History, Modern -- 19th century; Nineteenth century
The destructiveness of shell from ordinary guns was so obvious,
especially for forts to use against wooden ships, that the difficulties
were gradually overcome, and horizontal shell fire was introduced soon
after the cessation of wars allowed men time for thought and change.
But although the idea was accepted and the fact realized, practice
changed slowly, as it tends to do in the absence of emergency. In the
attack on Vera Cruz, in 1848, Farragut was present, and was greatly
impressed, as with a novelty, by the effect of what he called the
“shell shot,” a hybrid term which aptly expresses the transition state
of men’s minds at the time. I remember an officer who entered the
navy in 1840 telling me the respectful awe and distrust with which
his superiors then regarded the new weapon, a very few of which for
each gun were supplied tentatively. Ten years more, however, saw a
great change, and in 1853 the attack of the Russian squadron of wooden
sailing-ships upon the Turkish vessels in the Bay of Sinope gave an
object-lesson that aroused the naval world to what wooden ships must
expect from horizontal shell fire. In a few minutes three out of seven
Turkish frigates were in flames; while of nine sailing-ships and two
steamers only one of the latter escaped.
HORIZONTAL SHELL FIRE
The Crimean War followed quickly, and in 1854 the wooden steamships of
the line of the allies, vessels identical in fighting characteristics
with those of Trafalgar, attempted to silence masonry works at
Sebastopol. Though the disaster was not so great, the lesson of Sinope
was reaffirmed. Louis Napoleon, a thoughtful man though scarcely a man
of action, had foreseen the difficulty, and had already directed the
construction of five floating batteries which were to carry armor.
Before the war ended these vessels attacked the forts at Kinburn, which
they compelled to surrender, losing, themselves, no men except by
shells that entered the gun ports. Their armor was not pierced.
Horizontal shell fire had called for iron armor, and the two, as
opposing factors, were now established in the recognition of men. The
contest between the two sums up the progression and the fluctuations
of military ideas which have resulted in the battle-ship of to-day,
which, as the fleet-ship, remains the dominant factor in naval warfare,
not only in actual fact but in present probability. From the first
feeble beginnings at Kinburn to the present time, although the strife
has waxed greatly in degree, it remains unchanged in principle and in
kind. To exclude the shell, because, starting as one projectile, it
became many after penetration, in what does it differ from excluding
the rapid-fire gun, whose projectiles are many from the first, and
penetrate singly?
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account