Richard Johnston
07-16-2013, 12:54 PM
I took my 2-band 1863 Springfield rifle to the Knoxville Antique Roadshow last weekend for an appraisal and didn't do very well. The expert said he'd never seen one before and then started looking through the Fledermann ? handbook which said maybe it was real and maybe it wasn't. In previous threads, this has been discussed with no resolution. I purchased mine about 25 years ago from a guy that wanted to get the money for an Enfield reproduction so he'd match the rest of his buddies in his Civil War Reenactment unit. I've done some research and come up with much conflicting info. I recall finding one source that claimed about 27000 of these rifles were manufactured. Also, another source indicated that the band design for the 1863 changed in February 1863 to a new style and that indicated that my rifle was manufactured between December 1862 and February 1863.
The rifle is in excellent condition and doesn't look like it was ever issued. The barrel is 33 inches long to the end of the tang. It has a two leaf sight and the lockplate etc. looks identical to 1863 model. It has the standard VP proof mark and it is 58 caliber. Although it is claimed that no photographs exist of this rifle in the hands of an artillery unit, I would like to point out the next best thing.
About twenty years ago, I toured the Gettysburg Cyclorama and saw a contemporary Civil War artist painting hanging in an adjacent room It was titled something like "Artillery Unit in Retreat" and had a very dramatic view of a wide eyed rearing horse hitched to a caisson and a shell exploding nearby. Anyway, on the ground was a two-band Springfield rifle with no bayonet in plain view. Although no photos have been found, that artist had seen that rifle in close proximity to an artillery unit or he would never have placed it there. Anyway, artists usually have pretty good visual memories when they are composing something from memory plus imagination. I became convinced by that painting that these rifles existed and were issued to artillery units as a self-defense side arm.
Incidentally, the standard bayonet doesn't fit on this rifle as the 1863 barrel had a 1-mil per inch taper so with the shortened barrel, the bayonet is too tight. (I scratched the end of my Springfield up trying to muscle a bayonet on to it) I believe artillery units, which got overrun all the time, were instructed to get one round off to slow the rebs down and get out as quick as they could. They were not expected to defend the artillery positions against infantry attack.
Has anybody found out anything else about these rifles? I'd like to hear other people's experience with "the rifle that doesn't exist"
The rifle is in excellent condition and doesn't look like it was ever issued. The barrel is 33 inches long to the end of the tang. It has a two leaf sight and the lockplate etc. looks identical to 1863 model. It has the standard VP proof mark and it is 58 caliber. Although it is claimed that no photographs exist of this rifle in the hands of an artillery unit, I would like to point out the next best thing.
About twenty years ago, I toured the Gettysburg Cyclorama and saw a contemporary Civil War artist painting hanging in an adjacent room It was titled something like "Artillery Unit in Retreat" and had a very dramatic view of a wide eyed rearing horse hitched to a caisson and a shell exploding nearby. Anyway, on the ground was a two-band Springfield rifle with no bayonet in plain view. Although no photos have been found, that artist had seen that rifle in close proximity to an artillery unit or he would never have placed it there. Anyway, artists usually have pretty good visual memories when they are composing something from memory plus imagination. I became convinced by that painting that these rifles existed and were issued to artillery units as a self-defense side arm.
Incidentally, the standard bayonet doesn't fit on this rifle as the 1863 barrel had a 1-mil per inch taper so with the shortened barrel, the bayonet is too tight. (I scratched the end of my Springfield up trying to muscle a bayonet on to it) I believe artillery units, which got overrun all the time, were instructed to get one round off to slow the rebs down and get out as quick as they could. They were not expected to defend the artillery positions against infantry attack.
Has anybody found out anything else about these rifles? I'd like to hear other people's experience with "the rifle that doesn't exist"