Exploding musket ball

[wt_jimbos]

I have read in several books about Union soldiers stating they were hit by "exploding musket balls". In the U.S. army college guide to the battle of chickamauga, there was a chapter on medical treatment in the civil war. In the chapter they used the account of a wounded private's dairy to help paint a picture of the type of experience one would have in the union medical system. In this he mentions being hit by an "exploding musket ball" and states when the surgeon removed it it was in several pieces, with one round shot slightly flattened and coated in steel.

This is the first time I have seen any description of a so called "exploding musket ball" (as i have only seen it mentioned not explained) and I wasn't sure if the private's description was accurate, can anyone shed some light on this???

[scone]

James,

this is the first I have heard of such a thing but look forward to hearing more about this..

[johan_steele]

There is quite a bit of argument whether any "exploding bullets" were used by the CSA. The CSA people continually denied it but there were several times where it was found.

To make matters even more complictaed there is question to the exact meaning of "exploding bullet." Glass bullets, powder filled w/ a percussion cap (for detonating cassions. There are at least three examples I have read of troops at Vicksburg passing messages between the lines that glass bullets wouldn't be used.

I've been told, but haven't seen this, there is supposedly also concrete evidence of their use at Gettysburg.

To add further to the confusion the horrific wounds caused by the standard minie ball were enough to confuse anyone and the experts of the day didn't have the knowledge of wound paths, ballistics etc.

My own belief is that they were never used in battle, frankly the thought of putting a percussion cap next to powder jostling in a cartridge box on my hip... would scare the hell out of me. However, I do firmly believe "glass bullets" were used.

I recall reading of an incident where a captured Drummer boy was nearly hanged because he had a bunch of what some men thought were glass bullets in his haversack. An Iowa Corporal pointed out that he was a drummer boy without a rifle and the bullets looked like marbles to the Corporal plus there was no powder... the drummer boy survived the war.

"Explosive bullets" as described by Fuller (I may have the wrong author as I'm on the road away from my references.) were a standard Minie Ball w/ a hollow cavity filled w/ powder, a percusion cap in the point of the bullet ignited the small charge. The idea was to use this to ignite Cassions. This was not a new weapon system. Both the Brits & French had been using them for at least twenty years.

"Glass Bullets" included a variety of examples, the majority seem to have been round balls; not minie balls. They were packaged as in standard cartridges. There was some question if these may have been a field expedient... I don't honestly know, but a glass bullet would shatter into shards in the wound and be VERY difficult for a surgeon to remove.

The argument has been covered quite in depth by one particular author; though I cannot recall who. I believe it may have been Claude Fuller but may be wrong.

[rbenne]

A conjecture...

Buck and Ball? one big and four small, separate on leaving barrel. Can be construed as "exploding"?

[jenna]

So answer me this, to a woman who has no knowledge of firearms or bullets or the like, but am very interested in this topic. You make reference to the fact that the CSA denied ever using "exploding bullets". Did this then go to the belife that this was to be a gentleman's war? That you were not to use anything that would be ungentlemanly? Like hand to hand, and bayonetts. I have heard at re-enactments and on history programs that the reason they marched in long lines was so that you wouldn't know who you were really going to hit, and that you in turn had no idea who you were going to hit, and that they tried not to do hand to hand combat or bayonetts because it was to personal and face to face. Is that why they wouldn't have used the "exploding bullets"?

(lol. Sorry for the spelling errors but I have yet to figure out how the spell check on this thing works?)

[wt_jimbos]

Shane,
thank u for your post, that gives me plenty of leads to follow, could u please give me some details on the book, I haven't been able to find it.

Jenna,
the reason for organizing men into large lines was not so that a soldier would not know who they hit, this was to maximize fire power and hence be more effective then an unorganized opposition (hence skirmishers could rarely hold their ground against advancing formed lines). Bayonet and hand to hand were used but mainly when a breach or weak point in a line was established or the enemy were wavering, as charging a solid line of infantry would expose the aggressors to a devil of fire.

Raymond,
The idea has passed through my mind especially after reading the account in the private's diary above, though his mentioning of the piece that was steel coated threw me.

[rbenne]

In theory all wars have rules, like no exploding bullets and all honorable men follow them.

In fact all wars have the rules broken by dishonorable men.

From the caves to today, it’s always been that way. It is not just the Bushido who have a code but all warriors. Some don’t follow it is all. I am sure our Civil War had the usual proportion of honorable, and dishonorable, men.

[rbenne]

James;

Perhaps this too is a longshot, but ever see lead after it has melted and reformed? How shiny it looks? Like steel. The buck (small balls) are rather small, I have seen examples, may have melted a bit as it left the barrel and reformed.

He could have been simply mistaken.

[scone]

Bayonets were more intimidation. But they also came in handy for cooking you meat, intrenching , used to stack rifles, makes a handy candle holder , used to grab wire bail of mucket thats been sitting on a fire.

[wt_jimbos]

Raymand,
I have seen lead heated and cooled, and it taking on a shiny appearance, but I didn't put the private's account in in full "After cutting in he removed a number of fragments of ball and remarked "I guess you were shot with a button". After probing further he removed a one ounce lead ball-round except a flattening on one side. The outside covering of the main ball is steel about the thickness of a knife blade". This part exploded. I know this to be true and still possess the ball."
Now this opens a can or worms, because, he does mention fragments (could be buck) and a main ball (the ball), but he still has the ball and so would know whether it was heated shiny or coated in steel, so this account leaves me further from forming any conclusion. I would like to get a hold of the book Shane mentioned as I think it would broaden the possibilities, not only of this case but the several other that have simply mentioned "exploding musket balls", but I do believe buck and ball could have been in many cases the so called "exploding musket ball" but with all this new light on the topic it would be interesting to view the possibilities and view more primary sources on the topic.