Why no pant's belts in the west?

Silver_Rings · January 12, 2006, 01:46:37 PM

Belts have been around for 1,000's of years, so why didn't they have belt loops on pants and wear beltsin the wild west?.

It seems to me that braces would have been alot more prone to getting hung up on steer horns, branches and such.

Inquiring minds want to know.

SR

St. George · January 12, 2006, 03:14:39 PM

We've covered this before and there's more in the back pages - but once more - we'll re-visit.

Though 'belts' have been around - 'trouser' belts haven't, since there were no trouser loops.

They're essentially a turn of the century invention.

Braces, galluses, or suspenders - all were used during the time - as were the high-waisted trousers.

They were effectively 'hidden' - both from view and from entanglement - by vests and coats - and 'all' men wore those as working dress.

If you didn't like wearing a pair - for reasons best known to yourself - then the adjustment belt was available at the rear and could be tightened as needed.

Many men did this - using friction to hold their pants in place.

The sewn trouser loop wouldn't become a 'staple' of men's furnishings for many years - despite what's seen in the 'John Ford Reference Library'...

I 'do' like this quote from the Dodge City Live Stock Journal:

"A fashion item says that leather belts are in favor.
They were in favor here at one time.
Perhaps there was a difference in them.
Ours were studded with cartridges, and were very popular..."

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

Silver_Rings · January 12, 2006, 04:37:49 PM

Sorry to have ruffled you feathers with my question.

SR

Hell-Er High Water · January 12, 2006, 08:14:53 PM

Well SR, I didn't know either. So thanks for asking.

HHW

St. George · January 12, 2006, 10:40:38 PM

No feathers were ruffled at all.

You asked a question - and it was answered.

The Archives of this Forum and that of the NCOWS Forum have the answers to a helluva lot of interesting questions, so if you have some time - take a look.

And - if you can add to the knowledge - please - do so.

It'll be appreciated.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

gospel micah · April 16, 2007, 09:38:48 AM

howdy i i have a book called gunfighters from the series of books called the old west from time life they did not have belt loops but i have seen a man on page 105 wearing a belt around his waist and it is not a gunbelt the picture has a paragraph above it.it says the first lawmen of guthrie in oklahoma territory line up with other citzens under a sign misspelled by the craftsmen next door the town zoomed from zero residents to 10,000 during the land rush of 1889 he wears it around his waist you could probably find the book on ebay hope this helps grace and peace gospel micah

St. George · April 16, 2007, 09:52:19 AM

That photo came from the Cunningham Collection in Stillwater, Oklahoma and has no date.

The individual with the belt showing is wearing a belt to hold up his holstered firearm, since not all wore a cartridge belt - and not all cartridge belts featured a full set of loops.

The statement that the town grew from zero to 10,000 is merely an interesting fact - not a date for the photo.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

gospel micah · April 16, 2007, 10:10:55 AM

those kind of belts could also been used for knife holsters too the picture shows they could have used those belts also to hold up there pants if they wanted to grace and peace gospel micah

St. George · April 16, 2007, 10:33:52 AM

Sure - in fact - they could be used to do that, and the Army provided a saber belt that did both chores admirably.

As mentioned - the common trousers of the time featured a small belt and buckle at the rear - now often referred to as an 'Ivy League' belt.

Many slimmer men just snugged that one up tight and used 'friction' to hold their trousers in place.

As men gained both age and girth, however - suspenders were pretty much universally used.

But the original question really deals with trouser loops - and those came at the turn of the century - as has been explained above.

Vaya,

Scouts Out!

Mick Archer · April 16, 2007, 02:23:09 PM

Howdy Pards!

Yes, there are surviving examples as well as images of so-callled "civilian belts" in the second half of the 19th century . As well as a few Civil War soldier images where a lad used a rifle sling for an expedient ad hoc trouswer/trowser belt. (Federal trousers followed an older pattern with no adjustment loops- just a tie cord in the back. Some Confederate trousers, copying the current civilian pattern styles, included the small cloth and buckle adjustment belt.)

But as shared, the differences fall in two areas- one the practice was not common, and two, the belts were NOT worn in "belt loops" as they had none at that time.

Mick Archer

gospel micah · May 04, 2007, 01:33:47 PM

Howdy check out this photo from 1905 its Nebraska guardsmen. Theres a man in the photo with belt loops and a belt. http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/displayPhoto.pl?path=/award/nbhips/lca/131&topImages=13174r.jpg&topLinks=13174v.jpg&displayProfile=0&title=Nebraska%20National%20Guardsmen%20in%20camp,%20Kearney,%20Nebraska.&m856s=$dnbhips$f13174&dir=ammem&itemLink=D?psbib:9:./temp/~ammem_mSyf::

Delmonico · May 04, 2007, 01:39:53 PM

Quote from: gospel micah on May 04, 2007, 01:33:47 PM
Howdy check out this photo from 1905 its a Nebraska guardsmen. Theres a man in the photo with belt loops and a belt http://memory.loc.gov/cgi-bin/displayPhoto.pl?path=/award/nbhips/lca/131&topImages=13174r.jpg&topLinks=13174v.jpg&displayProfile=0&title=Nebraska%20National%20Guardsmen%20in%20camp,%20Kearney,%20Nebraska.&m856s=$dnbhips$f13174&dir=ammem&itemLink=D?psbib:9:./temp/~ammem_mSyf::

Thats when the Army added belts in 1904.

gospel micah · May 04, 2007, 03:45:31 PM

Howdy i was in the library and i looked at the Sears Robucks catalog from 1905 and they had gym pants with belt loops.they had Sears Robucks catalogs going as far back as 1905. But they did not have any from the 1890s.

Mick Archer · May 07, 2007, 01:40:47 PM

Howdy Pards!

But Levi's did not put belt loops on their jeans until 1922 (1924?)...

Mick Archer

Slowhand Bob · May 26, 2007, 07:42:55 AM

Some with belts, some with suspenders, some with neither but there is one despicable individual who wears both! How can you trust a man who doesn't even trust his own pants?

You guys must be mistaken, I've seen the Duke wearing belts diring the Civil War period.

Delmonico · May 26, 2007, 09:06:13 AM

Quote from: Slowhand Bob on May 26, 2007, 07:42:55 AM

You guys must be mistaken, I've seen the Duke wearing belts diring the Civil War period.

I hope this is a tongue in cheek joke.

gospel micah · May 26, 2007, 01:53:44 PM

The dukes movies were very false in their apparel.Every old western i have seen there pants are not period correct.

Steel Horse Bailey · May 28, 2007, 12:38:25 PM

Quote from: gospel micah on May 26, 2007, 01:53:44 PM
The dukes movies were very false in their apparel.Every old western i have seen there pants are not period correct.

Yep! But it's OK -The Duke did it - God rest his soul. He is missed. Besides, his last movies were big improvements, authenticity wise. Hollyweird does what IT thinks best. I really enjoy Open Range. I have heard that director/star Costner was pretty insistent that details of guns, holsters, etc. be as authentic as possible. Except for HIS buscadero rig, that is!

Pretty funny, if ya think 'bout it, IMHO.

gospel micah · May 28, 2007, 01:07:00 PM

There were some people that wore belts on pants without belt loops. one of the guys in this photo has a belt on.
http://memory.loc.gov/award/nbhips/lca/100/10065v.jpg

Mick Archer · May 28, 2007, 01:20:32 PM

Howdy Pards!

The woman in the back of the boat with shirt and trowsers is the more interesting...

Mick Archer