"CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

[FTrooper]

Hey all,
I am in the middle of a rather odd research project and someone on here MIGHT be able to help me. Alot of the more questionable sutlers sell a white canvas double-bag with black straps. I have been told that it is based on some originals...I personally beleive that if such a pack does exist it is actually a post Civil War US Item according to some evidence I have in Ordnance Reports and such. SO my thing is does anyone have pics of such a pack (original) or know of where one is in a museum or collection that I can look over?

Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Chris Fischer
F-Troop

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

The only reference to a CS unpainted knapsack that I've found reference to comes from an older article in Colector and Military Historian which discussed them coming out of Atlanta in late 63 through 64. There was no speculation as to type or what they looked like, just that they are listed on manifests of goods leaving the depot. I've seen "Kibbler" or Mex War types made unpainted and used by some quality living historians and called Atlanta knapsacks, but without any documentation to them. I've always wondered just what they looked like myself.

[FloridaConscript]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

There is a picture of some Arkansas troops early in the war that have unpainted knapsacks, and I have seen reference to the Atlanta one's that Brother Ross referred to.

In Brasseys American Civil War: Confederate Army by Ron Field.
Page 79. The photograph is from June 1861 and was taken in Arkadelphia. Also in this image is a fellow with smoked glasses (sunglasses?) and an African American in the ranks. the pack straps appear to be canvas and tie in front of the chest as opposed to being buckled. good book, if y'all don't have it.

I maybe be 100% wrong on this, but the chances of a CS or State depot making an EXACT copy of us 1855 double bag sans paint is very highly unlikely. These mainstream skinners 1) buy all their gear from the same source in India or Pakistan 2) will often times slightly alter a US model of a widget and call it a "CS" version.
One would have to produce an obcene amount of documentation before I wore or bought an "unpaineted CS version of a '55".

[LWhite64]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

Part of the speculation for them being the Keibler style was that on one of the contracts for them, it states leather straps and then there is another for cloth straps. I would dearly love to know exactly what they looked like as well as exactly what the Atlanta Haversacks looked like.

Lee

[FTrooper]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

OK, first let me clarify my request. I am NOT researching CSA canvas knapsacks per say. What it basically boils down to is that throughout the 1870's, 1880's and 1890's there are references to "Light Artillery Knapsacks" in the Annual Reports of the Secretary of War to Congress. These ARE different from the packs, clothing bags, blanket bags, etc. carried by Infantry. In the 1908 Ordnance manual is show a Light Artillery Knapsack that IS a M1853 Double Bag! The only differences is that the leather is russet, the body is unpainted khaki canvas, and the shoulder straps have been replaced by a pair of wrap around straps and a suitcase style handle. The questions that arise and my project is, when did they stop painted them and when did they replace the shoulder straps? I was amazed that in ALL the post ACW Light Artillery photos I find I can't see any baggage! This is my starting place because I am pretty sure if a double bag made of white canvas (like 1870's field gear) exists it is probably mislabeled as a CSA pack. This will help the AC movement by showing that the current reproductions are in no way what people think they are (note, just because its in a museum doesn't mean its right...I went to a ACW museum recently with a great reputation and there was an 1890's Spanish Reserve Ammunition Haversack listed as being the binocular case for a CSA officer, provenanced and all!). The reverse of this may be that M1853 knapsacks, painted with shoulder straps may have been produced many many years AFTER the ACW!!! So identifying post war made to wartime may be beneficial. Attached below are a couple pics of MY 1908 era one! and one of the gross repros!

Chris Fischer
F-Troop

[DougCooper]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

In the 1908 Ordnance manual is show a Light Artillery Knapsack that IS a M1853 Double Bag! The only differences is that the leather is russet, the body is unpainted khaki canvas, and the shoulder straps have been replaced by a pair of wrap around straps and a suitcase style handle.

Uh, so other than the straps, leather and bag, this is an 1853 double bag? This sounds like simply an evolutionary change, vice an altered copy.

Also, who is making the repros?

[FTrooper]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

The white repros are made by the overseas folks and can be seen on most webpages that carry that stuff. They show up on ebay a bit.

You are correct Doug, its a simple evolution from 1865-1908 of the exact same pattern, what I am trying to figure out is WHAT was the evolutions and when did they take place? When did they changer the strapping? When did they stop painting them? Etc. Are these alleged CSA pack really Post Civil War US?

Its an interesting series of questions.

Chris Fischer
F-Troop

[Ken Knopp]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

Gentlemen,

This may be relative to the discussion. This information comes from the “Annual Report of operations at the Atlanta Arsenal CSA commanded by Major M.H. Wright, Ordnance Officer, during the current year ending June 30th 1863" as found in the National Archives, Record Group 109, Confederate Records, Records of the Ordnance Bureau.

(selected quotes “as is” with no editing..........)


------------------
REMARKS:
It has been the object in all cases to attain immediate results and meet the demad of the service and at the smallest possible expense.
Economy has been exercised in very expenditure and good serviceable articles at a low rpice, we always preferred. Those of a fine and more handsome quality at a higher price, and for two reasons 1st economy, 2nd the one has served the new troops, we have had to put into the field just as well as the other, for but little care is taken of the best. For example, the white duck knapsack at one dollar and a half has been preferred to the painted at $3.00 and received the following stores:

..........Knapsacks, white duck with leather straps...27,248 The average cost about $4.50 each.
Haversacks, no osenburg, with partitions about 23, 551. The average cost about .40 cents each. ...................


HARNESS AND SADDLE SHOP:

In this connection may be mentioned the manufacture of eight thousand one hundred and eighty eight haversacks, by the wives of the employees chiefly it being very difficult to get osanburgs these articles were made chiefly by contractors.


--------------------

By coincidence, I happened to see this about two weeks ago while researching an upcoming article on cavalry equipment for the Camp Chase. I thought it interesting as I (not being the infantry type) had never heard of unpainted, white duck knapsacks so almost posted it but got distracted and forgot. This thread reminded me of it so here it is.


Ken R Knopp

https://www.confederatesaddles.com

[FloridaConscript]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

27,000 unpainted knapsacks coming out of Atlanta pre june '63! Think one or two of those showed up at Chickamauga?

[GarrettG1993]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

Do you think they were treated with a water proofing substance, or just left plain cloth?



Regards,
Garrett Glover

[FTrooper]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

I don't know about the "Atlanta" ones, but I would suspect that the post war bags I am researching would be treated. The Army started experimenting with various treatments in 1872 when they were looking at getting away from the painted or tarred bags.

Chris Fischer
F-Troop

[Brian Baird]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

Chris,
Have you checked with the QM Museum at Ft. Lee?
Brian Baird

[packer01]

Re: "CSA" Double Bag Knapsacks?

The reverse of this may be that M1853 knapsacks, painted with shoulder straps may have been produced many many years AFTER the ACW!!! So identifying post war made to wartime may be beneficial. Attached below are a couple pics of MY 1908 era one! and one of the gross repros!

Chris Fischer
F-Troop

My understanding is that NO infantry knapsacks were produced post-war, the peacetime army using the stockpiles of wartime-manufactured goods. By 1871, General Meigs, Quartermaster General, stated "As all the old knapsacks have been condemned, and it is necessary to replace them, this is a proper time to determine finally what pattern of equipment shall be used in replacing them. [...] The Army is nearly without knapsacks, and an early decision is of importance."

[Letter to the Secretary of War, November 3, 1871, quoted in Board of Ordnance Memoranda 13 (1872).]

The Board that was convened as a result of that letter adopted a variation of the British 'Valise' equipments in 1872, to be followed by Palmer's braces in 1874, and the Blanket Bag in 1882. As you've probably already uncovered in your digging, none of these are anything like the double-bag in construction.

I have a Bannerman's catalogue page advertising surplus "U.S. Artillery Valise Knapsacks" which look identical to the ones you are describing. (For unknown reasons I am unable to post attachments, so contact me and I'll send a scan) It doesn't really add any new information for you, except they once sold for $6.00 a dozen...

Unless there were a whole lot of unfinished knapsack bodies left unpainted in an armory somewhere that someone decided to experiment with, it doesn't appear that there is any way that your Light Artillery knapsack is directly related to the CW ones. It has however been my experience that 're-inventing the wheel' is a continual part of knapsack development, and after twenty years of something else, perhaps the style was resurrected (only to be dispensed with again after a while!) From your photos, it seems that the pocket gusset appears different from CW gussets, and there might be other differences which are discovered from a direct back-to-back comparison. Of course, there are also many variations in the double-bags which still exist too, so even that may be of limited value!

As these knapsacks do not seem to be part of the official design development, without more details being uncovered it's mostly speculation...

It's an interesting question and an interesting item, and I hope that you turn up more information.

Frank Packer