The second most commonly imported European military arm during the U.S. Civil War after the P-53 Enfield long and short rifle(s) was the Model 1854 Austrian Rifle. Estimates of three hundred thousand or so were imported by both sides during the early to mid-1860s.
There is a certain lack of understanding that has evolved around the Model 1854 Austrian rifle or “Lorenz” as it is often called today. It was simply called the “Austrian Rifle” in the 1860s by U.S. and C.S. soldiers and perhaps sometimes by other less complimentary names.
To begin with, the 1854 Austrian Rifle was designed to work with a solid lead projectile invented in 1852 by Josef Lorenz (1814–1879), an Austrian Artillery officer working at the government arsenal in Vienna. Regardless of what you may have read elsewhere, Lorenz was not a gunsmith in Vienna nor a Lieutenant in the Army.
Technically his highest rank was Captain of Artillery and as such, this is how he should be referenced by the dictates of military protocol. Josef Lorenz apparently developed an understanding of ballistics from his experience in the field with rifled artillery, of which the Austrians produced some of the best of the middle of the nineteenth-century. All artillery used by the Austrians was manufactured at the Wien (Vienna) Arsenal, where Lorenz was employed.
The standard bore size for the Austrian Rifle was designed by Lorenz to be 13.9 mm, which was about .547 caliber. Apparently, the correct ammunition for it was not imported. Instead, the U.S. 1841 Percussion Rifle, better known as “The Mississippi” (.54 caliber) round balls were sometimes issued to be used with the Austrian Rifle. They measured .535 and rattled around in the barrel of a 13.9 mm Austrian rifle like a BBs in a box.
The correct round for the Austrian Rifle was not the conical Minié ball either, but rather the Lorenz/Wilkinson solid base bullet. Due to the design of Austrian rifles using solid lead ammunition in a smaller caliber, the trajectory was much flatter. With incorrect ammunition of the wrong size, accuracy was negatively impacted. The following quote is from an 1861 article from an English engineering journal on how the Lorenz projectile and rifling system worked:
“Another exactly opposite system, from the hollow base conical Minié ball, of making the projectile fill the grooves is by compression—that is to say, it is not expanded by the explosion of the powder, but squeezed together longitudinally. This system
Model 1854 Austrian Rifle lock assembly, note numbered parts (37) and no “tumbler link.” This is an example of the ‘old style’ so-called hook lock where the mainspring rests directly on the tumbler, an antiquated design even at the time.
possesses the same advantages as the Minié as regards simplicity and convenience of loading, with a great reduction of recoil, through the successive filling of the grooves by the bullet. The peculiarity of this system is that it was simultaneously invented by two gentlemen in 1852, an Austrian artillery officer of the name of Lorenz, and an English gunsmith, Wilkinson, hence the system is fairly known as the Lorenz/Wilkinson. It has been most extensively employed in Austria, where, since 1854, the Chasseurs have been gradually armed with short rifles of that pattern. They were employed in Italy in 1859, and that they are effective in the hands of expert shots was proved by the great loss the French suffered in officers.”
By mid-1863, the Union was either re-rifling large numbers of Austrian rifles to .58 caliber or ordering them made by commercial contractors to that bore diameter and issuing them (mostly) to Western Theater but also Eastern Federal troops. It is not uncommon to find Federal units equipped with U.S. Model rifle-muskets, P-53 Enfield long rifles, and the M1854 Lorenz, in .577 or .58 caliber, all at the same time.
Private Orrin Cook of the 22nd Massachusetts Co. B noted in his diary, “Some of our boys got Austrian rifles, some Enfield, and others Springfield. I got the Enfield.” There are of course recorded issues related to the scarcity of spare parts, but at least they mostly used the same size ammunition.
The Confederacy also imported Model 1854 Austrian rifles, and roughly 30,000 were issued to the Army of Tennessee in mid-1864. They were part of an earlier shipment which was condemned as “a lot of trash...in horrible condition” upon arrival in Nassau in 1863 and sent to be refurbished and repaired. The rough numbers of C.S. imports are usually given as the awfully round figure of 100,000 (by Caleb Huse).
Upon closer examination, one can only account for about 80,000 *documented* Model 1854 Austrian rifles purchased by Confederate agents. The backing for that is found in the footnotes in the chapter on the Model 1854 Austrian Rifle in an upcoming book (by the author) Suppliers to the Confederacy Volume III: British and European Imported Quartermaster Goods, Artillery and Other Ordnance.
The majority of Model 1854 Austrian rifles in the U.S. Civil War were the Type I infantry version with block sights, 1,335 mm in length (close to fifty-three inches) with a 945 mm (just over thirty-seven inches) barrel and a total weight of 3.9 kilograms (eight pounds). The metal parts were finished in a variety of ways. Some later contracts were ordered “finished as the Enfield,” which most likely meant “blued.” Others were noted by soldiers as “bright and shiny as a fifty-cent piece.” As with all Grade Two, hand-made arms, the Model 1854 Austrian rifle would not interchange parts. For this reason, the individual parts of the rifle are numbered so they could be more easily matched up during final assembly at the factory. Considering the lack of sophistication in the design of the Model 1854, it had other positive qualities that Civil War soldiers appreciated. Compared to the U.S. model rifle-musket, the shorter barrel length meant the round could be rammed home in one continuous push, rather than tapped down in stages. The left side of the stock (often) featured a cheek rest, which was a nice piece of human engineering, at least on most of the Austrian Government rifles. The commercial gun-makers filling commercial contracts later in the war often left the cheek rest off the stock to cut costs. The 1854 Austrian Rifle was a pound lighter in overall weight than either the U.S. Model 1861 rifle-musket or the P-53 Enfield long rifle, a fact much appreciated by the soldiers that carried them.
The Lorenz was marked on the lock plate with the last three digits of the year of production. For example, “857” would be a rifle made in 1857. Like the U.S. Model 1861 rifle-musket, the Model 1854 Austrian rifle stocks did not have a ramrod “spoon” in the stock, relying instead on a swell near the tip to hold it in place. This was the reason for double strap top barrel band and trumpet shaped thimble, which would otherwise appear to be there for decoration. The barrel had a very slow rate of twist made to work with the projectile designed for it. The “hook” lock was designed so the mainspring rested directly on the tumbler, in other words, it lacked the tumbler link used in the P-53 Enfield and U.S. model rifle-muskets.
Recently, an inquiry directed to reproduction gun-maker Davide Pedersoli about the possibility for a quality reproduction of the Civil War-era Lorenz was answered as follows:
“Thank you for your email and for the continuous confidence you are giving to our products.
The Lorenz rifle is a project we are currently having working on and we forecast to be ready to introduce it at the end of 2016. If you want to reserve one to be among the first customers to receive it, we suggest you contact one of the following two companies:
Based on the current cost of other Civil War reproduction muskets in the Pedersoli Silver line, the Lorenz will probably be in the $1,000 to $1,200 range when it first comes out. Whatever the case, it’s an option for an Italian made reproduction we have not had available before.
In the recent past, the Italian reproduction gun makers were not interested in having another European rifle or rifle-musket that competed directly with their Enfields (in their eyes). This new product is a step toward meeting the pent-up demand in the market for a quality reproduction of the Model 1854 Austrian Lorenz.
In addition to Civil War living history enthusiasts, Pedersoli is popular with the N-SSA black powder target shooting community, and they are also well known in the International target match competitions in Europe. They want to be the preferred choice for the living history community but “live fire” target shooters are their primary focus.
It remains to be seen if their Lorenz will have the correct historical features such as the hook lock configuration, different bore diameter and rifling system that made the original 1854 Austrian Lorenz so unique.
A Self-Made Man: The Political Life of Abraham Lincoln, 1809-1849. By Sidney Blumenthal. Illustrated, photos, notes, bibliography, index, 556 pp., 2016, Simon & Schuster, www.simonandschuster.com, $35.
Readers might ask: Do we really need another biography of Abraham Lincoln? Some might answer that not only do we not need another Lincoln biography, we do not need another book on Lincoln, period.
Those of us who study and write about Lincoln, however, are always willing to read another Lincoln book, especially a biography. We like to relearn something through a new or different perspective. This is what I sought in A Self-Made Man.
This book, the first of a projected four-volume Lincoln biography, is by Sidney Blumenthal, a journalist and high-level political advisor. He has witnessed up close the controversies and vicissitudes of American politics. It is this experience that shapes Blumenthal’s study.
First and foremost, this is a political biography of Lincoln. Blumenthal clearly admires Lincoln as a politician, and this volume covers the period in which Lincoln honed his political skills.
The story Blumenthal tells is not new; it’s been told many times in countless studies of Lincoln. He covers fully Lincoln’s tenure as an Illinois state legislator, his anonymous political writings in the Sangamon
Antietam Battlefield Guides The 1862 Maryland Campaign 2-8 hour tours or customized to your interest Tours of Antietam Harpers Ferry South Mountain Shepherdstown
Journal and the Illinois Journal, his competition with Stephen A. Douglas, and his congressional career.
The story is conveyed in a well-written and fast-paced manner that is a joy to read. In fact, A Self- Made Man is more than a biography of Lincoln. It is really a “life and times” treatment of the first 40 years of Lincoln’s life.
There are several chapters in which Lincoln disappears completely from the narrative. Two examples will suffice. Chapter 5 concentrates on John Quincy Adams’s battles against slavery during his post-presidential years in Congress. Chapter 16 is devoted solely to William H. Seward and Thurlow Weed.
This is not a criticism. I understand Blumenthal’s intent to provide background he believes essential to understanding the political environment in which Lincoln operated.
Blumenthal opens and closes his book with Lincoln’s 1856 quote, “I used to be a slave,” to put Lincoln’s antislavery position in context. He took a moderate position that rejected abolitionists’ immediacy and pro-slavery advocates’ slavery-isgood arguments.
Blumenthal presents a generally accurate depiction of Lincoln’s views of slavery during the 1840s — a position that remained fairly consistent until his presidency.
One aspect of A Self-Made Man that may raise eyebrows is Blumenthal’s views concerning Mary Todd Lincoln. According to him, Mary was essential to Lincoln’s success as a politician.
As far as Blumenthal is concerned, Mary, just as ambitious as her husband, helped make Lincoln what he became: “there would have been no Lincoln without Mary” and Lincoln “knew it.”
I look forward to the next installment of Blumenthal’s work but will be surprised if he discovers anything new about Lincoln. Nevertheless, I recommend A Self-Made Man.
Reviewer Thomas A. Horrocks is an independent scholar who has written, edited and co-edited seven books, including Lincoln’s Campaign Biographies (2014) and The Annotated Lincoln (2016).
Observing Hancock at Gettysburg: The General’s Leadership through Eyewitness Accounts. By Paul E. Bretzger. Illustrated, photos, maps, notes, bibliography, index, 246 pp., 2016, McFarland, www.mcfarlandpub.com, $29.95 softcover.
Paul Bretzger’s book on Winfield Scott Hancock is an excellent addition to the literature on Gettysburg in general and on Hancock in particular.
Although his reputation may have faded in recent decades, Hancock was long regarded as a larger-thanlife, outstanding Union leader in the Battle of Gettysburg. This book helps fill in the blanks as to why and how he was such a domineering personality in the Army of the Potomac during that battle.
The author captures the essence of Hancock by focusing on the general’s leadership qualities and performance.
Bretzger fulfills his purpose to once again bring Hancock to the forefront of important commanders at Gettysburg. He puts it succinctly in his introduction: “This book seeks to reclaim Hancock’s true historical importance and explain the qualities he had that enabled him to be so important.”
Of course, Hancock’s activities during the battle provide much material for readers to examine for the purpose of analyzing his leadership. He played a significant role in each of the three days of fighting.
On Day One he was sent to Gettysburg by George Meade to take command and control of the army’s on-scene forces and determine where additional arriving forces should be dispersed.
He arrived there as the Union army’s 1st and 3rd Corps were retreating through Gettysburg to Cemetery Hill. Amid the chaos of the disintegrating military situation, Hancock’s commanding presence and decisive actions had a calming influence on harried soldiers.
On Day Two he was thrown into the breach once again by Meade, who asked him to take command of the 3rd Corps for the wounded Daniel Sickles.
As the battle reached its peak late that afternoon, Hancock ordered the 1st Minnesota to charge the enemy. Their costly (82 percent casualties) and fateful charge into Gen. Cadmus Wilcox’s attacking Alabamians helped stem the final and most dangerous Confederate onslaught that day.
Finally, on Day Three Hancock was once again the calming influence on his men as he slowly rode his horse up and down the Union line prior to and during Pickett’s Charge
A Virginia officer in an Alabama regiment, commander the Army of Northern Virginia’s elite sharpshooters, Eugene Blackford’s correspondence spans nearly the entire war and allows a modern reader to see this turbulent era through the eyes of someone who lived it. His accounts of the sharpshooters; battles like Chancellorsville and Gettysburg; camp life; army leaders; and national and regimental politics are detailed and exceptional. Volume 1 of 3. Special 20% prepublication discount • 6x9 cloth, 235 pages, 10 Maps,
30 illustrations, footnotes, index, bib. – CFS Press, Asheville, NC
Suppliers to the Confederacy: More British Imported Arms & Accoutrements Volume II By Craig L. Barry & David C. Burt
until he suffered a serious wound.
To help readers appreciate the significant impact Hancock had at Gettysburg, Bretzger relies heavily on written accounts from those who fought there. He has done an admirable job ferreting out these primary documents from the vast literature that exists on Gettysburg.
The book accurately describes Hancock’s actions throughout the battle and how those around him reacted to his presence. It is interesting to note that those reactions were universally positive, reaffirming the author’s contention that Hancock’s reputation should be reinstated to the high level it had immediately after the battle.
This is recommended reading for those with any interest in Hancock, Gettysburg or the Army of the Potomac.
Reviewer Jay Jorgensen has written several books about Gettysburg, including Gettysburg’s Bloody Wheatfield. He is a Superior Court Judge in New Jersey.