As a Confederate impression reenactor, I went to great lengths to make my impression correct. I twice won 1st person impression competitions including the one at Carnifix Ferry in W.VA. That was a small event but their 1st person impression was known as "the Inquisition." The examination was conducted by 3 fellows at the same time. Any one or two of them could be pawing over your gear, and questions coming from all around all at the same time. One of the guys was a police detective and another an insurance investigator. Don't know about the third. After winning the cop told me I was the "biggest BS'er he'd ever interrogated!"That was part of the secret of my success. People forget or don't realize the questioners don't necessarily know the answers to the questions they're asking. It's the reaction you give that counts. I mean, you're supposed to be a Civil War soldier but you don't know who your third Corporal or 1st Sgt is?! You were a farmer but don't know what a "cradle" is? (I don't mean what you rocked the baby in either!) One thing I used to do was keep a loose list of prepared names in my head. Ask me somebody inconsequential I didn't know? I had a name for you!
Well the upshot of all this is, that some feature or detail of imported equipment has tripped up some one competitor or another time to time. That lead me, with some encouragement from a fellow in our unit to update and "defarb" my musket too. Our "Lt." had been part of the Park service's 7th Cavalry living history impression group and they were anal about detail. He pointed out several indiscretions between my "1853 Enfield" (a first generation P/H) and what the soldiers of the 1860s would have carried. So we set out to 'correct some of them.
One thing I had going for me was my base rifle- Mine was a "1st generation," English made Parker-Hale Enfield, (mfg in the 1970s), reputed to be one of the best repros made, then and now. At some point in the past, these ceased to be made in Englandand the quality dropped. Anyway, Parker/Hale were said to be an original manufacturer of the 1853 and it was claimed they still had and used the same drawings and some of the tooling or forms for the reproduction. An example of the detail lies in the rifling. It was claimed that the original M1853 had tapered rifling going shallower towards the muzzle to reduce gas blow by thereby increasing pressure and improving accuracy- or so it was claimed. At this time, (I bought the rifle in the 70s IIRC) wide shallow grooves were rather the norm for repro rifle(d) muskets.
All modifications were done by my friend and based much on his knowledge which was (I hoped) far greater than mine. Any gaffs are his and beyond my correcting. He wanted to do a full make over obliterating all modern markings. I put the brakes on that for two reasons. First of all, I was proud of having a P-H and wanted to hang on to that fact. Therefore the lock plate and stock cartouche will not be altered, therefore not strictly "correct." Not really secondarily, but another reason was that I was concerned about somebody trying to pass off this thing as original should it escape my hands. I have no intention of trying to literally "fake and original."
Anyway, here's the pics and descriptions of modifications. As I said, My knowledge of the specific details of the original weapons is limited. So if any particular errors are there, feel free to point them out. It matters little to me as I am long since retired from the hobby. As did the veterans of old, my uniform lies tucked away in a cedar chest along side my US army (the modern or "real" one) uniform. I like to say I was "killed" at Gettysburg 125th reenactment in 1988 when a pasteboard pyrotechnic fragment thumped my hat on the top of my head.Had that been the real deal... lets just say it was a sobering thought.
Some pics descriptions (from Left)...
1. A view from the business end.
2. the Parker/Hale lock plate and 'hammer' Quality of fit and finish are evident compared to most modern reproductions.
3. Birmingham (England) proof stamps. Other changes: The P-H brass guards around the screw heads had round ends. The originals were square. I cannot now recall if these are original or whether we made these from sheet brass. Some parts on this are original replacements. The "JG on the stock do not belong there. They are my initials for identification so disposed as to be unobtrusive and hopefully overlooked in the event of theft.
4. That's P-H's cartouche. Carved star adds 'flavor' but, I put it there mainly as a means of rapid identification.
5.& 6. The original P-H bluing was very dark, black. That was stripped and this finish, imitating the originals applied by an older process. P?H stamps (crudely) removed and original stamps put on. Where he got the stamps, I don't know. I think some were original borrowed from a museum the fellow (our Lt.) worked with.
7. P-H bbl bands replaced with originals.
8. Original stamp on breech left of nipple.
9/10. Bayonets can be problematical especially as to fit. This one, an 'original' but whether actually an 1853 model I'm not sure, came out of India. It was at one time in Brit service having their "broad arrow" stamp upon it. Just how or when it came to these shores, I have no idea. Enfield bayo reproductions were rather hard to come by back then if I recall correctly, or maybe having found this one, I just liked it. I don't remember now. Unfortunately, the leather scabbard, a repro fortunately, has succumbed to time and poor storage conditions for many years. This bayonet was wobbly loose so I lined the socket with JB Weld and ground, sanded it out to a close fit.
There you have it folks. The weapons that have stood me in good stead through many hard fought conflicts and a few hunting trips. As it happens, this musket and a "one that got away" story, had me on a local TV sporting show not too long ago. Awww, fame...
As it happens, I have been generating a few cartridges for the first time in many years. May be I can post a range report in the near future.Information
![]()
Warning: This is a relatively older thread
This discussion is older than 360 days. Some information contained in it may no longer be current.