gmstreet
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2007
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 3
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Elkins, West Virginia
- Detector(s) used
- Whites DFX
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
Upvote
0
Last Hunt of 2007(Chewed Bullet)
- Thread starter gmstreet
- Start date
Southern_Boy
Hero Member
- Joined
- Feb 2, 2007
- Messages
- 534
- Reaction score
- 4
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- New York State..Vestal, NY
- Detector(s) used
- Fischer CZ-3D
Very interesting finds. Learned alot about chewed bullets too,.
gmstreet
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2007
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 3
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Elkins, West Virginia
- Detector(s) used
- Whites DFX
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
- #43
Thread Owner
I agree with this post from the last time this subject came up.
TeddyB1967
Sr. Member
Posts: 448
Pennsylvania
I don't understand why it's so difficult to believe a soldier in severe pain would not bite on a bullet to give himself some relief. I'm sure the last thing on an injured soldier mind that was just shot in the middle of a chaotic hectic bloody battle was, "I shouldn't bite on this for fear I might swallow it." or "If I suffer here long enough screaming and scared to death, I might make it to a field hospital for some real pain med. or a leather strap to bite on instead of this here bullet."
A soldier isn't gonna be carrying much more than he needs into battle, (A weapon and ammo, MAYBE a water canteen), carrying leather straps or rags to chew on wouldn't be something they would need or even think about needing. Also you have to remember that most of these soldiers were very young and not well educated.
In the moment of chaos, your not gonna think logically or use common sense. Some of you are assuming only those wounded that made it to a field hospital ever bit or chewed on a bullet, not the men in the field before ever going to a field hospital. It may not have been common for a doctor to give the wounded a bullet to chew on, but those soldiers in the field would have done what they thought would help the injured to ease the pain or at least give them something else to focus on.
Of all the war picture's I have seen, I have yet to see one with a feral hog running around during or after any of the battles. Not saying there weren't any wild hogs, just saying I personally don't think they were as common as some may think.
It has been proven that CW surgeons used anesthetics during surgeries.
It is also logical to believe that they probably had specialized instruments for the soldier to bite down on during surgery at the medical site(cloth wrapped stick, leather strap, ect.)
However in a field situation when you are far from any real medical support your gonna use what you have for easement of pain.
Sure you could pick up a stick and bite on it, if your near one.
As far as cutting up your belt, shoes or any other leather accessories you carry, I think it would be far easier to use what is handy like a soft lead bullet.
I'm sure that the soldiers had their own home remedies they passed on to each other.(like putting a bullet in your mouth to keep it moist, or biting one for pain)
Somebody said that the soldiers needed to account for all of their bullets. How is it then we find carved ones and hammered ones for poker chips.
If you look at my bullet you see the hollow end was bitten nearly closed. This is the thinnest part of the bullet, easily bitten by a human.
Another theory is that in the excitement of battle the soldier bit the wrong end of the paper cartridge, if this was the case of this bullet the solid end of the minie' would have the bite mark in it, as the bullet tip would be at the end of the wrapped cartridge.
Somebody said that a soldier would have used his molar teeth to bite on the bullet, mine clearly has been bitten with both molar and canine incisors, in fact as an experiment to see if it could have been bitten by a soldier, I checked to see if my own teeth would match up.
Clearly they do!!
Which I believes dispels the other theory that 99% of bit bullets are from wild hogs. Are you kidding?, Think of the number of soldiers, now think of the number of wounded soldiers, now think of the number of bullets, now think of the number of bit bullets found. 99% that's a lot of wild hogs...
Anyway mine was found in Beverly city limits
I would say both sides are right and both sides are wrong.
Soldiers probably didn't bite bullets during actual surgery.
Soldiers did chew bullets for boredom, dry mouth, and pain(during dire times).
The 99% wild hog theory cracks me up!!!
Greg
PS. We'll probably never know!! Unless the Discovery Channel would do some kind of forensic show on Civil War Myths and Legends.
TeddyB1967
Sr. Member
Posts: 448
Pennsylvania
I don't understand why it's so difficult to believe a soldier in severe pain would not bite on a bullet to give himself some relief. I'm sure the last thing on an injured soldier mind that was just shot in the middle of a chaotic hectic bloody battle was, "I shouldn't bite on this for fear I might swallow it." or "If I suffer here long enough screaming and scared to death, I might make it to a field hospital for some real pain med. or a leather strap to bite on instead of this here bullet."
A soldier isn't gonna be carrying much more than he needs into battle, (A weapon and ammo, MAYBE a water canteen), carrying leather straps or rags to chew on wouldn't be something they would need or even think about needing. Also you have to remember that most of these soldiers were very young and not well educated.
In the moment of chaos, your not gonna think logically or use common sense. Some of you are assuming only those wounded that made it to a field hospital ever bit or chewed on a bullet, not the men in the field before ever going to a field hospital. It may not have been common for a doctor to give the wounded a bullet to chew on, but those soldiers in the field would have done what they thought would help the injured to ease the pain or at least give them something else to focus on.
Of all the war picture's I have seen, I have yet to see one with a feral hog running around during or after any of the battles. Not saying there weren't any wild hogs, just saying I personally don't think they were as common as some may think.
It has been proven that CW surgeons used anesthetics during surgeries.
It is also logical to believe that they probably had specialized instruments for the soldier to bite down on during surgery at the medical site(cloth wrapped stick, leather strap, ect.)
However in a field situation when you are far from any real medical support your gonna use what you have for easement of pain.
Sure you could pick up a stick and bite on it, if your near one.
As far as cutting up your belt, shoes or any other leather accessories you carry, I think it would be far easier to use what is handy like a soft lead bullet.
I'm sure that the soldiers had their own home remedies they passed on to each other.(like putting a bullet in your mouth to keep it moist, or biting one for pain)
Somebody said that the soldiers needed to account for all of their bullets. How is it then we find carved ones and hammered ones for poker chips.
If you look at my bullet you see the hollow end was bitten nearly closed. This is the thinnest part of the bullet, easily bitten by a human.
Another theory is that in the excitement of battle the soldier bit the wrong end of the paper cartridge, if this was the case of this bullet the solid end of the minie' would have the bite mark in it, as the bullet tip would be at the end of the wrapped cartridge.
Somebody said that a soldier would have used his molar teeth to bite on the bullet, mine clearly has been bitten with both molar and canine incisors, in fact as an experiment to see if it could have been bitten by a soldier, I checked to see if my own teeth would match up.
Clearly they do!!
Which I believes dispels the other theory that 99% of bit bullets are from wild hogs. Are you kidding?, Think of the number of soldiers, now think of the number of wounded soldiers, now think of the number of bullets, now think of the number of bit bullets found. 99% that's a lot of wild hogs...
Anyway mine was found in Beverly city limits
I would say both sides are right and both sides are wrong.
Soldiers probably didn't bite bullets during actual surgery.
Soldiers did chew bullets for boredom, dry mouth, and pain(during dire times).
The 99% wild hog theory cracks me up!!!
Greg
PS. We'll probably never know!! Unless the Discovery Channel would do some kind of forensic show on Civil War Myths and Legends.
BioProfessor
Silver Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 85
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Mankato, MN
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab e-Trac, White E-Series DFX
It would be good to read up a little on the distribution and feeding habits on feral hogs. They were everywhere during the civil war era. During that time, people would fence their gardens and animals were housed in barns and small enclosures. They were let out to feed periodically but feral hogs had free rein.
The role of hogs in the Civil war has not been publicized much but if you look, it is there.
From: http://www.civilwarinteractive.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=654&forum_id=32&page=1
Hellcat
Member
Ok, so we all know about the Battle of Gettysburg. The Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of the Potomac clashed at the town of Gettysburg from July 1st to July 3rd of 1863 with Gen. Meade's army being the victor. But for the wounded on the field there was a third and unwelcome "army" at Gettysburg. I only recently learned of this army in Michael Sanders's More Strange Tales of the Civil War.
In the book Sanders reprints the words of one Lt. Barzilia (Berzila) Inman of the 118th Pennsylvania Volunteers. Inman, who served in Company F of the regiment, was injured on the second day of fighting at the Wheatfield and would not be removed from the field until the July 4th. On the night of the second he encoutered the third army, a group of hogs who ended up feeding on the wounded and the dead.
That night a number of stray hogs came to where I lay and commenced rooting and tearing at the dead men around me. Finally one fellow that in the darkness looked of enormous size approached and attempted to poke me---grunting loudly the while. Several others also came up, when waiting my chance, I jammed my sword into his belly, which made him set up a prolonged, sharp cry. By constant vigilance and keeping from sleeping I contrived to fight the monsters off till daylight.
To be honest, until I picked up this book I'd never before given thought to what the wounded and the dying had to face on a battlefield beyond fellow soldiers. And maybe buzzards. Now I'm not sure I won't look at the various battles and wonder what additional "army" visited the field once the fighting died down there.
CalCav
Member
Walking the quiet paths and grassy fields of Shiloh it is difficult to imagine the horrors that occured the evening of April 6th, 1862. Most of the wounded spent the night where they fell, robbed of any rest by a cold rain that began to fall around midnight. Those that found shelter were awakened by shells fired at ten minute intervals by the gunboat Tyler until midnight ,when it was relieved by the Lexington that continued the harrasing fire at 15 minute intervals. During the fighting in the area known as the Hornet's Nest the woods around the 44th Indiana caught fire and many of the wounded were unable to crawl away. Some men, wounded and horribly burned, waited through the night for relief that did not come. A young Confederate soldier was woken from a sound sleep to stand picket duty and was horrified at the scene he found under the stormy sky, ""Vivid flashings of lightning rent the heavens and...sickening sights fell before my eyes...I saw a large piece of ground literaly covered with dead heaped and piled on each other. I shut my eyes upon the sickening sight...Through the dark I heard the sound of hogs...quarreling over their carnival feast."
David White
Member
There is a famous Gardner photo of the battle aftermath showing the effects of the hogs. Often, uninformed authors attribute the ghastly sight to artillery fire but it was the hogs.
Doc C
Member
There's numerous reports of soldiers being attacked by hogs while laying there wounded. In addition, this "3rd army" were often present near hospitals feeding on the discarded amputated limbs. They're numerous accounts in the literature of such attacks by these hogs. Just ran across the book, The Hogs of Cold Harbor: The Civil War Saga of Private Johnny Hess, CSA (Paperback) by Richard Lee Fulgham
CleburneFan
Member
Revisiting the original topic of this thread, an excellent book on the aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg and its impact on the town and surrounding areas is titled "After the Smoke Cleared at Gettysburg" by George Sheldon, Cumberland House Publishing, 2003, $16.95.
It also discusses the horrific experiences of the wounded including frying in the July sun, soaking in drowning rain, maggott-infected wounds (which actually helped some wounds"), attacks by insects, flies, lice and worms, and lack of water to quench thrist or clean wounds. Often infections would set in before the wounded were moved or before a surgeon could treat the wounds. The book I mention above does say the grotesque injury on one photo when studied by recent research,"...suggests that the corpse attracted wild hogs."
------------------------------------
“Remembering Perryville: History and Memory at a Civil War Battlefield”
Kenneth W. Noe, Dept. of History, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36830
In contrast, most Confederate casualties remained on the field unburied for a week after the fight. Angry at the Rebels for
robbing their dead the night of the battle, Perryville’s garrison summarily refused to bury them. If the
enemy wanted their dead buried, one man asserted, they should have interred them themselves instead
of pillaging fallen Federals. Feral hogs that usually occupied the woods swarmed the field, devouring
putrid body parts with aplomb until they too sickened and began to die from their gory repast. Bottom
attempted to drive the hogs off his scarred land, but the absence of fences and the refusal of neighbors
to associate with him while elements of the Federal army remained allowed the hogs to return
repeatedly.
---------------------------------------------
Just a sample of the books that have been written on the subject. There were LOTS of hogs around and they would continue to return to the areas to feed for months/years. They feed by picking up EVERYTHING on the surface of the ground or just under the ground (roots and things). They bite the object to determine if it is edible. They bite hard to try and crack open nuts and other hard sources of food. These bites result in the deep, heavy, single tooth marks on the main portion of bullets. Not the hollow end of a bullet. Humans are capable of biting, bending, and leaving impressions on this thin band of lead. They are not capable of doing the same thing on the solid portion of a bullet. Teeth and muscles just not strong enough to leave that single tooth impression in a solid piece of lead.
As far as a soldier being wounded and using a bullet to bite on to ease or bear the pain. That is most likely true. There is ample evidence about human behavior and pain to suggest that chewing or biting down on anything will ease pain. It is probably a result of the mind/body being distracted and concentrating on the object being bitten. if the pain is severe, the bite will be more severe. This is a completely supportable idea. The use of bullets to bite on while your leg was cut off is what is not true and is the ONLY thing I am referring to as far as the use of bullets is concerned.
Daryl
The role of hogs in the Civil war has not been publicized much but if you look, it is there.
From: http://www.civilwarinteractive.com/forums/view_topic.php?id=654&forum_id=32&page=1
Hellcat
Member
Ok, so we all know about the Battle of Gettysburg. The Army of Northern Virginia and the Army of the Potomac clashed at the town of Gettysburg from July 1st to July 3rd of 1863 with Gen. Meade's army being the victor. But for the wounded on the field there was a third and unwelcome "army" at Gettysburg. I only recently learned of this army in Michael Sanders's More Strange Tales of the Civil War.
In the book Sanders reprints the words of one Lt. Barzilia (Berzila) Inman of the 118th Pennsylvania Volunteers. Inman, who served in Company F of the regiment, was injured on the second day of fighting at the Wheatfield and would not be removed from the field until the July 4th. On the night of the second he encoutered the third army, a group of hogs who ended up feeding on the wounded and the dead.
That night a number of stray hogs came to where I lay and commenced rooting and tearing at the dead men around me. Finally one fellow that in the darkness looked of enormous size approached and attempted to poke me---grunting loudly the while. Several others also came up, when waiting my chance, I jammed my sword into his belly, which made him set up a prolonged, sharp cry. By constant vigilance and keeping from sleeping I contrived to fight the monsters off till daylight.
To be honest, until I picked up this book I'd never before given thought to what the wounded and the dying had to face on a battlefield beyond fellow soldiers. And maybe buzzards. Now I'm not sure I won't look at the various battles and wonder what additional "army" visited the field once the fighting died down there.
CalCav
Member
Walking the quiet paths and grassy fields of Shiloh it is difficult to imagine the horrors that occured the evening of April 6th, 1862. Most of the wounded spent the night where they fell, robbed of any rest by a cold rain that began to fall around midnight. Those that found shelter were awakened by shells fired at ten minute intervals by the gunboat Tyler until midnight ,when it was relieved by the Lexington that continued the harrasing fire at 15 minute intervals. During the fighting in the area known as the Hornet's Nest the woods around the 44th Indiana caught fire and many of the wounded were unable to crawl away. Some men, wounded and horribly burned, waited through the night for relief that did not come. A young Confederate soldier was woken from a sound sleep to stand picket duty and was horrified at the scene he found under the stormy sky, ""Vivid flashings of lightning rent the heavens and...sickening sights fell before my eyes...I saw a large piece of ground literaly covered with dead heaped and piled on each other. I shut my eyes upon the sickening sight...Through the dark I heard the sound of hogs...quarreling over their carnival feast."
David White
Member
There is a famous Gardner photo of the battle aftermath showing the effects of the hogs. Often, uninformed authors attribute the ghastly sight to artillery fire but it was the hogs.
Doc C
Member
There's numerous reports of soldiers being attacked by hogs while laying there wounded. In addition, this "3rd army" were often present near hospitals feeding on the discarded amputated limbs. They're numerous accounts in the literature of such attacks by these hogs. Just ran across the book, The Hogs of Cold Harbor: The Civil War Saga of Private Johnny Hess, CSA (Paperback) by Richard Lee Fulgham
CleburneFan
Member
Revisiting the original topic of this thread, an excellent book on the aftermath of the Battle of Gettysburg and its impact on the town and surrounding areas is titled "After the Smoke Cleared at Gettysburg" by George Sheldon, Cumberland House Publishing, 2003, $16.95.
It also discusses the horrific experiences of the wounded including frying in the July sun, soaking in drowning rain, maggott-infected wounds (which actually helped some wounds"), attacks by insects, flies, lice and worms, and lack of water to quench thrist or clean wounds. Often infections would set in before the wounded were moved or before a surgeon could treat the wounds. The book I mention above does say the grotesque injury on one photo when studied by recent research,"...suggests that the corpse attracted wild hogs."
------------------------------------
“Remembering Perryville: History and Memory at a Civil War Battlefield”
Kenneth W. Noe, Dept. of History, Auburn University, Auburn AL 36830
In contrast, most Confederate casualties remained on the field unburied for a week after the fight. Angry at the Rebels for
robbing their dead the night of the battle, Perryville’s garrison summarily refused to bury them. If the
enemy wanted their dead buried, one man asserted, they should have interred them themselves instead
of pillaging fallen Federals. Feral hogs that usually occupied the woods swarmed the field, devouring
putrid body parts with aplomb until they too sickened and began to die from their gory repast. Bottom
attempted to drive the hogs off his scarred land, but the absence of fences and the refusal of neighbors
to associate with him while elements of the Federal army remained allowed the hogs to return
repeatedly.
---------------------------------------------
Just a sample of the books that have been written on the subject. There were LOTS of hogs around and they would continue to return to the areas to feed for months/years. They feed by picking up EVERYTHING on the surface of the ground or just under the ground (roots and things). They bite the object to determine if it is edible. They bite hard to try and crack open nuts and other hard sources of food. These bites result in the deep, heavy, single tooth marks on the main portion of bullets. Not the hollow end of a bullet. Humans are capable of biting, bending, and leaving impressions on this thin band of lead. They are not capable of doing the same thing on the solid portion of a bullet. Teeth and muscles just not strong enough to leave that single tooth impression in a solid piece of lead.
As far as a soldier being wounded and using a bullet to bite on to ease or bear the pain. That is most likely true. There is ample evidence about human behavior and pain to suggest that chewing or biting down on anything will ease pain. It is probably a result of the mind/body being distracted and concentrating on the object being bitten. if the pain is severe, the bite will be more severe. This is a completely supportable idea. The use of bullets to bite on while your leg was cut off is what is not true and is the ONLY thing I am referring to as far as the use of bullets is concerned.
Daryl
gmstreet
Full Member
- Joined
- Jul 29, 2007
- Messages
- 121
- Reaction score
- 3
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Elkins, West Virginia
- Detector(s) used
- Whites DFX
- Primary Interest:
- All Treasure Hunting
- #45
Thread Owner
Read up on the hogs, and although I do believe they fed on the dead and dying, and perhaps bit a few blood covered bullets. I'm still not convinced that the biggest majority of bit bullets were from them. I do agree that the ones with single bites to the solid end of the bullet were probably made by a wild hog or other animal. Some of the bullets that are totally mangled are probably the result of a bored soldier chewing on it for weeks at a time. Like I said both sides of this debate are probably right in some aspects and wrong in others.BioProfessor said:
Greg
PS. This is my last response to this post. I don't want to tie up the "Today's Finds" board any longer with an item I found a week ago.
Thanks all for your responses!!
BioProfessor
Silver Member
- Joined
- Apr 6, 2007
- Messages
- 2,917
- Reaction score
- 85
- Golden Thread
- 0
- Location
- Mankato, MN
- Detector(s) used
- Minelab e-Trac, White E-Series DFX
I think you are right. The bullets that are just mangled were most likely chewed by soldiers. Either to cause salivation, boredom, or habit. I would bet that they would even put the bullet in their pocket when they got tired of chewing on it and keep chewing it until it either fell apart or they just started a new one.
The only thing I am trying to say is that there is no credible evidence of soldiers using bullets to bite down on while they had a limb amputated or an operation (Just didn't happen) and that the human tooth and jaw are not capable of the single deep mark in a solid bullet. Only animals can do that.
Not much of a disagreement here.
Daryl
The only thing I am trying to say is that there is no credible evidence of soldiers using bullets to bite down on while they had a limb amputated or an operation (Just didn't happen) and that the human tooth and jaw are not capable of the single deep mark in a solid bullet. Only animals can do that.
Not much of a disagreement here.
Daryl
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
Sponsored Vendors
View all →
