wearing accouterments

[billmatt04]

Hello all,
I don't know if this subject has been brought up before (if it has appologize), but I used the "search" option and did not come up with anything. My question is, how exactly should a cartridge box with a sling and a belt be worn? A fellow reenactor with the 36th Illinois told me that he had read a letter from a soldier form the 36th home saying that the leather belt was run through the straps on the back of the box and that the sling was simply there to relieve some of the weight of a full cartridge box. This makes a lot of sense, but I see few reenactors doing it. Most throw over the box and sling, then strap the belt over the top of it (myself included). Does anyone know about this practice, how frequently it was done, and possibly some images to back up either practice? I am currently looking through all of the booxs I have and searching the web for images that can support either practice. I would greatly appreciate any help that any one can offer me.

Sincerely,
Matthew Cassady
104th Illinois Vol. Inf.

[MarkTK36thIL]

Re: wearing accouterments

Howdy Matt,
A while ago(not sure when- but a unit member knows), a local newspaper in Ottawa, IL printed letters home from a soldier in the 36th during the actions around Franklin. In them, he wrote in detail of his accouterment wear. This was something done commonly with the 36th, however, I am not familiar with the 104th or any other unit for that matter. If anyone does have a subscription to the Ottawa Daily Times, please contact me via PM. I haven't been able to get to Ottawa nor willing to spend $30 for a six month subscribtion to use their search button.

[Jimmayo]

Re: wearing accouterments

Cartridge boxes were worn both ways. The army didn't like the soldiers wearing them by the belt only. Caused some internal problems with the weight of the box on the belt around the body. If you can get a copy of Paul Johnsons Cartridge Box book it has information to support the wearing of boxes with and without the shoulder strap. I have a set of accrouterments on this page http://www.angelfire.com/ma4/j_mayo/relics.html
which was worn on the belt only.

[20thMainerCampaigner]

Re: wearing accouterments

I've seen quite a few pictures with soldiers wearing their cartridge boxes on their belt. I wear mine over the shoulder and on the belt, sometimes it's easier, especially if i'm wearing my blanket or carrying my knapsack. The only problem I run into with wearing it on my early war belt is that the leather keeper eventually gets in the way. But if you do a dress parade or something you should wear it over the shoulder. Sometimes the soldiers' shoulder straps would eventually wear out, and at inspecton they would see this and place the order for the new one, but the soldier would either have to find another one or wear it on his belt until the new one came. If you tighten your belt and put your cartridge box on, it shouldn't wear down the belt or the straps on the back.

Best regards,
Court Micker

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Re: wearing accouterments

The wearing of the box both on the sling and the belt seems to be a pecularity of Illinois troops. This does not mean that other troops did not do this, but usually when an identified image of the practice shows up it tends to be of an Illinois soldier.

[John E. Tobey]

Re: wearing accouterments

How were accouterments worn? I don't know enough about the western armies to speak for them, but in the east I think it depended on the preferences of the officers in command and the men who wore the stuff. There is documentation to support a very large amount of variation. In fact, some period documentation does not even jive with today's CCW (campaigners' conventional wisdom) as shown in the following quote...

“Capt F has said that the ‘traps’ must be put on so as to have the body belt with the brass eagle outside and the waist belt with its brass US confine this and the canteen, haversack, and body belt. We did in reality carry our haversack under everything and canteen outside of everything and that is where they belong allow me to say (for convenience).” [John Mead Gould, "The Civil War Journals of John Meade Gould," p. 17]

Yes, some soldiers did "lose" their cartridge box belts, and in some commands, the sergeants were officially allowed to wear their boxes on their waistbelts. Again, I'm speaking of the Army of the Potomac. I can say, however, that the AoP did its best to prevent and remedy such unauthorized actions on the part of its enlisted men. In the worst cases, a soldier who "lost" his cb belt could face some costly repercussions depending on the time frame, the unit, and the officers involved --

“...at inspection of the men on the 21st every man who had cut his body belt, to suit his notion, was charged with the price of a new belt...another man wore his body belt passing through the loops of his cartridge box (as all the old soldiers wear them). Col Perkins ordered him to be fined 4 dollars.” [Benjamin Hirst, "The Boys From Rockville," p. 26]

John Tobey

[DougCooper]

Re: wearing accouterments

The practice described above in the 36th Ill actually makes great sense when you think about it...and is the engineering priciple around the whole system of accouterments from the mid 19th century up through today - proper weight distribution.

Putting the box on a sling helps support the 5+ pound full box and by passing the belt though the box as well, it supports the belt/cap pouch/bayonet and scabbard. By placing the belt through the box, rather than just over the box (as most of us do), it actually helps lessen the weight on the sling as well, and the whole affair just feels more integral and secure. It is actually a bit easier/faster to put on too - it all goes on together vice one then the other.

[coffee boiler]

Re: wearing accouterments

From what I have seen so far, the soldiers either wore the cartridge box with a shoulder strap or wore it on their belt, but not both. According to Paul Johnson the placement of the cartridge box on the waist started during the Seminole War when the soldiers would modify the boxes by cutting slits into the back of the box to slip the belt through and discarded the shoulder strap. In response to this practice the ordnance department modified the boxes so that they could be worn either way.

The following is from J. Ray’s “The Diary of a Dead Man” and was written by Pvt. Ira Pettit Co. B, 11th U.S. Infantry.
"When we were paid at Culpepper 62 cents was taken from each man's pay for throwing away the cartridge box strap and brass plate we slip it on the waist belt like the cap box: it is more convenient and makes less harness." Whether he continued this practice beyond Culpepper is unknown.

The following page has an example of a box worn with a strap and another worn on the belt.

http://www.cwreenactors.com/~sykes/equipment/cartridge_box_pics.html

[Kevin O'Beirne]

Re: wearing accouterments

To support John Tobey's post, photographic evidence of Federal infantrymen shows a wide variation in how men wore their traps. Most reenactor "campaigners" prefer to wear their traps (accoutrements, camp equippage, etc.) fairly short, because 1) many 'streamers already wear them "long" and there's always that desire to make yourself look different from the 'streamers, and 2) the darn things bounce less when you run or jog, and are in general simply more comfortable to wear when the straps/slings are shorter.

That said, it's not correct to say that "all" soldiers of the Civil War wore their traps like "campaigner" dogma says they need to. Years ago I wrote an essay that attempted to draw some conclusions on the appearance and how traps were worn in a given regiment based on a fairly well-known photo of one company of that regiment in the winter of 1864. In the image, the men who's cartridge boxes could be seen were GENERALLY wearing them somewhat "high", but not all. In fact, the fellow who's cartridge box was most-visible was wearing it in a way many of us would consider "farb" (i.e., hanging down almost to mid-thigh level). In this particular photo (Army of the Potomac troops) everyone that I could see was wearing a shoulder sling with an eagle plate. While this is for just one regiment (and in one photo!) it shows that there WAS variation in how traps were worn. I'm sure that others can provide documentation of one way or another, or many ways ad infinitum.

Best bet to satisfy yourself of how you should be wearing them is: 1) Look at photos of troops wearing traps, 2) Check documentation applicable to your unit (if you portray a single regiment), and 3) (gasp) See what method suits you best--heck, for all I know, you LIKE having your traps hanging down low.

Personally, I wear my cartridge box sling and canteen sling short. The length of the strap on a Federal-issue haversack was "short" but does not usually need shortening because straps on originals show they were pretty short to begin with.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: wearing accouterments

...

The following is from J. Ray’s “The Diary of a Dead Man” and was written by Pvt. Ira Pettit Co. B, 11th U.S. Infantry.
"When we were paid at Culpepper 62 cents was taken from each man's pay for throwing away the cartridge box strap and brass plate we slip it on the waist belt like the cap box: it is more convenient and makes less harness." Whether he continued this practice beyond Culpepper is unknown.

Interesting -- great quote. Do you recall the date of that diary entry? I've compiled a list of the costs of common items of Federal clothing, camp and garrison equipage, and ordnance that would indicate it was probably before 1863. If it had been later, the cost would have gone up to 79 cents.

I like the $4.00 fine in the earlier message, though -- the actual cost, plus three dollars and change for putting the officer and clerk through the hassle of accounting for the items thrown away.

It may be worth observing that while clothing belonged to the soldier, and camp and garrison equipage to the company, the officer was held personally liable for all ordnance. As stated in the Instructions for Making Quarterly Returns of Ordnance and Ordnance Stores (GPO, 1863):

"40. Stores cannot be Issued to Enlisted Men. – Returns are constantly received at the Ordnance Office in which all the arms and accoutrements on hand are disposed of by the entry “Issued to members of Co. F” &c. or “Issued to non-commissioned officers of the company,” “Issued to the Armorer.” &c. Such “issues” or transfers of property are entirely inadmissable... no issues but those to Commissioned Officers, Ordnance Sergeants in the Regular Army, Military Storekeepers of the Ordnance Department, or other person specially authorized, will be recognized... All enlisted men are directly responsible to their commanding officer for the Ordnance Stores in their possession. The commanding officer is alone responsible to the Treasury Department."

[Possum Skinner]

Re: wearing accouterments

Building on some of the discussion, I have been looking at and debating some of my own ideas on wearing federal accoutrements.

I guess I am seeking some honest opinions on some observations I have made. When recruits were trained to load and fire, they were instructed to bring their cartridge boxes to the front, meaning to me that they were in a position farther back. I have tried wearing my accoutrements, particularly the cartridge box, in a number of variations based on evidence. When the cartridge box is under the belt, or on both the belt and shoulder strap, it is quite a chore to move it around. I wear my box pretty high.

Looking at photos, I see that the shoulder strap is very nearly completely under the armpit on some soldiers. The attached image is a perfect example. The only way I have found of duplicating that look, is to move the cartridge box all the way to the small of the back. My strap is of standard length, and I am 5'5" tall, and my box will fit into the small of my back with the strap falling under the armpit. If I leave the box loose, meaning not under or looped through the belt, it is no problem to reach around and pull it forward for firing. Just reach back and pull it around. It also doesn't bother me on the march or the run and is more accessible.

Look at the attached image and chime in on other thoughts.

[1stMaine]

Re: wearing accouterments

Comrades,

Comrade Possum Skinner wrote:

"When recruits were trained to load and fire, they were instructed to bring their cartridge boxes to the front, meaning to me that they were in a position farther back. "

That is not always the case, and to my mind, is another "reenactorism". It is a result of too much emphasis being placed upon Hardee's manual vice other systems for various weapons. Hardee's Rifle and Light Infantry Tactics encourages the men to pull the box around to the front, but his system was designed for a cartridge box that rode on the waistbelt only ( the model 1855 accouterment set). It was normally in the small of the back when not in use, and was brought around to the front to become, in essence, a belly-box for firing. A box worn on a sling cannot easily be used in this manner, and was, in fact, never intended to be used in such a way.
His system is also the source of the idea that the soldier is to "reach around" and grab the cartridge box when grounding or raising arms. That keeps the box, worn on the waistbelt, from sliding around when the men bend over. Boxes worn on slings do not have that problem.
The waistbelt was initially adapted for the enlisted man to keep the various accouterments in place when the men were moving at a speed faster than common time. Prior to the 1830's the cartridge box and the bayonet were both worn on slings (think Rev-War here). With the advent of the percussion system, it was found that a small pouch or box was the easiest way to carry the caps, and it eventually found it's way onto the waistbelt. Interestingly enough, the English initially placed the cap box onto the cartridge box sling, before moving towards the American system of belt suspension. Various bayonet suspension methods were also tried before devolving into the angled belt-worn pattern.
At this point the belt was not needed to hold all the slings in place, but WAS needed to keep all the other parts in place.
Anyway, I digress.....
The "pull the box to the front" only works when the box uses a waistbelt suspension. Any use of the sling negates that part, and you should just reach around and draw a cartridge.

Respects,

[Possum Skinner]

Re: wearing accouterments

Thank you for your observations Mr. Kindred. The use of old style manuals with modern (at least modern in 1861) equipment certainly explains a lot of the reenactorisms. It is interesting to note that the U.S. Manual of 1862, essentially a reprint of Hardees with another name, also instructs the recruits to pull the box forward. It seems like someone would have corrected this procedure earlier, but I suppose it might have been simply corrected in the field.

What about the position of the cartridge box sling on the attached photo? How is that particular look achieved if not by placing the cartridge box in the small of the back? It seems odd to me that these men would have just done that for the photo if it was not something they were used to doing.

[hardtack1864]

Re: wearing accouterments

http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&category=13960&item=2269167668&rd=1

Here is a great hoto off ebay, shows the Cart box on the belt, but the sling still on the cart box.

[coffee boiler]

Re: wearing accouterments

Looks like the start of a new fad.