The Shooting Kit of a Snider Rifleman

INTRODUCTION
The equipment needed or desired by a historical shooter is largely a matter of personal taste and interest; the kit chosen can be as simple as just a weapon and ammunition or can be as elaborate as a full military uniform and equipment as for a living history presentation, or anywhere in between.  In this post I will review the gear I have assembled for my personal kit as an example of what the reader may wish to consider.  Obviously, this is a work in progress and will need a lot of work to bring to the standard I hope to achieve.

While I do not intend to participate in a nineteenth-century living history group, I elected to pick a specific campaign in which the Snider played an important role as a way to focus my choices in a consistent way. I chose the Abyssinian campaign of 1866-1868, and specifically the Battle of Magdala, because that was the first time the Snider played an important role in the warfare of the period. For even more precision, I chose the 4th King’s Own Royal Regiment as my unit since they were one of the first in contact. For others of a like mind I heartily recommend reading Stanley’s Magdala:  The Story of the Abyssinian Campaign of 1866-7. For an excellent exemplar of a soldier from that campaign, look at the picture of a private of the 4th Foot shown below which was taken during the Abyssinian campaign.  As the photographs of the period make plain, by this point in history soldiers rarely wore knapsacks in battle, they being carried in the unit pack train instead. For that reason I chose to forego the knapsack and assemble the rest of the kit appropriate for a soldier in that battle; we might term this kit “Field Order.”

A Private of the 4th Foot in Abyssinia.

My full Abyssinian Campaign uniform.

Drill Order uniform.

EQUIPMENT DESCRIPTION
The air-tube helmet shown in the picture of a soldier of the 4^th Foot came about because British designers were seeking a way to make a helmet suited to the heat of their foreign conquests. Harry Elwood of Elwood and Sons came up with a so-called ‘air chamber principle’ for hats. I have recently acquired a reproduction air-tube helmet made by a friend, but the example in the older pictures above is a modern reproduction of a later foreign-service helmet.

The Elwood air-tube helmet.

My reproduction air-tube helmet.

Information about the uniform worn in the Abyssinian campaign is somewhat limited, however, this was the first instance of khaki (or “kharki”)—a gray, tan, or brown fabric made of closely twilled linen or cotton—being officially issued to British troops (Farwell 1989 p. 75). This was the standard white drill uniform of 1859 dyed khaki in color (Barthorp 1988 p. 45); the jacket has a standing collar and five buttons, and the trousers are supported by braces. The uniform had a loose, comfortable fit well suited to hot weather.  Although people today usually think of khaki being a brownish color, the color of such uniforms varied widely, and it is likely those worn by the 4th Foot were a sort of bluish gray (Barthorp 1994 p. 20).  Unfortunately, no one carries the blue-gray khaki of the period, so I ordered a replica uniform from Regimental Quartermasters (regimental-quartermaster.com/index.html).  The shirt pictured below comes from The Replicators in India.

Standard British military shirt.

The load-bearing equipment of this period as worn in combat consisted of the 1862-pattern waist belt, 1861-pattern ball bag, 1854-pattern bayonet frog, and the 1859-pattern cartridge pouch as modified for the Snider and suspended from a buff sling. As noted above, and as the pictures of the Abyssinian campaign make plain, the knapsack was not worn in combat at this time, so I do not use one. The pattern 1862 waist belt had a thong for attaching the locket (buckle) rather than having it sewn on as in previous models (Turner 2006 p.49) and was worn over the sling of the cartridge pouch to keep it from moving in use. My waist belt and ball bag were made by Graham Humphrey. The locket or buckle for this pattern of waist belt should be of the regimental design, however mine is a later “Dieu et Mon Droit” Edwardian example, an anachronism I am willing to accept; it comes from Regimental Quartermasters.

The ball bag was used to carry a rag, the oil bottle, and ten rounds of loose ammunition (id. p. 49). The cartridge pouch was modified from the previous model by removing the cap pouch and by modifying it to hold 50 rounds of wrapped Snider ammunition in two tin dividers along with a compartment for the Snider combination tool (id. p. 63). My load bearing equipment comes from Graham Humphrey.

My waist belt, ball bag, and bayonet.

Interior of the ball bag showing ten loose rounds, an oil bottle, and a rag.

The oil bottle.

My cartridge box with 50 rounds of wrapped ammunition.

Fifty rounds in the cartridge box.

The implement compartment under the lid of the cartridge box.

The cartridge box, closed.

The standard issue canteen for British troops at this time was the 1862 pattern, however, these weren’t issued in India, which is where the 4th Foot was before being shipped to Abyssinia.  There, troops received locally sourced soda water bottles with leather covers and slings (Barthorp 1994 p. 17), and it is these water bottles which were probably carried by the 4th in this campaign. Mine comes from Regimental Quartermasters.

My Indian Mutiny-style water bottle.

The pattern-1867 haversack was made of linen or cotton and was changed from the previous versions by adding a sliding buckle to make the shoulder strap adjustable.  In addition, this pattern had a button on the back so that when not in use the bag could be rolled up and buttoned (Turner 2006 p. 25). Although the haversack was normally used for the food ration, I use mine for shooting supplies such as a cleaning kit, target markers, notebook and pen, etc. My haversack comes from Regimental Quartermasters.

My haversack, shown open.

My haversack buttoned up for carry when empty.

My Snider is a Mk. III model made in Nepal in 1868, and thus it is impossible that it should have seen service in Abyssinia. Rather, the rifles used at Magdala were almost certainly Mk. II’s, although, again, I am perfectly content with this anachronism.  I purchased my rifle from a private collector.  Since Sniders were converted from the earlier 1853-pattern Enfield rifle (and even the new-built Mk. IIIs were of precisely the same design at the muzzle), the 1853-pattern bayonet and scabbards were still in use. My bayonet is from 1864 and was used during the American Civil War, but the scabbard is a modern reproduction. They were purchased from a private collector.  The rifle sling used in the Abyssinian campaign was probably the 1850 pattern with a buckle on the rear, however my sling is the 1871 pattern which was the last buff-colored version and was attached with a leather thong rather than a buckle (id. p. 44), which was the type used on later Sniders such as mine. My sling comes from Pierre Leather.  The ammunition carried was made with a mold sold by X-Ring Services using brass from the same company.

My Mk. III Snider-Enfield Rifle.

My Enfield bayonet.

Finished Snider cartridges.

Nota bene:  Of course, if I were an actual Snider "rifleman," I'd have a two-band Snider and my leather gear would be black.  I hope my readers will appreciate the linguistic nuances of my word choice for the title of this essay.

WORKS CITED
Barthorp, M. and D. Anderson. The British Troops in the Indian Mutiny 1857-59. London: Osprey Publishing, 1994.

Barthorp, M. and P. Turner. The British Army on Campaign 1816-1902 (3): 1856-1881. London: Osprey Publishing, 1988.

Farwell, Byron. Armies of the Raj: From the Mutiny to Independence, 1858-1947. New York: W. W. Norton, 1989.

Stanley, Henry M. Magdala: The Story of the Abyssinian Campaign of 1866-7. London: Sampson, Low, Marston & Company, 1896.

Turner, Pierre. Soldiers’ Accoutrements of the British Army 1750-1900. Wiltshire: The Crowood Press, 2006.

SUPPLIERS

Stan Dolan, Regimental Quartermasters <www.regimental-quartermaster.com/>

Graham Humphrey, Graham the Leather Guy <grahamtheleatherguy@gmail.com>

Martyn Robinson, X-Ring Services <xringservices@yahoo.com>

Le Pierre Sutler <www.lepierreleathers.com/>

Range Report: 20MAR2022--Remington New Model Army and Smith Carbine

Definitely not my best day of shooting, but, as they say, a bad day shooting is still better than most days doing something else.

Typically, this is where most of us will cite a long list of reasons they didn't shoot well, and I'm not going to do that--I just had a bad day, and that's on me.  However, having admitted that, there are two factors I should mention in the interest of scientific accuracy.  First, the wind was very heavy from 8:00; I doubt that affect the pistol bullets much, but I strongly suspect it did affect the carbine bullets, especially when I tried to aim off to allow for it.  I really think aiming off is the big problem I'm having with most of my rifles--not just the Smith.  My eyesight is bad enough that the hair thin front sight on the Smith is very hard to see, and targets at 50 yards are more even more so.  So when I am aiming off (if you're new to this blog, "aiming off" is the practice of setting your sights on some part of the target other than the bullseye to allow for wind, or drop due to distance, or even offset sights, etc.), it's hard to pick a consistent spot at which to aim, which tends to make the groups open up a bit; I think I need to put an actual mark to aim at on the targets for elevation.  I think if I get a thicker front sight post (to make it easier to see) and one that is taller (so I don't have to aim 12 inches below my intended mean point of impact), I will be able to get *much* better string tests.  The short version of today's results is that if you add all the scores together, my result was a disappointing 5.2 inches/round with the Smith carbine today; compare that with my average score of 2.94 in./rd. in November.

Second, I was unable to set up my pistol targets at 15 yards as I usually do, and had to shoot at 25 yards instead, so naturally the groups opened up a bit from my usual results.  If you add the strings for all four tables of pistol fire, you end up with an average of 3.2 inches/round, which, given the 2.5-3.0 inches/round I've been averaging at fifteen yards isn't really that bad (unless you compare it to my all-time best of 1.7 in./rd.!).

By the way, if you're not yet familiar with the String Test method for gauging accuracy, you are really doing yourself a disservice.  The String Test is a way of calculating the average distance of each round from the bullseye.  It is vastly superior to simply calculating the group size since group size doesn't take into account how close the group is to what you're trying to hit, whereas the string test takes both ideas--the tightness of the group and how close that group is to what you're trying to hit-- and condenses them into a single number that can be precisely tracked and used to gauge how well you're doing, or how a specific load changes things, etc.  To learn more about the String Test, read this.

The weather was dry and sunny, 44 deg., wind heavy from 8:00.  All shooting was offhand, 50 yards for the Smith and 25 yards for the Remington New Model Army.

The Smith carbine cartridges were loaded with greased Smith bullets cast in a mold from Eras Gone Bullet Molds and 35 grains of Schuetzen 3F powder.  To learn how they were made, read this.

The revolver cartridges were combustible paper cartridges made with Kerr bullets from an Eras Gone mold with 25 grains of either Pyrodex "P" or Schuetzen 3F (and yes, I forgot to write down which batches where which for comparison, and I am kicking myself about that lost opportunity for comparison!).  To learn how they were made, read this.

The targets in the pictures below are 18"x24", and the black dots are 3" in diameter, just for comparison.

Table One--Smith

Table One:  Smith Carbine
String Test:  10 rounds, 38 inches = 3.8 in./rd.

Tables Two and Three--Remington

Table Two:  Remington New Model Army
String Test:  5 rounds, 15 inches = 3.0 in./rd.

Table Three:  Remington New Model Army
String Test:  5 rounds, 20 inches = 4.0 in./rd.

Table Four--Smith

Table Four:  Smith Carbine
String Test: 10 rounds, 42 inches = 4.2 in./rd.

Tables Five and Six--Remington

Table Five:  Remington New Model Army
String Test:  6 rounds, 19 inches = 3.2 in./rd.

Table Six:  Remington New Model Army
String Test:  6 rounds, 16.5 inches = 2.7 in./rd.

Table Seven--Smith

Table Seven:  Smith Carbine
String Test:  13 rounds, 90.5 inches = 6.9 in. rd.
(NB:  I wasn't cleaning my barrel, and it is possible the fouling by this point was causing my results to get worse.)