Marksmen of the 1857 Sepoy Rebellion

[LoneRider]

I remember reading about a famous marksman with the nom de guerre of either Bob the Nailer or Jim the Nailer depending on the account of the Siege of Lucknow of 1857 one reads.

This particular individual was known to be icily precise. His shooting would 'spurn the waste of a single cartridge' and inflicted no small damage of the morale of the native garrison.

Based on the disparity of naming and no clear record for the numbers killed by this particular marksman, I'm guessing that like another infamous enemy marksman, Juba, this particular sniper's exploits are composites of several individuals.

Has anyone heard much about Sepoy Mutiny sharpshooters? Particularly the sort of weaponry used? I wonder if the Sepoys had access to optical sights.

The latter doesn't seem too far fetched, for Adrian Gilbert in his book Sniper stated that both the British Enfield and Whitworth rifles of that particular period sported 14 inch telescopic sights and were designed with deadly accuracy at long range in mind. However again I've seen no evidence that Whitworth or Enfield marksmen rifles were in use in India in the 1850s.

Disclaimer: Any discrepancies in my account are due to the fact that the books I've read are currently in the States while I'm in the Desert right now.

 

[everallm]

This one might be difficult to track down as the Sepoy/Indian mutiny was when India was fully owned and managed/exploited by the East India Company NOT the British Crown.

It was one of the direct consequences of the mutiny that the East India Company was dissolved and rule taken by the Crown.

As such, the weapons of the troops in the EIC could vary noticeably from the issue weapons of the British Army of the time.

If I recall correctly, the major supplier to the EIC at the time was Parker, Field and Sons (up until 1857) and one of the (many) sparks of the rebellion was the initial issue of the 1853 Pattern Enfield.

This was a rifled-musket in .577 caliber, percussion cap ignited, firing a black powder, 530 grains Minie ball with iron sights (in theory) good to 1000 yds

 

[LoneRider]

If I recall correctly, the major supplier to the EIC at the time was Parker, Field and Sons (up until 1857) and one of the (many) sparks of the rebellion was the initial issue of the 1853 Pattern Enfield.

I recall it was either a fact or rumor that the 1853 Pattern Enfield had cartidges greased with beef or pork fat which hacked the Sepoys off to no small detail and that was one of the many sparks.

This was a rifled-musket in .577 caliber, percussion cap ignited, firing a black powder, 530 grains Minie ball with iron sights (in theory) good to 1000 yds

That would be conceivable that Jim the Nailer's exploits were possible without telescopic sights.

Heck, our own Kentucky Rifle wielding marksmen of the American Revolution did so without telescopic sights, so this isn't too far fetched.

 

[Bwana John]

All I can remember about the Sepoy Mutiny was somthing about cartridges that needed to be ripped open with teeth were susposed to be lubed in pig fat, and that captured Mutineers were "blown from the mouths of the gun".

Dosent take a lot of marksmanship to hit someone with a cannon when they are lashed to the end of the barrel

 

[LoneRider]

I recall it was either a fact or rumor that the 1853 Pattern Enfield had cartidges greased with beef or pork fat which hacked the Sepoys off to no small detail and that was one of the many sparks.

More or less that equals what you just said:

All I can remember about the Sepoy Mutiny was somthing about cartridges that needed to be ripped open with teeth were susposed to be lubed in pig fat, and that captured Mutineers were "blown from the mouths of the gun".

Dosent take a lot of marksmanship to hit someone with a cannon when they are lashed to the end of the barrel

No arguement there. But very rarely did marksman versus artillerist duels of the 19th century turn out in favor of the artillerist. On more than a few occasions during the American Civil War, light guns like the Parrot gun failed to silence stealthy and deadly accurate Confederate Marksmen with Whitworth and Enfield target rifles.

 

[desidog]

You might want to ask this question in the blackpowder forum, where some knowledgeable historians roost.

/i'm not one of them!

 

[Mike OTDP]

To the best of my knowledge, there were no telescopic sights in anything like general issue at the time. Even in the Civil War a decade later, they were extremely rare. Most Whitworth and Kerr sniping rifles had iron sights.

On the other hand, military services were not nearly as strict about personal weapons as today. Officers could pretty well carry anything they pleased.

 

[Abndoc]

Do a search on John R. Chapman for info on early scopes.

 

[hank327]

Very doubtful that telescopic sights were used in any numbers during the Sepoy Mutiny. I think that by the time of the Sepoy Mutiny that India was under the control of the British Raj and not the East India Company. I know that it was British Army units that put down the revolt along with loyal Indian Army forces that didn't revolt. I know that it was a Scottish Highland Regiment that spearheaded the relief of Lucknow in the fall of 1857. The 1853 Enfield was the standard issue rifle of the British Army at this time. I'm sure that older weapons, even the Brown Bess were in service with the Indian forces at this time.

 

[LoneRider]

The 1853 Enfield was the standard issue rifle of the British Army at this time. I'm sure that older weapons, even the Brown Bess were in service with the Indian forces at this time.

The fact that there were no telescopic sights available to the Indian marksmen fighting the British and Loyalists definitely makes their feats of marksmanship all the more impressive.

I haven't any numbers as of yet regarding the number of sniper inflicted casualties on British forces during the Sepoy Mutiny, but they must have been fairly significant or some higher ranking Brits fell to the shooting of the Sepoy marksmen if accounts of a Jim or Bob the Nailer survive to this day.

To the best of my knowledge, there were no telescopic sights in anything like general issue at the time. Even in the Civil War a decade later, they were extremely rare. Most Whitworth and Kerr sniping rifles had iron sights.

On the other hand, military services were not nearly as strict about personal weapons as today. Officers could pretty well carry anything they pleased.

The Union Army unit, Berdan's sharpshooters carried a forerunner of the Sharp's Carbine for general use and had their own target rifles some weighing in excess of 30lbs stored in the baggage train for special duty sniping.

I know the Confederates carried their own telescopic sighted or not Kerr or Whitworth rifles with them as both of them were intended to be highly accurate at long range military rifles.

 

[everallm]

Hank327

To clear up a little.

I think that by the time of the Sepoy Mutiny that India was under the control of the British Raj and not the East India Company. I know that it was British Army units that put down the revolt along with loyal Indian Army forces that didn't revolt. I know that it was a Scottish Highland Regiment that spearheaded the relief of Lucknow in the fall of 1857.

As I posted earlier, India was not under the control of the British Crown at the time of the Sepoy mutiny in 1857 but the East India Company.

It was due to the failures of the EIC that in August of 1858, the Government of India Act 1858 was passed that severed company rule and passed control to the Crown.

In addition to the troops of the EIC, there were also some regular units of the British Army based in India, mostly who's duties were in "bandit country" in what is now Afghanistan, Pakistan and the North West Frontiers (time passes but little changes)

The 93rd Highlanders were one of a mixed group including amongst others the 2nd Ghoorkas (original spelling), 4th Punjabi Infantry, some of the 8th Element of Foot (from the first relief) etc who formed the force making up The Second Relief.

A platoon of the 93rd were the ones, during a recce which found a small breach in the walls of a fortified mosque called Shah Najaf, holding in place until sappers had blown a larger gap and were part of the sucessful assault to take it.

From this fortified point the relief force managed to link with the Residence and organize the relief and evacuation.

The 93rd's contribution was important but not pivotal.

 

[4v50 Gary]

LongRider - pick up the current (April 2009) issue of TheGunReport. It has an excellent article by John Gross on the British Whitworth rifle.

 

[hank327]

Everallm, I got that one wrong. Thanks for the correct info. For some reason, I thought that before the Raj that there were only East India Company troops in India and not regular British Army units. Just shows you that a little knowledge can be a dangerous thing!

 

[pavocavalry]

I remember reading about a famous marksman with the nom de guerre of either Bob the Nailer or Jim the Nailer depending on the account of the Siege of Lucknow of 1857 one reads.

This particular individual was known to be icily precise. His shooting would 'spurn the waste of a single cartridge' and inflicted no small damage of the morale of the native garrison.

Based on the disparity of naming and no clear record for the numbers killed by this particular marksman, I'm guessing that like another infamous enemy marksman, Juba, this particular sniper's exploits are composites of several individuals.

Has anyone heard much about Sepoy Mutiny sharpshooters? Particularly the sort of weaponry used? I wonder if the Sepoys had access to optical sights.

The latter doesn't seem too far fetched, for Adrian Gilbert in his book Sniper stated that both the British Enfield and Whitworth rifles of that particular period sported 14 inch telescopic sights and were designed with deadly accuracy at long range in mind. However again I've seen no evidence that Whitworth or Enfield marksmen rifles were in use in India in the 1850s.

Disclaimer: Any discrepancies in my account are due to the fact that the books I've read are currently in the States while I'm in the Desert right now.

you sttae that Bob the Nailer demoralised the native defenders of lucknow.this is not correct.the residency was defended by Fighting Men :---

(1) Europeans - 1008.
(2) Natives - 712 (230 deserted during the siege).

Bob the nailer killed many Britisher and Indian defenders of the residency including possibly the military commander Major Banks on 21 Jully 1857.Hence how can you say that Bob the Nailer demoralised only the natives ?

As far as your second question is concerned.It has been said that Bob used a double barelled shot gun with possibly LG or SG cartridges used for hunting boars and big game.In addition the sepoys mostly had the old Brown Bess , inaccurate beyond 100 yards and some Enfields.

 

[pavocavalry]

Clarification about British and Other troops of English East India Company

i would like to address this question in some detail:--

1-The English East India Company that ruled India or parts from around 1600 till 1857-58 was a commercial entity.
2-Initially it had only private native and european troops but then it hired regular battalions and regiments of british crown starting from 1740s and 1750s (Seven Year War).Initially King Charles Second sent a small regular British force to garrison his dowry Bombay in 1660s.Later when the crown handed over Bombay to the English East India Company in 1668 the European troops were organised as the English East India Companys First Bombay European Regiment.Later Madras and Bengal Presidencies raised their own European private regiments and Lord Clive indeed was commissioned in First Madras Fusiliers a private unit of east india company.In 1748 Captain Stringer Lawrence of HM 14th Foot arrived in Fort Saint David and was tasked to be first C in C of all companys troops in India.Later HM 39th Foot was loaned to the company arriving in India in September 1754.Later when it was called back to England its soldiers were given option of serving in private european regiments of east india company.Lord Clive returned to India later with Kings commission.The system of having native units,private european units and hired kings regiments continued till 1857-58 (second afghan war included) all along with a C in C from Royal Army.Finally the European units were disbanded after 1857 and given option of joining Royal Army.They mutinied in protest and an individual or two were hanged.

 

[pavocavalry]

Technical and Tactical Superiority of the Enfield Rifle over the Brown Bess Rifle held by the Indian Rebels in 1857
A.H Amin
1998

The Enfield Rifle played a decisive role in defeating the rebellion of 1857. Much more than the British officers of that time or most British historians since 1947 want anyone to know. This tendency is understandable because it deflates the deliberately cultivated myth of "White Man's Superiority" in the post 1857 sociopolitical scenario. There is no doubt that the British soldier was brave, that their younger officer lot was resolute and that their higher commanders were by and large an assorted bunch of incompetent old men.

S.S. Thorbum was one of those very few Britons who admitted the superiority of the Enfield Rifle and the decisive part it played in the Sepoy defeat in 1857. In the Appendix of Thorburn's book which few people read, Thorburn made a very profound observation, he said, "Had the sepoys accepted the Enfield and mutinied afterwards, our difficulties in suppressing their revolt would have been enormously increased453.

A very simple gauge of this fact is the high proportion of EEIC's Bengal Army casualties in the First and Second Sikh Wars. This happened because the EEIC forces till 1849 were still equipped with the old Brown Bess Musket and the Sikhs were armed with a similar weapon. Thus the British suffered a very high proportion of casualties, in the Sikh wars as compared to the battles of 1857. Thus the following comparison is thought provoking:-

1. Mudki:- British Casualties - (First Sikh War) - 454
a. Total Strength - 12,350
b. Casualties - 872 men or 7.06%
c. Details -
(1) Killed - 215 or 1.74% of total
(2) Wounded - 657 or 5.32% of total
2. Feroz Shah - British Casualties - (First Sikh War)455
a. Total strength - 16,700
b. Casualties - 2415 or 14.46%
c. (Details:- -
(1) Killed - 694 or 4.154% of total
(2) Wounded - 1721 or 10.31% of total
3. Lucknow - March 1858 - British Casualties - 456:-
a. Total strength - 19,771
b. Casualties - 735 or 3.72%
c. Details:-
(1) Killed - 127 or 0.64% of total
(2) Wounded - 608 or 3.08% of total

The British casualties at siege of Delhi were higher because in Delhi most of the fighting was done at very close ranges and thus the advantage of longer range of Enfield Rifle was nullified. Secondly a large number of British casualties were caused by artillery fire. Technically and tactically speaking the Brown Bess musket was hopelessly outmatched by the Enfield rifle. The Brown Bess did not have an effective range of more than 100 yards and a maximum range of 200 yards. The Enfield with a. .577 calibre had an effective range of 900 yards. It could be rapidly reloaded and thus could fire upto four rounds per minute. The Brown Bess could not fire more than one round per minute in actual battle conditions457.

The sepoys were hopelessly outgunned in comparison with European troops they were facing in terms of actual infantry tactical combat. The European troops could play havoc with the sepoys even before they could get as close as 200 or 300 yeads. The same thus happened at Trimmu Ghat where Nicholsons largely European force armed with Enfields effectively annihilated the 46 NI even before they were within 200 yards of Nicholson’s force. The sepoys knew the tactical potential of the Enfield Rifle but mistakenly advanced against Nicholson's force thinking that they are loyal native troops because Nicholson’s Europeans were dressed in Khaki coloured uniforms. Lack of sepoy resolution to advance against Europeans in deliberate attack has a considerable connection with the immense technical and tactical superiority of the Enfield Rifle. This explains why the sepoys mostly used defensive lines at Lucknow and Delhi as their most favoured form of warfare. But we are still at a loss while explaining our failure at Valtoha despite the fact that we possessed both numerical and technical superiority in the shape of the Patton Tanks! Two British authors were much more intellectually honest in thus explaining the devastating tactical potential of the Enfield in 1857. They thus described the battle of Trimmu Ghat fought between Nicholson's moveable column and the 46 NI and 9 light cavalry on 12 July 1857 in the following words; "It was here for the first time that the "Enfield" demonstrated its enormous superiority as a weapon. At 300 yards the smooth bores of the 46th were firing at twice their optimum combat range and most of the fire was totally ineffective, the balls were half spent and wildly inaccurate. The Enfield's in contrast sighted as they were up to nine hundred yards and throwing a point five seven bullet of substantially higher muzzle velocity were firing at near point blank range, and with devastating effect. The heavy soft lead, high velocity bullets mushroomed as they struck home and the impact frequently stopped the advancing Sepoys dead in their tracks. At that range there were very few wounded, a solid hit would tear a jagged entry hole and leave an exit wound the size of a dinner plate. In the face of this withering fire the mutineers pressed home their attacks desperately, some of them coming to within 50 yards of the 52nd's ranks, but no troops could sustain that kind of battering and ran,...458.

It appears that more than the resolution of the British officer or the native subsidiary collaborator, or north of Jhelum River's martial races or the fiery Sikhs, it was above all the "Enfield" Rifle which was the real victor of 1857. But the British were clever. They stressed the superiority of white man more than the superiority of Enfield. Hardly any British account of that time admitted the role that Enfield Rifle played in the defeat of the Sepoys! The capabilities of the Enfield were never discussed and it was never compared with the Brown Bess! There is no doubt that the British officer in 1857 was a better leader. But can we blame the Indian of 1857 for not being a leader. His rights were usurped the day the northern invader started invading the Indo Pak region. Whatever the Sepoys of 1857 did was very extraordinary keeping in view their circumstances.

The introduction of accurate rifles as a matter of fact revolutionised warfare in the mid nineteenth century. What was happening in India in 1857 was not merely an “India only��? phenomena but was taking place in other parts of the world also. The Brown Bess Musket balls had thus hopped and rolled in flight leading to unpredictable results. The invention and innovation of Minie rifle developed in the 1840s revolutionised and dramatically changed infantry tactics. Before the 1840s the effective range of infantry weapons was 100 to 300 metres. The Minie Rifle increased this effective range to 1000 metres. In 1849 a Prussian Army suppressed a popular rising in Baden in Germany with devastating effect using the new Dreyse Rifle. Thus a German newspaper commented as following; Against a column of old musketeers, the impact of these new rifles is dreadful��?.459 In the Crimean War again in 1854 - 56 the superiority of the superior long range rifles was proved in a scenario where two European conventional armies fought on generally more equal terms taken the Sepoys versus the British in India in 1857.

Here at the Battle of Inkerman British infantry armed with French “Minie Rifles��? annihilated some 15,000 men out of a total Russian force of 27,000. In this battle the Russians were attacking the British in close order formation in vogue before the advent of Minie Rifle on the battlefield460. In Prussia the German General Moltke the Elder could not help commenting that “The English bullets simply could not miss��?461. This was not all, the new rifles to be effectively used required a soldier who had a good basic education and reasonable IQ because range between 100 to 500 metres was not easy to estimate by naked eye method which we call “JD��? or “Judging Distance��? in the army. Thus it was observed that in the US Civil War an average Union Army Soldier on the average consumed 900 pounds of lead and 240 pounds of powder to kill his enemy i.e. the Confederate Army soldier! This average figure it must be noted was for killing just “one Confederate soldier��?462. During the Prusso - Danish war of 1864 it was observed that the Prussian Dreyse Rifle which was superior to Minie Rifle. During this war in a small unit action 124 Prussian soldiers convincingly defeated 180 Danish soldiers by virtue of superior weaponry i.e. the Dreyse Rifle. Thus the Prussians started firing from 250 metres range and by the time the Danish were at the 150 metres line the Prussians troops had fired thrice ensuring that the Danish attack broke up and the Danish withdrew463. In another action in the Prusso - Danish war the Prussians opened fire on a Danish attacking unit at the range of 250 paces. After advancing for 100 more paces the Danish broke up and withdrew after having suffered 50% casualties464.

All these very convincing examples quoted from European military history dismiss the myth of “white man's superiority��? which the post 1857 British writers attempted to impose on the people of Indo Pak. These myths certainly had a negative influence on the Indo Pak man's mind in the period 1857 - 1947 and succeeded in a considerable manner in creating a docile Indian who silently accepted the British supremacy. Even today many Indo Pak writers are baffled at the overwhelming sepoy - British - Loyal Indian numerical differences in the battles of 1857. They are at a loss to explain why so few Britishers and Loyal Indians could defeat so many rebel sepoys in 1857. This aspect has two dimensions which we will discuss in greater detail in the later part of our analysis. However, in a nutshell, firstly the Enfield Rifle" seriously offset the “Sepoy Numerical superiority��? and secondly the “Sepoy numerical superiority��? was highly exaggerated by British soldiers who fought the battles of 1857 and by the post 1857 British Historians. These Britishers with few exceptions like Malleson were mostly praising and projecting each other!

Another very convincing proof about British conviction regarding the vast superiority of Enfield Rifle over the Brown Bess lies in the post 1857 native infantry standard personal weapon policy adopted by the British military authorities in India. The Enfield P-53 rifle was not issued at all to the native soldiers in India after 1857. Not even to the trusted so called martial races north of River Jhelum or Chenab! A very clever policy was adopted by issuing to the native troops a rifle which was identical to the Enfield rifle, but only externally. These were nomenclatured as the P.58 and P.59 muskets for “Native Infantry��?. These were of .656 smooth bore calibre and had an effective range of 200 yards as compared to the P.53 Enfield Rifle issued to the European troops which had an effective range of 900 to 1000 yards and was of .577 calibre. The Sikhs were trusted a little more and were issued Brunswick rifles which were a little better than the P.58 and P.59 Enfield muskets issued to the native infantry 465.

Thus when in 1866 the vastly superior Snider breach loading rifles were issued to the British units in India, the now inferior P.53 Enfield muzzle loaded rifle of the British soldiers was handed over to the native soldier. A breach loading rifle was hundred times superior to a muzzle loading rifle! Thus in 1874 when the British soldiers were issued the Martini Henri Rifle some phased out Sniders were issued to the Indian infantry. In 1892 once a newer and far superior Lee Metford Rifle was supplied to the British Army, the now outdated Martini Henry was given to the Indian Army. Even in 1911 the Indian soldier was issued a single shot non magazine weapon while the British soldier held a longer range magazine Lee-Enfield and Lee Metford Rifle466! The white man's supremacy was maintained by technically superior weapons!!.

The ironic aspect of the whole affair is that so effective was the British propaganda that many Indian and Pakistanis writing as late as 1971 were still convinced that the British of 1857 were more supermen and were really out numbered overwhelmingly by the rebel sepoys. Nowhere did these Indo Pak historians appreciate or point out the tremendous technical/tactical superiority of the Enfield Rifle. The over exaggerated figures of sepoy strength advanced by the British were also nowhere challenged. This is the irony of pre 1947 colonial history and historians of the post 1947 era have a very serious responsibility on their shoulders. The beauty and the irony lies in the fact that loyal Muslims and Hindus were a party in perpetuating such myths.

 

[pavocavalry]

Technical and Tactical Superiority of the Enfield Rifle over the Brown Bess Rifle

my great grandfathers father was in the native light cavalry in 1857.