Haversack fit

[sweatlock]

I did a search on this topic and didn't come up with anything, so I thought I'd ask...

I just put together a haversack using an excellent pattern, based on the Moses Alexander type that resides in the Museum of the Confederacy. It came out really well if I do say so myself. However, when worn the top of the sack is about at waist-level, with the bulk of it sitting on my left hip. Is this correct? I only ask because there seems to be a lot of variation in how the haversack fits based on the photos I have seen of reenactors on various websites. Some reenactors have theirs very low, past the hip and level with the thigh.

Btw, the strap was specified as 44" overall on the pattern, but with approximately 1" folded over on the ends where it attaches ot the sack itself this is now approximately 42".

Thanks! :p

[VaTrooper]

I only ask because there seems to be a lot of variation in how the haversack fits based on the photos I have seen of reenactors on various websites. Some reenactors have theirs very low, past the hip and level with the thigh.

Look at photo's of the real soldiers not reenactors.

[jurgitemvaletem]

Look at photo's of the real soldiers not reenactors.

And you will generaly find that the top of the haversack runs equal to the true waist (belly button) not the "modern waist".

This has been said over and over again and I tend to follow this logic, you never want your accouterments hanging that low as they will beat you to death. Also, they weren't issued at such lengths.

[bob 125th nysvi]

you're going to have to shorten the strap so you aren't beating either yourself or your crackers to pieces.

If you tall it is going to ride a little higher. (I somehow can't imagine an officer telling some tall guy to find some material to lenghten that strap so it hangs right.)

The army based it's specifications on what it considered the "average" sized soildier. Unless your the same size as the 'model' it is going to ride on you a little differently.

And according to the 1865 Specifications the strap could be anywhere from 40 to 45 inches long.

So based on the differences in surviving examples and even the fact that the regs allowed for some leeway I'd suggest that the proper height to wear it is about the height of your waist belt as long as it is comfortable.

[sweatlock]

Thanks for the replies guys - being a newbie to the hobby I'm still learning.

As for looking at original photos, you're right - that was a d'oh on my part, lol. I just noticed that an inordinate amount of reenactors seem to have their haversacks riding very low. Kind of like the "big lie" theory - if enough people tend to believe (or do something) it is eventually accepted as gospel.

Thanks again! :p

Glyn

[bill watson]

It may simply be that most haven't given it a moment's thought and also haven't had to double quick or run with it hanging that low. Run with it once and the advantage of "less room for it to swing" become really clear. :-)

[GaWildcat]

As for looking at original photos, you're right - that was a d'oh on my part, lol. I just noticed that an inordinate amount of reenactors seem to have their haversacks riding very low. Kind of like the "big lie" theory - if enough people tend to believe (or do something) it is eventually accepted as gospel.

Of note in original pictures how haversacks are not under thier waistbelts, but its a reenactorism to belt over the haversack....

[flattop32355]

I just noticed that an inordinate amount of reenactors seem to have their haversacks riding very low.

That's one of the pitfalls we reenactors tend to fall into: We look more at the way other reenactors do things (under the assumption that they are doing things correctly), rather than checking back to the original sources available.

Time and again you'll find that what was at one point accepted as "fact" on how to do something has been discovered to be at least somewhat incorrect, of not totally false. Part of it is the continuous addition of new information and sources. Some of it is just discovering that, hey, we were wrong about that.

The lesson being to always check to see if there are original sources to consult.

[Kevin O'Beirne]

If the repro is made to original specifications regarding length of the strap, it will ride "right" on the wearer. If you want to see where originals "rode" on the soldiers, look at original photos, not images of reenactors. Simply put, most reenactors are not wearing a repro that is similar to the original in size and strap length.

Not that this means much, but I have not seen any original haversacks where the strap was shortened by the soldier. Maybe some still exist, but I haven't seen them. That leads me to conclude that the originals were probably lower than how some "fad of the month' types wear their haversack (i.e., under the armpit), and certainly few soldiers wore them dangling down near their knees the way many reenactors do.

I have seen original canteens with straps shortened both by knotting them and by cutting-sewing, and I've seen first-person accounts decsribing the knotting-the-strap method for canteens. I have not read any soldier accounts of shortening haversack straps, however.

Finally, for anyone owning a "typical repro", it may be necessary to shorten the strap so that it "rides" at a level something like what one sees in photos of Civil War troops. If you have, however, a more-accurate repro, it should be fine "as-is" relative to strap length.