Saxon Model 1857 - Unhandy?

[Michael Comer]

I was looking at EOG - Union today and on page 36-37 there is a photo of an 1857 Saxon model musket. The caption reads: "...the .58 caliber Saxon Model 1857 was considered unhandy but reliable by the Yankee foot soldiers..."

So I got to looking closer at the picture to see why it would have been 'unhandy'. It looks like a typical musket to me, perhaps a bit shorter than the Lorenz and French 1859 pictured on the same page. It's a 3 bander with what appears to be a pretty typical percussion system for firing.

So why was it considered to be unhandy? Has anyone studied these enough to enlighten me as to what it was about this firearm that warranted the label?

[csuniforms]

Re: Saxon Model 1857 - Unhandy?

This firearm was issued to the 14th and 16th Wisconsin Infantry early in the War and they themselves considered it a first class weapon. At Shiloh a soldier in the 16th Wisconsin, in the original line of skirmishers watched as the Confederates came marching down the Corinth Road, ranks deep, and in the thousands, their front he described as a "V" shape. They began firing their Saxons the bullets would pass through 2 or 3 men at a time.
They are rather heavy and cumbersome, but the Wisconsin boys sought to keep them as long as they were serviceable.

CSuniforms
Tom Arliskas

[Johan Steele]

Re: Saxon Model 1857 - Unhandy?

I handled one in as issued condition at a Gunshow some time back and can understand why the men thought them "cumbersome" it's balance was different than either the Springfield or Enfield. I will only say different not better or worse. All in all I remember liking it.

The seller commented that it was a real pig to break down but I don't know why that would be true.

[Craig L Barry]

Re: Saxon Model 1857 - Unhandy?

Perhaps the soldiers who found it "unhandy" (whatever that means) were promised US Model 1861s ("Springfields") and were disappointed to get the Dresden rifles? We really don't know what was meant by the statement. In checking it out, I could not find any documented period accounts where soldiers issued the Dresden (Saxon) rifle were any more critical of it than usual, or made any reference to its handiness. The Wisconsin boys who had the Dresden seemed to like it all right.

In terms of some of its styling features, the Dresden is mildly reminiscent of other European arms like the M-1854 Lorenz, and yet quite different in detail. Looking at the rifle closely, a couple odd features do stand out. Aside from the bore diameter of .58, it is largely "non-standard" otherwise, at least in terms of appearance. Back lock assembly, two sets of double barrel bands (top and middle), bayonet lug beneath the barrel, and IIRC a bit heavy for its size...though nothing compared to our modern Springfield/Enfield reproductions. Or perhaps there was some confusion in identity on the part of the author with complaints made about the earlier (obsolete) Dresden .71 smoothbore muskets? It's hard to say what that comment in E of G might have meant, really. The statement is not referenced with a footnote, though it seems to suggest origin from a first hand account by US troops issued the rifle.

If anybody knows about, or finds any first hand period account of "Yankee foot soldiers" explaining what was "unhandy" about the Dresden rifle, please enlighten the rest of us.

[Taji04]

Old thread, but I have an M51 Saxon Dresden rifled musket (below, SN 3413) which is just slightly longer than the 57. Unhandy I think means heavy. Much heavier than a '61 Springfield. Mr. Steele is right about the balance, it just feels different and more unwieldy than the '61, '63, and the Enfield. The M51 Saxon was considered a first tier weapon comparable to the '61 Springfield performance wise. The Saxon Army coughed theirs up to U.S. agents after they entered into an alliance with other German states that were using the Lorenz. Those German states wanted Saxony to have the same weapon as them in order to simplify ammunition logistics (.54 cal Lorenz vs .58 cal M51). The ~28,000+ weapons wound up here and were issued to mostly Western regiments.

My Saxon is a variation as it does have a Lorenz rear sight original to the musket because the rear sight notch in the barrel is unmodified, narrow, and proof marked on the notch. Most Saxons have a 2 leaf rear sight that fits into a much larger sight notch that is almost twice as wide.

The 30th Wisconsin was issued the M51 also and used them as they pushed the Dakota tribes west during the Dakota War of 62. My ancestor was in Co G, 30th Wisconsin.