Socks over your pants?

[PvtHull48thovi]

Re: Socks over your pants?

I would like to take the time to thank all of you for your replies. Ive been re enacting for along time as well, my dad raising me into it since I was 3 (Im 24 now) as it were. And Id like to think my impression is pretty spot on 99 percent of the time. It always amazes me that the most obscure questions that I have usually get great responses on this website along with a tumultuous amount of views. I don't post these questions looking for insane amounts of views, but I do like the fact that I seem to always ask a question that everyone seems to want to know about themselves. So Again, to everyone that answered the question and posted, thank you. It is truly appreciated it.

What Ive learned,

Its a rareity in of itself. Only truly to be done (it seems) on a campaign.
It is a personal preference for some
And It is one of the harder things to document via photographs.

Thank you all Gentleman,

Sincerely,
Shelby Hull

[jakebook]

Re: Socks over your pants?

I just saw a book at Barnes and Noble that ended up not getting, but there was a studio portrait in it of a guy with his socks up over his pants. But I cannot find the picture online.

EDIT : Just noticed someone posted it above!

[Coatsy]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Shelby,

That is what this forum is for. I was surprised with the amount of photos showing socks tucked in. You learn/see something new/different every day.

[Secesh]

Re: Socks over your pants?

In "Letters to Amanda; The Letters of Marion Hill Fitzpatrick", Fitzpatrick informed his wife that he had received the new trowsers she sent him, and that he has cut his old ones off at the knee, so that he may slip the leg portions over his new trowsers, tying them at the knee, and not fray the bottoms of his new ones while on campaign....

[jake.koch]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Purely conjecture but it seems that the situations where it would/may have been more appropriate to blouse or tuck the trousers into socks may not be as well documented by photographs because those were the times photographers were not around as much such as on campaign, in combat, etc., My gut instinct tells me it was done maybe a bit more then we think, however with no proof to back it up who knows.

[JerseyMutt]

Re: Socks over your pants?

I'm with you Jake. While period photographs are great, they only show a small sliver of life back then. We then try to fill those gaps with period letters and other writings, but my gut is that there were a lot of mundane or inconsequential things (that may very well have occurred) that just simply weren't written about. It would be akin to me e-mailing my wife while I was deployed and telling her that I brushed my teeth on that day.

[Secesh]

Re: Socks over your pants?

I personally believe it was done while on campaign, or going into combat, as Mr. Koch stated, but wasn't documented by photographs because it simply wasn't feasible. Photographers and their cumbersome equipment simply weren't around to document it. I would find it hard to believe that the Union soldier seated by the wrecked railroad (in the previous shared image), was the only soldier to do this or think of doing it...And if he did it, surely others did also.

[jake.koch]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Tommy, I think you hit the nail on the head. How many things do we do throughout the day that we wouldn't bother to tell someone in a phone conversation because it is so mundane? You and brushing your teeth was a good example, think of all the things we know about from the period material culture-wise that is never mentioned in diaries or letters. I don't think the infantryman in the postwar army out on the frontier invented the concept either - I am definately not advocating we all start blousing or tucking or whatever you want to call it but it is interesting to dig a little deeper into the subject.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: Socks over your pants?

http://books.google.com/books?id=sIovAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22pants%20in%22%20socks%20OR%20stockings&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q=%22pants%20in%22%20socks%20OR%20stockings&f=false

"One of our officers is worthy of mention: during that winter he used to appear on the parade ground at the morning drill with his head in a woolen tippet, his pants in his socks, and his toes in a pair of slippers. He would watch the drill, and seeing something wrong, he would rip out a volley of orders, at the same time pointing a clay pipe at us in such a manner, that if Barnum or Dan Rice could have seen and heard him, his fortune would have been made. The name of Rathbone was frequently heard to echo through the camp."

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: Socks over your pants?

http://books.google.com/books?id=nMw-AAAAYAAJ&dq=marching%20pantaloons%20intitle%3Ahints%20inauthor%3Agould&pg=PA54#v=onepage&q=marching%20pantaloons%20intitle:hints%20inauthor:gould&f=false

"Another habit of the soldiers was that of tucking the bottom of the pantaloons into their stocking-legs when it was dusty or muddy, or when they were cold. This is something worth remembering. You will hardly walk a week without having occasion to try it."

- - - Updated - - -

From G.O. 76 of 1879: "The universal custom on marches of tying the pantaloons at the bottom and pulling the socks over them to save the feet and ankles from dust, which chafes them, and to prevent the pantaloons from flapping' about the legs when saturated with mud, has, together with many communications to the Board, suggested leggings as a necessary part of the uniform of foot-soldiers for field service. The Board, therefore, recommends brown canvas leggings, in four sizes, to correspond with shoes, of the pattern submitted, to be secured by a strap under the instep, to extend up the leg to the bend of the knee and to be fastened by buckles and straps."

http://books.google.com/books?id=ECgtAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22socks%20over%22%20soldiers&pg=RA3-PA19#v=onepage&q=%22socks%20over%22%20soldiers&f=false

[Jim of The SRR]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Blouse or not to blouse and how common either way is debatable. One thing that Mike Jones stated is worth restating…."it would NOT be acceptable, such as formal functions, garrison, parade, etc." This is something I see the mainstream do all the time at formations. It is not accurate and the NCOs should correct it before marching to parade, etc.

Jim Butler

[BobRoeder]

Re: Socks over your pants?

FWIW, here's a fascinating article by Fred Adolphus from his excellent site titled The Confederate Soldier at Fort Mahone, Battle of Petersburg, April 2, 1865. I would recommend reading the entire article, but for the purposes of this thread, Mr. Adolphus concludes from his examination of the photographic sample of Confederate casualties at Ft. Mahone in April 1865 - "Four had their pant legs tucked into their socks, one had his pant cuffs folded up outside the socks, and eight had the pant legs worn outside the socks (not tucked inside)" a few were also barefoot so it is not possible to know how they wore their shoes & socks. Excellent photographs accompany the descriptions.

http://www.adolphusconfederateuniforms.com/the-confederate-soldier-of-fort-mahone.html

Cheers,

[PvtTrey]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Bob you beat me to it. I was just going to link the Adolphus article. It's obvious in period photos that it was an acceptable practice in the field to blouse your trousers. Is it overdone in the hobby? Who's to say for sure? I'm certain that in parade and dress functions it's not appropriate, but if we know anything about the common soldier in any time, it's his ability to adapt and make the best of a bad situation. We don't get 1/1000th of the experience at a weekend event dealing with critters like they did. Like anything else, necessity becomes the mother of invention.

Erik P. Jacobs

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Socks over your pants?

Hallo!

It may be a chicken or the egg argument, but...

It may be possible that the seemingly higher incidence of "tucked in' trousers may have been a reaction to the muddy trenches? More "loose" fitting trousers can become annoying or uncomfortable when they get caked with mud and either start flopping around or growing stiff.
(Versus the other side of the coin where the tops of the shoes being exposed leads to mud, dirt, and water more easily getting inside one's shoes.)

Curt