"Loading Multiple Musket Balls?" Topic

In an account of the Battle of the Plains of Abraham (Quebec 1759) that I read recently, it said that Wolfe had his men load two musket balls (and also to wait until the enemy attack columns were within 30-40 yards before firing).

In Guns on the Early Frontiers, the author mentions early American military buyers insisting that musket barrels not explode, even if loaded with multiple charges and musket balls. After one battle which I can't remember, they found numerous muskets with multiple unfired loads in the barrels (I think the highest was 26).

Was this a common practice? Just how many charges/musket balls could you load in the average military service musket and expect it to fire without it blowing up in your face? I've heard this was Wolfe's "column-smashing" tactic.

What about in other situations? Did soldiers load additional charges after a misfire and hope for the best? Forget they'd loaded the weapon and reload? I know you can jam a variety of stuff in a muzzle-loading weapon and hope that it discharges, I just wasn't sure how often entire battalions were told to do it intentionally.

The battle you're referring to was Gettysburg. There were thousands of muskets that were found un-fired. Many of these un-fired muskets had been loaded multiple times, including the one you mentioned, was loaded 26 times. This has been attributed to, despite their training, people being hesitant to kill another human, even in a war.

This has been attributed to, despite their training, people being hesitant to kill another human, even in a war.

I have read that they forgot to cap their musket in all the excitement, fear and confusion.

They also found muskets that had been loaded several times and then capped which produced ugly results.

If you don't want to kill your fellow man just aim high.

Have you guys heard of loading multiple musket balls as a tactic before? Or ordering several thousand regulars to fire a volley in that fashion?

I haven't heard of it as a tactic per se. However buck and ball ammunition for smoothbores was common in the Civil War. One ball and three buckshot in one round.

I have heard of buck and ball was something the Americans would do in the AWI as well.

Buck and ball was also used in the War of 1812 and possibly the Mexican War.

The theory, much like double shotting a ships' gun is the same. You get extra bang for your buck with the first shot (no pun intended).

How much this was actually done, well, that would be a Phd in my opinion…

Eric

I believe Brumwell discusses this topic in Redcoats. I am sure you have already read Paths of Glory.

Seems very unlikely that after having climbed out of boats & scaling a cliff that Wolfe would have been able to order his men to do something completely out of their drill. Musket cartridges of black powder & round ball were made of heavy paper & tied with string. They would have to destroy a cartridge to get at a 2nd ball to load like this.

I agree with stecal. Loading two full cartridges will likely blow up in your face (drill was to hand the multiply-loaded firearm to a sergeant, who would unload it with a bullet puller, not fire it off!).

Loading a double-ball or buck-and-ball cartridge would have to be done at the factory. Or maybe at the field supply train, using the broken-down cartridges powder for cannon priming? I know buck-and-ball was premade at the factory. Not sure about multiple full-sized balls.

The double shotted musket wouldn't have produced any great result. The balls would push each other off at tangents when leaving the muzzle.

Same effect for buck-and-ball. Seems like a good idea, but when the propellant charge goes off the force is dissipated by the multiple balls and poor surface to push on and the balls go every which way.

A study by a retired USMC officer found that an all-buckshot cartridge would have greater effect than Buck-and-ball.

"If your opponent, against all probability, should stand firm and allow you to come very near him without firing himself, then you give the first volley, and take good care that your men always load two bullets to a round. I have owed, more than once, success to the use of the two bullets. In the heat of action I might forget to order it, but you will think of it; I attach great importance to this. With that cool determination, and with this fire of two bullets to the round, you will seldom have to fire a second volley, whether in attacking a position or in repelling a body of troops charging you."
(Colonel Bugeaud)

double-shotted balls aren't perfect by any stretch of the imagination. It's not necessarily a fault of the spread if the two balls stay in a flatter plane than into a cone.

The idea was well-known from Naval use, so it makes sense that someone would actually sit down and make (or order made) double-shotted cartridges in addition to the usual buck-and-ball.

My shoulder hurts thinking about shooting that, though. Especially since the US seems to have liked using nearly double the powder of the standard British charge (100 grains powder or more in a .54cal firearm, when British standard was 68gr in a .58cal).

Both sides in the AWI used "buck and ball" (also known by the British as "swan shot"). It is generally thought that Sumter was wounded by men of the 63rd Foot at Blackstocks using this ammunition; similarly, Huger at Guilford by a volley from the 33rd Foot (see Babits).

Beyond all of the above, I've also read that (some) Native Americans preferred to load smoothbore muskets with multiple pistol balls instead of a single musket ball. I would imagine that would also increase the probability of hitting an individual (as well as hitting a formed body of soldiers), especially in wooded areas where fighting was close in.

Swan shot are balls of roughly .10 in diameter. Buckshot is balls of roughly .30 diameter.

Multiple pistol balls would not improve probability of hitting an individual much. Pistols were generally around .65 callibre to .52cal. so the ball would bounce around the barrel and come out in weird tangents from the muzzle.

The best combination would be about 12 buckshot in one cartridge, or a slightly smaller number pressed into holes drilled in a soft wood plug made to fit the bore loosely. This would act as a kind of choke to the spread pattern of the balls. Napoleonic French skirmishers used this method.

Multiple balls above a single charge of powder and multiple charges of powder and ball are not at all the same thing.

The first is a deliberate choice. How effective it is depends on what the balls do after exiting the muzzle. As for a larger charges there is a point of diminishing returns. Eventually a point is reached at which the excess powder exits the muzzle still burning, that is to say it does not contribute to the explosive force of the round.

Multiple charges of powder and ball are the result of loading a new round on top of a round that was not fired. This is a very dangerous situation and can lead to a burst barrel if each charge ignites. Instead of one large mass of powder burning you get a number of individual explosively burning charges all along the barrel. Pow! The gun may well burst in your face.

I believe the passage you are referring to is the soldiers using buck and ball, not two musket balls (I have never heard of that). I'd have to do more research on that as I would suspect that would be a purposeful cartridge containing both since a soldier had no practical place to carry the smaller (buck) shot.

It's not adviseable to load a double round of musket balls down a musket, due to the increased possibility of rupturing the barrel. The fire rates in the 18th century were no where near what they were in the ACW, so higly unlikely to pack a musket full of balls and powder without knowing it.

Wolfe had no column smashing tactic that I have ever read about (including in instructions to Young Officers volume). The French formations were mixed at that battle, not the least bit disordered (reasons vary). Of more interest to me is that the British were more likely in their usual formations of three ranks there, with the exception of one of the 60th Battalions, drawn up in two ranks, according to Knox of the 43rd. Reason being, they were not so numerous after previous engagements. This three rank use is confirmed in the Edward Penny painting of the death of Wolfe, which is regarded by historians as being more authentic than the West painting – though not as good an artistic rendering.

The British fired there normal vollies by companies (okay, that had been modified from the drill manual), but I am not aware of any special tactics. The French had problems of their own as they advanced and the Brits had the advantage of just standing there and waiting till they go in range to open fire. Hard to say what role buck and ball played in that victory.

link

Note Wlfe is dressed in a grenadier coat, not the usual red coat with boot cuffs you often see. I think this choice is based on accountes of him scouting the French lines dressed as a grenadier. He was also with the converged grens when he was shot.