Pistols. Simple numbers!

[Indianabugles]

I have recently been examining some of the statements I use when talking on these, the generality and the accuracy and how I can refine what I say and how I say it during presentations..
I have raided some of Curt's postings, which pretty much concur with the findings I was coming too. A pleasing revelation indeed.
This started with this list....


Colt Navy (All Models) 185,000 Plus
Colt Army (All Models) 150,000 Plus
Remington Army 147,000
Starr 37,000-45,000
Whitney 33,000
Colt Dragoons (All Models) 18,500
Savage Navy 12,000- 20,000
Remington Navy 7,000
Joslyn Revolver (Both Models) 3,000
Le-Mat 2,500
Spiller and Burr 1,451
Dance and Brother .44 500

Rogers and Spencer ( Disqalified ) 5,000

I have considered with care some of the things generally said,
Colts are fair safe "They were the most common." OK "They outnumbered the next best competitor by 3-1" Including all models yes!
Then it went wrong!! "Remington's are the second most common.." Only if were are talking about all models, or the Army!! The Navy is way down the list ..
Well I knew the Strarr Models were next an thought them a fair safe third place, But Whitney is not far behind. These guys never get enough press and are clearly worth a mention in any display talk...
In last place as a relevant substantial numbers revolver comes the Savage. Interesting, but not going to dwell on that.

What annoys me is that when I hear people talk about the revolvers they seem to talk about Remingtons, Colts and Le Matts, in fact I have seen several bad replica's of these monsters a several UK reenactments.
IMHO The Le Matt fails to qualify as common Civil war revolver, as does most of the bottom list. They are interesting oddities, unit specific and relevant only, in many cases as to what they copied .. Colt - Dance, Whitney - Spiller and Burr.
For me the discussion should be, do we include the Savage as a common Revolver?

brass frames... I have replaced all of mine with steel. Curt's previous article on this nails it. The one Brass frame that really antagonists me is the Remington Texas.. WTF?
Simpy put...Never existed..

Anyway my intention is to write an article in the mainstream newsletter accentuating this list and the weighting of it's components.
But before I do, please throw corrections, additions and amendments at me..

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Hallo!

IMHO...

Much of the choices of weapons, and particularly revolvers, have their roots in Reenacting Culture which is not based on research and documentation into the actual arms issued to the units being recreated or portrayed but rather on a tradition of "likes and dislikes" and individual unit members buying what they want to have, what reproductions are available (and at what cost), and whether a M1863 Remington or M1865 Spencer Carbine is "okay" or "fine" for 1861/62 impressions.

IMHO still...

The issue of "commonality" of a weapon can fall back on the old (and often misused and misunderstood) PEC (Plain, Everyday, and Common" concept/efforts of the 1990's in trying to use R & D's kit firstly, and then go heavily on the concept of "by like company" issuance rather than having no two men ever having the "same" kit. And, perhaps combined with a so-called "vanilla" approach to impressions that made history safer by not focusing on rarities and exceptions (which was useful for the assimilation and fielding/uniting of messes and companies into unit-specific portrayals for different events).

Even when deducting Colt percussion revolvers that were made Post War 1865-1872/73, a Colt M1851 "Navy" revolver by overall numbers, over 1861-1865, would have been the most "common" revolver. But, it would be the historically WRONG revolver if one's unit was armed with say Remington M1863 Navy's.

"For me the discussion should be, do we include the Savage as a common Revolver?"

Discounting the handful of Savage revolvers tested, the U.S. Government bought 11,284 in the first two years of the War, with over 10,000 going to the Army. By most standards, fairly "not common."
By and large, the discussions falls into numbers, but also does not carry over into reenacting or living history much as there are no reproductions with none likely ever being made.

Curt

[Indianabugles]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Thanks for the reply Curt
I concur that often the unit or period being portrayed should be first call as to what weapon systems were commonly there, and when they were. Where I am now in the presentations I do I need to get myself into a less wrong explanation.
In the scene I see I often come across manufacturisms (New word), Yes Pietta, I talk about the imaginary colt Texas or the fact people are marketed Rodgers and Spencer as Civil war Pistols.
Curt is also on the nail with what is possible. Thankfully Colts and Remingtons are easy to get hold off, even here in the UK!
It is also possible to get Starr's, pricey but possible..
Whitneys are a harder proposition and the Palmetto version is more than a little rattley.
There is no way to get hold of Savage's at all, so even if historically viable it is not possible, which is a shame
There is however an issue here... All of the above are SECTION 1 firearms, so if you do not have you are limited to Blank firing pistols, Colts and Remingtons only.
While this is limiting, and sad, it gets worse. A company called Denix makes Fakes, including the Le Matt.
What I intend to do with my article is throw a truer picture of numbers and availability rather than the Manfacturisms that I am seeing.
I do not want to see another US Provost with a Le Matt and want to provoke a few the mainstream here to consider doing three things.
Firstly, understand that cost and what the manufacturer says are not the be all and end all, research where possible and if not at least do not go to rares and uncommons because they look good.
Secondly, Get a Section 1, blank firers look wrong and sound wrong!
Thirdly, Know a Little more about the real prevalence of CW revolvers rather than the "Colt, Remington, Le Matt split that seems to be what I hear.
Please understand that while this may be a little too general for AC I appreciate all feedback and I will cause offence to certain people in the mainstream, again, with this.

http://www.baytree-interiors.co.uk/replica-militaria/denix-replica-guns-pre-1870-pistols-revolvers-and-rifles/le-matt-revolver-usa-civil-war-1860.html

Poop like this has to go..

[Palmyra Possum]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Obviously, when you are portraying a specific person, time, place, event, whatever, if you can document the accuracy of something it should be done. For example, there is a LeMat revolver that is IDed to Private George W. Mercer, Co. H, 55th Virginia Infantry. I can't think of any reason I would ever recommend that someone portraying a private of infantry carry a LeMat unless you are portraying this guy.

Exceptions for specific portrayals aside, sometimes just looking at raw numbers can seem a little meaningless when you're talking about a reenactment with a hundred guys, most of whom would not be carrying a revolver, on each side. Here's Christian's list (with the high number of his ranges arbitrarily selected) broken down by percentages:

Colt Navy……………..185,000……..30.18%
Colt Army……………..150,000……..24.47%
Remington Army………147,000……..23.98%
Starr………………....…..45,000…...….7.34%
Whitney…………………33,000……....5.38%
Colt Dragoons…………..18,500………3.02%
Savage Navy……………..20,000………3.26%
Remington Navy…………7,000……….1.14%
Joslyn…………………….3,000…….....0.49%
LeMat…………………….2,500…….....0.41%
Spiller & Burr…………….1,451………0.24%
Dance & Brother…………....500………0.08%
……………..…………..612,951……100.00%

The question then comes up, what are you trying to accomplish? Absent documentation to the contrary, if you want the soldiers on the field who should carry revolvers to carry something representative, you'd be hard pressed to justify anything other than a Colt Army or Navy, or Remington Army at anything but larger events (with apologies to Curt for ignoring the whole 1858/1863 Remington thing).

If your goal is to put together a "display talk," as described by Christian, for the public of typical revolvers of the Civil War, you then have to decide for yourself at what rate of usage a revolver becomes "typical." 10%? You're stuck with the Big 3. 5%? You can add a couple more.

[Indianabugles]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

THAT CERTAINLY RESPINS THE PLATE.
Percentages vs Bulk numbers.
But the important question on the page is what are we trying to accomplish. My goal is twofold, firstly so I can answer questions in my display, in and out of reenacting with a degree more accuracy and Eric's last statement pretty much nails that.
The second objective requires a little more explanation.
I was going to add that my list is far from complete, but the sheer lack of numbers of the remaining missing types makes so little difference either in bulk figures or percentages as to be negligible.
I have done, and have been to and enjoyed full immersion events. I own two different types of rifle and several uniforms so I can attend with unit specific gear, and I get it. This is not a universal truth among UK reenactors and even I am regarded among the dedicated in the UK as a half way house.
So please understand that the target audience here may be well below where you would expect folk to be.
When I first came into UK Reenactment there was a mad mix of guns, Remington rifles, converted percussion, shotguns etc.this has now moved on and while Curt's fore mentioned 1990 Vanilla approach falls well behind the "researching what your unit actually had approach" it certainly cleared the decks of many very wrong guns and stopped people buying sutler described "Civil war guns" notably Remington rifles.
While the pistol wearers are relatively few, this also means if they have it wrong they become the focus for that wrong and where as the rifle carriers are more and more questioning the correctness of their guns, thankfully and at least conforming to the Vanilla approach the pistols seem to have never been given a reality check and most people seem to now very little about them. This is a twofold approach as many of the pistol carriers, Provost etc are folk who do not want to conform, educating those who are moving forward will hopefully raise some questions. What I intend to do with my article is simply lay out some figures and get some thinking going! Get some questions asked and in doing so, hopefully, get some very wrong disappeared.


I came here as a lot of the internet is full of inaccuracy, many weapon searches have manufacturism facts or disagree.
I came here as I expected to get way more challenged on this than by my target audience.
I came here to challenge myself before I wrote it

Thank you Eric

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Hallo!

To make the impossible somewhat more simpler... ;) :) Perhaps start out by going out on a limb and exclude pistols that were still in service or use from before 1861 and may be even try to ignore the attrition and loss rates over time due to use as well as upgrading with more "modern" revolvers replacing single shot muzzleloaders.
And yes, exact numbers are often not available, not known, "believed to have been," and just plain misrepresented or wrong.

Here is a list, of sorts, of pistols held as "martial" obtained through government contracts, open market purchases, and commercial/private purchase.

US:

Adams/Massachusetts Arms Navy
Allen & Wheelock Lipfire Army
Allen & Wheelock Lipfire Navy
Allen & Wheelock Army
Allen & Wheelock Navy
Alsop Navy
Bacon Rimfire Navy
Beals-Remington Army (aka Remington-Beals)
Beals-Remington Navy (aka Remington-Beals)
Butterfield Army
Colt M1836 (Paterson)
Colt M1847 Army (Whitneyville 'Walker')
Colt M1848 Army (Whitneyville-Hartford)
Colt M1848 Army 1st Model
Colt M1848 Army 2nd Model
Colt M1848 Army 3rd Model
Colt M1849 Pocket
Colt M1851 Navy, 1st Model
Colt M1851 Navy 2nd Model
Colt M1851 Navy 3rd Model
Colt M1851 Navy 4th Model
Colt M1860 Army ("Types 1, 2, 3, 4")
Colt M1861 Navy
Colt M1862 Pocket/Police
Colt Percussion Navy Revolver
Cooper Navy
Eagle Company Navy
Freeman Army
Joslyn Army
Manhattan Navy
Metropolitan M1851 Navy
Metropolitan M1861 Navy
Metropolitan Pocket/Police
Moore Rimfire
Pettengill Army
Pettengill Navy
Plant Cup Primed
Pond Army
Prescott Rimfire Navy
Remington M1861 Army ("Old Model Army")
Remington M1861 Navy ("Old Model Navy")
Remington M1863 Army ("New Model Army")
Remington M1863 Navy ("New Model Army")
Remington "New Model" Belt Revolver
Remington-Rider "New Model" Belt Revolver
Remington "New Model" Police
Rogers & Spencer Army (I know. But 200, also given as 800, were sold on the commercial civilian market)
Savage-North "Figure 8" Navy
Savage-North Navy
Smith & Wesson No. 2 Army
Starr M1858 Navy
Starr M1858 Army
Starr M1863 Army
Union Arms Navy
Walch Navy
Warner Army
Warner Navy
Wesson & Leavitt Army
Wesson & Leavitt Belt
Western Arms Company Navy
Whitney Navy

CS:

Augusta Machine Works
Columbus Firearms MFG. Company
Griswold & Gunnison
Griswold & Grier
Leech & Rigdon
Rigdon-Ainsley
Spiller & Burr
CS "Spiller & Burr"
T.W. Coffer
J. H. Dance & Brothers
Schneider & Glassick
Tucker, Sherrard & Co.
Clark, Sherrard & Co.
W. H. Henley

Curt

[Indianabugles]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

A similar thought had occurred to me via my son who pointed out that duration of service was as much an aspect as numbers when it came to commonality. 18,000 Dragoons, already in service, still modern enough to be relevant, already dissipated through the armies at the point of separation are therefore more likely to be seen than the same number of out of the box pistols delayed by arrival date and issue and the like.

"I came here as I expected to get way more challenged on this than by my target audience." Literally Curt? LOL.

My four page article, in essence has become an eight page one and in an inescapable undertow reads now reads.

1. Check what they had.
2. Check what you have measures up.
3. If you cannot get what they had, due to it not being manufactured, here is other stuff that is likely to have been used
4. Here is some stuff that is so rare that unless it conforms with point one don't get it.
5. Here is some stuff that does not exist or was not used so do not get.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Hallo!

And expanding that...

The number of specimens in any artifact pool tend to be skewed towards the youngest.
Meaning, "surplus" items in storage and not issued, or issued at the end of the War tend to be higher than those from its start produced in smaller numbers and "used up" in service. The uniform and kit a lad was wearing when mustered out in the summer of 1865 that he went home with is not the same as what he entered the service in in 1861.

Curt

[Indianabugles]

Re: Pistols. Simple numbers!

Do you mind if I quote that and add it to the end of the article?