only used in sieges, as the transport of such cumbrous pieces was nearly an impossibility, and when they were subsequently adopted for use in the field it was but seldom they were used after the first discharge. During the fifteenth century fresh developments took place; trunnions were invented, whereby the recoil was transferred directly to the carriage; the weapon was cast in one piece which tapered towards the muzzle, and many improvements in loading and discharging were made. Bombards were introduced, being short pieces with a large bore which were fired at a considerable elevation and discharged balls of stone to a small distance; they were the prototypes of our modern mortars and howitzers. One of the earliest examples of mediæval ordnance preserved in this country may be seen at the Rotunda, Woolwich (Plate XL., p.366). It is known asthe Creçy Bombard, and may possibly date back to the time of Edward III. It is said to have been found in the moat of Bodiham Castle, Sussex, and is known to have been in Battle Abbey for many years. Its interior is of cast iron, one of the earliest known specimens of the metal in that form, and iron hoops have been shrunk upon this inner core. The chamber in the smaller portion of the breech will hold about three or four pounds of powder; the stone shot discharged weighed about a hundred and sixty pounds and was fifteen inches in diameter. The carriage is modern. The cannonier wears a capacious salade and is defended by a hauberk of mail and a thick leather apron; he is discharging the bombard with a hot iron and protects his face with his hand from the inferior powder blown off the touch-hole by the explosion.PLATE XXXVIIIThe Dardanelles Bronze Gun,a.d.1468. (Rotunda, Woolwich)Very large cannon were in use at times. Mons Meg at Edinburgh is an example of a fifteenth century production; it weighs nearly four tons, has a calibre of 20 inches, and threw a stone projectile of 300 lbs. The powder-chamber is considerably smaller in bore than the cannon, in order to withstand the force of the discharge. This piece is reputed to have been made in 1455 for the siege of Thrieve Castle by James II.; this latter monarch was killed five years later by the bursting of a similar cannon, the Lion. Another example is preserved at Ghent, where a foundry existed for their manufacture: the piece has a calibre of 26 inches, while English guns are to be seen at Mont St. Michael of 15 inches and 19 inches bore respectively. A remarkable example of fifteenth century monster ordnance is the Dardanelles bronze gun preserved at the Rotunda, Woolwich, and illustrated inPlate XXXVIII. It was cast during the reign of Sultan Mahomed II.,a.d.1468, and presented to Queen Victoria by the Sultan of Turkey in 1867. It weighs 18 tons 14 cwt., the calibre is 25 inches, and the total length equals 17 feet. It is made in two parts, which are screwed together, and the breech portion which forms the powder chamber has a bore of only ten inches. The stone shot weighed 6 cwt. each. The names applied to ancient ordnance were many and various, and at the same time confusing, inasmuch as the calibre of the various pieces was constantly changing. The following is an approximate list of some of the pieces ordinarily in use:—Cannon Royal, weight of shot, 66 lbs.; Carthorun, 48 lbs.; Cannon, 34 lbs.; Bastard Cannon; Great Culverin, 15 lbs.; Bastard Culverin, 7 lbs.; Demi-Culverin, 2 lbs.; Basilisk, Serpentin, Aspik, Dragon, Syren. For field service: Falcon, 1 lb.; Falconet, 14 ozs.; Saker.PLATE XXXIX1. Peterara, time of Edward IV.2. Wall Arquebus. (Rotunda, Woolwich.)3. The Brocas Heaume.4. Heaume from Rotunda.Cannon have been made of various materials apart from iron and bronze, such as wood, paper, and rope, the outside covering being of leather. All the early guns used in England were obtained from abroad; the first foundry in England was that of Hugget of Uckfield, Sussex, in 1521, who cast cannon in brass and iron, using the Sussex iron smelted with charcoal. There are some pieces of ordnance preserved in the Rotunda at Woolwich which are of this age, and may possibly have come from the Sussex foundry. Examples of early cannon are rare in England, but on the Continent many may be found, especially in Belgium. The Rotunda and the Tower of London probably contain the finest specimens in the British Isles. In the Royal Arsenal at Madrid is preserved a small piece of ordnance dating from late fifteenth century. It is double-barrelled and breech-loading, and exhibits a wealth of ornamentation upon almost every part (Plate XXXVII.*). A breech-loading peterara of forged iron of the time of Edward IV. is in the Rotunda, and is illustrated inPlate XXXIX. It is made of longitudinal bars of iron hooped together with iron rings; the powder-chamber with its lifting handle is seen in position, and a simple locking arrangement prevented its blowing out upon the discharge. Trunnions are affixed to the piece, and the metal by which it was attached to the long-decayed wooden gun-carriage is still preserved. The length of the gun is 3 feet and the calibre 2½ inches, while the name implies that the shot was of stone. This very rare piece of ordnance is in excellent condition.The progress in artillery was very slow, but gradually cannon became mounted upon wheels and rude carriages, an advance upon the logs and cumbrous beds of the preceding period, while iron was substituted for stone in the projectile. The engagement of trained professional gunners in place of the civilians who had managed the artillery in the fourteenth century, was another step which led to improvement, Dutch artillerymen being employed by Henry VIII. Charles VIII. and subsequent French monarchs undoubtedly did much for the improvement of the weapon; they adopted light guns for field artillery, and introduced the system of rapidly taking up different positions from which to assail the enemy. The Civil War in England found a great scarcity of cannon, and more particularly of efficient gunners, and generally it may be stated that the English use of artillery was muchbehind that existing upon the Continent until the middle of the eighteenth century.PLATE XLThe “Creçy” Bombard,temp.Edward III. Arbalestier, Fifteenth Century. (Rotunda, Woolwich)The existence of cannon in the mediæval period would naturally suggest a weapon that might be used in the hand, and from a very early period hand-guns have been in evidence. They are rarely mentioned by writers of the time, and very few illuminations are extant showing the weapons then employed, which would tend to show that their use was restricted, and their efficacy valued but little. The earliest were simply tubes affixed to a stick and fired by means of a lighted match; some of them were ignited from the muzzle, thus indicating that they were shotless and only used to frighten horses in a cavalry charge. The long-bow and arbalest were of infinitely greater efficacy than the early hand-gun, and it is a matter for wonder that the latter held a place at all in the armies of the period. It was made in various shapes, but that generally shown in contemporary illustrations is depicted inFig. 339, the piece being discharged by means of a touch-hole on the top of the barrel near the breech. The earliest use of a hand-gun is involved in obscurity; there can be no doubt that many attempts were made to introduce such a weapon, but the first mention that occurs is in the reign of Edward III., when they were brought into England from Flanders. They were in use by both horse and foot soldiers, the stock in the first case being shortened so that it could be placed against the chest, while in the second it passed under the right arm, the left hand being used to grasp it and the right to hold the discharging match. The gun was supported in the case of cavalry by a forked rest which projected from the saddle. In all these guns the powder-chamber was smaller than the calibre of the barrel. In some cases the hand-gun was used as a mace after being discharged.Hand Culverin.—A larger hand-gun was subsequently evolved, which was much in use during the second half of the fifteenth century, and necessitated the presence of two men for its manipulation. It was called the hand culverin, and had a bore of about three-quarters of an inch; it was constructed of forged iron, and was attached by bands to a straight stock of wood. This weapon was fired from a rest. It was subsequently improved by the addition of a pan and touch-hole at the side and a modification of the stock, while the barrels were often of brass or bronze, and polygonal in section. Their weight varied from ten to sixteen pounds, and a variety which was carried on horseback at times weighed nearly sixty pounds. Warwick the King-maker employed “Burgundenses” or Burgundian hand-gun men in the Second Battle of St. Albans, 1461, and culveriners formed a part of the forces under Edward IV. in the later battles of the Wars of the Roses.The Serpentin, Matchlock, or Arquebus.—An improvement was made about the year 1500, whereby the slow match, hitherto held in the hand, was affixed to a lever bent into the form of a serpent and fastened by the centre to the stock on a pivot; by pulling the lower portion the upper end carrying the match was made to descend upon the priming powder. Subsequent innovations consisted of a sliding cover over the flash-pan, and the jointing of the serpentin to increase the leverage. The matchlock was in use for about two centuries, in spite of the cumbersome nature of the weapon, the slow rate of its discharge, the trouble involved in keeping the match alight during boisterous or rainy weather, and the heavy rest for holding it when loading and taking aim. The greatest merit was undoubtedly its simplicity and cheapness. The arquebus shown inPlate XXVII., p.322, is of the sixteenth century, time of James VI., and is in the Edinburgh Museum. The figure of an arquebusier may be discerned inPlate VIII., p.64, under the horse’s head of the Bayard figure. The arquebus is seen poised upon its rest with a piece of loose tow hanging from the barrel; the arquebusier is in the act of taking aim, and is accoutred in seventeenth century military dress. InPlate XXXIX.a wall arquebus is shown from the Rotunda, which is nearly 9 feet in length and weighs 87 lbs. It is fitted with a tube sight and an arrangement for pivoting in an iron socket upon a wall or in an embrasure. Its calibre is 1.3 inches. These pieces were at times carried into the field and required three men to manipulate them.The Wheel-lock.—The great difficulty experienced in keeping the match alight resulted in the invention of the wheel-lock in the earlier part of the sixteenth century at Nuremberg, and its introduction into England about 1540. The mechanism consisted of a wheel serrated at the edge which protruded into the priming pan, and was fixed by its axle to the lock plate (Plate XLI.). This axle was made square upon the outside for a key, while at the other end a strong spring engaged with it; by winding it the spring was compressed and held in place by a catch. The lock held a piece of pyrites, and when it was depressed rested in the priming pan, which had a removable cover; upon the trigger being pulled the spring caused the wheel to revolve quickly, whereby its file-like edges struck sparks of fire from the pyrites with which it was in contact and thus ignited the powder. For the cavalry and also for sporting purposes the wheel-lock was in use for many years, but its cost precluded a general introduction among the infantry. A high degree of ornamentation was lavished upon many of these weapons; examples may be readily found in all museums of importance.The Snap-hance.—This variety of lock was invented in Holland or Germany about 1550, and from the simplicity and ease with which it was made and the consequent cheapness of production, rapidly came into favour in England and on the Continent. It is said to have been evolved by a body of Dutch poultry stealers (Snaphans), who could not use the matchlock because of the light entailed, or the wheel-lock because of the expense, and thereupon devised the snap-hance, little dreaming that the invention would become so popular. The wheel-lock was superseded by a hammer which struck upon a piece of sulphurous pyrites; the flash-pan was the same, but the cover was actuated by a spring and flew back when the hammer descended, thus allowing a free passage for the shower of sparks.The Flint-lock.—The snap-hance was undoubtedly the intermediate weapon between the wheel-lock and flint-lock. The latter may be claimed as an English invention, as a specimen occurs in the Tower having the date 1614 upon it, the date generally assigned for its introduction being 1630 according to continental records. The knowledge that fire could be produced by striking flint upon steel was well known to the ancients. In the flint-lock the fall of the hammer containing the flint was made to open the flash-pan and at the same time to strike sparks from its cover. The earlier kinds had all the mechanism upon the outside of the lock, but subsequently it was hidden, and a tumbler connected the mainspring with the hammer. Highly decorated examples of the flint-lock are common, especially those of Italian and Spanish origin (Plate XLI.*). The weapon did not come into extensive use in England until the second half of the seventeenth century, but it eventually superseded all others, and was adapted for every kind of firearm, both military and civil, and remained in use until the advent of the percussion cap about 1830.Pistols underwent the same variations as the larger weapon, but these were often combined, being fixed in shields, battle-axes, pole-axes, daggers, halberds, &c.The subject of this chapter is an extremely wide one, and an attempt to cover it completely in the pages of this work has not been attempted; the broad facts given here may, however, be acceptable to the general reader.FOOTNOTES[1]From “Projectile-throwing Engines of the Ancients,” by Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey, Bart., by kind permission of the author, to whose work I am indebted for several particulars in this chapter.[2]The Royal Armoury at Madrid is undoubtedly the finest collection of its kind in the world. It was founded by King Charles V., 1516-1568, and in addition to Spanish armour and arms contains magnificent examples of the works of the greatest armourers of Europe. By the kindness and courtesy of Mr. Albert F. Calvert, author of “Spanish Arms and Armour, being a Historical and Descriptive Account of the Royal Armoury at Madrid,” we are enabled to produce illustrations of many of the exhibits from photographs supplied by him. These illustrations are distinguished by an asterisk (Plate I.*, &c.).INDEXAilette,101circular,109,110introduction of,97lozenge-shaped,103of Henry de Beaumont,102of Gilbert de Clare,103of John de Warenne,102use of,105Album, Jacobi,294Albyn, Robert, brass of,190Allecret,307Almayne corselets,305rivets,282,305Almeric, Lord St. Amand, bascinet of,151chapelle-de-fer of,151mentonnière of,151Amand, Lord St.,161Angon, Frankish,44Anelace,252,334Anton Pfeffenhauser,357Arbalest,93Arbalestier,126at Rotunda (Plate 40, p.366),132Archer, Chain Mail Reinforced Period,122Surcoatless Period,209Archers, English,255Etruscan,35Half Armour Period,318Archer’s stake,209Archery,124,130Argentine, Sir John de,189Armet,221Arm defences, Tabard Period,225Armour, Burgundy Cross,355Charles V. (Plates 30and33, pp.340,352),353upon coinage,161decorated,292Edinburgh Castle (Plate 24, p.312),306Edinburgh Castle (Plate 25, p.316),316English,352and foreign compared,350Flemish (Plate 23, p.268),357foot,358fluted,277Frankish,45German (Pl. 21, p.236),353,356German influence upon,349Gothic,353horse,354for Infante (Philip III.), (Plate 18, p.196),357influence of gunpowder upon,360Italian,355influence upon,349lancers’ (Plate 25, p.316),316Maximilian,278Milanese (Plate 21, p.236),355,357Milanese, of King Philip IV. (Plate 35, p.356),358Norman,67from Pamplona (Plate 22, p.240),357by Picinino (Pl. 19, p.212),357Roman Republican,36Savoy, Duke of (Plate 36, p.358),358King Sebastian (Plate 20, p.232),356slashed,291tegulated,74tilting,233Armourers’ Hall,294gauntlet,298Arms, towns renowned for,359Arquebus,306,367wall (Plate 39, p.364),368Arquebusier,260,315Maximilian,30Arrow-heads,4bronze,16Saxon,55Assyrians, the,20Artilleryman,365Audley, Lord, brass of,269Augsburg armour (Plate 30, p.340),353Colman family of,353Axe, Danish,64Edinburgh Castle (Plate 27, p.322),322Saxon,53Bacon, Sir — de, brass of,118Balista,343Bamberg, effigy at,169Banded mail,70,134construction of (Plate 14, p.136),134introduction of,97Banner,110Banneret, knight,110Barbute,172Bardiche,210Bardwell, William, brass of,270Bascinet (British Museum MSS.),150,153,172,173,209Lord St. Amand,151Thomas de Beauchamp,150Sir William Burgate,174Camail and Jupon Period,170Sir John de Creke,142Cyclas Period,142Parham Park,171St. Albans, Camail and Jupon Period,170Sir Humphrey de Stafford,216Studded and Splinted Period,149Surcoatless Period,195,208Tower of London,171Ulrich Landschaden,173Wallace Collection,171Baselard,338Bases or lamboys,289Basket-hilted sword,337Bastard sword,197,261Battle-axes,8Bavière (British Museum MSS.),208,266Surcoatless Period,195Tabard Period,220Bayard, Chevalier, armour of (Plate 8, p.64),272Bayeux Tapestry,65,67Bear’s-paw sabbatons,280Beauchamp Chapel,244Richard de,211effigy of,244Thomas, Earl of Warwick,160Thomas de, bascinet,150Belt, bronze, Greek,31Berkeley, Lord,169Bifid beard, Saxon,62Bill (Plate 27, p.322),328Billman (British Museum MS.),205Surcoatless Period,204Bipennis,54,80Bitton, Sir John de,87Black Prince, heaume of,184Bœotian helmet,29Bohun, Humphrey de, crest of,116Bolts or quarrels,133Bombard, the Creçy (Plate 40, p.366),363Bombards,307,362Bothe, Sir Robert del, brass of,249Bouche,253Bourdonass lance,311Bow, Assyrian,22Egyptian,23Greek,26,32Norman,66Bowman,255Bracer,209,319Brass at Croft,118Brass of Robert Albyn,190Sir John d’Aubernoun,97,144Lord Audley,269Sir — de Bacon,118William Bardwell,270Sir Robert del Bothe,249Sir Thomas Braunston,190Humphrey Brewster,301Sir Robert de Bures,116Lord Robert Ferrers of Chartley,199Sir William Cheyne,157Robert Colt,230,248John Colt,270John Daundelion,247Sir William de Echingham,176Lord L’Estrange,270Sir Simon de Felbrygge,199Sir — de Fitzralph,118John Gaynesford,247Henry Green,250Walter Green,247Sir Thomas Grene,250Sir Anthony de Grey,230,252Richard Gyll,270Sir John Hanley,190Sir Robert Harcourt,230Sir John de Harpedon,217Sir Hugh Hastings,150,158Sir Ralph de Knevynton,169Knight at Laughton,193Sir John de Leventhorpe,201Sir John Lysle,201Sir John de Northwode,144Henry Parice,230,248Sir John Peryent,229Sir John de St. Quintin,190Sir Thomas de St. Quintin,200,244Sir John Say,252Sir Robert de Septvans,117Edward Stafford,269Sir Humphrey Stanley,271Sir Miles de Stapleton,157,188,227Sir Robert Staunton,229,248Sir Roger de Trumpington,99Sir John Wylcotes,192Brassarts, demi-,118Jacobi,297Transition Period,269Brayette,284Breastplate (British Museum MS.),168Burgundian,358Camail and Jupon Period,168Cyclas Period,140Globose,242Jacobi,296long form of,250Maximilian,282peascod,283Studded and Splinted Period,148Surcoatless Period,195Tabard Period,223Transition Period,267(Tower of London),225Brigandines, construction of,263Bronze Age,9arrow-heads of,16daggers of,11mace of,19shields of,17spear of,14sword of,12,19Bronze gun, Dardanelles,363Brown bill,328Bufe,279Bures, Sir Robert de, brass of (Plate 11, p.116),116Burgate, Sir William, bascinet of,174Burgonet,28Hatfield House,307“Burgundenses,”262Burgundian breastplate,358Burgundy cross armour (Plate 31, p.346),355Byrnie, Saxon,58Cabasset (Plate 26, p.318),304Caliver,306,316Calthorpe, Sir William,201Camail and Jupon Period,166,174bascinet,170bascinet, St. Albans,170gauntlets,178hauberk,169heaume of,183hip belt,180laminated epaulières,177leg armour,180misericorde,182plate defences,177shield,183sword,181visor,171Cannon, construction of,364Dardanelles (Plate 38, p.362),363at Ghent,363Madrid (Plate 37, p.360),365at Mont St. Michael,363names of,364at Rotunda,364Cannonier,262,306,363Cap-à-piesuit, Tower of London,240Wallace Collection,242Carabine,306Carbineer, half armour of,316Catapult,342Cavalry, Half Armour Period,315Maximilian Period,307Celts, bronze,9Egyptian,7origin of name,2pronunciation of,2Palæolithic and Neolithic,3Chain mail,84fabrication of,86Period,81Reinforced Period,97archer,122guige,99heaume,101soldier,121sword,98Saxon,60Chanfron (Plate 34, p.354),354Chapelle-de-fer,259of Lord St. Amand,151Charles V., equestrian suit of,354Negroli armour (Plate 10, p.80),355Chausses,98Norman,76Studded and Splinted Period,149Cheney, Sir John, genouillière of,272Chevalier Bayard, armour of,272Cheyne, Sir Thomas,189Sir William,157,189Cinquedea,334Claymore,337Clehongre, effigy at,145Club tournament,312Cobham, Sir Reginald de, orle of,187Sir John de,190Coif-de-mailles,98fixing of,105Coif, Norman,73Coinage, armour upon,161Colt, John, brass of,270Robert, brass of,230,248Thomas, pauldron of,228Collections, foreign armour in,350German suits in,350Colman, Desiderius, foot armour (Plate 12, p.128),356family at Augsburg,353Composition of gunpowder,361Construction of early cannon,361Contoise,101,186,237Continental equipment,351and English equipment,352Coronal,238lance head,311Corporation mace,331Corselets, almayne,305Coudières,118butterfly,244fan-shaped,201of Thomas Playters,229Studded and Splinted Period,155fan-shaped, Surcoatless Period,196Tabard Period,228Wallace Collection,229Courses,308Courtney, Edward, panache of,187Crakeys,361Cray, John, misericorde of,182Creçy bombard,363Creke, Sir John de, bascinet of,142Crest, Humphrey de Bohun,116Richard Fitzalan,116introduction of,90John de Warenne,116Crests,97,115,186Crinet,354Cross-bow,126barrelled,133à Galet,133goat’s foot, or hind’s foot,131hand,131missiles,133moulinet and pulleys,132wheel and ratchet,132Cross-legged effigies,99Cuirass,30Etruscan,34Greek,24Roman Imperial,39Roman Republican,36,37Cuirassier, Half Armour Period,315Cuir-bouilli,98Cuishes,309Cuissarts, Transition Period,269Cuisses, Maximilian Period,284Culette,291Cultellus,79,334Culverin, hand,367Cumæ,29Cyclas Period,139,141soldier of,144sword,144Dag,308Dagger,338bronze,11kidney,339main-gauche,339Norman,79Saxon,54thumb-guard,339Daggers,6Dagging,168Dardanelles bronze gun (Plate 38, p.362),363Danes,63Danes and Saxons,47Danish axe,64helmet,63shield,64spear,64sword,64Das Deutsche Stechen,238,308d’Aubernoun, Sir John, brass of,97,144Daundelion, John, brass of,247Decorated armour,292Defences, not plate,71Demi-placcate (British Museum MS.),225Tabard Period,223d’Eresby brass,192orle,187Despencer, Hugh de,160Dragon,308Half Armour Period,316Dunbar, Patrick, heaume of,113Early cannon, construction of,361Early projectiles,362Echingham, Sir W. de, brass of,176Edinburgh Castle, armour in (Plate 24, p.312),306Edward III.,160Edward, Prince of Wales, heaume of,116Effigies, cross-legged,99Effigy, Bamberg Cathedral,196Richard Beauchamp,244Clehongre,145Prince John of Eltham,145from tomb of Lady Eleanor Fitzalan,153Sir Robert Shurland,141Aymer de Valence,143Sir John Verney,247Sir Thomas Vernon,246Egyptians,22Engines, projectile-throwing,340English archers,255armour,352and Continental equipment,352Épaule de mouton,237,286Epaulières, laminated, Camail and Jupon Period,177,196Tabard Period,226Equestrian suit, Charles V.,354Wallace Collection,241Equipment, continental,351Espalier pauldrons,239Etruscans,33Falarica,343Falchion,334Falcon,307Fauchard,210,320Felbrygge, Sir Simon de, brass of,199Ferrara suit,300Ferrars, Robert de, heaume of,112of Chartley, Lord R., brass of,199Fire-pot,261Fitzalan, Lady Eleanor, effigies from tomb of,152Fitzalan, Richard, crest of,116Fitzralph, Sir — de, brass of,118Flail, military,329Flamberge,337Flemish armour (Plate 23, p.268),357Flint-lock,369Fluted armour,277Foot armour,287,288,358soldier (British Museum MSS.),206,207Surcoatless Period,204tournaments,312Forbidden gauntlet,356Armourers’ Hall and Tower of London,298Foreign armour in collections,350Foreign armour and tournaments,350Fork, military,326scaling (Plate 27, p.322),326Francisca, Frankish,43Franks,43Free Course,286,312Fustibal or staff-sling,134Fylfote,99Fynderne, William, tabard of,215Gadlings,179Gambeson,67Cyclas Period,141Surcoatless Period,196Gammadion,99Garde-de-bras,229,237,287Garde-de-rein,241,279,282Gauntlet, Armourers’ Hall,298Camail and Jupon Period,178Charles V. (Plate 32, p.348),354forbidden,356Jacobi,298mail,107shell,253Surcoatless Period,196Gaynesford, John, brass of,247Genouillière, Jacobi,297of Sir Roger le Strange,272Wallace Collection,231Genouillières (British Museum MSS.),156,232Chain Mail Reinforced Period,98of Sir John Cheney,272Studded and Splinted Period,155,156Tabard Period,232Geoffrey, Count of Anjou, crest of,90Gerard, Piers, sabbatons of,232tabard of,215German armour (Plate 21, p.236),353,356Course,308suits in collections,350Ghent, cannon at,363Gilbert de Clare, ailettes of,103Glaives (Plate 27, p.322),328Goedendag,330Gorget, Jacobi,296Maximilian Period,280Surcoatless Period,194,212Transition Period,267Gothic armour, Wallace Collection,239style,242suits,353Goussets, laminated,239plate,225,267Grande-garde,285Greaves, Greek,25,30,31Greek engines,341fire,261,360historic age,24,27lance,27phalanx,27Green, Henry, brass of,250Walter, brass of,247Grene, Sir Thomas, brass of,250Grevières or jambarts, Studded and Splinted Period,157Grey, Sir Anthony de, brass of,230,252Grey of Ruthin, Lord,160Gridiron helmet,312Guard-plate to knee,250Guige,78,238Chain Mail Reinforced Period,99Guisarme,210,320Norman,79Gunpowder, composition of,361influence on armour,360introduction of,27Gyll, Richard, brass of,270Gyn,345Half Armour Period,313archers,318arquebusier,315carbineer,316cavalry,315cuirassier,315dragoon,316helmet,313musketeer,317pikeman,316three-quarter suit,314Halberd, Edinburgh Castle (Plate 27, p.323),323Hand-and-a-half sword,197Hand culverin,367guns,365gun man,261,262gun men, Burgundian,262Hanley, Sir John, brass of,190Haqueton,117Cyclas Period,139Harcourt, Sir Robert, brass of,230Harpedon, Sir John de, brass of,217Hastings, Sir Hugh, brass of,150Sir Hugh, heaume of,154Lawrence,160Hatfield House, burgonet,307helmet,300sabbatons,305Hauberk,98Camail and Jupon Period,169Cyclas Period,140Norman Period,73Studded and Splinted Period,147Surcoatless Period,196Hausse-col,252Haut-de-chausses, Studded and Splinted Period,156Hawberk, Sir Nicholas,169Head-piece (British Museum MS.),206Heaume,81Berlin,91Black Prince (Plate 17),184the Brocas (Plate 39, p.364),274Roger de Bigod,82Camail and Jupon Period,183Chain Mail Reinforced Period,101,112Richard de Clare,83Cœur de Lion,91conical, introduction of,97Patrick Dunbar,113Hugh Fitz-Eudo,82Edward, Prince of Wales,116Robert de Ferrars,112Hamelin,83Sir Hugh Hastings,154Henry de Lacy,115Painted, at Leipzic,82Sir Geoffrey Luterell,154Henry de Perci,115Pembridge,185Richard Plantagenet,112Pranker,187Rotunda (Plate 39, p.364),185Sir William de Staunton,101Tower of London,273Sir Edward de Thorpe,187Tilting,235Various,274Hugh de Vere,83The Wallace,273Helmet, Assyrian,21Cabasset,304Danish,63Egyptian,23Etruscan,33Greek,24,28Gridiron,312Grotesque,292Half Armour Period,313Hatfield House,300Jacobi,295latticed,312Maximilian Period,280morion,304nasal,112Norman,78of Philip II. by Wolf (Plate 16, p.166),356Roman Imperial,39Republican,37Saxon,56Tabard Period,216Transition Period,265Henry de Beaumont, ailettes of,102Henri de Perci, banner of,111Heraldry, beginning of,89Hip belt, Camail and Jupon Period,180Surcoatless Period,196Hog’s bristle,318Holy water sprinkler,329Horse armour,354Houppelande,207,259Huskyn,319Imperial Period, Roman armour,37Infantry, Maximilian Period,301Italian armour,355Course,238,286,310Jacobi brassarts,297breastplate,296gauntlets,298genouillière,297gorget,296jambarts,297pauldrons,297sabbatons,297suits,294taces,296turners,297Jacque,204,262Jambarts, demi-,118Jacobi,297Javelin,4,31,263Jazeraint work,264John de Warenne, ailettes of,102Joustes of Peace,238Jupon, Camail and Jupon Period,167Kidney dagger,339guard,282King Sebastian, armour,356Knevynton, Sir Ralph de,188brass of,169Knighthood,111Knight, Transition Period,271Lacy, Henry de, heaume,115Lambrequins,31,237Lamboys or bases,289Laminated goussets,239Lancaster, Henry, Earl of,160Lance,99,332Assyrian,22Bourdonass,311Frankish,44Greek,26Lance head, coronal,311Norman,65rest,233Landschaden, Ulrich, bascinet of,173Landschut, Wolf, family of,355Latimer, Sir W. de, panache of,186Latten,242Latticed helmet,312Laughton, knight at, brass of,193Leg armour, Camail and Jupon Period,180Leg defence, leather,109Leg defences, Tabard Period,231L’Estrange, Lord, brass of,270Leventhorpe, Sir John de, brass of,201Littlebury, Sir Humphrey,189Lobster-tail tassets,307Long-bow, Saxon,55Lucio Picinino,357Ludwig of Bavaria, Duke, salade of,220Luterell, Sir Geoffrey, heaume of,154Lysle, Sir John, brass of,201Mace,329Assyrian,22Bronze Age,19Corporation,331Norman,67Saxon,67used by ecclesiastics,331Madrid, Royal Armoury at,353Mail, banded,134gauntlet,107skirt,240Main-de-fer,237Mainfaire,355Main-gauche,339Malacat, Sir Pandulf,212Mammelières,204,261Man-at-arms, Chain Mail Period,95Surcoatless Period,203Mangonel,346Manifere,237Manteau d’armes,286,311Mantling,237Martel-de-fer,331Matchlock,367drill,318Maule,319Maunche,159Maximilian armour,278breastplate,282cavalry,307cuisses,284gorget,280infantry,301pauldrons,283Period,275pikeman,303Mentonnière, of Lord St. Amand,151Tabard Period,219Wallace Collection,221Milanese armour (Plate 21, p.236),355,357Military flail,329fork,326pick,79Misericorde,252Camail and Jupon Period,182John Cray,182Surcoatless Period,197Missaglias,244Mons Meg,363Mont St. Michael, cannon at,363Morgensterns,330Morion,304Morning star,329Musketeer, Half Armour Period,317Names of cannon,364Nasal, Norman,78Negroli family,355Neville, Richard,253Norman armour,67bow,66chausses,76coif,73hauberk,73helmet,78lance,65mace,67nasal,78pennon,65period,65Norman shield,77sword,66Northwode, Sir John de, brass of,144Occularium,218,222Open Course,238Orle,187,246Sir Reginald de Cobham,187d’Eresby,187Palette,196,237Paletoot, Sir John de,189Pamplona armour (Plate 21, p.240),357Panache,186Edward Courteney,187Sir William de Latimer,186Parazonium, Greek,32Parice, Henry, brass of,230,248Partisan,210,324Pas d’ane,336Passe gardes,227Patron,308Pauldrons,237Thomas Colt,228espalier,229Jacobi,297laminated, Tabard Period,227Maximilian,283Tabard Period,227Transition Period,268Wallace Collection,228William Yelverton,228Pavise,257(British Museum MS.),258Wallace Collection,257Pavon,110,111Peascod breastplate,283Pembridge, Sir Richard, shield of,183heaume,185Pennon,110Norman,65Pennonçel,110Perci, Henry de, heaume of,115Perrier,345Peryent, Sir John, brass of,229Petardier,261Peterara (Plate 39, p.364),365Petrary,346Petronel,306Pfeffenhauser, Anton,357Philip III. armour (Plate 18, p.196;Plate 19, p.212;Plate 22, p.240),357Picinino, Lucio (Plate 19, p.212),300,357Pike,210,324guards,227,244,268Pikeman, Half Armour Period (Plate 24, p.312),316Maximilian Period,303Surcoatless Period,204Pilum, Roman (Imperial),40Pistols,370Plantagenet, Richard, heaume of,112Plastron-de-fer, Norman,73Plate defences, Camail and Jupon Period,177goussets,225Playters, Thomas, coudière of,229Polder mitten,237,286Pole-axe,210,240,321Saxon,54Poniard,338Pot-de-fer,260Pourpoint,155Pranker heaume,187Pre-Norman Period, sword of,333Projectile-throwing engines,340early,362Pryck spurs,99Quarrels or bolts,133Queue, Tower of London,236Wallace Collection,236Quintin, Sir John de St.,190,199Sir Thomas de St., brass of,200Thomas de St., brass of,244Quiver,209Greek,33Ranseur (Plate 27, p.322),324Rapier,336Rhodes armour (Plate 9, p.72),253Ricasso,337Richard III.,253Rivets, almayne,305Roman armour, Republican,36Imperial Period,37engines,341Rondache, Augsburg (Plate 4, p.40),299Desiderius Colman (Plate 3, p.32),299Italian (Plate 1, p.16),299(Plate 5, p.48),299(Plate 6, p.56),299Philip II. (Plate 2, p.24),299Rondaches,298Rotunda,253cannon at,364heaume,185Roundels,118Royal Armoury, Madrid,353Sabbaton,232Sabbatons, bear’s-paw,280of Piers Gerard,232Hatfield House,305Jacobi,297Transition Period,269Sabre,334Salade,217,260on brasses,248of Duke Ludvig of Bavaria,220of German pattern,220Maximilian Period,281Milanese (Plate 7, p.60),355Tower of London,219Wallace Collection,219Salletts,218Saxon arrow-head,55axe,53byrnie,58chain mail,60dagger,54helmet,56long-bow,55pole-axe,54shield,57sling,55spear-heads,49swords,50Saxon umbo,57Saxons and Danes,47Say, Sir John, brass of,252tabard of,215Scaling fork,326Scarisbrick Tabard,216Scimitar,209,335Sebastian, King, armour of (Plate 20, p.232),356Septvans, Sir Robert de, brass of,117Serpentin,307,367Sharfrennen,309Shell gauntlets,253Shelton, Sir Ralph, tabard of,215Shield, Assyrian,21Bronze Age,17(British Museum MS.),203Camail and Jupon Period,92Danish,64Egyptian,23Etruscan,35Greek,25,28Norman,77Roman, Imperial Period,39Saxon,57Sir Richard Pembridge,183Studded and Splinted Period,157Surcoatless Period,203of Robert Wyvill,183Shields or rondaches,298Shurland, Sir Robert, effigy of,141Sieges,340Sir John de Bitton,87Sir Oliver d’Ingham, stone effigy,100Sir Roger de Kerdeston, stone effigy,100Sir Robert de Trumpington, brass of,99Sir William de Staunton, heaume,101Skirt of mail, Transition Period,269Slab, Sir John de Bitton,87Slashed armour,291Sling, Saxon,55Sling-stones,7Snap-hance,369Snout-faced visor,171Soldier, Cyclas Period,144Chain Mail Period,93Chain Mail Reinforced Period,121Sollerets,120studded and splinted,157Spanish soldiers, eleventh century,351Spear, bronze,14Danish,64Egyptian,23heads,4Greek,32Saxon,49Roman Imperial,40Saxon,48Spearman (British Museum MS.),207Chain Mail Reinforced Period,96Spetum,324Spontoon,326Sprinkler, holy water,329Spurs,242pryck,99Stafford, Lord,160Edward, brass of,269Sir Humphrey de, bascinet of,216Staff-sling or fustibal,94,134Stake, archer’s,209Standard of mail, Transition Period,221,267Stanley, Sir Humphrey, brass of,271Stapleton, Sir Miles,189brass of,157,188,227Staunton, Sir Robert, brass of,229,248Stechtarsche,238Stone Age,1arrow and javelin heads,4battle-axes,8celts,2daggers,6sling-stones,7spear-heads,4Stone effigy, Sir Oliver d’Ingham,100Sir R. de Kerdeston,100Strange, Sir Roger le, genouillière of,272Studded and Splinted Period,146Suits, Jacobi,294Surcoat,98Chain Mail Period,88Surcoat or jupon, Studded and Splinted Period,147Surcoatless Period,194archer,209bascinet,195,208bavière,195billman,204breastplate,195fan-shaped coudières,196foot soldier,204gambeson,196gauntlets,196gorget,194,212hauberk,196hip belt,196man-at-arms,203misericorde,197pikeman,204shield,203sword,197taces,195Svastika,99Swedish feather,318Swine’s feather,318Sword,252,332anelace,334Assyrian,21bastard,261,338basket-hilted,337bronze,12,19Camail and Jupon Period,181Chain Mail Reinforced Period,98Cinquedea,334Cortes (Plate 29, p.338),335cultellus,334Cyclas Period,144Danish,64Egyptian,23Falchion,334Flamberge,337Frankish,45Gonsalvo de Cordoba (Plate 29, p.338),335guards of,335Greek,25,28Norman,66Pre-Norman Period,333Roman Imperial,40Philip II. (Plate 28, p.334;Plate 29, p.338),335sabre,334Saxon,50scimitar,335Surcoatless Period,197Tabard Period,232thumb-guard,336two-handed,255,336Swynborne, Sir Robert, brass of,170Tabard, William Fynderne,215Piers Gerard,215Period,213,214arm defences,225bavière,220breastplate,223coudières,228demi-placcate,223genouillières,232helmet,216laminated epaulières,226laminated pauldrons,227leg defences,231mentonnière,219pauldrons,227sword,232taces,229tuilles,229tuillettes,229Scarisbrick,216Sir John Say,215Sir Ralph Shelton,215John Wantele,215Taces, Jacobi,296Surcoatless Period,195Tabard Period,229Tapul,283Tassets,282lobster tail,307Tegulated armour,74Thorpe, Sir Edward de, heaume,187Three-quarter suit, Half Armour Period,314Thumb-guard, dagger,339sword,336Tilting armour,233German,234Wallace Collection,235heaume,235pieces,285Tormentum,342Tournaments,308and foreign armour,350Tower of London, Greek armour,29Towns renowned for arms,359Transition Period,265brassarts,269breastplate,267cuissarts,269gorget,267helmet,265knight,271pauldrons,268sabbatons,269skirt of mail,269standard of mail,267Trebuchet (British Museum MSS.),344,345,346,347Trews,117Tuilles, Tabard Period,229Tuillettes, Tabard Period,229Tunic, Assyrian,20Egyptian,22Turners,254Jacobi,297Two-handed sword,336Über die Pallia,238,310Umbo, Saxon,57Umbril,307Valence, Aymer de, effigy of,143Vamplate,310Tower of London,236Vambraces, demi,118Studded and Splinted Period,155Ventaille,112Verney, Sir John, effigy of,247Vernon, Sir Thomas, effigy of (Frontispiece),246Vervelles,142,176,222Visor, Camail and Jupon Period,171Volante piece,285,356Voulge,326Wantele, John, tabard of,215Warenne, John de, crest of,116War hat, Wallace Collection,152Warwick Roll,253Welsches Gestech,238Wheel-lock,367Wolf family,365Philip II., armour (Plate 13, p.132),356tilting armour (Plate 15, p.146),356Wylcotes, Sir John, brass of,102Wyvill, Robert, shield,183Yelverton, William, pauldron of,228
PLATE XXXV*Milanese Armour of King Philip IV.A. F. Calvert
PLATE XXXV*
Milanese Armour of King Philip IV.
A. F. Calvert
The year 1554, which saw the production of some of the above suits, probably witnessed the delivery of another to King Sebastian of Portugal, which is preserved in the Royal Armoury at Madrid, and is perhaps the most magnificent in the whole collection. The details of the backplate, pauldrons, and arm defences are shown inPlate XX.*,p.232. It is the work of Anton Pfeffenhauser of Augsburg, and undoubtedly his masterpiece; as an example of repoussé work it places him upon an equality with the best German masters of his time. “Mythological figures are embossed upon the bands traversing the backplate; designs symbolical of Power, Victory, Peace, and Navigation are represented on the pauldrons, back and front, while the coudières display the four figures of the cardinal virtues.” It is essentially a pageant suit, as is also the one presented to Philip III., when prince, at the age of seven. It is a half-suit of Italian workmanship, formed in gilded iron and decorated with figures, masks, &c., all embossed and damascened (Plate XVIII.*, p.196). Another, presented to the same monarch in his childhood, is represented inPlate XIX.*, p.212, and is believed to be the work of Lucio Picinino of Milan. The decoration is less profuse but quite as beautiful as in the preceding example. A piece of Spanish armour made at Pamplona in Navarre in 1620 is shown inPlate XXII.*, p.240. Mr. Calvert states: “It is of steel-plated iron and of extraordinary thickness.… A curious feature is the seven indentations made by the bullets of an arquebus, and each set with silver pearls. These marks do not say much for the quality of the metal, which is 10 millimetres thick. The backplate, which is only 3 millimetres thick, has been perforated by a bullet. The arms are defended by espaliers reaching to the elbow, where they meet the cuffs of the gauntlets.”
Plate XXI.*, p.236, is a suit of Milanese make, early seventeenth century, intended for war purposes, and absolutely devoid of ornamentation. An example of Flemish armour of 1624 is represented inPlate XXIII.*, p.268; it was sent by the Infanta Isabel Clara Eugenia to Philip IV. The ugliness of the breastplate and the huge rivet-heads upon the pauldrons are strongly suggestive of the “boiler plate” armour prevailing in England at the same period.Plate XXXV.*is a suit presented by the Cardinal Infante Ferdinand to Philip IV., and exhibits the lames of plate inserted in the gousset of the coudière, similar to the Henry VIII. foot armour in the Tower. It is of Milanese make, and decorated with vertical bands of medallions, &c.
Fig.445.—Globose breastplate (Burgundian). (Tower of London.)
Fig.445.—Globose breastplate (Burgundian). (Tower of London.)
A second example of armour of Spanish make is given inPlate XXXVI.*; it was fabricated at Pamplona for the Duke of Savoy in 1620, and is decidedly an improvement upon the suit shown inPlate XIX.*, p.212, which came from the same locality. It is worthy of remark that Spain, with all its vast resources of the finest iron ores in the world, did not become a centre for arms and armour. She was undoubtedly able to supply her own requirements, and in the wars against the Moors these were of no mean order, but no distinct Spanish “School” was evolved similar to the German or Italian. The excellent quality of her swords attained world-wide reputation, and the blades of Toledo, Bilbao, and Seville are justly famous. No town in France achieved special success in armour or arms, although many were active in the production. Burgundy was chiefly noted for its eccentricities, the breastplate illustrated inFig. 445furnishing an example, though many inventions, such as the burgonet, emanated from that warlike district, while its hand-gun men of the fifteenth century were the best in the world. Holland and Belgium have always enjoyed a reputation for arms, and Netherlandish weapons and defences were in great demand. The overwhelming superiority of Italian products must not be ascribed solely to one town, Milan, for many others were famous, such as Pisa, Verona, Lucca, Mantua, and Brescia, while Florence became a serious rival to Milan in the latter part of the sixteenth century. In Germany, Augsburg and Nuremberg probably were the most renowned for armour, but Cologne bore pre-eminence for weapons.
PLATE XXXVI*Armour of Duke of Savoy, 1620. Made at Pamplona.A. F. Calvert
PLATE XXXVI*
Armour of Duke of Savoy, 1620. Made at Pamplona.
A. F. Calvert
PLATE XXXVII*Double Breech-loading Cannon, in Bronze, used in Spain from the end of the Fifteenth Century.A. F. Calvert
PLATE XXXVII*
Double Breech-loading Cannon, in Bronze, used in Spain from the end of the Fifteenth Century.
A. F. Calvert
The invention of gunpowder and its use in propelling missiles from tubes was the signal for the abolition of armour, as we have indicated, though the struggle for supremacy between the two lasted for considerably more than a century. The Eastern nations are generally credited with the discovery of the properties of a mixture of saltpetre, carbon, and sulphur so far as their use in fireworks is concerned, but it was undoubtedly to the Western nations that the knowledge and application of the propelling nature of the mixture were due. The first authentic account of its use for military purposes must be ascribed to the seventh century, when, under the name of Greek fire, it was used at the defence of Constantinople by the Byzantine emperors against the invading Saracens. The true Greek fire, however, is supposed to have contained more ingredients than the three which constitute gunpowder proper, viz. resin and naphtha, the latter being in excess, and this mixture appears to have been so inflammable and so difficult to extinguish that the terror excited by its use was out of all proportion to the destruction that it wrought. It was propelled from balistæ, projected from tubes, and carried by means of arrows which bore tow steeped in the composition, while its use in a besieged town to pour down upon assailants was probably the most efficacious. Its composition was fora long time kept secret, but the knowledge gradually spread, and during the later mediæval period its use was not unknown in England (Fig. 337). Gunpowder proper was used for the first time in the Spanish wars with the Moors in the twelfth century by both combatants; and the secret of its composition was discovered by Roger Bacon in the thirteenth century, probably from the translation of manuscripts. Schwartz, a German Frank, perfected it about a century later, and its first use in England occurred in the wars against the Scots by Edward III. in 1327, when the cannon were denominated “crakeys,” a diminutive from “crake,” the first name of the composition, which may be a corruption of “grec.” At the siege of Cambrai in 1339 cannon were in use, and they are specifically mentioned by Froissart. After that time their use became general, and in 1346 many were in operation at the battle of Creçy, the gunpowder being imported from abroad until the reign of Elizabeth, when English powder-mills were established in the country. The word artillery had been in use to denote projectile-throwing weapons anterior to the use of gunpowder, and became eventually the term by which the larger kind of firearms was designated. The construction of the first cannon was, as might be inferred, of the rudest possible description. Pieces or bars of iron were arranged longitudinally so as to form a rough tube, around which iron hoops were placed to hold them together. The powder and ball were in a separate case, open at one end to allow of the exit of the ball; this case was inserted in one end of the tube and secured by a stirrup arrangement pivoting upon two projections on either side of the tube, which fell over the open end and prevented the case from being blown out when the discharge occurred. The powder was fired by the insertion of a red-hot wire. The cannon was fixed down to a piece of timber which rested upon a similar piece: at the breech end of the cannon the two planks were hinged together, and by the insertion of wedges in the front between the timbers the piece could be elevated. Other contrivances almost as crude as that described were introduced in order to overcome the difficulties of taking aim. The projectiles were at first made of stone, and subsequently of lead or iron, or stone coated with lead. It must not be supposed that the introduction of such weapons created the profound consternation which a few contemporary writers have led us to suppose; the general impression produced was, in fact, one of contemptuous indifference, and it was only after many improvements had been effected that cannon began to be taken seriously. The earliest were only used in sieges, as the transport of such cumbrous pieces was nearly an impossibility, and when they were subsequently adopted for use in the field it was but seldom they were used after the first discharge. During the fifteenth century fresh developments took place; trunnions were invented, whereby the recoil was transferred directly to the carriage; the weapon was cast in one piece which tapered towards the muzzle, and many improvements in loading and discharging were made. Bombards were introduced, being short pieces with a large bore which were fired at a considerable elevation and discharged balls of stone to a small distance; they were the prototypes of our modern mortars and howitzers. One of the earliest examples of mediæval ordnance preserved in this country may be seen at the Rotunda, Woolwich (Plate XL., p.366). It is known asthe Creçy Bombard, and may possibly date back to the time of Edward III. It is said to have been found in the moat of Bodiham Castle, Sussex, and is known to have been in Battle Abbey for many years. Its interior is of cast iron, one of the earliest known specimens of the metal in that form, and iron hoops have been shrunk upon this inner core. The chamber in the smaller portion of the breech will hold about three or four pounds of powder; the stone shot discharged weighed about a hundred and sixty pounds and was fifteen inches in diameter. The carriage is modern. The cannonier wears a capacious salade and is defended by a hauberk of mail and a thick leather apron; he is discharging the bombard with a hot iron and protects his face with his hand from the inferior powder blown off the touch-hole by the explosion.
PLATE XXXVIIIThe Dardanelles Bronze Gun,a.d.1468. (Rotunda, Woolwich)
PLATE XXXVIII
The Dardanelles Bronze Gun,a.d.1468. (Rotunda, Woolwich)
Very large cannon were in use at times. Mons Meg at Edinburgh is an example of a fifteenth century production; it weighs nearly four tons, has a calibre of 20 inches, and threw a stone projectile of 300 lbs. The powder-chamber is considerably smaller in bore than the cannon, in order to withstand the force of the discharge. This piece is reputed to have been made in 1455 for the siege of Thrieve Castle by James II.; this latter monarch was killed five years later by the bursting of a similar cannon, the Lion. Another example is preserved at Ghent, where a foundry existed for their manufacture: the piece has a calibre of 26 inches, while English guns are to be seen at Mont St. Michael of 15 inches and 19 inches bore respectively. A remarkable example of fifteenth century monster ordnance is the Dardanelles bronze gun preserved at the Rotunda, Woolwich, and illustrated inPlate XXXVIII. It was cast during the reign of Sultan Mahomed II.,a.d.1468, and presented to Queen Victoria by the Sultan of Turkey in 1867. It weighs 18 tons 14 cwt., the calibre is 25 inches, and the total length equals 17 feet. It is made in two parts, which are screwed together, and the breech portion which forms the powder chamber has a bore of only ten inches. The stone shot weighed 6 cwt. each. The names applied to ancient ordnance were many and various, and at the same time confusing, inasmuch as the calibre of the various pieces was constantly changing. The following is an approximate list of some of the pieces ordinarily in use:—
Cannon Royal, weight of shot, 66 lbs.; Carthorun, 48 lbs.; Cannon, 34 lbs.; Bastard Cannon; Great Culverin, 15 lbs.; Bastard Culverin, 7 lbs.; Demi-Culverin, 2 lbs.; Basilisk, Serpentin, Aspik, Dragon, Syren. For field service: Falcon, 1 lb.; Falconet, 14 ozs.; Saker.
PLATE XXXIX1. Peterara, time of Edward IV.2. Wall Arquebus. (Rotunda, Woolwich.)3. The Brocas Heaume.4. Heaume from Rotunda.
PLATE XXXIX
1. Peterara, time of Edward IV.
2. Wall Arquebus. (Rotunda, Woolwich.)
3. The Brocas Heaume.
4. Heaume from Rotunda.
Cannon have been made of various materials apart from iron and bronze, such as wood, paper, and rope, the outside covering being of leather. All the early guns used in England were obtained from abroad; the first foundry in England was that of Hugget of Uckfield, Sussex, in 1521, who cast cannon in brass and iron, using the Sussex iron smelted with charcoal. There are some pieces of ordnance preserved in the Rotunda at Woolwich which are of this age, and may possibly have come from the Sussex foundry. Examples of early cannon are rare in England, but on the Continent many may be found, especially in Belgium. The Rotunda and the Tower of London probably contain the finest specimens in the British Isles. In the Royal Arsenal at Madrid is preserved a small piece of ordnance dating from late fifteenth century. It is double-barrelled and breech-loading, and exhibits a wealth of ornamentation upon almost every part (Plate XXXVII.*). A breech-loading peterara of forged iron of the time of Edward IV. is in the Rotunda, and is illustrated inPlate XXXIX. It is made of longitudinal bars of iron hooped together with iron rings; the powder-chamber with its lifting handle is seen in position, and a simple locking arrangement prevented its blowing out upon the discharge. Trunnions are affixed to the piece, and the metal by which it was attached to the long-decayed wooden gun-carriage is still preserved. The length of the gun is 3 feet and the calibre 2½ inches, while the name implies that the shot was of stone. This very rare piece of ordnance is in excellent condition.
The progress in artillery was very slow, but gradually cannon became mounted upon wheels and rude carriages, an advance upon the logs and cumbrous beds of the preceding period, while iron was substituted for stone in the projectile. The engagement of trained professional gunners in place of the civilians who had managed the artillery in the fourteenth century, was another step which led to improvement, Dutch artillerymen being employed by Henry VIII. Charles VIII. and subsequent French monarchs undoubtedly did much for the improvement of the weapon; they adopted light guns for field artillery, and introduced the system of rapidly taking up different positions from which to assail the enemy. The Civil War in England found a great scarcity of cannon, and more particularly of efficient gunners, and generally it may be stated that the English use of artillery was muchbehind that existing upon the Continent until the middle of the eighteenth century.
PLATE XLThe “Creçy” Bombard,temp.Edward III. Arbalestier, Fifteenth Century. (Rotunda, Woolwich)
PLATE XL
The “Creçy” Bombard,temp.Edward III. Arbalestier, Fifteenth Century. (Rotunda, Woolwich)
The existence of cannon in the mediæval period would naturally suggest a weapon that might be used in the hand, and from a very early period hand-guns have been in evidence. They are rarely mentioned by writers of the time, and very few illuminations are extant showing the weapons then employed, which would tend to show that their use was restricted, and their efficacy valued but little. The earliest were simply tubes affixed to a stick and fired by means of a lighted match; some of them were ignited from the muzzle, thus indicating that they were shotless and only used to frighten horses in a cavalry charge. The long-bow and arbalest were of infinitely greater efficacy than the early hand-gun, and it is a matter for wonder that the latter held a place at all in the armies of the period. It was made in various shapes, but that generally shown in contemporary illustrations is depicted inFig. 339, the piece being discharged by means of a touch-hole on the top of the barrel near the breech. The earliest use of a hand-gun is involved in obscurity; there can be no doubt that many attempts were made to introduce such a weapon, but the first mention that occurs is in the reign of Edward III., when they were brought into England from Flanders. They were in use by both horse and foot soldiers, the stock in the first case being shortened so that it could be placed against the chest, while in the second it passed under the right arm, the left hand being used to grasp it and the right to hold the discharging match. The gun was supported in the case of cavalry by a forked rest which projected from the saddle. In all these guns the powder-chamber was smaller than the calibre of the barrel. In some cases the hand-gun was used as a mace after being discharged.
Hand Culverin.—A larger hand-gun was subsequently evolved, which was much in use during the second half of the fifteenth century, and necessitated the presence of two men for its manipulation. It was called the hand culverin, and had a bore of about three-quarters of an inch; it was constructed of forged iron, and was attached by bands to a straight stock of wood. This weapon was fired from a rest. It was subsequently improved by the addition of a pan and touch-hole at the side and a modification of the stock, while the barrels were often of brass or bronze, and polygonal in section. Their weight varied from ten to sixteen pounds, and a variety which was carried on horseback at times weighed nearly sixty pounds. Warwick the King-maker employed “Burgundenses” or Burgundian hand-gun men in the Second Battle of St. Albans, 1461, and culveriners formed a part of the forces under Edward IV. in the later battles of the Wars of the Roses.
The Serpentin, Matchlock, or Arquebus.—An improvement was made about the year 1500, whereby the slow match, hitherto held in the hand, was affixed to a lever bent into the form of a serpent and fastened by the centre to the stock on a pivot; by pulling the lower portion the upper end carrying the match was made to descend upon the priming powder. Subsequent innovations consisted of a sliding cover over the flash-pan, and the jointing of the serpentin to increase the leverage. The matchlock was in use for about two centuries, in spite of the cumbersome nature of the weapon, the slow rate of its discharge, the trouble involved in keeping the match alight during boisterous or rainy weather, and the heavy rest for holding it when loading and taking aim. The greatest merit was undoubtedly its simplicity and cheapness. The arquebus shown inPlate XXVII., p.322, is of the sixteenth century, time of James VI., and is in the Edinburgh Museum. The figure of an arquebusier may be discerned inPlate VIII., p.64, under the horse’s head of the Bayard figure. The arquebus is seen poised upon its rest with a piece of loose tow hanging from the barrel; the arquebusier is in the act of taking aim, and is accoutred in seventeenth century military dress. InPlate XXXIX.a wall arquebus is shown from the Rotunda, which is nearly 9 feet in length and weighs 87 lbs. It is fitted with a tube sight and an arrangement for pivoting in an iron socket upon a wall or in an embrasure. Its calibre is 1.3 inches. These pieces were at times carried into the field and required three men to manipulate them.
The Wheel-lock.—The great difficulty experienced in keeping the match alight resulted in the invention of the wheel-lock in the earlier part of the sixteenth century at Nuremberg, and its introduction into England about 1540. The mechanism consisted of a wheel serrated at the edge which protruded into the priming pan, and was fixed by its axle to the lock plate (Plate XLI.). This axle was made square upon the outside for a key, while at the other end a strong spring engaged with it; by winding it the spring was compressed and held in place by a catch. The lock held a piece of pyrites, and when it was depressed rested in the priming pan, which had a removable cover; upon the trigger being pulled the spring caused the wheel to revolve quickly, whereby its file-like edges struck sparks of fire from the pyrites with which it was in contact and thus ignited the powder. For the cavalry and also for sporting purposes the wheel-lock was in use for many years, but its cost precluded a general introduction among the infantry. A high degree of ornamentation was lavished upon many of these weapons; examples may be readily found in all museums of importance.
The Snap-hance.—This variety of lock was invented in Holland or Germany about 1550, and from the simplicity and ease with which it was made and the consequent cheapness of production, rapidly came into favour in England and on the Continent. It is said to have been evolved by a body of Dutch poultry stealers (Snaphans), who could not use the matchlock because of the light entailed, or the wheel-lock because of the expense, and thereupon devised the snap-hance, little dreaming that the invention would become so popular. The wheel-lock was superseded by a hammer which struck upon a piece of sulphurous pyrites; the flash-pan was the same, but the cover was actuated by a spring and flew back when the hammer descended, thus allowing a free passage for the shower of sparks.
The Flint-lock.—The snap-hance was undoubtedly the intermediate weapon between the wheel-lock and flint-lock. The latter may be claimed as an English invention, as a specimen occurs in the Tower having the date 1614 upon it, the date generally assigned for its introduction being 1630 according to continental records. The knowledge that fire could be produced by striking flint upon steel was well known to the ancients. In the flint-lock the fall of the hammer containing the flint was made to open the flash-pan and at the same time to strike sparks from its cover. The earlier kinds had all the mechanism upon the outside of the lock, but subsequently it was hidden, and a tumbler connected the mainspring with the hammer. Highly decorated examples of the flint-lock are common, especially those of Italian and Spanish origin (Plate XLI.*). The weapon did not come into extensive use in England until the second half of the seventeenth century, but it eventually superseded all others, and was adapted for every kind of firearm, both military and civil, and remained in use until the advent of the percussion cap about 1830.
Pistols underwent the same variations as the larger weapon, but these were often combined, being fixed in shields, battle-axes, pole-axes, daggers, halberds, &c.
The subject of this chapter is an extremely wide one, and an attempt to cover it completely in the pages of this work has not been attempted; the broad facts given here may, however, be acceptable to the general reader.
[1]From “Projectile-throwing Engines of the Ancients,” by Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey, Bart., by kind permission of the author, to whose work I am indebted for several particulars in this chapter.[2]The Royal Armoury at Madrid is undoubtedly the finest collection of its kind in the world. It was founded by King Charles V., 1516-1568, and in addition to Spanish armour and arms contains magnificent examples of the works of the greatest armourers of Europe. By the kindness and courtesy of Mr. Albert F. Calvert, author of “Spanish Arms and Armour, being a Historical and Descriptive Account of the Royal Armoury at Madrid,” we are enabled to produce illustrations of many of the exhibits from photographs supplied by him. These illustrations are distinguished by an asterisk (Plate I.*, &c.).
[1]From “Projectile-throwing Engines of the Ancients,” by Sir Ralph Payne-Gallwey, Bart., by kind permission of the author, to whose work I am indebted for several particulars in this chapter.
[2]The Royal Armoury at Madrid is undoubtedly the finest collection of its kind in the world. It was founded by King Charles V., 1516-1568, and in addition to Spanish armour and arms contains magnificent examples of the works of the greatest armourers of Europe. By the kindness and courtesy of Mr. Albert F. Calvert, author of “Spanish Arms and Armour, being a Historical and Descriptive Account of the Royal Armoury at Madrid,” we are enabled to produce illustrations of many of the exhibits from photographs supplied by him. These illustrations are distinguished by an asterisk (Plate I.*, &c.).