While Guttenberg’s forge was working to bring about the Renaissance, a more common use was to create weapons to kill one another. One of the most noteworthy is the musket.
Early muskets were more like small cannons than the later-day rifles. Sometimes two-people needed to operate the earliest weapons due to their weight. Armies responded by building even heavier armor.
However, by the mid-1600s, technology began to miniaturize. The flintlock enabled dramatically smaller and less expensive muskets. Single soldiers could carry and operate a musket. Armor made little difference. Avoidance, instead of armor, became the most effective means of defense.
By the 1700s, the musket was in common use for both fighting and hunting. Miniaturization continued and the pistol, a mini-musket, eventually evolved as a weapon in its own right.
Muskets are different from rifles in that they’re less accurate but easier to load, fire, and require less cleaning. Since even the most accurate rifle at the time could barely hit the side of a barn the extra cost wasn’t worth the hassle.
Use & Impact
The US and French revolutions, plus countless other wars, featured muskets as a primary weapon. Many soldiers fought in the US Civil War in the 1860s with old flintlocks despite the availability by then of better technology.
Musket manufacturing led to the creation of standardized parts, the American Manufacturing System. French arms maker Honoré Le Blanc originally developed standardized parts. However, the French government rejected his methods due to the perceived effect of automation on jobs. Then ambassador Thomas Jefferson brought the new system to American Eli Whitney, and the method drove US innovation for the next century.
The musket had profound changes to military and civilian culture by simplifying hunting, largely eliminating the usefulness of armor. Furthermore, it created the notion that one person with a gun can make a difference, an idea later popularized by Sam Colt.
“God created men equal, Sam Colt made them equal.”
Colt’s revolver reduced the cost and risk of settling the US. Before the revolver, Native Americans could shoot arrows faster than pioneers could reload muskets, making westward travel and settlement dangerous. The Colt revolver reversed the dynamics and is widely credited with winning “the Indian wars.” Colt extensively relied on standardized parts ー especially modern bullets ー to make reloading his guns faster and less expensive.
Colt had many false starts. Besides the weapon itself, historians argue it is a leap in standardized manufacturing, especially in the use of easy to load, inexpensive bullets. Collier had built and patented a multi-shot musket in 1813, that Colt likely saw while in the army. But the user was required to turn the barrel by hand to load the next bullet. Colt’s barrel automatically switched and locked into the next position (hence the name, revolver).
Colt’s gun wasn’t seen as especially useful until used, by the army, in a fight where they were vastly outnumbered by Native Americans. Whereas single-shot muskets were slow to reload, Colt revolvers ー quickly firing shot after shot ー decimated Indian tribes. A June 1844 battle led by Capt. Hayes where a small group of rangers killed a much larger group of Comanches. Colt’s weapon decisively won the battle and changed the opinion for Colt’s gun.
Colt was a strong marketer, creating popular slogans to build mythology about his guns that exists until today: “God created men equal, Col. Colt made them equal.” “There is more law in a Colt six-gun than in all the law books.”
Standardized parts allow parts of a machine to be swapped out, enabling factories to manufacture parts without worrying about the larger machine. Interchangeable parts vastly lowered manufacturing costs.
Check out the video we created about interchangeable standardized parts:
Today, everything from cars to computers, software and even food, is interchangeable. We’re annoyed that a USB plug only works in one direction but the idea that such a plug works at all — that it fits into countless computers and makes enormous data stores accessible — is a big yawn.
Today, we take it for granted that parts can be replaced and that every part is the same. But, at the time, this was an enormous breakthrough.
On a table is place a collection of random parts to create about 50 muskets. An observer picks random pieces then fits them together into a fully functioning musket. Muskets were individually handcrafted, at enormous cost, before Le Blanc’s innovation.
Interchangeable parts vastly lowering the cost of maintaining an army.
Then US Ambassador to France Thomas Jefferson witnessed Le Blanc’s demonstration and invited him to bring it to the US. Le Blanc declined, wishing to remain in France. France, concerned about job loss, declined to embrace Le Blanc’s method.
There is some speculation that the idea of standardized parts predates Le Blanc, though Cotty’s 1806 book — written in a pre-Napoleanic french dialect — shows that to be unlikely.
Specifically, Cotty notes that Le Blanc:
Is the first to use “hardened steel” (a process apparently in use for some time in the steel industry) to produce the lock of a firearm; Le Blanc created this technique in 1777.
Highlights the pros and cons of interchangeable standardized parts for muskets.
Specifically details Le Blank presenting 50 or 60 rifles to Mr. de Gribeauval, “inspecteur general de l’artillerie,” the inspector general of the French artillery, in 1789 before the French Revolution.
Le Blanc then had his men take the rifles apart, mix up the parts, and put them back together. However, there were enough defects that de Gribeauval decided to rely on “old” (their word) manufacturing methods.
de Gribeauval was also concerned with complaints from soldiers about the standardized parts muskets and with the effect on jobs.
There was some speculation that Jefferson’s recounting of the French demonstration was an urban legend. Jefferson mentions the demonstration in a 1789 letter to Henry Knox but there is no other mention despite the enormity of the innovation. However, Cotty’s account makes the idea that Jefferson fabricated the idea to gain traction extremely unlikely.
Jefferson eventually returned to the US and brought the idea of standardized parts to Eli Whitney, inventor of the cotton gin. Jefferson, in his earlier role as Secretary of State, failed to process Whitney’s cotton gin patent in a timely manner. In all fairness, Jefferson openly did not like patents and was slow to process virtually all patent applications, not just Whitney’s. For example, he eventually granted four separate people a shared patent for the steamboat despite that two of the applicants didn’t have working boats. Jefferson was openly hostile to patents.
Due in part to the lack of patent protection knockoff cotton gin’s thrived and Whitney made no profit. Feeling a sense of guilt, Jefferson brought Whitney the idea for a musket based on interchangeable parts.
Jefferson worked with Whitney to repeat the same demonstration as Le Blanc, mixing up a bunch of parts then assembling a musket. However, Whitney’s parts all fit together perfectly, probably because historians agree they cheated and marked parts Whitney knew were pre-fitted.
Whitney, with his well-known name and Jefferson’s help, secured a contract to build an interchangeable part musket. His factory never quite worked — he could not build the parts to tight enough tolerances — but his children, who took over the factory, eventually succeeded.
Despite that Le Blanc of France created the concept, interchangeable standardized parts became known as the American Manufacturing Method.
Later, Sam Colt thrived on interchangeable parts. Ford was also an interchangeable parts fanatic, to the point he insisted that shipping crates use the same size planks for reusability.