Question: Any Interest in an Enfield Book?

[Craig L Barry]

I was at Blockade Runner leaving some things off for Todd Watts (the gunsmith) to work on for me, and I saw something interesting...a customer picked up a copy of the book "The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy" (one of two copies left) and he said "Too bad there isn't something like this just on the Enfield." Jerry Smith (the owner) was there and said, "Well, there's the author, ask him why not..." I had really not thought that much about it since a fair amount of Enfield material is in "The Civil War Musket" already.

So my question would be, is there greater interest in an Enfield-only monograph of 75-80 pages at half the price of the 150 pg $27.95 list Civil War Musket (which covers US Model rifle muskets and smoothbores as well)? It would be good the know before the 2nd edition goes to print.

Discuss among yourselves.

[indguard]

There is one written by Geoff Walden if I am not mistaken. He is an expert on Enfields. I hope someone with a better memory chips in, here.

WTH

[PetePaolillo]

Well it limits yourself to readers who are just Enfield owners or people interested in just the Enfield, whereas the "The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy" covers more weopans and reaches more readers.... I would like to get one so if you could let me know when you have some ready. I will buy one. Thanks

[Blair]

indguard,

Geoff Walden is a prolific writer on the subject of CW period Enfield's. I don't know that he has any books out or that any of his articles have been compiled into book form (Imaybe wrong). Much of his works maybe found by a Googel search "Geoff Walden, Enfield"
Blair Taylor

[indguard]

No, I am pretty sure that in the late 1980s he did a monograph on Enfields. I think it was when he was Colonel of the Breckinridge bttn.

Someone will have to help me here.

WTH

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

You are thinking of Geoff Walden's pioneering monograph "Authenticizing Your Reproduction Enfield" which came out in 1985 and was revised/updated in 1995.

I don't know whether it is still available.

Asdie from Herr Geoff's, and Herr Craig's work, there is Curt Schmidt's mini-article "The Case for the British Enfield" in "The Columbia Rifles Research Compendium (Second Edition)."


IMHO, there is not so much need for another "Enfield" booklet as there might be for a reprinting of "The Civil War Musket."

Some argue that the need for "Springfield" or "Enfield" so-called "defarb" books has been lessened by the appearance of lads and businesses who offer
so-called "defarb services."

IMHO, while partially true, so-called "defarbing" is a combination of concept and work-in-progress." Meaning, the steps, measures, replacement parts, wood and metal finishes, and markings incrementally range from a really basic "refinishing the stock and removing the modern Italian markings" on "up."

A reference booklet or monograph would help lads become more educated consumers and more informed customers in making historically-correct choices when it comes to how few or how many "defarb" changes they want, need, or actually should have on their Italian reproduction "Enfields."
And help "protect them" from some "defarbers" who add incorrect treatments and markings like someone decorating a Christmas tree as long as the customer doesn't know what is right and is willing to pay for "the more, the better" even when it is not.

And, who knows... IMHO, the more factual references there are out there, perhaps the better the defarb services will be.

Others mileage will vary...

CHS

[Blair]

Craig,

I think there is a need for such a book.
What do you think most enactors what to know?
Like indguard pointed out Geoff Walden has some pretty good info on Enfield's already in print.
http://authentic-campaigner.com/articles/walden/enfauth.htm
Now I love this stuff. To me it's like "Bet you can't eat just one?" potato chip commercials. I can sit and engross myself in for hours and still have questions.
Most people, their eyes glaze over after only a paragraph or two and...
Well, I think you know what I mean.
Blair Taylor

[RJSamp]

Craig,

I think there is a need for such a book.
Most people, their eyes glaze over after only a paragraph or two and...
Well, I think you know what I mean.
Blair Taylor

Yes, you stated above that there isn't a 'widespread' need for the book....

Put this another way.....do you think you could sell 1,000 copies in a year at $18 each including taxes, postage, packaging....

[Blair]

RJ,

Sir, I believe you have misquoted me.
My intent was to find a focus on what the average reenacter may want and need.
You may put this in anyway you wish, but, this is Craig L Berry's thread, not mine. Just in case you should be worried about this, I would be a consumer of such a project.
However, if well done, I would recommend it to anyone with an intrest, and expect nothing in return.
Blair Taylor

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

I would have one of the thousand.

;) :)

CHS

[Blair]

And I would be two of that thousand.
Blair

[Craig L Barry]

...which is why I posed the question to people whose opinions I respect. Good food for thought. Thanks. I have always thought that there was an unidentified genome that separated Springfield enthusiasts from their Enfield toting counterparts. Rarely is someone equally enthusiastic about both arms as they are only going to purchase one of them. So, in either case half the book is not in your area of interest...in the case of the Civil War Musket, 2/3 because smoothbores are in there, too.

Civil War Musket started out as Geoff Walden and me working on an update to his "Authenticizing" monograph back in 2003, i.e., Parker Hales were no longer made in England, etc. He blanched at my rewrite (understandably) and we parted ways.

[musketbal]

I would also buy one. I have a signed copy of," The Civil War Musket: A Handbook for Historical Accuracy---Lock, Stock and Barrel". It helped me greatly in research to defarb my Euro Arms Enfield to a Barnett. You have put a lot of time and effort. Thank You!

A. Brent Conner

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

I too would like a monograph on the Enfields, but Craig please don't autograph it, it knocks 50% of the resale value right off the top.

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Really?

Now I won't have to send my copy to Herr Craig to get his autograph, er, signature.

Thanks!

;) :)

CHS

[Craig L Barry]

...made for leaving the whole thing alone, too. I have a file called "Mudslinging" about the British Enfield sling controversy. The whole thing brings back memories, Keith Miller of the NATIONAL ARMY MUSEUM Chelsea, London and Wayne Moug, Military Curator Parks Canada got into the act. You are to be excused if you do not find this as fascinating as I do, but what follows is just the push back on one chapter about Brit Army slings. Imagine what a 75-80 page monograph on the Enfield would generate? I think I will stick to disappointing magazine and Civil War internet forum readers.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
Sirs:
Please forward to me any other correspondence that you would like me to review, I read these three memos posted on your website. My comments are simply that a distinction has to be made between pre- and post-US Civil War era slings. Note my comments to what is discussed here is numbered 1-3 and (a) thru (c). The number/letter reference is placed next to the passage in question. I apologize if this is hard to read that way.

My summary comments follow at the end.

CLB

MEMO # 1

Mr. McElhinney,

Following our conversation yesterday, I had the opportunity to check a few more secondary references in our library.

Mike Chappel illustrates an Enfield sling in the Osprey Men-at-Arms Series #107 book, 'British Infantry Equipments, 1808-1908'. Plate C includes elements of the equipment wore by British troops in 1854 including the sling, which is shown as a single length of leather with a fixed keeper at one end and a sliding keeper, the other end has four holes and a hide 'string' to lace through the holes. This is the one I believe you were describing. (1a)

The 'List of Changes of British War Material in Relation to Edged Weapons, Firearms and Associated Ammunition and Accoutrements, Vol. I, 1860-1886', compiled and published by Ian Skennerton in 1980, has a single reference to a musket sling on page 67.

2232 Musquet Slings 20 Nov 1871

Sling, buff, Infantry, for long rifled musquet.
Sling, buff, Infantry, for short rifled musquet, Serjeants.

Having lower end when passed through guard swivel fastened by a white horse-hide thong instead of a brass buckle. (1b)

So, it appears that in 1871, coincidently the same year the Martini-Henry was introduced into service, the buckle on the sling was removed. Unfortunately, it still doesn't definitively indicate when the buckled sling was introduced, although it most certainly had been by 1866 [see reference sent yesterday, which is below].

It may be that the buckled sling had a short 'official' lifespan in the late '60s but more information will be required for the Civil War period. (1c)

I'll continue to keep an eye out for references.

Wayne

Please note that the two references, 'List of Changes...' and 'Arms and Equipment....' cited are reprints of period official publications.

MEMO # 2

Mr. McElhinney,

Regarding your query as to specifications on the musket sling suitable for the '53 pattern Enfield in the 1860s, I can provide the following information.

The book 'Arms and Equipment of the British Army, 1866', edited by John Walker and published by Greenhill Books in 1986 lists (p. 49) two types of musket slings as being issued to the army, one in black for rifle regiments and the other in buff for Guards and line regiments. Plate XV illustrates two slings, a buff musket sling for serjeants, and a black musket sling (presumably for the rifle regiments). Both slings are of the same dimensions, 3' 9" in length and 1-1/4" in width. (2a) The thickness is not noted. There is an additional sling shown in Plate XVI, titled buff musket sling. It has the same length as the other two. The width is 1 and ?", the fraction being illegible, but it would probably be the same as noted for the serjeants and rifle regiments as the swivels should be the same. All three illustrations show a buckle and two 'keepers', one fixed and one sliding.

Research carried out on behalf of the Halifax Citadel National Historic Site of Canada by Mr. Douglas Anderson of Glasgow, Scotland, in the early 1980s gave corroborating information. In his report he provided the following (report not paginated). RIFLE SLING Buff leather 1/8" thick, 1-1/2" wide and 3' 9" long the sling had a 3/4" wide buff keeper sewn on one end. There was also a loose keeper of the same size and a rectangular brass buckle 1-3/4" x 3/4". (2b)

I believe earlier patterns of the musket (rifle) sling would have been of similar dimensions but did not have the brass buckle, using friction and the sliding 'keeper' to tighten it in place as required. (2c)

Should I come across anything more relevant to your question, I will pass it on.

I hope this information is of some help to you.

Wayne Moug
Military Curator
Parks Canada

MEMO # 3

NATIONAL ARMY MUSEUM
Royal Hospital Road
Chelsea, London
SW3 4HT

25th September 2004
Our Ref: 8730.7/KRM/ed

Dear Mr. McElhinney

ENQUIRY: MUSKET SLINGS

Thank you for the information and the three musket slings, which are comparable with the ones produced here for re-enactors. One difference is that our ones are rough both sides and early ones are prepared with oak bark tan as we are not sure when more modern tanning methods were introduced. (3a) I have given the slings to our education department to use on their various displays.

As far as the slings used by the British Army on the Pattern 1853 Rifle Musket, they were sliding loops with the guard swivel fastened by leather thongs. The samples you sent are of this type and all our re-constructions are the same. At some point, probably after the Crimean War and before 1860 a brass buckle was used to fasten the sling at the guard swivel. (3b) The sliding loops would have been retained to adjust the sling. Obviously the brass buckle was not that effective because on 20th November 1871 (List of Changes 2232) the guard swivel end of the sling reverted to fastening with a white horse-hide thong. This system remained in use with the Martini-Henry, which was introduced about that date.

Musket slings provided for the American Civil War by British contractors may well have had buckles, as I said British haversacks, which always had button closures, turned up in America with buckles. There is also the possibility that Civil War Enfields had their slings manufactured in America to different designs. (3c)

I hope this information is of help.

Your Sincerely,

Keith Miller
Head of Department
Department of Weapons, Equipment and Vehicles

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My response follows in the next post...

[Craig L Barry]

My reply was as follows:


NOTES:
1(a). THIS IS PRE-US CIVIL WAR, MID-1850s CRIMEAN WAR ERA. AGREE. THIS SLING IS NOT US CIVIL WAR-ERA.

1(b). DATE OF 1871, POST-US CIVIL WAR ERA. AGREE.

1(c). YES, IT IS THE MID-1860s PERIOD WHICH WOULD APPEAR TO BE THE US CIVIL WAR-ERA. AGREE. THESE APPEAR IN MANY PERIOD PHOTOS.

2(a). NO, ACCORDING TO THE "ARMS AND EQUIPMENT OF THE BRITISH ARMY", THE RIFLE SLING IS LONGER AT 4 FT, AND THE RIFLE-MUSKET IS 3 FT 9 IN. PLATES XV and XVI INDICATE THAT. THEY ARE NOT BOTH LABELED 3 FT 9 IN. ALSO AGREE, THESE ILLUSTRATIONS ARE NOT THE BEST.

2(b). CORRECT, THIS IS WHAT MY RESEARCH INDICATES, TOO, IF HE MEANS RIFLE-MUSKET VS RIFLE. THE ENFIELD RIFLE WAS A TWO BANDER, THE RIFLE-MUSKET HAD THREE BANDS.

2(c). EARLIER PATTERNS MEANING "PRE-US CIVIL WAR" TYPE(S)? AGREE.

3(a). MOST EVIDENCE SUGGESTS BRIT SLINGS WERE ROUGH ON ONE SIDE AND SMOOTH ON THE OTHER, MORE OR LESS LIKE THE ONE(S) YOU MAKE. BUFF LEATHER SLINGS WOULD NECESSARILY BE ROUGH ON BOTH SIDES.

3(b). CORRECT, IT APPEARS HE IS SAYING HERE THAT THE BUCKLE TYPE SLING WAS NOT IN USE PRIOR TO THE LATE 1850s. THIS INFERS THAT IT WAS IN USE DURING THE 1860s, AND I AGREE.

3(c). YES, WE REFER TO THAT TYPE AS "FEDERAL REPLACEMENT SLINGS". LONG SLINGS WERE ALSO APPARENTLY MADE BY CONFEDERATE CONTRACTORS FOR THE ENFIELD IN NEW ORLEANS, RICHMOND AND
ELSEWHERE.

IN CONCLUSION, I'LL ALLOW THAT MY LAST RECORDED BRUSH WITH THE WORLD OF ACADEME WAS SOME TIME AGO. HOWEVER, LET'S CONSIDER THIS IN ANOTHER WAY, A COMMON SENSE WAY. AS STATED PREVIOUSLY IN THE WATCHDOG CIVIL WAR QUARTERLY ARTICLE, IF LOOSE LEATHER THONG TIED SLINGS ON ENFIELDS WERE COMMON TO THE US CIVIL WAR, WHERE ARE THE PHOTOS OF THEM? THERE ARE PLENTY OF PHOTOS SHOWING SLINGS WITH BUCKLES ON ENFIELDS, BUT WHERE ARE THE EXAMPLES OF THE LOOSE THONG TIED SLINGS? I WILL ALLOW THAT THE MERE ABSENCE OF PERIOD PHOTOS IS NOT PROOF IN AND OF ITSELF, HOWEVER SHOULDN'T THERE BE SOME PHOTOS OF THEM IF THEY WERE ISSUED? A VARIETY OF
DIFFERENT SLINGS ARE SEEN IN PHOTOS, BUT NOT THIS TYPE. AND WHAT OF ALL THE BUCKLE SLINGS FOUND IN CIVIL WAR PERIOD PHOTOS? NOTHING I READ HERE CONTRADICTS THAT THE BUCKLE TYPE SLINGS WERE FOUND ON ENFIELDS DURING THE US CIVIL WAR, WHICH WAS THE POINT OF THE ARTICLE. THESE SLINGS ARE IDENTIFIABLE, AS ARE A VARIETY OF OTHER SLINGS, NONE OF WHICH WERE TIED WITH LOOSE LEATHER THONGS AT THE BOTTOM SWIVEL. MY CONCLUSION REMAINS AS STATED, AND IN AGREEMENT WITH MRs McELHINNEY, MOUG AND MILLER, IN AS FAR AS THEY DETERMINE THAT THONG TIED SLINGS IDENTIFIED FOR ENFIELDS PRE-DATE AND POST-DATE THE TIME PERIOD WITH WHICH WE ARE CONCERNED. AND THAT THE BUCKLE VARIETY SLINGS APPEAR TO DATE FROM LATE 1850s TO 1860s, CAN BE IDENTIFIED TO THAT TIME, AND ARE NOT COMMON AFTERWARDS. THE ARTICLE HAS A PICTURE OF A SURVIVING SPECIMEN FROM THE US CIVIL WAR.

I HAVEN'T FOUND DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE THAT DESCRIBES WHAT THE BIRMINGHAM SMALL ARMS TRADE AND LONDON CONTRACTORS SOLD AS SLINGS TO ACCOMPANY SHIPMENTS OF P-53 TYPE III ENFIELDS GOING TO THE UNITED STATES DURING THE CIVIL WAR. I KNOW OF NO SURVIVING RECORDS LIKE THAT. SLINGS, WHEN MENTIONED IN DOCUMENTS AT ALL, ARE NOT DESCRIBED IN DETAIL AS TO TYPE OF CLOSURE. HENCE, WE SHOULD BASE OUR CONCLUSIONS NOT ONLY ON WHAT THE BRITISH MILITARY USED (WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN IDENTICAL TO WHAT THE PRIVATE CONTRACTORS SOLD), BUT ALSO WHAT SHOWED UP OVER HERE IN THE WAY OF PERIOD PHOTOGRAPHS. THE EVIDENCE FOUND POINTS AWAY FROM US CIVIL WAR ENFIELD SLINGS HAVING LOOSE LEATHER THONG TIES AS THE COMMON TYPE. BUCKLES AND LEATHER KEEPERS ARE EASILY IDENTIFIED AND THESE BUCKLES HAVE BEEN "DUG" AT CIVIL WAR BATTLEFIELDS. SINCE THERE ARE DUG SLING BUCKLES, SURVIVING SLING SPECIMENS AND PERIOD PHOTOS, THERE IS GOOD EVIDENCE THE BUCKLE TYPE ENFIELD SLING WAS IN USE.

C BARRY, ASSOC EDITOR

Subject: WATCHDOG ARTICLE How To Sling A Musket...
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Post Script:
The kicker is, when Pierre Turner's British Accoutrements 1750 to 1900 came out a few years later, it essentially confirmed what this correspondence stated in 2004. The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese. I never heard back from either of these museum goofs saying, "Oops, I guess you were right all along." I wonder if they still display the 1871 friction slings on the P53s they have on display?

[Blair]

Craig,

I think this is why a book of this type is needed.
After all these years and there are still too many loose ends in the Enfield story.
It would be nice if the British Academics publish something with some historical substance to it.
A book published in America about Enfield's might just cause that to happen?
Blair Taylor

[LibertyHallVols]

1) Yes, I think the book would be well-received and I could guarantee sales of a third of the 1,000.

2) What do most reenactors need to know? I think for this, or any other piece of material culture, reenactors need to know what the originals actually looked like. I think this translates to large, full-color (where necessary) photographs of original pieces. All too often, we see few photographs, and what we do have are low resolution.

"For Fatigue Purposes" is a wonderful reference book, however there is a photo intended to show the variations on the shade of blue... but it is B&W! Several other pictures are blown-up beyond the capability of the resolution of the parent file, making individual pixels visible and quite large.

I think it would be neet to see 10 "'62 Tower" or "Barnett" or any other group lined up next to each other to show variances in side panels, butt shapes, lock markings (or ANY markings, for that matter), wood color, and other features.

Just some thoughts. Hope to see the book someday!!! :-)

[VaGent]

I would love to have a complete book on this, and sure many of our members would also buy one. It would appeal not just to reenactors, but gun collectors, relic hunters, and CW buffs alike. Heck, some of us collect CW reference books as a discrete hobby.

Still have a copy of Geoff Walden's monograph at home somewhere, it was great for its time but seems lacking nowadays.

[RJSamp]

Isn't there an English Monograph on P1853 Enfield's?

Or are they too broad based brushes versus what was reworked here in the US and actually imported?

There might be some 'meat' in this list, for example:
http://www.researchpress.co.uk/firearms/british/enfield/index.htm

[Craig L Barry]

...a good website, but generically about the Enfield, not really about the commercial P53s that were used during the US Civil War.

I have been working on a pamphlet which is on the order of the $5 booklet on Rules & Management for the Cleaning and Maintenance of the Rifle Musket, but consolidating the information from the Volunteers Rifle & Drill book and British Army manuals and other various sources to do one like it for the Enfield.

Drawing the plates, and whatnot. Any thoughts on that?

[Parault]

I would be interested.

[MarkTK36thIL]

I'd buy one. I'd make my brother buy one too.

What do you want to bet that after a year or two and the thousand copies did finally sell out that someone would sell on on ebay for a $100 and the AC/CWR would be full of WTB threads for the book?

[PetePaolillo]

I am buying an Enfiled so I will definately take one

[Craig L Barry]

...for $195 once a book is out of print. Highway Robbery. Going with a new publishing partner though, should be a quicker turnaround and able to keep from going out of print on future editions.

I have a meeting with the publisher tomorrow, and will share some of the feedback all who posted have provided, pro and con, so they can decide if it is in their wheelhouse or not. Thanks to all. I like the P53 pamphlet idea, the Brit names for the gun parts are so interesting compared to the US rifle musket. Pin = screw, Turnscrew = screw driver, swivel = tumbler link, pricker = vent pick and so on. Anyone want to guess what the side nail is? The projections?