Earl J. Hess, The Rifle Musket in Civil War Combat: Reality and Myth (Lawrence: University of  (original) (raw)
Towards a Hierarchy of Civil War Bullet Rarity
2023
Since the mid-1960s, several American Civil War bullet experts have contributed a number of important compilations of photographs and measurements for use in the collector community. Generally, the research and documentation required for these types of publications takes years to compile and reflects a unique passion for the study of early projectiles. What is typically not shared is the rarity of one example to another, a product of the research of advanced collectors. Expanding this knowledge would allow anyone to evaluate the historical impact of any specimen whether it was recovered in the field or purchased. In this report, a panel of Civil War bullet experts was polled in hopes of creating a hierarchy of Civil War bullets that will standardize terminology and distinctly communicate the scarcity of specimens in collections.
Too Little Too Late? The Introduction of the Spencer Rifle
2018
The photo above does not seem like much, but the story behind it is incredible. On August 17, 1863, a man named Christopher Miner Spencer entered the White House, gun in hand. He was let in past the sentries and ushered in to meet with President Abraham Lincoln. Spencer was at the White House to show the president his invention, the repeating rifle. He had been trying to get it adopted by the United States Army with little success, so he decided to go to the man with the most power. Spencer showed Lincoln his gun, and the president was impressed by how simple it was. One could take it apart and put it back together in only a few minutes, needing only a screwdriver. Lincoln invited Spencer back to the White House so that they could test the rifle. [excerpt]
journal of confl ict archaeology, 2014
This paper deals with firearms that were employed by the Argentine army in frontier warfare between 1869 and 1877. Documentary information and archaeological assemblages from two contemporary military facilities —Fort General Paz and Fortín Algarrobos — are combined to characterize the armament in service during those years. This was a crucial period, during which a process of modernisation and standardisation of the army’s armament started, centred on the incorporation of Remington single-shot breech-loading rifles and carbines. However, the archaeological record shows that this process was slow and that an astonishing variety of older firearms (flintlocks, percussion smoothbores and rifles) remained in service, causing logistic and operative problems, and reducing the army’s combat effectiveness. The paper then discusses the impact of the incorporation of the Remington guns on frontier warfare, critiquing commonly held determinist characterisations, and placing the Remington’s effect in a broader political and economic context.
The great american gun war: Notes from four decades in the trenches
2013
In this essay I provide an account of how research on gun violence has evolved over the last four decades, intertwined with personal observations and commentary on my contributions. It begins with a sketch of the twentieth century history of gun control in the United States. I then provide an account of why gun violence is worth studying, with a discussion of how and why the type of weapon used in crime matters, and assess the social costs of the widespread private ownership of firearms. I then detour into the methodological disputes over estimating basic facts relevant to understanding gun use and misuse. In Section IV, I focus on how gun availability influences the use of guns in crime and whether the incidence of misuse is influenced by the prevalence of gun ownership, regulations, and law enforcement. I go on to review evaluations of efforts to focus law enforcement directly at gun use in violent crime. Next I turn to the hottest topic of our day, the role of guns in self-defense and what might be deemed private deterrence. The conclusion summarizes the claims and counterclaims concerning gun regulation and asks, finally, if there is the possibility of an influential role for scientific research in the policy debate.
For many years, historical arms literature has interpreted American markings observedon some 18th-century muskets, particularly of French manufacture, as attesting to purchase by the Continental Congress and, most importantly, as verifying wartimeissuance to and usage by the Continental Army. The variety of such stamped markingmost frequently seen on surviving muskets is a “US” monogram typically found on thetail of the lockplate and/or atop the barrel breech, in an upright, sideways or eveninverted position.The second, and notably earlier, category of markings, seen on far fewer survivingweapons, includes the stamping or “branding” of “UNITED:STATES” or, more often, “U.STATES” into the musket stock. Stamped into the wood by a heated marking iron,the full two-word brand is typically positioned either in two lines on the face of the buttstock or in one line behind the trigger guard, while the abbreviated mark is seen in rear orin front of the trigger guard or, less often, on the face of the butt stock.Recently published documentation has notably advanced the interpretation of these two categories of markings and, in particular, has clarified our understanding of their validity and reliability as evidence of Continental Army usage of a given musket and, thereby, a ong arm class and model.
Union and Confederate Views on Guncotton
Vulcan, 2015
This essay investigates why guncotton was not commonly used by both sides of the American Civil War, despite it being a more powerful explosive than the standardexplosive (gunp owder/black powder). The question hitherto has not been fully answered; it is proposed that both sides did realize its superiority yet chose different modes of action. The Union army tested the material in America, but chose the Britishcourse of action, to wait until the material, with its known instability, was improved. The Confederate navy was willing to take the risk and looked in mid-1864 for large amounts in Europe for use in certain types of sea and river mines (“torpedoes”). Large quantities did arrive, but were too late to be used. The types of torpedoes to be employedwith guncotton are not known but it is estimated that the material was intended for those types where gunpowder limited their effectiveness.