Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

GUNPOWDERGUNPOWDER AND AND ARABARAB FIREARMSFIREARMS ININ MIDDLEMIDDLE AGESAGES

BYBY A.A. RAHMANRAHMAN ZAKYZAKY

GUNPOWDERGUNPOWDER (BARUD)(BARUD)

THERETHERE isis nono certaintycertainty asas toto thethe actualactual datedate ofof thethe inventioninvention ofof gun­gun- powder.powder. TheThe evidenceevidence thatthat thethe ChineseChinese possessedpossessed itit inin ancientancient timestimes isis notnot conclusive. conclusive. AmongAmong thethe claimantsclaimants ofof discoveringdiscovering gunpowdergunpowder are are

Chinese,Chinese. Indians,Indians. Greeks, Greeks. Arabs,Arabs.z English English" and and Germans.Germans. WhoWho firstfirst thoughtthought ofof propellingpropelling aa ballball throughthrough aa metal metal tubetube by explodingexploding gun­ gun- powderpowder isis unknown; anyhow;anyhow; itit certainlycertainly 'was was notnot Monk Monk BertholdBerthold Schwartz.Schwartz. IsIs therethere anyany probability thatthat RogerRoger BaconBacon (c.(c. 1214-1292)1214-1292) waswas thethe discovererdiscoverer ofof gunpowder?gunpowder? HisHis formulaformula waswas hiddenhidden awayaway inin crypticcryptic writings writings onlyonly recentlyrecently solved. solved. Rearranging Rearranging thethe lettersletters ofof hishis strangestrange words,words, wewe get:get: «take<(take77 partsparts ofof saltpetre,saltpetre, 55 ofof young hazelwoodhazelwood (charcoal),(charcoal), andand 55 ofof sulphur».sulphur>>. ThoughThough BaconBacon suggestssuggests thatthat byby meansmeans ofof thisthis explosive explosive mixturemixture anan enemy'senemy's armyarmy «might<(might be eithereither blownblown upup bodilybodily oror putput toto flightflight by thethe terrorterror causedcaused byby thethe explosion»,explosion>>,therethere isis nothingnothing inin hishis writingswritings toto leadlead usus toto supposesuppose thatthat hehe everever contemplatedcontemplated usingusing itit asas itit isis inin firearms.firearms.'1 Almost Almost atat thethe samesame time,time, anan arabarab AI-HassanAl-Hassan al-Rammahal-Rammah (f1.(fl. c.c. 1275-95)1275-95)wrote mote aa militarymilitary treatisetreatise inin whichwhich hehe clearlyclearly indicatedindicated thatthat saltpetresaltpetre waswas thethe primaryprimary substance substance forfor pyrotechnicpyrotechnic com­ com- positions, andand describeddescribed carefully carefully how itit waswas separatedseparated fromfrom otherother saltssalts byby solutionsolution andand repeatedrepeated crystallization. crystallization. ContemporaryContemporary alsoalso isis thethe bookbook ofof FiresFires forfor thethe BurningBurning ofof EnemiesEnemies by MarcusMarcus GraecusGraecus 2 (f1.(fl. c.c. 1300).1300). AsAs toto China,China, thethe earliestearliest evidence evidence forfor thethe manufacture ofof saltpetresaltpetre isis inin thethe ChineseChinese records records before A. D.D. 1200.1200. TheThe AndalusianAndalusian IbnIbn aI-Bayal-Baytartar (d.(d. 1248)1248) mentions itit asas «Chinese<(Chinesesnow». snow)>. ItIt seemsseems thatthat thethe ChineseChinese have mademade use ofof theirtheir discoverydiscovery chieflychiefly forfor manufacturing fireworks.fireworks. TheThe Arabs,Arabs, thanksthanks toto theirtheir communicationcommunication withwith ChinaChina sincesince thethe tenthtenth centurycentury oror before,before, werewere not not longlong beforebefore theythey learntlearnt thethe artart ofof makingmaking gunpowder;gunpowder; and, and, asas itit wouldwould seem,seem, atat firstfirst theythey mademade objectsobjects suchsuch asas

I' J.J. F.F. C.C. FULLER:FULLER:ArmamentA~marnent andand History,Hzstovy, NewNew YorkYork 1945,1945, p. 79.79. SeeSee also:also: W.M. 1.L. HIME:HIME.TheThe OriginOrtgzn ofof Artillery,Avtzllevy, 1915,1915, pp.pp. 112-113;112-113; alsoalso hishis GunpowderGunpowder andand Ammunition,Arnrnunztzon, 1904,1904, p.p. 142.142. 2 SeeSee later.later.

45

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

crackers, which would explode in a case. From such a use of powder as this, to putting it withwith a projectile into a tube for the purpose of discharging the projectile, a very long stepstep had to be taken.taken.33 It was by the Arabs, that this step step waswas taken, and thus with justice, they may claim to have performed an important part in the invention of the can­can- non at least as the Chinese themselves: The earliest indication of

FIG.FIG I.-Earliestl -Earltest typetype ofof aa cannon.cannon FromFrom thethe ms.ms ofof WALTERWALTEROFOF MILLEMETE:MILLEMCTE.De nobilitatihusnobzlztatzbus sapientiissapzentzzs etet prudenciisprudenczzs regum,regum, fromfrom about about 1326-271326-27 (Library(Library ofof ChristChrist ChurchChurch CoiL,Coll, Oxford,Oxford, n.On: 92,92, fol. 70').70'). R,l?. {I1/49Lj g

cannoncannon inin ChinaChina isis extantextant examplesexamples clearlyclearly dateddated 1356,1356, 1357,1357, andand 1377.1377.44 TheThe firstfirst pictorial evidence evidence ofof aa cannoncannon inin EnglandEngland isis foundfound inin thethe Mille­Mille- mete manuscript ofof 13271327 portrayingportraying an an armoured armoured knightknight touchingtouching thethe linstocklinstock toto aa crude, crude, vase-shaped piecepiece loadedloaded withwith aa stoutstout featheredfeathered bolt 5 (Fig.(Fig. 1).1).

,' CIIARLESCEIARLESBOUTELL:BOUTELL: ArmsArms andand Armour,Armour, pp.pp. 216-217.216-217. , L.L. C.C. GOODRICH:GOODRICH:NoteNote onon fewfew earlyearly ChineseCbznese bombards,bombards, «!sis»,<(Isis)>,XXXV (1944),(1944), 211,211, figs. figs. 11 andand 2;2; ibid.,zbid, XXXVI (1946),(1946), 122,122, n.n. 27,27, 120,251.120, 251. S ChristChrist Church, Church, OxfordOxford Ms.Ms. ofof WALTERWALTEROFOF MILLEMETE:MILLEMETE:DeDe OfficiisOfficzzs regum,regum, foL€01. 70.70. ColonelColonel RimeHime offersoffers historicalhistorical evidenceevidence toto showshow thatthat gunsguns withwith powderpowder werewere importedimported intointo EnglandEngland fromfrom GhentGhent inin 13141314 (?).(?). AtAt anyany rate,rate, thethe newnew weaponweapon soonsoon spreadspread throughoutthroughout westernwestern Europe,Europe, sincesince bombards areare mentionedmentioned inin thethe accountaccount ofof aa siegesiege ofof Metz inin 13241324 andand inin aa FlorentineFlorentine documentdocument ofof 1326.1326. 46

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

There is not enough evidence of the use of cannon in India u~rduntil the fourteenth century and the beginning of 15th century, when they were very common in the Daccan States. The reason was that these states were in contact by sea with Arabia, Iran and Turkey, from which they received artillery and engineers. It is said that Sultan Mahmoud Shah Bahmani installed a firearms factory in 1365. Sultan Mahmoud BaykaraBaykarB with the help of Turkish gunners sank with his guns a Portu­Portu- gese ship at Diu in 1509. Bahdur Shah of Gudjarat excelled his contem­contem- poraries in Artillery; his master gunner, Rumi Khan, cast many cannons.

BARUD (GUNPOWDER)

Perhaps the first word used by thethe Arabic-speaking peoples to denote the new saltpetre-containing powder, a word of universal ap­ap- plication, was «dawa»ctdawb (remedy), medicament, or drug. It Waswas in fact the term used by Hassan al-Rammahal-Rammiih (d. circa 1295), to denote the mixture used to fill the «midfa»<(midfa)>(gun): 10 parts of «barud»,ttbarud,, 2 of char­char- coal, and 1.5 of sulphur. The form of the word «barud»ttbarud), appears for the first time twice in the Djami' of Ibn aI-Bayal-Baytartar (d. 1248),61248); which is the foremost Arabic and medieval treatise of its kind. It is stated there that abarud);.«barud» is the name given in the Maghrib by the common people and physicians to the <. Again, for Ibn al-Kutubi (£1.(fl. about 1310), «barud»ctbarud,, only meant saltpetre. From the mention of «barud»ctbarud), in Ibn ai-Bayal-Baytar,tar, Romocki concluded that saltpetre first came to the Arabs from China in c. 1225-50, and the Arabs then passed on the knowledge of it to Europe, where it was known to Roger Bacon in 1248.1248.77 AlXJmariAl:Umari (d. c. 1348) in his «Ta'rif»ctTa'rif)> twice uses the word «barud».ctbarud)>. In one instance, he is talking about a substance incorporated in the «naphthactnaphtha pots»pots), (Kawarir al-Naft), projectiles used in naval warfare. In the other, he is talking about Makahil al-Barud, where the word could be taken to refer to a propulsive saltpetre compound.

, IBN AL-BAYTAR, part 2, p. 306, 151, Cairo, 1291 H. See also:also. GEORGE SARTON: IntroducttonInlroduclion 10to theIhe HzstoryHistory 0/of Science, vol. II,11, part 11,II, p. 663. 7' ROMOCKI:Geschichte,Geschtchte, I, 38-39.

47

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

HASSAN AL-RAMMAH

Circa (1275-1295) Hassan al-Rammahal-Rammih Najm aI-Din al-Din Ahdab, a Moslem author contributed an Arabic treatise entitled: Al-Furusiyahwa al-mal-muna-una­ sebscb al-Harbiya al-Harbzya (Horsemanship and strategms of war). This treatise exists in two Paris Arabic manuscripts, BNEN ancient fonds 2825 (old 1128) and fonds AsselinAsse1in 643. The introduction says that the book con­con- tains «all military operations, the different ways of using the lance, the mace, and the arrow: ways of mixing materials, constructing machines, communication of fire, etc., naval combats, and other things no less curious»,curious)>,all for the advancement of Islam. Pyrotechnics, how-how­ ever, play the most important role. The manuscript says: «The<sieges, when a place is to be set on fire, in saps when doors covered with iron are to be burnt, when pots are to be thrown by mangonels,mangone1s, pots with narrow necks, clubs, fire-lances, instruments for distillation, the proportions (recipes), smokes, flying fire or rockets, flowers (fireworks), lance-heads, cups, birds, and moons)>?moons».s An anonymous work in ms. 2825 cites the same two authors as Hassan al-Rammah,al-Rammih, and another (different) al-Rammah. It professes to reveal all the secrets and describes the purification of saltpetre by a process of simple crystallisation.crystallisation?9 Hassan describes the purification of saltpetresalt~etre(barud)fbarud) bvby treatment of the solution with wood ashes (which would precipitate deliquescent calcium and magnesium salts) and crystal­crystal- lisation.''lisation. 11 He considers saltpetre the fundamental substance of pyro-pyro­ technics. From Hassan's explained methods, Sarton says that this is far more important than it may seem, for the impurities of saltpetre are hygroscopic and thus tend to destroy its value. The discovery of salt­salt- pttrepetre and its uses was one thing, and to purify was another. Sarton also agrees that the «barud»ctbarud)> mentioned in Hassan's military treatise un-

, Extracts from the Kitab al-furusiyah, in Arabic and French are given by JJOSEPIIOSEPIl TOUSSAINT REINAUD & lLDEPHoNsEIIDEPHONSEFAV~:FAvE: Histoire de l'artillerie, 18re1""' partie. Du Feu gue'gois,gregois, des feuxfeux de guerre et des origines de les poudres ab canon (Paris 1845). See also: J. T. REINAUD:RElNAUD: De l'art militaire rnilitaire chez les Arabes (J.(I. Asiatique, vol.vo!. 12, 193-237, 1848). This deals with a1-Hassan'sal-Hassan's treatise and others of thethe same kind (SARTON, vol.vo!. 11,II, part 11,II, p. 1040). See also: H. L. HIME:HI~IE: Gunpowder and Ammunition; J. R. PARTINGTON:A History of Greek firefire and Gunpowder, Cambridge, W.Heffer, 1960, pp. 200-201. 9 FAvB,FAVE, in: Napoleon,Napoleol1, Etudes surstir le passe'passe et l'avel1irl'auenir de l'Artillerie,I'Artillerie, 1862, Ill,111, 34; HIME: The Origins of Artillery, 1915, p. 19; PARTINGTON,o.O. c.,C., p. 201. In10 A translation is given by MERCIER:Le Feu Gregois,Gre'gois, Paris 1952, p. 116.

48

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

doubtedly is."is. 1I From thethe days of Hassan (closing decades of thethe 13th century) onwards the identity of sbarud),«barud>~ with saltpetre inin Arab sources cannot be contested.I2contested. '2 The purification of saltpetre by crystallisation is described by Roger Bacon (1214-1292), who may also have usedused wood ashes, but the first reference to the use of the latter isis by Hassan al-al­ Rammiih.13Rammiih. 13 Hassan al-Rammiih describes various kinds of incendiary arrows and lances,lances, andilnd he describes and illustratesillustrates what has been supposed to bebe a torpedo (Romocki: Geschichte, p. 71, fig. 14). This is called ccthe«the egg wich moves itself and burns),,burns», and thethe illustration and texttext suggest at least thatthat itit was intendedintended toto move on the surface of water. Two sheet iron pans were fastened togethertogether and made tighttight by felt; thethe flattenedflattened pearshaped vessel was filledfilled 'Withwith <(naphtha>>,«naphtha», metal filings, and good mixtures (probably containing saltpetre), and thethe apparatus was provided with tgotwo rods, and propelled by a large rocket.I4rocket. '4 Such an apparatus is not described in Chinese works. The question as to whether Hassan was acquainted with the explo­explo- sive, as distinguished from the incendiary or pyrotechnic, use of gun­gun- powder was discussed by Fave/FavC,155 who said: «Many<{Manyof the mixtures given by Hassan al-Rammiih could also ex­ ex- plode, but no mention of an action of exploding a cannon was ever given in his book; the passages in which he mentions it are perhaps not understandable or he does not describe it because the explosive action was very well known and is without use in war. Whatever it may be, it is certain thatthat the Arabs, thus manipulating real gunpowder inin various proportions, must have experienced unexpected explosions...explosions.. . The ex­ex- ~losionsplosions were more to be feared of at the time of Hassan than at the time of Marcus Graecus, because the preparation of saltpetre had been im-im­ proved (its purification with wood-ashes).»wood-ashes).), Another Arabic manuscript, copied at the end of the fifteenth century for a Mamluk Sultan of Egypt exists in the Asiatic Museum of Lenin­Lenin- grad. It once belonged to Count de Rzevuski, l11ldand was known as the St. Petersburg Ar. Ms. It is entitled «CollectionctCollection combining the various branches of the art»,art>>,and is ornamented with illuminations. Reinaud and FaveFavC suggested 1300-50 A. D. for its original date of composition, ,ince~inceit cites Hassan al-Rammiih and mentions Ghiiziin, Ghazan, Mongol Khan

11 SAI\TON:SARTONIntrod~ctzou,Introduction, 11, pppp. 29, 1037, 1040.1040 12IZ AYALON: Gunpowder and FirearmsFzvearms inzn the Mamluk Kzngdom,Kingdom, pp. 42. Ll" PI\I\T1NGTON,PARTINGTON,ibid.,zbzd, p.p 314.314 "'VAKTINGTON,PAI\TINGTON, ibid.,zbid, pp. 203.203 "IF Etudes,Etf/des, 111,Ill, p.p 33.

49 4

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

of Persia, who died in 1304. The work is very methodical, but the sections on incendiaries are less detailed than those of Hassan. Reinaud and FaveFavt attributed it to Shams aI-Dinal-Din Mohammad, who died at Damas­Damas- cus in 1350, while Romocki regarded the author as unknown. In thethe manuscript, the name «midfa'» <(midfa')>is used for an instrument for projecting arrows or bullets, and Reinaud and FavtFave 16l6 regarded it as a gun. It says:

FIG. 2.-Mzdfar2.-Midfa' from an Arab manuscript. The original ms. from about 1300, the copy from 1474, made for a Mamluk sultan of Egypt (Once in thethe coIl.coll. of the Count r3 of Rzevuski, now in the Asiatic Institute, Inst. Wostokowedenia A. W., Leningrad). K.h.i lq/.q.?'3

<(Description«Description of the drug (mixture) to be introduced in the madfa'a (cannon) with its proportions: barud, ten; charcoal two drachmes, sul­ sul- phur one and a half drachmes. Reduce the whole into a thin powder and fill with it one third of the madfa'a. Do not put more because it might explode. This is why you should go toto the turner and ask him to make a wooden madfa'a whose size must be in proportion with its

16 Quoted from PARTINGTON,pp. 204-205. Wsewolod Arendt in 1936 published it in Russian.

50

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

muzzle.muzzle. IntroduceIntroducethe themixture mixture(drug) (drug)strongly; strongly;add addthe thebunduk bunduk(balls) (balls) ororthe thearrow arrowand andput putfire fireto tothe thepriming. priming. TheThemadfa'a madfa'alength lengthmust mustbe be ininproportion proportionwith withthe thehole. hole. IfIfthe themadfa'a madfa'a17 l7was wasdeeper deeperthan thanthe the muzzle'smuzzle'swidth, width,this thiswould wouldbe bea defect.a defect. TakeTakecare careof ofthe thegunners. gunners. BeBe caref~l»careful>>(Figs.(Figs. 2-3). 2-3).

Flc.FIG3.-Tbe 3.-The ArabAmblext textfrom fvomIhe thesame samemanuscripl, manzlscnpt,wilh zu~th{I descripliona dercrzpt~onofof how hozu totoserve servethe themid/a'. mtdfa' it.3.i'/(GO 1:.>-0

LIBERLIBERIGNIUM IGNIUMOF OFMARCUS MARCUSGRAECUS GRAECUS

Now,Now,we wediscuss discussbriefly brieflythe thetreatise treatiseof ofMarcus MarcusGraecus. Graecus. ThisThisis is ananimportant importantdocument documentin inthe thehistory historyof ofincendiaries incendiariesand andgunpowder gunpowder -known-known asasthe theBook Bookof ofFires Firesfor forthe theburning burningof ofenemies, enemies,which 'whichis isat­ at- tributedtributedto toMark Markthe theGreek. Greek. OfOfthis thisbook, book,two twomanuscripts manuscriptsexist existin inthe the BibliothequeBibliothPqueNationale Nationale(Paris), (Paris),BN BN7156-and 7156-and BNBN7158; 7158;and andtwo twoin in

" "Most Mostprobably probablya woodena woodentube. tube.

515 1

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

Munich (Munich Royal Library 267, and Munich 197). There are also copies in Berlin and at the Vatican. It is not a large work, it would fill about six pages. The Liber Ignium includes thirty-five recipes, fourteen are war mixtures, six are for extinguishing incendiaries or the prevention and cure of burns, eleven are for lamps, lights, etc., and four for prepar-prepar­ ing chemicals. Five of these recipes contain saltpetre (nos. 12, 13, 14, 32, 33). Hime who discussed Marcus Graecus says the description of the rocket and its filling «is<(is as definite and precise as many a recipe of the 17th century»;century,,; other recipes (32-33) are as precise as those of Hassan al-Rammiih.al-Rammah. Reinaud and FaveFav6 (Le Feu Gregeoi:i,Gve'geois, p. 87), thought the purification of saltpetre was more primitive than Hassan al-Rammii's.18al-RammFt'~.'~ Nothing is known about Marcus,Marcus. and as the scholars have noticed,noticed. the dating :f of the various copies of hi'shis manuscript differs. All scholars who discussed that book agree on one point: that the manuscript in which the recipe of gunpowder is mentioned cannot be attributed to any date preceding 1300. Besides, that recipe does not give the force of making an explosion; this is because Marcus did not know the most important secret, which is the purification of nitrate-nitrate­ potassium from impurities, and the result was that the mixture when burnt does not explode, as Ch. Seignobos mentioned.19mentioned. 19

MEDIEVAL FIREARMS IN EGYPT

Mamluk sources furnish little information on the technical aspects of Egyptian firearms, e. g., their size, weight, range, the weight of the projectiles used, weight of charge, etc. This dificiency cannot be re-re­ paired by archaeological specimens anywhere, for very few cannons have come down to us from the whole Mamluk period (1250-1715). There are three cannons from Sultan Kaytbay's time (1468-1496) now in the Military Museum at Saint Irene, in Istanbul,2oI~tanbul,~'two of these bear thethe Sultan's name in an inscription (Fig. 4). The use of artillery in the Mamluk Kingdom took place between the sixties and the early seventies of the fourteenth century. We meet the

18'"LiberLiber Ignium was published in a Latin version under thethe titletitle Liber i[!,niumignium a Marco Graeco descriptus. The best edition is that of M. BERTHELOT: La Chimie allau moyen age,rige, 1, 100-35, with a French translation and accurate discussion on the treatise. A more recent edition: HENRY W. 1.L. HIME: The Origin ofoJ Artillery, 45-63. SceSee also: ].J. R. PARTINGTON:A History of Greek Fire and Gunpowder, 1960. " History of Medieval Civilization, p. 235. 20 KIIALILKllALIL EDHEM, published a detailed description of thisthis cannon in Tarihi Osmanly Encumeni Mecnzuasi,Mecmuasi, no. 45, pp. 128-139.

52

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

first authentic evidence inin a passage describing a weapon called ctmakiihil«makahil al-bard)>,al-barud», which either firedfired cannon-balls (bunduk) or projected flamesflames (nar) inin IbnIbn Fad1Fadl Allah alTJmarilsaJ:Omari's book at-Ta'arzfat-Ta'ari//i fz aC-Mustalahal-Mustalah ash-ash­ 2 Sharzf.Sharif. 'Umari'Umari died inin 1348-1349 and compiled his 'Workwork inin 1340.211340. \

FIGFIG. 4.4. -Sultan- SlIltan Kay~bay'sKaytbay's ccan­ an- nons,nons, twotwo ofof themthem bearingbearing hishis namename inscribedinscribed (Milita-(Milita­ ryry MuseumMuseum ofof SantaSanta Irene.Irene, Is-Is- O- tanoul). f\·II.J:)'/. ItIt isis clear,clear, however,however, thatthat thethe ctMakahil«Makahil al-Barud)>al-Barud» mentionedmentioned inin thatthat passagepassage isis usedused bothboth inin thethe sensesense of throwingthrowing firefire (niir),(nar), andand thatthat ofof shootingshooting solidsolid projectilesprojectiles (banadik).(banadik).

''21 at-Ta'njat-Ta'rij fiji MustalahMlIstalah ashShavif,Clsh-Sharij, CairoCairo 13121312 H.,H., p.p. 208.208. SeeSee also:also: AYALON:AYALON: Gunpozudev,Gunpowder, p.p. 41.41.

53

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

The second historical evidence is a passage written by an eye-witness, the encyclopaedist al-Qalqashandi.al-Qalqashandi."22 «I<(Isaw in Alexandria, during the Sultanate of al-Ashraf Sha'banSha'bln b. Husayn, at the time of the governorship of the late amir Salah ad-din b. 'Arram,'ArrBm, a cannon (midfa') made of copper and lead and fastened by iron chains. A great ball (bunduk) was fired from it from the hippodrome (maydan). The ball fell inin bahr as-silsilah outside blbbab al-bahr which is a great distance. Ibn 'Arram was governor of Alexandria twice under Sultan Sha'banSha'bBn in 767 H.j1365,H.11365, and from Shawal768Shawal 768 H. to JumadaJumBdi 769 (May 1366-Jan. 1368). Hence, although it is more probable that al­al- Qalqashandi refers toto either 1365 or 1366-1368, the year of 778/137677811376 (Sha'ban's(Sha'bln's death) should be considered the latest possible date for al­al- Qalqashandi's midfa'.)>midfa'.» While the date of the Alexandria cannon can be fixed only 'withinwithin somewhat wide limits (Ayalon, p. 3), the date of the first use of Artil-Artil­ lery in Cairo can be established with accuracy. In Rabi' 11,Il, 768 H.jH./ December 1366, Amir YalbughlYalbugha an-Nasiri, in the neighbourhood of Cairo Citadel, fired at his opponents with Makahil an-neft. That ac­ac- count was furnished by the Arab historian Ibn KhaldGn,Khaldun, a contemporary of the event. It is also mentioned by the historians al'AynialcAyni and al­al- Maqrizi who were alive when the above incident occured. Both histo-histo­ rians, Ibn Taghribirdi, and Ibn Iyas also allude to it. AI-Makrizi's testimony is of particular importance because it proves that the intro-intro­ duction of artillery into the Mamluk navy had been more or less simul-simul­ taneous with its introduction into siege warfare on land.land. We learn from the same testimony that in the skirmishes of 1366, both Yalbugh;Yalbugha and his opponents employed firearms. In the years 791-792 H./1389-1390H.11389-l390 during the fierce skirmishes fought Barquq,BarqGq, Yalbugha and MintashMintlsh for the accession to the throne, artilleryardlery figuresligures prominently in the sieges of the Cairo Citadel and of Damascus. After that date the employment of artillery increases stead­stead- ily, sometimes with handicaps or confined to very narrow limits, until it becomes one of the common weapons of the realm.

A fifteenthfifteenth century cannon test The only detailed description of a cannon to be found in published Mamluk sources is furnished by the Egyptian historian Ibn Taghribirdi (1411-1469) who was not only an eyewitness to its operation, but took

"l' Subh al-A'sha, Cairo 1913-19, vol.vo!. Il,11, Il,11, p. 144, 1.17; p. 145. See also: AYA-AyA­ LON, ibid.,zbid., pp. 21-22.

54

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

part in measuring its rangerange and was told about its size, weight, cali-cali­ bre, etc., from the mouth of the Mamluk Sultan himself. Here is the translation of that description: «And< On the second test I (i. e., Ibn Taghribirdi) was not present, and the information about the range of fire was not given to me by a reliable source, but by some of the people who quoted various figures, some of them giving higher figures and others lower ones. The Sultan ques­ ques- tioned me about the cannon and its properties and characteristics, and he further asked me to measure its range in the third test. I answered him: «Neither<(Neither do I know the weight'weight of the cannon, nor the -weightweight of its projectiles, nor the weight of its gunpowder. Then the Sultan per-per­ sonally dictated to me all these particulars which I shall submit below. »When)>Whenthe above-mentioned Tuesday (the 14th of Shawwiil) arrived, the cannon was tested for the third time from the same place (J(Jabalabal al-Ahmar) facing KhanqahKhanqlh Siryaqus. It was fired twice. The second projectile (hajar) fell towards Masjid at-tibn from the side of al-Matariyah. This distance is greater than that traversed by the first stone or that traversed by the stone fired in the second test on last Thursday (9th of Shawwal). I, and another man whom I trust, undertook to measure that distance with the greatest accuracy. »The)>The result of our measurements was 5,648 ells and one span (shibr) 24 according to the new ell; while according to the ell (dhirii')

"Al' A dhirii'dhiri' measures about two and a half foot.foot. 24" A shihr measures twenty two centimetres. 55

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

commonly used in thethe service of the post (barid) thethe same distance was 6,589X.6,589Yz. This distance is about a mil and a half plus a quarter of a tenth of a mil; i. e., about one-sixth of a barid. This isis a rare and strange thing to which we have not heard inin the past generations. This cannon has greatly amazed the public. The days on which itit was tested turnedturned out to be festival days because of thethe numerous spectators. )>By»By Allah! Had I not been an eyewitnesseyewi tness to all this, I should not have recorded itit in my chronicle because of itsits strangeness and magnifi-magnifi­ cence. And all this was done by thethe Sultan's grace, may Allah perpetu-perpetu­ ate His rule. »As)>As to thethe measurement of the cannon, they are as follows, accord­accord- ing to what the Sultan dictated to me, and according to my own observa­observa- tion: Its length, 15 spans, which correspond to 5% ells. The perimeter of its muzzle, 3% ells. Its thickness, about (?) ells. Its weight, 170 Egyptian quantal'squantars (100 ratls). The weight of itsits projectile, 4 Egyptian quantal's.quantars. The weight of its gunpowder, 37 Egyptian ratl~)>.~~ratls».25

Firearms of QaytbiiyQaytbay

The most important measure taken by Sultan Qaytbay (1468-1496) in connection with artillery was during the building of his fortress in Alexandria in 1479. The fortress which was intended to protect the town from the incursions of the Frankish corsairs and was strongly fortified, was surrounded by a large number of guns?6guns.*" The first account of the use of the arquebus took place when Qayt­Qayt- bay in 895 H.11490H./1490 was preparing his last expedition against the Otto­Otto- mans north of Syria. He inspected the units of Awlad an-nasan-nls whose month pay was 1,000 dirhams or less. Earlier he ordered them to learn the proper handling of al-bunduk ar-raslsar-ras~'is (arquebus), and they now drilled with the new weapon in the Sultan's pre~ence.~'presence.27 Sultan Qaytbay waswas succeeded by his son, an-Nasir Abu Sa'adiitSa'adGt Mohammad, a boy of fourteen who who ruled for little more than three years (1496-1498) before he was assassinated. He waswas very earnest in his desire to build up a body of black arquebusiers and equipped a large number of slaves withwith firearms. In 1497 he had 500 men thus equipped, and he used them successfully against his rival Qansuh Khamsmi'a and on other occasions. These arquebusiers were called «'cc'AbidAbid Naftiya»Naftiya), by Ibn Iyas, and «'cc'AbidAbid

2''' IBNTAGIIRIBIRDI:TAGI~RIBIRDI: HawadtthHawadith el-Duhur lifz Mada el Ayyam wa-al-Shuhur,wa-al-Shuhuu, edition W. Popper, University of Calif. Press, California 1932, part 3, pp. 474-476. "'"IRNIEN IYAS,hAS, edition of Kah1eKahle and Mostafa, vol.vo!. 111,Ill, p. 151.151 27'' IBN IYAS,hAS, ibid.,rbrd, TTT,TIT, p. 263, n. 2.

56

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

barudiya)>barudiya» by Al-Ansari. AI-Ansari. The sultan tried to establish law and order by organising parades inin Cairo in which they marched in front of him. He was the firstfirst Mamluk Sultan ever toto do such a thing.thing. This aroused disgust against him,him, and tension prevailed between him and his Amirs and high rankrank cfficersofficers as a result of thethe favouritismfavouritism he showed toto the black slaves. At lastlast the Amirs intervened and forced him to disband thethe arquebusiers and made him promise never to raise itit again. From that event toto the very end of al-Nasir Mohammad's rulerule there isis no mention of the slave arquebusiers, at leastleast untiluntil he was murderedmuroered (1498).

al-Ghawri's firearmsfirearms

Few years later,later, perhaps in 1506, a moor of North Africa had come toto Sultan Kansuh al-Ghawri with thethe newly inventedinvented fire-armfire-arm (gun or musket). The moor said thatthat thethe weapon had justjust appeared in thethe West andano inin Asia-Minor, and advised thethe Sultan toto raiseraise a special Mam-Mam­ lukluk unitunit inin thethe use of it.it. The Sultan who enjoyed a higher prestigeprestige than thethe previous boy-kirlg,boy-king, and inin whose timetime thethe needneed forfor thethe arquebus was much more pressing, made with much caution, a second attempt toto create a unit of arquebusiers. After thethe Sultan heardheard thethe suggestion of thethe moor, hehe ordered a fewfew soldiers toto be broughtbroughI' toto his presence, and had thethe new-arm demonstrated before them. But when thethe soldiers triedtried a fewfew shots, thethe Sultan was unimpressed, and even displeased with thethe ccunworkableness>>«unworkableness» of thethe weapon; he turtledturned toto thethe moor and said: <(We«We shall not abandon the teachings of our Prophet..Prophet. .. . forfor adopting thethe new methods of thethe Christians>>.28Christians».28 Anyhow itit was as latelate as 1510 thatthat another arquebusiers ucitur.it was raised,raised, and even thenthen its existence was precarious.precarious. This unit was calledcaIJed >,al-khamisah», because it did not receivereceive itsits pay trrgethertrJgether with thethe restrest of thethe army in one of thethe fourfour official pay days roundround thethe middle of thethe month, butbut separately on a fifthfifth pay-daypay-day at thethe end of thethe month.29month.29 It was also called ccal-'askar«al-'askar al-mulafak,,,al-mulafab, (the patched-up troops),troops), be-be­ cause itit was composed of heterogenous elements besides AwladAwlad al-nls-al-nils­ Turkomans, Persians, and various artisans. Later, thethe Royal Mamluks joinedjoined thethe unitunit after thethe Sultan launched a big expedition against thethe PortugesePortugesc in thethe Red Sea (1514-15). The old same atmosphere of hostility against the arquebusiers pre-pre­ vailed agairlagain and again, inin spite of thethe newnew developments inin armament

" TBNIBN ZUNBUL:TarzkhTarikh AkhdhAkhdh MasrMasr min al-Charkiss, Leiden Ms. £01.fol. 49 A-B.A-B. '""I AYALON,J\YALON, ibid.,bid, p. 72. 57

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es Gladius, VI (1967), pp. 45-58 A. Rahman Zaky ISSN 0435-029X

which took place inin the Ottoman army. In such situation, the sultan gave way, thus dissolving «at-tabaqa itat-tabaqa al-khamisah» al-khimisah,, on 920 H./March 1514.1514.3030 In the other fieldfield of artillery, Sultan al-Ghawri started casting can­can- nons at a raterate and on a scale never known before in the history of the MamlOks.Mamluks. He established near his newly built hippodrome in southern Cairo, a foundery for cannon (masbak) which turned out pieces of artil­artil- lery at short intervals. Ibn Iyas, the Egyptian historian (1448-1523) indicated the number of guns in some occasions; in four cases, however, he does. In one there were 15 guns, in another 70; in a third 74; inin a fourth 75. The bulk of these guns was transported to the ports of Egypt both in the Mediterranean and the Red Sea for coastal fortifications or to be used on board warships. A portion of the output of cannon was allotted to the colossal citadel of Cairo, built during the rule of Saladin. Ibn Ayas furnishes us also with data on the measurements of al­al- Ghawri cannons. In 918-1512 four of these were cast, each weighting 600 Egyptian quantars, according to what was said.31said.3l The size of the cannon measured ten ells each. Names of gun artificers belonging to that period are very few; nevertheless we know of them: Mohammad ibn at-Tarabulsi and Ibrahim al-Halabi, both of them Syrians, Moham-Moham­ mad ibn Hamzah made two bronze cannons (1530-31) by order of Su­Su- laiman the Magnificent for the Ottoman campaign against the Portugese, who were then invading India. India.3232

'O .\0'O InNIBNIYAS,hAS, vol.vo1. IV, p. 360. "'I IBNInN IYAS,hAS, vol.vo1. IV, p. 261. "'WneOne cannon is now in the Tower of London. FARMER: Turkish ArtilleryArlillerv (Transactions, Glasgow Or. Soc., 1934, p. 14, fig. 3-f); Syria, XXXIV, p. 379. -.

58

Digitalizado por InterClassica Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas http://interclassica.um.es http://gladius.revistas.csic.es