Continental Army Rifle

[CharlesZ]

"Any captured Rifleman was summarily executed without trial."

In other words, a rifled barrel was considered
barbaric during this period? Unbelievable!
I'm basically trying to find out what the 'average' American soldier carried. If he came with his own musket--rifle, what was popular at the time. What might have raised curiousity?
If I was to purchase a replica musket I know a Bess or Charleville would fit the bill but what about American made and what about rifles? I'll restrict it to the Revolution. Thanks.

 

[Coot]

The earliest known records for a public (state owned & operated) arms factory in America are for 1775 when the 3rd Virginia Convention established the Fredericksburg Manufactory. Operating under various names, it produced arms until about 1780 when it seems to have become a repair facility. The works was raided by Tarleton in July 1781 and reportedly "1000 new muskets were destroyed". Many believe that this report was exaggerated and that a much smaller number of repaired arms was the actual tally. At any rate Ahern states that at least six known Fredericksburg/Rappahannock Forge muskets are known to exist. I have seen four of them, at the Fredericksburg Museum, in the Virginia Historical Society and the Colonial Williamsburg Collection. While similar, they cannot be said to have been made to a true standard pattern, with varying barrel lengths, furniture and woods. Other Committee of Public Safety muskets are equally rare and varying. To make it short, I am not aware of any commercially made reproduction of an American made Rev War musket. A custom builder could doubtless make a copy of one of the very few existing originals & while a wonderful thing to have, if re-enacting is important to you, most re-enactor units use replicas of the weapons that the unit that they are re-creating was known to have been issued. Re rifles, as others have mentioned, there was no US pattern or issue rifle during the Rev War. Any civilian rifle with architecture predating the war's end could have been a militia man's weapon. Replicas of these guns are out there on the used market and as with the musket, one could be custom made.

 

[flintriflesmith]

"Any captured Rifleman was summarily executed without trial."

In other words, a rifled barrel was considered
barbaric during this period? Unbelievable!
I'm basically trying to find out what the 'average' American soldier carried. If he came with his own musket--rifle, what was popular at the time. What might have raised curiousity?
If I was to purchase a replica musket I know a Bess or Charleville would fit the bill but what about American made and what about rifles? I'll restrict it to the Revolution. Thanks.

Riflemen being executed without trial is indeed "unbelievable" and, as near as current research can tell, it is a myth. There may have been a time when it was true in the very early days of rifles in European warfare but a number of riflemen were captured during the Rev War and were not executed.

Few civilians would have owned muskets -- by definition they were military arms and usually owned and issued by the government -- so when you are asking what a civilian would have brought with him it would have mostly likely been a fowling pice (shotgun in modern terms) or a rifle. However a man enlisting in a regular Continental Army unit did not need to bring a gun because one would normally be issued. The "bring your own gun" applied mostly to militia and rifle units.

There are always exceptions to these general statements but you asked what the average man carried and it was very different for line units, rifle units, and militia units. To make it even more complicated the militia laws varied from state to state and year to year.
Gary

 

[CoyoteJoe]

In short, a revolutionary rifleman would bring what he had, a Yeager, transitional Kentucky, or perhaps an early Virginia would be an acceptable item. For 1812 you could use an 1803 Harpers Ferry but get a good one, the Italian imports can be troublesome.
To see some photos of the various rifles and get an idea of cost, check out "Track of the Wolf". They have a terrific online catalog. Also check out gun kits even if you don't intend to build a kit you will see good photos of the finished guns in various styles. Then if something strikes your fancy you can give them a phone call and ask if that style would be appropriate to the period or if there is something else they would recommend. http://www.trackofthewolf.com/Categories/PartList.aspx?catID=12&subID=81&styleID=280

 

[Twisted_1in66]

I have a few comments on this to share.

Ӣ There were NO rifles owned or issued by the army during the Rev war. Rifle company captains raised their companies and then brought them to the regiment. Capt. Posey raised three companies of riflemen during the revolution from my general area in Southwest Virginia which was very much considered the frontier at the time. The reason there were so many riflemen here was because of the buckskin trade. Half cured buckskin (rawhide) was the second largest export from Virginia (behind tobacco) at the start of the Revolutionary war. All of these riflemen came with their own rifles and their own round ball molds to fit the rifle.

Ӣ Riflemen were originally called for by George Washington to be used as a light infantry group. Most commonly, they ended up being used as scouts, and skirmishers. The Indians who were accompanying the British were primarily armed with rifles and did the same thing until they found themselves countered by riflemen...then they left. That was probably one of the biggest advantages of a rifle company - it eliminated the Indian threat.

Ӣ Riflemen at the beginning of the war were given preferential treatment and did not have to stand guard or do other normal chores because everyone was so glad to get them and enamored with the difference they made in the battles. That wore off pretty quickly though and by 1779 they were pulling duties in camp like everyone else.

Ӣ By far and away, battles were won by using the musket and the bayonet, but the rifles played their part. Daniel Morgan took his company of 500 riflemen to Saratoga where they were decisive in the battle. The best effect of pairing rifleman with light infantry was seen at Saratoga during the fight of Freeman's farm which went back and forth all day. The rifles would push the British back by engaging them from well beyond the range of the British muskets The light infantry, armed with muskets, would advance and push the Brits off the field, only to run into British reinforcements. The Brits then pushed them back and started to take the field again until the riflemen opened up on them. The riflemen were primarily firing from inside the tree line and up in the trees and they suffered the fewest casualties of the battle. The light infantry company that kept pushing the Brits from the field and then got pushed back themselves suffered the highest casualties.

After General Burgoyne retreated and consolidated his line the rifles continued to pick off soldiers and officers which preyed on the Brits morale. However, what finally beat Burgoyne and forced his surrender was a bayonet charge by the musket companies led by Benedict Arnold that captured a redoubt and turned the flank of the Brits.

Ӣ Mad Anthony Wayne didn't like riflemen because he was stupid. He had no idea on how to use them. Being the idiot that he was, he put the riflemen in the line with muskets to have them fire along with the muskets. Rifles are too slow to load to be effective in a Continental line and have no bayonets so cannot withstand a bayonet charge. He eventually made the riflemen he was given turn in their rifles and he issued them French muskets. Statements by Mad Anthony Wayne about how useless riflemen were deserve to be ridiculed because he didn't know how to strategically employ them.

Even Mad Anthony Wayne however, used riflemen at the battle of Greenspring in July of 1781 as Cornwallis was supposedly moving his troops across the James River in a retreat to Portsmouth and finally Yorktown. Since Layfayette was in charge perhaps it wasn't all up to Wayne. The rifles pushed through the woods and began pushing their British counterparts across the field and into a trap on the other side of the field, capturing a cannon position in the process. The main British force were waiting on this side of the river, instead of the smaller rear guard that was expected. As the Brits came out to retake the field and possibly encircle much of Lafayette's army, Mad Anthony Wayne ordered a bayonet charge against the far superior numbers of British troops. This shocked the British and stopped their vastly superior forces in their tracks. The rifles then covered their retreat after the main part of Lafayette's forces had escaped from the trap. The bayonet charge while vastly outnumbered is why Anthony Wayne began to be referred to as Mad Anthony Wayne.

Ӣ I've heard that statement "Any captured Rifleman was summarily executed without trial" by the British, but have never found any primary documentation to support that. That seems a bit out there to me, especially since the British had their own riflemen in the Hessian Jaegers. I have seen the primary documentation promising summary execution of any Continental loaded with "buck and ball", which was a normal round ball with tyically 3 buckshot loaded on top of that. But that was shot from a musket, not a rifle. Nonetheless I would certainly be interested in the primary documentation of that statement if it can be found.

Ӣ The Battle of Kings Mountain was almost entirely fought with rifles against the British. The "over the mountain men" Continental Militia were all rifleman and they trapped the loyalist forces commanded by British Major Patrick Ferguson (Ferguson rifle) of the 71st Foot. The Continental militia surrounded the Brits at the top of Kings Mountain. The only thing that kept them from being entirely overwhelmed at once, were the bayonet charges the Brits made when the Continental riflemen made the top of the hill. But even the bayonet charges could only delay the inevitable. Major Ferguson was killed trying to break through the lines and the Brits surrendered. So if you have to have one battle that was won solely by rifles, that would be it.

Ӣ Cowpens was Daniel Morgan Using rifles as rifles should be used. The first line was rifleman and Tarleton sent his dragoons to dispurse them. The dragoons were repulsed by accurate fire from the rifles because they could engage them accurately at distance. Next came the main line and the rifles made a point of shooting epaulettes. Tarleton lost 39 officers in the action. When pressed by the continued advance the riflemen retreated behind the main line. Light dragoons chased the riflemen but were repulsed by Colonel Washington's dragoons.

The second line at Cowpen's was made up of North and South Carolina militia under orders to fire 2 shots and then retreat. The militia did that and as the Brits started flanking the Continentals, the British line lost its cohesion in pursuit of the Continentals. The militia, who had surprisingly been making an orderly retreat turned and fired one more volley right before Colonel Washington's dragoons swept in behind the British lines. At that point the main Continental Line troops attacked and totally overwhelmed the British. The Brits lost 39 officers and 60 soldiers killed with 829 troops wounded or captured. The Americans had 12 dead and 60 wounded. Tarleton was last seen fleeing the field with the remnants of his cavalry that had refused to enter the battle from the reserve.

Just my 2 cents...

Twiseted_1in66 :thumbsup:

 

[nchawkeye]

To the OP....Take any early Lancaster design with either a sliding wood patch box or fairly simply brass one and you have a rifle that would qualify for a rifle that could have been used during the American Revolution...As long as the builder knows the proper lock and stock design for that period...

As far as rifles and the Revolution...

The most important victory in the early years was Saratoga...This brought the French into the Revolution with their money, troops, guns, ships etc...We couldn't have won without them...Daniel Morgan and his company of 500 riflemen were key to this victory...

Now, the Revolution was won in the South in 1780 and 1781...Yorktown was simply a mop up after we ran Cornwallis out of North Carolina...

Study Kings Mountain, Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse and you will learn that militia were heavily involved in these battles...Militia brought with them their rifles which were very common in this area at the time...After all, the Piedmont of North Carolina was settled first by hunters from Pennsylvania coming down here to kill deer for their hides...Deer hunters used rifles, not muskets...Soon, gunsmiths from Pennsylvania moved here as well...The primary settlers into the Piedmont of NC were German, English and Scots...

The proper use of rifles and the men who owned them helped win the Revolution...

While in the North, most battles were fought with muskets, those battles did little to help win the war...

 

[Dphar]

I'm looking to buy a flintlock rifle that would be representative of the military rifle used by the Americans during the Revolution. If that is too obscure, the War of 1812 would work.
Looking for a rifle, not a musket.
Any suggestions?

There was no American military rifle prior to the 1803 Harpers Ferry. They were all PA/KY rifles prior to that. Even the Contract Rifles of the 1790s were just Kentucky rifles made by Kentucky Longrifle makers...
Try looking in Rifles of Colonial America vol 1 and 2. Interlibrary loan is a way to get a look at them.
See #48, it would be a great choice.
Or Chambers Flintlocks VA rifle kit. There are many many options that would be a perfect representation of the Rev-War American Rifle.
Track of the Wolf has number of good representative rifles for sale on their site right now.
Like http://www.trackofthewolf.com/Cate...catId=12&subId=81&styleId=280&partNum=AAJ-912

NONE of the cheap mass produced rifles on the market qualify as a decent Kentucky of any period. American or import.

Dan

 

[Dphar]

The musket and the ability to use it was what finally won the Rev war.

I've got a quote somewhere with General Mad Anthony Wayne commenting on how he thought the rifle was a colossal waste on the battlefield.

His thinking must have changed, since he placed the order for the 1792 contract rifles when he was forming his legion for the Northwest Indian War.

Of the battles where most or all of the Patriot forces were rifle armed the patriots won 74% of the battles and only lost 18% according to Hamilton.
Read Colonial Riflemen in the American Revolution by Huddleston or The Frontier Rifleman by Hamilton.
Huddleston gives a pretty good account of the rifleman's faults, and many units had them.
In reality the British were ADDING rifles right to the end of the war while many American Generals were removing them from their units so they could fight the British Army's fight with musket and bayonet.

Yes, the musket won the Revolution. But the rifle was a major factor in some key battles.

Why did Wayne want rifles against the Natives? The Natives are not into linear tactics and outside linear tactics the musket was not so desirable. And a lot of Natives used rifles.

Dan

 

[Tommy Bruce]

Twisted, I was with you right up until the "Mad Anthony Wayne was stupid" comment. He studied and fought with traditional 18th century linear tactics. I guess Washington was stupid too because he also sought to reduce the amount of riflemen in the ranks as the war went on. Riflemen no doubt played a key part in the Revolutionary war but in the end it was a traditional siege that won the day at Yorktown. It is also interesting to note that Wayne succeeded in securing the North West territory after St. Clair and others before him had failed. I guess it's a good thing that Washington did not share your sentiments :shake: :shake:

 

[Tommy Bruce]

To the OP....Take any early Lancaster design with either a sliding wood patch box or fairly simply brass one and you have a rifle that would qualify for a rifle that could have been used during the American Revolution...As long as the builder knows the proper lock and stock design for that period...

As far as rifles and the Revolution...

The most important victory in the early years was Saratoga...This brought the French into the Revolution with their money, troops, guns, ships etc...We couldn't have won without them...Daniel Morgan and his company of 500 riflemen were key to this victory...

Now, the Revolution was won in the South in 1780 and 1781...Yorktown was simply a mop up after we ran Cornwallis out of North Carolina...

Study Kings Mountain, Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse and you will learn that militia were heavily involved in these battles...Militia brought with them their rifles which were very common in this area at the time...After all, the Piedmont of North Carolina was settled first by hunters from Pennsylvania coming down here to kill deer for their hides...Deer hunters used rifles, not muskets...Soon, gunsmiths from Pennsylvania moved here as well...The primary settlers into the Piedmont of NC were German, English and Scots...

The proper use of rifles and the men who owned them helped win the Revolution...

While in the North, most battles were fought with muskets, those battles did little to help win the war...

Mop up?? If the French had not defeated the British at sea to complete the surrounding of Cornwallis at Yorktown, he would have simply departed on British ships and escaped or reinforced. Riflemen did play a key roll in the south and at Saratoga, used in conjunction with musket wielding line troops. Cornwallis failed largely because Clinton failed to support him much like Howe failed to support Burgoyne at Saratoga.

As far as the battles in the North not having an effect on the war? I guess we forget about the victory over the Hessians at Trenton when everyone was about to give up and the battle at Monmouth where Washington slugged it out with British regulars and was left with the field proving that the continentals could stand toe to toe with British regulars.

 

[Coot]

To the OP....Take any early Lancaster design with either a sliding wood patch box or fairly simply brass one and you have a rifle that would qualify for a rifle that could have been used during the American Revolution...As long as the builder knows the proper lock and stock design for that period...

As far as rifles and the Revolution...

The most important victory in the early years was Saratoga...This brought the French into the Revolution with their money, troops, guns, ships etc...We couldn't have won without them...Daniel Morgan and his company of 500 riflemen were key to this victory...

Now, the Revolution was won in the South in 1780 and 1781...Yorktown was simply a mop up after we ran Cornwallis out of North Carolina...

Study Kings Mountain, Cowpens and Guilford Courthouse and you will learn that militia were heavily involved in these battles...Militia brought with them their rifles which were very common in this area at the time...After all, the Piedmont of North Carolina was settled first by hunters from Pennsylvania coming down here to kill deer for their hides...Deer hunters used rifles, not muskets...Soon, gunsmiths from Pennsylvania moved here as well...The primary settlers into the Piedmont of NC were German, English and Scots...

The proper use of rifles and the men who owned them helped win the Revolution...

While in the North, most battles were fought with muskets, those battles did little to help win the war...

Mop up?? If the French had not defeated the British at sea to complete the surrounding of Cornwallis at Yorktown, he would have simply departed on British ships and escaped or reinforced. Riflemen did play a key roll in the south and at Saratoga, used in conjunction with musket wielding line troops. Cornwallis failed largely because Clinton failed to support him much like Howe failed to support Burgoyne at Saratoga.

As far as the battles in the North not having an effect on the war? I guess we forget about the victory over the Hessians at Trenton when everyone was about to give up and the battle at Monmouth where Washington slugged it out with British regulars and was left with the field proving that the continentals could stand toe to toe with British regulars.

:thumbsup:

 

[Stumpkiller]

Harumph. Won in the South? I suppose Saratoga (Burgoyne's Surrender), Trenton, Princeton, Bennington were just brief skirmishes?

We just finished earlier up North after wearing them out, killing the brave ones and chasing the rest South. Heck, the war didn't even get started in the South until 1778 and we'd been fighting for four years by then.

 

[Loyalist Dave]

Saratoga was a big one, but yes, Trenton, Princeton, and Bennington were minor blows to the British and Germans. What Trenton and Princeton did was convince the Colonials to reenlist..., thus saving Washington's army, but had this not been a problem, these would have been minor events in the eyes of both sides.

Now, the Revolution was won in the South in 1780 and 1781...Yorktown was simply a mop up after we ran Cornwallis out of North Carolina...

WOW well the Volunteers of Ireland, plus some regular regiments HELD South Carolina, and the only real seaport in the South, until AFTER Cornwallis surrendered, and the British decided to abandon the South. The previous post was right, had not the British been forced away by the French Navy, and late to begin with..., We might have Queen Elizabeth II on our money right now.

LD

 

[Tommy Bruce]

Dave, that's the point I was trying to make about Trenton and Princeton. Washington himself had written that "The game was pretty much about up" in regards to the revolution. Small in the number of troops for sure but I'd rate the importance of these victories right up there with Saratoga. Without them I doubt there would've been an army to continue into 1777. I also have to wonder what would've happened in the South if General Clinton would not have made that proclamation forcing colonist to swear allegiance to the crown or Ferguson threatening to lay waste to the homes of the overmountain men or if Clinton had left Cornwallis with enough troops to secure the south and well too many variables to talk about in one post I guess.

 

[Twisted_1in66]

Hi Tommy,

My comment wasn't that Mad Anthony Wayne was stupid, rather that his use of riflemen was stupid. It was! You don't take a weapon and strategically place it where it can't work. He didn't know how to strategically employ them, so folded he them into musket line.

Rifles cannot keep up with the fast loading muskets and they lose all of their advantage when you are in a firefight at only 50-yards distance. Especially when the muskets have bayonets and decide to charge you from 30-yards out. You have no chance to reload and no bayonet of your own to counter the charge. You would of course have a tomahawk on your belt, but you can't really throw it and you are at a real disadvantage against what amounts to a 6 foot long spear. So you run to try to get space to reload and or cover to shoot from. And, of course, that is not very encouraging to the musket troops who are going toe-to-toe with the Brits as they see part of their line disappear on them in a run to the rear. That's just the dumbest thing a person could do with riflemen in the Rev War!

Interestingly, Washington who supposedly wasn't enamored with rifleman anymore, requested Governor Reed of PA to raise a corp of 300 rifleman in late June of 1781 and requested Major Parr of the PA 7th regiment to command them. His intent was to use them for the siege of New York that he so badly wanted. Specifically they were to, "...fire into the embrazures and to drive the enemy from their parapets when our approaches are carried very near their works. Without this can be done, our loss will be immense when we come within musket shot." An interesting quote in his letter to Governor Reed is, "One of the terms is that they shall find their own rifles as we have none in Store". Even at this late date in the war, there were no "US rifles" available to be issued.

What won the battle of Yorktown was pulverizing the place with the huge cannon. Besides the American Batteries, the French brought their 32 and 40-lb cannons off the ships (after they had repulsed the British ships) and by the time the 3 rd parallel was dug there was no place inside Yorktown that couldn't be turned into mud. At that point Cornwallis knew he was not going to be relieved and that he had no choice but to surrender.

The major infantry action at Yorktown was the taking of the only 2 remaining redoubts before Cornwallis totally pulled all of his forces inside Yorktown. And both of those redoubts were taken by bayonet charges - one by the Continentals and one by the French.

At this point, Washington no longer had the 500 man rifleman force that he had asked Daniel Morgan to raise early in the war. He never wavered from his opinion that they should be used as a light infantry. He was never of the opinion they should become "line troops". But what had been Morgan's rifle "company", which was originally 5 times larger than a normal regimental company, was reduced in size by 1781 to between 200-300 men, And, don't forget that after Daniel Morgan retired the first time, most of his riflemen were captured as part of the 5,000 man Virginia 7th Regiment at the Siege of Charlestown in May of 1780. Rifle companies in 1780 and 1781 were not very large at all.

Anyhow, if you are interested in some of the major influences that riflemen played in the Revolutionary War, I highly recommend the small book by Mike Cecere, "They are Indeed a Very Useful Corps (subtitled: The American Rifleman in the Revolutionary War)". Although a small book from Heritage Press, it is full of great info about the American Rifleman along with an abundance of primary documentation to back it up.

Twisted_1in66 :thumbsup:

 

[nchawkeye]

Had it not been for Saratoga and Morgan's Riflemen the French wouldn't have been at Yorktown...

Nope, didn't forget about any of the battles in the North, they just didn't have a direct effect on Cornwallis ending up at Yorktown...They prolonged the war which helped us win, but Cornwallis burning his baggage while trying to catch Morgan and Green is why he had to turn east and resupply...

Cornwallis couldn't catch Green partially because riflemen were posted at every river crossing he got to down here in North Carolina...This held him up long enough for Green to collect boats and cross the Dan and resupply with men and equipment...

After Cowpens and Pyle's Defeat, Loyalists were scared to join Cornwallis and militia from VA, SC and NC joined Green...The tide down here had turned...

 

[Tommy Bruce]

Hawkeye and Twisted, thanks for clarifying your points :wink:. I am in no ways trying to make light of the contribution of riflemen and irregulars during the war. Aside from a few pitched battles, much of the war in the south was smaller skirmishes waged by partisans on each side and aurguably the bloodiest of the war.

 

[Zonie]

I sure hope ole' CharlesZ (the original poster. Remember him?) stuck around for all of this.

Just asking a simple little question about what kind of gun he should get got him a whole dissertation about the Revolution. :rotf:

 

[CharlesZ]

CharlesZ is loving the posts.
My love of these weapons stems from a love of the history these guns helped shape. When I finally acquire my Revolutionary period firearm, I want to feel what our forefathers felt when they hefted these guns to their shoulders and took aim.
Posts are great. Thanks.

 

[Tommy Bruce]

Zonie you should know by now that there is no way to get from A to B without travelling the whole alphabet :blah: :blah: