1700084397

1700084398 7.This work by Walter de Millemete is entitled De officiis regum（On the Duties of Kings）and was presumably written in 1325 or at the beginning of the reign of Edward III, that is, shortly after 1327. The manuscript is in Oxford. The illustration is to be found in Guttmann，figure 69，reproduced in the Zeitschrift für historische Waffenkunde and also, very unclearly, in Feldhaus, p.100. I handed my colleague, Tangl, the sample given in Guttmann, and he told me that no conclusion could be drawn from the passage. While he was certain it belonged in the fourteenth century, it was of the type of elegant writing which contains so little of an individual character that it is impossible to establish a closer date. But he went on to say that if the manuscript can be proved to stem from the years to which it has been attributed（1325-1327），then we may also assume that the illustration is from the same period. The fact that the projectile with the arrow point is aimed at the gate of a stronghold could perhaps be interpreted as indicating that we are dealing with a purely decorative composition that does not necessarily show firing against the strong gate. Shooting with bolts instead of balls was actually done.

1700084399

1700084400 8.The most important are two frescoes in the church of the former monastery of St. Leonardo in Leccetto near Siena, on which a siege with a cannon and a hand firearm are shown（Guttmann, p.28）. According to an account book, the master Paul was paid 16 L.，12 R. for these works in June 1343. Professor Tangl told me, however, that the writing in the account book is of a much later period.

1700084401

1700084402 9.On this point see the articles by Schneider and Forrer named in note 1 above.

1700084403

1700084404 10.Of course, Rathgen and Schäfer point out that in the papal accounts, as detailed as they are in other respects, there is no entry for wood for the blocks. They say, however, that these blocks may have been made on the spot.

1700084405

1700084406 11.According to Clephan，“A Sketch of the History and Evolution of the Handgun，”Festschrift für Thierbach, pp.35，40，gunpowder and various types of cannon are mentioned for the first time in England in 1338，in a procurement contract.

1700084407

1700084408 12.With respect to Meissen, see Baarmann in the Festschrift für Thierbach, p.67，where it is said that the defender of Salzderhelden successfully used a lead firearm several years earlier.

1700084409

1700084410 13.“On the Oldest Cannon in Switzerland, with a Document from the Year 1391”（“Ueber älteste Geschütze in der Schweiz, mit einer Urkunde vom Jahre 1391”），by Dr.J. Häne in Zurich.Anzeiger für schweizerische Altertumskunde, new series，2（1900）：215-222.

1700084411

1700084412 14.Jacobs, p.136.

1700084413

1700084414 15.Favé，3：80 ff.，according to Köhler.

1700084415

1700084416 16.The ribaudequins were originally large crossbows that were installed on the walls. In the fifteenth century they were often named as cannon. The most important passages are cited in Köhler, Kriegswesen der Ritterzeit，3：178，279，315.

1700084417

1700084418 17.In an extract from the Book of Pyrotechnics（Feuerwerksbuch）of 1429 it is already stated how “lump powder” was made and the fact that this powder was more effective than fine powder. Köster（p.336）and Jähns（p.401）believe that this lump powder was not yet a true granulation but only a preliminary step. Romocki, p.182，and Clephan, p.36，call it simply granulation. Clephan adds that, nevertheless, fine powder continued to be used for a long time and granulated powder was again used at the beginning of the sixteenth century. As the reason for this, he assumes, as does Köhler，3：255，that the explosion of the granulated powder was so strong that the weak cannon could not withstand it. This explanation is not very enlightening, since one could have used less powder.

1700084419

1700084420 18.G. Körting, Petrarch’s Life and Works（Petrarcas Leben und Werke），p.542，says that the poet devoted many years to this work but did not finish it until he was old—on 4 October 1366，according to a reliable source. Azzo died in 1362. This date is also accepted by Karl Förster, Petrarch’s Collected Canzonas（Petrarcas sämtliche Canzone, usw.），translation，2d ed.，1833，p.XI. This report is based on Baldelli, Del Petrarca e delle sue opere, Florence，1797.2d ed.，Fiesole，1837. Blanc, in Ersch and Gruber, III，19，p.237，reports that Petrarch started the work in 1358 and finished it in 1360. In 1360 or early 1361 he supposedly presented it to the Dauphin, later Charles V of France, on the occasion of a diplomatic mission, and Charles had it translated into French. Blanc also bases his statements on Baldelli, but Baldelli, in his second edition at any rate, names 1366 as the year of completion.

1700084421

1700084422 19.Published in Geneva by Jacob Stoer in 1645，p.302.

1700084423

1700084424 20.In the word “wooden”Jähns saw indirect proof of its derivation from the madfaa. That does not seem clear to me.

1700084425

1700084426 21.Jovius, Elogia virorum bellica virtute illustrium（Aphorisms of Men Distinguished by Military Virtue），Basel，1575，p.184. Also Guicciardini, Historia d’Italia, Venice，1562，4：100.

1700084427

1700084428 22.Jacobs, p.53.

1700084429

1700084430 23.Jacobs, p.51 ff.，p.136.

1700084431

1700084432 24.Napoléon, Etudes, p.66.

1700084433

1700084434 25.Baarmann，“The Development of the Gun Carriage up to the Beginning of the Sixteenth Century and Its Relationship to that of the Rifle Stock”（“Die Entwicklung der Geschützlafette bis zum Beginn des 16. Jahrhunderts und ihrer Beziehungen zu der des Gewehrschaftes”），Festschrift für Thierbach, p.54. A very valuable study. I cannot agree with the differing opinions in Essenwein and Gohlke（Geschichte der Feuerwaffen）. According to von Graevenitz, Gattamelata and Colleoni and Their Relationships to the Art（Gattamelata und Colleoni und ihre Beziehungen zur Kunst），Leipzig，1906，p.96，Colleoni placed cannon on mobile carriages and thereby became the creator of the field artillery in Italy.

1700084435

1700084436 26.Robertus Valturius, de re militari（On Military Affairs），Verona，1482，has a series of illustrations of cannon in Book X. Among them are also bombs with burning tinder, but in other respects the pictures are fantasies.

1700084437

1700084438 27.On his rapid march from Rome to Naples in 1495，Charles VIII bombarded the city of Monte Fortino so that it could be taken by storm（Pilorgerie, Campagne de 1494-1495，p.174）. The same procedure was repeated at Monte di San Giovanni（p.174）. Charles VIII himself gives testimony in a letter written on the day of the victory（9 February 1495）of “a bombardment of four hours.”During that time an extensive breach had been made（p.176）. In a letter dated 11 February, Charles refers to Monte Fortino as “one of the fortified places of this country famous for its strength.”He did not move out against this city until after the midday meal, and less than an hour after the first shot the attack had already succeeded（pp.177-178）. A letter from a high-ranking French officer from Naples, written in February 1495，states：“Our artillery is not large, but we have found more in this city and large stocks of powder. But we have a shortage of iron bolts because here they have only stones”（p.197）.—In the presence of the king the shooting was better—“Today the king went to dine with the artillery, and in short order the cannoneers fired so well that they knocked down a tower”（13 March 1495）.（Pilorgerie, Campagne de 1494-1495，p.211）.

1700084439

1700084440 28.Beck, History of Iron（Geschichte des Eisens），1：906，says that iron balls were among the earliest proof for the invention of iron casting and existed long before 1470，when Louis XI supposedly bought the secret from a German Jew（p.910）. On p.915 he even claims they go back to the beginning of the fifteenth century. But that certainly seems false. In those cases where iron balls are mentioned earlier, they may have been, as Beck himself says, forged balls, and the cast-iron balls that appeared toward the end of the fifteenth century were regarded as something entirely new. Jähns，1：427，cites the statement from an anonymous military book dated 1450 to the effect that stone balls were to be preferred because they were much less expensive than those of iron or lead. The high price, however, can hardly have been a decisive factor when we realize that, although the individual stone ball was much cheaper, the manufacture, transportation, and manipulation of the cannon that it required were all the more costly. The manuscript of a book on pyrotechnics that Jähns，2：405，places in the year 1454 recommends covering iron balls with cast lead. This can no doubt refer only to forged iron balls which were rounded off with the lead casting, something that could not be done easily by forging. This would therefore seem to be indirect proof that the casting of iron itself was not yet understood. A Nuremberg inventory of 1462 that is mentioned in Jähns，1：427，does not show iron cannon balls.

1700084441

1700084442 29.Liebe，“The Social Rank of Artillery”（“Die soziale Wertung der Artillerie”），Zeitschrift für historische Waffenkunde，2：146.

1700084443

1700084444 30.De la Noue，26.Discours, Observations militaires, ed.of 1587，p.755.

1700084445

1700084446 31.Sello，“The Campaign of Burgrave Frederick in February 1414”（“Der Feldzug Burggraf Friedrichs im Februar 1414”），Zeitschrift für Preussische Geschichte，19（1882）：101.

[ 上一页 ]  [ :1.700084397e+09 ]  [ 下一页 ]