Talk:Gunpowder/Archive 10

Archive 5

←

Archive 8

Archive 9

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

→

Archive 15

Article is a mess

Wow. It appears that in the last four months this article has managed to generate itself seven pages' worth of discussion around the single issue of who invented the stuff. No wonder the article is a complete mess. I'd argue that we're placing undue weight on this issue to the detriment of the rest of the article.

Tempted to spin this off into a history of gunpowder article. The talk page archives could be shifted over there; it's not like they're in any particular chronological order right now anyway. Chris Cunningham 15:08, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

There's a great deal of material in the history section that belongs more at gunpowder warfare and/or history of firearms. But first things first, right now we're in the middle of bringing the article into compliance with the "no original research" policy and making sure that sources actually verify the statements for which they're cited. JFD 15:22, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I would be fine with spinning the history off into a history of gunpowder article, especially if you intend to add more information to this article on the use, chemistry, etc. of propellants. I don't think the historical issue will be settled to JFD's satisfaction by the strict application of the cited policies (and he is the most reasonable of those who advocate his POV). (ocanter) 171.64.141.148 16:59, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Unsurprisingly, I'm highly confident that it will be, but that's neither here nor there. JFD 17:15, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

I support the split, but I think JFD is right to try and bring the article under compliance first, otherwise managing the revision history will get to be too much of a headache.

But yeah, it seems to me that even after the article is repaired, the history section will most likely be a bit on the long side for the main article... --Jaysweet 18:10, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

To: PericlesofAthens
You added much of the material in the history section.
Might I ask you to remove material which overlaps with gunpowder warfare/history of firearms or which more appropriately belongs in those articles?
JFD 18:39, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

For my part, I would like to see it stay. It is useful information to have on hand, even if the history section is getting very long. (ocanter) 171.64.141.148 21:02, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

This is true, I edited China, India, Islam, and Europe. I very well could transfer most of this stuff to Gunpowder warfare, but I support the split of this article into a new History of gunpowder. If most of this stuff is going to be placed in a new split article, I don't really see the need for placing all the same stuff in Gunpowder warfare, which has a lot of different information, like thick walls of polygonal-shaped fortification types that better resist cannon fire.--PericlesofAthens 08:08, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I may as well take this opportunity to clarify my position and clearly state that I would prefer that the history of gunpowder article not be split off and that excess material be transferred to gunpowder warfare/history of firearms instead. JFD 08:28, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I've taken the liberty of creating a rough (very rough) proposal for the history section below. All it is is the current history section with material removed where the article got too abstruse and esoteric. I haven't really done anything to, as Jaysweet put it, "bring the article under compliance" so that would still have to be done. At this point it's only useful to ask others if they agree with the removal of the more abstruse and esoteric paragraphs. JFD 09:40, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Proposed rudimentary framework for History section

The earliest clear, certain references to saltpetre explosives come from China. Joseph Needham argues that ancient Chinese alchemists were probably the first to develop an early form of gunpowder, as part of their search for elixirs of immortality. He notes that only in China was there evidence of the precursors of black powder (Needham's 'proto-gunpowders' and early 'true gunpowders'), while in Europe, black powder is noted to appear suddenly and already relatively developed in recipes incorporating saltpeter, sulfur and charcoal (and early on, other adulterants). Needham calls gunpowder one of the Four Great Inventions of ancient China. The word 'gunpowder', widely defined, should include all mixtures of saltpetre, sulphur and carbonaceous material; but any composition not containing charcoal, as for example those which incorporated honey, may be termed 'proto-gunpowder'. Our word gunpowder arises from the fact that Europe knew it only for cannon or hand-guns. In China, however prototype mixtures were known to alchemists, physicians and perhaps fireworks technicians, for their deflagrative properties, some time before they began to be used as weapons. Hence the Chinese name for gunpowder, huo yao, literally 'fire-chemical' or 'fire drug'. Adoption of this definition and historical perspective places the earliest recipe for gunpowder in China, no later than the eleventh century. The earliest extant recipe for gunpowder in the form of pure black powder, however, was set down by Roger Bacon in England in 1267. There is no direct record of how the formula for black powder was invented, or how it came to be known in Europe and Asia, but most scholars believe that saltpeter explosives developed into an early form of black powder in China, and that this technology spread west from China to the Middle East and then Europe, possibly via the Silk Road. Bert S. Hall promotes the view that many cultures contributed to the development of gunpowder in its ultimate form. Gunpowder is not, of course, an 'invention' in the modern sense, the product of a single time and place; no individual's name can be attached to it, nor can that of any single nation or region. Fire is one of the primordial forces of nature, and incendiary weapons have had a place in armies' toolkits for almost as long as civilized states have made war. The facilitation of combustion by addition of saltpeter was discovered very early in China. An early record of Chinese alchemical experimentation comes from a Han era book The Kinship of the Three compiled in 142 A.D. by Wei Boyang, where he recorded experiments in which a set of ingredients were said to "fly and dance" in a violent reaction. By 300 A.D., Ge Hong, an alchemist of the Jin dynasty conclusively recorded the chemical reactions caused when saltpeter, redwood and charcoal were heated together in his book "Book of the Master of the Preservations of Solidarity". A ninth-century record of Chinese experimentation with saltpetre, the "Classified Essentials of the Mysterious Tao of the True Origin of Things," indicates that saltpeter-aided combustion was an unintended byproduct of Taoist alchemical efforts to develop an elixir of immortality: Some have heated together sulfur, realgar and saltpeter with honey; smoke and flames result, so that their hands and faces have been burnt, and even the whole house where they were working burned down. This period of alchemical experimentation coincided with a long period of political disunity. According to Kenneth Chase, "China suffered from long periods of disunity during which there was some immediate use for infantry and siege weapons . . . The discovery of gunpowder in the 800s coincided with another such period, from 756 to 960." The years 904–6 saw the use of incendiary projectiles called 'flying fires' (fei-huo). One early application was the fire lance, a handheld flamethrower which could also be loaded with shrapnel, and first depicted in Chinese artwork by c. 950 AD; by the late thirteenth century the Chinese developed these into guns. In archeological terms the oldest existent bronze handgun is from the Chinese Heilongjiang excavation dated to 1288 AD. Of little surprise, in the years 1287-1288 AD the Yuan Shi historical text describes the rebellion of the Christian Mongol prince Nayan and the Jurchen-born military commander Li Ting who, along with a Korean brigade conscripted by Kublai Khan, suppressed Nayan's rebellion by using foot soldiers armed with handguns and portable bombards. The various Chinese formulas for explosives in the Wu Ching Tsung Yao held levels of nitrate in the range of 27% to 50%. By the end of the 12th century, Chinese formulas for explosives were capable of bursting through cast iron metal containers, in the form of the earliest hollow, grenade bombs filled with these explosives. Saltpetre combustion technology spread to the Arabs in the 13th century, what the Arabs had called "Chinese snow" (thalj al-Sin). Ajram (1992) claims that the Chinese only developed saltpeter for use in fireworks and knew of no tactical military use for gunpowder, which was first developed by Muslims, as were fire-arms, and that the first documentation of a cannon was in an Arabic text ca 1300 CE. Gunpowder arrived in India perhaps as early as the mid-1200s, when the Mongols could have introduced it, but in any event no later than the mid-1300s. Asitesh Bhattacharya cites a number of studies, most from the 19th century, to argue that gunpowder was invented in ancient India. The earliest extant written reference to gunpowder in Europe is in Roger Bacon's "De nullitate magiæ" at Oxford in 1234. In Bacon's "De Secretis Operibus Artis et Naturae" in 1248, he states: We can, with saltpeter and other substances, compose artificially a fire that can be launched over long distances... By only using a very small quantity of this material much light can be created accompanied by a horrible fracas. It is possible with it to destroy a town or an army ... In order to produce this artificial lightning and thunder it is necessary to take saltpeter, sulfur, and Luru Vopo Vir Can Utriet. The last part is probably some sort of coded anagram for the quantities needed. In the Opus Maior he describes firecrackers around 1267: a child’s toy of sound and fire made in various parts of the world with powder of saltpeter, sulphur and charcoal of hazelwood. In 1326, the earliest known picture of a gun, from anywhere in the world, appeared in a treatise entitled "Of the Majesty, Wisdom and Prudence of Kings," by Walter de Milemete. On February 11 of that same year, the Signoria of Florence appointed two officers to obtain canones de mettallo and ammunition for the town's defense. A reference from 1331 describes an attack mounted by two Germanic knights on Cividale del Friuli, using gunpowder weapons of some sort. The French raiding party that sacked and burned Southampton in 1338 brought with them a ribaudequin and 48 bolts (but only 3 pounds of gunpowder). The Battle of Crécy in 1346 was one of the first in Europe where cannons were used. Writing shortly after this in 1350, the famous poet Petrarch described cannons on the battlefield "as common and familiar as other kinds of arms." Europe soon surpassed the rest of the world in gunpowder technology, especially during the late 14th century with the development of the process of black powder "corning". Corning involves forcing damp powder through a sieve to form it into granules which harden when dry, preventing the component ingredients of gunpowder from separating over time, thus making it far more reliable and consistent. It also allowed for more powerful and faster ignition, since the spaces between the particles allowed for oxygen necessary for speedy combustion. However, the prevalence of superstitious belief in alchemy and magic commonly led, at least in the early days of firearms, to the adulteration of the mixture with exotic, but of course deleterious products, usually mercury salts, arsenic and amber. Shot and gunpowder for military purposes were made by skilled military tradesmen, who later were called firemakers, and who also were required to make fireworks for celebrations of victory or peace. During the Renaissance, two European schools of pyrotechnic thought emerged, one in Italy and the other at Nürnberg, Germany. The Italian school of pyrotechnics emphasized elaborate fireworks, and the German school stressed scientific advancement. Both schools added significantly to further development of pyrotechnics, and by the mid-17th century fireworks were used for entertainment on an unprecedented scale in Europe, being popular even at resorts and public gardens. The introduction of Smokeless powders for military purposes lead to a contraction of the gunpowder industry.

Let's do this. The long version is preserved in the page history; for now, the more succinct version would make the article read considerably better. Chris Cunningham 13:18, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

OK with me. (ocanter) Ocanter 17:09, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

I have condensed the lede, Definition, Principle of action, Composition, and Characteristics and use sections into something much more succinct. JFD 04:20, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

If you aren't going to move this stuff into a split history article on gunpowder, then why hasn't all of the information in the former history section of this article been moved to Gunpowder warfare where it belongs? If no one takes the liberty, I'll do it in the next few days. It's kind of sad to see that cool quote I added to the article now gone.--PericlesofAthens 05:23, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Below is the "cool quote" to which Pericles refers. (Or a version of it at any rate.)

In China, the importance of safety measures has not always been recognized. In 1260, the personal arsenal of Song Dynasty Prime Minister Zhao Nanchong caught fire and exploded, destroying several outlying houses and killing four of his prized pet tigers. The Gui Xin Za Zhi of 1295 records that a much bigger accident took place at Weiyang in 1280, at an arsenal used primarily for the storage of trebuchet-launched bombs:

Formerly the artisan positions were all held by southerners (i.e. the Chinese). But they engaged in speculation, so they had to be dismissed, and all their jobs were given to northerners (probably Mongols, or Chinese who had served them). Unfortunately, these men understood nothing of the handling of chemical substances. Suddenly, one day, while sulphur was being ground fine, it burst into flame, then the (stored) fire lances caught fire, and flashed hither and thither like frightened snakes. (At first) the workers thought it was funny, laughing and joking, but after a short time the fire got into the bomb store, and then there was a noise like a volcanic eruption and the holwing of a storm at sea. The whole city was terrified, thinking that an army was approaching...Even at a distance of a hundred li tiles shook and houses trembled...The disturbance lasted a whole day and night. After order had been restored an inspection was made, and it was found that a hundred men of the guards had been blown to bits, beams and pillars had been cleft asunder or carried away by the force of the explosion to a distance of over ten li. The smooth ground was scooped into craters and trenches more than ten feet deep. Above two hundred families living in the neighborhood were victims of this unexpected disaster.

In favor of re-inserting it is that it's drily funny and has contemporary relevance. In opposition is that the history section is much tighter now and Pericles' "cool quote" would disrupt the narrative flow. What does everyone else think? JFD 01:50, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't see that this anecdote reveals anything other than that gunpowder is dangerous. I don't really think we need a long quotation to this effect. Chris Cunningham 12:04, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I put it back in, not under history, but under disadvantages of blackpowder where it talks about how easily black powder is ignited and how the US Dept of Transportation has classified it as a Class A High Explosive as a result (even though black powder is not a high explosive at all). JFD 17:59, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Mr. Meatwaggon

The sources i have provided are considerable they are from well known specialized and scientific web sites and those web sites cite the source, i have copied the source and provided the website that cited it, so the whole thing is scientific, check those websites and if you have and problem whith their content just tell me:

• History of Science and Technology
• Muslim Heritage
• IslamOnline (Arabic) IslamOnline article translated by Google into English note that the translation is not perfect and the word "defender" in the translated pages means "cannon".
• IslamSet IslamSet article translated by Google into English

so dont remove any cited information and if you have any other sources just add them Tinglepal 11:21, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

Article was a mess, now a disaster area

I thought the whole rationale in shifting the focus away from early history was so that we could add more information on the technology itself. I don't see much new technical information, but the history stuff has been gutted, dumbed down, and crammed to the bottom. I can't believe I am the only person who came to this article because he wanted to know the history of gunpowder rather than the fact that the optimal percentage of sulfur by weight is 11.85%. (On whose authority we know this we can only guess; no citation is given.)

Peace, Ocanter 18:33, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I have not checked myself, but if you take an equation such as 10 KNO₃ + 3 S + 8 C → 2 K₂CO₃ + 3 K₂SO₄ + 6 CO₂ + 5 N₂ and use the appropriate molecular masses, the left hand side of the equation can be expressed as percentages by weight.Pyrotec 20:11, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The problem with the history section was that it was rambling, contradictory and weighted heavily in favour of a single source. Cutting it down is (or should be) a temporary measure which keeps people reading the article (as opposed to giving up halfway through). The article isn't exactly FA status right now, but it's at least paced a bit better and ripe for future development. It's only been four days anyway. Chris Cunningham 18:53, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Well, I would say that it is still rambling, still contradictory, and still weighted heavily in favor of a single author (and the many authors who have simply popularized his work). The only difference is that now most of the actual historical information is gone. Ocanter 19:42, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

^Most of the info on China was actually moved to Gunpowder warfare, but sadly much of the informative stuff on the Islamic world, India, and Europe has still been purged.--PericlesofAthens 19:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

The stuff on the Islamic world has been moved to gunpowder warfare, but it's has been broken up by century, because the Ottoman section at gunpowder warfare is organized that way; the stuff on the Safavids was also added to its respective section.

The stuff on India is in the history of gunpowder. Some of the Indian stuff belongs more in gunpowder warfare, because it deals with weapons and battles, but there isn't a section devoted to India there the India section there is devoted specifically to the Mughal Empire.

The stuff on Europe is either still here (but now found in the manufacturing section) or now at history of gunpowder.

I have, however, found Pericles' beloved "cool quote" a permanent home at history of gunpowder.

JFD 21:33, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Well that depends on what is meant by history and the aim of the article. The article appeared to be a history of the development of pro-gunpowder and gunpowder by China, with possibly some help by the Arabs and India. Full stop. There is at least another 500 years, or so, of development in Europe and about 200 years in the USA. Militarily gunpowder (blackpowder) was obsolete almost 100 years ago, however it was still being used 20 years ago and work was going on then to find "drop-in" replacements. There are still military specifications for gunpowder (blackpowder), so it is presumably still being used. Pyrotec 20:00, 2 July 2007 (UTC) Personally, I'm only interested in the last 200 years or so of history; other people may be interested in the medieaval history; and others in the Chinese (and others') invention of pro-gunpowder and gunpowder. The article needs to accommodate all these views. Pyrotec 20:16, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

I am coming to the opinion that Thumperward's initial impulse—to spin off a history of gunpowder article—was the correct one.

As it stands the "Manufacture" section is effectively a continuation of the history section.

A separate article is the only way to accommodate the material Pyrotec indicates he wishes to add, the already abundant output of Pericles' research, and Ocanter's desire to give as many POVs as possible an exhaustively detailed hearing.

JFD 21:14, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

As the article currently exists, then yes, as JFD surmises, the Manufacture section will be expanded as time permits to cover say the last 200 years of history from a European (+ UK) and USA perspective. The Manufacturing technology section would then cover how gunpowder was made in industrial quantities; and how this changed over time. In possibly one of these sections, we could state that the need for large guns lead to the development of prismatic powders; but only give an introduction and use the {main article} link. Pyrotec 07:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I was of the same consensus to create a history of gunpowder article, but I think much of that information can be moved into Gunpowder warfare. The funny thing is, all of the cited information in that article is on China, since all the Chinese info was pretty much moved there (and no one provided proper citations to the material of other areas and subjects already there previously). I think purged info from this article on the history of gunpowder in Europe and the Islamic world should be moved into that article.

The info on the Islamic world is, in fact, already there but not all in one place. The info on Europe is either here or at history of gunpowder, though a fair bit of it does belong more at gunpowder warfare. JFD 21:46, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow, this article is a mess. Wikipedia is not really considered a reliable source for history, biographies etc. but the present setup reads like a propoganda piece for the communist party of China. - Colin 220.225.18.36 11:53, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

<sarcasm> ^Hold on Comrade Colin, I'm opening up my Little Red Book that Mao Zedong gave to me, just to make sure your statement aligns with Mao Zedong Thought; if not, your nuts could be put in a blender manufactured by the government. </sarcasm> Seriously, though, what does the credible history of medieval Chinese gunpowder warfare have to do with the present-day Reds in the Chinese Communist Party? After all, the members of the CCP weren't the first to experiment with it, but some of their far off ancestors certainly did. And you totally dismissed the possibility that this could be a propaganda piece from Taiwan or Singapore (lots of Chinese there), or even that Godless Chinese hell-hole known as San Francisco. So, what is it you suggest we do? Delete all the info on China? Omit information that is excessive (which I can't see, really, since the history section is so short now). I'm not the one who recently edited the article to the way it is, I was actually happier when info on every other region was presented fairly. But I do like the article's short and to the point manner, where most of the info on gunpowder history should be located in the article on Gunpowder warfare, or a new article created on the History of gunpowder.--PericlesofAthens 19:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Wow! I was not expecting a new article on the History of gunpowder! I was expecting that link to show up red. Lol. Nice work User:Eiorgiomugini and JFD, one step ahead of me apparently.--PericlesofAthens 19:54, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

I just added the link to the History of gunpowder in the history section of the article.--PericlesofAthens 20:03, 3 July 2007 (UTC)