Submitted by Hunter7695 t3_1089c5c in history
I've recently discovered that granades were invented rather early in history. My question is, why weren0t they used more often? I've read that some of it was because it was rather dangerous to use (which I find both amusing and understandable) but there was also some places that said it was because the methods of warfare did not benefit these explosives, how so?
(I've been trying to search for that info and found, not much)
I think 'somewhat unreliable' is probably a huge understatement. Fuses where completely unpredictable compared to for instance modern cheap fireworks, and both too fast and too slow are very bad.
I originally was going to post very unreliable, but I figured someone would object...LOL oh well
Yeah no matter what you do some dweeb is gonna come at you with the " well akshually"
BTW an early of cannon had a short barrel & was slung from an A-frame, it was used as a door breaching device. Fuses as you said were sometimes unreliable which among other failure modes could sometimes kill the cannoneer.
This device was called a petard, hence the phrase, Being hoist by one's own petard.
Is this where the idea of the Cartoon-style, little black ball bomb with fuse came from?
For a live action example, see Swiss Family Robinson.
Yep! That and mortars I believe
They were specialized weapons that needed extra training and skill to use. Early explosive grenades were much larger and heavier than modern grenades, since their black powder filler was not as powerful as modern explosives, so they needed to have more explosive filler as well as thicker containment in order to be effective.
A typical grenade from the Napoleonic era weighed about 3-4 pounds. In comparison, a Vietnam War-era M67 grenade weighs a little less than 1 lb. Now ask yourself, how far can you throw a 3-4 pound ball? Obviously, the range of these things weren't too good in the hands of regular soldiers, and the ones than were trained to use them (grenadiers) tended to be the biggest and strongest recruits.
This was on land anyways. In the naval setting, they were much more widely used since in ship boarding action, range wasn't as much an issue, and grenades were excellent weapons for clearing defenders below decks.
If I recall correctly, much of the extra training consisted of learning to say “tow, row, row, row, row, row” for your fellow Grenadiers.
Grenades were never 3-4lbs, what you are talking about is mortar/cannon shells. Most grenades were ceramic and weighted much less that. They were about the size of a modern cricket ball according to most books I've seen about early modern grenades in the UK.
The small blast radius and poor fuses compared to modern grenades made them only used in sieges and storming of fortified works. They were terror weapons like fire lances and other fireworks.
There are accounts of musketeers in the English Civil War carrying a half dozen in their knapsack when storming fortified town. The is one account I remember of grenades being used to force the surrender of church where troops were holding out.
Grenades in the US Civil War were up to 5 lbs
18th Century grenades used cast iron, not ceramic. They were fairly heavy. Interestingly musket slings were developed for grenadiers allowing them to sling the musket over their back while hurling grenades and holding the long fuse. Also the use of mitre caps and bearskins were worn to allow slinging of the musket instead of a tricorn cap which would catch up in the sling.
>Grenades were never 3-4lbs, what you are talking about is mortar/cannon shells.
I'm pretty sure a mortar or howitzer shell during the Napoleonic Wars weighed much heavier than 3-4 pounds. A shell for a 6 inch howitzer of the French Gribeauval system would had fired a shell that weighed at least 20 pounds. For a large 12 inch siege mortar, it would had been around 150 pounds.
[removed]
Are you taking about grenades? Its been used for a while - there are Byzantine examples that date around the 8th century.
They also were widely used in the 15th and 16th century for defense of castles. Then by the 17th century, Grenadier's were standard in almost all European armies.
So unless you do not mean grenades, Im confused as to where you're researching they did not exist in those timeframes.
Note that Byzantine grenades were more like Molotov cocktails than what we think of as grenades.
Main reason why grenades were used in a very limited fashion until the early modern era (16th century) is the lack of a reliable fuze. It wasn't until the gunpowder fuze that you could reliably light an enclosed and thrown explosive charge, early gunpowder weapons (outside China and India) used loose gunpowder to guide the flame to the main charge and that loose gunpowder would have been scattered when you threw the weapon.
We see the first traces of match cords In the mid 15th century
sorry, my first language is not english so I didn't really understand the last part of the comment.
otherwise I also read something about the chinese using granades, but not much (please take into account that I made some searches on the internet and found nothing, so perhaps if I dug deeper I would Have found that info)
Other than that, thanks for the info, I will keep on searching about that.
You spelled grenades incorrectly and the person responding wasn't certain that you meant grenade.
IIRC, modern hand grenades were tried in the US Civil War, but the impact fuses worked poorly and it was common that the targets of hand grenades to throw them back. I imagine the same thing happened with black powder grenades with wicks.
Interesting
Any good sources on this you came across? I’m curious
There were a few varieties. The Ketchum grenade was thrown or lobbed and had a fuse on the tip. There were also Rains grenades, basically the Confederates took the idea of the contact fuse on a Ketchum grenade and buried it nose end up in what amounts to the first landmines. The Union hated these and there's stories of them marching POWs at the head of their columns.
Less reliable, heavier and harder to use and less immediately effective than more recent designs. Grenadiers were a dedicated unit in some cases just to section off the dudes that were big enough to throw it out of range of their own people, much less carry them around.
They did have some use cases, particularly times when you could drop them into a hatch or strong door instead of having to hurl them yourself, they just weren't widespread like the 20th century.
As most have already noted grenades were not beneficial in open field or line combat which was the method of the day. A grenade is effective to 25m which puts the thrower in danger if they're not able to utilize cover. Grenades are perfect for CQB, and room clearing. Naval combat used them extensively cause of the nature of room clearing onboard a ship. If you stick your face through a hatch to see if it's empty you risk getting your head blown off, so it's better to drop a grenade through it and clear it with violence rather than vision. As warfare evolved into what it is with soldiers utilizing cover, trench warfare and city warfare the use of the grenade excelerated because it's more useful in those environments.
Given how many of the grenades were made from poor quality cast iron, I'd guess that the thrower had a lot more risk--you can't really throw something that heavy as far. Makes using them in open areas even less attractive.
restrains self from discussing the holy hand grenade
Well played Mr.Newton.
[removed]
"Hoist with his own petard" Source is ironic because it wasn’t uncommon for a bomb-maker to be blown up by his own explosive device. Grenades had the same development glitches, until WW2.
Because cannons were much more reliable than hand thrown grenades.
[removed]
The Portuguese used hand grenades in the XVI century, one soldier wrote on his memoirs some very harsh words on some of his comrades that had so many on their bodies they could barely run.
But they were too unstable and too unreliable to be used as successfully as they are today.
Given that the dominant infantry formation of the day was a tightly packed group of pikeman ( called a tercio in Spanish, I believe, that was almost viewed as unstoppable.) Throwing it rolling grenades, even from a short distance could disrupt a charge and bridge the gap created by the long pikes of the day. Especially in an era of single shot slow reloading muskets and artillery. Grenadiers were typically recruited for size and strength and were viewed as shock assault troops much in the same way Eastern Euro armies have “Guards” divisions.
But this is really more a 17/18th century usage. 14th C the English longbow and German short pike were the battlefield weapons of choice.
I also think that hand grenades are most useful by individual soldiers, especially when attacking a bunker or enclosed area.
I think that is a fairly modern concept in terms of war, before this century everyone just used to march around in red outfits and lineup to shoot each other
[deleted]
Also they were used.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=CxlRJsQ7p2k&t=105s
(Yes the battle from this movie is 17th century, but they were used in similar ways earlier too.)
The big problem is black powder. That shit lights up like no one's business, and so in a musket line... They would be dangerous.
So they were really more of a sometimes weapon, especially when cannons breached a wall grenades would be used to help gain a foot hold in the breach. But the point remains people didn't walk around with them. They were provided when needed for a particular task (until they became reliable, and fit with the infantry doctrines being used ... ... Which took a while
Grenades, as we know them today, were not widely used during the 15th and 16th century for a number of reasons. One of the main reasons is that the technology for creating and using grenades did not yet exist during this period. The first hand-held grenades were developed in the late 16th century, and these early versions were relatively simple devices that were filled with gunpowder and had a fuse attached.
Additionally, the tactics and strategies of warfare during the 15th and 16th centuries did not yet involve the use of grenades. The primary method of warfare during this period was still armored knights charging on horseback and infantry armed with pikes, swords and bows. The use of firearms had not yet become widespread, and the technology for creating effective firearms was still in its early stages.
Furthermore, the cost and complexity of producing grenadiers and the grenades themselves were not yet viable, only a few armies could afford and maintain them.
It's worth to mention that there were some examples of early versions of grenades being used during this period, but these were relatively rare and not yet widely adopted by military forces.
It wasn't until the 17th century that grenades started to be used more widely in warfare.
[deleted]
[removed]
Grenade type stuff was definitely used since around gun powders use wherever it was present.
But Iike you said, part of it was the danger of using early grenades.
Part of it was the practicality of them in line warfare. You’re standing in lines shooting at each other. By the time you’re close enough to light and throw a grenade you’re probably dead lol.
There were times grenade type things were used, but not often in typical line warfare because the style of war just didn’t work out well for their use
[removed]
They were. Just not called Grenades. They were gun power balls, wrapped with straws, paper, rocks, nails with a fuse.
no im pretty sure that they called them grenades too
Riverwalker12 t1_j3rbkcb wrote
They were used extensively in naval warfare, dropping a grenade down a hatch was very effective, but these were fuse lit and some what unreliable
In Open field battles you could not huck them very far and you were exposed to enemy arrows and other fire
In closed quarters they had some use
But in the field a cannon was far better