Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifled Musket----C.S. or U.S.?—a story.
I requested Joe Bilby’s help regarding this gun because of the numbers seen on the butt tang and this is the story that unfolded.
(Any references to “Jack” is a “made up” name as he is not someone I know.)
The gun.
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC03643-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...lmarkin1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...DSC03645-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...ckplate1-1.jpg
https://www.milsurps.com/images/impo...SC088981-1.jpg
Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifled Musket (second type)
Manufactured in 1861. (BIRMINGHAM “TOWER”)
(The sling shown in these photos is not period correct.)
Other markings:
Crown behind hammer on lock plate with the date 1861 TOWER,
Inside lock-E.C&W.C, back of hammer E 8, 8 also on lock plate behind hammer.
Under barrel, J.R.Cooper also E.C (over) J.H. and another J.H.
-74 on breech plug and breech (under barrel) ---Breech barrel flat (left side) 3 proof marks, and twice the number 24.
Inside barrel groove in stock just behind spoon spring-XX
I emailed Joe Bilby on March 10 2006 with photos of the Butt tang marking “1121” as well as the “24” bore marking on the barrel.
He consulted with an expert on Civil War Enfields, “Jack”, and the following extracts are from his communication on this subject;
Joe, do the markings on the butt plate tang of this Enfield fit any kind of Civil War markings pattern that you are familiar with?
Thanks again for your help.
Regards
David
I'll forward it to my Enfield expert and get back to you. The "24" on the barrel indicates the guns bore size, which is .58 calibers rather than the standard "25 bore" or British .577. This is one indication that the gun may be a Union import.
Joe
This from my Enfield guy. You may have hit the jackpot.
Joe
While it's difficult to positively ID anything and to determine legitimacy from a photo, the piece seems to be a CS central government purchase. 1121 is the "control number." If the ramrod is original to the piece, it will also have 1121 engraved on it near the jag head. There should have been a large serif letter in front of the butt plate tang, but the stock seems to have been scraped. On the bottom of the stock behind the trigger guard, there should be two commission broker's stamps and a JS anchor stamp. The stampings behind the trigger guards were often light. Lacking the anchor stamp, there should be either a G or an SC on the lock side of the butt stock for this particular number range.
Some of the numbered arms can be traced to the vessel and the jobber, but - this is the big hole in the argument presented by the high-rolling dealers - there are only extant records for 2,000 arms that were brought into Savannah. Most CS dealers like to lead the buyer to believe that there are records for 30,000 numbered arms.
If I ever get my book done, I will attempt to uncloud some of the mystery. Brit regulations specified that all arms were to have a number not to exceed four digits engraved "and in no instance stamped or punched" on the butt plate, the ramrod, the bayonet socket, the bayonet scabbard stud, and the waist belt. In short, each stand of arms had all of the components numbered together. The Confederates followed the same practice at first, but then realized that it was a waste of time. The Confederates also used a few other numbering methods, and several states also had their own numbering systems. Many Army of Tennessee arms had an additional mark applied.
The piece is not a Brit issue as it lacks the army proof house markings - even arms bought commercially for Brit service were normally reproofed at an army proof house.
The piece in the photo you sent is a Grade 2 handmade arm with filed flat-headed mount screws.
Joe, after looking at the reference points referred to below I have observed the following;
(1) No marking on the ramrod indicating the #s 1121.
(2) “There should have been a large serif letter in front of the butt plate tang,” NONE SEEN.
(3) “On the bottom of the stock behind the trigger guard, there should be two commission broker's stamps and a JS anchor stamp. The stampings behind the trigger guards were often light. Lacking the anchor stamp, there should be either a G or an SC on the lock side of the butt stock for this particular number range.” NONE SEEN”
Joe, I have no idea where that leaves us???
Best regards and thank you
David
Still probably Confederate.
Joe
The fact that that it may have a C.S. history really surprises me,….but what do I know? I would have thought that a “25” bore marking .58 cal. would have suggested a Union gun if anything?
I guess my original question started with the tang marking “1121”, and look where we have progressed to.
Thanks very much for your help.
Best regards
David
Surprised me as well. But I think the early Confederate orders might have been 24 bore. My friend, who is an expert in these matters, says he is almost positive it is Confederate, with the number on the buttplate and the 24 bore marking. You made a really good buy. :-)
Joe
This is rather exciting (and unexpected) Joe,….thank you very much for your help, and please express my appreciation to your friend.
Best regards
David
I will, but as my buddy advises, you still got 90% to go before you can call it Confederate definitively -- but you got a good possibility. :-)
He also advises that some Enfields made for the US, in 24 bore, in the early part of the war, were actually bought by the Rebels, and that might explain the bore size.
Joe
Joe what does this mean exactly,
“you still got 90% to go before you can call it Confederate definitively -- but you got a good possibility”…..what is the process, and what does the next step involve …if anything?
I plan on keeping this gun…what would you do if you were me???
May I know your friends’ name,…I have started reading your articles, as well as those of Tom Kelley and Tony Beck,…great stuff.
I have noticed several references to “ in the early part of the war”, I realize that this gun is 1861 dated;… did the early Confederate guns fit into a particular configuration that has been documented that this particular gun can be compared to?
I really appreciate your help and insight Joe, ..and that of your friend.
Best regards
David
My buddy is “Jack”, who has been amassing info on Enfields and Rebel firearms in general for many years. The "90%" means that the number on the buttstock is a sign, but that, unfortunately, the other markings he mentioned are either not there or have been removed over the years -- still, a 10% confederate firearm is worth a lot more than a conventional Enfield.
I would keep it, myself. By the way, “Jack” also said there were an unusual number of Confederate arms that showed up in Canada, but he did not know why -- speculation of Canadian Volunteer organizations buying surplus captured stuff from US dealers, but nothing definite.
Joe
