Jump to content


Photo

1866 - 1899 Belts with Plates & Cartridge Boxes


  • Please log in to reply
33 replies to this topic

#26 rayg

rayg
  • Members
    • Member ID: 89
  • 1,141 posts

Posted 17 January 2007 - 08:00 AM

Greg, Okay, Still can't tell if it's a rounded hook or a little squared/flat because of the reflection. Maybe a side shot would tell. Anyway, If it appears to have some flats similar to the hooks I posted, in other words if it's not perfectly round. Then I think US canteen would be correct that it may be a CW musket sling hook. In either case, it is as he said, a field/saddler made belt. It looks like some type of keeper, possibly a civilian made one, was used. Again, if the hook is not a round wire shaped one, similar to the one on the 2nd belt posted, then there is a good possibility that both the belt and plate are CW period. Ray

#27 Greg Sebring

Greg Sebring
  • Members
    • Member ID: 118
  • 579 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Tecumseh, Michigan

Posted 17 January 2007 - 12:23 PM

Ray,

I'm going to say it's a round hook. I appreciate all your attention and feedback.

Greg

DSC04372.JPG

#28 US CANTEEN GURU

US CANTEEN GURU

    BANNED

  • Banned
    • Member ID: 85
  • 266 posts

Posted 17 January 2007 - 12:44 PM

It is the more rounded type hook used on pattern 1874 belts and canteen, haversack and blanket bag straps starting in 1878. The attachment looks like it was done by stitching rather than the two rivets normally used so IMO it's a field made belt useing components from a pattern 1874 belt.

In the original images the hook appeared to be more pointed like the Civil War hooks shown by Ray.

#29 NorwichCadet

NorwichCadet
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,639
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:26 PM

I saw this tread and it reminded me of a belt I have that I have never been able to nail down, I think it is SAW period but maybe you can tell me for sure. I took a picture of the markings but it did not come out very good, it is marked 5 H 39 and 14 G 41 I assume these are unit markings and 38 Rock Island Arsenal H.E.K. I thought the 38 was the size but when I measured it is not the waist size but the actual length before it is folded back and hooked, and of course the maker and inspector. What accoutrements would be used with this belt and when was it used.

QED4, I have been searching for info on the belt you posted for a long time as I have one just like it. We may have the only two remaining in existence. My research indicates it is a "1903 uniform waist belt" as told to me by a national expert. Unfortunately, mine does not have the correct buckle plate which I am told should be a "1878 plate". However, I do not know what an "1878 plate" looks like. Is the one you show an "1878 plate"? Mine is in very good shape, brown, and marked "Rock Island Arsenal" , "38", and E.?, W.?, T.(insp initials). When I got it it came with a RIA 1904 .38 ammo pouch. I will post pictures later. Can anyone show me what an 1878 plate looks like?

#30 NorwichCadet

NorwichCadet
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,639
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:28 PM

QED4, I have been searching for info on the belt you posted for a long time as I have one just like it. We may have the only two remaining in existence. My research indicates it is a "1903 uniform waist belt" as told to me by a national expert. Unfortunately, mine does not have the correct buckle plate which I am told should be a "1878 plate". However, I do not know what an "1878 plate" looks like. Is the one you show an "1878 plate"? Mine is in very good shape, brown, and marked "Rock Island Arsenal" , "38", and E.?, W.?, T.(insp initials). When I got it it came with a RIA 1904 .38 ammo pouch. I will post pictures later. Can anyone show me what an 1878 plate looks like?



#31 NorwichCadet

NorwichCadet
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,639
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:30 PM

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/grillagracy/DSC04064.jpg

#32 NorwichCadet

NorwichCadet
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,639
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:32 PM

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/grillagracy/DSC04066.jpg

#33 NorwichCadet

NorwichCadet
  • Members
    • Member ID: 5,639
  • 240 posts

Posted 23 February 2009 - 01:34 PM

This is the buckle plate it came with which is not correct. It should have an "1878 plate.

http://i245.photobucket.com/albums/gg59/grillagracy/DSC04072.jpg

#34 noworky

noworky
  • Members
    • Member ID: 2,455
  • 954 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Idaho

Posted 22 June 2009 - 07:16 AM

Darn, disregard the above. I got the two belts mixed up. Canteen is right about the first belt. It looks like it could be "field made" using a privated purchased civilian style keeper.
The 2nd belt has the standard 1874 waist belt hook on it and is probably an NCO belt as it was arsenal issued where as officers purchased their belts from military unifom stores. Too late at night to think straight.



I tend to agree with US Canteen and rayg because of the stitching on the belt and the way the hooks are attached that the first belt was made at unit level. I can't find in any of my reference the keeper on the belt so possibly private purchase part and the plate appears to be CW EM. The second belt does look like a standard 1874, I usually ask rayg a lot of questions and have learned a bunch from him and I'm for sure still learning. ;)


0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users