[
    {
        "id": 214286,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 144,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "107\n\nWEAPONS OF THE CHINA WARS\n\nRICHARD J. GARRETT\n\nOne of the remarkable features of the nineteenth century China wars was the ability of a relatively small force of European soldiers and sailors to overcome a numerically superior Chinese force. Just as in the recent Gulf War, where Saddam Hussein's dream of a 'mother of all wars' was shattered by high tech. weaponry, so one of the factors which made the difference was, undoubtedly, the vast difference in the military technology available to each side. It was not the only factor, but it is necessary to understand it to arrive at a clear picture of the China wars.\n\nIt is worth dismissing any idea that the quality of the fighting men was inferior. There are many instances of troops fighting to the death and refusing to surrender.1 Indeed, to the European mind some of these heroics seemed foolish, just as they could not understand why people committed suicide rather than fall into the hands of the 'barbarians.'2 Captain Loch R.N. remarks that \"I feel persuaded that, if drilled under English officers, they would prove equal, if not superior, to the Sepoys; they have greater physical power, greater obstinacy, and consequently minds that retain impressions with greater tenacity, and would be slow to lose confidence after it was once built upon the foundations of their vanity.\"3 It was not that the officers were cowards, as many of the Mandarins died bravely, but rather there was no conception of the need for the troops to be trained to act together as a whole. Mackenzie, an officer present during the first war, notes: \"As yet, I imagine that no field exercise and evolutions have been compiled for the use of the Chinese Army. Neither do the troops, as far as I observed, move in concert, nor do they make any formation in bodies.\"5 Although the Manchu armies had been an efficient fighting force at the time of the conquest, two centuries later they neglected to maintain rigorous training programmes.\n\nThe European officers, on the other hand, put a lot of effort into exercising their men. An example of this is recorded by Lord Jocelyn: \"During our stay in Singapore the seamen of the flag-ship Wellesley were exercised on shore, under the supervision of the commanding...",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214291,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 149,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "112\n\nsmaller pieces did exist firing shot of a few ounces. Similar weapons were used in the West, but were generally referred to as wall-pieces or swivel guns, the latter term being used particularly with reference to those mounted on the gunwales of ships.\n\nIn describing the fortifications at Tinghai Lord Jocelyn reports: \"on the walls were mounted gingalls and cannon of various calibres, but none exceeding a nine-pounder; and wall-pieces with shifting breeches, each having eight or nine spare breeches attached to it, ready loaded.\"23 This reference to wall-pieces with shifting breeches is of interest as they represent an early form of breech-loading. The idea dates back many years and King Henry VIII had weapons of this form; however, it fell from favour and in the mid-nineteenth century must have seemed very strange to western eyes.\n\nFinally there was the Chinese rocket. This had probably been in use for centuries, but it had not improved with time. Mackenzie notes that these were \"the merest child's weapon being not above six inches long, fastened on a slender bamboo shaft and armed with a barb inserted at one end.\"24 Clearly it was not a mass killer, but it did claim at least one life,25 and it had a use as an incendiary device.\n\nAs would be expected, the Chinese did learn from their experiences in the first war and by the second they had made considerable progress. It is recorded that when the forts at the entrance to the Pei Ho river were attacked in May 1858, that:\n\n\"The guns were much better cast, and not so unwieldy as those in the Canton River, and were better equipped in every respect. They had good canister shot, and the hollow 8-inch shot appeared an imitation of our own. There were several English guns in the batteries.\"26\n\nHand-Held Arms\n\nThe next class of weapons are the hand-held arms. On the European side the main projectile arm was the musket, a smooth-bored arm about 55 inches long, and firing a spherical lead ball of just over an ounce (14.5 No. to the pound). The flintlock musket used black powder (gunpowder) and ignition of the charge was achieved from the sparks",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214293,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 151,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "114\n\nMarines and it was not until an action at Amoy on 26th August 1841 that the British Army (Her Majesty's 55th Regiment of Foot) used them in anger.\n\nApart from the musket itself, the soldier was also equipped with a bayonet which extended the musket into a thrusting weapon equivalent to a short pike. It had an overall length of about six feet, and time and again proved itself to be a formidable weapon. This was used both defensively, as in a formed square fending off cavalry, and offensively as in the charge. Its offensive use was considered by some commanders to be more effective than firing the muskets, and it was common to describe the number of troops by the number of bayonets.29 Officers would carry a sword and perhaps one or two single shot pistols. Swords (cutlasses) and pistols were also the weapons of marines when boarding opposing ships, and some may have been carried by those operating on land; however, they were more likely to have been equipped with muskets.\n\nOn the Chinese side, there were a wider variety of arms. Lord Jocelyn describes a display put on by the Manchu Tartars, who were the elite of the troops in China, where the: \"Tartars were dressed in white cotton garb and black cap, and their weapons were swords and matchlocks, or bow and arrows.\"30 Ouchterlony31 illustrates a Chinese swordsman brandishing a sword, but also holding in his left hand a matchlock and with a powder horn slung from his waist. Hence, it can be seen that the projectile arms were matchlocks and bow and arrows. The matchlock musket uses a form of ignition even earlier than a flintlock. It derives its name from the match, which is a hemp cord impregnated with saltpetre and spirits of wine such that it burns steadily without going out. The mechanism is simple in that the match is held in an arm which, on pressing the trigger, descends onto the priming charge and, hence, ignites the main charge. At this time, it was archaic, and it was also a danger to its user, as the burning match could set fire to clothes or, more seriously, to the powder pouch which the user carried round his waist. Also, when wounded, the danger was compounded, and there are reports of troops being burned to death after falling with otherwise non-lethal wounds.32 Perhaps this had helped to preserve the use of the bow, although it continued in use well beyond the adoption of more modern firearms. Photographs33 of the Taku forts taken after their fall in 1860 show crossbows34 amongst the debris. Also Arch-",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214296,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 154,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "117\n\nleading their men to an attack.\n\n5 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 138.\n\n6 Lord Jocelyn. Six Months with the Chinese Expedition. London, 1841, p. 41.\n\n7\n\nAlthough the benefits of rifling to give more consistent trajectories were known, no one had yet been able to come up with a practical means of taking advantage of it in a cannon.\n\n8 Lieutenant John Ouchterlony, The Chinese War: An Account of all the Operations of the British Forces from the Commencement to the Treaty of Nanking, London 1844, p. 98 notes that at Tycocktow the Gunboat Nemesis \"threw shells into the upper fort.\"\n\nD. Bonner-Smith & E.W.R.Lumby. The Second China War 1856-1860. London, 1965, p.53 records that Rear Admiral Seymour reports that \"The Barracuta at the same time also shelled the troops in the hills at the back of the city, from a position at the head of Sulphur Creek.\"\n\n19 D. Bonner-Smith, op. cit., p. 173 records that Commander Forsyth of the Hornet reports \"..commenced firing grape and shrapnel, with ricochet shot,into the whole mass of junks, which must have done dreadful execution, as they were crowded with men to excess.\"\n\nOuchterlony, op. cit., p. 239.\n\n12 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 23 reports \"a Congreve rocket, which was fired at the Admiral's junk, went through the deck into the magazine, upon which she immediately blew up.\"\n\n13 Loch, op. cit., p. 40.\n\n14 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 149 notes \"In artillery they are very backward, their guns being of enormous weight in proportion to their calibre; some of the pieces of ordinance which we captured weighing seven ton, although only 42 pdrs; yet notwithstanding the immense thickness of metal in many cases the guns burst.\"\n\n15 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 157 notes \"in the great arsenal at Amoy, a large two-decked junk was found nearly ready for sea with guns, as well as something bearing a resemblance to gun-carriages.\"",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214297,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1998",
        "page_number": 155,
        "title": "RAS-1998",
        "content_text": "118\n\n16 Mackenzie, op. cit., includes an Appendix giving details of all the guns captured in the period 1 January to 1 June 1841.\n\n17 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 150.\n\n18 Ouchterlony, op. cit., p. 113.\n\n19 Loch, op. cit., p. 52 notes \"In fact, the carriage was precisely like a large garden barrow, with a locker before for shot, and a drawer between the handles containing loose powder and a small shovel to load with.\"\n\n20 Giuliano Bertuccioli ed., La Cina Nelle Lastre Di Leone Nani (1904-1914), Pontificio Istituto Missioni Estere 1994, p. 67.\n\n21 David Woodward, Armies of the World 1854-1914, London 1978, p. 157.\n\n22 Loch, op. cit., p. 113.\n\n23 Jocelyn, op. cit., p. 64.\n\n24 Jocelyn, op. cit., p. 152.\n\n25 D. Bonner-Smith, op. cit., p. 27 notes that in January 1858 \"Mr. H. Thompson, Midshipman of the Sans Pereil, a most praiseworthy and zealous young officer, was mortally wounded by a spear-rocket.\"\n\n26 D. Bonner-Smith, op. cit., p. 339 a report by Rear Admiral Sir M. Seymour to Secretary of the Admiralty dated May 21, 1858.\n\n27 Ouchterlony, op. cit., p. 153.\n\n28 Ouchterlony, op. cit., p. 156.\n\n29 Ouchterlony, op. cit., p. 37 describes that the force comprised \"a compact and serviceable body of troops, mustering about 3600 bayonets.\"\n\n30 Jocelyn, op. cit., p. 114.\n\n31 Ouchterlony, op. cit., p. 274 et seq.\n\n32 Mackenzie, op. cit., p. 22 notes \"The tortures which most of the Chinese endured,",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1998.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/1g05n0794",
        "rank": 0
    },
    {
        "id": 214851,
        "series_id": 26,
        "series_slug": "histsyn-rashkb-journal-engine",
        "series_title": "RASHKB Journal 皇家亞洲學會香港分會學刊",
        "series_use_hku_proxy": false,
        "document_key": "RAS-1999",
        "page_number": 266,
        "title": "RAS-1999",
        "content_text": "233\n\nEssays and Notes (London, John Murray, 1865)\n\n[same] China, During the War and Since the Peace (London, Longman, Brown, Green and Longmans, 2 vols., 1852)\n\nCaptain Arthur Cunynghame, An Aide-de-Camp's Recollections of Service in China (London, 2 vols, 1844)\n\nK.S. Mackenzie, Narrative of the Second Campaign in China (London, 1842)\n\nGranville G. Loch, The Closing Events of the Campaign in China (London, 1843)\n\nAlexander Murray [Lt. In the 18th Regt. (Royal Irish)], Doings in China (London, 1843)\n\nLord Robert Jocelyn, Six Months with the Chinese Expedition (London, 1841)\n\n“A Field Officer\", The Last Year in China (London, 1843)\n\nArmine S.H. Mountain, Memoirs and Letters (London, 1857)",
        "txt_file_path": "txt/dfo323lmgvd/RAS-1999.txt",
        "external_url": "https://digitalrepository.lib.hku.hk/catalog/s178b887x",
        "rank": 0
    }
]