Hunting guns use

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Hunting guns use

My collaborator Tom Ezell has just saved me some substantial typing time. The "Universal Yankee Killer" was a .69 cal smoothbore musket w/ a flint or percussion lock. Expect a lengthy monograph on this particular subject when W t G (Wearing the Gray) is published by the Watchdog in 2008.

You would not be out of place carrying a smoothbore musket to most Eastern theater events, even Gettysburg where there were still 27 AoP units armed completely or partially with .69 cal muskets (and at least that number in the ANV) and certainly your smoothbore is in place for most Western theater events. As has been previously stated, there were still smoothbores reported in the trenches in front of Atlanta in 1864. "Buck and ball" rounds in substantial numbers continued to be requisitioned and produced for issuance up until Appomattox.

As always one should do the research and determine what the unit being portrayed was issued at the time of the event. In your case Todd Watts, the 9th KY Co B (US) unit had P-53s by Shiloh, and before that a mixture of unspecified US model smoothbore muskets meaning most likely 1816-22 or US 1842s.

[Todd Watts]

Re: Hunting guns use

Intriguing! So it is essentially impossible for us today to be really accurate in apperance at the 1861 and spring 1862 events with so many percussion 1842s and the many 1861s and Enfields. It is as I suspetced. In doing my 1st person CS account parts this year at Stones River I am going to be carrying my Brown Bess because we knew there were flinters there and we have decided to show this unique nearly-forgotten part of the battle's history.

Why exactly is it today that the 2-banders are "taboo" at events? I have always heard that they are banned, but what is the real reasoning?

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Hunting guns use

Borrow the Stones River NPS owned US 1816 in flint to be absolutely on par for the course.

Re: Two banders:
Some say it was backlash over the wide use of the never issued "Zouave" two banders at early Civil War battle enactments. See The Civil War Musket (Watchdog 2006), where there is a chapter on the lack of Civil War provenance for that particular firearm. Why a ban on all two banders, if that was the case? There were a great many P-58 Enfield rifles and US 1841s that had a definite US Civil War provenance. This seems unlikely to be the only reason.

The most widely accepted explanation is "compliance with event rules". That is, some events do not permit two banders when used in the rear rank as the shorter (33") barrels create the potential for ear injuries to the front rank soldier due to being too close to either the cap or the end of the muzzle at ignition. This is actually a firearms training issue.

[Tom Ezell]

Re: Hunting guns use

Why exactly is it today that the 2-banders are "taboo" at events? I have always heard that they are banned, but what is the real reasoning?

Mostly, because the event-meisters sez so. ;-)

At the root of the problem, it started with an attempt to rid the ranks of the old Remington Zouave rifles, which were some of the first blackpowder reproductions available on the market back in the starting days of The Hobby.

The primary argument at this time against 2-band rifles for use in Civil War enactments is that they create a safety hazard when used by the rear rank for front rank soldiers. The distance between the end of the barrel and the bolster is supposedly not enough to prevent high decibel noise from being directed at the front rank soldier’s ear during firing.

First and foremost, it should be noted that the two primary tactics manuals in use in the reenacting hobby, Hardee’s 1855 Rifle and Light Infantry Tactics and its 1861 Mobile update, and Casey’s 1862 Infantry Tactics are written (and illustrated) with the use of the M1841 and M1855 rifles in mind, both 2-banded weapons. Col. Hardee made some minor adjustments in the manual of arms in his 1861 update to his manual, but the applicable provisions for loading, firing, and weapons safety remained the same.

The principal problem with the safety of the 2-banded rifle in our ranks is the halfast manner in which many units teach drill, and in which the officers and NCOs enforce safety when firing in ranks. Far too many enactors learn and subsequently teach their drill by word-of-mouth rather than by rigorously using the drill manuals. When I first learned the drill from the officers in my old unit, and what I hear time and again when eavesdropping on the instruction of new recruits (and forgetful old ones) is that when firing from the rear rank, you should endeavor to aim so that the ear of your front rank file partner is somewhere between the middle and rear barrel band of your musket.

This bit of advice is a pure “re-enactorism” – you will not find that quote in any tactics manual used during the Civil War. What you will find, however, is the rule that “ (t)he distance from one rank to another will be thirteen inches, measured from the breasts of the rear rank men to the backs or knapsacks of the front rank men.” I've tried this, with both 3-banded and 2-banded rifles, with and without knapsacks, and it can be readily demonstrated that if the troops maintain the proper interval in ranks, and that the file closers ensure the correct interval is kept during loading and firing, then the position of the rifle muzzles – long or short – will also be correct and no safety problem will result. Too many folks fall into the easy habit of stepping back to get a little more room when loading, and then don't pay attention to what they've done with respect to the proper interval.

As a second problem, many re-enactors in the rear ranks do not positon their feet properly when aiming, and this allows for too much distance between the front rank and the rear rank. This is another reason why some consider the 2-band weapon to be dangerous. If the men are trained to use the 2-band weapon and properly supervised by their officers, it is every bit as safe as a 3-bander.

(And as a point of semantics, in most cases when period sources refer to a "rifle," they're talking about what we refer to as "2-banders." "3-banders" are properly known as "rifle-muskets.")

Me, I've carried an M1841 at nearly every event so far this year, and deliberately hidden out in the rear rank with it to test this theory... And it does work!

[Vuhginyuh]

Re: Hunting guns use

...carrying my Brown Bess because we knew there were flinters there...

I'm not convinced a Land Pattern musket is any better choice than a '61 Springfield; unless you know they were actually used there. Based on local records of the time, if I had to speculate on a proper flintlock, I would lean heavily towards locally made rifles and fowlers (both percussion and flint) and unconverted US martial muskets.

There were tons of Bess’s and CoS muskets used and made around here and I can’t find a single example of one in the hands of a 1861 NC volunteer. Several M.A. Baker, John Eagle, Gillespie and Kennedy rifles are associated with NC Vols.

There is a North Carolina document associated with the Goldsboro Rifles that notes all those who mustered prior Ft Macon with their own firearms though it does not specify the type. About 35% had personal arms when they showed up but it does not give any details about whether or not they actually kept or ever used them.

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?t=3600&highlight=BESS

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Hunting guns use

Tom is right. There you go, more or less the same answer in long form. Let me add that the US 1841 percussion rifle is a terrific piece and the Euroarms reproduction is uncharacteristically faithful. And as pointed out in the most recent May/June 2007 issue of Civil War Historian (Vol 3 # 3), in an article on US 1841s, they were far from rare. Mississippi rifles were probably right after the M-1854 Lorenz and US 1842s in terms of the total number issued.The conclusion reached is that in the interest of accurately recreating what weapons were actually in the ranks in what ratio, these popular and widely used rifles deserve a place in the hobby. Some of the units that used them historically (on both sides) are listed.

As far as the British Brown Bess, as Tom Ezell posted back in 2004 "these would be exceedingly rare." As to the original subject of the thread, Garrison Beal is also correct in stating "locally made (civilian hunting) rifles and fowlers..." were common CW fire locks.

[Tom Ezell]

Re: Hunting guns use

I haven't seen references made to "Brown Bess muskets" with the exception of the British-to-Mexican-to-Texican hand-me-downs left over from the Texas Revolution that saw some service with Texas troops early in the War.

The early war accounts of Tennessee regiments contain numerous references to old flintlock "Tower muskets" and "Queen Anne muskets," but it's not at all certain if these were leftover Brown Besses or Land Pattern muskets from the War of 1812 or whenever...

I do keep finding a lot of references to the Mississippi and "Harpers Ferry rifles" up and down the Mississippi valley. It seems at times like these were sort of the AK-47s of the time. They were, first of all, actually rifles, and had an impressive reputation from the War with Mexico and the anti-Mormon and Indian campaigns of the 1860s. Batches of them turn up in a lot of places in the summer of 1861. Many were sold as civilian rifles for hunting and self-protection ($13.50 @) for the wagon trains going out to California, Oregon, and nearby locales. The War Department also sold 60 of them to the Pony Express for rider defense...

And don't forget the shotguns...

Tom

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Hunting guns use

Tom:
Don't start that AK-47 stuff or you will get Todd Watts all fired up and he will carry on about gun control (again). We want to stay somewhat on the subject here, which I believe was ACW use of civilian hunting guns.

Didn't I send you the rough draft from W t G on shotguns and civilian rifles? There are numerous period accounts of their use. I found some receipts from the state of Alabama where they purchased shotguns from private citizens and issued them to infantry and so on.

[Todd Watts]

Re: Hunting guns use

I figured it must just be a event word-of-mouth rule that was keeping the shorter guns off the fields. We use them in demonstrations at the park, but that is closely watched and usually just 1 rank. Another probems I have seen with the lack of disciplined training is rear rankers stepping too far forward. This places the lock right next to the 2 front rank mens' ears during firing. No doubt this happened back then as well, probably with the same earned dirty looks or elbows in the file closers' noses.

We are certain there were flintlocks in CS hands at Stones River, and may have even been some in teh US hands as well, but there is not written evidence that I am aware of that says exactly the makes and models. Likely, yes local guns were there, fowlers, small game rifles, and the like. But, it is just as likely that a lot of the older arsenal military guns were there and the many more that got taken home by "Pa" or "Grandpa" after the Rev. War or 1812 or even Mexico. That is the story I am planning on dealing with. An awful lot of men back then were going to have arrived to musterings with the old guns that had been captured or been used by ancestors.

[PvtRoland]

Re: Hunting guns use

The conversion of civilian hunting guns to military use was widespread in East Tennessee during the war. Lt. James W. Terrell of Thomas' Legion wrote "The men were armed with small "squirrel" rifles some of which had been boured (sic) out so as to admit a larger bullit (sic). They were all percussion locks and no fine ammunition but loose powder." He also said that "staffs with a small speer fixed to the end were 'dumped' into camp." (Storm in the Mountains, Vernon Crow, pg. 7) This refers to the Legion in the spring of 1862 as it assembled in Knoxville. Many Confederate units from East Tennessee were armed with these guns if they were armed at all, due to the Confederate authorities distrust of units from the region. See Todd Groce, Mountain Rebels, for more on this issue. A final reference regarding East Tennessee is Divided Loyalties by Digby Gordon Seymour. On pages 13 - 16 he discusses the Knoxville Arsenal, which originally converted "wagonloads" of flintlock hunting guns into percussion military arms, specifically cavalry carbines. There was also a gun factory at Mossy Creek until destroyed during Sanders Raid in June 1863, and a small gun shop also operated in Sevier County for more than two years. By the end of May 1862 the Knoxville Arsenal switched to production of new arms. As an interesting aside, the Confederate authorities commandeered Parson William Brownlow's steam powered print shop to help manufacture Confederate arms in Knoxville.

Nicholas Roland

[Todd Watts]

Re: Hunting guns use

Not to beat the Bess subject to death, but I have seen several examples of Bess muskets for sale here in the US that can be traced to the Rev War or 1812, and many of these have been altered such as having stocks or barrels cut back. These, I believe, are the "fowlers" that often were mentioned. A "fowler" was just a shotgun, or some larger bore smooth bored musket. "Fowling" guns had to be of large enough bore to hold enough shot to create a good fowling pattern. Hence, little 24 ga or even 20 ga shotguns were not what would be commonly referred to as a "fowler." The 12 and 10 ga bore diameters were more commonly used as bird-getters. The Brown Bess is in the 10 ga category. When we consider how many thousands of the various 3 patterns of Bess muskets that the Brits brought over here between the 1750s and 1814, it just seems logical to me that thousands of these stayed in the many cabins and houses and remained in use by the Americans. These same guns filled our militia arsenals after the Rev War, captured from the Brits. Many were probably converted to percussion, and many were also certainly "misapropriated" by militia members over the years and lost form inventory. I may one day cut mine's stock back to mimic the ones we see for sale nowadays, but I have not decided to go that route just yet.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Hunting guns use

Todd:
Leave your Brown Bess as it is. There are other uses for it. Consider that at the time of the ACW, even the flintlocks used in Mexico 15 years earlier were decrepit. The 1760s vintage Brown Bess would have been 100 years old at the time of the US Civil War...Most muskets that old would have been condemned before the Mexican War, and would not have been kept in the Arsenals for issuance in the 1860s. As I understand your point, could someone have brought an antique wall hanger from home to use in the ACW? Hard to say, because period accounts mention weapons using terms like "old style Tower muskets", and we assume they mean more modern P-39 or P-42 "Brown Bess" or derivatives either made with percussion locks or converted from flint to percussion. It is kind of like when period accounts say "we were issued the old style (smoothbore) US musket". We can't know what that means exactly...US 1816/22...US 1835 in flint or percussion conversion? Or could it mean a US 1842?

About all I can say is I do not know of any Rev War-era British Brown Bess flintlock muskets with a US Civil War provenance. Could some have been cut down for use as shotguns and brought from home? Who knows... As far as imports, both the US and CS did not import any European muskets w/ flintlocks. They were all percussion or converted to percussion. Hence if somebody had a British flintlock musket it would have to have been a surviving Rev War or War of 1812 firearm.

If you are worried about it, you can borrow one of my flintlock KY rifles for the Stones River National Park Service "early war" weapon demos we will be doing later this Summer.

[georgerutherford1861]

Re: Hunting guns use

I hope this does not muddle the original question (specifying civilian arms), but a few years ago I saw a shortened converted US .69 smoothbore. Now, I know that there were probably a metric buttload (which anyone will tell you is larger than a standard English buttload) of these floating around the country during and after the war, as they would be handy as a cheap shotgun post-war, but the family's story and lack of knowledge of military firearms gave it an air of truth in my mind.

The weapon in question is a pre-1842 US model .69 flintlock, cut down to about half the original barrel length, and with a somewhat crude (to our eyes) conversion to percussion. The story is that the "guerrillas/Confederates" came by the family house, liked the family gun a bit more, and conducted a "trade," taking the family's gun (no idea what it was) and leaving this wonderful little piece of history behind. Now, I am sure that stories like this are as prevalent as places that claim that George Washington slept there, but a few things do line up to support the family story in my mind. First, I would think that a postwar civilian cutdown fowler would have been more likely an original percussion weapon, as a beat-up conversion from flintlock would almost seem like not worth the effort. Second, the family lived right in the path of the 1864 Confederate campaign into Missouri, which included vast hosts of mounted men, for which a carbine of any kind would have been preferred, and the supply issues of the Trans-Mississippi are famous.

As to other civilian shotguns, I thankfully got a used Navy Arms double barrel a few years ago (cylinder/cylinder repros seem hard to find). A new buttplate, an entry pipe for the ramrod, and refinishing of the stock and browning of all the metal converted it into what I hope will be my go-to sidearm for a lot of events.

I just looked at how rambling this message is, so I will mercifully close.

Doug Frank

[tmdreb]

Re: Hunting guns use

Craig,

I don't disagree with your assessment of the Brown Bess usage during the War, but I would point out that the New Land Pattern Bess, the type used by the Mexicans in the 1846-48 War, was produced by the British until 1815, so they weren't all 1760's relics.

[Campjacksonboy]

Re: Hunting guns use

Regarding the two bander question the Mississippi and enfield (non-zouave) two-banders are encouraged for the CS guidelines at Marmaduke's Raid. In addition Marmaduke himself mentioned men armed with shotguns and squirrel rifles in his May 1863 After action report.
If any of my pards had two-banders I would encourage the same for Pilot Knob in September.

Regarding the "brown bess" provenence issue there were a few different models however they do show up in the quartermaster reports of the 5th Missouri as ".75" and ".69 cal. British muskets." Even the 1st Missouri appears to have had some of these around the time of Shiloh. Joseph Boyce of the same regiment mentions them in his memiors. Interestingly one of these appears to have been dug up at Grand Gulf, MS and was on display when I visited the museum down there a few years ago. It was, however, missing, the lock and breach area so I have no idea if it was percussion or flintlock.
Frank Aufmuth