![]() |
![]() |
#37 | |
Member
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: California
Posts: 1,036
|
![]() Quote:
It is believed that the guns used to batter Constantinople's Theodosian ramparts (visible in restored condition today) were not mounted in carriages as we know them, but rather propped on earthen berms to provide the requisite elevation. As such, accuracy was nil but Orban was not idly boasting when he told the Sultan that his creations could batter the walls of Babylon into ruin. The projectiles did tremendous damage when they did connect. A slow rate of fire and susceptibility to damage (such as bursting) also compromised the effectiveness of these cannon. Basilisc only managed three shots daily, and became inoperative after several weeks. Nando, your observations are spot on. The effect on defenders' morale, not to mention that of the civilian non-combatants within the walls, must have been horrendous. Weapons of this size and power were a relative novelty to most people of the era, even seasoned soldiers. It's true that a very slow rate of fire allowed the defenders to shore up the breeches to help repel infantry assaults, but repeated exposure must have been wearing. Considering that... ...According to historian Steven Runciman, under 7000 Byzantine soldiers and foreign Christian volunteers and mercenaries had to defend 14 miles of walls and gates(counting both landward and seaward defenses) against some 80,000 Turks (inclusive of elite troops, regular troops, and irregulars) who attacked on land and water, with the help of cannon. Guns which Orban originally offered to the Byzantine emperor, who refused to pay his asking price! One would imagine that the Turkish rank and file got used to the presence of these monsters especially the infantry who saw how they could make the job of taking a massively-walled city somewhat easier on them. However, as in Europe, guns and the men who served them must have engendered fear and mistrust for reasons given in prior posts. Another history of the siege which I have read states that Basilisc actually exploded at one point -- reinforcing the idea that the dicey metallurgy and design of early cannon could make them as dangerous to shooters as to the intended targets. Which brings me to admit an oversight that I made earlier -- in that the bombards used in Europe, with their forged wrought iron stave-and-hoop construction, were quite a different breed of cat from Orban's creations. The period documentation indicates that Mehmet's siege cannon were cast -- in the case of Basilisc, in a foundry at the Ottoman capital. Although Basilisc has not survived, a huge Turkish cannon made just a decade or so later has -- the so-called Dardanelles Gun which can be seen today at Ft. Nelson, above Portsmouth. It's safe to conclude that its construction mirrors that of Orban's designs (he didn't live beyond the year of the siege). Even more remarkable is the fact that this gun, and smaller ones of the era still existing in Turkey, are of two -piece construction, the chamber section is screw-threaded into the barrel proper with remarkable precision for the day. Amazing! |
|
![]() |
![]() |
|
|