You are here: Home > Firearms > Ammunition
Introduction > Leutmann’s bullet
Overlooked, unknown or forgotten however is the work of Johann Georg Leutmann (1667-1736), who in 1733 described the use of elongated balls, with a conical cavity at the base. Leutmann’s egg-shaped ball predates that suggested by Robins in 1747 and the much later adoption in the 19th century of what today is often referred to as the Minié principle.
Leutmann studied theology, medicine, mathematics and physics at the university in his hometown of Wittenberg. In 1726 he became a professor of mechanics and optics at the newly established (1824) Imperial Academy of Sciences in Saint Petersburg. He authored a number of monographs, and in 1733 the Academy published “Nachricht von gezogenen Büchſen, und etliche rare Anmerckungen vom Schießen” (Report on rifled Guns and various rare annotations on shooting).
Leutmann opens his work with a discourse on barrel making and rifling, including a description and illustration of a rifling machine of his own invention. There follows a series of notes and experiments addressing rifle shooting. The first note covers the flight of the ball and describes firing through sheets of paper to demonstrate that the path followed is a parabolic arc.
The second note is introduced with the observation that, “In the past only spherical lead balls have been used for shooting.” It is here that Leutmann introduces: Elongated Balls, with a conical cavity at the base:
“But from practical experience one discovers that if an elongated, egg-shaped ball which has in its base a conical or spherical cavity one-third the length of the ball in depth, is used in a rifled barrel, the ball not only has greater force, but will travel further in a straight line before it begins to drop.”
Leutmann notes that the ball with the conical cavity is easily cast, and a suitable mould is illustrated. A simple coned base plug is held in place when the mould is closed, which forms the cavity when the ball is cast.
The remainder of the work continues with descriptions including felt wads, a bullet that fragments into four, wire balls (whereby two ball are connect by a coiled wire), a breech plug with a parabolic chamber, the best form of touch hole and loading recommendations.
Whilst there are occasional published references to Leutmann, his work seldom sees analysis by 19th century authors (or those writing in modern times), Deanes’ Manual of the History and Science of Fire-Arms (London, 1858) being one exception that gives him brief mention. Benjamin Robins was also familiar with Leutmann’s work but writing in 1747 quotes him as an example of the latest who has written about the advantages of the rifle, and of the motion of projectiles, but who has in his opinion little understood the theory. Robins also sets out defects of the rifle and suggests that deflection of the bullet when the flight is extended could be remedied by “making use of bullets of an egg-like form instead of spherical ones.” In this respect his thoughts on the advantages of the egg-shaped ball echo those previously published by Leutmann, although Robins makes no mention of a conical cavity.
Leutmann’s thoughts on the motion of projectiles and the nature and effects of the explosion of gunpowder reflect best knowledge of the time. His notes on the practical aspects of rifle shooting, based on experiments rather than hypothesis, are remarkable. It is perhaps time that his work was re-evaluated and Leutmann’s name (re)placed into the lexicon of smallarms ammunition development.
Acknowledgments
- The author wishes to thank the late Bill Curtis for bringing Leutmann’s work to his attention, and the late De Witt Bailey for the translation of Leutmann’s text regarding elongated balls, with a conical cavity at the base.
This brief article is abridged from:
- ‘Leutmann’s Forgotten Bullet’ by David Minshall – published in Research Press Digest 2025 (pp. 103-112). The article expands upon the introductory details here and draws from Leutmann’s original text and illustrations to gain a fuller picture of the importance of his work.