Incidentally, this does help explain one of the more curious bits of my bad English translation of Sandokan. In one of the battles there is a reference to machinegun fire. I didn't think Emilio Salgari was sloppy enough to put machineguns in the 1850s. Today I came across this concerning the introduction of the Mitrailleuse:
Another reason may have related to the introduction by the French army of the Beaulieu 4-pounder rifled field-gun in 1858: the new artillery, though much more accurate and long-ranged than the smoothbore ‘canon-obusier’ it replaced (which, incidentally, was the most prevalent artillery piece of the US Civil War), was not suited to firing anti-personnel case-shot (which, in French, is called ‘mitraille’). The Mitrailleuse so gained its name, and may thus have been intended to provide the high-volume dispersed anti-personnel fire which rifled ordnance—at this early stage in its development—could not.
Undoubtedly, Salgari was talking about case-shot, but since the Mitrailleuse lent its name to later rapid-fire guns in French (and subsequently Spanish and probably Italian), the translator got confused.
no subject
Date: 2008-02-20 04:57 pm (UTC)Another reason may have related to the introduction by the French army of the Beaulieu 4-pounder rifled field-gun in 1858: the new artillery, though much more accurate and long-ranged than the smoothbore ‘canon-obusier’ it replaced (which, incidentally, was the most prevalent artillery piece of the US Civil War), was not suited to firing anti-personnel case-shot (which, in French, is called ‘mitraille’). The Mitrailleuse so gained its name, and may thus have been intended to provide the high-volume dispersed anti-personnel fire which rifled ordnance—at this early stage in its development—could not.
Undoubtedly, Salgari was talking about case-shot, but since the Mitrailleuse lent its name to later rapid-fire guns in French (and subsequently Spanish and probably Italian), the translator got confused.