English Imported Gear

[1stMaine]

Re: British import accoutrements

Neil,

Thank you and some clarification from me- When I stated the doubt of being used in the CW I was reffering to the ones as seen on ebay. Most if not all that I have seen carry the broad arrow mark. This meant crown property, and not for export.

I am aware of whit buff examples, and do not believe they were uncommon. Just not as prevelant. I agree with you, Militaman opened a can of worms!!! I have not read the Mcrae papers, but would really love to! For some reason, the British equipment intersts me! I know there is always new resources on the market, and knowledge is constantly changing!

I will add a pet peive of my I see most reenactors making the mistake on British "Enfield" frogs. Most reenactors use the type of frog which has a strap and buckle across the frog. These were meant to be used with sword style bayonets. The triangle type bayonet frog did not have a strap and buckle!

J

Jeremy,

The part about the bayonet frogs is not correct. The frog without the strap and buckle was to be made of buff, whereas the pattern with the strap and buckle is of black leather, and both were intended for use with the traingular scabbard for the socket bayonet.

Also, the illustrative plate shows no "expense pouch" but, rather, lists it as a "ball bag" which is the same nomenclature as seen in the McRae invoice posted in the Preservation folder.

For what it's worth, the only pouch for percussion caps illustrated is that which has the angled loop for wearing on the cross belt. This was apparently designed for use with the boxes for Guards regiments, as boxes for Line and Rifle have the cap pouch sewn directly to the right front face of the cartridge box, under the outer flap. This latter is the style delivered to Massachusetts.

Having said that, it is interesting to note that extant images of Massachusetts soldiers wearing English accoutrements (which were limited to certain regiments at certain times) have them wearing the "ball bag" as a cap pouch.

See: "Equipment of Infantry" , plate 15, by Capt. Martin Petrie, 1865; depicting the accoutrements used by the Rifles, Line, and Guard regiments.

Addtionally, all 10,000 sets of accoutrements purchased by Massachusetts from England were of either black or russet leather. No buff was used, not even on the cartridge box closure tabs.

I have included a scan of Peterie's plate, and an image of a CS field-modified English box with the cap pouch still attached. The latter was collected from the field at Gettysburg.

Respects,

[Marc29thGA]

Re: British import accoutrements

Nice thread – I am intrigued with the British accoutrements in Confederate service as well. Before the crash there was a thread (from 2004?) on the ball bag and expense pouch that I frequented in my quest for knowledge. Does anyone have this archived and could post it again? I can't find it in the "search" anymore.

Regards,

[Richmond Depot]

Re: British import accoutrements

This is my favorite image of British gear. Note the correct Enfield sling and BUCKLE.

[Richmond Depot]

Re: British import accoutrements

Fellows,

The original intent of the Enfield cartridge box was to serve as a "reservoir" of extra cartridges and caps, and not originally intended to be used in the American fashion of being pulled from directly though it could be if needed.

In a combat type of situation, rounds would be pulled from the ready round pouch and caps of course would be in the chest mounted cap pouch. If you look closely at the image that I posted above at left, the flap of the ready round pouch is just barely visible.

The cartride box strap is also a very cool piece of gear. The end tabs ( with holes for cartridge box buckles) were sewn directly to the strap. The thought process behind this was that if the holes ripped out, new tabs could be sewn on.

[1stMaine]

Re: British import accoutrements

Comrades,

Absolutely correct. The intent of the English cartridge box may be easily discerned by the arrangement of the tin dividers. Unlike the American system, the tin was divided into compartments to hold bundles of cartridges, not loose rounds.

One bundle at a time was taken from the tin, opened, and the rounds placed into the "ball bag" later known as the "expense pouch". The soldier drew from this lot, and when depleted, withdrew another bundle and started the process over.

Respects,

[47thNYReb]

Re: British import accoutrements

Scott, I could not pull up the research information on the Enfield sling from your website. Could you post a little about it? I am not familiar with the buckle and would like to learn more. Thanks, Thomas N. Rachal.

[Knapsack Matt]

Re: British import accoutrements

The English cap pouch that was carried on the sling was buff but some were dyed black. On the Cartridge Boxes the Tab was buff on some models like the volunteer one and some had buff slings.

Matt

[jgr1974]

Re: British import accoutrements

Just for my own defense! I want to state that I am open to others opnions and new ideas! I know new research materials are always found and updates more frequently than some of us change our under drawers!

The book I am pulling My references from is called "Tangled Web" Canadian Infantry Accouterments 1855-1985 by Jack L. Summers. It was publised by Museum Restoration Service in 1992. The Canadian War Museum holds the copyright.

Bayonet frogs-I do not argue the fact that the "buckled" frog was used by both sides of the war for the triangluar bayonet. At a time when equipment is scarce, anything and everything is pressed into service. Soldiers are the best people to understand use and modify the equipment, as they know what works for them. My point is that there are not nearly enough "buckless" frogs in the hobby. The intended use of the buckle types were for the sword bayonet type. Again, not saying they were not used for the triangular bayonet! An example of the two types of frogs can be seen in EOG Union page 38 and 39. One interesting point I find of the triangular style frog (The top one.) is that it is made of one piece of leather! Typically the construction consists of two pieces, loop and the back of the frog, then the front piece which accepts the scabbard stud. According to the book, Tangled Web, there was a third type of frog. It's intent was for use by sappers and minors use of a saw backed sword type bayonet. It is made from three pieces of leather. It has a stud similar to the type that the frog/loop swivels so the bayonet could be swung out of the way for fatigue duties. I will try to scan a photo later.

Expense pouches-From my early statements, according to the book, says there are two basic styles The 1861 and the 1855. The pouches of the 44th Mass, are a little different, but are the same style as the 1861 pouch. The flap is a little different. a little more square,. I believe the 44th Mass expense pouch has a cap pouch as well. These were probably made by a certain contractor. I am curious. I do know they were taken from a blockade runner, which name escapes me as of now. These were probably a Confederate State contract. I know several individual CS states took the initiative to purchase their own accouterments overseas. While I am thinkgin of it I want to recomend another good book, "Guns for Cotton" my copy has been misplaced, but it not only talks of Union and Confederate purchases of accouterments and arms, but from individual states as well.

Cartridge boxes-TW states that the pouches with the sewn on cap pouch are actually earlier patterns dating from the War of 1812. They were converted to save money and pool resources of the government. These conversions happened in the early 1850's as England was adopting the percussion system.

Cap pouches-Like the American system they went through several changes. once the percussion system was adopted caps needed a place to rest. Early pouches were simple leather pouches with no loop. They were kept in the outer coatee pocket. some regiments started modifying them to fit on the waist belt for easier use. They eventually were modify by the goverment to be worn on the cartridge box sling around 1860.

I hope this information is not looked upon as simple ramblings of this crazy Irishamn,, but as another "amatuer historians' use of resources and personal opinions. It is not my intent to discourage or disagree with others, but to share the little knowledge I have learned on this subject!

Thank you all for your time,

The Mad Mick!!!

[LWebster]

Re: British import accoutrements

Tim & Neill: As usual your comments are edifying.

The russett accoutrements issued to the Massachusetts regiments is intriguing. Here's perhaps a new twist for you. Back in the mid 1960's, a friend visited the fabled Bull Run Trader shop near Manassas, where he examined a British knapsack with russett corner caps. Now, this is a fellow who means russett when he says russett. I have never heard of another such example.

Buff ball bags and other accoutrements were indeed in Rebel hands by November of '61. I have records of buff accoutrements sent from Savannah and Charleston on to Atlanta, Nashville, and Augusta, if my my memory serves me correctly. I will admit that I find no mention of them after the summer of 1862.

The Ordnance Bureau must have found the ball bags not to their liking; there is a summer 1863 invoice for more than 1,000 ball bags being returned to the Richmond Store House, categorized as "scrap leather." The source from whence the ball bags were shipped is not identified. Were these new or used up? No easy way of telling, but the fact that they were a shipment solely consisting of ball bags, and that they were identified as scrap, leads me to think that were initially issued, found not to answer, and subsequently handed in.

I've also run across the issuance in Little Rock in December 1862 of sets of accoutrements with "an extra cap pouch." Given the influx of stores brought from over the river during this same time frame - including significant amounts of accoutrements and packs of English manufacture - these "extra cap pouches" were almost certainly ball bags / expense pouches. The Little Rock Military Storekeeper was simply unfamiliar with the nomenclature, at least that's my guess.

L.Webster

[Richmond Depot]

Re: British import accoutrements

Thomas,

There were two known variations of buckles used on the Enfield sling. The variation that I have pictured above is the rectangular style. From period photographs and recovered specimens, this seems to be the type most commonly issued to to Southern troops. I own an original buckle of this type that was dug in the area around Fredericksburg back in the '90's.

The second style, and much rarer variation is the D shaped buckle. This buckle shows up in photographs of Northern troops, (probably Mass. boys )with some frequency. There is only one known example of this buckle so far that has been recovered and I believe that it is in a museum in the North East. Copies of this buckle came to me through Malcolm Adams.

Regarding Tangled Web mentioned above, I have thumbed through a copy but never been able to find one for sale here in the states. I know that the boxes issued to Sgt.'s and as pictured by Tim Kindred in an earlier posting were origially intended to be issued to Sgt.s in the service of the crown. I do not know if they were seperated out here upon arrival in the south for issue to Sgt.'s or if they were just randomly issued to the rank and file of Southern troops.

A quick way to tell a good reproduction Enfield box is by looking at the outer flap. There should be no visible stitching on the flap where the buff tab is applied. This is called a blind stitch and is a difficult stitch to do correctly and usually most of the mainstram makers will cheat by sewing all the way through the flap. The better reproductions, like thoes offered by Jarnigan, L.D. Haning and the soon to arrive box by E.J. Thomas Mercantile all have this feature.

[jgr1974]

Re: British import accoutrements

Mr. Haines,

I was lucky to come across mine on ebay! It is a great book!!! Mr. Heath i would really like to read the book you quated, but have been unable to locate it! Could you give author and ISBN so i could locate it?

[Iron Scout]

Re: British import accoutrements

Scott,

The method of attaching the billet to the pouch cover you mention is a "tunnel stitch" and you are very correct that few vendors have learned to do this properly. When inspecting originals, one will also find this on many English belts attaching the teardrop keeper to the belt itself. Interestingly enough, there is one A. Ross box I believe that Sharpsburg Arsenal had for sale where the billet did utilize a solid stitch through both billet and pouch cover.

This is a neat stitch where the awl is laid on it's side and used to split the inside or middle of the leather creating "tunnels". As with many items of English manufacture, they have a tendency to be over-engineered.

Regards,

Neill Rose
PLHA

[1stMaine]

Re: British import accoutrements

Jeremy,

The Massacusetts English accoutrements are often erroneously presumed to be from a captured blockade runner. This notion came from an article in the Oct. 22nd 1862 edition of the "Boston Traveller" newspaper, which had an acount of the 44th Mass infantry. The last 2 paragraphs read:

" This corps is armed with Enfield rifles captured from an English steamer, and their belts, bayonet sheaths and cap-puches were similarly obtained.

The hank of the belt is a snake of brass- so emblematic of the vileness of the rebel cause. Probably the shippers little imagined they would be used against the rebels."

In fact, the English accoutrements were part of a contract for 10,000 sets and some "20,800 long Enfield rifles" negotiated by Francis B. Crowninsheild, who was acting as agent for Governor John Andrew and his council.

When the war broke out, Massachusetts found herself unable to supply all of her regiments with American pattern accoutrements, so she went abroad. By the time the English patterns arrived, sufficient sets of the American pattern had been obtained, so the Englisg were put into storage (although the boxes were modified to remove the cap pouches and rework them as in the American pattern system). Contracts for the modifications were let to James Boyd & Sons.

Some 2000 sets of russet acoutrements were placed into storage and issued in 1864. The remaining sets on hand were of black leather.

Having said all this, the issue of these accoutrements to regiments is not confined to the 44th Mass. There were only two regiments (44th & 6th MVM ) which had complete sets, and Enfield rifle-muskets. The remaining stocks were used in combination with American pattern sets to arm the rest of the 9 month's regiments of that call-up. These included:

3,4,&8 MVM: armed with Austrian rifle-musket, received English accourements, but with American pattern scabbards.

47th Mass: Austrian rifle-musket; American pattern accoutrements, but with English scabbards.

46 &51 Mass: Robbins & lawrence M1841 rifles, English accoutrements and American scabbards (custom made for longer socket bayonet).

For what it's worth, the Enfield rifle-muskets came partially from the Burmingham makers, and also from the London Armoury company as well as the firm of Barnett, Potts, & Hunt, also of London. Despite encroachments by Schuyler (of Schuyler, Hertley & Graham, NY) and Confederate agents, Crowninsheild still was able to send an initial issue of P-1853 models to Massachusetts in 1861 of 14,700 weapons. The rest followed shrtly thereafter.

The 2, 7, 10, 12, 13, 16, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 25 & 27 regiments all drew arms from this intial contract in 1861. The 24th also drew Enfields, but returned all but 3 as unsuitable and exchanged them for M1861 Springfields.

Enfield rifle-muskets purchased by the state were considered to be state property and, as such, were marked on the butt plate with a rack/issue number, and an abbreviated reginental number and company letter. Excavated remains of these weapons, as well as extant examples bear out this stamping.


I am interested in the claim in TW that the cartridge boxes with the attached cap pouch were 1812 patterns modified for use with percussion muskets. Captain Petrie's drawings and his book were published in 1865 and were the official guide as to what was then in use in the British Army.

Respects,

[neocelt]

Re: British import accoutrements

Very interesting discussion...

I recently had the opportunity of examining a number of British-made cartridge boxes and knapsacks in the Atlanta History Center collection, and I was gob-smacked by the attention to detail exhibited in all of the British leather products. Incidentally, the "hidden" stitch that's used on the finial closure tab is most commonly utilized for joining two relatively thick pieces of leather butted against each other edge-to-edge; hence (in my experience), it is generally referred to by saddlers and cordwainers as a "butt stitch". It is accomplished by employing a curved awl and needles.

Cheers,

[jgr1974]

Re: British import accoutrements

Nick Hello!

You beat me to the technique of using a curved needle for the "hidden stitch". I am not sure where this style originates as it can also be found on accouterments of the Revolution on both American and British armies.

1st Maine, thank you for your information! I am just curious of your resources? I would love to have some items to refer back to at a later time. Especially if this site crashes again!!! I am making no claims to be an expert I am nearly stating my information as I know it. History as we know it is ever changing as new information is found like the Mcrae papers. (I am just curious, is there a plan to publish these so the public will have access to them in the future?

I took TW to work today to browse over, but did not get the time. Of course I left it at work! The boxes that were converted might have actaully been Crimean war vintage, but according to TW they, at least the early ones with pockets, were converted from pouches of an earlier era.

I to am interested in learning more of the sling. I think I have access to the proper type buckle, which would be imported from England!!!

I will continue to follow this thread as I find others input intriguing! I hope everyone can have an open mind as I have on this subject!

Nick, Make sure the cider is cold, and the whiskey well aged!!!

The Mad Mick!!!