Author Topic: Small Cannon Identification Help (Read 1014 times)

TickTocBoom · « **on:** February 08, 2012, 08:23:32 AM »

I have a friend who is in the antiques business and he recently purchased several items from the estate of a man who was a long time collector of militaria. He showed me several interesting pieces that he will be offering for sale, including some interesting civil war swords, old flags and several small cannons. I was particularly interested in one of the cannons, mainly based on what appeared to be better quality and also age. My search for information led me here. I'm not very knowledgeable about military items or cannons so I'm hoping someone here can assist me in identifying it.

I've attached a picture of the cannon I currently have him holding for me. I'm not sure what all information aside from the photo which might be necessary to help identify it so I'll just try my best to describe it. I didn't have a tape measure with me but the barrel appears to be about 10-12" long. The barrel is very thick and the barrel opening is about 1/2". I could flip up the "tabs" on the side of the barrel and the barrel comes out of the carriage. The carriage appears to be rather old and is made of wood, including the wheels. The wheels are held on by metal pins which appear to have been hand hammered. Most of the metal attachments appear to have been hand fashioned. The barrel is rather decorative and has a few markings. Their is a crest on the top toward the back of the barrel and what may be the letter "E" in heavy script in the center lower portion of that crest. Just under that crest is the number 16 to the left of the crest and the number 44 on the right. Is this a reproduction of something from 1644? What is this thing and does it have any value aside from cheap doorstop or a desktop curiousity? I'm not interested in firing this thing off but I would be interested in knowing if it is capable of doing so.

Thanks, in advance, for any help you guys can provide.

A.Roads · « **Reply #1 on:** February 08, 2012, 08:57:06 AM »

The one photo is not a lot to go by but does strongly suggest that the model itself is antique. It depicts a twin trail carriage with a contempory barrel, probably bronze, such as would be found in the 1700s. Personally I think its a lovely piece & would not hesitate to pay several hundred dollars for it. Do not polish the barrel as this will ruin it.
Adrian

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #2 on:** February 08, 2012, 09:49:48 AM »

Adian,

Thank you for the information. I've attached a few other photos I had taken when I was there. I didn't know what parts I should have concentrated on in the photographs. I hope I have included enough to get a better idea of what this is. You may be able to even see a few of the other cannons as well.

So, it appears to be an antique but is not necessarily from the period or style being depicted? Any guess as to how old it might be? Is the carriage correct for the barrel, period-wise? I also believe the barrel is bronze because I can see some hints of the underlying color beneath the dark patina.

Given the price range you mentioned you would consider paying for it, I believe I'm going to come out really well.

cannonmn · « **Reply #3 on:** February 08, 2012, 12:16:43 PM »

I really hesitate to rain on someone else's parade, but I don't like that cannon. There are many little details that don't look just right to me, but the photos you posted aren't really good enough for a detailed analysis using the remote-viewing-only method.

Note that comments I make here are based on my evaluation of whether the cannon actually dates from the date on it, 1644, or not. If I think it was cast in 1644, I will like it, if not, I won't like it. It might be a nice model made much later, but if so that should be reflected in the price.

My suggestion is take the tube out of the carriage and get detailed macro photos all over it. I don't like the "composite" looking cascabel, the "16___________44" which is much smaller than a date on such a cannon should be, the sharpness of detail (lacking), the foliage just behind the muzzle swell, etc. Need good photos of the dolphin and trunnion areas. Need photos of underside, etc. etc. Glad to help, I've seen more of these small cannons than I can count, and bought just a few. Why does the vent look like the material changes down inside of it? The trunnions look like they have rimbases, and no real bronze cannons or models of them (that I know of) of the "1644" era had rimbases. If the whole thing, dolphins and trunnions and cascabel, wasn't cast as one single casting, it is almost certainly a recent item intended as a decoration only. The carriage shows few if any signs of age.

Rayfan87 · « **Reply #4 on:** February 08, 2012, 12:25:59 PM »

It may just be me, but it looks like there was something on either side of the vent that has been broken off.

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #5 on:** February 08, 2012, 01:17:52 PM »

Sorry about the photos. I know they're not particularly good. I took them with my cell phone. I really wasn't expecting to have a need to take such detailed photos when I was shown this thing.

I'm getting a crash course in cannon parts.

I'm looking up the parts mentioned (cascabel, trunnion, etc.) and I believe I understand the parts you are referring to now. The cascabel is the back end of the cannon, right? If so, it is made of the same material (bronze?) the rest of the cannon is made of. As to the trunnions, I'm not sure what you mean by rimbases. You are referring to the mounting pins, correct? If so, they are pretty much just straight pins extending out the side of the tube/barrel.

If I interpreted Adrian's post correctly, I believe he had suggested that the piece may be antique but that it is "contemporary". I took that to mean that it may be newer than the 1644 date on it but still quite old.

Any idea as to what might have been on either side of the vent that might have broken off? I'll have to look a little more closely at that when I get a chance.

I'll try to get some more detailed photos.

Rayfan87 · « **Reply #6 on:** February 08, 2012, 01:29:18 PM »

You've got the cascabel right, the trunnions are the part that sits on the carriage, and rimbases are slightly larger areas at the base of the trunnions where they meet the barrel. The question would be do the trunnions go straight into the side or are they bigger right at barrel?

cannonmn · « **Reply #7 on:** February 08, 2012, 01:31:38 PM »

On the plus side, looking at the outside profile etc. and ignoring minor details, it is a pretty good model of a typical Dutch cannon of the 17th C. I haven't seen such a "later" model with this level of detail before. The broken things either side of the vent were mounts for a vent cover, sometimes called an apron. The cover was pivoted on one side, and locked down with a pin through the "hasp" on the other side. The mounts are usually present on old Dutch cannons, but the cover or apron is often missing. If the barrel alone was original and actually cast in 1644, in this size, it might bring a price of somewhere in the low 4-figures at auction.
I am pretty well convinced it is a late 19th/early 20thC. or so "decorator" cannon, possibly made of plated spelter. If it were a plated piece, that might explain why the vent changes color part-way-down. Plated spelter was a popular media for "bronze-looking" mantle-sized statuary in the 19th and 20th C, because it takes casting details about as well as bronze but is much less expensive.

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #8 on:** February 08, 2012, 01:53:11 PM »

I don't have the cannon in front of me at the moment, but I'm pretty sure the trunnions were simply straight pins with no flaring/flange.

Regarding the broken vent cover mounts, if this were a plated cannon, wouldn't the broken portion of them be the same color as the interior of the vent hole? Assuming this is plated, both of those areas would be of the same unplated metal, wouldn't they?

Thanks. I appreciate everyone's thoughts and opinions.

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #9 on:** February 10, 2012, 03:55:01 AM »

Sorry I haven't yet taken additional photos. I'm hoping to find time to take some additional photos tonight.

One quick question/concern though. I peered into the bore of this thing and there is definitely something inside of it. I'm concerned that this thing might actually have an old load inside of it! It looks like the rear portion of the bore is filled with something to about 1/3 of the length of the barrel. Whatever it is appears to be hard (maybe crystalized?) and I cannot shake it out of the end. I have no desire to poke or prod it for fear that I might deeply regret doing so. Whatever it is seems to be somewhat violet in color and a bit opaque. Could this be what I fear it is? If so, what should be done? Can it be removed safely?

flagman1776 · « **Reply #10 on:** February 10, 2012, 05:12:18 AM »

Yes, the gun might be loaded with live load or blank.
The gun might be plugged rather than spiked. A plugged barrel has a ball inserted with no powder and then iron or wood wedges driven in to secure it. This is more difficult to remove than spiking.
Always possible it was disabled with concrete or other blockage. I would use a bore light to exhamine closely. Perhaps a mechanic's tool retriever (magnet on a stick) would be useful.
Dealing with an unknown obstruction / load is about as safe as messing with a pissed off rattlesnake. Be safe.

Zulu · « **Reply #11 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:43:15 AM »

Soak the barrel overnight in water. Sure can't hurt.
Zulu

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #12 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:51:56 AM »

I can't see anything that looks like a projectile but obviously there's a lot more behind the very small part that I CAN see in the barrel. I thought about soaking the barrel, as Zulu suggested. I just didn't know if that would make it safe enough to attempt to remove what's there. I've also had some friends mention an extraction tool that they say resembles a corkscrew. It seems to be something used by people who hunt with muzzleloaders that is used to extract a load from the barrel?

Zulu · « **Reply #13 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:57:53 AM »

Try an air nozzle on the vent and see if that gets anything to blow out.
Zulu

TickTocBoom · « **Reply #14 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:27:50 AM »

The tips like what are used to inflate footballs just might fit into the vent. It's somewhat close to that size. The vent may be too small though. I'll have to check. If that would fit, I could probably try to seal it off somehow and put some pressure behind the obstruction. Why do I have this weird feeling that I'm destined to wind up in the hospital, on the evening news, or win a Darwin Award? Even if the obstruction comes out without igniting, I suppose it could come out with a loud pop. If I do this I think I should keep a change of shorts nearby.

flagman1776 · « **Reply #15 on:** February 10, 2012, 07:42:07 AM »

I would deactive any charge by soaking in oil... also lubricates the bore. Good suggestion. There are CO2 ball removers for use in muzzleloaders including a flint lock needle adaptor. A rubber tip air nozzle might just blow the obstrustion out. (point away from anyone... Even without ignition it could still cause injury)
A friend bought a blackpowder rifle with a obstructed bore. Aftertrying everything else, we removed the nipple & rethreaded it to a standard thread. He screwed in a zerk fitting & pushed the dry ball out with grease. (He was a mechanic & didn't have to buy the grease.) Gasses like CO2 or air are compressible... liquids or grease are not so generate more pressure. You'd have to tap the touch hole & later install a bushing.

Artilleryman · « **Reply #16 on:** February 10, 2012, 10:41:25 AM »

Another possibility would be to use a rubber nozzle on your blowgun to get a good seal around the vent.

cannonmn · « **Reply #17 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:21:30 PM »

One possibility is that the small cannon was never bored out all the way to the vent. If it wasn't intended for firing, there'd be no reason for the maker to make the bore "realistic."

KABAR2 · « **Reply #18 on:** February 10, 2012, 04:58:03 PM »

How much does the barrel weigh? that will tell us better if it is cast bronze or like Cannonmn mentioned the cabon method of creating a model...... with a thin plated outer shell...... those were lite by comparison........ the screw device you mentioned is a ball puller it would work IF the ball were lead if iron or anything else I doubt it would screw into it.

cannonmn · « **Reply #19 on:** February 10, 2012, 06:17:34 PM »

I'm wondering if there's a built-in discontinuity in the bore as there sometimes is in small model cannons. One way the maker speeds up production is to take a metal shaft and stick it into a hole drilled through the barrel where the trunnions should be. The shaft is pre-cut to the length where the protrusion on either side will look like trunnions. Then sometimes friction holds the shaft in place and sometimes it is glued or soldered. Reason I bring this up is that the one trunnion that's visible looks like a different color from the cannon tube, and has a silvery-looking area that could be solder.

flagman1776 · « **Reply #20 on:** February 11, 2012, 02:56:57 AM »

I recieved a cast iron display model from the wife last week. Indeed the "trunions" is a shaft straight through the barrel.

Quote from: cannonmn on February 10, 2012, 06:17:34 PM

I'm wondering if there's a built-in discontinuity in the bore as there sometimes is in small model cannons. One way the maker speeds up production is to take a metal shaft and stick it into a hole drilled through the barrel where the trunnions should be. The shaft is pre-cut to the length where the protrusion on either side will look like trunnions. Then sometimes friction holds the shaft in place and sometimes it is glued or soldered. Reason I bring this up is that the one trunnion that's visible looks like a different color from the cannon tube, and has a silvery-looking area that could be solder.