Confederate Enfield?

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

I have read that Confederate British

Enfields never had a picture of a crown as a marking. Is this true? Here are some photos from an Enfield that I was told by two sources was Confederate. Any input would be appreciated.

 

[52ndFandS]

I should have a crown. It's proof mark.

 

[Dbackfed29]

You can see the Crown on the lock plate. There are other markings that could indicate Confederate use. Check by the butt plate, opposite of the lock, or by the trigger guard.

 

[52ndFandS]

You can see the Crown on the lock plate. There are other markings that could indicate Confederate use. Check by the butt plate, opposite of the lock, or by the trigger guard.

I think I need glasses. You're seein' better than me.

 

[RedRover]

I think I need glasses. You're seein' better than me.

I think I see the crown too. Here's a color modification that makes it perhaps a little more visible...

inside the red marking line...

 

[52ndFandS]

I think I see the crown too. Here's a color modification that makes it perhaps a little more visible...
View attachment 511849

inside the red marking line...
View attachment 511851
View attachment 511850

I see it now. Like one of those 90s 3d posters except inmts an Enfield.

 

[Old Soldier]

Most of the P53s supplied had only the crown on the lock plate. Some had none. All those supplied to the British Army had V.R underneath the crown (V+R = Belgian-sourced; V*R = French-sourced, but not always) and Enfield marked locks are all dated. No Enfield locks were supplied to either side during the conflict. While this is true for the vast majority, the London Armoury Company (L.A.C.) supplied some 70,000 P53s with the V.R under the crown, as they did for all the rifles produced by them (they had the same machinery as Enfield). The later LAC P53s also had no London proofs, just L.A.C on the barrel

The real decider on a British issue rifle is the military acceptance marks on lock and barrel.

On the lock, it usually appeared near the maker name (Enfield or Tower)

None of these were supplied by the British government although a number of older 'sold out of service' guns were sent by civilian contractors, but these will have the opposing arrow mark -X- on butt and barrel, and civilian proofs on the barrel. The acceptance marks were often overstamped as well.

 

[rob63]

Did the two sources that said it was Confederate explain why they thought it was Confederate? If so, could you share what their reasoning was?

 

[OldSarge79]

Your musket should be made by Barnett. If you look closely you will see the remnants of "TOWER" under the crown. To my knowledge, only some Barnetts were marked that way. I have never seen "TOWER" under the crown on any other than Barnett.

 

[Old Soldier]

Your musket should be made by Barnett. If you look closely you will see the remnants of "TOWER" under the crown. To my knowledge, only some Barnetts were marked that way. I have never seen "TOWER" under the crown on any other than Barnett.

It looks that way, but there is a lot of corrosion there, however the 'high' crown seems to confirm it. The TOWER was usually stamped where the makers name is on this photo from an older thread:

Two questions and a request:
Are there spring retainers for the bands?
Is there a number stamped on the barrel in front of the foresight?
Can we see a photo of the barrel near the breech for any proof marks?

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

You can see the Crown on the lock plate. There are other markings that could indicate Confederate use. Check by the butt plate, opposite of the lock, or by the trigger guard.

No other visible markings besides a "VI" carved into to the channel of the ram rod groove.

 

[Story]

I have read that Confederate British Any input would be appreciated.

Can you post pics of the complete lock and the overall weapon?

 

[JOHN42768]

It looks that way, but there is a lot of corrosion there, however the 'high' crown seems to confirm it. The TOWER was usually stamped where the makers name is on this photo from an older thread:
View attachment 511878


Two questions and a request:
Are there spring retainers for the bands?
Is there a number stamped on the barrel in front of the foresight?
Can we see a photo of the barrel near the breech for any proof marks?

The rear markings are definitely correct match

 

[Old Soldier]

No other visible markings besides a "VI" carved into to the channel of the ram rod groove.

Picture of the top of the breech and barrel please. It should still have the proof marks there Let us see. We can then tell you whether it is the original barrel or a replacement.

 

[Jeff in Ohio]

Lots more photos posted here might get you an answer.
I 'll add that the mark 330 on the trigger guard looks like an ink catalog number put on by a museum

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

Picture of the top of the breech and barrel please. It should still have the proof marks there Let us see. We can then tell you whether it is the original barrel or a replacement.

No other marks anywhere on gun

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

Did the two sources that said it was Confederate explain why they thought it was Confederate? If so, could you share what their reasoning was?

One wrote a book on Confederate arms. I cannot remember his reasoning.

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

This is an answere I got from a facebook page: The crown stamp to the rear of the lock was typical of nearly all Pattern 1853 Enfield arms, whether they were British Military or commercial arms. However the "VR" mark under those crowns typically indicated British government ownership and most of those guns did not get exported for Civil War use. Exceptions to that "rule" include London Armoury made Enfields, which all had the VR whether they were British military or commercial arms and some of the obsolete British military arms sold out of service during the war. These include the Patters 1839, 1842 and 1851. Also, some earlier Type I and Type II Enfields were acquired by the south and are known with Sinclair, Hamilton & Co markings. These guns all have the VR and other British military markings. They are, however, extremely rare and very much the exception and not the rule. It looks like a very weak "Tower" stamp is below your crown, indicating this is a Barnett lock. Barnett was the only maker to put that under the crown and I believe it was only used fairly early during the war and specifically for guns being exported for Civil War use.

 

[Ihatecomplicatedinterface]

It looks that way, but there is a lot of corrosion there, however the 'high' crown seems to confirm it. The TOWER was usually stamped where the makers name is on this photo from an older thread:
View attachment 511878


Two questions and a request:
Are there spring retainers for the bands?
Is there a number stamped on the barrel in front of the foresight?
Can we see a photo of the barrel near the breech for any proof marks?

No other marks than the ones I posted. I don't know what spring retainers for the bands means.

 

[OldSarge79]

One wrote a book on Confederate arms. I cannot remember his reasoning.

Barnett was one of the most prolific arms suppliers to the Confederacy. A large percentage of British-made weapons imported by the Confederacy came from and through Barnett.
That being said, not all Barnett arms were Confederate. Most, I'm sure, but not all. So unless there is another indication or provenance that indicates Confederate, you won't be able to say with any certainty.