Could these musket balls be "case shot" ? Any info is appreciated!

[ToastedWheatie]

After some research, I went to an area that I believe there was a "skirmish" where the Colonists met the British as they approached a fort to attack. The British did not have artillery at this spot, but the Colonist had brought three guns into the woods away from the fort. The cannon were destroyed prior to the retreat back to the fort.
I found these four items that I believe to be musket balls in an area about 30 yards square. I then found the hornets nest that ended my day.....

But researching online. I see these may be "case shot", based on the multiple indentations. This is extremely relevant to me, as case shot is proof to me that I found the spot, and these were Revolutionary musket balls, and not hunter fired at a later time.

I do not have access right now to a caliper, but each one weighs between 10 and 10.5 grams.

If this is true, it multiplies the cool factor of a generic round ball by 100!

Can anyone help?

 

Amazon Forum Fav 👍

How to Research for Treasure Hunting and Metal Detecting From Lead Generation to Vetting - Grab it through Amazon!

[C TROOPER]

Could be what is known as "grape shot"... large amount of lead balls loaded into a cannon and fired like a shotgun at infantry at close range...IMHO

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

If you found them at a Revolutionary War battlesite, those lead balls cannot be artillery Case-Shot balls, because that type of ammunition for cannons wasn't invented until after the end of the Revolutionary War. It was invented in 1784 by British army officer Henry Shrapnel.

You report their weight as being 10 to 10.5 grams. That translates into 154 to 162 grains, which means the original diameter of the balls was approximately .475 to .48 inches. That size is not correct for any RevWar era firearm I know of. It is a bit too large to be a RevWar .50-caliber musketball.

A civil war era .44-caliber Colt pistolball was approximately .464"-diameter and weighed approximately 138 grains (8.94 grams).

Also... no artillery "Grape-Shot" (nor Canister ammo) used such tiny balls.

 

[ToastedWheatie]

Darn.
Back to square one.

Trying to my own research before bothering you guys, I thought Shrapnel's invention was a spherical case like a hollow cannon ball filled with smaller balls and a bursting charge set off by a time fuse.

Maybe I shouldn't have used the phrase "case shot"? I see many references to scatter shot (grape shot? Cannister shot?) in different forms straight out of the cannon that predate this 1777 battle. Such as this: Tin Case Shot or Canister Shot in the 18th Century for Artillery (Adrian B. Caruana)

But these balls are probably too small for even that.


Maybe Buck and ball (buckshot) from musket? ("Perhaps the most famous proponent of the buck and ball loading was George Washington, who encouraged his troops to load their muskets with buck and ball loads during the American Revolution."):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Buck&Ball_musket_StormWreck.jpg

Or maybe I should just go back, avoid that bee nest (bring Benadryl this time), and see what other clues come up.

Your thoughts, sir?

 

[ToastedWheatie]

Bought a caliper- .50 - .52 inches at the undented spots.
If you believe these may be .54 caliber, can these dents be caused by richotet?

 

[TheCannonballGuy]

Yes... in Historical Artillery nomenclature, the term "Case-Shot" means ONLY explosive artillery shells which contain anti-personnel balls/slugs/wedges -- or the balls/slugs/wedges from a Case-Shot shell. So, that is what I thought you meant. Insofar as I'm aware, no Case-Shot balls (nor Grape-Shot balls, nor Canister-Shot balls) smaller than .5-inch ever existed.

Because the you said the balls you found weigh 10 to 10.5 grams, they absolutely cannot be .54-caliber musketballs... which weigh approximately 221 grains (14.32 grams).

There is a serious contradiction between the size-measurement (.50-to-.52") and weight-measurements (10-to-10.5 grams) you are reporting. All I can suggest to resolve the conflict is to re-weigh the balls on a scale which tells the weight in grains.

Other readers may want to see my response to your PM, because it also answers what's in your posts... so here's the text of my PM reply.

Thanks for the info you provided regarding what I thought may have been case shot.
You sent me back to the drawing board, where I am now looking at "buck and ball" (see my response on the post).

"I find this online:
In October 1777, General Washington recommended the men deliver their first volley with a load of “one musket ball and four or eight buckshot, according to the strength of their pieces.” And from Army GENERAL ORDERS, Head Quarters, Perkiomy, October 6, 1777; “buckshot are to be put into all cartridges which shall be hereafter made."

•The majority of excavated shot displayed from our Ft. Clinton, lost and destroyed by the British in Oct. 1777, are clearly larger than .25 and appear to average in the low .30’s
•Thomas’ three-volume tome, Round Ball to Rimfire, demonstrates pre-Civil War buckshot as .30 from the Hudson Highlands in 1781 as well as
•a packet of ten cartridges possibly of Rev. War vintage where the buckshot in the one removed for testing shows to be greater than .25 next to the .69 caliber ball they sit atop.
•A curator at the West Point Museum shared that they have two known-to-be Rev. War buck-n-ball cartridges there and the x-rayed buckshot is .32 diameter.
•The Heidelberg College excavation of the 1795 Fallen Timber Battlefield found three .25 pellets vs. 35 .31 pellets. "

Do you think I'm in the right direction? Or still wrong caliber?

thanks!

Tidajo, the key to solving the riddle is the super-precise measuring of the weight of the (lead) balls. Smashing a lead ball or bullet changes the projectile's shape but does not change its weight. As I said in my previous posted reply, the precise weight you reported (10-to-10.5 grams) matches up with a lead sphere whose diameter is approximately .475 to .48-inch. As your other research shows, buckshot and the "buck" from Buck-&-Ball loads are typically .31 to .32 for .69-caliber Buck-&-Ball ammo. You can see the proportionate sizes of the 3 small balls and one large ball in the x-ray loaded-musket photo you posted. The "buck" are a bit smaller (such as .25-inch) when the single large ball is smaller than .69-caliber.

I have not personally used a .50-caliber musket or Colonial-era .50 rifle such as a Hawken. I've been told that because a cloth "patch" was supposed to be used to wrap the lead ball in those .50-cal firearms, the ball was about .46-inch in diameter. If what I was told is correct, your precise-weight-indicated .475-to-.48" balls are slightly too large to be Colonial-era .50-caliber musket/rifle balls.

I really do wish I had happier news to give you, but all I can do is provide the facts... which can sometimes be disappointing to us relic-diggers.