至遲於萬曆四十八年（1620），明人開始仿鑄歐洲的前裝滑膛銅砲。此後二十多年與清軍交戰的過程中，明朝工匠陸續融入南方較發達的鑄鐵工藝以及北方已有逾百年傳統的鐵心銅體佛郎機子銃製法，造出品質絕佳的「定遼大將軍」砲。稍後，清朝也利用投降漢人工匠成功量產出結構類似的「神威大將軍」砲。這些複合金屬砲比銅砲更輕更省，且可強化砲管的抗膛壓能力，其品質應在世界居領先地位。然而，此一先進製法卻在清朝定鼎之後長期的平和狀態中遭到遺忘。道光二十年（1840）掀起的鴉片戰爭，迫使清廷重新大量造砲。此波新砲追求厚重，並令複合金屬技法再度風行，製出「耀威大將軍」等萬斤重砲。惟因其砲管內壁不夠勻稱，材質亦較西砲為差，仍無力面對西方列強的挑戰，紅夷火砲在中國也終於隨著稍後線膛砲的崛起而走入歷史。本文除介紹筆者過去十多年來所獲見的48 門深遭學界忽視的明清複合砲外，並嘗試勾勒出此類特殊砲種的「文化傳記（cultural biography）」。

No later than 1620, the Chinese of the Ming Dynasty started to cast muzzleloading smooth bore bronze cannons following European models. After two decades of effort, the Ming army was able to manufacture in 1642 high quality “Dingliao grand general” cannons, which combined the advantages of advanced cast-iron technology developed in southern China and iron-bronze composite barrels invented in northern China more than a century before. Later on, Han craftsmen in the Qing army also began to mass-produce cannons with a similar structure, the “Shenwei grand general” cannons, in 1644. The quality of these composite cannons was considered unsurpassed in the 17th century because they were not only lighter and cheaper than bronze cannons, but their barrels could also endure stronger explosive pressure. Yet, this advanced cannon-casting technology was forgotten in the long peaceful period after Qing’s unification of China. The Qing army was forced to cast cannons in large quantities when the First Opium War erupted in 1840. Composite-metal technology became valued again, and cannons that weighed as heavy as six tons, such as the “Yaowei grand general,” were made. However, because the inner barrels were not homogeneous and the metal quality was unsatisfactory, these new cannons were no match against Western artillery, and the Qing army could not resist the Western invasion. Although muzzleloading smooth bore cannons reached their peak in the mid-19th century, they finally faded from history because of the rise of rifled artillery. This article will introduce forty-four extant Ming-Qing composite-metal cannons which have been neglected by historians, as well as attempt to compare them with similar cannons in the Netherlands and India.