View Full Version : Musket ?
pvt_dirty
10-13-2007, 10:13 AM
Howdy pards
I have found a musket forsale in my town guy said he found it in a attic. It is the real deal i just have a few questions. The musket is a 1861 Springfield
but it has a brass Buttplate. Any ideas was it just replace?
Thanks for the help
Tyler Goodrich
jgr1974
10-13-2007, 12:05 PM
It is very hard to tell!!! If the rifle could talk it would tell you!!! Very possibly a period repair or later replacement. Without seeing it I personally could not tell you for sure. A lot of these muskets were sold by a company called Francis Bannerman for years. His company was notorious for cobbling items together. The best way to tell if it is ariginal to the gun is by the wood to metal fit. If it is spot on, probably been together since production, if there are gaps between the two, or if the but plate is removes and evidence of wood chiseling is present most likely not original to the gun!!! If the price is right, and that is the only ting bothering you, buy it!!! If you don't want it contact me and I will be happy to buy a bargain!!!
The Mad MIck!
skamikaze
10-13-2007, 12:48 PM
Could be a Richmond Rifle. The confederacy often improvised with brass.
Regular3
10-15-2007, 02:24 PM
Could you post photos of the item?
pvt_dirty
10-16-2007, 04:09 PM
I have not purchase the musket yet so photos I can't get.
Your pard
Tyler Goodrich
Stonewall_Greyfox
10-16-2007, 04:16 PM
Could be a Richmond Rifle. The confederacy often improvised with brass.
While a few arsenals in the south did suplement with brass furniture/hardware, I do not believe Richmond was doing this. Maybe it was the Fayetteville Arsenal you were thinking of?
Paul
Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
10-16-2007, 04:23 PM
Hallo!
Real Deal?
I read your post as it is an original M1861 Springfield just with a brass buttplate.
Just an aside...
The "First Generation" of Italian repro M1861's had brass buttplates that were thinly plated.
It may be such that someone removed the thin, worn, or damaged plating.
It is not likely a "Richmond" with a dated M1861 lock.
It may also be a Sears, Bannerman, or host of other firms that took surplus "muskets," and do some degree bored them out and "sporterized' them into half-stocks, and parts-gun so-called "Farmers Shotguns" and "Poor Man's Shotguns" for resale at a couple of dollars or so.
In any event, without pictures or seeing the actual gun, this is guesswork.
It may well be an orignal M1861 that was missing its buttplate and all the lad had was a original (or repro) M1855 Rifle brass buttplate to replace it with...
Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
jgr1974
10-16-2007, 10:12 PM
Maybe thinking of 1855/Richmond rifles. After Harpers Ferry was captured, rifles were quickly assembled from parts on hand. Early 55's did have some brass furniture. However, the musket (actually rifle) should then have a 55 lock, or early richmond type rifle with "high hump". I do not believe it is a Confederate musket just because of brass butplate. I believe it is a later replacement. Could be a period part as the US government struggled with arming their soldiers as well. Just because the regulations were in place did not mean they were always followed by contractors. Many early war contracts though not exceptable by inspectors, were pressed into service due to need. Though many look down on Francis Lord's work, it is a good reference. In one of his volumes there is a cartridge box, I believe a cavallry box or pistol box, with the US and oval stamped upside down, but yet passed inspection!!!
The Mad MIck!!!
Just wondering, does the lock have a manufacturer name???
Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
10-16-2007, 11:17 PM
Hallo!
Correct...
Only the initial production (1857-1858 ) of the M1855 Rifle was brass mounted (save for long and short brass nosecaps until replaced with iron in 1859).
However, The Richmond Armory used the Harpers Ferry iron M1855 Rifle-Musket buttplates and continued to make their own through March of 1862. When according to payroll records, contractor made brass buttplates started to be used. (Which should not be a surprise as James Burton had already written a letter back in November of 1860 that brass was preferred as less likely to rust and being cheaper...)
Curt-Heinrich Schmidt
pvt_dirty
10-17-2007, 12:47 PM
howdy pard
I would like to thank you for your help with this musket I will post pics as soon as I can. should get the musket in a few days.
Thank you for your help
Tyler Goodrich
vBulletin® v3.8.2, Copyright ©2000-2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.