Check out this lousy and sloppy website of mine, which I have created a few years ago but never publicized on the Internet... If my interest picks up, I will enhance this site and create another one for Chinese cannons...


http://chinese-gun.freewebspace.com/index.html

nice stuff.

So why is it that that I've never heard of a battle where Chinese used guns against European invaders?

If I remember correctly, it was the opinion of Joseph Needham, the great sinologist, that Chinese cannons of the late 1500s - early 1600s (indigenous designs as well as copies of Western models) were equivalent to Western cannons in quality...

If I am not wrong, one of the earliest battlefield encounters between the Europeans and the Chinese was when Koxinga using Chinese cannons... had successfully defeated the Dutch who were occupying Taiwan...

Excellent, hope to see more. The Blue Standard formation looks a lot like a typical European army during the Thirty Years War. I once saw a Qing era drawing of Ming soldiers using those bipodded muskets you had under the Qing era - against Manchu cavalry and running away as their line failed.

I wonder how that breechloading musket worked. Did they manually remove the breech piece in action? It almost look like they were one step away from inventing the metallic cartridge shell. Imagine keeping a few spare breech pieces loaded and ready. . .

One issue:

1. Under the Ming section you wrote "In 1558, a total of 10,000 of such weapons were manufactured for the Chinese Imperial Army". Is that a typo, how did the Ming encounter European matchlock guns so early?

Yes... those Qing muskets have the bipod feature, a legacy from the Ming...

The Chinese had captured matchlock guns used by the Japanese pirates during the mid-1500s and set about to reproduce them... as they had done with Portguese breech-loading cannons earlier before...

There is one book on Chinese weapons that quotes from the official Ming document Ming Hui Dian 明会典 on the production of 10,000 arquebuses in 1558...

Another academic source states that it was the Chinese leader of a Sino-Japanese pirate band that taught the Japanese pirates based in Kyushu island how to manufacture these weapons... He was captured and the Chinese official in charge gave him the responsibility to make these weapons for the Chinese Imperial Army... The fellow probably learned it from the Portuguese traders/pirates/smugglers he came into contact with...

RE: I wonder how that breechloading musket worked. Did they manually remove the breech piece in action? It almost look like they were one step away from inventing the metallic cartridge shell. Imagine keeping a few spare breech pieces loaded and ready.

The principle is based on the Portuguese breech-loading cannons... You prepare a cartridge filled with gunpowder and a bullet, and slot it into the chamber... insert your fuse and voila... There was no need for ramrods... It was an innovative and cool weapon with a faster reload...

The Matchlock mechnaism was invented during the 15th century, so it quite conceivable that the matchlock firearms would reach China by then.

What was the cartridge material made of? Iron, brass? How was the fuse attached? Do you mean like a external wick? In which case is there still a trigger mechanism?

I was kinda curious of why the Qing Imperial Cavalry warrior carries many weapon (mathlock,sabre,lance,bows) and how can he use them effectively in battle?

[Yun: HaSY's other post on arrows has been moved to the Bows thread]

Hi guys

I have a soft copy of the Chinese musket manual "Shen Qi Pu" or "Magically Efficient Tools Manual" of 1598, authored by Zhao Shizhen, who developed what is most likely the world's earliest type of breech-loading musket... in 32 jpegs, in a zip file... If you guys want a copy, pls post your email on this thread....

Can you give me some more info about Chinese musket manual "Shen Qi Pu" or "Magically Efficient Tools Manual" of 1598, authored by Zhao Shizhen?

Shenqi Pu was written in response to deficiencies in Chinese arquebuses observed during the war in Korea. Zhao Shizhen proposed the adoption of the chedian chong, an arquebus with five smaller secondary barrells, and the xunlei chong, a five-barrelled heavy arquebus. Both were designed to increase the rate of fire by allowing one barrell to be fired after another.

Zhao Shizhen also proposed a modification of the arquebus for the windy and rainy weather of the northern frontier. This had a chamber for the pan that could be opened or shut with a switch, and also a rain cover. The weapon was called the xuanyuan chong.

Thomas' computer is having problems right now, but if you send him your e-mail address he will send the Shenqi Pu files to you as soon as he's got it fixed.

I'd like a copy of that Mr. Chen
email: danpt2000@yahoo.com

Thanks in advance. I'm really learning a lot about military history of China...

Dear Thomas,

I would like to beg you for a copy of "Shenqi pu".

Please mailto:artak_malik-zoda@mail.ru

If there are any more treatises - I want to get it all (as I try to make the appropriate view on the activity of Qi Jiguang here in Russia).

Waiting for your letter,

Alexey.

Dear Yun,

Thanks a lot for info.

Have you got any Chinese treatises in your own? The period of late Ming (General Qi etc.) and early Qing would be highly appreciated!!!

Then regarding the rain cover for match - I met in Korean sources that a special cover of oil-soaked paper was invented in 1724 by Korean master to protect match from drizzling rain. What is true?

How did the 5 smaller barrells work? As a revolver? Or were they ignited by turn?

Do you think these 5-barrelled guns were really used in field battles against Japanese or Manchu/Mongols?

Best regards,

Alexey.

Alexey, I'm afraid I am as yet unable to answer your questions as I have not read the Shenqi Pu carefully (I also received my copy from Thomas a few weeks ago). But here is a picture of the Xunlei Chong from the Shenqi Pu:

What is right - Shunlei chong or Xunlei chong? How did they ignite charges in barrells? There is no matchlock and revolver device. Was it powder-train?

So, another question - is "Shenqi pu" in modern Chinese (i.e. translation) or is it the re-print of the original treatise?

And if Thomas fails with "Shenqi pu" within this week could you re-send me a copy? Thomas is too difficult to catch and I am afraid of it...

Best regards,

Alexey.

'Xunlei chong' is right - sorry for the earlier typo. It uses a snapping matchlock mechanism, although this may not be evident from the diagram. When firing, the five barrells are rotated such that each in turn gets aligned with the matchlock and fired - essentially the revolver style of mechanism, although the revolution was probably done manually. The weapon rested on an axe with a fork at the end of its haft. At the rear end of the arquebus was a spearhead that could be used for close-quarter fighting after the bullets ran out.

The Shenqi pu that Thomas Chen is a reprint of the original, with all original pictures. There is no modern Chinese translation that I know of.



OK.

Chinese characters and meanings for these three types of arquebus:

xunlei chong 迅雷铳 - "swift thunder arquebus"

chedian chong (earlier mistakenly written as zhidian chong) 掣电铳 - "flashing lightning arquebus"

xuanyuan chong 轩辕铳 - "Yellow Emperor arquebus" [the legendary Yellow Emperor or Huang Di 黄帝 was named Xuanyuan 轩辕]

TwinkieDP & Altaica Militarica

pls check your email...

Can i also get a copy please?of "Shen Qi Pu"
email:

done...

Thanks a lot

re: The Shenqi pu that Thomas Chen is a reprint of the original, with all original pictures. There is no modern Chinese translation that I know of.


Mine is a Japanese copy of the Chinese original...

Wei Feng, my email bounced back... pls clear your mailbox...

Could you sent me the copy again please me mailbox was full.it is clear now

Could you sent me the copy one more time please .i have mircroft offices email now

Dear Thomas,

Thanks a lot. I received the file but I wonder what is the format of the file to open it?

By the way, Thomas, could you share a copy of General Qi's manual? It would be so kind of you as I requested for such a copy the Institute of Asian and African researches in Moscow, but they do not have this treatise (nor "Jixia xinshu" neither "Lianbing shiji") and these manuals are almost unknown here in Russia (except for my short paper about the life and activity of General Qi and Mao Yuanyi according to the Korean sources here is no serios paper for this manuals).

Best regards,

Alexey

Dear Tomas,

Unfortunately the file tries to open as TXT-file. You wrote you have this manual as JPEG-files. I think it occurs something wrong when sending.

Could you re-send the manual in JPEG-format?

Best regards,

Alexey.

Thank you very much sir! Although my chinese is very bad, can't even read a newspaper , I'll probably have my brother or a friend look at it. Thanks again...

And I, Thomas, I'm
firebat582@yahoo.com

Could I have a copy please?

hi, install this software to decompress the file i sent you to view the 32 jpeg files...

http://www.pkware.com/business_and_develop...ndows&fam=pkzip



email sent to you...

-------------------

Wei Feng, your mailbox still bounces back... pls have 8 megs free space for your mailbox...

Question: Why was the musket so much more popular in Japan as compared to China?

BTW, how large was the musket component in the Qing army during the Kangxi reign?

Not really - the arquebus became important in China about the same time as Japan: in the 1550s. The wokou ('Japanese pirates') were using arquebuses extensively - even though the majority of them were Chinese rather than Japanese, their arms were purchased in Japan. The Ming coastal armies then adopted arquebuses to counter the wokou, and after their success in this they also adopted arquebuses on the northern frontier. In the wars with the Manchus, arquebuses were heavily used, as were European-style cannon after the 1620s. Indeed, the Tokugawa shogunate actually downplayed the arquebus in favour of the sword from the 17th century onwards, so as to preserve the social primacy of the samurai. The Qing had no such reservations about guns, but in the century of peace (the 18th century) there was too little incentive to make the use of advanced firearms and cannon more widespread in the Qing armies.

I'm aware that the arquebus was widely use during the Qing, but from what I've heard the Ming guns were inferior in both numbers and quality to those of the Japanese under Hideyoshi. with the exception of Ming cannons, which were superior.

Try this Link http://http://www.musketeer.ch/blackpowder/handgonne.html

I stated earlier in this thread that the chedian chong 掣电铳 ("flashing lightning arquebus) in the Shenqi Pu was an arquebus with five smaller secondary barrells. This was a mistake arising from a misinterpretation of the phrase zichong. I understood these to be secondary barrells, but after discussion with Thomas Chen I now know them to actually be self-contained cartridges of gunpowder and projectile - an improvement over the slow separate loading of powder and ball in muzzle-loaders, and possibly the earliest version of the modern bullet. Thomas Chen showed me that these cartridges were fitted into an opening in the rear of the arquebus, and then replaced after firing. Each arquebus had five such cartridges - a relatively small firepower, but compensated for by high rate of fire. These were indeed, as Thomas Chen mentioned, very likely the first breech-loading small arms in the world.

The inspiration for this design actually came from the Folangji Pao, or Portuguese ("Frankish") cannon. These were breech-loaders each equipped with five large cartridges of gunpowder and cannon ball. As the Ming Chinese came into contact with the Portuguese on the southern coast in the mid- and late-16th century, they adopted the improved firearms technology of the Portuguese. The second wave of this borrowing came towards the end of the Ming (the 1620s), when both the Ming court and the Manchus raced to introduce the newer form of Portuguese cannon (the Hongyi Pao or "Red-haired Barbarian cannon"). These had a larger calibre and were mounted on a three-wheeled carriage, a configuration essentially similar to the Western artillery used from the 17th century to the present day. The Jesuits and their supporters in the Ming court (notably the Christians Xu Guangqi and Sun Yuanhua) urged the Ming court to invite Portuguese artillery troops from Macao to come to the north and teach artillery techniques to the Ming army. The Jesuits also supervised the casting of Hongyi Pao. However, xenophobic ministers at the court opposed this reliance on the Portuguese 'pirates' and 'barbarians', and in the end only a small number of Portuguese were allowed into north China, where they were stationed in the Shandong naval base of Dengzhou (now Penglai) to conduct training of Ming artillery troops.

A few catastrophes hindered the Ming army's full-scale adoption of Hongyi Pao and gave the Manchus an advantage instead. One was the Manchu capture of many new Ming cannons and artillery experts at the fall of Yongping, which were formed into an artillery unit among the surrendered Ming troops that eventually became the Han Eight Banners. Another was the unjust execution of Yuan Chonghuan, who had pushed strongly for the modernization of Ming artillery and may have overseen the killing of Nurhachi with a Hongyi Pao at the Manchu siege of Ningyuan. The last was the mutiny of Ming generals Geng Zhongming and Shang Kexi at Dengzhou, which killed Texeira, the commander of the Portuguese artillerymen, and led to the defection of Geng and Shang to the Manchus by sea. With Geng and Shang were a large portion of the newly-trained Ming artillerymen and their cannons. Shortly before this, the Manchus (now under Hongtaiji) had successfully cast their own Hongyi Pao, and the addition of the forces of Geng and Shang to their army was a great boost. To make matters worse, Sun Yuanhua (who commanded the Dengzhou garrison) was executed for having failed to suppress the rebellion, and Xu Guangqi also passed away shortly after.

With their new Hongyi Pao formations, the Manchus were able to achieve a string of successful sieges. The tide of the war began to turn against the Ming.

Picture of the Hongyi Pao:

Note that the Qing changed the word for 'yi' in Hongyi Pao from one meaning 'barbarian' to one meaning 'coat', because of the Manchus' sensitivity towards being called 'barbarians' by the Han. This is reflected in the text in the above picture.

Very interesting Yun, amazing the innovations even then!

So Yun-
Can you tell us the calibre of these early guns and cannons? How about approximate ranges, as well as a comparison between the native Chinese designs and the newer European ones?
What sort of ammunition did they use? Would some sort of explosive shells be available at the time, or something like canister shot for antipersonnel use? Or was it always solid ball ammunition?

For that kind of info, Altaica Militarica would be your best bet

I've also just lent my Chinese book on ancient Chinese firearms (by Liu Xu, an expert in this area) to Thomas Chen. So any relevant info in there would be with him...

He did call to tell me yesterday that according to the book, the chedian chong was rediscovered from the Shenqi Pu after the fall of the Ming, and revived for use during the Qing dynasty. However, it was never used in large numbers.

Yun is right.... The breech loader musket developed in the late Ming reappeared again in the Qianlong era... as mentioned by Liu Xu's book... Liu Xu seems to be unaware that the prototype first appeared during the late Ming though...

Dear Thomas!

I see you have some info regarding the early fire-arm tactics in China (late Ming - Qing era). On your site I have even found the picture of a matchlock from "Jixiao xinshu" (edition of 1588 - here in Russia we consider the earliest edition survived is of 1598). Could you share this original info (especially from the book of General Qi)?

And then I will send you by e-mail a very specific passage from "Wu bian" (app. 1555) regarding the technology of swords production - I need you kind opinion regarding some details.

Best regards,

Alexey.

Let me substitute Yun for a while

1. The bore-hole was of 1-2 inches in average. But there were some rare examples of 100 mm. cannons (3 zipao/changeable cartidges of this type of Ming cannons were found in Korea).
2. One Korean military officer in XVII century said it had the range of 2000 paces (or bu in Chinese) and he begged to send more such cannons to substitute close-ranged cannons in a fortress on sea shore to protect it from pirates. I think it is not true - as 2000 bu is 3 km! But if the pace is 0,75 meters - it is equal to 1,5 km and it seems to be a little bit more true.
3. Mainly there were solid balls as the bore-holes were very small in general.
4. There were some special ammunition such as explosive bombs (tian lei) and grape-shots (qixing pao) but grape-shots were difficult to use effectively with small caliber canons.
Bombs were used only with a kind of mortar. But they were not in common use as they were very dangerous for cannoneers. E.g. during the siege of Albazin in 1686 Qing troops used solid balls and huojian to bombard the fortress. Qing P-o-W said th Russians they had only several cannons which could use bombs and only 36 pieces of bombs were made by Jesuits for that siege. But those bombs did not reach the battlefield untill the end of the siege.
So folanji pao never used bombs.
5. In general - yes, they were.

Best regards,

Alexey.

The earliest edition of the Ji Xiao Xin Shu preserved in China appears to be the the 1588 edition, according to the preface of my edition of the book... My book is based on the 1588 edition...

There appears to be an earlier edition but that seems to have been lost...


I have a copy of certain sections of the "Wu Bian" as well.... How can I help??

"Yepona mama!" Russian Sinology lost its position completely!!! Here we know only about 1595 year edition of "Jixiao xinshu" (I was wrong saying 1598 ) Then there are no information about Tang Shunzhi and his treatise - our scholars think it was completely lost. They even call it "a book about wushu" and date it XIV century!!!

The best way to quit with this ignorance is to share info. Could you share your electronic copies of Chinese treatises with me? I would be very grateful to you as I wopuld get the chance to look through the originals in researches. Of course, the "courtesy of Thomas Chen" would be indicated everywhere!!! Even constructing my website I have given links to your sites about swords and fire-arm both.

For today I found only several passages from "Jixiao xinshu" in Korean translation (you know that book - "Muye dobo tongji"). But it is not the original text like that one you partially published on your fine site about swords (I found it very useful to fill the gap of my own ignorance regarding Chiniese weaponry as well as your second site about Chinese fire-arm). This is only Korean translation(even very well done but translation). Our scholars think the treatise is the wushu manual So I went on my searching and foud the "Shefa pian" of this book about Chinese archery during XVI century. So it is all we have here in Russia regarding General Qi and his inheritage.

As far as I understood you are not professional scholar. Is it right? If so you know much more about Chinese warfare than the most part of Russian specialists in Sinology!

Regarding "Wu bian" - e.g. there is a passage about melting iron. What does Tang Shunzhi mean - cast iron or ore? The word shentie means "cast iron" but it seems sometimes to be "ore" in the description.

Then there is a passage: "foundry workers using zhjia (I have no idea what is it - Lim Donggu says it was bamboo tubes, but translating literally we have "bamboo grip") hammer the mass pouring out from the narrow pipe with wooden (!) mallets to make an ingot"!!!

There is another passage, directly following the previous: "Sometimes they use zhudao (literally "bamboo knife") to paint on the vine vessels easily". What does it mean? Why did it follow the passage about melting and hammering the iron mass into ingot?

All these problems are result of lack of original sources

I think it is not convenient to solve these matters on the CHF (as it is not sharing the knowledges but real scientific work and it could seem to be dull and boresome for most part of people here). If you have not something against could I bother you regarding this matter by e-mail?

Best regards,

Alexey.

Will get back to you on this....

OK!

The first results of "Shenqi pu" studying - I see the text is not complete as in some juan's there are no end formula "the end of juan # ..." and the pagination is not complete too. So I think we have only the digest of the treatise.

Could you obtain the rest of the treatise?

Best regards,

Alexey.

Sorry Alexey, the softcopy is the only incomplete version that I have (Yun has also remarked earlier that it seemed incomplete, which I was unaware as I did not study the entire text; it was from a Japanese library website and I had assumed it was complete... I will try to obtain a complete version from the university library...

I have sent you the original Chinese text and the partial English language translation of the chapter on iron and steel of the "Wu Bian". Please check your email...

Thanks a lot for your e-mail message. I have received these pages. The results of my research of them is almost overwhelming - prof. J. Needham was hardly wright having given such a translation as he did.

Please check your e-mail as I am to consult with you first before tell it to everybody.

Regarding the "Shenqi pu" treatise - as a most part of late Minig or Qing military treatises they are almost unknown in Russia. I plan to start with their translation after obtaining my diploma (I specialize in early Russian-Qing relations).

Best regards,

Alexey.

Miniature reconstruction of the multi-barrel gun.

http://jczs.sina.com.cn/pc/2005-01-31/29/1099.html

By the way, Thomas - why do you think that Chinese matchlocks were borrowed from Japanese pirates?

Could you give the exact quotations from "Ming Huidian" and "Jixiao xinshu" (or somewhere else) to prove it?

Best regards,

Alexey.

You can find out everything you would possibly want to know about Chinese gunpowder and firearms development by reading Joseph Needham's "Science and Civilisation in China" Volume 5 Part 7 (The Gunpowder Epic) which I have in my hand right now. It has more information and illustrations than you can shake a firelance at. Check it out at your nearest university library. I've read it cover to cover

By the way, if you'd like to own an nine-barreled Qing blunderbuss, here's your chance:

http://cgi.ebay.com/Antiuqe-Chinese-Blunde...1QQcmdZViewItem

[I posted that for educational purposes and I'm not affiliated in any way with that seller nor am I trying to hawk his antiques]