Help support TMP


"“Buck and Ball”: Identification and interpretation of..." Topic


1 Post

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

Please remember not to make new product announcements on the forum. Our advertisers pay for the privilege of making such announcements.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the War of 1812 Message Board


Areas of Interest

Napoleonic
19th Century

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Recent Link


Featured Ruleset


Featured Showcase Article

28mm Captain Boel Umfrage

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian returns to Flintloque to paint an Ogre.


Featured Profile Article

The Simtac Tour

The Editor is invited to tour the factory of Simtac, a U.S. manufacturer of figures in nearly all periods, scales, and genres.


Featured Book Review


735 hits since 29 Oct 2016
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Tango0129 Oct 2016 1:03 p.m. PST

… buckshot injuries to the pelvis from the War of 1812.

"During the War of 1812, the flintlock smoothbore musket represented a significant cause of injury and death. Putative musket ball and buckshot injuries were observed in the skeletal remains of individuals from the Smith's Knoll collection, comprised of soldiers killed during the battle of Stoney Creek (1813, Ontario, Canada). In order to confirm the identification of three impacts from buckshot ammunition in two innominates from this assemblage, faunal proxies were shot using a replica War of 1812 flintlock smoothbore musket and ammunition. Experimental research also aimed to evaluate whether the spacing of lesions could be related to impact characteristics such as projectile velocity as associated with range of fire. Significant differences in distance values for lesion spread were found between shots taken from distances of 9.14 and 18.29 m (10 and 25 yards), however, there was some overlap between the ranges for these distances. While the small distance between archaeological injuries suggests they are more likely to result from a shot taken at a closer range of fire, a shot from further away cannot be ruled out. The archaeological lesions display characteristics associated with musket injuries, and their sizes correspond specifically to the experimental injuries caused by buckshot ammunition. This represents the first identification of buckshot injuries in archaeological skeletal material"
See here
link

Amicalement
Armand

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.