question about hardpacks

[3alabama]

Re: question about hardpacks

I am not sure this is a hard pack per se, but can anyone identify this knapsack? Might this be the French import knapsack of which we hear so much? Note that this Confederate wore it into battle. Surely somebody knows--I've been wondering this for years.

Detail from Gardner's photo of dead from Wheat's Louisianans along Hagerstown Pike.

I have examined 1 french import knapsack and from what I can tell from the blown up picture they do look the same. I am going from memory but I know the strap was hooked in the same fashion as a federal pack. The flap faced out, away from the back unlike the English Trotter pack. The one detail I can't recall is if it had straps on the side for a horseshoe roll or just blanket roll straps on top.

[Garrett Silliman]

Re: question about hardpacks

Another indicative feature of these packs is the tape (for lack a better term) that covers the outer seams. This is seen in the Gardner photo as well as on the two originals on display at the Atlanta History Center (see photos below).

Thanks,

[3alabama]

Re: question about hardpacks

Great Pics Garrett- the tape you mention looks to be a leather binding on the edge. I have seen this done on many packs. Mostly seen on NY state packs and the post war Sep Co. marked packs you see around.

[Garrett Silliman]

Re: question about hardpacks

Binding is a much better word - tape implies that it was some sort of fabric.

[Coatsy]

Re: question about hardpacks

This is going off topic, but the Stone Mountian Museum that has been mentioned is no longer in Stone Mountain. The relic store has been closed for some time and the uniforms that used to be in display cases at the park in Memorial Hall have either been boxed up or they have gone to the Atlanta History Center. I don't know if the Stone Mountain Relic Shop relocated or just closed for good.

[vamick]

Re: question about hardpacks

Fred,

while the man laying on the left has his toes peaking out, see the second image.
Regards,

look at those edges where the toes protrude, my first instinct is that this shoe was trimed that way due to a , sore toe? ect?? of course it may appear so sharp because the wornout leather was trimed away...??

[PanzerJager]

Re: question about hardpacks

Agreed, it appears as though the shoe has been purposely cut to accommodate the man’s foot or toe as opposed to a seam wearing out and busting open, It could be trimmed away from where it was worn out but I would be more prone to guess it was to make a smaller sized shoe fit a larger sized foot.

Regards,

[Adjutant]

Re: question about hardpacks

I am not sure that these men were from two brigades and were mostly killed by artillery fire. Given thier location along the Hagerstown Pike they are probably from Starke's Brigade (in the origional photo caption they are identified as LA troops) and were probably killed during the "eyeball to eyeball" fight along the pike with elements of the Black Hat Brigade and the 2nd US Sharpshooters.

There is some well done anaylsis of the photos in Frassanito's Antietam: A Journey in Time.

Great knapsack discussion all!

[westcoastcampaigner]

Re: question about hardpacks

Great knapsack discussion indeed, however, it has strayed in different directions that have nothing to do with hardpacks and I don't believe my original question has truely been answered. What time frame can hardpacks be appropriately used when portraying a Confederate soldier, particularly in the Army of Northern Virginia. Can we stick to the main topic at hand please. Thanks.

Josh Sawyer
Liberty Rifles
Hardtack Society

[Milliron]

Re: question about hardpacks

OK. We have shown at least one example of a hardpack being carried as late as September, '62. Does anybody have any others?

My personal opinion is that by mid '63 at the latest, you would be pushing it for a hardpack.

[1stMaine]

Re: question about hardpacks

I am not sure that these men were from two brigades and were mostly killed by artillery fire. Given thier location along the Hagerstown Pike they are probably from Starke's Brigade (in the origional photo caption they are identified as LA troops) and were probably killed during the "eyeball to eyeball" fight along the pike with elements of the Black Hat Brigade and the 2nd US Sharpshooters.

There is some well done anaylsis of the photos in Frassanito's Antietam: A Journey in Time.

Great knapsack discussion all!

Comrade,

While several are, as Gardner noted, members of Starke's LA brigade, their were two other brigades who passed through this area prior to the Pelicans advancing to this position, then changing front to face the Pike. Those two other brigades had been engaged and fought a fighting withdrawal until clear of the line held by Starke and Taliaffero's brigades, which then advanced to the fight.

My opinion on the casualties being primarily from artillery fire is based upon Starke's left flank being exposed, when he wheeled onto the line of the Pike, to the guns of Battery "B", 4th US Artillery, which prodeeded to throw case and cannister into them with flanking fire, right down their line. An examination of the images shows some horrific wounds which could be better explained through case and cannister than minnie's, though the latter can still cause severe damage.

Of course, we can never be certain as to the cause of these poor men's wounds, but we can develop some theories based upon the positions of the wounded, and the extent and size of the injuries suffered.

What I would offer is that it has been my experience, from examining period images, that, overall, casualties suffered through small arms fire tend to be spread out along the line of battle, whereas those casualties suffered from artillery fire tend to be grouped together, as the men from Starke's brigade appear.

Respects,

[1stMaine]

Re: question about hardpacks

OK. We have shown at least one example of a hardpack being carried as late as September, '62. Does anybody have any others?

My personal opinion is that by mid '63 at the latest, you would be pushing it for a hardpack.

Comrade,

I'm not so certain that that is correct. It would depend more upon WHERE and WHOM. For example, hardpacks were issued to nearly all of the 128 independant companies of "coast guard" infantry raised in Maine during the war. This is based upon examining a range of stencilled knapsacks still in existence which run from single to 3-digit numbers, indicating that there were several thousand available here, at least, for issue.

Then of course, their are the "Trotter" or "I&C" knaopsacks which could, within reason, be referred to as a hardpack due to the wooden frame within them.

I would offer that, although not as common as the "soft pack" style, hardpacks of several designs would have been seen throughout the war. However, I would suspect that, if they were issued, it would have been a case of everyone in that unit having them, rather than a mix of hardpack and soft pack styles.

Respects,

[Milliron]

Re: question about hardpacks

Comrade,

I'm not so certain that that is correct. It would depend more upon WHERE and WHOM. For example, hardpacks were issued to nearly all of the 128 independant companies of "coast guard" infantry raised in Maine during the war. This is based upon examining a range of stencilled knapsacks still in existence which run from single to 3-digit numbers, indicating that there were several thousand available here, at least, for issue.

Then of course, their are the "Trotter" or "I&C" knaopsacks which could, within reason, be referred to as a hardpack due to the wooden frame within them.

I would offer that, although not as common as the "soft pack" style, hardpacks of several designs would have been seen throughout the war. However, I would suspect that, if they were issued, it would have been a case of everyone in that unit having them, rather than a mix of hardpack and soft pack styles.

Respects,

Fair enough, but we ARE talking about Confederates. I personally have no idea how many hard packs were issued to the ANV. My feeling is that these were likely issued early and were few and far between by 1863, at least in the ANV. In the Gardner photo, the man in question seems to be the only soldier in that series of photos who has a pack at all. It seems reasonable, however, to assume that others also had similar packs.

Considering how uncomfortable a hard pack was in the best of circumstances, combined with a disdain for packs in general, it seems unlikely that these would have persisted much beyond early '63, IMHO. As these became worn out, it seems unlikely that the Confederate QM could/would replace them, absent foreign importation.

Could you find some nut tromping around with one after that? Almost surely, but I doubt it would meet the whole p/e/c concept. Anyone with some harder info that that, however, please pipe up.

[1stMaine]

Re: question about hardpacks

Bob,

But to my mind, the attitude that Quote" combined with a disdain for packs in general" unquote, Is a part of the problem. Frtom my own reading, I tend to believe that the use of packs in the Confederacy is far more prevelant than we believe. In fact, I think the whole "doing without" mantra by some is a tad overdone.

For example, the April 1st, 1865, edition of the "Richmond Enquirer" has an article whicch contains a list of the items issued by the Richmond Arsenal prior to 1 January, 1865. That list icludes 180, 181 knapsacks of various patterns.

Even if averafed out, that would indicate some 60,000 knapsacks A YEAR being issued from Richmond alone, not to mention the other Confederate Arsenals.

Anyway, food for thought :)

Respects,

[Gallo de Cielo]

Re: question about hardpacks

How late were such items issued? Hard to say. Quatermaster returns typically just list issued items as "knapsacks." The best bet would be folks chiming in with specific references to hardpack or frame knapsacks with a dated letter, diary, etc.

Generally, I would say that we might be drifting towards "reenactorism land" to say that hardpacks are an early war item. I think we associate them with militia-type equipment and thus feel that they were issued early until newer items came on-line. However, as has been noted, the French and English items were imports, not old relics from the militia racks stateside. I would feel that they might be appropriate much later than were giving them credit for. The Trans-Miss was reliant on goods coming in from Texas and imports taken in from Mexico. There were a few eastern seabord ports that remained open until near the end of the war too. Certainly those units would have had access to imported goods and if they entered the larger "bloodstream" of the CS QM system, who knows where they would have been distributed. For instance, Hoods' army returned from the Nashville fight and was re-equipped/clothed prior to going to Mobile and NC. In other threads we have fleshed out that .69 cal smoothbore weapons were still used in large numbers into the later stages of the war. However, many still perpetuate the thinking that a smoothbore is an "early war" weapon. More to ponder at the very least.

As to the comfort, I actually prefer the French knapsack. It's very comfortable. At BGR I carried it with a heavy load the entire time with no complaint. I also own a Mex war softpack and an 1855 double-bag, so I have some cross-reference. In my mainstream past I owned a hardpack with a heavy beast of a wooden frame and had 1" leather straps that tended to cut pretty deep after a short time.

My two cents.