A theroy on Civil War Issue of the Zouave Musket

All said, there seems to be only evidence that these were never issued during the Civil War. We have not seen any evidence that they were issued.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

CENSORED

[Blair]

Gentalmen,

You have your you 19th Century nomenclature all turned around.
In this respect you are comparing apples to oranges and wondering why they don't taste like peaches.

The Harper Ferry Rifle refers only to one firearm. That firearm is the M-1841 Rifle.
Springfield manufactures none of this model firearm throughout the M-1841's production history. Which is why this model is commonly known as the "Harpers Ferry Rifle" within it's time period.

Both Harpers Ferry and Springfield Armories are involved in manufactoring the M-1855 series of firearms. Springfield's production rate is slightly higher of this model firearm that what comes out of Harpers Ferry. Partly due to the fact that Harpers Ferry is so heavely involved with modifying and up dating the M-1841's.

The Remington Contract Rifle commonly known as the "Zouave" Rifle today is not made up of old parts. It is a completly new designed firearm. I don't care what the lock markings are, or how close they maybe to an older contract. The Remington "Zouave" lock is a completly new desinged lock using a stirup mounted mainspring. Which no other M-1841 type lock uses.
Blair

[threepdr]

Blair said: "The Remington "Zouave" lock is a completly new desinged lock using a stirup mounted mainspring. Which no other M-1841 type lock uses."

I think Blair is right here, however I don't think I'd call it a "completely new design". Remington was probably able to take advantage of some of the old tooling they had on hand from M41 production to make the locks and barrels, which is why they chose those design features. The stirup and the lack of mainspring screw are the biggest differences in the lock. The lack of the screw is also evident on the exterior of the plate

[mikepatty4]

This is really great stuff but one I think is for sure is that there is no definate evidence one way or the other , although I would lean to limited issue of the firearm , simply because I know of one Remington that is photographed and in a publication on the 1861 Springfield, that has been identified as being purchased and brought home after the war by a USCT.
I can list the book where this is if I am allowed to do so on this forum.
Mike

[Blair]

Mike,

The excavated remains or A Remington "Zouave" Rifle have has been recovered by the James River Inst. for Archaeology for the National Park Service in the Petersburg area.
I was able to view these parts shortly after they were recovered.
The name and date on the lock were unreadable. Identification was made by the serviving brass furniture. Furniture that was designed for and unique to the Remington "Zouave" Rifle.
Since that time (the early 1980's) I have herd about two more that have been excavaterd. I have not seen these other two, so I can not say if these were indeed "Zouave" Rifles.
Does this prove documentaion these arms were issued during the War?
No it does not!
It only proves, at least some of there firearms saw service in that area either very late in the War or after.
Blair

[Blair]

Mark,

Yes it is obvious that Remington uses the tooling from their M-1841 prodiction. The bolster, barrel, lock plate profile, Hammer and trigger bow evlove from this Harpers Ferry Rifle pattern.
But look at what was newly designed for this firearm.
Stock, butt plate, patch box, trigger plate,side lock washers, barrel bands, nose cap, bayonet lug and ramrod. Many of these parts are unique to this fireame.
I think this qualifies as a completly new designed model firearm.
Blair

[threepdr]

Blair,

I agree on the firearm as a whole, just not a completely new lock as suggested earlier. I think the Remington engineers who designed this rifle were very clever in using existing Remington machinery resources blended with new elements that were inspired (not copied) from the Model 1855 Rifle.

Too bad it did not see any significant use during the war, but after having toted a sword bayonet for many miles during my early reenacting career in the 1970s I can see why rifles which used them were not appreciated by the units to who they were issued!

When the Remington rifles finally were sent to Government in 1863 I can understand why issue of standard Springfield took precidence.

[Southron Sr.]

Based on the fact that remains of a Zouave Rifle have been excavated from a late war, battlefield site, then we must conclude with a 99% probability THAT INDEED, REMINGTON "ZOUAVE" RIFLES WERE ISSUED AND SAW COMBAT IN THE LATTER STAGES OF THE WAR IN THE EASTERN THEATER, INCLUDING PART OR ALL OF THE PETERSBURG CAMPAIGN!

Now, I am going to propose a theory as to HOW THIS HAPPENED:

When General Grant was given overall command of the Union Armies and was planning to take on Lee's Army of Northern Virginia with overwhelming forces in the Spring Campaign of '64. What Grant did was to reassign numerous "backwater" Heavy Artillery military units that had, so far, remained far from combat on peaceful "Garrison Duty" in the forts around D.C. to the Army of the Potomac.

By 1863/64 the emphasis of the Yankee Ordnance Department was to replace all the various models of older arms in the active field armies with the various ('61.'63 & '64) models of the Springfield pattern.

These Heavy Artillery, etc., units, prior to being assigned to the Army of the Potomac, were not in the supply chain of arms and equipment being supplied to that army. Arming and equipping these backwater units (prior to their assignment to the Army of the Potomac) was not necessarily a "High Priority." as far as the Yankee Ordnance Department was concerned.

Most likely, with the supply of Springfields earmarked for the active armies, these backwater units were issued "Secondary Arms," which would include the Remington Zouaves. Of course, when these backwater units were ordered to join the Army of the Potomac for the Spring Campaign of '64-they carried their issue Zouaves with them and into combat.

So, we can theorize with a high degree of certainy that the Remington Zouaves WERE NOT USED IN COMAT UNTIL THE SPRING CAMPAIGN OF 1864.

There is a good chance that those former "backwater" units that had carried their Zouaves into combat, sometimes after the Petersburg Campaign stagnated into trench warfare, turned their Zouaves in and were issued regular Springfields. This would make sense as these formerly "backwater" units were now being supplied by the supply chain for the Army of the Potomac and the emphasis was on issueing everyone new Springfields.

This would also account as to why SO FEW ZOUAVES HAVE BEEN EXCAVAED, as they were not used in combat for very long.

So, Blair has settled the argument about Zouaves being used in combat for wonce and for all. Most likely, (according to my theory) is that they weren't used for very long.

Your comments, opinions and theorys on this would be most Welcome.

THANKS FOR YOUR INPUT BLAIR!!!

[Southron Sr.]

The first thing to do would be for a researcher to go to the National Archives and find out exaxctly what Heavy Artillery units, along with other "back water" units were assigned to the Army of the Potomac for the Spring Campaign of 1864.

Then go to the "Compiled Service Records" of those units in the National Archives and go thru their correspindence, records, etc., looking for references to "Remington Harper's Ferry Rifles," etc.

One thing about going thru the Compiled Service Records, you never know what you are going to run across. For example when I researched the unit that was issued the Georgia Rifles, I also found that in addition to requisitions for regular .58 ammo (persumably for the Georgia Armory Rifles in the unit) they were also requisitioning ammo for .54 Austrian Rifles!

So, for anyone that wanted to document the combat use of the Remingon Zouave Rifle, this would be the roadmap to follow, especially for anyone that wants to write a Masters Thesis in History, magazine article, etc.

Will any scholarly Skirmisher take up the challenge? I simply don't have the time.

ONE LAST POINT: If the Remington Zouaves were used for a short while in combat and then turned in to be replaced by Springfields, this would explain why so many of the Zouaves survived the war in such good condition-considering that most Zouaves were never issued out and the ones that were, were in active field service for only a short time before being turned in.