1855 Springfield

[BishopLynch]

Pards,
I'm looking into getting an 1855 Springfield for my Confederate impression. Id like to know how prevelant they would have been, lets say up to December 1862?
Would this rifle be ok to carry at a midwar event, maybe up until September 1863? My impression is mainly forcused on primarily Penisular Campaign through Gettysburg. Money is tight so I want to make a good purchase. I've been told to get a '55, but I'm a little wary that it wont be right to carry for my impression.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Hallo Kamerad!

IMHO. one would be better off with an M1861 Springfield rifle-musket than an M1855, as the '61 works well for a late 1861 thorugh 1865 time frame (if one can only have one weapon...)

Between 1857 and 1861, there were only 47,115 M1855's made at Springfield, with another 12,158 made at Harpers Ferry between 1859 and 1861- for a total of only 59,273.

These were the most current and up-to-date arms available in 1861.
Once production of the M1861 and M1861 "contracts" kicked in, they would be greatly eclipsed by the '61.

The PEC discussion on the M1855 is how many of those roughly 59,000 made were still in the field after 1862- and what numbers would have lost in combat, captured, damaged, or "traded in"- especially by 1863-1865.

As with any firearm, if the research and documentation for the unit, time, andplace one portrays speaks to having M1855's, fine.
IMHO, if one wants to make a more generic but "universal" "Springfield" choice, than the M1861 serves more needs longer than the '55.

Others' mileage may differ.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
One Time CW Gunmaker and Custom Maker of M1855's and "Richmonds."

[tmdreb]

Re: 1855 Springfield

The PEC discussion on the M1855 is how many of those roughly 59,000 made were still in the field after 1862- and what numbers would have lost in combat, captured, damaged, or "traded in"- especially by 1863-1865.

Not to doubt your wealth of knowledge, but there do seem to be a surprising number of 1855 Springfield parts that show up on late War sites like Petersburg, Mansfield and Pleasant Hill. Being that these were modern arms at the beginning of the War, and likely used throughout, it does seem illogical that so many were still in use later on. I'm sure there's a good explanation, but the 1855 doesn't seem to be rare, even by late War standards.

[Jimmayo]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Found a Maynard tape primer lock in an 1864 CS trench. I think it would surprise people to know how many different arms were in use by CS forces even to the end of the war.

In one of the national archive pictures of a dead Confederate in a trench at PB there is a Springfield laying across his chest which is obviously a prop. If you look at the musket in the background the barrel has what appears to be battle damage at the muzzle but I can't determine what kind of musket it is. I wish someone would check it out. I have also seen Austrian Lorenz and Mississippi parts and complete rifles found around Petersburg.

There is a Mississippi in the MOC which belonged to a 9th Va. Infantryman. He was wounded at Drewerys Bluff in 1864 and I would bet he was using the Mississippi (which he had at the start of the war) at the time.

Not saying these type weapons were very common, in fact I don't think they were in great numbers but they were there and in enough numbers to be lost or for parts to fall off of. This mix of arms is one aspect that does not show up at events. Everyone has Springfields and Enfields.

Love my Mississippi and can't use it.

[Johan Steele]

Re: 1855 Springfield

The 55 was primarily the rifle of the US Regulars, CSA 55's came about through capture of Regulars and battlefield salvage... IIRC Texas had the highest number from the Regulars captured at the start of ther War who were in state. I don't know if any would have found the way into CSA troops on the Penninsula.

I think a 42 or 61 Springfield or an Enfield would be your best bet.

Good Luck

[Minieball577]

Re: 1855 Springfield

In one of the national archive pictures of a dead Confederate in a trench at PB there is a Springfield laying across his chest which is obviously a prop. If you look at the musket in the background the barrel has what appears to be battle damage at the muzzle but I can't determine what kind of musket it is. I wish someone would check it out. I have also seen Austrian Lorenz and Mississippi parts and complete rifles found around Petersburg.

Jim, I have recently been interested in the very rifle you speak of. I too cannot identify it. There should be a copy of the image shown and hopefully I can upload a close up of the rifle in question. The rifle-musket in the foreground is clearly a propr, and is an 1863 Type I Springfield. Notice the additional rammer laid accross the arm.

The mystery rifle though is strange. It seems to have Enfield characteristics, around the cone seat and the lock itself, as well as the comb of the stock and the butt plate. The exception to this is it seems to have a clean-out screw on the bolster. It also has a long range rear sight similar to those found on rifled-1842 English Arms, among others, but those arms have their barrel retained to the stock with wedges or pins, and the arm in the photo you speak of has barrel bands. Also it seems to me that this rifle has a sword/saber bayonet lug on the damaged barrel. Perhaps this is the light, but it sure looks like a lug to me. Also, I see it has a sling swivel attached to the butt of the stock, which was typical of arms repaired at the various Confederate Arsenals.



I do have a general comment on this thread though, and that is to be careful about the terminology. For example, what is known as the "'55 or 1855" could mean a variety of things. In this case it seems unclear in some instances whether the 1855 Rifle-musket is being discussed, or the 1855 Rifle is being discussed. For example,

The 55 was primarily the rifle of the US Regulars, CSA 55's came about through capture of Regulars and battlefield salvage...

U.S Regulars were typically using 1855 Rifle-muskets, and what is general known of as the "Confederate 1855's" is the RIFLES produced by Fayetteville armory off of capture Harper's Ferry machinery. Otherwise "Confederate 1855's" would refer to rifle-muskets built by Richmond armory, commonly referred to as "Richmonds" and specifically in the early production as "High Hump Richmonds" in that the lock had the same configuation at the U.S. 1855 Rifle-musket, but without the Maynard system. IT could also simply mean 1855 Rifle-musket used by CS troops. In short, what I am trying to say is, in this case, the terminology is key to understanding the thread, and any thread involving arms of the period.

Also, I agree with Phil in that if a rifle, rifle-musket, or any arm in general was still in fine functional shape, it would remain in service. As such, someone portraying an 1864 event would be ok using an 1855 rifle-musket. In deed, many 1855 rifle and rifle-musket locks still function well today. Also, just because a new model was available does not mean it was used by everyone.

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Bent Barrel rifle in the back is a Brazilian Light Minnie Rifle!

I have a friend that owns an original, minus the long rear sight, and has markings on it that shows Belgian manufacture. I think only about 900 have been imported during the war. (William Edwards: Civil War Guns)
The "Springfield " type rifle laying over the dead soldier has a FLAT middle barrel band, the other bands are contoured...parts gun?

Kevin Dally

[Jimmayo]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Does your friends Brazilian Light Minnie Rifle have a bayonet lug on the front band. There is a rifle that I remember someone calling an enfield lug band rifle or something to that effect. These rifles had a bayonet lug on the front band. Could this be the same thing?

As for the flat middle band on the prop gun, I thought this may have been a field repair. I am surprised at the number of lock parts found in PB rifle pits and trenches. Tumblers, hammers, screws, bands. Looks like they were working on their muskets while in the field.

Thanks

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Hallo Kameraden!

The PEC discussion on the M1855 is how many of those roughly 59,000 made were still in the field after 1862- and what numbers would have lost in combat, captured, damaged, or "traded in"- especially by 1863-1865."

Lads, don't read between my lines.... ;-) :-)

I am just throwing out a PEC type discussion, not making a historical case or argument that the M1855 RM was a rare or non-extant weapon.
And I spoke from a "more Federal" view, particularly with the Confederacy's
state of firearms where any serviceable weapon (particular a "1st Class" one) would have been around to the "end."
Meaning. considering federal supply and fairly common "trade in's for upgrades, looking at the 815,139 M1861/M1863's made at Springfield, plus the
643,439 contract made arms- the total number of M1855 RM's made at 59,000 is not PEC (Except for those federals and confederates that had them... ;-) ) (and without looking at numbers of "Enfields.")
And, in general, Federal Ordnance requisitions do not help as they usually always do not specify which RM was being used- just that .58 ammo was requested.

Besides, I built them, and I used one myself for many years.... ;-) :-)



Yes, that is a Brazilian Light Minie Rifle. The flat long range rear sight, flat barrel band with swivel, swivel near the buttplate, and unusual "combination" nose cap and forward "ramrod pipe" are keys. Another feature, not particularly visible due to what may be a burst barrel (possibly caused by short-balling) is the somewhat longer length appearance of the muzzle.
And yes, it used a large barrel lug for a sabre type bayonet.

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: 1855 Springfield

You may want to consider a 1842 or 1816 musket. I find my 1816 is a wildcard that works for alot of theaters/timeperiods and both sides.

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Does your friends Brazilian Light Minnie Rifle have a bayonet lug on the front band. There is a rifle that I remember someone calling an enfield lug band rifle or something to that effect. These rifles had a bayonet lug on the front band. Could this be the same thing?

As for the flat middle band on the prop gun, I thought this may have been a field repair. I am surprised at the number of lock parts found in PB rifle pits and trenches. Tumblers, hammers, screws, bands. Looks like they were working on their muskets while in the field.

Thanks

Jim:

I sent pictures of this rifle to Geoff Walden, He said...

"It's a so-called "Brazilian Light Minie Rifle." What gave it away was that
DC/Anchor mark, which is what made me remember it. I looked it up in
Edwards' "Civil War Guns" and that new volume "Firearms from Europe" (the
Enfield section of which is full of mistakes, but the sections on other
European arms seem better).
Some conflicting info in both sources, and I haven't done the research on
these guns to know which (if either) is more correct. But anyway, this gun
was made in Liege, Belgium by O.P. Drissen & Cie. Their mark was that
DC/Anchor. The E/LG in the oval on the barrel was a common Liege proof mark.
The "Firearms from Europe" book says some examples are marked OHIO. It also
says the bore is supposed to have three grooves (they are probably wrong in
this). That brass plate with the eagle was a standard feature of this rifle.

Edwards says the gun was being made for Brazilian Emperor Dom Pedro ...
who knows. Both sources indicate this was a rifle bought by Northern
purchasing agents - Edwards thinks it was William Syrus, and the other book
says more likely C.K. Garrison."

The bayonet lug was on the barrel, made for sword type. It had multiple grooved barrel, like an original .54 Mississippi Rifle. Hard to count how many!

Kevin Dally

[Pritchett Ball]

Re: 1855 Springfield

OK, back to original subject...

A while back, on the Fronteer Guard LH BB, they had a disscussion on the 1855's in Sibley's Brigade. They seemed to think that the San Antonio Arsenal had some of these newer designed rifles at that surrendered arsenal.
But, I don't remember any hard documentation on the subject, but also remember they had found documentation of an 1855 in Confederate hands at Praire Grove, Arkansas Battle.

I would think that 55's would be scattered among the Confederate ranks.
Myself would love to have a good repro of a 55, but chose an Enfield as the mainstay weapon of my choice.

It's like Confederate & English Blankets...no wrong or right answers! We just don't have hard proof of what they commonly looked like, or how they were made, we more "guess" at them, and hope that more evidence shows up in the future to help us out.

I see nothing wrong with you having the 1855 RM, but if you are falling in with a LH unit, that has documentation of having something else, your safer going to that weapon instead.
Repectfully:

Kevin Dally

[Jimmayo]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Jim:

The bayonet lug was on the barrel, made for sword type. It had multiple grooved barrel, like an original .54 Mississippi Rifle. Hard to count how many!

Kevin Dally

Thanks for the info. The reason I was curious is that I found a front band with a sword bayonet lug in some CS works Hatchers Run and have been trying to identify it.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: 1855 Springfield

Hallo Herr Jim!

"The reason I was curious is that I found a front band with a sword bayonet lug in some CS works Hatchers Run and have been trying to identify it"

Was that "a front band with a sword bayonet lug?"

Or,

Was that, "a front band AND a sword bayonet lug?"

Meaning, are you saying that the lug was on the front band? (As on the British Pattern 1856 No. 2/Pattern 1858 Short Rifle rifle- with the "Bar-on-Band.")

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[Jimmayo]

Re: 1855 Springfield

The lug was on the front band. Is that why they call it a bar on band?

Thanks Curt

By the way, do you are any one else know what the pictured band went on? It was found in a CS cav. post.