Exploding musket ball

[jenna]

James, Raymond and Steven: thank you for that bit of insight.

The "rules" of combat are new to me, for being a woman I really have no need for them. I had just always heard there was a gentleman's code and that they still fought that way.

No matter which way you slice it though, these "exploding bullets" sound terrible.

[johan_steele]

Jenna, it really wasn't until the War was well under way that killing had taken on a professional turn. Thus the comments that fighting in line was much easier than skirmish order as you weren't trying to kill a single man , instead in line a man was just shooting at a mass of men.

Claud E Fuller wrote an outstanding book: <u>The Rifled Musket</u> in 1958. It has an entire Appendix dedicated to the "exploding bullet."

The Gardiner bullet was the only exploding bullet patented in the US and it was issued in some number to the Union Army, though about a third were captured by the CSA and issued. Of approx 471 million cartridges aquired by the US govt during the ACW only 33,500 were Gardiner bullets. 10,000 approx of which were captured by the CSA and issued by the CSA to the Army of Norther Virginia. The majority in Union hands were ironically used in target practice by IIRC the 9th Corps and were generally not favorably reported on. One complaint was that the ramming home of the bullet in a hot weapon would sometimes ignite the bullet prematurely w/ disastarous results.

Other sources which I can't seem to lay my paws upon give other specific examples which include: What could be easily constued as an explosive bullet was a .58 "case round" similar in effect to a modern glaser round, a thin case surrounded a number of buckshot and the effect was that of a shotgun, but often the thin case would not rupture until it hit something... its target. It lacked range and it's accuracy was questionable as the case was thin and uneven tin or copper foil. The effect of ramming home the cartridge was suposed to rupture the case. However, this apparently was not always the effect. Distorting the Case and failing to rupture it would considerably distort the accuracy of the round.

On glass bullets, they were all round shot, none were ever known in the shape of a minie ball, There were none none in anything but .69 cal. Apparently it's path was very erratic and it lacked accuracy of any sort past 50 odd yards...thus their lack of much service in the Civil War. However, they were a fearful weapon as the glass, the consistancy of a childs marble would often chip &amp; shatter upon impact causing multiple wounds and glass was QUITE difficult to see and remove from a wound.

The British &amp; French both had designed and used a similar bullet well prior to the ACW; it was intended for the destruction of Arty cassions. It is imposible to know how many of these were imported and where they might have been issued.

It is very important to keep in mind that the surgeons of the day had no knowledge of ballistics and there had been no study on the effect of the minie ball on the human body, many of the accounts in Longmore's <u>Treatsie on Gunshot wounds, their history &amp; treatment</u> as well as the <u>Medical &amp; Surgical History of the War of the Rebellion</u> were taken from second hand accounts and often personal reminisces writen twenty plus years after the war.

During the war only 130 cases of wounds to Union soldiers were attributed to exploding bullets.

The number attributed to glass bullets was considerably less.

Needless to say while their use is documentable it was miniscule, and with the dubious knowledge of wound ballistics of medical personel it was perhaps miniscule to the point of being non existant.

[scone]

Jenna,
In some ways it was in others it wasn't. One thing that drew me into the studying the Civil War and it still fascinats me is that men one day would be fighting a battle or a skirmish, a couple days later soldiers (usually men on picket duty I would guess) since they were iut from the main lines, might meet exchange tobacco for coffee, newspapers or just chit chat and a few days later would be back to shooting at each other.


I rember reading one account by an officer in the ANV , cant remember who though. Or the exact wording of it but went like this.

This officer came across two boys swimming or bathing in a creek or stream and he kept seeing this bush near the bank move. Officer asked about the movement and the soldiers said it nothing but after further questioning the men, the reason for the movent of the bush reviled itself as another lad came out. Upon questioning him, it discovered that he was a union soldier he just wanted to come over a chat with the boys for a while. The officer told him to go back to where he came from and that if it happened again he would become a prisoner of war.

Shane, thanks for the wonderfull information.

A question though. I heard of artillery after using all their rounds they started using the chains and harnesses of the horses and even rocks to fire out of the piece. I wonder if this was ever done in the infantry. Like the actual use of marbles or small pebbles. Any thoughts?

[johan_steele]

Steven, I don't believe so only because the way cartridges were packaged and I have yet to find corroboration to the claims that the men on both sides sometimes made their own cartridges. It makes more sense for arty to use whatever might make a handy projectile because the size of the barrel would allow quite a lot to become nasty projectiles and canister/grape etc was for use when the battery was in CLOSE contact w/ infantry. The accounts I recall of Infantry units runing out of ammo have the men picking up rocks and chucking them or just plain saying I'm outta here.

The glass bullets I've read of were specifically in .69 and appeared to be packaged as a standard cartridge... I don't think that was ever a standard glass marble size. It wouldn't be too difficult to remove a round ball and replace it w/ a marble. It would make a useful field expedient, but again now there would be a spare round ball...