"French 8lb Gribauval Cannon" Topic

"I'm working up the courage to invest in a resin-based SLA 3-D printer. I thought it would be an excellent tool to augment my laser and significantly increase my making capabilities for wargaming terrain, vehicles and maybe eventually figures. Before I'm willing to pull the trigger, I need to make sure my 2-D CAD skills can translate well to 3-D modeling. This project is a learning exercise in using the free 3-D modeling program Blender…."
See here

link

Amicalement
Armand

Nice attempt at a piece from the second- / third-best artillery system of the era.

The best being the Russian. Discuss.

Best tactical flexibility, serviceability and speed of production – Russia.

Best effectiveness in employment despite deficiencies – France

Best designed and built, copied/imitated, used everywhere afterwards – Britain.

Best precursor in design and employment – Austria

Seriously the dano-norwgian 1pdr amusette puts all others to shame, equally good at shooting squirrels as it is at shooting more squirrels.

The prize has to go to Gunfreak I guess. But unsurprisingly I agree with Stoppage.

If you had to clear out an isolated outpost then the amusette would help to do the trick.

Being able to pop large iron balls through the windows would signal your determination and intent.

(Would be better if you could place shell but I don't know the smallest size of gun/howitzer to do this)

Definition of an artillery system:

‘The most significant innovation one sees in the systeme Gribeauval was that it was indeed a system: a thorough synthesis of organization, technology, material, and tactics. Every aspect of the system, from the harnessing of the horses to the selection and organization of personnel, embodied a single functional concept. Utility was its principle, mobility was its goal. Every element of the systeme Gribeauval was designed to function in a particular way, in a particular circumstance. Men and technology were considered functional elements in a total system.'
-Howard Rosen, ‘The Systeme Gribeauval: A Study of Technological Development and Institutional Change in Eighteenth Century France', 48.

And to that definition can be added formal artillery education, especially for officers as well as training and doctrine. Not all of the artillery arms of the period qualify as complete artillery systems because they lack one or more of the attributes of an artillery system.

1.

Nice attempt at a piece from the second- / third-best artillery system of the era.

Which, then was first or second best?

2.

The best being the Russian.

No. The British and Austrian artillery arms, as well as the French, were superior to the Russian artillery arm. The Russian artillery arm was playing catch-up up to the introduction of the 1805 artillery system. And that system did catch up materially with the Austrian artillery arm in the design of its gun carriages, etc., and with the elevation device for the field pieces, which was a copy of what the Austrians were using, who had copied it from a ca 1740s Prussian design. And the lack of education of Russian artillery officers, as well as a lack of overall training of the arm made the Russian artillery inferior to the artillery arms of the countries already mentioned. They did field a lot of artillery, but the substitution of mass over skill was not a solution to the problems, although after 1807 the Russian artillery greatly improved.

3.

Best tactical flexibility, serviceability and speed of production – Russia.

Best effectiveness in employment despite deficiencies – France

Best designed and built, copied/imitated, used everywhere afterwards – Britain.

Best precursor in design and employment – Austria

Could these ideas please be explained and compared or contrasted with other armies' artillery arms?

The comments on the Russian and Austrian artillery arms as being ‘best' is not backed up by the research on those artillery arms. The British did have, after ca 1800, the best designed gun carriages, limbers, and caissons, but that alone does not make it either a complete artillery system or the ‘best' in the field.

Finally, what French artillery 'deficiencies' are being alluded to here?

Hi Brechtel. They are off-the-cuff besties.

As a system – as you point out – the French was the most comprehensive.

In my mind the French equipment is late 18th century – over-long and over-strong barrels, over-heavy and cumbersome gun carriages.

However we have to bear in mind that adaptability and flexibility is also a feature of a good system and during our period of interest the 4lb and 8lb calibres were discarded, the 6lb adopted; various different caisson designs were attempted.

In detail each of the various artillery producing nations had their moments of bestness – because each was designed to fulfil the particular requirements for the theatres that they fought in.

The design that actually lasted, in favour of which all other designs were discarded, was the Congreve system. As mobile artillery it wasn't bettered until the introduction of the StuG III.

actually,the dano-norwegian 1pdr amusette was a knock-off of an older hessian model. hesse-kassel had a shocking squirrel problem.

Whole of Germany had a huge squirrel problem.

Finally, what French artillery 'deficiencies' are being alluded to here?

Just read was Allix had to say or a lot of other artillery officers, most the artillery waggon, but this was already discussed in excess in the past.

Gribeauval was not a bad system, but out dated in 1800 – and this was pointed out again and again, the whole artillery system should got improved (now when Boney feels that it needs strong improvement – he would have had his reasons, or suffering then from a personal disorder already?) , but due to constant war this innovation was only partially realized, hint – 6 pdr gun.

Actually the Prussians copied Austrian artillery in the 7YW but this is another story.

@ Gunfreak

Do you have a colour version of that photo? I see he is wearing a bricole over his right shoulder and I'm wondering how these should be painted.

a bricole…. painted. Oh, dear me.

Actually the Prussians copied Austrian artillery in the 7YW but this is another story.

Are you referring to the mess that Frederick the Great made of the Prussian artillery in that long guns were made with chambers unnecessarily as howitzers were?

And the Liechtenstein System was developed in a direct answer to the Prussian field artillery which was superior in the War of the Austrian Succession.

The Gribeauval System was excellent as well as robust and the innovations that came with that system were copied across the continent and prompted Adye to remark in ca 1800 that it was an excellent artillery system.

The decision in the French artillery committee to develop the Systeme AN XI which was supposed to replace the Gribeauval System was a split vote in the artillery committee-Gassendi among others voting to retain the Gribeauval System. Ruty pushed to use the Gribeauval 8- and 4-pounders to replace the AN XI 6-pounder in 1814. The Gribeauval System was finally replaced by the Valee System in 1827-1829. Persy remarked on how the Systeme AN XI was abrogated in favor of the Gribeauval System.

The Systeme AN XI never replaced the Gribeauval System, merely supplementing it. And the only field pieces of the Systeme AN XI that were produced in any quantity were the new 6-pounder and the 5.5-inch howitzer. And Davout's large command in 1809 which had been in central Europe since Tilsit still employed the older Gribeauval pieces and the 8-pounder was a favorite of the French horse artillery arm.

The Gribeauval System was not outdated in 1800. The Liechtenstein System was ten years older and still employed by the Austrians through 1815. And the Russian 1805 System used gun carriages designed in the 1750s as well as an elevator system developed in the 1740s.

you are entitled to your opinion, I have a different on this subject.

And that's fine. However, my information is based on researched and assembled facts, not opinion, as well as continuous study on the subject over the past 17 years.

'You are entitled to your opinion; you are not entitled to your own facts.'-Senator Patrick Moyhnihan.

In my mind the French equipment is late 18th century – over-long and over-strong barrels, over-heavy and cumbersome gun carriages.

So is the material in all of the major, and most of the minor, states artillery arms.

The French didn't seem to have trouble in the field with the Gribeauval system field pieces.

The flasks of the gun carriages were designed to direct some of the recoil downwards instead of just to the rear.

The gun tubes were cast solid and then drilled out which made them uniform in caliber and windage, unlike those of the Austrian system as well as others.

The gun tubes were deliberately designed to be more robust than either the Prussian or Austrian gun tubes. Gribeauval had seen both systems and had served with the Austrian artillery during the Seven Years War. He and other French artillery officers were seconded to the Austrian army as they had a shortage of experienced senior artillery officers of their own.

The wheel hubs had brass housings which cut down on friction with the axle and made them easier to maneuver, so the gun carriages were not awkward to move.

The new iron axle made for less breakdowns from broken wooden axles, though it made the gun carriages heavier.

That's just a few of the advantages of the gun tubes and gun carriages of the Gribeauval System.

The design that actually lasted, in favour of which all other designs were discarded, was the Congreve system. As mobile artillery it wasn't bettered until the introduction of the StuG III.

The Congreve Rocket System had two 'branches.' First, the rockets used on land with the army which were inaccurate and had a tendency to boomerang on their crews.

Second, the more formidable rockets used by the Royal Navy. 300 of them were used in the siege of Copenhagen in 1807 and contributed to the terror bombing of that city and the burning of a significant portion of it.

They failed at the bombardment of Fort McHenry at Baltimore in 1814. The fort held and the Royal Navy withdrew.

And the Sturmgeschutz III was an assault gun, not a rocket system.

The Congreve rockets might have 'failed' in Baltimore but at least an anthem came out of it – Star Spangled Banner.

Back to the OP.

The Gribeauval 8 pounder is a good model to choose – you can see all the salient characteristics – the skid trail, the action/travelling position trunnions. Also it is more likely a true French design – not being either the 4 pounder (Piedmont/Saxony), nor the 12 pounder (Prussia).

The French calibers were established by Valliere the elder with the regulation of 1732.

And the gun carriages for the Gribeauval 4- and 12-pounders were similar in design, as in the 4-pounder, and identical in design, as in the 12-pounder, with the gun carriage for the 8-pounder.

If you find and take a look at the design criteria as well as the technical drawings which are available in Descheel and Fave, to name two sources, it is easy to see the similarity with the designs. They are not similar to the Saxon or Piedmontese or the Prussian designs. They are original to the Gribeauval System. In short, they are French designs.

In point of fact, the only difference between the Gribeauval 4-pounder gun carriage and those of the 8- and 12-pounders besides the size of the gun carriage, is the lack of two sets of trunnion plates. The 4-pounder only had one set.

An excellent reference for the Gribeauval System is Engineering the Revolution by Ken Alder.

"The design that actually lasted, in favour of which all other designs were discarded, was the Congreve system. As mobile artillery it wasn't bettered until the introduction of the StuG III."

The Congreve Rocket System had two 'branches'…,

It is possible he wasn't referring to rockets.

Brechtel:

Thanks for the tip re: Engineering the Revolution by Ken Alder.

One for the Xmas book list.

I like to imagine sometimes how much more effective Napoleon's armies would have been if they had had the best, rather than the second- or third-best artillery system of the era.

A French army with British horses and block trail artillery, rather than the clapped-out old nags and antiquated ordnance it actually did have, would have posed a significant threat even to Wellington's army.

How was the british 12pdr, I know they very rarely used it but they did have it.

Also did Congreve also do none rockets?
If I search for Congreve system, I only find rocket stuff.

I like to imagine sometimes how much more effective Napoleon's armies would have been if they had had the best, rather than the second- or third-best artillery system of the era.
A French army with British horses and block trail artillery, rather than the clapped-out old nags and antiquated ordnance it actually did have, would have posed a significant threat even to Wellington's army.

Perhaps you could clarify these two inaccurate statements and also add a source or two?

And, as already noted, perhaps you could explain Captain Adye's praise of the Gribeauval System, ca 1800?

Thanks for the tip re: Engineering the Revolution by Ken Alder.

You're welcome.

There are quite a few errors that have been posted on the Gribeauval System, and Gribeauval himself, over the past twenty years or so. Sometimes you have to dig a little to get to the better and more accurate information.

Another volume I have found useful is The Development of Technical Education in France 1500-1850 by Frederick Artz.

The French were at the forefront of technical education, both civilian and military during the Napoleonic period and before. The French artillery schools, for example, were first opened in 1689 and were eventually expanded. The other European powers, including Great Britain and later the United States, based theirs on the French example.

From Artz: 'The French, in three and a half centuries between about 1500 and 1850, developed all, or nearly all, the basic forms of modern technical education.'-vii. The excellent French artillery schools were the basis of the excellent French artillery arm that performed so well from 1792-1815.

@ Gunfreak

Try block-trail in your search term. Strictly, it was designed by General Desaguliers in the mid-1770s. It became known as the Congreve system because he was the bloke who wrote the drill manual for it. There were 3-, 6- and 12-pounder block-trail-mounted guns, and 5.5" howitzers, by the 1790s – same carriage, standard limber. The 9-pounder was added later.

The Royal Artillery had a few bracket-trail guns but they were so inferior to the block-trail type that they were steadily replaced. Johnny Foreigner put up with them, but of course he knew no better.

The British 12-pounder was rarely used because its range was not much better than the 9-pounder, but it required more horses than a 9-pounder over Spanish roads. Wellington frequently had to leave artillery out of campaigns because he lacked the draught animals to move their guns. I guess you'd rather have ten 9-pounders than eight 12-pounders…

Congreve's house east of Stafford was up for sale earlier this year. Nice Queen Anne redbrick pile.

The British block trail gun carriage was indeed innovative and was greatly admired by the French artillerymen in Spain. The later French Valee artillery system copied the British system and improved upon it. The US Army would also adopted the block trail and it was used by both sides in the American Civil War.

Desguilier's block trail design was based on a French 3-pounder captured in Martinique in 1761 and was then tested in trials at Woolwich (see Wellington's Guns by Nick Lipscombe, 25). Colonels Congreve and Williams, the Inspector of Military Machines and Carriages and Commander of the Park of the Royal Artillery, respectively, recommended that the block trail be used by the RHA (Lipscombe, 25).

The bracket trail gun carriage for the 6-pounder battalion gun, first used in 1776, may still have been in service at the beginning of Great Britain's participation in the wars by the foot artillery brigades. The bracket trail gun carriage was still being used in the colonies 'as late as 1812.' (British Napoleonic Field Artillery by CE Franklin, 41).

The block trail gun carriage was used by the RHA beginning in 1793. The foot artillery brigades began being issued the block trail gun carriage by 1800. Some 6-pounders and 5.5-inch howitzers had block trail gun carriages as early as 1794 and when the 9-pounder field piece was brought into service in 1808 all of them were mounted on block trail gun carriages. The new limbers were 'in general service as early as 1794' and by 1812 artillery units in Canada were being equipped with block trail gun carriages as they became available and were shipped overseas from Britain (Franklin, 53-54).

The two works referred to here are very useful for the Royal Artillery during the period. The Dickson Manuscripts are also a valuable resource. General Dickson was undoubtedly the premier British artilleryman of the period.

It should be noted that an artillery system is much more than the equipment and artillery pieces, as previously noted.

It's important to distinguish between William Congreve father (1742-1814)and William Congreve son (1772-1828)

William Congreve senior, is sometimes overlooked in favour of his son, designer of those infernal rockets.

During the course of a brilliant career that started when aged sixteen he served as a Royal Artillery fireworker in the Seven Years War, this prolific gunner officer following field command in the American War fof Independence was appointed Superintendent of Military Machines at Woolwich in 1778, Deputy Comptroller of the Woolwich Royal Laboratory in 1783 and then Comptroller in charge in 1789. Congreve had already produced his own design of light gun carriage and later improved versions of block trail carriages designed on the Desagulier Principle. He also developed instruction training of artillery personel and did much to improve the quality of black powder by refining production methods. He rose to the rank of Lieutenant General, was made a baronet in 1812 and died in 1814.

Well done.

So the British army in Flanders (1793-1795), commanded by the Duke of York, did not use block trail gun carriages.
Is it correct?

a good read about British Artillery by an author who knows his stuff, though about the Peninsular

Some Notes on the Royal Artillery in the Peninsula 1808
By Anthony Leslie Dawson

The Royal Artillery in the Peninsula campaign was in a most parlous state for want of equipment, stores and most notably, horses. The majority of these problems do not appear to have affected the Royal Horse Artillery, who appear to have been better equipped. This all impacted upon the tactical organisation of the artillery, as well as its usage.

link

also I like to draw the attention at the

Smoothbore Ordnance Journal like

link

It is worthwhile to look at the other numbers as well and you will find well researched articles which take a much more balanced look at for the example the Gribeauval system.

If you are going to study the artillery of the period, it is much better to get primary source material than secondary works that may or may not be accurate.

For example, perhaps the following will be helpful:

Systeme d'Artillerie de Campagne du Lieutenant-General Allix

link

Petit Manuel de Canonier-Anonymous.

link

Maneuvres des Batteries de Campagne pour l'Artillerie de la Garde Imperiale-Anonymous.

link

L'Artillerie de Campagne 1792-1901: Etude Technique et Tactique by J Compana.

link

Memoires d'Artillerie Contenant l'Artillerie Nouvelle ou les Changemens fait dans Artillerie Francoise en 1765 by Otto DeScheel.

link

If anyone has any questions regarding the artillery of the period, Gribeauval, or any other artillery question, I would be more than happy to discuss them. My home email is Boulart198@yahoo.com.

The best references for Gribeauval and his artillery system are:

-Instrument of War by Christopher Duffy which covers Gribeauval's service with the Austrians in the Seven Years War where he was promoted to general officer rank in the Austrian Army.

-Gribeauval, Lieutenant-General des Armess du Roy by E. Hennebert

-Gribeauval, Lieutenant general des armees du roi (1715-1789) by Pierre Nardin.

-Engineering the Revolution by Ken Alder.

-The Systeme Gribeauval by Howard Rosen.

Gribeauval was a school-trained artillery officer who is sometimes mislabeled as an engineer, which is incorrect. He did command a miner company in the French service before being seconded to the Austrian service, but that was a normal assignment for artillery officers of that period as the miners were then part of the artillery.

These five references give an excellent picture of Gribeauval and the artillery system he developed in the 1760s, which was superior technically and as an artillery system to both the light artillery of Austria and Prussia. And it was also superior to the Russian artillery system of 1805.

If you are going to study the artillery of the period, it is much better to get primary source material than secondary works that may or may not be accurate.

you confuse me with that statement there all you recommend to read as best are secondary sources

The best references for Gribeauval and his artillery system are:

-Instrument of War by Christopher Duffy which covers Gribeauval's service with the Austrians in the Seven Years War where he was promoted to general officer rank in the Austrian Army.

-Gribeauval, Lieutenant-General des Armess du Roy by E. Hennebert

-Gribeauval, Lieutenant general des armees du roi (1715-1789) by Pierre Nardin.

-Engineering the Revolution by Ken Alder.

-The Systeme Gribeauval by Howard Rosen.

anyway they are in my view not the best and some essential reads are missing.

The other posting listed primary sources. Do you need more examples.

What, 'in your view' would be 'essential reading'?

Have you read the ones posted?

a good start for no nonsense articles – well balanced by experts who have no axe to grind please read the articles in the Smoothbore Ordonnance Journal, articles can be downloaded as pdf

link

There I pointed out those primary sources you listed in the past and much more – thanks don't bother to send more.

Perhaps the following will help. I have these on hand and have found them more than helpful over the years.

Adye, Ralph Willett, The Bombardier and Pocket Gunner, Nash, London, 1813.

Albion, Robert G., Forests and Sea Power: The Timber Problem of the Royal Navy 1652-1862, Archon Books, Hamden Connecticut, 1965.

Alder, Ken, Engineering the Revolution: Arms and Enlightenment in France, 1763-1815, Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1997.

Allent, Pierre Alexander Joseph, Memoire sur la Reunion de l'Artillerie et du Genie, Crapalet, Paris, no date.

Allix, Jacques-Alexandre-Francois, Systeme d'Artillerie de Campagne du Lieutenant-General Allix, Anselin et Pochard, Paris, 1827.

An Officer du Corps, Essai sur l'Usage de l'Artillerie: Dans la Guerre de Campagne et dans celle de Sieges, Amsterdam, 1771.

Anonymous, Petit Manuel de Canonier, Paris: 1810.

Anonymous, Compendious Exercise for the Garrison and Field Ordnance as Practiced in the United States, Washington, 1810.

Anonymous, Exerzir-Reglement fur die Artillerie, Berlin 1812.

Anonymous, Titre Troiseme Ecole Artillerie, no date.

Anonymous, Zur Ausbilding und Taktik der Artillerie, Biblio Verlag, Osnabruck, Germany, 1982.

Anonymous, Essai sur l'Usage de l'Artillerie: Dans la Guerre de Campagne et Dans Celle des Sieges, Chez Arckstee & Merkus, Amsterdam, 1771.

Anonymous, Exercier-Borschrift mit dem Kaiserlich-Koniglich Ordinaren Feld-und Cavallerie Geschusse forvuhleinzeln als in Battieren, Wien, Austria, 1809.

Anonymous, Maneuvres des Batteries de Campagne pour l'Artillerie de la Garde Imperiale, Thionville, France, 1812.

Anonymous, Titre Troiseme Ecole Artillerie, no date.
Artz, Frederick, The Development of Technical Education in France 1500-1850, MIT Press, Cambridgei, 1966.

Barbuto, Richard V., Long Range Guns, Close Quarter Combat: The Third United States Artillery Regiment in the War of 1812, Old Fort Niagara Association, Youngstown, New York, 2010.

Becke, AF, Friedland, Magenta Publications, no date.

Belidor, Bernard Forest de, Le Bombardier Francois: Ou Nouvelle Methode de Jetter les Bombes Avec Precision, Paris 1731.

Belidor, M., Le Bombardier Francaise, Paris, De L'Imprimerie Royale, 1771.

Belidor, Bernard Forest de, Oeuvres Diverses de M. Belidor: Concernant l'Artillerie et le Genie, Chez Jombert, Paris, 1754.

Boudou, Pierre, France et Armies on the Danube, 1809 Allies Artillerie 1804-1815, no date.

Boulart, Bon, Memoires Militaire du General Bon Boulart sur les guerres de La Republique et de l'Empire, La Librarie Illustree, Paris, 1890.

Caruana, Adrian B., British Artillery Ammunition, 1780, Museum Restoration Service, Ottawa, 1979.

Caruana, Adrian B., British Artillery Drill of the 18th Century, Arms Collecting, Ottawa, 1977.

Caruana, Adrian B., The Light 6-Pounder Battalion Gun of 1776, Museum Restoration Service, Bloomfield Ontario, 1977.

Caruana, Adrian B., Grasshoppers and Butterflied: The Light 3-Pounders of Pattison and Townsend, Museum Restoration Service, Bloomfield, Ontario, 1979.

Chalmin, Pierre, Revue d'Histoire Economique et Sociale, ‘Le Querelle des Bleus et des Rouges dans l'Artillerie Francaise a la fin du XVIII Siecle', Volume XLVI, Numero 4, Marcel Riviere et Cie, Paris, 1968,

Chartrand, Rene, Napoleon's Guns, 1792-1815 (1) Field Artillery, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, 2003.

Chartrand, Rene, Napoleon's Guns, 1792-1815 (2) Heavy and Siege Artillery, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, 2003

Compana, J, L'Artillerie de Campagne 1792-1901: Etude Technique et Tactique, Berger-Levrault & Cie, Paris, 1901.

Congreve, William, Details of the Rocket System, J Whiting, London, 1814; reprint by the Museum Restoration Service, Ottawa, 1970.

Congreve, William, An Elementary Treatise on the Mounting of Naval Ordnance, J Egerton, London, 1811; reprinted by the Museum Restoration Service, 1970.

Congreve, William, A Treatise on the General Principles, Powers and Facility of Application of the Congreve Rocket System as Compared with Artillery, Longman, Rees, Orme, Brown, and Green, London, 1827.

Craig, Alexander, Rockets, Bombs and Bayonets: A Concise History of the Royal Marines and Other British and Canadian Forces in Defense of Canada 1812-1815, Epic Press, Canada, 2013.

Crooks, JJ, History of the Royal Irish Regiment of Artillery, Browne and Nolan, Limited, Dublin, 1914.

D'Antoni, Alessandro Vittorio Papacino, Captain Thomson, RA, translator, A Treatise on gunpowder; A Treatise on Firearms and a Treatise on the Service of Artillery in Time of War, London, no date.

De Scheel, Otto von, Memoires d'Artillerie Contenant l'Artillerie Nouvelle ou les Changemens fait dans Artillerie Francoise en 1765, Paris 1795.

De Scheel, Otto von, DeScheel's Treatise of Artillery, Translated by Johathan Williams, Editied by Donald E. Graves, Ottawa: Museum Restoration Service, 1984.

Dickson, Alexander, Leslie, John H., editor, The Dickson Manuscripts, 5 volumes, Royal Artillery Institution, Woolwich, 1905-1908, Reprinted by Ken Trotman, Cambridge, 1987.

Dolleczek, Anton, Geschichte der Osterreichischen Artillerie, Graz, 1973.

Douglas, Howard, A Treatise on Naval Gunnery, C Rowarth, London, 1829.

Downey, Fairfax, Cannonade, New York: Doubleday, 1966.

Doyle, GE, A Military Dictionary, Comprising Terms, Scientific and Otherwise, Connected with the Science of War, William Clowes and Sons, London, 1876.

Duane, William, A Military Dictionary, or Explanation of the Several Systems of Discipline of Different Kinds of Troops, Infantry, Artillery, and Cavalry, William Duane, Philadelphia, 1810.

Duffy, Christopher, The Army of Frederick the Great, Revised edition, Chicago: The Emperor's Press, 1996.

Duffy, Christopher, Instrument of War, Chicago, The Emperor's Press, 2000.

Duffy, Christopher, The Military Experience in the Age of Reason, Atheneum, New York, 1988.

Duffy, Christopher, Russia's Military Way to the West: Origins and Nature of Russian Military Power 1700-1800, Terence Wise, Knighton, 1994.

Duncan, Francis, History of the Royal Regiment of Artillery, 2 volumes, Naval and Military Press, Ltd., Uckfield, no date.

D'Urtubie, Theodore, Manuel de L'Artilleur, Paris: 1794.

Du Teil, Jean, The New Use of Artillery in Field Wars: Necessary Knowledge, The Nafziger Collection, 2003.

Du Teil, Chevalier Jean, De l'Usage de l'Artillerie Nouvelle dans la Guerre de Campagne, Marchal Librarie, Metz, 1778.

Faber du Faur, Christian Wilhelm von, With Napoleon in Russia: The Illustrated Memoirs of Major Faber du Faur, 1812, edited and translated by Jonathan North, Greenhill, London, 2001.

Fave, Ildefonse, Etudes sur le passe et l'Avenir de l'Artillerie, Volume IV, Librarie Militaire, Paris, 1863.

Fave, Ildefonse, Etudes sur le passe et l'Avenir de l'Artillerie, Volume V, Librarie Militaire, Paris, 1871.

Fave, Ildefonse, Histoire et Tactique des Trois Armes: Et Plus Particulierement de l'Artillerie de Campagne, J Dumaine, Paris, 1845.

Fave, Ildephonse, Nouveau Système d'Artillerie de Campagne de Louis-Napoléon Bonaparte Président de la République: Résultats des Expériences Faites en 1850 Énoncé et Examen de toutes le Objections, Librarie Militaire de J Dumaine, Paris, 1851.

Fortune, T, The Artillerist's Companion, J Millan, London, 1778.

Franklin, CE, British Napoleonic Field Artillery, Spellmount, Gloucester, 2008.

Franklin, Carl E., Congreve Rockets of the War of 1812, Arms Collecting, Ottawa, 2001.

Franklin, CE, British Napoleonic Field Artillery: The First Complete Illustrated Guide to the Equipment and Uniforms, Spellmount Limited, Stroud, Gloucestershire, 2008.

Gaier, Claude, Four Centuries of Liege Gunmaking, Translated by FJ Norris, Librarie Halbart, Liege, no date.

Gassendi, Jean-Jacques Basilien de, Aide-Memoire a l'usage des Officiers d'Artillerie attaches au service de Terre, Paris: Chez Magimel, Anselin et Pochard, 1819.

Girod de l'Ain, Maurice, Grands Artilleurs: Drouot, Senarmont, Eble, Paris, 1895.

Goosiev, E., Russian Napoleonic Artillery, Moscow, 2001.

Gooding, James, An Introduction to British Artillery in North America, Museum Restoration Service, Ottawa, 1988.

Graves, Donald E., American Ordnance of the War of 1812, Arms Collecting, Ottawa, 1993.

Graves, Donald E., ‘For Want of this Precaution so Many Men Lose Their Arms: Official, Semi-Official and Unofficial American Artillery Texts, 1775-1845', Unpublished Manuscript, no date.

Graves, Donald E., Sir William Congreve and The Rocket's Red Glare, Museum Restoration Service, Bloomfield, Ontario, 1989.

Graves, Donald E., ‘Louis de Tousard and his Artillerist's Companion: An Investigation of Source Material for Napoleonic Period Ordnance,' Ottawa: Arms Collecting, 1983.

Gribeauval, Jean Baptiste Vaquette de, and Manson, Jacques de, Reglement Concernant les Fontes et les Constructions de l'Artillerie de France, 2 volumes, Paris, 1792.

Hall, AR, Ballistics in the Seventeenth Century: A Study in the Relations of Science and War with Reference Principally to England, University Press, Cambridge, 1952.

Henry, Chris, British Napoleonic Artillery 1793-1815 (1): Field Artillery, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, 2002.

Henry, Chris, British Napoleonic Artillery 1793-1815 (2): Siege and Coastal Artillery, Osprey Publishing, Oxford, 2003.

Hicks, James E., French Military Weapons 1717-1938, Flayderman, New Milford, 1962.

Hughes, BP, Smooth-Bore Artillery: The Muzzle Loading Artillery of the 18th and 19th Centuries, London: Arms and Armour Press, 1969.

Hughes, BP, Firepower: Weapons Effectiveness on the Battlefield, 1630-1850, Arms and Armour Press, London, 1974.

Hughes, BP, Open Fire: Artillery Tactics from Marlborough to Wellington, Antony Bird Publications, Chichester 1983.

Hulot, M., Instruction sur le Service de L'Artillerie, Paris: Magimel, 1813.

Ireland, Bernard, The Fall of Toulon: The Last Opportunity to Defeat the French Revolution, Cassell, London, 2005.

Jackson, Melvin and de Beer, Charles, Eighteenth Century Gunfounding, David and Charles, Newton Abbot, 1973.

Jany, Curt, Geschichte der Preussischen Armee, Volumes II and III, Biblio Verlag, Osnabruck, 1967.

Jones, John T., Journals of Sieges Carried on by the Army under the Duke of Wellington in Spain during the Years 1811-1814 with Notes and Additions, 3 Volumes, John Weale, London, 1846.

Juhel, Pierre, De l'Ile d'Elbe a Waterloo, La Garde Imperiale, pendant les Cent-Jours (1815): Organisation, habillement, equipement et armament de la derniere Garde de Napoleon, La Revue Napoleon, 2008.

Kiley, Kevin F., Artillery of the Napoleonic Wars 1792-1815: Field Artillery, London: Greenhill, 2004.

Kiley, Kevin F., Artillery of the Napoleonic Wars 1792-1815: Siege, Garrison, and Naval, Frontline, London, 2015.

Kiley, Kevin F., ‘The Cannon's Breath: Jean-Baptiste de Gribeauval and the Development of the French Artillery Arm 1763-1789,' First Empire Magazine, Volume 81, Summer 2005.

Kosciusko, Tadeuz, Maneuvers of Horse Artillery, New York, 1808.

Lamare, Jean Baptiste, An Account of the Second Defense of the Fortress of Badajoz by the French in 1812, Townson and Burrill, London, 1824.

Landman, Isaac, The Principles of Artillery: Reduced into Questions and Answers, for the Use of the Royal Military Academy, at Woolwich. W Glendinning, London, 1801.

Lauerma, Matti, L'Artillerie de Campagne Francaise Pendant les Guerres de la Revolution: Evolution de l'Organization et de la Tactique, Helsinki 1956.

Laws, MES, Battery Records of the Royal Artillery 1716-1859, Royal Artillery Institute, Woolwich, 1952.

LeBlond, Guillaume, Treatise of Artillery, 1746, Ottawa: Museum Restoration Service, 1970.

Le Diberder, Georges, Les Armees Francais a l'Epoque Revolutionnaire 1789-1804, Collections du Musee de l'Armee 1989.

Lipscomb, Nick, Wellington's Guns, The Untold Story of Wellington and his Artillery in the Peninsula and at Waterloo, Osprey, Oxford, 2013

Litre, Emile Francois, Les Regiments d'Artillerie a Pied de la Garde, Paris, Toulouse, 1895.

Lombares, Michel, Histoire de la Artillerie Francaise, Charles-Lavauzelle, Paris, 1984.

Letrun, Ledovic and Mongin, Jean-Marie, Alan McKay translator, Officers and Soldiers of French Artillery and the Gribeauval System, 3 Volumes, Histoire & Collections, Paris, no date.

MacLannan, Ken, ‘Liechtenstein and Gribeauval: ‘Artillery Revolution' in Political and Cultural Context,' War and History, Volume 10, Issue 3, July 2003.

Malinowsky, Louis, and Bonin, Robert, Geschichte der Brandenburgish-Preussischen Artillerie, 3 Volumes, Wiesbaden, 1982.

Manucy, Albert, Artillery Through the Ages, National Park Service, Washington DC, 1949,

May, John, A Few Observations on the Mode of Attack and Employment of the Heavy Artillery at Ciudad Rodrigo and Badajoz, in 1812, and St. Sebastian, in 1813; with a Discussion on the Superior Advantages derived from the use of Iron instead of Brass Ordnance in such Operations, T Egerton, London, 1819; reprinted by the Naval and Military Press, no date.

McCloy, Shelby T., French Inventions of the Eighteenth Century, University of Kentucky Press, 1952.

Mercer, Cavalie, Journal of the Waterloo Campaign, Da Capo Press, New York, 1995.

Yermelov, Alexii, translator and editor Mikaberidze, Alexander, The Czar's General: The Memoirs of a Russian General in the Napoleonic Wars, Ravenhall Books, London, 2006.

Ministrie de la Defense, Revue Historique des Armees, ‘Artillerie', 2e Annee, No 1-2 (Special, 1975.

Monhaupt, Ernst, Ueber den Gebrauch der Reitenden Artillerie, Berlin, 1836.

Morawski, Ryszard, and Nieuwazny, Andrej, Wosjko Ksiestwa Warszawskiego: Artyleria, Inzynierowie, Saperzy, Pelta, Warsaw, 2004.

Mordecai, Alfred, Artillery for the United States Land Service, J and GS Gideon, Printers, Washington, 1849.

Morla, T., de, Tratado de Artilleria para el Uso de la Academia de Caballeros Cadetes del Real Cuerpo de Artilleria en Tres Tomos y Otro de Laminas , que Tartan de la Principales Functiones de los Officiales de este Cuero pen pas y en ruerra, Segovia, 1816.

Muller, John, A Treatise of Artillery, Museum Restoration Service, Ottawa, 1977.

Napoleon III and Fave, Ildefonse, Etudes sur le Passe et l'Avenir de de l'Artillerie, Librarie Militaire de J Dumaine, Paris, 1871.

Nafziger, George, Imperial Bayonets, London: Greenhill, 1996.

Napoleon, Correspondence Inedite de l'Empereur Napoleon avec le Commandant en Chef de l'Artillerie de la Grande Armee pendant les Campagnes de 1809 en Autriche, 1810-1811 en Espagne et 1812 en Russie. Avec un Fac Simile Autographe du Napoleon, et des Notes Historiques et Topographiques, Chez l'Editeur et Chez J Dumaine, Paris, 1843.

Nardin, Pierre, Gribeauval, Lieutenant general des armees du roi (1715-1789), Paris: Fondation pour les etudes de defense nationale, 1981).

Naulet, Frederic, L'Artillerie Francaise (1665-1765) Naissance d'une Arme, Paris: Economica, 2002.

Noel, Jean-Nicholas-Auguste, Brindle, Rosemary, editor and translator, With Napoleon's Guns, Greenhill Books, London, 2005.

O'Connor, John Michael, A Treatise on the Science of War and Fortification Composed for the use of the Imperial Polytechnic School and Military Schools, J Seymour, New York, 1817.

Persy, N., Elementary Treatise on the Forms of Cannon and Various Systems of Artillery, Ottawa: Museum Restoration Service, 1979.

Peterson, Harold, Roundshot and Rammers: An Introduction to Muzzle-Loading Land Artillery in the United States, Stackpole, Harrisburg, 1969.

Picard, Ernest, L'Artillerie Francaise au Dix-Huit Siecle, Berger-Levrault & Cie, Paris, 1906.

Pietsch, Paul, Formations-und Unifromierungsgeschichte des Preussischen Heerres, 1808 bis 1914, Band II, Helmut Gerhard Schulz, Hamburg, 1966.

Pigeard, Alain, ‘L'Artillerie Napoleonienne et le Genie,' Tradition Magazine, Hors Serie No. 23, Paris, 2002.

Radozhitskii, Ilya, translated by Alexander Mikaberidze, Campaign Memoirs of the Artilleryman, Part I, The Napoleonic Society of Georgia, Tbilisi, 2011.

Rosen, Howard, ‘The Systeme Gribeauval: A Study of Technological Development and Institutional Change in Eighteenth Century France', PHD Dissertation, The University of Chicago, Chicago, Illinois, 1981.

Robertson, Frederick Leslie, The Evolution of Naval Armament, The Scholar's Bookshelf, Cranbury, New Jersey, 2005.

Robinson, Benjamin, and Wilson, James, New Principles of Gunnery, F Wingrave, London, 1805.

Roquerol, G., L'Artillerie au Debut des Guerres de la Revolution, Paris 1898.

Ruty, Charles-Etienne-Francois, ‘Observations on the Part of the Systeme AN XI Realted to the Subdivision Scale of the Calibers of the Pieces of Ordnance for the Field and Siege Equipment Companies,' translated by Scott Bowden, Carton 2w84, Archives di Service Historique de l'Etat-Major de l'Armee de Terre, Vincennes.

Sabine, Edward, editor, Letters of Colonel Sir Augustus Simon Frazer, KCB, Naval and Military Press, Uckfield, 2001.

Saint Remy, Pierre Surirey de, Memoires d'Artillerie, Volume 3, Chez Rollin Fils, Paris, 1745.

Saski, Commandant, Campagne de 1809 en Allemagne et en Autriche, Tome Premier, Berger-Levrault et Cie, Paris, 1899.

Scharnhorst, Gerhard, Handbuch der Artillerie, Hannover: 1806.

Scharnhorst, Gerhard, Captain Haverfield and Lieutenant Hofman, translators, Military Field Pocket Book, Vogel and Schulze, London, 1811.

Selig, Robert, Statistical Overview of Artillery at the Siege of Yorktown (1781), Journal of the Brigade of the American Revolution, 2001.

Smirnoff, Alexander, Arakcheev's Artillery: The Russian Artillery System of 1805, Moscow, 1998.

Smola, Josef Freiherr von, Handbuch fur Kaiserlich-Konigliche Osterreichesche Artillerie-Offiziere, Vienna: 1839.

Smola, Karl, Smith, Digby, translator, ‘The Austrian Cavalry Gun in Comparison to the Horse Artillery of Other States by Smola in 1827, Smoothbore Ordnance Journal, 1(01) 1-26, August 2010.

Titze, Jorg, Das Sächsische Artillery Korps: Das Train Bataillon 1810-1813, Herstellung und Verlag, Norderstedt, 2012.

Tousard, Louis de, American Artillerist's Companion, 3 Volumes, C & C Conrad, Philadelphia, 1809; Reprinted by Greenwood Press, Westport, 1969.

Tronson du Coudray, Charles, L'Ordre Profond et L'Ordre Mince, Consideres par Rapport aux Effets de L'Artillerie, Paris, no date.

United States Department of War, A System of Exercise and Instruction of Field Artillery including Maneuvers for Light or Horse Artillery, Hilliard, Gray, Little, and Wilkins, Boston, 1829.

Werth, Albert, Erinnerungen an den Kaiserlich Osterreichischen Generalmajor in der Artillerie Josef Freiherrn von Smola, Bibliotheks-Verwaltung, Wien 1905.
Henriot, Jean, Artillerie de la Marine, 1758, Editions Omega, Nice, 1987.

Wilson, Sir Robert, Brief Remarks on the Character and Composition of the Russian Army and a Sketch of the Campaigns in Poland in 1806 and 1807, Newcastle, Worley, 2000.

Winter, Frank, The First Golden Age of Rocketry, Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington DC, 1990.

Zhmodikov, Alexander, and Zhmodikov, Yurii, The Tactics of the Russian Army in the Napoleonic Wars, two volumes, The Naafziger Collection, West Chester Ohio, 2003.

Carnet de la Sabretache

Carnet de la Sabretache, Paris:
-Volume 3, 1895:
-‘Le 7 corps a Eylau', p. 3.
-‘Bataille de Eylau', p. 81.
-‘Bataille de Friedland (Journal d'operations du 1eme corps de la Grande Armee)', p. 325.
-‘Les marins de la flotilla et les ouvriers militaires de la marine pendant la champagne de 1809 en Autriche' pp. 145, 206, 274, 385.
-‘Prise de Ratisbonne 1809' p. 227.
-‘La Defense de Torgau en 1813' pp. 339, 427, 449.

-Volume 4, 1896:

- ‘La defense de Torgau en 1813 (fin)' p. 22.
-‘Le sage de la Grande Armee,' p. 72.
-‘Quelques lettres de Drouot au capitaine d'habillement du regimetn d'artillerie de la Garde, 1809-1810' pp. 128, 205, 245.
-‘L'artillerie de la marine jusqu'en 1811' p.173.
-‘Les variations de l'uniforme du Corops royal d'artillerie 1756-1792' p. 451.

-Volume 5, 1897, ‘Nouvelles lettres du General Drouot 1801-1814' pp. 388, 453.
-‘Napoleon Bonaparte et les generaux du Teil,' p. 54.

-Volume 7, 1899, ‘Un recit du siege de Lerida, 1810' p. 129.
-‘Nouveautes touchant l'artillerie,' p. 89.

-Volume 8, 1900, ‘Lettres inedits du General Comte Drouot' p. 408.

-Volume 9, 1901, ‘Un Episode de la retraite de Russie: letter d'un officier d'artillerie,' p. 279.

-Volume 10, 1902, ‘Une letter du General Drouot,' p. 310.

-Volume 14, 1906, ‘Notes du General baron Jean Thomas sur l'expedition de Capri (Octobre 1808)' p. 232.
-‘Officier d'artillerie a cheval de la Garde des Consuls,' p. 449.

-Volume 15, 1907, ‘Deux lettres du general comte Drouot' p. 717.
-‘Le Centenaire de Friedland,' p. 321.
-2d Serie:

Volume 7, 1908, ‘Le passagae du grand Saint-Bernard,' p. 413.

Volume 8, 1909, ‘Le centenaire d'Essling et de Wagram,' p. 321, 515.

Volume 10, 1911:
-‘Gribeauval, lieutenant general, premier inspecteur d'artillerie (1715-1789)' p. 251.
-‘Lettre du general Drouot' p. 509.
-‘Napoleon de Buonaparte, officier d'artillerie 1784-1785,' p.133.
-‘Nouvelle lettres du general Drouot, 1801-1814,' p. 380.
-‘Quelques lettres de Drouot au capitaine d'habillement du regiment d'artillerie de la Garde, 1809-1810,' pp. 128, 205, 245.
-Souvenirs militaires d'un officier du premier empire (Colonel Noel),' p.433.

-3d Serie
Volume 1, 1913
‘Un Saint-Cyrien Artilleur: Michel-Marie-Charles Tournier', p. 465.
-‘Le colonel d'artillerie Chauveau,' pp. 385, 449, 513.
Volume 2, 1914-1919
-‘Le chef d'escadron d'artillerie de Lassus-Marcilly', p.369.

Volume 3, 1924
-‘Cannonier de l'artillerie legere de la Garde des Consuls', p. 225.

hm, is that all – I still see corner stones missing – about Gribeauval, as well as about other topics, like Saxon artillery, but this is not the topic here.

You're relying on one publication only? To which 'experts' are you referring?

Please read all articles of the Smoothbore Ordnance Journal – you will encounter many

I've read them and they are not the best to use as source material. In point of fact, I also have at least three of the journals in hard copy.

…is that all – I still see corner stones missing – about Gribeauval, as well as about other topics, like Saxon artillery…

Perhaps you could list them?

I've read them and they are not the best to use as source material. In point of fact, I also have at least three of the journals in hard copy.

You are entitled to your opinion, I have another, there they often contain translated primary sources I cannot share your negative attitude at all.

Why didn't you answer the question put to you regarding 'Gribeauval and other topics'?

I am not aware that I am in front of a court.

Sad that this thread began as quite an interesting article about 3D printing but, as always, descended instantly into the same old people trotting out their same old (very tired)diatribes.

I feel partly responsible with my initial response above, but nobody's forcing the usual suspects to react.

Definitely the third-best system.

Definitely the third-best system.

Perhaps you could actually discuss that opinion or, better yet, post information and sources that support your opinion.