What's new
British Ordnance Collectors Network

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

HANES or EXCELSIOR Grenade

B

Bellifortis

Well-Known Member
John D. Bartelson, in his nice book "Civil War Explosive Ordnance 1861-1865" shows as Fig.119 a hand- grenade with percussioncap-nipples attached on its outer surface. I have not seen this type of construction mentioned in the military inventory of any country but only as european anarchist bombs of the 19th century. Bartelson names this construction "Hanes" or "Excelsior". Who was the originator of this construction ? I would be thankful also about any hint about background literature concerning this construction.
Regards,
Bellifortis.
 
Thanks for the tip. There even is a nice filmclip on Youtube where the complete grenade is shown in detail. I also found the patent of 1862. What Hanes really patented is the outer container for the nipple covered grenade inside. Grenades with an assortment of percussion-cap-nipples were produced in England already before 1862. Does anyone know of a source, besides Orsini, of this "nipple covered grenade" before 1862 ? Thank you for your consideration.
Bellifortis.
Slick said:
W.W. Hanes. Or so it says.

http://homemadedefense.blogspot.com/2011/11/hanes-excelsior-percussion-cap-grenade.html
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Bellifortis said:
John D. Bartelson, in his nice book "Civil War Explosive Ordnance 1861-1865" shows as Fig.119 a hand- grenade with percussioncap-nipples attached on its outer surface. I have not seen this type of construction mentioned in the military inventory of any country but only as european anarchist bombs of the 19th century. Bartelson names this construction "Hanes" or "Excelsior". Who was the originator of this construction ? I would be thankful also about any hint about background literature concerning this construction.
Regards,
Bellifortis.
Click to expand...

John used to post on this forum, he would be the one to ask. Haven't seen anything from him in some time, is he still around?
 
Bellifortis said:
Thanks for the tip. There even is a nice filmclip on Youtube where the complete grenade is shown in detail. I also found the patent of 1862. What Hanes really patented is the outer container for the nipple pickled grenade inside. Grenades with an assortment of percussion-cap-nipples were produced in England already before 1862. Does anyone know of a source, besides Orsini, of this "pickled grenade" before 1862 ? Thank you for your consideration.
Bellifortis.
Click to expand...


Three early English percussion grenades that I have meagre notes on are Capt Norton's (about 1830), Parlour's (1834) and Bucknill's (1854). They are mainly single percussion cap grenades but Bucknill had a version that used two (perhaps more) percussion caps. The Walsall anarchist group (1892) devised a multiple cap grenade. All relied on a 'head-first' strike to function. None went as far as Hanes in devising an 'allways' functioning grenade.
 
Bonnex said:
Three early English percussion grenades that I have meagre notes on are Capt Norton's (about 1830), Parlour's (1834) and Bucknill's (1854). They are mainly single percussion cap grenades but Bucknill had a version that used two (perhaps more) percussion caps. The Walsall anarchist group (1892) devised a multiple cap grenade. All relied on a 'head-first' strike to function. None went as far as Hanes in devising an 'allways' functioning grenade.
Click to expand...
Thank you for this additional info. Meanwhile I found the nice work of Anthony Saunders on the net, but he quotes you. I could not find pictures or patents of any of the constructions you quote above. Do you have Patent numbers of any of this early percussion initiated grenades ?
regards,
Bellifortis.
 
Bellifortis said:
Thank you for this additional info. Meanwhile I found the nice work of Anthony Saunders on the net, but he quotes you. I could not find pictures or patents of any of the constructions you quote above. Do you have Patent numbers of any of this early percussion initiated grenades ?
regards,
Bellifortis.
Click to expand...

As far as I am aware no British Patents cover the grenades of Bucknill, Norton or Parlour. Although we have records of Patents going back to 1617 it was not until the Patent Office was reconstituted in 1852 that patents began to be commonly applied for. Even so (given the date of his suggested designs) Bucknill made no application that resulted in a patent bing granted but he did write to the Board of Ordnance submitting his ideas in 1854 (just before the Board of Ordnance was disbanded).
 
For those with an interest in US Civil War Ordnance, it is difficult to beat the books of Dickey and George.

ref: Field Artillery Projectiles of the American Civil War, 1980 edition.

Hanes.jpg
 
Thank you for your info. While searching the net for the designs you mentioned, a patent was mentioned with one of the names, I don't remember which. Please have a look in Wikipedia at : "Orsini Bomb image ILN 1858" What are your thoughts when you compare this with all the designs mentioned above ? I appreciate your valued opinion.
Regards,
Bellifortis.
Bonnex said:
As far as I am aware no British Patents cover the grenades of Bucknill, Norton or Parlour. Although we have records of Patents going back to 1617 it was not until the Patent Office was reconstituted in 1852 that patents began to be commonly applied for. Even so (given the date of his suggested designs) Bucknill made no application that resulted in a patent bing granted but he did write to the Board of Ordnance submitting his ideas in 1854 (just before the Board of Ordnance was disbanded).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Certainly a John Norton had taken out eight 'firearm' related patents between 1852 and 1854 but whether this is the same Captain John Norton that devised the percussion grenade in 1828 I cannot say. The patents do cover projectiles but not 'grenades' in the British use of the word. I would be happy to hear that you had found a grenade patent from that period.

Herewith sketches of Parlour's grenade and Bucknill's grenade. In the case of these and the Norton the persussion caps are covered and struck by the cover on impact. I believe Orsini's grenade had 'bare' percussion caps fitted on the nipples so in that way the Orsini differs from the others. In terms of disposition of the nipples I suppose you could say that there is a similarity between the Orsini and Bucknills multiple cap design. The original Orsini grenades were made in Britain but I don't suppose the makers drew any information from the work of Norton etc.

By the way there was another design submitted to the Board of Ordnance (in 1852) devised by a man called Spencer but I do not have any details.

I hope this is of some interest.

percussion Parlour Image 0102 comp.jpgPercussion Bucknill Image 0101 comp.jpg
 
Thank you very much for your interesting answer. The british makers (artisans shop) did not even know what they were ordered to manufacture. The precise design was given to the maker by Orsini and his collaborators.None of them were munitions knowledgeable (just thinking about the filling they used, makes your hair rise and shiver), so the idea must have been drawn from some existing source. By the way, I like the old plastic at the "Sagrada Familia"(I think its a Cathedral) in Barcelona. That's the first time that I see a Grenade that has found its way into religious art.
Greetings,
Bellifortis.
Bonnex said:
Certainly a John Norton had taken out eight 'firearm' related patents between 1852 and 1854 but whether this is the same Captain John Norton that devised the percussion grenade in 1828 I cannot say. The patents do cover projectiles but not 'grenades' in the British use of the word. I would be happy to hear that you had found a grenade patent from that period.

Herewith sketches of Parlour's grenade and Bucknill's grenade. In the case of these and the Norton the persussion caps are covered and struck by the cover on impact. I believe Orsini's grenade had 'bare' percussion caps fitted on the nipples so in that way the Orsini differs from the others. In terms of disposition of the nipples I suppose you could say that there is a similarity between the Orsini and Bucknills multiple cap design. The original Orsini grenades were made in Britain but I don't suppose the makers drew any information from the work of Norton etc.

By the way there was another design submitted to the Board of Ordnance (in 1852) devised by a man called Spencer but I do not have any details.

I hope this is of some interest.

View attachment 96654View attachment 96655
Click to expand...
 
Bellifortis said:
Thank you very much for your interesting answer. The british makers (artisans shop) did not even know what they were ordered to manufacture. The precise design was given to the maker by Orsini and his collaborators.None of them were munitions knowledgeable (just thinking about the filling they used, makes your hair rise and shiver), so the idea must have been drawn from some existing source. By the way, I like the old plastic at the "Sagrada Familia"(I think its a Cathedral) in Barcelona. That's the first time that I see a Grenade that has found its way into religious art.
Greetings,
Bellifortis.
Click to expand...

Thank you for the interesting thread. Just to show that history repeats itself the Walsall anarchists in the 1890s engaged a foundry to make grenades. Clearly the foundry had no idea what they were making. Of course there will be examples of terrorist groups using innocent manufacturers to make components for 'infernal devices' throughout the next century.
 
Hallo N.,
just to improve my understanding of the english language, how do you define the word "Grenade" in british use ?
Regards,
Bellifortis.
Bonnex said:
Certainly a John Norton had taken out eight 'firearm' related patents between 1852 and 1854 but whether this is the same Captain John Norton that devised the percussion grenade in 1828 I cannot say. The patents do cover projectiles but not 'grenades' in the British use of the word. I would be happy to hear that you had found a grenade patent from that period.

Herewith sketches of Parlour's grenade and Bucknill's grenade. In the case of these and the Norton the persussion caps are covered and struck by the cover on impact. I believe Orsini's grenade had 'bare' percussion caps fitted on the nipples so in that way the Orsini differs from the others. In terms of disposition of the nipples I suppose you could say that there is a similarity between the Orsini and Bucknills multiple cap design. The original Orsini grenades were made in Britain but I don't suppose the makers drew any information from the work of Norton etc.

By the way there was another design submitted to the Board of Ordnance (in 1852) devised by a man called Spencer but I do not have any details.

I hope this is of some interest.

View attachment 96654View attachment 96655
Click to expand...
 
Bellifortis said:
Hallo N.,
just to improve my understanding of the english language, how do you define the word "Grenade" in british use ?
Regards,
Bellifortis.
Click to expand...

Ouch. I think the answer is 'not very well'. I am going to be on dodgy ground here because the pedants will have every line for breakfast :). In defence I am going to rest on the fact that the English language is full of inconsistencies.

In British Service in the 19th Century the grenade was considered to be a hand thrown bomb of a weight that could be conveniently 'manipulated' by a serviceman. In Ordnance parlance they were called (or listed with) spherical shells and the thickness of the shell was about 1/7th of the diameter. Land and Sea Service grenades were provided. The Land Service grenade could be projected and the Sea Service grenade was used to make up 'Grape' - so much for the 'hand' definition. Shells of about 5-inches in diameter were Mortar shells but could be used as a grenade (service nomenclature) in a shute in a defensive work - not conveniently manipulated!

In Britain in the years prior to the First World War the use of the word grenade was I believe confined to the work of the Royal Laboratories and the Cotton Powder Company hand and rifle grenades. During the war chaos reigned with several small 'trench howitzer' projectiles being called grenades (Hays and Foulis are examples). It was not helped by the Grenadier Guards insisting that men specialising in grenade throwing/firing should be called Bombers rather than Grenadiers which inevitably meant the use of the term bomb was coloquially applied to grenades which touched on the naming of mortar bombs and aircraft bombs.

Even during the inter-war years the projectiles for the 2-inch and 2.5-inch mortar were known as grenades. By World War Two of course we were much better at calling a grenade a grenade (the Hawkins' mine is a good example:)

To bring it up-to-date we define a grenade as a small hand thrown or rifle launched device of an explosive or pyrotechnic or 'less lethal' nature. A similar device not thrown or launched might be called a flare or a generator. In British Service we give 40mm grenades the nomenclature of 'Round' because it has a projectile and case, but it will be of no surprise that almost everyone calls them grenades.

So Bellifortis, I expect this has not been very helpful but I hope slightly amusing. I think when I mentioned definitions earlier I was alluding to the use of the word 'granat' for artillery projectiles in some countries.
 
Hallo N.
Germany is one of the places where a shell of any size is named a "Granate" (from the italian GRANATA=Pomegrante), even the WW2 600mm THOR. Traditionally, up till the middle of the 19th century the smaller calibers (up till about 10-12 pounds iron weight system) were called "Granaten", while the larger ones, all shot from mortars, 25 pounds (stone weight system that goes back hundreds of years) approx. 220mm and 50 pounds and larger were called bombs. By using iron and stone weight system in the 18th/19th century concurrently, the right naming is sometimes difficult today. With the appearance of cylindrical projectiles (2nd half 19th century) everything is named a "Granate". Generally the german language is very precise, besides the inconsistencies you mentioned, so a prefix is added like Hand-granate, Mrser-granate, Haubitzen-granate, Gewehr-granate. One of the inconsistencies is for instance the "Orsini Bomb". Because it was used by an anarchist it is called a "Bombe" in german, if it had been used by the military it would have been called a "Hand-Granate". Because of all this, there will never be a computer-translation-program worth its money and like you said before, the pendants may even be of another opinion.
Bellifortis
 
1 - The Sagrada Familia is not the Barcelona cathedral, till now. It was designed to be that in the future, but at this moment, with the works unfinished, we have a gothic one. By the way, the Gaudi's wish was that it has to be builded with donors from the inhabitants of Barcelona, but lately we have forgot that and the works is paid as any other religious building.
2 - In spanish we use also the word GRANADA
 
1 - The Sagrada Familia is not the Barcelona cathedral, till now. It was designed to be that in the future, but at this moment, with the works unfinished, we have a gothic one. By the way, the Gaudi's wish was that it has to be builded with donations from the inhabitants of Barcelona, but lately we have forgot that and the works is paid as any other religious building.

2 - In spanish we use also the word GRANADA, sometimes, to refer any projectil, but its a word/meaning used mainly bye the old men.
 
Getting a timeline for these inventions is difficult. Forsyth's patent for the percussion cap expired in 1821 and it's known that Joshua Shaw, a British artist who moved to the US took out his own patent in 1822 and began making and selling his caps for sporting guns as the military were slow to take up the invention. So the US was potentially in the game from 1822.

Parlour seems to have been the first with his heavy single cap initiated grenade in 1834 and Captain John Norton's design was accepted by Woolwich Arsenal in 1840. Gallingly the list of Norton's inventions held in the Bodlian Library does not give a date for the start of his grenade design work. Norton seems to have concentrated on artillery shells and rifle bullets.

The Orsini debuted on the 14th January 1858 with the grenades being made by John Taylor, a gunsmith in Birmingham probably during mid 1857. So that predates Hanes' patent. Hanes may have just been picking up an un patented design and registering it himself.

Here's a photo showing two grenades presented to Queen Victoria. Captions say it all.

DSCN2574.JPG
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top