A theroy on Civil War Issue of the Zouave Musket

[mikepatty4]

I would like to propose a theroy , probally one which I will get ripped apart on, but I am going to propose it anyway.

The Remington Model of 1862 ( commonly referred to as the Zouave rifle) is generally not considered to be an issued firearm as we cannot seem to find evidence (documents) referring to their issue and also based on the fact that so many of them are found in excellent condition.
I would first like to address the later fact ( excellent condition) and simply point out that a large number of weapons can be found in excellent condition ( 1855, 1861 1863 Springfields , Spencers , Sharps , etc. etc.) and yet we know from documental evidence that these were indeed issued firearms. Condition of surviving pieces therefore cannot be considered proof positive of issue or not.
Now of the first part, lack of documental evidence, I have only one thing to ask are we looking in the right place? My reason for asking this is the simple fact that both Remington and the War Department referred in coorespondence with each other to this guns as 1855 Harper's Ferry rifles and not as Remington 1862 rifles , or Mississippi rifles , and certiantly not Zouave rifles. The rifle best resembles a 1855 Harpers Ferry rifle with a Mississippi Lockplate on it anyway so referring to them as such kinda makes sense. Since we know that Harpers Ferry did not make anymore 1855 rifles (or anything else for that matter) after the start of the war, it may be plausible to assume that any 1864 or 1865 ordnance return referring to 1855 harpers Ferry Rifles and Saber Bayonet may indeed be referring to our Remingtion 1862 Contract " Zoauve " rifle.

Now for a question , does anybody know when and why Remingtion switched from 7 to 3 Groove rifling in the Remingtion 1862 Contract " Zoauve " rifle
thankyou
Mike Pierson

[Southron Sr.]

Someone needs to go into the National Archives and actually research the history of the "Zouave Rifles." Until that is done, we can only specualte IF Zouaves were ever issued of IF NOT.

The ill fated "Georgia Armory Rifle, manufactured in Milledgeville, Georgia beginning in 1862 was ALMOST IDENTICAL to the Zouave Rifle.

Although production of the Georgia Armory Rifles were limited, there is no doubt that they saw plenty of combat in the Atlanta Campaign of 1864.

Ironically, production of the Georgia Armory Rifles were halted so the factory could be convertend into a "Cotton Card" factory. [I am the first researcher to discover this fact!]The idea being that the state could sell Cotton Cards at a profit to civilians in Georgia to help pay for the war effort!

Realize that by 1864 the Union Ordnance Department was engaged in a program to replace the polygot of various models and makes of infantry muskets and rifle-muskets with various models of the Springfield Rifle-Musket. By 1864 brand new Springfields were becoming available in huge quantities thanks to the efforts of Springfield Armory and a host of contractors making the Springfields.

But by 1864,-Zouaves might have not been issued simply because they were NOT SPRINGFIELDS, and hence, a "non-standard" arm. Like I said, only additional research in the National Archiveswill be able to find the facts.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

CENSORED

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

I have never seen the "Zouave" production being called an 1855 H/F rifle. I have seen repeated references to merely H/F Rifles. This is probably why the "Zouave" is a mix of 41 & 55 rifles and a band shape of the 61 special, and the later 64 rifle musket pattern. Since there was no defining model spec Remington felt free to incorporate the best of several types.
Too many exist in pristine condition compared to the production numbers for them to have been a combat arm. Yes, ther are 41's, 55's and other models existing in mint condition but the production numbers on those types are way above the numbers of "Zouaves" produced.
As a rule armies despise having wide diversity in field equipment and arms and usually attempt to standardise as quickly as possible. Like Mr. McAuley indicates the "Zouave" arrived in arsenals at a time when the Springfield patterns were flooding in in large numbers.
Perhaps the tooling wore out and three groove was considered a better system based on the H/F testing reports I have seen.
There are two seperate lock plate markings seen on Zouaves also. After owning several over the years I have found that, unlike Springfields and the contract arms of those patterns, not all parts are reliably interchangeable. Also the proof markings and dates on the breech are never in exactly the same spots on the "Zouaves". Look at several next chance and you will see the differences.

Fun stuff!


Jim Brady
2249V
Knap's Battery

These rifles are called "Harpers Ferry Rifles" in original ordnance documents, though I have seen "Harpers Ferry Model 1862" rifle mentioned someplace. According to McAulay, all 10,000 were still in storage at Watervliet Arsenal (their point of delivery) in 1866, and 9,999 were sold to Bannerman in 1901. He names it the "Remington Model 1863 Contract Rifle".
I know of no one who knows why the appellation "Zouave." was applied to these rifles. If we found an early Bannerman (or maybe Sears or Montgomery Ward) advertisement maybe we would know when the nickname started.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

CENSORED

[Jim Brady Knap's Battery]

I'll say again that I have seen where the contract called for "Harpers Ferry Rifles" but have never seen a specification stating which model, 41 or 55. I agree on the 64 rifle musket production. While Flayderman's book is a good general reference it is not infallable.
Here's a good debate point on Zouaves, the "U" on the barrel bands on Zouaves are properly placed on the left side of the band. That way the open end of the letter "U" is properly pointed towards the muzzle. On most all other US arms the "U" is on the right side of the bands to have it's open end towards the muzzle. I have seen this on other Remington arms like some of the Remington produced rolling blocks.

Jim Brady
2249V
Knap's Battery

[Ken Hansgen, 11094]

I once asked, at the Springfield Armory museum, what the U on the bands meant. The Curator answered that it meant "up" -- when the weapon was assembled on a table, the lock was up so the U on the bands went on the right side. Now I'm wondering how they assembled the weapons at the Remington factory!

[Richard Hill]

The contract and specifications for this gun can be found in “Civil War Arms Makers and Their Contracts – A facsimile reprint of the Report by the Commission on Ordnance and Ordnance Stores, 1862” by Mowbray and Heroux, starting on page 131. The first paragraph of this section reads:

"Ordnance Office, Washington, July 30, 1861.

GENTLEMEN: You will please make for this department, and deliver with all possible dispatch, ten thousand rifles, with sword bayonets, and appendages complete. These rifles are to be of .58 inch caliber, and to have a three-leaf rear sight, and a cupped ramrod, with sword bayonet stud similar to those of the Harper’s Ferry rifle model of 1855, in other respects of the pattern of the rifles without bayonets heretofore made by you for this department."

The “pattern of the rifles without bayonets” would be the model 1841, or the Mississippi rifle. The above book is the proceedings of the Holt-Owen Commission and is quite interesting. The Remington section also includes revolver early contracts.

[R. McAuley 3014V]

CENSORED