Accurate Enfield equipment

[jerryeberg]

What would be accurate for a Union and Confederate Enfield scabbard, frog, cap box, cartridge box, and rifle sling? Thanks for your help.

[TimKindred]

jerry...

You need to be a little more specific with your question.

If you are asking if having an Enfield rifle-musket means having English-pattern accoutrements, then that is absolutely untrue. Many a soldier carried an Enfield rifle-musket and American-pattern accoutrements. Some had combinations.

Problem is, it isvery much a unit/date type of thing.

The idea that Enfields came with British pattern accoutrements is not supported by existing documentation, nor by photographic evidence. It is true that there was some limited use of British pattern accoutrements by federal troops, but in each case it was a specific regiment at a specific time, and there are only 2 regiments that I am aware of that got both British pattern accoutrements as well as Enfield rifle-muskets. Those were the 44th and 6th MVM, both 9 month's regiments.

Massachusetts purchased 20,000 sets of British pattern accoutrements early in the war, to offset the lack of American pattern sets in her arsenals. By the time they were available for issue, however, sufficient stocks of the American pattern were on hand, and the British pattern were set aside for later issues. That came with the second call from the federal government. Even then, however, those sets were parcelled out to fill gaps in the American pattern sets. Some regiments got American pattern boxes and slings, with British belts and cap pouchs and bayoney sheaths. Others got British boxes, but with American pattern belts, cap boxes, etc. Again, it was a time and unit specific thing. In each and every case, however, all knapsacks issued were of American pattern. I have yet to find any Northern purchase of british pattern knapsacks.

Having said that, there were considerable amounts of British pattern accoutrements issued to Southern regiments. Again, caution should be used regarding entire sets of these accoutrements, and with which weapon they accompanied. Just because a Southern unit had Enfield rifles, or rifle-muskets, doesn't mean then men carried British pattern accoutrements. The reverse is also correct. In fact, British pattern accoutrements would only be found with regiments carrying .58 calibre weapons. The boxes were too small to accomodate .69 ammunition, and too large for .54 cartridges. Specific boxes would be required for those types of ammunition. However, again, that would have no bearing on whether the belts and cap boxes and bayonet sheaths were of British or CS patterns. Again, time and unit specific things.

There should, indeed, be more British pattern equipments in Southern units, but they should not be all willy-nilly. These would have been part of a larger issue, so the majority of men in a unit ought to be carrying the same type of box, either British or American pattern. Same with the other accoutrements. That way, it gives the impresion of large issue and uniformity within each regiment, something that many reenactors can't come to grips with.

One thing that is often overlooked, is what the English box was designed for. The English box was designed to hold packets of rounds up right and ready to use. The American box was designed to hold lose rounds upright and ready to remove. Similar systems, but differing approaches.

What the English did was to envision the cap box upon the cartridge box strap, or upon the front face of the cartridge box itself. In fact, the Massachusetts' English boxes came with the cap boxes sewn directly to the outer face of the box, towards the wearer's front, and resting underneath the outer flap. Massachusetts paid a couple of firms to remove those cap boxes and add belt loops to the back so they could be worn directly on the waistbelt, ala the American system. Extant boxes both north and south show evidence of the cap boxes being removed (holes where the stitches were) and some still have the cap boxes attached.

Anyway, the Brits used a large pouch with an accordian pleat, known as an "expense pouch" and worn upon the waistbelt. It was about the size of a pistol cartridge box. It was worn where the American cap box was worn. the idea was that the soldier would take a packet of 10 cartridges from his cartridge box, open it up, and place the loose rounds into his expense pouch. he would then use these up, and when the expense pouch weas empty, he would repeat the process. In the American system, of course, the soldier kept 20 rounds at the "ready" in the top of the tin trays in his box, and drew from them until they were expended.

Thus the deep box with equal sized tins for the English system. It was designed solely to transport and protect the cartridges, not as a means of having them available for use. The differing philosophies of the two systems are seen thus in the design of the tin inserts in each cartridge box.

The sets actually came in two colors and three varients. The sets for the line regiments and rifle regiments were made both in black and in russett. Those for the Guard regiments had black boxes and pouches, but buff leather straps and slings. There were also some variations as to the tin compartment arrangements, the line boxes having 5 comparments, but those for the sergeants having only three larger ones. Again, the sgt's pattern was designed so he could "feed" spare ammunition to his men from his own box if needs be.

Guard regiments, and rifle regiments had the seperate cap box designed to be worn on the box sling, vice the belt. No seperate cap box was provided for wear on the belt during our period, or shortly thereafter. The best information on this can be found in Captain Martin Petrie's "Equipment of Infantry" a pamphlet printed in 1865 and illustrating exactly what was produced and issued to the English forces.

There is a cap box design that is claimed to be English, and reproduced by some sutlers, but I have yet to see it either illustrated in period literature, or in images. The cap boxes I have seen are either those attached to the cartridge box, the same removed and modicied for waistbelt use, or those designed to be worn on the cartridge box strap, or American pattern cap boxes issued with the English waistbelt.

Again, either russett or black is correct, although those are for smooth leather. Buff leather starps were guard issue items, and would thus be in white, although perhaps redyed black by a later user.

Respects,

[Southern Cal]

It took a long wait for a production run but I eventually had a fine Enfield pattern cartridge box and other Enfield leather accoutrements from maker L.D. Haning. This gear is not cheap, but high quality comes with a price. If you can get up enough pards for a large enough run of Enfield equipment to make it worth the time and effort it takes the craftsman to construct, delivery time would probably be shortened. You'd also have some uniformity in your unit. There are others who make acceptable Enfield boxes for less but the stitching and overall quality is a notch below. The idea of having several, or most, or all members in the unit accoutred with Enfield boxes and leather is very good and would certainly draw favorable attention to detail.

[Picket Post]

actually, there is some documentation of Enfield weapons (rifles and rifled muskets) being shipped through the blockade with bayonet and scabbard. Letters from Huse to Richmond document that the price of Enfields included bayonet and scabbard. A quick search of the OR's will reveal this info. Further, from ships manifests, it appears that bayonets were shipped more times than not with scabbards, as they are usually not listed as seperate items.

While one could argue that this does not document the issue of the bayonet and scabbard with the musket, it only makes sense that you would give the soldier the gun and the bayonet to go with, and since it was shipped with the scabbard, the soldier would get the whole kit.

Now, this does not mean that he was issued Enfield scabbards from that point forward. Once it wore out, it could have been replaced with another Enfield scabbard or a CS manufactured one.

Accouterments are generally listed in ships manifests as sets, and sometimes lists "sergeants sets" seperatly. This does not mean that these sets were issued as sets. These sets could have been broken down and issued as seperate items.

I do believe GOOD Brittish accouterments are under represented in the hobby, especially on the Federal side. (well, one could argue that GOOD accouterments of any type are under represented!)