Explore The NRA Universe Of Websites

American Muskets of the Revolution

American Muskets of the Revolution

This article, "American Muskets in the Revolutionary War," appeared originally in the October 2003 issue of American Rifleman. To subscribe to the magazine, visit the NRA membership page here and select American Rifleman as your member magazine. Paintings courtesy of Don Troiani.


As galloping express riders and ringing church bells spread across New England during the early hours of April 19, 1775, thousands of farmers and tradesmen carrying a variety of firearms poured out of their homes and headed toward Lexington and Concord to intercept the British Army column approaching from Boston. America’s War for Independence had begun. Yet, despite their deeply held convictions, these provincials had no realistic chance to win.

In opposition against the finest army and navy in the world, the Colonists possessed no trained armed forces, no established central government, no financial reserves and no industry to supply their effort.
American-made muskets played a crucial role in the early battles of the War for Independence, including the Battle of Bunker Hill. America-made muskets are prominently featured in Don Troiani’s “Bunker Hill.” Of the 300,000 muskets used by American line troops during the Revolutionary War, in excess of 80,000 were the products of America’s some 2,500 to 3,000 scattered gunsmiths using mixed components.

The northern American Colonies had been settled to enrich the mother country by exporting raw materials to England’s factories and then serve as a market for their finished goods. Thus, the manufacturing facilities, such as those needed to produce arms and support a war, did not exist this side of the Atlantic.

As a young society gripped in a pioneering spirit, however, the rebels possessed an explosive vitality and ability to innovate. How they defied the impossible and drew upon this “new world energy” to successfully equip their spawning armies is one of the untold stories of our incredible path to freedom.

American Militia Organizations

In the beginning, the only existing American military groups were the individual militia systems of each colony. These units were usually identified by their town or county locations and included all men from 16 to 60 years of age. Being loosely structured, they met locally to drill several days each year, but lacked the discipline to stand against professional troops in open battle.

Each member was equipped with a firearm plus a bladed back-up arm, such as a short sword, belt axe or bayonet. Yet, unlike the mother country’s own militia regulations—in which the authorities controlled the arms and stored them together in a secured central location between muster days—each American had to provide his own arms and keep them at home.
“Virginia Militia, 1780”

The gun specifications, in turn, were vague. Massachusetts, for example, required only “a good fire arm.” Because Britain had done little in past years to furnish her colonists with military arms, the militia employed a wide assortment of smoothbore muskets, carbines, fusils, trade guns, light or heavy fowling pieces, and rifles—of varied lineages and bore sizes.

In addition, as the new United Colonies hurriedly attempted to create a regular army by enlisting militia members into Continental Line regiments, many of the recruits left their personal arms at home for the hunting demands and physical protection of their families.
“3rd Pennsylvania Regiment, 1777”

When Washington arrived at Cambridge opposite Boston in July 1775, he found an estimated 15 percent of the troops without firearms and many others with arms not capable of military field service.

The First Sources of American Arms

The immediate American needs had to be satisfied quickly by obtaining existing guns. The provincials proceeded to raid local arsenals, confiscate Loyalist guns, purchase civilian arms, seize British supplies, acquire cast-off or surplus firearms in Europe through independent agents and repair or cannibalize damaged pieces.
A c. 1715-1730 bulbous Dutch lock is on a Massachusetts gun dating about 1740.

Efforts were also implemented to make use of the limited production capabilities within the colonies. An estimated 2,500 to 3,000 gunsmiths were available, of which perhaps two-thirds favored the American cause (Moller I). Early in 1775, local “committees of safety” were already placing orders with those makers.

Some modern collectors describe all American Revolutionary War muskets as “committee of safety” guns. This term should only refer to those arms produced under a “committee” contract. Few survived, and most were not identified by the makers who feared retaliation by royal authorities.
A locally cast innovative American brass pattern trigger guard c. 1740.

Within a year, the committees had largely been superseded by the states, most of which raised and equipped their own regiments during the war. The Continental Congress also began issuing multiple contracts through agents of its Board of War.

The rebels’ early specifications followed the British Land Pattern with its pinned .75-cal. barrel, but the stipulated barrel lengths varied from 42” to 46” and recommended bayonet blades ranged from 14” to 18”. Surviving examples further show that even these official dimensions were routinely disregarded to expedite production.

Foreign Arms in the American Revolution

Eventually, the patriots’ desperate shortage of arms would be relieved by supplies from abroad. Yet this aid raised even more complications. Beginning in 1777, shipments began to arrive from France, as well as the Netherlands, Belgium and Spain.
A simple colonial hand-forged iron form nailed onto a plain c. 1715-1750 country fowler.

Mixed within these consignments, however, were firearm patterns of virtually all Western European nations, as most of the foreign arsenals supplying American aid had captured, abandoned or damaged arms in their inventories from multiple enemies of previous wars.

American agents, such as Benjamin Franklin, Silas Deane and Arthur Lee, also arranged large private deliveries of assorted armaments from Europe’s professional arms dealers. Such an overwhelming variety of gun patterns in the American ranks were further aggravated by a substantial number of odd musket components within the cargo.

American Production of Arms

The existing provincial gunsmiths included a number of master craftsmen, but the need for volume soon overrode artistry as their primary objective. The most time-consuming work was making locks and barrels. Even before hostilities began, it was usually more cost-effective for the makers to import those two components in bulk and make the remaining parts locally.
A French Model 1717 lock retains its unique vertical bridle in this c. 1760-1780 provincial musket.

This new flood of used parts changed most gun production to mixed assembly and repair. The author has found as many as five countries represented on a single American musket. Some of these reused parts even had portions cut off to reduce inletting work.
A reused traditional French double-pointed musket trigger guard in iron.

Although the typical American-made long arms favored the familiar British Brown Bess Land Pattern during the early war years, they shifted toward French designs and components as foreign aid expanded and France’s serviceable muskets re-equipped most of the Continental Line. The transition came slowly, however, for the maintenance and repair of arms returned from active field use added to the gunsmiths’ burdens.

As late as 1778, General von Steuben wrote of Washington’s line regiments following his arrival at Valley Forge in February, “The arms were in horrible condition, covered with rust, half of them without bayonets, many from which a single shot could not be fired … muskets, carbines, fowling pieces and rifles were seen in the same company.”
A British Long Land 1756 pattern, stamped “TOWER”, was manufactured after 1764 (when lock-date marking ceased) before restocking by the rebels.

To cope with these continuing demands, individual states and Congress began to establish larger and more centralized storage/repair facilities. By 1778, there were six Continental arsenals located in Pennsylvania (Philadelphia, Carlisle, Lancaster), Maryland (Head of Elk), New York (Albany), and Virginia (Manchester). (Moller I).
The British Long Land Brown Bess cast brass pattern; its screw penetrated the stock’s wrist to secure the escutcheon.

In 1780 Congress created the Philadelphia Supply Agencies, which included The French Factory, The Continental Armory, and related parts suppliers as major repair and production sources centered in that city.

Also by this late date, Congress had enough inventory to sell surplus arms to the states which, in turn, had expanded their own capacities. Virginia founded a State Gun Factory in Fredericksburg (1775), but most of the states resorted to encouraging private gunmakers in favorable locations, such as Pennsylvania’s Lancaster County, Connecticut’s Goshen and Virginia’s Rappahannock Forge.
A c. 1750 English fowler’s lock and trigger guard appear on a Connecticut musket, c. 1776-1780.

The American's most complete manufacturing resources were in Pennsylvania, which had important iron furnaces; but much of this capacity was focused on civilian long rifles.
A remounted English fowler trigger guard that had both ends cut off to minimize inletting work.

Identifying Muskets from the American Revolution

Because the great proportion of muskets made here during the Revolution mounted a mixture of reused or locally made parts, no standard American pattern emerged from the war.

This is why a modern collector is faced with the challenge to identify and date each component in order to determine the probable age of a gun. There are, however, certain indicators for associating smoothbore long arms with our relevant 1715 to 1783 period:

• Most period stocks had a round wrist; it became oval beginning about 1790.

• The musket stock usually included a chair rail crease or pinched channel along the lower edge of a raised comb.

• Locks prior to the 1790s were made with a rounded cock on a rounded lockplate, or a “flat on flat.”

• The lockplate ended with a tapered point for its tail versus the 19th century rounded form.

• The tip of a cock’s post was either stubby, notched or had a forward curl; after 1795, it often curled toward the rear.

• When present, sideplates were a single, complete piece; two separate components appeared after 1800.

• Many colonists had an aversion to sling swivels; some cannibalized European trigger guards retained an earlier hole drilled for the lower swivel, but the American stocks frequently omitted a hole for the second swivel in its fore-end.

• Components fabricated by the provincials were usually cruder and cheaper than European made elements, such as rolled sheet brass ramrod thimbles versus the British use of castings.

• Hunting fowlers, which normally extended their stock fore-ends to the muzzle often had them cut back and added a barrel stud to mount a bayonet for military service.
• Roller frizzens are found on some private European guns from our period, but they did not appear on issued long arms until about 1800.

• Most European military stocks were of black walnut or, occasionally, beech. The Americans also employed walnut, but, in addition, showed a preference for cherry and either plain or striped maple. On a limited basis, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will generously test pieces of wood (from inside your stock) to identify North American vs. European species.

No. 1: An Early Assembled Fowler/Musket, c. 1740

This American long arm, which predates the War for Independence, illustrates the Colonists’ early reliance upon reused mixed parts. Jacob Man of Wrentham, Mass., would later carry it as a Minuteman at Lexington/Concord and while a soldier in the 13th Massachusetts Continental Regiment through the New York-Trenton-Princeton campaigns (1775-1777), as well as at the Battle of Rhode Island (1778).
Notice the cut off and reshaped British buttplate, the early English trade escutcheon and a crude beavertail carving around the barrel tang of an American assembled c. 1740 long arm.

The American stock mounts a bulbous Dutch lock, a convex French S-shaped iron sideplate, a cut-down British brass buttplate, an English trade pattern escutcheon and a crude locally cast brass trigger guard secured by four nails. A French pinned fowler barrel is stocked to the muzzle, indicating the early lack of socket bayonets. Its iron ramrod is held by three thimbles, of which the bottom one is an old Queen Anne ribbed pattern, and the others simple rolled sheet brass.

No. 2: A Club Butt Country Fowler, c. 1715-1750

Although technically a hunting gun with the fore-end of its maple stock reaching to the muzzle of a European barrel, this family fowler, which omits all but the basic components, is typical of many of the existing arms carried into the field by the American forces early in the Revolution and by the militia throughout the war.
This sparse family hunting gun does not include the superfluous buttplate, escutcheon or side plate.

Its stock is the popular civilian club butt form, but the non-essential buttplate, escutcheon, sideplate, raised carving and bottom ramrod pipe are not included. The Queen Anne period, three-screw flat lock design with its reinforced cock has an unbalanced profile which suggests possible Colonist manufacture. An uneven, hand-forged iron trigger guard, however, is obviously American-made. The wooden rammer is secured in two upper, sheet-brass thimbles.

No. 3: Early French Components, c. 1760-1780

A French Model 1717 musket furnished most of the elements remounted on this American cherry stock. It might have been an arm captured during the Colonial Wars with French Canada, or an early arm among the foreign aid shipments during our Revolution.
A provincial gunsmith reused a long, thin French M. 1717 iron buttplate here, but added the popular American lobed carving around the barrel tang.

Included is the distinctive M.1717 lock with its vertical bridle, a typical French flat S-shaped sideplate, a double-pointed trigger guard, a long butt tang, and a 47” barrel. The double-strap upper barrel band from a French Model 1754 musket had a cone-shaped ramrod pipe brazed to the bottom by the Colonists who were probably influenced by similar Spanish and Dutch designs. The provincial restocker also provided a New England petal-type raised carving around the barrel tang.

No. 4: British Brown Bess Elements, c. 1775-1783

Major parts from a British Long Land 1756 Pattern musket, which was still the primary arm of their infantry early in the Revolution, were remounted by the rebels on a maple stock to create this firearm. In doing so, they reused the lock, trigger guard, sideplate, and buttplate, but omitted the original escutcheon, fourth rammer pipe and raised beavertail carving surrounding the barrel tang.
This remounted Long Land Brown Bess furniture omitted the original escutcheon and the stock’s beaver tail.

The lock area of the stock, in turn, was made thicker by the Colonists, probably to strengthen that most vulnerable location from fractures. The convex side plate is also inset deeper than normal. An American hand-forged iron ramrod includes a thick button head, while the original 46” Brown Bess barrel has been shortened by 5/8” reflecting the constant need to dress the muzzle walls as they became sharpened from prolonged rammer wear.

No. 5: Mixed English Fowler Parts, c. 1776-1780

The above musket is attributed to the American manufacturing town of Goshen in northwestern Connecticut near the state’s iron furnaces. That key site had numerous gunmakers and as many as 28 blacksmiths during the Revolutionary War. The sloping striped maple stock supports a minimum of abbreviated components, which suggests early wartime production.
A Connecticut c. 1776 musket that ignored raised carving and then cut off an old English fowler butt tang to reduce production time.

Its 44” barrel, for example, conforms to the state’s October 1776 specified length, while the lock is reused from a c. 1750 English Fowler, as are the straight-backed trigger guard and buttplate—both of which had their ends cut off to reduce inletting work. The plain sideplate was cut from sheet brass after tracing the outline of its lockplate. Three simple rolled sheet brass thimbles hold the wooden ramrod. The exposed muzzle mounts a bottom stud for a socket bayonet.

No. 6: Complete American Manufacture, c. 1770-1800

Bulky in profile, this sturdy musket appears to be entirely constructed in the Colonies. Its heavy round barrel is marked, “new hampshire militia” (not official stamping). The flat beveled lock, in turn, resembles a popular period form in continental Europe, yet the extended tail and rounded pan with an exterior bridle suggest provincial manufacture.
Notice that this Colonist gunmaker simplified the British “stepped” tang design (see No. 4) and disregarded other embellishments.

The locally created simple brass furniture also shows the design influence of Britain’s stepped butt tang (held here by two rear nails), France’s double-pointed trigger guard, and America’s penchant for triangular sideplates cut from sheet brass. The stock is thickened at its most vulnerable location, i.e., the adjacent lock cavity, side plate inletting, barrel breech, and side screws. An escutcheon and raised carving are omitted. Three sheet brass thimbles hold a hand-forged, iron button-headed rammer.

No. 7: A Remounted Hessian Musket, c. 1776-1785

A cannibalized Germanic long arm furnished most of the parts for this example. Reused on a heavy ash stock was its flat/beveled German lock with the typical internal screw holding the frizzen spring, a faceted flash pan, and a squared frizzen top. The wide (21⁄8” across) buttplate is held by the original pair of rear projecting convex screws, plus two flush wood screws through the tang.
Remounts from a Hessian musket are apparent in this wide arrow-headed tang and pointed escutcheon.

Its pointed escutcheon with a center screwhead, the arrow-tipped trigger guard, plus the common Hessian barrel having a front blade sight and a bottom bayonet stud complete the transfer. The Americans added their own simple sheet brass sideplate and three plain rolled thimbles that supplemented a remounted, faceted Germanic bottom pipe for the iron button head ramrod. No raised carving was provided.

No. 8: French Aid Influence, c. 1777-1783

This arm’s three American brass barrel bands with their rear-side springs copied the iron bands on the newly arriving French aid muskets. A British Long Land Brown Bess 1756 pattern, in turn, provided the lock (marked, “EDGE 1756”), trigger guard, side plate, escutcheon and barrel, which was shortened from 46” to approximate the French length of 44 3⁄4”.
Another American modification of the established Brown Bess stepped butt-tang pattern was employed here to join an original reclaimed escutcheon.

The colonists supplied a chestnut stock, a simplified butt plate resembling the English stepped design, and a hand-forged replacement cock still holding a crude locally knapped flint. As with many rebel muskets, no sling swivels were provided. Use as a hunting gun after the war is also apparent from the thinning of the bayonet stud to create a front sighting blade and a later dovetail near the breech to add a rear sight.
An American-made c. 1770-1800 pattern incorporating the double-pointed French influence (see No. 3).

The great majority of surviving muskets manufactured by the Colonists are not identified by their maker or source. Yet a number of the states did, at times, stamp their issued arms to indicate ownership especially early in the war. These included, “MB” or “CMB”, Massachusetts; “SC”, Connecticut; “CR”, Rhode Island; “PP” or “P”, Pennsylvania; “JS” or “PS”, Maryland; “SP”, New Jersey; “NH” New Hampshire; “CN”, New York; and “SGF” (State Gun Factory), Virginia.
A Colonist-produced flat lock with an extended tail was mounted in a New Hampshire long arm c. 1770-1800.

In addition, by 1777 European arms were arriving in bulk without government ownership identification and the Congress instructed each Continental regiment in the field to stamp or brand its muskets “US”, “U:STATES”, or “UNITED STATES”. Their compliance was spotty, but the practice continued in postwar arsenals (Guthman).
A typical Germanic double arrow design remounted from a Hessian longarm.

Out of the more than 300,000 long arms used by the American line troops during the War for Independence, probably in excess of 80,000 were the products of America’s scattered gunsmiths using mixed components.
This Hessian pattern, having a typical squared frizzen top, was reused in a provincial ash stock.

Yet, because the soldier’s round lead bullets were undersized to allow for powder fouling in the bore and the issued socket bayonets had to be individually fitted to each barrel, their odd pedigrees did not create the extreme hardships one might have expected.
Another former British Brown Bess component that now omits the original sling swivel as did many Colonial-assembled muskets.

As such, they filled a vital gap in arming the early regiments and continued as the major repair and maintenance sources for Washington’s troops until the war was won. The individual muskets illustrated in this article are considered typical of the variety of long arms produced by this homegrown cottage industry.
A British 1756 pattern Brown Bess lock, dated “EDGE 1756”, includes an American, hand-forged replacement cock.

After facing an almost impossible supply problem following Lexington/Concord, the committed Colonists vigorously pursued all available sources to create the ­desperately needed supply of arms. Today their mixed-pattern muskets comprise a special category for ­collectors and historians that ­testifies so eloquently to the “can do” spirit which made possible our ultimate victory.

Recommended References
Guthman, William H., “Committee of Safety Musket? Prove It,” Man at Arms, July/August 1979
Moller, George D., American Military Shoulder Arms, Vol. I, University Press of Colorado, Niwot, CO, 1993
Neumann, George C., Battle Weapons of the American Revolution, Scurlock Publishing Co., Texarkana, 1998
Whisker, James B., Arms Makers of Colonial America, Associated University Presses, Inc., Cranbury, NJ, 1992

Comments On This Article

More Like This From Around The NRA