Cannon design

[Leatherneck]

I have a few questions about cannon design.
 
1. Why was it so advantageous (in terms of recoil control) that the trunions were placed towards the middle of the barrel?
2. Why is the 18th century (split trail-Gribeauval) wheeled carriage narrow at the front and wider at the rear? Does this have anything to do with how recoil was absorbed by the carriage itself?
Same went for naval carriages for the most of their existance.

[Zulu]

Trunnion placement is mainly for balance of the barrel over an axle.  If the trunnions were too far back, the barrel would be front heavy.  If they were too far forward, all the weight would be towards the rear and you would'nt be able to pick up the rear of the split trail carriage.  One person can pick up the rear of a #1 field carriage and roll it around because the axle supports the weight of the barrel in balanced proportions.
 Carriages are wider in the back than the front for stability.  It sure looks cool.    They are certainly harder to make.
Zulu
 
 

[Leatherneck]

I misunderstood a small detail that lead me to believe recoil could be controlled like that.
It was the practice of placing the trunions below the center line of the bore (not along the length of the barrel), which would cause the barrel to buck at the breech end. The master gunner of Woolwich (Royal Arsenal) corrected this in 1756.
 
This is offtopic, but is there a site where I could find a time line of big events in the development of cannons? Something covering the 18th and early 19th centuries.

[Microboomer]

I don't know about a web site, but the book "Round Shot and Rammers" covers artillery use in the US from the colonial days to 1865, and is pretty interesting.  It's out of print, but you can find used copies fairly easily, or you might find one in a library near you.
andy