Austrian Lorenz Question

Freeflighter

Cadet
Joined
May 1, 2018
Hello,
I would like to know about how many Lorenz rifles were actually used by the south in the Civil War. I know about 100,000 were imported to them but just how many were actually issued? I don't expect to find an exact answer but an approximation would be nice to have. Also when did they start to issue them? Thanks, Zach.
 
Hello,
I would like to know about how many Lorenz rifles were actually used by the south in the Civil War. I know about 100,000 were imported to them but just how many were actually issued? I don't expect to find an exact answer but an approximation would be nice to have. Also when did they start to issue them? Thanks, Zach.
Figure all that were imported. The CS did not have the largess to leave 1st class arms in the armory.
 
Noticed that picking up a Lorenz these days is getting much harder, especially if you want one that is in good condition. Used to be you could find a good one for under $1K, yet when I see them come up far less often these days, they are usually double that or more, even for average and poor condition. Is it just a swing in the market? Haven't really noticed any shift with your standard Springfields, Harpers Ferry or US contract arms much.
 
Welcome From THE Heart Of Dixie. I agree with @johan_steele every single ones was used.
 
Thank you everyone for your responses!

When did the South begin to use these rifles? Everything I looked up said they started to use them in 1862. Also I have read that they were more used in the west verses the east in the Civil War on both sides. Does that all sound correct?? Thank you all again for your help and giving such a nice welcome.
 
Yes the Army of Tennessee was armed with quite a bit of them in the western theatre. The Union army also had a bunch of them in various calibers .54-.58. The best quality Lorenz rifles you can find are the former Austrian military weapons with double eagles and regimental markings still in .54 cal.
 
Noticed that picking up a Lorenz these days is getting much harder, especially if you want one that is in good condition. Used to be you could find a good one for under $1K, yet when I see them come up far less often these days, they are usually double that or more, even for average and poor condition. Is it just a swing in the market? Haven't really noticed any shift with your standard Springfields, Harpers Ferry or US contract arms much.
Lorenzs' seem to have gotten more popular in written articles lately and this always seems to bring attention/interest in a marque with the resulting increases in prices.
 
Figure all that were imported. The CS did not have the largess to leave 1st class arms in the armory.
Interestingly enough Freemantle was astonished to see large amounts of Union Springfield Rifles left over from the Battle of Chancelorsville just rotting in the rain.
Leftyhunter
 
Thank you everyone for your responses!

When did the South begin to use these rifles? Everything I looked up said they started to use them in 1862. Also I have read that they were more used in the west verses the east in the Civil War on both sides. Does that all sound correct?? Thank you all again for your help and giving such a nice welcome.
The Wiki article on the Lorenz is that is was a copy of the Enfield P53. Many Austrian firms produced the Lorenz but the quality varied greatly. I know Wiki is not the gold standard source other might chime in.
Leftyhunter
 
The Wiki article on the Lorenz is that is was a copy of the Enfield P53. Many Austrian firms produced the Lorenz but the quality varied greatly. I know Wiki is not the gold standard source other might chime in.
Leftyhunter

It's not at all a copy of the Enfield. It is in fact a superior rifle when in its original .54 cal and compression bullets are used. From a historic standpoint, I would much prefer to command a rifle company armed with Type 1 Lorenz rifles vs almost any other 3 band musket rifle of the period. The sighting system was very simple.
 
It's not at all a copy of the Enfield. It is in fact a superior rifle when in its original .54 cal and compression bullets are used. From a historic standpoint, I would much prefer to command a rifle company armed with Type 1 Lorenz rifles vs almost any other 3 band musket rifle of the period. The sighting system was very simple.
True I misquoted the article in terms of the Loenz being a copy of the Enfield P53.
However the article stated it was very similar to the Enfield and Springfield.
Leftyhunter
 
Interestingly enough Freemantle was astonished to see large amounts of Union Springfield Rifles left over from the Battle of Chancelorsville just rotting in the rain.
Leftyhunter
And people wonder why I put such stock in wars being won by the least incompetent army.
 
Last edited:
Interesting. No doubt Don Dixon will weigh in with more specifics, but I recall in one of the Suppliers to the Confederacy Volume III (footnotes p 407), the contracts were entered in mid-1862, deliveries obviously later. According to correspondence from Josiah Gorgas to Secy of War James Seddon 27,000 Austrian Rifles (an awfully round number) had been imported by the end of 1862. Another 23,000 remained in Nassau awaiting shipment. A further 30,000 were in Vienna awaiting payment. If the math is right, that's about 80,000 M-54 Austrian rifles.

From there the paper trail goes cold. Who knows?
 
There are indications that the Confederates had Austrian weapons almost from the beginning of the war.

LTC Broun, who was appointed commander of the Richmond arsenal in 1863, recalled that "With the exception of a few thousand rifles, the [Confederate] soldiers at the beginning of the war were armed with the old smoothbore muskets and with old Austrian and Belgian rifles imported." LTC Mallet wrote that: "In the scramble of the early part of the war to obtain at once arms of some kind, both at home and abroad, a most heterogeneous collection was gathered. There were in the hands of the troops Springfield and Enfield muskets, Mississippi and Maynard rifles, Hall's and Sharp's carbines, and arms of English, German, Austrian and Belgian manufacture, of many different calibers. I had at one time samples of more than twenty patterns of infantry weapons alone."

The first known significant Confederate shipment of European arms – a mix of more than 3,500 Enfield and Austrian arms from Confederate government, private, and state purchases – left Liverpool aboard the British steamer Bermuda. Coaling at Falmouth on 22 August 1861, Bermuda sailed directly to the Confederacy, arriving at Savannah on September 18th. This is the first recorded shipment of Austrian arms, and is well before MAJ Huse's known purchases of Austrian arms began.

In February 1862 the 50th Illinois Infantry occupied Fort Henry after that fort was surrendered to MG Grant. Company B discovered among the captured arms, a lot of new Austrian rifle muskets, which they obtained. This is the first reference to Confederate troops in the field having Muster 1854 rifles, and was well before Huse's known purchases of Austrian arms began.

On 31 May 1862 S. Isaac Campbell and Company wrote to Confederate Secretary of State Benjamin that Huse had been to Vienna, where he had seen 30,000 "very superior rifles, the last Austrian pattern." S. Isaac Campbell had agreed to purchase these arms, and would dispatch them, along with 10,000 Enfield rifles from London. Huse subsequntly claimed that all told he purchased 100,000 Muster 1854 rifles from the Austrian Army, and an analysis of the crate numbers from cargo manifests and Federal Navy captures indicates that this number is probably correct, or at least very close. However, it was some months before the weapons were incrementally run into Bermuda and the Bahamas, and then run incrementally into the Confederacy. A few never left the islands [shipping luxury goods was more important to the Confederate aristocrats than shipping arms], and some were captured by the Federal Navy. Based upon the markings on the shipping containers, other Federal Navy captures were clearly not part of Huse's purchases. Some Confederate units in the field had Austrian arms in quantity before Huse's shipments arrived in the islands and the Confederacy.

It is possible to calculate some of the quantities of Huse's Muster 1854s that were run into Wilmington, and I know how many of Huse's Austrian arms the Federal Navy captured. There is still a significant delta between those totals and Huse's claim of 100,000 purchased. It is also very clear that Austrian arms were coming into the South from other sources well before Huse's purchases. The problem is from whom?, how did the jobbers assemble them?, what models?, and how many? How many made it through?...A whole lot more than anyone has previously thought.

An issue which complicates analysis is Confederate captures from the Federals, and Federal captures from the Confederates.

Regards,
Don Dixon
 
Last edited:

Learn About Us
About CivilWarTalk
Contact the Webmaster
Meet the Staff
Link to CivilWarTalk
Join Our Community
Register
Browse Forums
View Today's Discussions
Search the Forum
Get Help
FAQ
Student Guide
Forum Rules & Etiquette
Copyright / DMCA

     Contact Us CivilwarTalk on Facebook CivilWarTalk on YouTube CivilWarTalk on Twitter RSS Feed

Bringing the American Civil War and More to Life.
© 1999 - , CIVILWARTALK, LLC - Site Version 10.0

SlaveryTalk.com - SecessionTalk.com - CivilWarTalk.com - ReconstructionTalk.com
Back
Top