"Perry Plastics, no frock coats on enlisted men?" Topic

Campaigner,

In many accounts you read soldiers eating as much as they can early after getting their rations. The logic behind this? You don't have to carry it now. :)

Yeah. One thing that amuses me when looking at miniatures, the sculptors never really sculpt the blanket rolls _twisted_. Some do but many do not.

We did a 'tactical' for 3 days without returning to our cars for the whole time. We marched and fought the whole time. We did a Western impression with blanket rolls. After about a day it didn't take us long to find out the best way to keep your stuff in a blanket roll. You would think you just roll it up and tie the ends. Well… that doesn't work very well as the stuff manages to either fall out or clump up just as incomfortable as can be. I'm sure the REAL soldiers found this out as well. All we had to do was put your stuff in, roll it up and then twist the ends. You tie the ends and bliss! Well apart from the hot blanket. :( Four or five turns and that's all you need.

Avid and Campaigner, I am amazed by the depth of knowledge thank you!

Nathan

Avid,

You mention a detail that I too appreciate. It's one reason why I always praise the Dixon 25mm range so much! Even though gamers have criticized the range for the stocky nature of the figures and the oversized "pumpkin heads", it's still one of the most accurate ranges in terms of clothing and equipment. Whomever researched the Civil War for that range did a thorough job to be sure. They have many sculpts that have the blanket roll with the twists like you described. And indeed, they have gone so far as to include confederate single bag knapsacks, which are as clearly detailed and as clearly distinguishable from the federal double bags as the light of day. You can EVEN see differences in the cuts of the confederate frock coats from the federal ones, very very impressive.

One can even find in the Dixon range clear and distinct sculpts that have confederate canteens, confederate cartridge boxes, and a clear difference between US and CS belt and box plates!

I steer gamers toward this range for the amount of accurate research I see in it. I find that to be more important in capturing the feel of the period, than I do if the bodies or heads are in exactly correct proportion.

I agree with Campaigner1 – let us hope that the Perrys will do one set of Federal troop box which will be supplied with hats and forage caps and a Confederate box.

About carrying of equipment, this seemingly would vary – also between "Western" and "Eastern" armies.

However I disagree that accurate research is more important than the proportions of heads or body etc., both are essential, the Perrys could match both, in case the like to.

Campaigner,

Aaaaaaaaaaahhhh… Dixon. I hear ya but I just can't get over those pumpkin heads. They stare at me and mock me with those wacky heads. :)

BTW… the sculptor did a good job on the canteens as well. Who else sculpts bullseye canteens?

Although I would have preferred to see one placstic box set for Confederate and 1 for Union, I will still be getting this set from the Perry's. When I look at the figures they appear to more Confederate style vs Union, regardless of the coats. Just my preference I suppose.

I have seen paitings with of rebs with the backpacks as opposed to the blanket roll, and in watching "Gettysburg" again this weekend I noted a lot of the 20th Maine were wearing the blanket roll.

I do applaud the Perrys though, as I really like what they are attempting and the fact that they offer the hats seperate for variety, etc. Most of my Union and Confederate are Sash and Saber, which I am really fond of. But I think the Perry's will fit in well with them. Can't wait to get my first box.

I would like to see the Perry's opinion on this post. I wonder if they will listen to their consumers request? Would it be even economically possible for them to produce two plastic set, one for confederate and one for union? That being said I can live with the inaccuracy of those figures. For now I have bought 3 boxes and I will paint them entirely as Union troops. That will give me a least two "regiments" in shell jacket. I know that NY troops wear that sort of coat but I have no idea of what actual regiment I could portrait? Maybe Campaigner1 or avidgamer could help me on this? I will probably buy some other boxes later and paint them as confederate event if they will be historically inaccurate… They are cheap and, for me, it's a good way to introduce my nephews to wargames without having to paid for two full armies in metal.

"and in watching "Gettysburg" again this weekend I noted a lot of the 20th Maine were wearing the blanket roll."

*Gak!* Don't go by this movie for your history. PLEASE!!!!!!! It is as good as asking 4th graders what the Prussians wore at Waterloo.

"I know that NY troops wear that sort of coat but I have no idea of what actual regiment I could portrait?"

I don't think the NY shells were any where near as prevalent so you might think. Many NY regiments wore Sack coats and photos show this.

"Maybe Campaigner1 or avidgamer could help me on this?"

Read these:

link

link

The bit about the US Government not supplying coats for NY troops? Well… it seems hard to believe and I'll have to do some research on this. It seems at odds to some US Quartermaster reports and NYSV regimental quartermaster reports I have seen.

It is depressing to read that inaccuaries don't matter any longer as long as the figures are cheap. A good range of figures should promote the interest in the differences of uniforms and equipment.

With regards to stae issue coats, New York did issue short dark blue jackets cut like the shell jacket, but with the addition of shoulder straps and blue piping. This state issue jacket was issued to the 1st – 105th New York infantry regiments. This same state jacket was issued to New York's early artillery regiments, but piped in red instead of light blue. Thereafter, all New York regiments of higher number after the 105th, the federal government took over clothing New York troops(meaning that the state jackets gave way to the plain four button dark blue blouses and issue frock coats).

However, in the case of New York, the state issue jackets were very popular with the men, and they apparently took good care of them and kept them as long as possible. So what you probably saw in the field with New York troops was, in 1862 and 1863, a definite mix in the field of some of its men within the same regiment wearing the state jackets, while others had switched over to the government issue blouse(either because the state jackets were wearing out and being replaced or some men chose to adopt the more comfortable blouse out of preference, throwing away the state jackets as soon as the government clothing became available.)

I'm glad someone brought up the state of New York, it's a good example of how the Union states approached clothing its troops at the opening of the Civil War.

Typically, across a general cross section, the Union states initially took it upon themselves to cloth its troops at the start of hostilities, simply because in 1861 the federal government had not yet geared up production enough to cloth all the volunteers flooding into the army.

This situation is what let to the motley assortment of the first Union regiments going to war in militia uniforms, many of them gray, brown, or other color of material that was easily obtainable.

Even more fascinating is that within that chaos, the Union states DID make an attempt to follow the army regulations that were in place at the time. So, what you might find for example in the case of New York, yes it issued its own state jacket, but they did produce in in regulation dark blue, and did make an effort to also provide sky blue trousers. This uniform, while not perfectly regulation, WAS close enough in cut and color to the US army regulations to allow the men to serve until the government could take over clothing the men from the central government clothing depots.

In other words, most Union states tried as far as possible to cloth all its men in "dark blue above and light blue below", whatever the cut of the jacket and trousers might be.

The trouble began of course, when in 1861 blue material began to be bought up by the state purchasing agents, in a mad dash for each state to get the material necessary for its uniforms, and the supply of blue ran short. This forced many states to substitute other colors, most commonly gray. So you'd have early volunteer regiments going off to fight partially clothed in dark blue jackets, partially in gray jackets, and a mix even of sky and dark blue trousers, and this is WITHIN the same regiment!!! And, when it came to garments that required more cloth, like greatcoats and frock coats, the states produced these garments in sky blue, dark blue, brown, gray, and black. Not a good time to be substituting colors when the southern states were also sending its men off to war clothed in state issue blue, gray, brown, and the like as well!

And so, this colorful assortment of state issue and partial government issue is what led to the horrendous confusion at the first Battle of Bull Run. You had several Virgina regiments clothed in dark blue, a Wisconsin regiment clothed in gray, and zouave regiments clothed nearly identically on both sides. Throw in the fact that on top of this you had regiments that had companies clothed differently with the same unit, AND that at that time the confederate battle flag as we know it now did not exist yet, they were still using the first version of the stars and bars(which in the smoke of battle looked an AWFUL lot like the Stars and Stripes of the Union), it's no wonder that regiments accidentally fired into their own men.

Here's some good examples of the evolution of uniform issues of several Union states during the war:

Maine: State issue gray frock coats and trousers to the 1st-6th regiments(replaced with regulation government issue uniforms when the troops reached Washington in 1861), state issue blue uniforms to the 7th, 8th, 9th regiments, government issue regulation uniforms to all regiments after the 9th.

Rhode Island: State issue dark blue loose hunting shirt or tunic, gray trousers, black slouch hats(issued and worn at the First Bull Run). This uniform was issued to the 1st and 2nd Rhode Island Volunteers and worn until at least June of 1862 perhaps, when it was replaced by regulation government issue.

Minnesota: Black broad-brimmed hats. Red, blue, and some checkered flannel shirts worn as the outer uniform jacket, with black trousers issued to its first volunteers in 1861(This uniform was worn by the 1st Minnesota at 1st Bull Run). This non-regulation uniform was replaced by government issue clothing in late July 1861. The 2nd Minnesota was also issued this state clothing initially, but thereafter Minnesota volunteers received regulation government clothing.

By late 1861 to mid-1862, which was roughly when the "transition period" was taking place of state issue uniforms wearing out and/or being replaced by government issue clothing, was when you began to see some standardization in the general appearance of the union army.

Specific units, like the Iron Brigade and some zouave regiments aside(who took it upon themselves to continue to wear distinct items, like the Army Dress hat instead of the forage cap in the case of the Iron Brigade, or French style coats and baggy red trousers instead of regulation dark and sky blue in case of some zouaves), the union army was generally clothed in either the four button blouse, the skirted frock coat, or the issue dress or shell jacket. Trousers by this time were almost universally issued in sky blue to enlisted men, however some states like Maine continued to supply its men with dark blue trousers, being a matter of distinction and a point of pride that Maine was adhering to the clothing regulations that existed just before the Civil War, when DARK blue was the regulation trouser color, not sky blue). *From the 1850's up until December 1861, dark blue was actually the regulation US Army trouser color. After January 1862 the government switched to sky blue as an economy measure to save money on dyeing cloth.*

Those types of distinctions aside, Union troops east and west, were typically clothed in government issue dark above and light blue below. The Army Dress Hat became the preferred headgear out west, modified or cut down to a shorter height. In the east, union troops wore a mix of forage caps and dress hats, as well as slouch hats.

However, even with those generalizations, there were still yet a good many western troops that wore the forage cap, and a good many eastern troops that wore slouch hats. Head gear cannot be pinned down to one theatre of the war or another, as many Civil War buffs attempt to do. It was not a line as rigidly drawn as some historians claim.

It is true however, that the PREVALENT headgear can be pinned down to the eastern and western theatres. It is true that in the east a greater percentage of union troops wore forage caps than slouch hats, while in the west a great percentage wore hats over caps, but my point is that both types of headgear were worn in BOTH theatres, you can't generalize "western troops in hats" and "eastern troops in caps", that's too sweeping and broad.

Don't stop now Campaigner! … you're on a roll! What about some of the other states?

Man, I am learning so much about uniforms in this thread. THIS is EXACTLY why I love TMP. I get to gab with fellow gamers, and get educated by history buffs and scholars too.

And where did you find out all this info. Please tell me it was all in one, inexpensive book : )

I know, it was 20 years of reading, taking notes, and commiting all this to memory because that's just how your mind works, right?

I'll be quite honest, it's really a combination of just having exposed myself to the subject for so long, as well as seeing well-researched impressions done at reenactments. I always gravitated toward units at events that took extra care in researching its uniforms, so that constant visual reminder of seeing good impressions over time kind of burned itself into memory, and you kind of associate those memories with what you read in books and reference books.

Don Troiani's books and prints are an invaluable resource, both visually and reference-wise. That man has uniforms in his very veins. I live in Ct only a few towns over from where he lives, and I went to a seminar he held about his artwork, that was a great experience speaking with him.

What was also essential over the years was seeing up close and in person uniforms in museums, at battlefield parks, etc. I was even fortunate enough on several occasions to view and handle original caps, hats, shirts, and jackets belonging to private collections of whom the owners were generous enough to allow myself and group of my friends to research up close. That experience was also invaluable.

I know there are many mixed feelings with regard to the Osprey series, but in the case of its Civil War Men at Arms series(1-4, State Troops being no. 4), it is some of their best work. In particular, the book on state troops is a great overview of each state that gives you a good general feel about how each state faced its clothing and supply issues at the outbreak of war.

Further reading that I would require are any of the well-known memoirs from the war: Hardtack and Coffee(John Billings), Detailed Minutiae of Soldier Life(John McCarthy?), Company Aytch(Sam Watkins), etc.

I would also recommend Francis A. Lords series of books on Civil War artifacts, in particular the federal one, "They Fought for the Union."

In addition to this reading, I have collected over the past ten years numerous published articles from The Company of Military Historians. This is a SUPERB publication that puts out detailed information regarding specific uniform and equipment items. I have articles on sack coats, trousers, issue shirts and drawers, canteens, cartridge boxes, that are simply irreplaceable in terms of their research value and sheer amount of useful information.

Campaigner,

Hey you missed Echos of Glory? What were you thinkin'? ;)

I double agree with They Fought for the Union. Great reference book.

Miller's Photographic History of the Civil War.

Willey's They Who Fought Here

Lord's CW Collector's Encyclopedia

Have you read Si Klegg and his Pard?

Echos of Glory, indeed!! Time Life right? Miller's Photographic History is biblical in proportion in terms of photographs of troops in the field, another good one!

Lords, indispensible as well.

Good choices avidgamer!

Actually, no Si Klegg is one I have not read!

Man… you gotta get that one. You will _LOVE_ it and appreciate what Si goes through because you have been through it too.

Thanks for the quick rundown. I just started picking up the Ospreys (I have always found them to be a good place to start). Have the first two volumes, have not yet tracked down the State Troops volume, but it's next in line.

Nearly all of the ACW books I have are about battles and campaigns. Very few "detailed" treatments of uniforms, arms, equipment, etc. I have one or two, but not nearly enough to satisfy me.

Just picked up a rather inexpensive Illustrated Directory of Uniforms, Weapons and Equipment of the Civil War (Miller). Which, in addition to drawings of lots of items, has tons of photos of the real deal. At 480 pages, and something illustrated on every page, a nice beginning.

As a gamer, I'm not likely to need super-detailed bits. Once you paint up a regiment of union, hoping that the sculpts got it close to correct, they can be the 10th New York, or the 20th Maine, depending on the game, And if it turns out that the Maine regiments all had dark blue pants to match their coats, oh well. I wasn't specifically trying to paitn the 20th Maine, just a generic union regiment to use for gaming.

But, it's nice to know what they should have. And I'm just anal enough to want to paint a specific regiment, and then I can use it for any union regiment (same for the Rebs). But if somebody were to say "Hey, that's not exactly how that regiment was outfitted" I can at least say "I know, they were painted to be this other regiment, but in this game, they are stand-ins for some other unit."

Again, thanks.
Steve

Would you stop it already! My head is about to explode! LoL No kidding, I found a lot of useful information on this post. Thanks campaigner1 and Avidgamer for the information and the links.

At least this post answer to the question as for if the Perry's venture into plastic will bring a new interest in the ACW.

I think it does now!

You guys scare me ****less. I've been wanting to game this period since I first read my father's Timelife books as a teenager, but never ventured past the mythical Airfix sets. I really wanted to start building a few units and play brigade level scenarios (whole or parts of battles), but now feel put off by this steamroller arguments about uniforms, etc. So what can a ACW ignorant find comfort if he wants to use the Perry sets? Aren't they supposed to be used to bulk units rather than to build them solely from plastic figs?

Kingscarbine,

Yeah you can use the plastics. Sure! Here's what I'd suggest:

1. separate all the plastic figs by coat/jacket type. All Sack coats are Union and Shell jackets are Rebs.

2. Buy either Sash and Saber or Perry metal command groups to go with the plastics. This maximizes the plastics.

3. Buy some Sash and Saber or Perry metal soldiers to get alternative poses.

Done! It's that easy. You'll be rest assured to have accurate armies for both Western and Eastern armies. You'll have both sides covered for the bulk of 90% of all regiments.

That wasn't so hard, was it? :)

Kingscarbine,

Take the plunge!

If I didn't already have 300+ unpainted Old Glory ACW 25's laying around the house, I would be doing the Perry / Sash and Saber combination that avidgamer mentions.

I agree that one should acquire an understanding of the basic uniform and equipage of a time period, but I also believe in making the game your own. I will never be entirely bound by the fact that some figures do not entirely meet the ultimate test for accuracy . . . as someone who has labored for years as a costumed historic interpreter as well as a historical illustrator, I have come to realize the quest for absolute truth is an unattainable goal. Don't get me wrong – I always invest countless hours/days/weeks researching before I paint a picture or present a historical monologue, but sometimes you just have to take the plunge.

At the same time, I also want to applaud Campaigner1 and avidgamer for their passionate attention to historical details. I believe in having my cake and eating it too . . .

kingscarbine,

No need to be scared ****less! Just do what the fellow above recommended. Use the Perry sack coat sculpts for Union troops and use the shell jacket sculpts for Confederate, then buy up a bunch of those boxed sets to bulk out your armies. Then buy some metal commmands/personalities/artillery/zouaves, etc. from Sash and Saber, Dixon, Old Glory, Redoubt or what have you, to round it all out!

Mike

Listen folks, I just want to reassure everybody who may be intimidated by the "button counting" going on here with those who have a love for historical detail (that phrase makes me chuckle because it's in reenacting circles as well), that's not what this is about!

When I go about looking for "accurate figures" or "correct figures", it's not a matter of OH NO, I just bought a bunch of Dixon Zouaves and they have the wrong cuff lengths! That's not historical detail, that's hyper obssession.

What I've always tried to achieve and instill in gamers is gettting the "averages" right! THAT is what counts when getting the look of ACW armies right. And that's why you have to pay attention to details like the frequency of a certain canteen type OR the frequency of a jacket type, or the frequency of a hat or cap occurence in a body of troops.

There were so many variations in, for example, the simple Union four button blouse that was produced during the war(I know of SEVENTY-EIGHT documented versions of the sack coat made by different contractors from 1861-1865!!!). It is futility to try to even pursue those differences on a wargaming table. And I can tell you that some of those blouses were made with different amounts of buttons, different collars, some had exterior pockets, etc. NOW, there is no way on earth I would ever even attempt to try to reach that level in 25mm, but what I am trying to do is to get a Union army that is bulked out in generic sack coats from several miniatures manufacturers so that a correct uniformed average is achieved on the table.

So with that heavy analysis out the way, here is a straightforward and direct way to achieve good, balanced, average looking 25 ACW forces without driving yourself nuts over buttons, cuffs, collars, shoe laces, moustache and beard length(lol), etc:

UNION ARMY:
*Buy LOTS and LOTS of the Perry boxed sets, bulk out infantry units and use all the sack coat(four-button blouse) only sculpts for your Union troops. (Put aside all the shell jacket sculpts for confederate infantry units.)

*Buy some infantry packs from Sash and Saber, Redoubt, or Dixon to achieve some mixes in style in your units. Remember to buy mostly sack coat figures, but also buy some frock coat sculpts to round things out.

*Buy metal command groups, and flag bearers(2 per each regiment you build. Union regiments each carried two flags, one national, and one state flag) to round out the infantry units.

*Buy up some generic and average artillery pieces(Napoleons, Ordnance Rifles, 10 lb. Parrots) and crews in shell jackets and sack coats.

*Buy enough figures to make one or two "special units", maybe one regiment of zouaves(which can represent alot of different zouave units depending on your scenarios) and perhaps a couple stands worth of Berdan Sharpshooters, etc.

*Buy up some generic cavalry from Sash and Saber, Dixon, Redoubt. Also remember to buy up some figures enough to make some dismounted cavalry stands so you can represent cavalry units fighting on foot.

CONFEDERATE ARMY:

*Use all the shell jacket sculpts left over from the boxed sets of Perry's stuff to bulk out the infantry.

*Buy command figures in metal(most confederate regiments carried one flag each, as opposed to union regiments carrying two per regiment), buy drummers, officers, etc.

*Buy artillery pieces, but get mostly Napoleons, and fewer Ordnance Rifles and Parrots (to reflect the confederate armies having less rifled pieces than the Union armies), and get confederate artillery crews with SHELL JACKETS, DON'T get generic Civil War crews in sack coats.

*Generic Confederate cavalry same as Union cavalry, but with perhaps a greater quantity of confederate troopers in hats than with caps.

*Zouave units or special units same as above with Union forces, but paint up maybe one historically correct confederate zouave unit based on a specific unit(like Wheat's Tigers, for example), and use it as different zouave units as needed).

*NOTE about buying things like personalities, generals. I personally have purchased a few actual "general sculpts" for both my Union and Confederate armies(the Dixon Meade, Longstreet, etc.), but I found it's not important to actually have say, LONGSTREET or GRANT or HOOD on the table for accurate-specific scenarios. You can drive yourself nuts trying to match up miniatures of generals to actual scenarios on the table top. So what I did was I bought a few historical general sculpts(for the fun of it), and many generic ones, and simply use all of them as generic brigade, division, corps commanders, etc. In 25mm I don't worry too much that my General Grant figure is being used for a corps commander at Gettysburg, or my Lee figure is being used as a mounted brigade commander in a western scenario.

Of course, if you are playing a scenario, and you have the opportunity to actually use your Meade figure for Gettysburg, or Grant for your Wilderness scenario, by all means do so! It adds flavor to the whole thing if you happen to have the correct personalities on the table now and then.

Side note: I'm still bugged by using the shell jacket sculpts as confederate soldiers because of all of them having federal issue canteens(a point here- confederates DID use captured federal issue canteens quite extensively, but there were still many more thousands of confederates that carried southern made issue ones – the Perry boxed sets force you to have all your rebels with federal canteens, a better idea would have been a mix of federal issue and southern made canteens), but the plastics still do a good job of bulking out infantry units as a whole. Maybe future Perry releases will consider a seperate Union and confederate boxed set where they include those details of confederate-made items.

I'd also like to see some of the Perry plastics with knapsacks, that was another surprising thing missing from the boxed sets. The blanket rolls are great, because they were used generically by both sides, but it would have been neat to have had some of the sculpts with with federal issue knapsacks. That is another item that is perfect to have on any sculpt because confederates did use captured knapsacks at times.

Mike

As a general guideline, when a spring campaigne opened, soldiers in the federal armies were given the choice of which coat to take into the field with them, the sack coat or the frock coat. It was left up to them to shake out their own campaigning outfit. So, they would either decide on the four button blouse, or the 9-button skirted frock. A very, very small percentage of infantry soldiers actually made a third choice – the tight-fitting shell jacket. This was a matter of personal appearance and pride I suppose, it couldn't have been chosen for comfort, it wasn't a garment that made for comfortable campaigning. Nevertheless, you would always find soldiers here and there wearing this tight dress coat during the hottest campaigning months of the year!

So it's a very good choice on a wargaming table to have your federal units wearing a mix of sacks and frocks in your average infantry units.

Mike,

Thank you very much for this small guide. It has certainly helped me see the light. Have you seen the SALUTE 2008 pics of the Perry ACW game? Very nice.

Cheers

"Nevertheless, you would always find soldiers here and there wearing this tight dress coat during the hottest campaigning months of the year!"

There is a pic in Miller's that was taken in 1864 out West. Strangely for me anyone… shows on company. In this company every private is wearing a Sack coats and ALL the NCO's are wearing Frock. Kinda weird the uniformilty of that. Perhaps the NCO's got together and went this way as a matter of esprit du corps? I don't know but it does stand out and perhaps that is what they were trying to do.

I don't know what to build. Maybe some units for the Peninsula Campaign but haven't decided yet.

There seems to be two types of kepis and several slouch hats in the box. What types are better for each states? Did the Confederates use a characteristic type of kepi and did the Federals mix slouch hats with kepis?

Cheers

If it is a problem then buy from another manufacturer. These models are for people who want to game ACW at a reasonable cost. 6mm figures must give you conniptions.

"There seems to be two types of kepis and several slouch hats in the box. What types are better for each states?"

For slouch hats it doesn't matter. Those are typical and there were many styles.

Aactually there are NO Kepis in the box. They are all Forage caps. There were mainly two types of Forage caps: McDowell and the bummer's style. The difference is only in the visor. The Kepi was used mainly by Rebs, officers and Chassuer styled uniformed troops such as the 14th Brooklyn.

"Did the Confederates use a characteristic type of kepi"

See above. Rebs didn't wear that many Forage caps, mainly Kepis or slouch with mostly slouch. There was no certain type of Kepi.

"and did the Federals mix slouch hats with kepis?"

See above. Federals in the East wore mostly Forage caps and a mix of slouch and out West just the reverse.

Of course this is discounting all Zouaves and other special units.

Thanks for the explanation Avidgamer. I checked the box and there's definitely two different Forage caps and what seems like a kepi (it's shorter and more compact). I equiped the Union soldiers mainly with Forage caps and the Rebs with slouch hats and "Kepis".