The Art of Gunnery in Renaissance England Steven Ashton Walton
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
The Art of Gunnery in Renaissance England by Steven Ashton Walton A thesis submitted in conformity with the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Graduate Department of the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology (IHPST) University of Toronto © Copyright by Steven Ashton Walton 1999 Steven Ashton Walton “The Art of Gunnery in Renaissance England,” Insitute for the History & Philosophy of Science & Technology University of Toronto Ph.D., 1999. Abstract Previous histories of artillery have concentrated on the guns themselves and their use in military actions, whereas this dissertation attempts to understand those guns as the core of a technological system in late Tudor England and the meaning of that system to its contemporaries. Theoreticians, authors, and gunners all looked to “gunnery” as a field of inquiry, and this thesis proceeds from theoretical gunnery, through its practical operation, to its bureaucratic and intellectual organization in Renaissance England. First I investigate the ballistic work of Thomas Harriot (c1560-1621), to provide insight into the theoretical analysis of gunnery in the 1590s. Re-dating Harriot’s work to c1598-1600 and surveying Harriot’s career, personal influences, and scientific sources suggests that Harriot’s interest in gunnery was not generated by his first patron, the professional soldier Sir Walter Raleigh (as is usually assumed), but rather from his second patron, the military dilettante Henry Percy, ninth Earl of Northumberland. Next, printed English works on gunnery up to 1600 populate two species: practical manuals by Peter Whitehorne, William Bourne and Cyprian Lucar; and arithmetical/analytical works by Leonard and Thomas Digges and Thomas Smith. Then an analysis of two manuscript gunners’ manuals, written by practicing gunners, shows what the users themselves recorded. Next, a survey of artillery use by the Tudor monarchs establishes the extent and role of cannon in sixteenth-century England, noting that Tudor warfare predisposed them not to develop their artillery skills. Analysis of two Ordnance Office surveys of 1580 and 1592 show what they did develop and records of ancillary ii gunnery equipment and gunner employment records more fully represent the practice of gunnery. And, as both confirmation and augmentation of this picture, the field notebook of a practicing gunner in the Irish wars rounds out the picture of gunnery as a personal occupation. Finally, the bureaucratic and intellectual position of gunnery is told in the story of the Artillery Garden outside Bishopsgate and of William Thomas’ petitions to the Council for a formally chartered corporation for the licensing of gunners . Gunnery as a “mathematical” art and the gunners as “mathematical practitioners” concludes the thesis and indicates where gunnery “fit” into the late Elizabethan epistemology of practices. iii Vita Steven A. Walton Steven Ashton Walton was born November 6, 1968 in Milwaukee, Wisconsin, where he remained until he matriculated at Cornell University in Ithaca, New York, in 1987. Majoring in mechanical engineering, he graduated in 1991 with distinction and then proceeded to the California Institute of Technology in Pasadena, California, where he obtained a M.S. in mechanical engineering the next year. Avoiding the managerial fate that befalls many engineers and following his avocation, in 1992 he moved to Toronto, Ontario, to enroll in the M.A. programme at the Institute for the History and Philosophy of Science and Technology (IHPST) at the University of Toronto. Completing the M.A. in 1994 with a thesis on early-modern automata, he began research in pre-modern military history and the history of technology, culminating in his Ph.D., awarded in 1999. While at IHPST, he received a Dibner Library Visiting Fellowship at the Smithsonian Institution, Washington, DC and undertook his doctoral research in London, Oxford, and Delaware on University of Toronto Associates Graduate Travel Fellowships. iv Acknowledgments As with most introductions of this sort, there are usually too many people to thank or perhaps even remember. Bert Hall had a guiding hand in all this, and continually demonstrated his support even when my work was not what interested him the most. More importantly, he let me do what I wanted. I am proud to call him my mentor and happy to call him my friend. Janis Langins, both inside my field yet outside my time period, provided numerous thematic and detailed questions which kept me on the right track, and his conversations on wider history of technology issues were most fruitful. All the while he encouraged another ex- engineer to excel in the history of technology. Kenneth Bartlett, too, provided support throughout my project, kept my Tudor and Stuart history straight, and urged me on with kind and insightful comments, especially regarding my future research projects and the etiquette of archival research in England. Dr. Julian Dent also read the completed thesis and I thank him for his wonderfully irreverent sense of humour and, of course, helpful comments. Dr. Robert Tittler acted as my external examiner and profitably redirected my thesis to its ultimate form. People at the various libraries and archives in which I worked deserve a great deal of accolade, since I couldn’t have done it without them. Leslie Overstreet at the Dibner Library in Washington, DC taught me everything I needed to know about codicology. Bernard Nurse at the Society of Antiquaries in London was gracious in allowing me to transcribe documents, wander through the stacks, and plunder the Society’s incredible subject card catalogue. Thanks are also due to the Society of Antiquaries for permission to include the transcription of Appendix II in the final thesis. R.C. Yorke at the College of Arms was always accommodating even though I kept hanging up on him while learning the British payphone system. The staffs at Lambeth Palace, London, and the Royal Artillery Institution, Woolwich, were most helpful and the many anonymous staffers at the British Library, London, and the v Bodleian Library, Oxford, could not have been nicer in the face of so many North American summer researchers. Finally, L. Rebecca Johnson Melvin and her assistants at the University of Delaware Archives deserve heartfelt thanks for allowing me access to the photocopies of Harriot’s manuscripts even in the midst of their attempt to make sense of John W. Shirley’s papers in the face of being unable to read Harriot’s chicken-scratch. Theses cannot be finished without abundant personal support, and in that regard I have been rather lucky. Thanks to one woman for getting me in to this and especially to another for getting me out. Jennifer Davis urged me on in the early stages of my degrees and Dorothy Davis has always remained encouraging and supportive. Maylin Scott patiently listened to me rant about Harriot or cannon or my ‘little gunners” for two years, and then even edited the final product, which no doubt improved it immeasurably. Many fellow students at IHPST have been inexpressibly helpful, but I should single out Katherine Hill, Daryn Lehoux, Gary McIntyre, Lydia Scratch, and Marianne Stevens for their conversations, suggestions, and support, and particularly Gordon H. Baker for his concern and advice these last six and a half years. To those who know me and know what I have been through in the years working towards the completion of this degree, thanks for your friendship, toleration, support, and encouragement, regardless of our relations today. My mother, Jane Hyer Walton, has never failed me or failed to show interest in my work, even if it wasn’t her cup of tea. Most of all, however, this dissertation is dedicated to my father, Dr. Alfred W. Walton, who, despite never understanding why someone would give up a promising and lucrative career in engineering to study the history of science and technology, nevertheless supported me throughout this degree. Thank you one and all. vi Table of Contents Page Abstract ..........ii Vita...........iv Acknowledgments .........v Table of Contents .........viii List of Tables ..........x List of Illustrations .........xi List of Abbreviations ........xii Ch. 1 Introduction .........1 Structure .........9 Ch. 2 Thomas Harriot and Ballistics Introduction and Reputation ......15 Influences........22 “The Laundry List”.......28 Personal Contacts .......35 Patronage ........42 Sir Walter Raleigh .......43 Henry Percy, Ninth Earl of Northumberland . 49 Conclusion ........61 Ch. 3 Printed Books on Gunnery in England to 1600 Introduction ........66 English Printed Books on Gunnery .....76 Peter Whitehorne .......77 William Bourne .......88 Cyprian Lucar .......96 Leonard and Thomas Digges .....101 Thomas Smith .......112 On the Art of Textual Gunnery .....116 Ch. 4 Manuscript of Gunnery Practice Introduction ........125 The Contents of Gunners’ Manuals .....133 Rezeptliteratur and Fireworks ......146 Gunners’ Manual Recipes ......154 Ch. 5 Artillery and Tudor Military Tactics Introduction ........182 Sixteenth-Century English Artillery .....183 Henrician and Edwardian Artillery .....186 Queen Mary, King Philip, and Artillery ....191 Elizabethan Artillery .......194 vii Ireland .... ....196 The Netherlands .......205 Conclusion ........214 Ch. 6 Providing Materials for Artillery Warfare Introduction ........215 Ordnance Inventories .......216 Projectiles in Ordnance Lists ......227 Gunners’ Employment Records .....231 Edmund Parker, Irish Gunner ......240 Ch. 7 The Artillery