THE ROYAL ARTILLERY INSTITUTION. 297 
Cf ligneo,” there is no evidence to support the idea that the actual cannon 
were wooden. 
Evidently metallic balls were projected by them; and this is corroborated 
by other testimony; for, while as yet the only projectile which has been met 
with in France is the cannon arrow, or carreau, a document dated 29 th April 
1345, existing in the Imperial Library at Paris, proves the use of leaden 
balls in Prance at that epoch. 
This document, printed in extenso in the Emperor Napoleon's Etudes &c., 
Yol. iii. p. 80, is a receipt given by one “Ramundus Arqueru, artillerist to 
the French king at Toulouse for sundry material of war, including two 
iron cannon, two hundred leaden bullets, eight pounds of powder for 
cannon, and two hundred wedges furnished with leather for the same 
cannon—“duobus canonibus ferri; ii c plumbatis; viii libris pulveris pro 
canonibus; ii c cavillis pro eisdem canonibus munitis de tachis.” 
Applying again the same test as before we find that about | oz. of powder 
is the allowance for one charge, and estimating the projectile at ten times 
that weight, each leaden ball would only have weighed about 7 oz., much the 
same as the cannon arrows already named at an earlier period. Hence we 
may again conjecture that the piece from which they were fired was of the same 
weight, or nearly so, and not exceeding 25 lb. These cannon seem to have 
been loaded at the breech, and the wedge or plug covered with leather 
stopped the breech, and, being destroyed by the action of the powder, was 
renewed after each discharge. 
At Cahors in the same year it appears by the accounts of the consuls of 
the town, that cannon were cast. 1 These accounts speak of 24 cannon, 36 lb. 
of saltpetre, and 251b. of sulphur; which would allow about 31b. of 
powder as the supply for one cannon. This shows that the cannon must 
have been very small. 
The following year, 1346, is ever memorable in our history, for in July 
of that year Edward III. sailed on the expedition into France, during which, 
a few weeks later, was fought the famous battle of Cre£y. It has been 
popularly considered as an established fact, that cannon were employed by 
the English in that action; and that it was owing to the terror caused by 
these new and dreadful weapons, as much as to the valour and skill of their 
archers, that the English gained so signal a victory on this field. This 
theory has however been more than once called in question; and the point 
has been discussed with more than usual warmth. It is a matter of some 
importance, for this reason : if cannon were used at Crecy, this is an instance 
of their employment in the field; no other instance of which is known at so 
early a period; the only mention made of them hitherto being at sieges, and 
for the defence of towns and castles. 
For this reason it seems desirable to enter into the argument here, and to 
state the grounds of the opinions of those who hold different views in the 
matter. But we must bear in mind, -that all our evidence as yet has gone 
to show, that the cannon employed at this period were of such small 
dimensions, and the powder was of so feeble a nature, that it is utterly im¬ 
possible that three or four of such weapons, especially when we consider how 
1 Etudes &c.j vol. iii. p. 80. 
