Richmond Rifle in US Hands

[Silas]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Buncha farbs with too much hat brass on their forage caps.

[Palmyra Possum]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

All of the other lockplates in the unit have the standard Springfield profile...

Not sure that's correct. Attached are a couple other close-ups from the picture. The head in the lower left of your detail is the guy laying down in mine. Although it's not as clear as in your picture, the lockplate on his rifle appears to have a certain humpiness. Maybe someone with better resolution than I have can confirm.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Hallo!

Tis a humped lock plate.

It is interesting that the hammer is cocked, as if in "readiness." :)

Curt

[roundshot]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

On another note, in addition to hat brass there are corps badges visible - the Greek cross of the Sixth Corps. Since the 2nd NYHA was in the Second Corps it is quite likely these are men of the 2nd Connecticut HA which was in the Sixth Corps. The LOC has several other Ft. C. F. Smith garrison photos likewise labled as the 2nd NYHA where the 6th Corps badges are even more prevalent. Also, Company L of the 2nd NYHA was redesignated the 34th New York Independent battery in 1863. While not really germane to the thread I've always felt most of the "Smith" images are mislabeled as to the correct unit. Good eyes on spotting the humped locks! Interesting.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Hallo!

A Whitney "high hump:"



Curt

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Not sure that's correct. Attached are a couple other close-ups from the picture. The head in the lower left of your detail is the guy laying down in mine. Although it's not as clear as in your picture, the lockplate on his rifle appears to have a certain humpiness. Maybe someone with better resolution than I have can confirm.

[ATTACH=CONFIG]47368[/ATTACH][ATTACH=CONFIG]47369[/ATTACH]

Eric

Is it me or are those "63 Springfield" or Colt's contract type bands? Something just came to mind, being that they are "Heavies" could they have been issued captured 1st class arms?

[Palmyra Possum]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Is it me or are those "63 Springfield" or Colt's contract type bands?

Hard to say. In the last pictures I posted, the bands on the rifled musket of the guy laying down look thinner than the ones on the rifled musket of the guy sitting next to him, but I can't see them well enough to make a call on it.

Good catch to Bob Williams on the corp badges. Whatever unit it is, the more you look at this picture the more interesting it gets. Here's another detail as well as the full picture. On the detail, the rifled musket of the guy sitting down looks like a '61 to me. I think that's stock going over the top of the plate, and not a hump. But what's with the NCO in the center? I see an NCO stripe on his trousers, and an NCO plate on his belt, but no chevrons. And what is that plate on his cap pouch? I also like the white gloves on two of the men in this picture.

[fahnenschmied]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

I am not sure who told me about a Federal soldier who picked up a Richmond musket and carried it for several years, only to have it wrecked by a shell splinter or something at the battle of Bentonville. Also - I like the very bright polish evident on the muskets and bayonets, something which too many reenactors ignore. Even that guys belt plate is brightly polished.

[zachary.reese]

Re: Richmond Rifle in US Hands

Or it could be a Whitney 1861 springfield.

Please Note: Hi Zach! Please do not forget to sign your full name to every post. Rule #1 states: Sign Your Name - At the Bottom of Every Post, Sign Your First and Last Name - A username which contains your full name does NOT pass muster. You can prevent further infractions by clicking on settings in the upper right corner and clicking on edit signature in the lower left of the new page. Thanks for your cooperation! -Tyler Underwood