Rifle Covers

[Rob Weaver]

In "Life Among the Apaches" (1868), John C. Cremony describes his experiences guiding in the southwest in the 1850s and early 1860s. This quote appears on p. 139 of the Indian Head Books edition. "The Regular soldiers, in order to preserve the polish and fine appearance of their guns, are in the habit of carrying them in covers and unloaded. " The context is during the timeframe 1850-1852. This is the first time I've ever seen reference to soldiers carrying their arms in some sort of case. Does anyone have any more information?

[Todd Watts]

Re: Rifle Covers

I have no idea what to add except to say that I too often wonder about the "correctness" of the canvas and rubberized canvas covers sold to re-enactors today for musketry. I tend to believe that soldiers were not issued these items. Why would a solier ever want to carry his musket in a cover like that which prohibits its sling's use? But, for us today that only use the gun once every few weekends, the cover makes sense for storage. Out west, blanket covers were used even during the fur-trapper / Mountain Man era. Several surviving examples of these covers are still around in collections and museums. Maybe the soldiers referred to here had taken to the practice to keep the harsh sand off the guns. If they were inspected regularly and had an officer that was a stickler for polished weaponry, the soldiers on their own may have come up with the idea to reduce the work load of polishing and maybe to reduce their time peeling taters for having dirty guns.

[Linkstrap]

Re: Rifle Covers

Musket covers had been suggested as early as 1833 when Colonel Bomford, Chief of Ordnance, recommended to the Secretary of War the use of India-rubber covers or cases to protect small arms from dampness and moisture.

Gun covers were successfully used in the Mexican War and similar covers for artillery pieces were tested at the same time.

From 'India Rubber & Gutta Percha in the Civil War Era', by Mike Woshner

[jgr1974]

Re: Rifle Covers

They date back to the Revolution. Have some info on it somewhwere in the see of paper!!!

The Mad Mick!!!

[Todd Watts]

Re: Rifle Covers

But, were the covers actually used by soldiers, especially in the field? I can understand them in garrison, but soldiers, especially those that had a little time under their feet, had to realize that a cover is just added weight to carry in the pack, and if on the gun prevents it from being carried easily. Soldiers were and still are by nature lazy (in a good way). Heck, the war is full of accounts of sodliers shedding coats and blankets on the march just because they broke a sweat for the moment. I just can't imagine them keeping a cover unless their officer happened to be a hard-arse about such things.

[Clsinclair]

Re: Rifle Covers

I have never read an account regarding using gun covers during campaign. I have an original M-1842 Harpers Ferry Smoothbore, P-1853 Enfield, a short Winchester 22 cal squirrel rifle, and a few other old guns and I store each one of them in a Canvas or a Painted Oiled Gun case. Every few months I take them out and clean them weather they need it or not. When transporting the original rifles and muskets to living history events I use the cases to keep them from being scratched.

Regards,
Claude Sinclair

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Rifle Covers

As Claude states, the canvas gun sacks save wear and tear in the closet and prevent banging around during transport to and from the event. To my knowledge infantry arms were carried on campaign, either by the sling or in hand and stacked while in camp. No?

That is an interesting quote from "Life Among the Apaches". Of what use is an unloaded weapon in a canvas sack?

[Tom Ezell]

Re: Rifle Covers

That is an interesting quote from "Life Among the Apaches". Of what use is an unloaded weapon in a canvas sack?

It could be that the fellow was advertising for a cheap but efficient haircut :p

The other thought that comes to mind is that you shouldn't believe everything that you read in the funny papers.

It's difficult to evaluate this sort of observation without placing it more in context... What was the proximity to hostile Apaches?, for example... Second, it would bear a lot more weight and relevance if it was backed up by other observations and supporting comments. A single fact or observation has to stand on its own merits, but to be really useful it should be corroborated, and then evaluated in the light of other, related knowledge.

[vamick]

Re: Rifle Covers

I dont know about yall....but if I faced Apaches MY weapon would stay loaded and close at hand if not IN hand..same goes for Comaches, or any hostile 'area of operation' shine be damned..course Im just scared like that:D

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: Rifle Covers

Rob, maybe I missed something, but might the "Regulars" referred to have been dragoons or mounted rifles?

[Lee Ragan]

Re: Rifle Covers

Rob, maybe I missed something, but might the "Regulars" referred to have been dragoons or mounted rifles?

Regulars could also have been infantry. Just because it was in the west, doesn't mean all Army troops were mounted. Many an infantryman lugged a rifle out west and not just as garrison troops, during the Indian Wars.

[Todd Watts]

Re: Rifle Covers

Talk about a march that would INHALE! A long hot dusty infantry trek across Nebraska! Dusty, hot and no scenery.

[Rob Weaver]

Re: Rifle Covers

This is my current thinking on this odd quote. He is, specifically, talking about infantry; the immediate surroundings all discuss infantrymen. I think Cremony is describing what he saw when "mission creep" overtook the soldiers. Certainly he describes civilians keeping their arms at hand and ready. Perhaps the troops were moving around in sufficiently large bodies, on sufficiently mundane missions, that the Apaches simply weren't interested in them, and they got careless. The goal of keeping the rifle clean overtook the goal of keeping it at hand for the ambush that never quite transpired. He does indicate that the troops he was describing were not veterans. "None of these men have probably ever been in an Indian country, and, if they have, no experience elsewhere will avail them among the Apaches, whose mode of warfare is so entirely at variance with those of all other tribes." (obsit) Cremony also advises that "The men should be made to carry their muskets loaded, capped, and ready for action at a second's warning." He has come to the same conclusion several of you have, but what I find interesting is that his warining clearly intimates that the troops are in the habit of going about with cased and unloade muskets! From the vantagepoint of history, we often ascribe greater competence to these frontiersmen than they actually had. Not every frontier soldier was a grizzled old veteran, and by the same token, not every Native American was a wizard of primitive warfare. I'm thinking that the great probability is that their rifle covers were made of leather or blanket wool, and were probably locally made. Both kinds made for civilian rifles are attested to in collections all over the west. This is a fascinating book, an easy read, and a nice companion to Utley's "Frontiersmen in Blue."
I'm not suggesting that this quote would justify all of us going out and looking like Kit Carson, either! Although some of you boys who play in Apacharia might take it under advisement. (I get to play with Native Americans when I do American Revolution and frankly, they scare me spitless.)