List of muzzle-loading guns explained

Muzzle-loading guns (as opposed to muzzle-loading mortars and howitzers) are an early type of artillery, (often field artillery, but naval artillery and siege artillery were other types of muzzleloading artillery), used before, and even for some time after, breech-loading cannon became common. Projectile (early on with shot and then later on with shells) and powder charge are loaded via the muzzle and rammed down the barrel, and then fired at the target. Muzzle-loading artillery came in smoothbore and rifled form, the rifled guns increasingly taking over from the smoothbores as time past and technology improved. Most were made of bronze because of a lack of metallurgic technology, but cast and wrought-iron guns were common as well, particularly later on. Muzzleloading artillery evolved across a wide range of styles, beginning with the bombard, and evolving into culverins, falconets, sakers, demi-cannon, rifled muzzle-loaders, Parrott rifles, and many other styles. Handcannons are excepted from this list because they are hand-held and typically of small caliber.

Smoothbore muzzle-loading cannon

width=15% Caliber (mm)width=38% Weapon namewidth=28% Country of originwidth=19% Design
40 Early 15th century
50 1740
61 Early 15th century
76 18th century
76 18th century
83 18th century
84 1732
84 Late 19th century
96 1803
100 18th century
100 Early 17th century
105 Early 15th century
118 Early 15th century
120 Late 19th century
121 1688
121 1732
121 1853
130 18th century
134 1674
134 1679
151 1683
151 1828
154 18th century
155 1732
162 1764
178 1581
204 1820s
206 1846

Rifled muzzle-loading cannon

width=15% Caliber (mm)width=38% Weapon namewidth=28% Country of originwidth=19% Design
64 1879
73 1860
76 1862
76 1873
86 1858
96 1861
121 1859
140 1860s
160 1865
160 1870
160 1878
178 1860s-1890s
191 Widow Blakely[1] 1861
203 1866
206 1850s
227 1865
233 1863
254 1868
279 1867
305 1866
305 1873
318 1875
406 1880
450 1877

See also

Bibliography

Notes and References

  1. Olmstead, Stark & Tucker, pp. 138–139