• This community needs YOUR help today. We rely 100% on Supporting Memberships to fund our efforts. With the ever increasing fees of everything, we need help. We need more Supporting Members, today. Please invest back into this community. I will ship a few decals too in addition to all the account perks you get.



    Sign up here: https://www.muzzleloadingforum.com/account/upgrades

Unique Remington Rear sight

Muzzleloading Forum

Help Support Muzzleloading Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
That looks like a Remington to me, not an open top Colt Navy . Am I wrong? After all my kids and grand kids tell me that I am old enough to have been chased by a dinosaur, so I must have been around during the ACW.
 
Bannerman had a lot of Remingtons and he found he could sell a "CSA" marked gun for a lot more so guess what? The engraved backstrap attributing the revolver to Gilmore is on a pistol "made by the Southern firm of Leech & Rigdon. The revolver was a copy of the Model 1858 Colt Navy Revolver." The photo clearly shows that it's not a Remington.

I think you meant to write the photo clearly shows it is not a "Colt Copy" made by Leech and Rigdon?

BTW, unless there is additional engraving on the fore strap, the engraving on the back strap does not read as the article text says it does. Even so, since the strap was most likely engraved AFTER the war, then it could also have been a mistake by the person who had it engraved or less likely, the engraver himself.

Proven provenance is always the key to authenticating who owned a firearm. I don't see how the revolver was authenticated to Colonel Gilmor. Though I agree one should always use some skepticism with original guns, I would not completely rule out it was owned by Colonel Gilmor until it is shown there is no documentation authenticating it. That said, I would not buy the piece or the story, without such documentation.

Gus
 
"made by the Southern firm of Leech & Rigdon. The revolver was a copy of the Model 1858 Colt Navy Revolver." All in quotes was copied directly from the site. It's a little confusing and I had hoped to show that the photos and text were somewhat ambiguous. The text was under the photo of what is obviously a Colt style revolver but a first look it would seem the author was describing what he thought was the backstrap of the Remington and then calling it a L&R. After looking at the article a second or third time I believe he had moved on from the Remington to the single photo and description of the L&R. The way the photos were ordered on the site at first it seemed the last photo, the L&R, was included in the series of Remington photos.

As an aside I have a brace of brass framed revolvers which were the personal property of General Backstreet. Their value is somewhat diminished by the fact that very few have ever heard of him. He kept a very low profile throughout the War.
 
"made by the Southern firm of Leech & Rigdon. The revolver was a copy of the Model 1858 Colt Navy Revolver." All in quotes was copied directly from the site. It's a little confusing and I had hoped to show that the photos and text were somewhat ambiguous. The text was under the photo of what is obviously a Colt style revolver but a first look it would seem the author was describing what he thought was the backstrap of the Remington and then calling it a L&R. After looking at the article a second or third time I believe he had moved on from the Remington to the single photo and description of the L&R. The way the photos were ordered on the site at first it seemed the last photo, the L&R, was included in the series of Remington photos.

As an aside I have a brace of brass framed revolvers which were the personal property of General Backstreet. Their value is somewhat diminished by the fact that very few have ever heard of him. He kept a very low profile throughout the War.

Thanks for clearing that up for me. LOL about the Longstreet Revolvers!!!

Gus
 
Back
Top