What makes a Howitzer cannon a Howitzer?

historicus

Private
Joined
Oct 12, 2016
I have never known what makes a Howitzer cannon a Howitzer cannon as opposed to, say, a Napoleon cannon or a different type of cannon. Before today I had several theories about what might make a Howitzer cannon a Howitzer. Today I went to the Chickamauga Battlefield to try to figure it out. At the Visitor's Center for Chickamauga National Park, the National Park Service has six cannons on display. The National Park Service has plaques for each of the six cannons that label what type of cannon it is. Before today, my first theory was that maybe a Howitzer cannon meant a bronze cannon that was originally made as a smoothbore, but the cannon was retrofitted to be a rifled bronze cannon. One of the six cannons on display at the visitor's center seems to rule that out because it is a bronze cannon labeled a Howitzer, and it does not have the rifle grooves inside the barrel. I don't say that this definitely rules this cannon out of being a Howitzer because perhaps the rifle grooves wore away over time.

Before today, I thought that maybe a Howitzer cannon just meant a smoothbore cannon, but I saw several other smoothbores that were not Howitzers, so that ruled that out.

A third theory that I had before today was that a Howitzer cannon might just mean a cannon made out of iron instead of bronze, but the Howitzer I saw at the Visitor's center was made out of bronze, so that rules that theory out.

A fourth theory that I had before today was that a Howitzer cannon might just mean that the cannon was manufactured at a foundry named Howitzer. But the Howitzer cannon at the Visitor's Center for Chickamauga was made at the Tredegar Iron Works in Richmond. Also, I saw several plaques at Chickamauga that said that Federal batteries had Howitzers, so those two facts seem to rule out that the Howitzers are named after the Foundries where they were made.

So what makes a Howitzer cannon a Howitzer cannon as opposed to a Napoleon or a James or any other type of cannon?
 
A howitzer was a short-barreled smoothbore cannon, typically not rifled. They used a smaller powder charge and were sort of like a mortar in that their shells had a much steeper trajectory than, say, a Napoleon. Howitzers were used to lob shells behind fortifications or into trenches (or anywhere one needed to get behind an obstacle); thus the mortar-like trajectory. At close ranges they could fire canister although the load was less than what a Napoleon delivered.

Because they were smaller and lighter than Napoleons and the like they were sometimes used by cavalry units (e.g. mountain howitzer).

Both sides had bronze and cast iron howitzers although I think bronze was the most common.
 
Last edited:
A howitzer was a short-barreled smoothbore cannon, typically not rifled. They used a smaller powder charge and were sort of like a mortar in that their shells had a much steeper trajectory than, say, a Napoleon. Howitzers were used to lob shells behind fortifications or into trenches (or anywhere one needed to get behind an obstacle); thus the mortar-like trajectory. At close ranges they could fire canister although the load was less than what a Napoleon delivered.

Because they were smaller and lighter than Napoleons and the like they were sometimes used by cavalry units (e.g. mountain howitzer).

Regarding the short barrel, there were two cannons that sat by themselves at the Visitor's Center at Chickamauga. These two cannons were not part of the six, labeled cannons at the Visitor's Center, and these two cannons were not on the same side of the Visitor's Center as the six, labeled cannons. These two cannons on the other side of the Visitor's Center were both very little cannons. They were the smallest cannons I had ever seen. The plaque with them said that they were howitzers (which corrobates what John Winn and what the poster on post #2 of this thread is saying), and this type of tiny howitzer was mostly used in the Western theater of the Civil War. The plaque said the cannons themselves without the wheeled carriages only weighed 220 pounds each. I forgot the name of these types of tiny howitzers. Maybe it was mountain howitzers. I'm not sure. But the plaque said that these tiny howitzers were made so that they were easy to transport over mountains and other rough terrain. The tiny howitzers were made so that the cannon itself could easily be detached from the wheeled carriage holding it. Very interesting.
 
... So what makes a Howitzer cannon a Howitzer cannon as opposed to a Napoleon or a James or any other type of cannon?

downloadg-jpg.89946.jpg


During the Civil War and earlier there were mainly only two types of cannon: guns and howitizers. In this case, guns were relatively long-barreled pieces, usually made of bronze but sometimes cast or wrought iron, that fired on a flat trajectory and were used to batter solid objects like walls and bridges. Howitizers were as John has explained, shorter-barrelled cannon that fired on more of an arc and used to drop exploding shells behind obstacles like earthworks, etc. (Mortars were heavy, even shorter-barrelled weapons that fired on an even higher arc but were fired from fixed positions so did NOT accompany armies in the field; they were used aboard ship or in field fortifications.) In the photo from the Kenosha, Wisconsin Civil War Museum, notice the high angle of the little mountain howitzer compared with that of the iron 3" ordnance rifle (a type of gun) in the mural behind it. The Napoleon when introduced in 1857 was originally termed a gun-howitizer meaning a hybrid that could theoretically perform the duties of either.
 
Regarding the short barrel, there were two cannons that sat by themselves at the Visitor's Center at Chickamauga. These two cannons were not part of the six, labeled cannons at the Visitor's Center, and these two cannons were not on the same side of the Visitor's Center as the six, labeled cannons. These two cannons on the other side of the Visitor's Center were both very little cannons. They were the smallest cannons I had ever seen. The plaque with them said that they were howitzers (which corrobates what John Winn and what the poster on post #2 of this thread is saying), and this type of tiny howitzer was mostly used in the Western theater of the Civil War. The plaque said the cannons themselves without the wheeled carriages only weighed 220 pounds each. I forgot the name of these types of tiny howitzers. Maybe it was mountain howitzers. I'm not sure. But the plaque said that these tiny howitzers were made so that they were easy to transport over mountains and other rough terrain. The tiny howitzers were made so that the cannon itself could easily be detached from the wheeled carriage holding it. Very interesting.

Yes, those were mountain howitzers. When in transit they could be carried on a mule. The western theater saw much more use of somewhat outdated and odd equipment and artillery than the eastern theater so you'll often see references to things like six-pounders still being used out west long after they were all melted down to make Napoleons in the east. Warfare in the west was different in a number of ways than in the east.

mountain_howtzer.jpg


source: Coggins, Jack. 1962. Arms and Equipment of the Civil War. (Dover Publications, Mineola, New York).
 
I love this message board.

352-jpg.46236.jpg


Not all howitizers were tiny mountain howitzers; here's one dating from the Mexican War that also saw service in the Civil War, a 12-pounder howitzer at Fort Marcy in the Defenses of Washington, D. C. Scroll down this thread to see it and more types and sizes of Civil War cannon there: https://civilwartalk.com/threads/the-civil-war-defenses-of-washington-d-c.103889/

Edit: I'll add that howitizers were smoothbore weapons because they weren't intended for firing at a great distance so didn't need the rifling that increased the range.
 
Last edited:
At close ranges they could fire canister although the load was less than what a Napoleon delivered.
This wasn't always true. Didn't canister rounds for some of the larger caliber howitzers - the 24 or 32-pounder howitzer, for example - contain a larger number of shot than the Napoleon's 27?
 
This wasn't always true. Didn't canister rounds for some of the larger caliber howitzers - the 24 or 32-pounder howitzer, for example - contain a larger number of shot than the Napoleon's 27?

Sorry, I was referring to twelve-pound and mountain howitzers; perhaps didn't make that understood. To be more clear, I am saying that a twelve-pounder howitzer didn't deliver the same amount of canister as did a Napoleon twelve-pounder (in large part because of the smaller powder charge).
 
Sorry, I was referring to twelve-pound and mountain howitzers; perhaps didn't make that understood. To be more clear, I am saying that a twelve-pounder howitzer didn't deliver the same amount of canister as did a Napoleon twelve-pounder (in large part because of the smaller powder charge).
According to the shot tables here, the 12-pounder mountain howitzer canister round contained 148 shot. I read elsewhere that they were .69 cal. musket balls, as opposed to the Napoleon's much larger-sized shot. So smaller powder charge but larger number shot, albeit smaller caliber. Probably not as effective at longer ranges but perhaps more effective at very close range.
 
downloadg-jpg.89946.jpg


During the Civil War and earlier there were mainly only two types of cannon: guns and howitizers. In this case, guns were relatively long-barreled pieces, usually made of bronze but sometimes cast or wrought iron, that fired on a flat trajectory and were used to batter solid objects like walls and bridges. Howitizers were as John has explained, shorter-barrelled cannon that fired on more of an arc and used to drop exploding shells behind obstacles like earthworks, etc. (Mortars were heavy, even shorter-barrelled weapons that fired on an even higher arc but were fired from fixed positions so did NOT accompany armies in the field; they were used aboard ship or in field fortifications.) In the photo from the Kenosha, Wisconsin Civil War Museum, notice the high angle of the little mountain howitzer compared with that of the iron 3" ordnance rifle (a type of gun) in the mural behind it. The Napoleon when introduced in 1857 was originally termed a gun-howitizer meaning a hybrid that could theoretically perform the duties of either.
Very nice but When Grant was fighting the overland campaign they did take some small coehorn mortars with the army.
The ANV had some but didn't take them in the field.
 
According to the shot tables here, the 12-pounder mountain howitzer canister round contained 148 shot. I read elsewhere that they were .69 cal. musket balls, as opposed to the Napoleon's much larger-sized shot. So smaller powder charge but larger number shot, albeit smaller caliber. Probably not as effective at longer ranges but perhaps more effective at very close range.

According to the tables referenced, the total weight of the load for a howitzer was 11.2 pounds and that of a Napoleon 14.2 pounds. So, disregarding size the total poundage delivered downrange was somewhat less for the howitzer. I've got other references that talk about this issue but I'll not dither on. I certainly won't argue that at close ranges canister from a howitzer was defacto just as terrible as that from a Napoleon !
 
Regarding howitzers, E.P. Alexander said that the twelve-pound howitzer was his favorite because at close ranges it could fire canister effectively but had an advantage in that he could dig small trenches for the carriage trails, reduce the powder charge a bit, and turn them into very effective and mobile mortars in the field, something he couldn't do with other types of artillery. So a mix of howitzers, Napoleons, and 3 inch rifles was, in his opinion, the optimum. The Union, on the other hand, pretty much eliminated field howitzers in their batteries by late 1863.
 
Although there are characteristics of a howitzer which make it readily identifiable, the real difference between a howitzer and other smoothbores weapons is internal. And yes, a Civil War howitzer was always a smoothbore.

Howitzers had a short tube with a chambered, or tapered, interior that allowed the projectile to be fired with a light powder charge. They were very effective in an anti-personnel capacity firing canister or case shot, but their initial purpose was to lob a projectile over a high arc to hit a target on the reverse slope of a hill. It was truly a multi-purpose weapon with a number of field uses.

Here at Shiloh NMP our collection includes 51 howitzers of 18 different types and models. Most are 12 pounders though there five big 24 pounders, nearly too heavy for field use. Also on display is an 8" Siege Howitzer mounted on a heavy siege carriage. One of these beasts was actually used as a field piece by the Union on the second day at Shiloh.

IMG_4720.JPG
 
Last edited:
Yes, as pictured above, its the reduced powder chamber that makes a Howitzer a Howitzer.
The other guns have straight walled bores, the whole thing is same as the muzzle hole.
 
I used to get confused about the artillery of WW2. The Army had a 155mm Howitzer and a 155mm Cannon. The latter was commonly referred to as the "Long Tom" as it definately had a much longer barrel as well as dual axles with 8 wheels. Whereas the 155mm Howitzer and carriage was just a little larger than the 105mm Cannon with 2 wheel and tires a little larger than those used by the 105mm Howitzer.

For what its worth.

{Edited}
 
Last edited:
Back
Top