Enfield Rifle Question

[unionblue]

To All,

I would like to share something I read in the book, General Lee's Army: From Victory To Collapse, by Joseph T. Glatthaar.

In chapter 21, Arms and Ammunition, pg. 261, I read the following:

"...Despite the closeness in caliber, .577 and .58, the army had to issue different ammunition and loading instructions for Enfields and Springfields. During the Antietam Campaign, Hill Fitzpatrick struggled to load a Yankee round in his Enfield rifle. "To my greatest mortification my gun failed to fire," the private reported to his wife, "but I soon recollected that it was charged with a Yankee cartridge which had to be ram[m]ed hard. I drew my stick gave it a hard ram tried again and went clear as a whistle." After the battle, Lee's headquarters explained that officers and men could recognize the Enfield ammunition because it had a wooden plug at the cavity. Soldiers were to insert it into the barrel of the musket with the paper. The Springfield ammunition had grooves around it, full of grease. "The .58 caliber will be inserted naked," or without the paper, Lee instructed them..."

But, in chapter 27, Preparing for the Spring Campaign of 1864, pg. 361, I read the following:

"...The Ordance Department issued a circular for soldiers who fired Enfield rifled muskets, reminding them as Lee had done eighteen months earlier that when they loaded the weapon, they could not ram the charge with the paper cartridge. Soldiers must pour the gunpowder, drop the projectile without the paper down the barrel, and then pack it down with the ramrod. The circular reported that "many of them ram the charge home with the paper between the bullet and the powder. As this paper is a very stiff hollow cylinder it will not crumple up, therefore a considerable space in the barrel" developed. Either the projectile lacked adequate velocity when fired--a spent round--or if the powder packed near the bullet, a hang fire (a delayed, inaccurate firing) would occur..."

This was the first I had ever heard or read about this loading problem with the Enfield musket, even with all my years in Civil War reenacting as both a Union and Confederate infantry soldier.

I was under the impression that the paper the round came with was rammed into the barrel of both the Enfield and Springfield muskets, to help hold the powder in place.

It seems to me that the author has his facts a bit mixed up also, stating in the earlier chapter that Lee ordered the Enfield to be loaded with the paper, and yet in the later chapter, Lee sends out a circular stating the Enfield is NOT to be loaded with paper.

I checked the references for both chapters and came up with this:

Chapter 26, Arms and Ammunition, used this reference:

GO (I presume meaning General Order) No. 108, HQ, ANV. 21 Sep. 1862. Wright's Brigade Order Book, Civil War Times Illustrated Collection, US Army Military History Institute.

Chapter 27, Preparing for the Spring Campaign of 1864, had this reference:

Circular. HQ, Johnston's Brigade. 13 Aor. 1864. 1 Jan. 1864. Second Army Corps, O&C of Subcommands, ANV. Record Group 109, NA; Inspection Report of Heth's Division by Sidney H. Davvies, Assistant Adjutant & Inspector General, 28 Feb. 1865, referring to contents of circular in early 1864. Inspection Report, R16 (Microfilm), F59. Record Group 109, NA.

Anyone got any information on this problem of loading an Enfield musket with paper or does anyone think the author might have his facts confused?

Curious,
Unionblue

[johan_steele]

The US Minie doesn't need a patch... but other than that I'd wait for Leadhead to chime in. I fire the same round in both an Enfield & Springfiled, both repops and originals. But I only fire US style Ammo, I've never had a problem doing so. That said I've never left the paper on while ramming.

[tomh]

Unionblue,

The British style cartridge (Enfield .577, .70, .75, etc.) was designed to be loaded with the paper between the bullet and the rifling. These cartridges were externally lubricated by applying a mixture of wax and tallow. The bullet was at the bottom of the cartridge with the nose facing the charge and the loading proceedure was to tear the top of the cartridge, pour the powder into the barrel, insert the base of the cartridge (containing the bullet) into the bore and then tear off the excess paper at the nose of the bullet. Because the cartridge paper was intended to be loaded with the bullet the diameter of these bullets is smaller than the American bullets. Originally the bullet diameter for the .577 Enfield was set at .565 but this was changed, in part due to the studies of Capt. Arthur Hawes who determined that the troops in colder climates were having problems loading their weapons. It was determined that the best solution was to reduce the diameter of the bullet to .555, well below the accepted standard of bore size minus .015 inches.

Originally the Enfield/Pritchett bullet was designed with an iron cup (culot) in the cavity which would be driven into the body of the bullet on firing, increasing bullet diameter, destroying windage and engaging the rifling. It was determined that this could actually be better accomplished with a small wooden (generally boxwood, sometimes the CS used clay) plug that was narrower at the top than at the base. Eventually it was determined that the expanding gasses alone would actually accomplish the sought after increase in diameter so the plug was eliminated.

The American cartridge was internally lubricated with the wax/tallow mixture applied directly to the bullet. The bullet was located at the top of the cartridge with the cavity/base facing the charge. To load, the cartridge base (tail) was torn to allow the powder to be poured into the barrel. Then the cartridge was supposed to be completely unwrapped and the "naked ball" loaded into the bore. Many soldiers loaded the paper with the bullet to save time but this increased fouling and made subsequent loadings difficult.

Throughout the war the CS Ordnance Department had problems with bullet diameters, either too small to achieve a proper gas seal or too large to load easily (or at all). Superintendant Gorgas decided that the best solution was to run all bullets, both cast and machine pressed, through a swaging die to produce a more consistent diameter. I am currently examining a specific Enfield type that has a wheel (several variants) stamped in the cavity. Several Richmond area recovered specimens are actually too big to load (.590+), and we are trying to determine what caused these errors.

Hope this helps,
TomH

[tomh]

unionblue,

BTW, one of the great myths concerning bullets is that you could only fire an enfield bullet in an Enfield rifle. The bottom line is that any ammunition smaller than the bore could be used. The Federals used several hundred thousand Enfield P-53 rifle muskets but never purchased enfield cartridges. With the prescribed diameter of the .58 bullet also being .565 it was not neccessary to purchase imported ammunition for these weapons.

Problems in manufacturing were the major reason that some bullets would not load properly. Don't forget, this is the 19th century and measurments of 1000th of an inch are theoretical. I have seen a letter from Gorgas where he took his guages and micrometer to several CS arsenals to compare to their equipment. He states that no two agreed and variances were excessive.

The attached photo is a British manufactured (Eley Brothers of London) .577 enfield with the boxwood plug and the number .57 stamped in the cavity. This was produced before the reduction of dimeter to .555 at which point Eley began stamping their bulets with a "55" in the cavity.

TomH
(AKA leadhead)

[ole]

Am most certainly glad we have an authority on board. Although the information is an overnoad for me, dozens and dozens of our members will likely be happy to have that dissertation on Enfield cartridges.

ole

[M E Wolf]

Dear UnionBlue and TomH;

Gentlemen; thank you for bringing a deserving topic up and references; as well as illustrations.

Very interesting and informative.

Just some thoughts.

Respectfully submitted,
M. E. Wolf

[30th_il]

Where these cartidges made by hand or was there a machine that could paper wrap the ball and powder?

[tomh]

30th_il,

British enfield bullets were machine pressed but the cartridges were wrapped by hand. For info on the Anderson style press as favored by the British manufacturers take a look at:

http://www.civilwarprojectiles.com/a...on_machine.htm

That article also includes photos of several of the British "base marks" found in the cavities of the Enfield bullets.

TomH