Ohio marked Model 1861 Rifle Musket

rob63

First Sergeant
Joined
Jul 13, 2012
Location
PA, but still a Hoosier
I picked this up at an auction today, appropriately enough in Ohio. I already have an Ohio marked Model 1841 Rifle, and an 1842 Musket, but it is the first time I have ever seen the Ohio mark on a Model 1861. It also has a 5 and a 3 on the bottom of the stock just forward of the butt plate. It wasn't really anything I was looking for, but I noticed the mark and there was only 1 other bidder so I got a pretty good deal on it. I naturally want to assume the 53 stands for the 53rd OH! :smile:

P1000434.JPG

P1000427.JPG

P1000438.JPG

P1000435.JPG

P1000441.JPG
 
Very nice. Looks like it's in very good shape too! Is that an original strap? If so its in great condition! Congrats!


Frank
I honestly don't know about the strap as I have no idea how to tell an original from a reproduction. I just assumed it was probably a reproduction and haven't really looked at it. I will have to take some good photos of it tomorrow and post them.
 
Very nice buy. The M1841 Ohio marked, does it have a long range sight & bayonet lug or is it in original configuration?
It is a strange one. Almost all original; stock, lock, & barrel are all Harper's Ferry production. However, it has the short barrel band for the bayonet lug, but no bayonet lug! It seems unlikely that if it was made up from parts that they would all happen to be from Harper's Ferry, but the short barrel band makes no sense without the bayonet lug. I just don't know what the story is with it, but it is also obvious that the barrel band has been on the gun for a very long time from the patina. The bore is smooth so it appears to have been reamed out for use as a shotgun, but it measures .58 caliber. It is another one that the price was right and I was attracted to the Ohio marking so I was willing to overlook the obvious shortcomings, besides, with my budget I would never have been able to get a decent looking M1841 otherwise.
01.JPG

11.JPG
 

Attachments

  • 03.JPG
    03.JPG
    71 KB · Views: 238
  • 05.JPG
    05.JPG
    49.6 KB · Views: 237
  • 08.JPG
    08.JPG
    78.9 KB · Views: 272
  • 02.JPG
    02.JPG
    70.6 KB · Views: 262
  • 06.JPG
    06.JPG
    44.7 KB · Views: 246
  • 09.JPG
    09.JPG
    57.7 KB · Views: 251
  • 10.JPG
    10.JPG
    42.9 KB · Views: 275
  • 12.JPG
    12.JPG
    54.7 KB · Views: 249
Last edited:
Here are photos of the sling on the Model 1861. I don't expect good news on it, so don't worry about hurt feelings. I suppose it sounds funny that I could collect guns for so long and never manage to learn anything about slings, but you just don't see them on old guns very often so I never worried about them.

I also couldn't resist including a photo of the bore. I thought some of my rifle muskets had nice bores, but this one is amazing. I haven't ran a patch down it yet, but it looks like it is just dusty.
 

Attachments

  • P1000443.JPG
    P1000443.JPG
    22.1 KB · Views: 263
  • P1000445.JPG
    P1000445.JPG
    71.2 KB · Views: 260
  • P1000446.JPG
    P1000446.JPG
    48.9 KB · Views: 248
  • P1000447.JPG
    P1000447.JPG
    51.1 KB · Views: 257
I've seen one other Ohio marked M1841; it was really rough and over priced even though it still had the tools in the patch box. It was in the original configuration but had been bored out to a shotgun.

Your short band on the fornt is interesting; who knows when it was mated to that rifle. She's an interesting piece.
 
@rob63 - I will offer my opinions. A nice clean Mississippi! Even though the barrel is a Harper's Ferry product, as are all the rest of the parts as you have noted, it has to be a replacement for the original barrel which accompanied the short front band. All Harper's Ferry M-1841 Rifles which had the short front band also had long range rear sights of one type or another. The short front band would have to had been there, because the stocks on those models are 7/8ths of an inch shorter in the forearm than the ones with a long front band. A long front band just won't fit.

OHIO marked arms. It seems that the OHIO marks were applied when the arms were taken into storage at the end of the ACW. There are 2 types of OHIO stamps. One is like the example shown with wide flat stamped letters, and the other is one done with a sharp-edged die stamp which leaves the stamp with very narrow letters and cut into the wood like an inspector's stamp.

Model 1841 Mississippi Rifles are one of my all-time favorites!

J.
 
@rob63 - Nice example of the narrow stamp, thanks for sharing it with the group! I really like the educational aspect of what we do.
J.
Thanks Jobe, I appreciate your comments on my M1841 and agree that the barrel being replaced at some point is what makes the most sense. Actually, the only thing that makes any sense.

Question: Have you ever heard of anybody finding anything that documents the Ohio marking being done after the war? I have heard that idea before, but there is an interesting old thread about the subject on another website that leads to another possibility. I am going to try to contact the op on that thread to see if he ever learned anything new before I post anything about it. It remains very speculative at this point.
 
@cwbuff - Your "OHIO" marked M-1795 is the first one I have seen with that barrel stamp. I have not been able to figure out when, or for how long, Ohio stamped barrels with that stamp. I have seen what appears to be the same barrel stamp on a post Civil War Miller conversion, which also happened to be serial # 1. Because the Miller breech unit is so small there is the distinct possibility that the "OHIO" stamp on the barrel pre-dates the Miller alteration.
J.
 
The OHIO stamp more than likely indicates it was state of Ohio property and used by the Ohio National Guard. I have been researching the 4 original cannon at the Statehouse in Columbus. The Quartermaster General of Ohio specifically asked Miles Greenwood to stamp the muzzles with OHIO. Also, state arsenal inventory records show that they had OHIO stamps. The number was probably an inspectors mark. The Statehouse guns have a number stamped on the muzzle along with OHIO , still trying to figure it out but right now it seems like an inspectors mark. I know the muzzle numbers don't represent who had the cannons, since I have traced their possession and the numbers don't match any batteries that had the guns, and each gun has a different number. The state of Ohio had quite a collection of assorted guns for infantry units. The 8th Ohio independent battery ONG was issued Prussian muskets when sent to Johnson's Island where the battery provided protection with the cannon, but also served guard duty.
( the photo is not one of the StateHouse guns, but one of the surviving one from the original order of 4 batteries. This photo had a good clean image of the muzzle)
12pdr_183a.JPG
 
Last edited:
I'm dredging up this old thread because I just came across a very similar Model 1861 rifle musket on a dealer's website. One of the things that is very interesting to me is that this one is marked on the bottom of the butt stock with the numerals 56 just like mine is marked 53. Perhaps some sort of inventory number? The 5 on this gun appears to have been made with the same die that made the 5 on my gun, the fonts match perfectly. It also has the same 1862 date.

http://www.armyoftennesseerelics.com/civil-war-weapons

DSC03295.JPG

DSC03300.JPG
 

Attachments

  • DSC03289.JPG
    DSC03289.JPG
    190.9 KB · Views: 233
  • DSC03293.JPG
    DSC03293.JPG
    261.5 KB · Views: 234
Back
Top