1853 Enfield with No Proof Markings?

[Matt90]

Hi everyone,

I'm new here and this is my first post. I historically have collected Soviet and German WWII arms, but recently have taken an interest in black powder firearms and have a few reproductions (1860 Henry, 1858 Remington and 1874 Sharps) in my regular shooting collection and am thinking of picking up an antique Civil War musket such as an 1853 Enfield or 1861 Springfield, more for collecting than shooting of course.

I have my eye on an Pattern 1853 Enfield Rifle for sale that appears to be devoid of any proof markings according to the seller. Is it possible this is an "export" rifle? The rifle itself appears to be in good shape and lacks markings on the butt plate or the barrel from what I can see, though is Crown and Tower 1862 marked. Is it possible the rifle's metal is worn down to the point of wearing off the proof marks? My concern is could this potentially be a mix master of parts assembled not during the time period? Perhaps something of Kyber Pass origin? I am a little out of my "normal" knowledge area to be honest.

Any and all help is greatly appreciated!

Thanks

 

[Grayrock Volunteer]

I think that there is a good probability that this musket is a Nepalese P1853 type 2 that has had its original lock swapped out with a British made lock.

 

[captaindrew]

Welcome to the forum Matt

 

[WJC]

Welcome! I'm confident you will have the help of a number of members before long- you've already received one response. Meanwhile, have you tried searching our past threads? We've had some recent discussion of Enfields.
I'm looking forward to your perspectives in our discussions!

 

[mofederal]

Hello and welcome to the talk forum from Southeast Missouri located on the banks of the muddy Mississippi River.

 

[UCVRelics]

Welcome From THE Heart Of Dixie. Nice Enfield. As far as the proof marks being worn off I have to say no as they were stamped pretty deep and they were not located in a high wear area. Lets see what a couple of our Enfield experts have to say on this one. Paging @johan_steele and @Lanyard Puller

 

[Matt90]

Thanks for all the replies!

 

[Larryh86GT]

Welcome from WNY

 

[Banjo Pete]

I have a definite original M1861 Springfield with the proof marks worn off. Dunno if those were stamped as deeply as Enfields though... Come to think of it, I now wonder how plausible that happening is too !

 

[johan_steele]

It's possible someone aggressively removed rust on the barrel destroying the original proofs and it is also possible it was never proofed though that isn't as likely as you might think. It may well be a parts gun put together with dis associated parts or a Khyber made w/ a mix of original parts. I'd want to know if the barrel is a smoothie or rifled, condition & operation of the lock & barrel and maybe what the seller wants for it etc.

 

[redbob]

Welcome to the group and I believe that you have come to the right place for your answers.

 

[Matt90]

It's possible someone aggressively removed rust on the barrel destroying the original proofs and it is also possible it was never proofed though that isn't as likely as you might think. It may well be a parts gun put together with dis associated parts or a Khyber made w/ a mix of original parts. I'd want to know if the barrel is a smoothie or rifled, condition & operation of the lock & barrel and maybe what the seller wants for it etc.

Thanks for your info! The bore has rifling but it is in worn condition from my understanding. I'm not sure with regard to the operation of the lock to be honest. The musket is in Canada so I'm not sure if values would translate to the United States?

 

[JOHN42768]

Welcome, enjoy. I believe not original Enfield without proofs. Take a look at this site for comparison info http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/articles/walden/enfauth.htm

 

[Craig L Barry]

Well you have a common P-53 Birmingham Tower marked lock dated 1862 fitted into an earlier type II stock (hard bands, band springs). So you know those two parts don't quite match up. Who knows what the source of the barrel might be. That's about all you can say definitively.

Odds are this was "put together" from disassociated parts from a variety of sources.

 

[Ralph Heinz]

Craig is right on and in addition there is deep pitting on the hammer from the corrosive caps used at that time but none on the breech or rear of the barrel or nipple. It is certainly a "put-together" piece. You can find an all correct P.53 from a number of different CW dealers that you'll be happy with and it'll be money well spent. If you look at a lot of dealer web sites you can see price ranges and find a good one for a reasonable price. Don't be in a hurry.

 

[yulzari]

British law was quite clear. It was an offence to sell or export for sale any gun unless it had passed proof. No proof, not British. Nor French or Belgian to cover other manufacturers. I presume USA made Enfields were all stamped. This would apply just the same to barrels which did not pass inspector's standards (e.g. too large or small in the bore). So you could buy them in batches as scrap but you could not sell them as barrels unless proofed.

However there were makers in India and Afghanistan who made copies, often smooth bored, which externally are a match. I have one with me which would pass the casual eye very easily made somewhere in India in the 19th century. Well made too with spiral wound good wrought iron. Their rifling machines were much the same as rural USA ones into the 20th century and familiar to any longrifle rural gunsmith.

Ones made by the Kingdom of Nepal were all rifled AFAIK and usually sound, if occasionally variable in the bore.

A look under the barrel should reveal any barrel maker or inspectors marks if it is British (or French. Belgian or American).

 

[Lanyard Puller]

Just back from the Chattanooga, "American Diggers" show..Quite well attended and about 200 tables of dealers.

Got to agree with the comments so far of basically it's a parts gun; poorly fitted from mixed models. Some of the parts are of little, if any, value due to over cleaning and heavy usage.. If you really want an Enfield I'd advise that they are usually found at most antique gun shows. I bought a very crispy "parts gun" for $650 at Chattanooga, and all of the parts were usable, and it { a P53 Type3} would be perfectly suitable as a wall hanger.

Keep searching would be my advice, they are not rare {except some CSA models}

 

[Matt90]

Gents,

Thanks for all your advice! I will pass on this one and keep reading in the mean time. Any recommended books for Confederate and/or Union arms? I'm looking to likely start with a musket.

Thanks again,
Matt

 

[johan_steele]

Gents,

Thanks for all your advice! I will pass on this one and keep reading in the mean time. Any recommended books for Confederate and/or Union arms? I'm looking to likely start with a musket.

Thanks again,
Matt

Spend $100 on American Military Shoulder Arms Vol 3 by Moller.

 

[Lanyard Puller]

And.... drop another $100 for The English Connection and you'll learn everything you'll need to spot a CS carbine, rifle, rifle musket, or musket. {or sword, bayonet or even a Whitworth.}
Normally $125. that price only from. www.collegehillarsenal.com {NO, I get nothing out of this !}

That 200 bucks will be the best money you'll ever spend on research books.