In that time, there simply were no decent wide-angle lenses. The Goerz Hypergon (ultra wide large format lens) was only developed around 1900 and still had lots of flaws. There may have been some moderate wide-angle lenses before (maybe 35-40mm equivalent for 35mm film), but those had massive vignetting, because they were basically scaled down versions of lenses with normal focal length. Truly usable wide- and ultrawide lenses with completely new formulas only came about in the 1930s and 40s, as far as I know.
So, yes, a normal focal length is most probable, maybe a little on the long side, to enhance the image circle and only use the "sweet spot" for the picture... not an uncommon practice in the early days of photography.
Especially stereo cameras tend to have a normal lens, because that's what the human eye is used to see. These pictures where viewed in stereo viewers were each eye only sees one of the pictures. Just try to take stereo pictures with a wide angle lens and view them that way - it's confusing to say the least, because it's not, what the brain expects the eyes to see.
What exactly is considered standard for the camera in question is of course dependant on the picture format. There is a difference between whole plate and quarter plate, no matter if it's stereo or not. And I don't even know, if there were standardized sizes back then. Probably not.