Researching rifles used by particular regiments?

[FedericoFCavada]

1st post.

I've watched skirmishing and it looks like a really interesting and fun shooting event. I'm on the fence about joining in.

Apparently, not many of my ancestors were in the U.S. Civil War, and at least one in Ohio was drafted, but hired a substitute in his place, but I do know of three, one on my mother's side, and another two on my father's:

1. Co. K of the 97th Ohio Infantry Regiment
2958
2. Co. A 34th Indiana Infantry Regiment--(this exerts an appeal since the regiment fought near Brownsville, TX at Palmito ranch, and I live in Texas.... My ancestor was out of the unit before they became "zouaves" unless I'm mistaken.)
3. I have an ancestor born in PA who signed up when he was 60 years old in Iowa, joining Co. A of the Iowa 37th Volunteer Infantry, aka. "The Gray-beard Regiment." These elderly men guarded Rebel prisoners, supply depots, trains and so on.

I have read that Indiana troops had a mix of 1842 muskets, 3-band 1853 Enfields, and U.S. rifled arms.
While I don't know, it would seem the Gray-beards would have had assorted Lorenz, Potsdam, 1842, Belgian, etc. muskets?
My understanding is that at the outset OVI had 1816 muskets converted to cap-locks, 1842 muskets, and 2-band 1858 Enfields, but later had U.S. pattern rifle muskets.

Is it realistic to think that the actual, specific muskets and rifle-muskets can be researched without travelling all over the Midwest and East Coast? :confused:

[Maillemaker]

Is it realistic to think that the actual, specific muskets and rifle-muskets can be researched without travelling all over the Midwest and East Coast?

Depending on the unit, you may find that the work has already been done for you. Someone here may be able to point you in the right direction, or you might try www.cwreenactors.com.


I've watched skirmishing and it looks like a really interesting and fun shooting event. I'm on the fence about joining in.

It's a blast. I hope you give it a go. Here is a map of places where skirmishes are held:

https://goo.gl/maps/ErZmN

Steve

[R. McAuley 3014V]

1st post.

I live in Texas....

While I don't know, it would seem the Gray-beards would have had assorted Lorenz, Potsdam, 1842, Belgian, etc. muskets?
My understanding is that at the outset OVI had 1816 muskets converted to cap-locks, 1842 muskets, and 2-band 1858 Enfields, but later had U.S. pattern rifle muskets.

Is it realistic to think that the actual, specific muskets and rifle-muskets can be researched without travelling all over the Midwest and East Coast? :confused:

Some of them Texians at the onset of the war recieved arms from the State of Texas that had included old flintlock muskets captured from the Mexicans at the seige of Bexar in December 1835. At least one of those "captured" muskets issued to Texas troops was a British Brown Bess that was already over a hundred years old in 1861!!!

[FedericoFCavada]

Wow!

That is interesting! I'll have to share that with folks hereabouts!

Merry Christmas!

Thanks for the anecdote. I guess those "India Pattern" Tower muskets were built to last!

[FedericoFCavada]

Depending on the unit, you may find that the work has already been done for you. Someone here may be able to point you in the right direction, or you might try www.cwreenactors.com (http://www.cwreenactors.com).



It's a blast. I hope you give it a go. Here is a map of places where skirmishes are held:

https://goo.gl/maps/ErZmN

Steve

Aha! I might have known:

97th OVI - 940 Enfield rifle muskets.
From past thread:
http://www.n-ssa.org/vbforum/archive/index.php/t-301.html?

And Austrian Lorenz Muster 1854:

Iowa 37th Infantry

[Mike McDaniel]

You have to remember that most units would rearm during the war. Rifle-muskets were scarce in 1861-1862. By the end of the war, Springfield and Enfield rifle-muskets were the standard.

[Curt]

Halo!

This could be a long discussion, but I will cover some basics.

TIME (and Place).

Early War units are often different than later war except may be for units of special or dedicate ones such as the 27th Menopausal Militia Rifles and got ands kept. rifles.

Units formed under older versions of tactical manuals. Meaning the older ten company regiment where only two were "light infantry" armed with M1841 or M1855 rifles say and the rest had the common smoothbores of the day- M1822 or M1842, or alterations to percussion.

On both sides that fell behind as production or importation of first class arms like the M1861 Springfield or British P1853 3rd Model Enfields kicked in growing numbers after the summer of 1861.

Sometimes, governmental records exist. Up to a point, on e can sometimes trace a certain group up of weapon by the ammunition requests made for it. BUT in general folk.. even Ordnance were vague on ''Enfield," or "Springfield" as .580 or .577 but they NUG did not load .69 RB in them.


Ohio Executive Documents

Annual Report of the Quartermaster General to the Governor of the State of Ohio for the year 1862. Columbus, Richard Nevins, State Printer, 1863

Report of the Superintendent of Arsenal

Total arms issued to Ohio troops.

The following tables exhibit the total number of arms issued to Ohio volunteers, now in service, who have received arms through this department:

s, Richard Nevins, State Printer, 1863

Report of the Superintendent of Arsenal

Total arms issued to Ohio troops.

The following tables exhibit the total number of arms issued to Ohio volunteers, now in service, who have received arms through this department:


97th OVI - 940 Enfield rifle muskets.

Curt

[Don Dixon]

This is largely a copy of a post that I made on another forum.

The Federal ordnance manual required that the commanders of army units submit a quarterly ordnance report at the end of every quarter. During the Civil War, these reports were sent to the War Department, and clerks entered them into ledgers. The ledgers are contained in National Archives Record Group (RG) 156-159, and are available on microfilm or CD for about $1k.

There are several problems. The original quarterly reports were destroyed in the 1890s. The first existing ledger covers the last quarter of 1862, and reporting for the first quarter of 1865 is VERY incomplete. This is probably reflective of the War Department's disorganization as the Federal volunteer army was stood up in 1861-2 and demobilized in 1865. Records don't exist for all regiments for all quarters. And, even if even if a regimental record exists, it doesn't necessarily contain a record for each company. At a time when "copper plate" handwriting was highly valued, it is clear that many of the War department clerks who maintained the ledgers were not hired for their handwriting skills (Ah the joys of patronage, as opposed to competence.) So, when you read the records is it a "1," a "7," or a "9;" or a "4" or a "9;" or a "6" or a "8." So, reasonable people might well disagree about some of the numbers in the reports. There was also some clear confusion on the part of some commanders regarding exactly what model of firearm they had in their inventories, in that you have similar numbers for different models in sequential quarters.

For earlier periods of time, the northern states' Adjutant General's reports reflecting issues to state units provide some pretty good information.

The Confederates copied the Federal ordnance manual, and also required quarterly reporting. If reports were ever submitted, however, they do not exist in a central collection. Some do exist in the compiled service records of individual Confederate commanders, but digging them out in any systematic fashion is currently impossible for anything but individual units.

As stated in a post above, there was a progression of arms issues to individual units. And, the concept that units were uniformly armed with a single type of firearm is extremely incorrect. Most units were armed with some mix of firearms during most of their enlistments.

My comments are reflective of a book I'm working on regarding the employment of Austro-Hungarian arms during the Civil War. I'm interested in which units carried Austrian arms, for what periods, and what they thought of them; not in the arms carried by the hypothetical 42nd Mess Kit Repair Battalion during its enlistment. Significantly different research requirements.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

[Phil Spaugy, 3475V]

http://www.nps.gov/frsp/historyculture/armament-of-the-union-army-at-fredericksburg.htm

[H.Liniger]

A complete list of long arms carried by The Army of the Potomac by unit can be found in the publication Ready Aim Fire, Small Arms Ammunition in the Battle of Gettysburg by Dean S. Thomas.This information was compiled from the Quarterly Summary Statements of Ordnance and Ordnance Stores Record Group 156. Harry Liniger DSR

[FedericoFCavada]

Thank you, gents, for the insights and leads.

There are rather a lot of Austro-Hungarian rifle muskets there on that Fredericksburg & Spotsylvania list compiled from RG 156 at College Park, MD or NARA I, DC. Also rather more smooth-bores than I'd otherwise have imagined too.

Happy new year.

Very best regards,
F.F.Cavada.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

The relic shotgun shown below was carried by my great-grandfather, Benjamin Milam Johnson (1838-1915), of Shelby County, Texas. He together with his two brothers, four brother-in-laws, and five or six first cousins all served in Company E, 3rd Texas Cavalry from Shelby County. The shotgun is a 20-bore double, bearing Birmingham proofs, and has Milam's initials painted on the left side of the butt-stock. According to a great-uncle (born 1891 - died 1983), said he last shot Uncle Milam's shotgun in 1910. For many years the shotgun was stored in my grandfather's barn, inside a log crib, the locks having been misplaced, so the gun is merely a rusty hulk of what it once was. Milam received a medical discharge at Princeville (Tupelo), Mississippi on 29 July 1862, having been in hospital for 60 days suffering from chronic bronchitis and camp dysentery, his younger brother having died of a fever a month earlier on June 9th, his father died at home on 30 Aug, his elder brother wounded at Iuka and dying as a POW on 31 Dec 1862. A kid sister died in June 1863 leaving Milam, one elder sister (1833-1874) and their mother (1808-1884) the sole heirs of his father, Alvey R. Johnson Sr (1803-1862), a pioneer Texas Congressman (1838-39).

http://i267.photobucket.com/albums/ii305/rmac1023/BMJShotgun_zps02374f6d.jpg

[Gary Van Kauwenbergh, 101]

I've wondered for a long time what the 6th Wisconsin was first issued. Rufus Dawes refers to them in his book as 'Belgians' , and they're obviously an imported large-caliber smoothbore, but I've never been able to find a make or model. Lance Heredegen doesn't know either, and I suppose if he doesn't know, chances are no one does, but if anyone on the list knows I'd appreciate you sharing.

The unit I impersonate is the 2nd Wisconsin. They were first issued M1816 Harpers Ferry's, then the M1854 Lorenz. There are not a lot of pictures of soldiers under arms where you can see the sights on their M1854s, but on the ones there are, the all appear to be Type IIs, with the long-range, flip-up sights. I have not seen a picture of a 2nd Wisconsin soldier holding a Type I Lorenz (with the block sight), and that seems odd to me since the majority of the M1854s were Type I. If anyone has seen an image of a 2nd Wisconsin soldier with something other than a M1854 Type II, please enlighten me!

[Don Dixon]

Gary,

As you now know from the Austro-Hungarian Army (k.k. Army) System Lorenz manual, the division of System Lorenz arms in the k.k. Army was approximately 2/3rds Type I Muster 1854s (1st and 2nd ranks) and 1/3rd Type II's (3rd rank and NCOs). However, that wouldn't necessarily have followed in the Federal Army. The Federals paid a $0.50 premium for rifles with long range sights (Type IIs). So, I suspect that the Federal percentage was more weighted toward the Type IIs than the k.k. Army's. Likewise, the Confederacy's percentage was probably more weighted toward the Type I's.

Having said that, the Federal quarterly ordnance reports from 4th quarter 1862 to 1st quarter 1864 report the Muster 1854s in the 2nd Wisconsin Infantry as being "Austrian Rifled Musket, Quadrangular Bayonet, Caliber .54 and .55." That should have equated to Type I's. No rifles with "Leaf and Block Sights" (Type II's) in .54 or .577 caliber were reported as being held by the regiment in any of those quarters.

But, see my earlier comment about commanders being somewhat clueless about what their troops were equipped with.

Regards,
Don
2881V

[hawkeye]

You've already received some great info on researching civil war weapons, so I won't try to add to the info already posted, but maybe I can help you learn more about skirmishing and hopefully recruit you into our ranks. I noticed you live in central Texas and I wanted to let you know there are several of us in the Austin- San Antonio area who not only participate in NSSA skirmishes, but also conduct 4 skirmishes a year at our home range just outside San Antonio. If you can attend one of our local skirmishes you would have an opportunity to actually shoot some of the firearms we use as well as talk about skirmishing with active participants. If you'd like more info or have questions, feel free to contact me at hawkeye78628@yahoo.com.

Bill Knipscher
Terrys Texas Rangers
10825V

[FedericoFCavada]

Cheers and thanks, gentlemen.

Bill/hawkeye, Sure thing. I'll make it a point to attend more matches and learn a good deal more.

By way of thanks, I found this publication about Shiloh/Pittsburg Landing, TN. The part on infantry and artillery weapons starts out with a general overview but then goes to greater specificity for the particular theater.

http://usacac.army.mil/cac2/cgsc/carl/download/csipubs/gudmens.pdf

Again, thanks.
Very respectfully &c.,

FFCavada

[Scott Lynch 1460V]

A number of years ago, I purchased a Carbine de Chausser de Vincennes from Mike Yeck. This is the European version of the Whitneyville Plymouth Rifle. It had a name carved in the stock which I pretty much ignored as I bought the gun as a shooter, (Hoyt Liner), .69 caliber and shoots lights out. Phil Spaugy researched the name and found the guy and gave me a copy of his service record, and unit history. He was a member of the 97th Indiana Vol. Inf. and the unit history states that they were issued these rifled muskets. How cool is that? I am sure that later they were issued standard .58 or .577 muskets. Still very cool to tie a particular gun to a soldier. I tried to find descendants who might have more on this guy but I found out the surname Martindale is about as common as corn in Indiana.

[FedericoFCavada]

Wow, that is really cool. Do you mean to say you had the bore re-lined, or am I misunderstanding? :confused: Anecdotally, I have read in some publication or other that the 140th PA Volunteer infantry had the Vincennes muskets too. Supposedly they were nick-named "walking artillery" as a result... Although that can't make much sense given that there were very many .69 cal. smooth bores of different kinds. :rolleyes:;)

My particular bane is identifying Shoups in western PA, Moores in western PA, and Evans in Tennessee, West Virginia and southern Ohio--forget it! Just too many!

[Muley Gil]

Wow, that is really cool. Do you mean to say you had the bore re-lined, or am I misunderstanding? :confused: Anecdotally, I have read in some publication or other that the 140th PA Volunteer infantry had the Vincennes muskets too. Supposedly they were nick-named "walking artillery" as a result... Although that can't make much sense given that there were very many .69 cal. smooth bores of different kinds. :rolleyes:;)My particular bane is identifying Shoups in western PA, Moores in western PA, and Evans in Tennessee, West Virginia and southern Ohio--forget it! Just too many!

Many skirmishers in the N-SSA shoot firearms that have had the bores relined.

[John Holland]

FedericoFCavada -

I have read some of the original regimental documentation on the Penna. regiments that were issued the short Belgian Rifles, to which Scott Lynch referred. In the original references the term I saw used was "Foot Artillery". It was a derisive term used as "cat calls" by other regiments who made sport of them as they marched by. You noted you didn't understand why they would be called such considering the .69 caliber smoothbores also in use. The reason is due to the excessively heavy recoil of the service loads using the heavy weight .69 Minie ball, which is much worse than the smoothbore muskets. The recoil was referred to as being similar to firing an artillery piece from the shoulder! These short rifles were heavy to begin with, and when mounted with their matching heavy saber bayonet they became clumsy and most unpleasant to carry. Very simply, the majority of troops who had them hated them!

JDH

[FedericoFCavada]

Thanks for the explanation about the heavy-recoilling .69 rifle muskets. My understanding is that the .69 Minié from a rifled M1842 was actually more accurate than the patched .54 round ball from the M1841 percussion "Mississippi" rifle. But the recoil led to the development of the .58 by 1855....

I know that lots of folks know vastly more about this subject, but I thought I'd share these interesting bits from a Hungarian black powder enthusiast, Nemeth Bálasz. His Magyar accent can be a bit curious at times, e.g. "extracted" turns into "extracticated" and so on, but he has good descriptions and videos of how to roll various black powder cartridges and so on.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVNe5SSTXxI&index=3&list=PLIGg3pcPWcaKtgUsT9kvXRcoZMHrhzYjV

I thought the paper-patching process of the Lorenz .54"/13.7mm bullet was interesting too:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JVNe5SSTXxI&index=3&list=PLIGg3pcPWcaKtgUsT9kvXRcoZMHrhzYjV

Anecdotally, it would seem that knowledgeable writers extol the Austrian Lorenz, and indeed, large numbers were purchased, second only to the British Pattern 53 and Pattern 56/58 Enfields and various copies. Others deride it as being unsuitable or roundly disliked by troops to whom it was issued. Could there be anything to the notion that the .54 caliber Miniés for the M1841s still in use, when fired from an Austrian rifle, were a poor "fit" resulting in inaccuracy? Also, would the Austrian muskets have arrived with the cartridges already packed, like the British arms frequently did, or were the Lorenz bullets put into a U.S.-style simplified paper cartridge or an Enfield-type? :confused:

Happy 2015!

[Don Dixon]

Fredrico,

The standard bore diameter for the M1841 "Mississippi" was .540 inches, and the standard diameter for the swagged .54 caliber conical bullets used in the M1841 was .537 inches. The powder charge was 50 grains of musket powder. Standard "Mississippi" ammunition was used by the Federals in their System Lorenz rifles.

The standard bore diameter for the Muster 1854 System Lorenz arms was 13.9 mm/.547-8 inches. Austrian bullets were swagged at about .540 inches and then paper wrapped and greased with tallow, bringing them up to a diameter of .547 inches. The powder charge was 62 grains of musket powder.

So --assuming that everything about the ammunition and firearm was exactly on specification, which it often was not -- the standard Federal cartridge was at least .010 inches under bore size for standard System Lorenz rifles and contained 12 grains less musket powder than the Austrian cartridge. That Federal ammunition did not necessarily work well in System Lorenz rifles should not therefore come as a surprise. There is an additional problem in that the sights of System Lorenz rifles were calibrated for the standard Austrian cartridge, and the Federals never changed them out for sights calibrated for the Federal cartridge. The Confederates loaded their "Mississippi" standard .54 caliber ammunition with 70 grains of musket powder, so their ammunition may have slugged up a bit better in the bore. One finds much less complaining about System Lorenz rifles by the Confederates than by the Federals.

With the exception of some "Austrian" ammunition -- for which no data is given regarding specifications -- imported from Eley of Great Britain by the Confederates, neither side is known to have imported Austrian ammunition.

All of this says an enormous amount about the competence and intelligence of both the Federal and Confederate ordnance departments.

Regards,
Don Dixon
2881V

[FedericoFCavada]

Terrific information. Thank you very much for sharing some of your research.

I'll look forward to reading your book when it comes out! ;)

[FedericoFCavada]

... To Civil War Small Arms (Gettysburg, PA: Thomas Publications, 1990) ISBN: 0-939631-25-3 has that appendix youse guys recommended, which at least has the late period of the war, and makes an effort to identify the secesh regiments too...

As you told me up post:
97th OH & 34 IN: .577" Enfield P-53 rifle muskets
37th IA: Austrian and Prussian rifled muskets, .69 to .70.

As it happens, I recently acquired a .58 cal. version of the M1841 "Mississippi" percussion rifle. I guess this appears in records as the "M1840/1845 .58 cal. rifle." The articles and monographs posted here give an excellent account of the very many iterations of the rifle, so if I decide to go from skirmishing to the NSSA and really big events, I can make more accurate modifications to participate.


Thanks to everyone for the excellent pointers and discussion! Cheers!

Very respectfully, &c.
Lt. Col. Federico Fernández "Dave C." Cavada. :D