What are some of the earliest references to the use of a patch around the ball that can be found, and did it start with the rifle and was it used much with the smoothbore ( smoothrifles aside this would seem to be a given) there seems to be little menton of patched balls with smoothbores but they were there before the rifled guns which came first the chicken or the egg, would a 1560 matchlock smoothbore have a patch or wad to hold the ball in place any thoughts from the studied gun buffs.I suspect wadding was the norm with smoothbores from at least the early 1700's( due to wide windage standards) with possibly some patches being used as the rifle and patch became more popular, this would likely be subject to nationality and geography as well
Patch&Ball
- Thread starter tg
- Start date
Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:
In the book THE GREAT GUNS by Harold L. Peterson and Robert Elman (and available at most used book stores for real cheap prices) the author(s) mentions (on page 80) what he feels is the first "datable" rifle.
"This is a rifle made for the famous Hapsburg ruler who later became Maximilian I of the Holy Roman Empire. On its stock it bears the arms used by Maximilizn after he king of Germany in 1493 and before he bacame Holy Roman Emperor in 1508. Thus, it is almost precisely dateable. And it is a true rifle, with a bronze barrel rifled with multiple grooves in a slow twost and equipped with a peep sight for accurate long-range shooting."
The author goes on to state that a loosely fit unpatched ball would not engage the rifling so he feels the earliest rifles used oversized balls which were driven into the barrel to form rifling grooves on them.
After pointing out that this is a very difficult thing to do with a fouled gun he feels that "some genius discovered that wrapping the bullet in a greased patch of cloth or thin leather would produce the same result-and it was a lot easier on arms and ramrods... Riflemen probably began to use such patched balls during the 1500's. Actual patches survive from about 1600 in Dresden, Germany. And as far away as Spain, Alonzo Martinez de Espinar described the use of patched balls as standard practice in his Treatise on Guns and Shooting of 1644. Some shooters, however continued to drive outsized balls down the barrels of their rifles as late as 1800."
No mention of using patched balls in a smooth bore gun was made in this book.
Although I don't find reference to patched balls in a smooth bore surly someone did such a thing prior to the advent of rifling. There are several references I've read about shooting contests for smoothbores being held in the 15th and 16th century and although I haven't seen any evidence of their loading data it would seem reasonable that someone used patches to obtain as much accuracy as possible.
By the way, THE GREAT GUNS not only has a lot of very nice pictures but it is very well written.
I mention this because I've had that book for many years and occasionally looked at the pictures but it wasn't until recently that I actually read it.
I was quite surprised at the amount of useful information it contains.
If any of you see it in a used book store or at a gun show I highly recommend buying it.
"This is a rifle made for the famous Hapsburg ruler who later became Maximilian I of the Holy Roman Empire. On its stock it bears the arms used by Maximilizn after he king of Germany in 1493 and before he bacame Holy Roman Emperor in 1508. Thus, it is almost precisely dateable. And it is a true rifle, with a bronze barrel rifled with multiple grooves in a slow twost and equipped with a peep sight for accurate long-range shooting."
The author goes on to state that a loosely fit unpatched ball would not engage the rifling so he feels the earliest rifles used oversized balls which were driven into the barrel to form rifling grooves on them.
After pointing out that this is a very difficult thing to do with a fouled gun he feels that "some genius discovered that wrapping the bullet in a greased patch of cloth or thin leather would produce the same result-and it was a lot easier on arms and ramrods... Riflemen probably began to use such patched balls during the 1500's. Actual patches survive from about 1600 in Dresden, Germany. And as far away as Spain, Alonzo Martinez de Espinar described the use of patched balls as standard practice in his Treatise on Guns and Shooting of 1644. Some shooters, however continued to drive outsized balls down the barrels of their rifles as late as 1800."
No mention of using patched balls in a smooth bore gun was made in this book.
Although I don't find reference to patched balls in a smooth bore surly someone did such a thing prior to the advent of rifling. There are several references I've read about shooting contests for smoothbores being held in the 15th and 16th century and although I haven't seen any evidence of their loading data it would seem reasonable that someone used patches to obtain as much accuracy as possible.
By the way, THE GREAT GUNS not only has a lot of very nice pictures but it is very well written.
I mention this because I've had that book for many years and occasionally looked at the pictures but it wasn't until recently that I actually read it.
I was quite surprised at the amount of useful information it contains.
If any of you see it in a used book store or at a gun show I highly recommend buying it.
paulvallandigham
Passed On
- Joined
- Jan 9, 2006
- Messages
- 17,537
- Reaction score
- 94
I would think that if there is any reference to using a patch in a smoothbore, it might occur in some ancient literature relating to the early hand-cannons. Patching a cannon ball would be difficult at best, because there was no consistency in the diameter of the bores of cannons, and even less with the cast cannon balls. Wads would be quicker to use in battle, for cannon. However, when you get down to a 1" bore, in a hand-held cannon, and later, the Matchlock, both smoothbores, a patched ball would be loaded faster even on the battlefields, and be more accurate. These early guns were used in volley fire to decimate rows of enemy soldiers on the field, in much the same way archers were used before them. Accuracy was not required nor expected, but these guns did foul and using undersized balls and patches would be a quick way to load them, and keep the gun functioning. If the patch was lubed, the grease would soften the fouling, and allow the gun to continue to fire much longer before it had to be cleaned. The same considerations existed with the wheellocks, and then with the flintlock smoothbores. If the battle became extended, or the musketeers threatened, they could continue to fire the undersized balls out of their fouled muskets without the patches to continue the fight, and save their lives and equipment.
It would not surprise me that NO literature is found talking about using any kind of patch in a smoothbore gun, simply because the limited nature of literacy in those ages, and the fact that people who could write had little to do with fighting. They remained at " Court " advising the king, or in monasteries, serving the Abbot and God. It is these historical realities about who was allowed to learn to read and write that control what kind of information might be found yet today about mundane matters. The passage of time, and many wars intervening to destroy libraries and records over the centuries, can make Tg's question impossible to answer.
The question is a good one, however. But knowing how much of Europe was destroyed by countless wars, and how any indication of wealth, or writing was often destroyed by illiterate soldiers( even in WWII, where I have heard of this directly from surviving veterans) because they either could not read, or could not understand the language, or thought they were protecting themselves by destroying any enemy writing that might be intelligence for the enemy to use against them( instead of saving it and sending it on to the Army Intelligence officers)has to raise doubts of finding any answer.
This situation is not unique to modern times.The Great Library at Alexandria, Egypt, is still thought to have contained all the world's knowledge to the time of its burning. The Moorish libraries in Spain were burned to the ground when the moors were driven out in the Middle ages. The Spanish civil war in the 1930s, saw thousands of churchs, monasteries, libraries, colleges and university bombed, sacked and burned by one side or the other, destroying irreplaceable documents and manuscripts. Both WWI and WWII saw great damage done in Western Europe and in Germany through the bombings, fighting and burning that occurred there. The Declaration of cities as "Open Cities" such as occurred with Rome, Vienna, and Paris, saved many treasures and documents. But other cities were burned to the ground and most of the ancient records and documents were burned. Warsaw, Dresden, Berlin Come to mind.
So, researchers have to accept those realities of fate, and not be surprised if writings on some subjects no longer exist. The reliance ONLY on written records is a peculiarly Western Concept, as reflected by our reference to Pre-Columbian "history " of the western hemisphere, as if the writings of the Mayans and Incans don't count.
We historians talk of Pre-history as if there was no intelligent way to communicate thought, or teach concepts from one generation to another before writing and paper were invented. For some reason, we seemed unwilling to allow common sense solve these questions concerning ancient tools, and practices. More is the shame. :nono: :shocked2: :hmm: :thumbsup:
It would not surprise me that NO literature is found talking about using any kind of patch in a smoothbore gun, simply because the limited nature of literacy in those ages, and the fact that people who could write had little to do with fighting. They remained at " Court " advising the king, or in monasteries, serving the Abbot and God. It is these historical realities about who was allowed to learn to read and write that control what kind of information might be found yet today about mundane matters. The passage of time, and many wars intervening to destroy libraries and records over the centuries, can make Tg's question impossible to answer.
The question is a good one, however. But knowing how much of Europe was destroyed by countless wars, and how any indication of wealth, or writing was often destroyed by illiterate soldiers( even in WWII, where I have heard of this directly from surviving veterans) because they either could not read, or could not understand the language, or thought they were protecting themselves by destroying any enemy writing that might be intelligence for the enemy to use against them( instead of saving it and sending it on to the Army Intelligence officers)has to raise doubts of finding any answer.
This situation is not unique to modern times.The Great Library at Alexandria, Egypt, is still thought to have contained all the world's knowledge to the time of its burning. The Moorish libraries in Spain were burned to the ground when the moors were driven out in the Middle ages. The Spanish civil war in the 1930s, saw thousands of churchs, monasteries, libraries, colleges and university bombed, sacked and burned by one side or the other, destroying irreplaceable documents and manuscripts. Both WWI and WWII saw great damage done in Western Europe and in Germany through the bombings, fighting and burning that occurred there. The Declaration of cities as "Open Cities" such as occurred with Rome, Vienna, and Paris, saved many treasures and documents. But other cities were burned to the ground and most of the ancient records and documents were burned. Warsaw, Dresden, Berlin Come to mind.
So, researchers have to accept those realities of fate, and not be surprised if writings on some subjects no longer exist. The reliance ONLY on written records is a peculiarly Western Concept, as reflected by our reference to Pre-Columbian "history " of the western hemisphere, as if the writings of the Mayans and Incans don't count.
We historians talk of Pre-history as if there was no intelligent way to communicate thought, or teach concepts from one generation to another before writing and paper were invented. For some reason, we seemed unwilling to allow common sense solve these questions concerning ancient tools, and practices. More is the shame. :nono: :shocked2: :hmm: :thumbsup:
- Joined
- Oct 21, 2004
- Messages
- 2,703
- Reaction score
- 2
Zonie said:By the way, THE GREAT GUNS not only has a lot of very nice pictures but it is very well written.
A very nice book indeed...the pictures are superb and I especially enjoyed the chapter on jaegers, and the chapter on the birth of the American longrifle.
Good info, I have heard the theory that the first rifling was straight and its purpose was to allow a place for fouling to settle, I would be interesting to know how the ball was held in place before this revolutionary practce came to be, I suspectwadding due to variable bores and ball sizes.At sometime it would seem thta one would have a mould that offered a ball that could be fairly consistantly loaded with a patch tight enough to keep the ball in place and increase accuracy as the advantage of this was obvious with the rifled bore.
