Jilara (jilara) wrote,
Jilara
jilara

  • Mood:
  • Music:

My cannon might really be fullscale

Well, here's another one that shows why it pays to use original sources.

There are any number of stupid authors who pick something up from a secondary source and keep repeating it until everyone is sure it's true. (I think the greatest example of this the satire book, supposedly a history of brassieres, by "Otto Titschling" that has somehow become true because of people lacking in irony. The next in line is Thackary's satire on prudishness, where Victorians cover the legs of their pianos with pantaloons, again cited as Truth.)

Well, I have been on a voyage of discovery, researching my new cannon. Because I wasn't content to hear the eternal prattle about it being a 7/8 scale Parrott rifle, and just accepting it. I'll know for certain when I take delivery, but I've already discovered things people didn't know.

1. It's a Model 1861. The Model 1861 differed substantially from the Model 1863. Everyone has been acting under the assumption it was a Model 1863, because that was the most common tube.
2. Most of the statistics given in the books for the Model 1861 are NOT for the Model 1861. They're for the Model 1863. The only cited differences are the muzzle swell and bore size. NOT true!
3. If you look at the specs on existing originals, there were at least 3 Model 1861 10 pound Parrotts, all with slightly different dimensions and characteristics. These are the Union Army Parrott, the Confederate Army Parrott, and the Confederate Navy Parrott.

All of which will probably bore people who aren't really into this, rather like the various "real" model numbers of the so-called "Model A" bores folks who aren't car buffs. But I am absolutely jazzed!
Subscribe
  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

  • 0 comments