3-inch and 12-lb guns

[Stryker65]

I know next to nothing about artillery pieces, other than that some are light and some are heavy, and in looking over armaments at Harpers Ferry and Nashville I've gotten myself quite confused with the multiple artillery pieces there. The pieces in question:
- 12-lb howitzer
- 12-lb light gun
- 12 lb Napoleon
- 3-in Ordnance rifle
- 3-in light rifle
- 3-in James rifle
- 3-in Parrott rifle???
I'm pretty sure some of these are the same, since I don't remember there being more than one 3-in rifle. What exactly differentiates/defines them? Are these all real guns, and if so, are they all field artillery?

Sincerely,
Confused Regimental History Researcher

 

[Mississippian1861]

The 12lb-howitzer refers to the M1841 12-lb Howitzer. The 12lb Light gun probably refers to the Napoleon. 3-in Light Rifle probably refers to the Ordnance Rifle. 3-in Parrott refers to the 10lb Parrott.

 

[Belfoured]

I know next to nothing about artillery pieces, other than that some are light and some are heavy, and in looking over armaments at Harpers Ferry and Nashville I've gotten myself quite confused with the multiple artillery pieces there. The pieces in question:
- 12-lb howitzer
- 12-lb light gun
- 12 lb Napoleon
- 3-in Ordnance rifle
- 3-in light rifle
- 3-in James rifle
- 3-in Parrott rifle???
I'm pretty sure some of these are the same, since I don't remember there being more than one 3-in rifle. What exactly differentiates/defines them? Are these all real guns, and if so, are they all field artillery?

Sincerely,
Confused Regimental History Researcher

All are field guns.

Two and Three likely refer to the same gun, as do Three and Four. Seven is the 10lb Parrott (which was 2.9" until 1863 and then became 3").

Six didn't exist so far as I know. You're stepping into a real mess with "James" rifles. Six probably is intended to be the James 14lb/3.8" rifle. There were other "James" rifles, such as re-bored 3.67" smooth bores, etc.

Thank God you didn't ask about Wiards or 20 lb Parrotts ...

At the outset on the Union side - and pretty much for the duration on the Confederate - the M1841 6lb smooth bore was in use. It began getting replaced on the US side shortly before the war with the M1857 Napoleon.

 

[RedRover]

I know next to nothing about artillery pieces, other than that some are light and some are heavy, and in looking over armaments at Harpers Ferry and Nashville I've gotten myself quite confused with the multiple artillery pieces there. The pieces in question:
- 12-lb howitzer
- 12-lb light gun
- 12 lb Napoleon
- 3-in Ordnance rifle
- 3-in light rifle
- 3-in James rifle
- 3-in Parrott rifle???
I'm pretty sure some of these are the same, since I don't remember there being more than one 3-in rifle. What exactly differentiates/defines them? Are these all real guns, and if so, are they all field artillery?

Sincerely,
Confused Regimental History Researcher

Howitzers fire shells, etc. with such a trajectory to drop them in defilades, or ground not clearly visible. Generally smoothbored...

12-pounder howitzers were generally of the M1841 variety...

M1841 12-pounder howitzer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Guns, are smoothbore or rifled, and principally deliver fire directly upon visible targets or areas, firing principally solid shot.

The 12-pounder light gun, nicknamed, "Napoleon" was somewhat notable for being a "Gun-Howitzer," viz. it was to fire either solid shot like a gun or a shell something like a howitzer. Gibbon's artillery manual of 1860 noted it was considered a likely fix-all...

It's actual name was the 12 pounder light gun:

McClellan directed they be the primary smoothbored gun employed by the US forces...

Firing the 12-pdr Napoleon - Vicksburg National Military Park (U.S. National Park Service)

Firing the 12-pdr Napoleon

www.nps.gov

"Gun-howitzers" like the Napoleon "12 pdr. light gun" continued into the 20th Century... for example the famed French 75mm Gun was also classed as a "gun-howitzer"...

The "James Rifles" were guns rifled with James patent rifling, etc. or perhaps modified/upgraded old smoothbores with James patent rifling. As was previously noted they were various, but generally fired "James shot" or "James shell" designed for that particular rifling. From 1862 on were largely replaced by the 1861 pattern 3-inch rifles, called "Ordnance rifles" which soon became the Army standard rifled gun.


A "Parrot rifle" was notable for having a wrought iron reinforcing band around the breech...

 

[Belfoured]

Howitzers fire shells, etc. with such a trajectory to drop them in defilades, or ground not clearly visible. Generally smoothbored...

View attachment 550951
View attachment 550952


12-pounder howitzers were generally of the M1841 variety...

M1841 12-pounder howitzer - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Guns, are smoothbore or rifled, and principally deliver fire directly upon visible targets or areas, firing principally solid shot.

The 12-pounder light gun, nicknamed, "Napoleon" was somewhat notable for being a "Gun-Howitzer," viz. it was to fire either solid shot like a gun or a shell something like a howitzer. Gibbon's artillery manual of 1860 noted it was considered a likely fix-all...

View attachment 550950

It's actual name was the 12 pounder light gun:

View attachment 550956
View attachment 550957

McClellan directed they be the primary smoothbored gun employed by the US forces...

View attachment 550959




View attachment 550953


View attachment 550954

Firing the 12-pdr Napoleon - Vicksburg National Military Park (U.S. National Park Service)

Firing the 12-pdr Napoleon

www.nps.gov

"Gun-howitzers" like the Napoleon "12 pdr. light gun" continued into the 20th Century... for example the famed French 75mm Gun was also classed as a "gun-howitzer"...

View attachment 550958



The "James Rifles" were guns rifled with James patent rifling, etc. or perhaps modified/upgraded old smoothbores with James patent rifling. As was previously noted they were various, but generally fired "James shot" or "James shell" designed for that particular rifling. From 1862 on were largely replaced by the 1861 pattern 3-inch rifles, called "Ordnance rifles" which soon became the Army standard rifled gun.


A "Parrot rifle" was notable for having a wrought iron reinforcing band around the breech...
View attachment 550955

I would just add that the M1841 12lb field howitzer could also fire canister at "point blank" elevation. In the 18th century howitzers were designed only to fire at elevated angles. They were developed partly because the iron shells of the era were too thinly-walled to withstand the full powder charge used in guns. As a consequence of the reduced charge their range was significantly shorter than that of guns. Even the M1841 had a range well below that of the M1841 6lb smooth bore. The M1857 Napoleon was called a gun-howitzer because it could fire the same ordnance as the howitzer at varying elevations but with a full charge and therefore greater range.

 

[Dan Kohli]

The 12 pound light gun and Napoleon are one and the same. The heavy 12 pounder is the 1841 model of the gun. It did not use explosive shells, that is why it was paired with 24 or 32 pound field howitzer.
The 12 pounder howitzer is the M1841 12 pound field howitzer that was paired with the 6 pound gun. This type of arrangement was preferred during the prewar time period.

 

[Rhea Cole]

You will find this National Park Service Publication about the history of artillery in America very informative.

Link:

https://npshistory.com/series/interpretive/3-1955.pdf

 

[MWood1841]

You will find this National Park Service Publication about the history of artillery in America very informative.

Link:

https://npshistory.com/series/interpretive/3-1955.pdf

Thanks @Rhea Cole , I think @Stryker65 and I might be more confused now after reading through all of the above
I'm in the same boat, have always been confused on artillery identification (lbs, inches, etc)
Does a simple chart exist that kinda breaks it down 'barney' style?
That pamphlet looks pretty cool and thanks for sharing.

 

[rob63]

Some great answers here, but they raise a question I had never thought of before.

According to the info up-thread, the howitzer had a small chamber so that it could fire a reduced charge in order to not break the shell it fired. The 12-lb Napoleon could fire both solid shot and shells, but did not have the smaller chamber for a reduced charge. Was there a change in shell technology that eliminated the need for a reduced charge, or am I wrong about the Napoleon not have a smaller chamber?

 

[DixieRifles]

3-in Parrott refers to the 10lb Parrott.

Interesting. Never heard it referred to as that.

 

[Rhea Cole]

Some great answers here, but they raise a question I had never thought of before.

According to the info up-thread, the howitzer had a small chamber so that it could fire a reduced charge in order to not break the shell it fired. The 12-lb Napoleon could fire both solid shot and shells, but did not have the smaller chamber for a reduced charge. Was there a change in shell technology that eliminated the need for a reduced charge, or am I wrong about the Napoleon not have a smaller chamber?

No. The charge was essentially the same as a six pound cannon. The howitzer charge was for lofting the shell in an arching trajectory. That was what made spherical case ( shrapnel) so effective.

Where as a shell was a hollow ball, case shot contained a timed fuze, small bursting charge & balls. The goal was to have the charge shatter the case & release a shower of balls ten meters above & in front of the target. The impact is dependent on the velocity of the round (+/-) 700 feet / second.

I have seen hundreds of simulated 12 pound spherical case shot fired. When the light is just right you can follow the path until it goes off with a hollow "poop!"

At Stones River Gen Hanson of the Orphan Brigade was killed by the fuze from a spherical case shot.

Two 1841 model 6 pound cannon & a 12 pound howitzer on battery.

The doctrine was for the direct fire of 1841 six pound cannon & the 12 pound howitzer indirect fire to work in concert.

 

[redbob]

And to just add to the confusion, the 12# field gun, 12 #Field Howitzer (the Napoleon) and the 12# Mountain Howitzer all called for different sized canister. Whie all the canister rounds were 4.62" in diameter, they had different sized balls and a different number of balls in each..

 

[redbob]

Interesting. Never heard it referred to as that.

The early 10# Parrotts fired a 2.9"round and it wasn't until the Union standardized the rounds for the Parrott and 3" Ordnance Rifle to 3" that the Parrotts were bored to 3" in about 1863 if I remember correctly.

 

[redbob]

I know next to nothing about artillery pieces, other than that some are light and some are heavy, and in looking over armaments at Harpers Ferry and Nashville I've gotten myself quite confused with the multiple artillery pieces there. The pieces in question:
- 12-lb howitzer
- 12-lb light gun
- 12 lb Napoleon
- 3-in Ordnance rifle
- 3-in light rifle
- 3-in James rifle
- 3-in Parrott rifle???
I'm pretty sure some of these are the same, since I don't remember there being more than one 3-in rifle. What exactly differentiates/defines them? Are these all real guns, and if so, are they all field artillery?

Sincerely,
Confused Regimental History Researcher

The 3" James Rifle actually had a bore of 3.8" as it was a 6# bronze tube that had been bored out to 3.8" or a 14#er. And don't feel bad about being confused, when it comes to the crazy world of Civil War Cannon, we all often are.

 

[Belfoured]

Interesting. Never heard it referred to as that.

I've come across it in a few random accounts. I think it must have been intended to differentiate the change Parrott made in 1863 from the 2.9" bore. Similar to isolated references to the 3" Ordnance Rifle as a "Rodman", which to me is like biting on tinfoil.

 

[Belfoured]

The early 10# Parrotts fired a 2.9"round and it wasn't until the Union standardized the rounds for the Parrott and 3" Ordnance Rifle to 3" that the Parrotts were bored to 3" in about 1863 if I remember correctly.

Yep - the WP Foundry made that change for 1863. I recall trying to look into this at one point but it wasn't clear whether Parrott/West Point Foundry initiated this on their end or the Ordnance Bureau did.

 

[Belfoured]

The 3" James Rifle actually had a bore of 3.8" as it was a 6# bronze tube that had been bored out to 3.8" or a 14#er. And don't feel bad about being confused, when it comes to the crazy world of Civil War Cannon, we all often are.

As we know, "James" is a rabbit hole ...

 

[Belfoured]

No. The charge was essentially the same as a six pound cannon. The howitzer charge was for lofting the shell in an arching trajectory. That was what made spherical case ( shrapnel) so effective.

View attachment 551008
Where as a shell was a hollow ball, case shot contained a timed fuze, small bursting charge & balls. The goal was to have the charge shatter the case & release a shower of balls ten meters above & in front of the target. The impact is dependent on the velocity of the round (+/-) 700 feet / second.

I have seen hundreds of simulated 12 pound spherical case shot fired. When the light is just right you can follow the path until it goes off with a hollow "poop!"

At Stones River Gen Hanson of the Orphan Brigade was killed by the fuze from a spherical case shot.

View attachment 551010
Two 1841 model 6 pound cannon & a 12 pound howitzer on battery.

The doctrine was for the direct fire of 1841 six pound cannon & the 12 pound howitzer indirect fire to work in concert.

I think the confusion is that an earlier post referred to 18th century technology regarding howitzers. The howitzers had a chamber that had two effects: firing at a higher angle and using a reduced charge. As noted, the cast iron technology at the time produced a shell with more fragility. That technology improved in the 19th century with advances in blast furnaces and centrifugal casting.

 

[redbob]

Yep - the WP Foundry made that change for 1863. I recall trying to look into this at one point but it wasn't clear whether Parrott/West Point Foundry initiated this on their end or the Ordnance Bureau did.

I think that Parrott knew that the big money was in the ammunition and not in the tubes and if he had the market cornered on 2,9" rounds then the Union had to come to him.

 

[Belfoured]

I think that Parrott knew that the big money was in the ammunition and not in the tubes and if he had the market cornered on 2,9" rounds then the Union had to come to him.

I would definitely not disagree. IIRC there was a significant reduction in production of the 10lb for about 6 months or so. He did have a cost advantage over the PI Co's 3" rifles (due to their being entirely wrought iron) but increased volume of shell production would make sense as an enticement.