"Union head wear ... anything goes?" Topic

You hear a lot about Confederates dressing in non-issue civilian clothes, but what about Union soldiers? Take a close look at this view of 47 engineers at the Petersburg lines in 1864,

link

and it really gives you the impression that when it came to choice of headwear at least, just about anything was permitted. By my count, 26 of the 48 have non-regulation headwear, which includes 17 felt hats of varying description, and 9 kepis. The others all appear to have the issue forage cap.

Of course, some of these items could have been worn off duty (e.g. the guy with the big straw hat sitting fifth from left), but most appear to have the engineer badge and thus were likely worn on duty.

Otherwise, the 4-button fatigue blouse ('sack coat') seems to be universal.

Any thoughts?

For Union soldiers it is most likely that at LEAST 90% (mid-62 until the end) of eastern soldiers (and probably western) wore the Sack coat and the rest would be Frocks. I'd be willing to bet no civilian coats or jacket would be allowed to be worn.

For eastern head gear (mid-62 until the end) 70% Forage caps
and the rest slouch hats. In the west it might be completely reversed percentages.

In a lot of period pics you do see frocks in greater percentage than many gamers (and sculptors) realize. At Gettysburg, Burling's entire brigade wore Frocks in addition to the 147th NY from Cutler's.

"For Union soldiers it is most likely that at LEAST 90% (mid-62 until the end) of eastern soldiers (and probably western) wore the Sack coat and the rest would be Frocks. I'd be willing to bet no civilian coats or jacket would be allowed to be worn."

I don't think this is quite right, if for no other reason than New York issued a shell jacket to at least some of it's troops. I doubt that any Federals in the main armies would wear civilian clothing other than headgear though.

The NY shells stopped being issued in late-62 so it is about right.

Don't forget that CW photos are not generally taken on the battlefield (except afterwards) or "on campaign" but generally in camp. Soldiers often dress differently in different circumstances.

They would NOT wear non-military coats in the field and in camp why would they have an additional civilian coat with them? That makes no sense.

Some Ohio volunteer regiments were issued roundabout type shell jackets.

By mid/late 1862 shells, Chasseurs and zouaves would probably make up less than 1%. I am talking just about infantry for this. Artillery and cav would obviously be different, they wore shells more often than Sacks (or in equal measure).

That is a fine photograph. The Union blue looks almost like a medium blue in that picture.

Would troops have "additional civilian" hats aLong with them just for camp wear?
Regards
Russ Dunaway

The soldiers obviously never liked to carry extra stuff if they could avoid it. Generally speaking they didn't carry an extra hat/cap. Why would you anyway? You might use a straw hat temporarily and leave your Forage cap in your knapsack. Straw hats do not last very long in the field but you'd only really wear one hat/cap and when that wears out get a new one.

One note… soldiers DID carry stocking caps for sleeping in colder months but not very likely to wear that on duty.

My best guess on this question is that it was up to the officers at the regimental, or even brigade level (?) to decide whether they were going to vigorously enforce uniform regulations and disallow civilian add-ons. Perhaps this would depend on whether the troops were on campaign (marching, in the trenches, etc.) or in a more permanent camp.

The forage caps and kepis were regarded as looking very smart and military, but were less practical for daily wear. A wool cap can be uncomfortable in the heat of the day, and is not as good for keeping the sun or rain off one's head.

On a related point, it's pretty obvious that civilian shirts were also widely tolerated, as you can see from this photo.

Great photo. What is that huge structure behind them, some kind of shelter?

YouTube link

Officers and sometimes soldiers did indeed wear non-regulation civilian items while on campaign. The following account is from James Jackson Purman of the 140th PA Infantry and is taken from a much longer account of his actions in the Wheatfield on the 2nd day of Gettysburg. I am working on a book on the subject.

"On the morning before the battle I had a presentiment. I was much impressed, and spoke to Sergeant, afterward Captain, John A. Burns of my company about it, making him my executor. He laughed at my forebodings, but did not dispel them. I was wearing a broad-brimmed straw hat, a conspicuous mark, and so before going into the battle exchanged my hat with James A. Woods, the drummer of my company, for his cap. I never met him again until at a reunion at Gettysburg, twenty-six years afterward. His first salutation was: "Lieutenant, where's my cap?" "

Clearly from this account well into the course of the war soldiers, and in this case officers, wore non-regulation uniform items. I have been planning to make stand of infantry for my 15mm collection that includes a LT wearing a broad straw hat! Soldiers were also well known to wear civilian issue shirts under their coats as well.

I think there was very practical matters that played into each situation -- what is not avalable is simply not avaiable -- I know in the late 60s a Marine in Nam did not look anything like A Marine at Cammp pendelton or Lejune and don't tell me they did because I was there, wearing my Iowa state (not regulation) baseball cap.
Come to think of it, I don't think Tanks come with peace symbols painted on the side either?
Regards
Russ Dunaway

This photo taken in camp shows little tolerance for non-regulation caps among the ranks.

link

Notice the interesting mix of frock coats and fatigue coats, and at least one soldier with a 9-button shell jacket.

Like I said above-- "there are very practical matters that play into each situation". I am quite sure that everything varied from unit to unit, situation to situation, commanding officers, etc? I do not think the "one size fits all" applies here.
Regards
Russ Dunaway

Old Glory 16 May 2012 1:42 p.m. PST

I think there was very practical matters that played into each situation -- what is not avalable is simply not avaiable -- I know in the late 60s a Marine in Nam did not look anything like A Marine at Cammp pendelton or Lejune and don't tell me they did because I was there, wearing my Iowa state (not regulation) baseball cap.
Come to think of it, I don't think Tanks come with peace symbols painted on the side either?
Regards
Russ Dunaway

*NJH: LOL! Instead of my issue baseball cap, I wore a Marine Corps fatigue cap, because it fit nicely in my back pocket. When you spend most of your day crawling around in small spaces a hat becomes a liability. I was never hassled about my choice of headgear.

DCW1962 16 May 2012 12:07 p.m. PST
…….

On a related point, it's pretty obvious that civilian shirts were also widely tolerated, as you can see from this photo.

*NJH: I have a letter from one of my kinfolk (34th MA VI, IIRC) writng home asking for shirts for the unit.

DJCoaltrain,
In the Marines it would actually be a "utility cap" and
not a fatigue cover?

Latrine = head
mess = galley
bunk = rack
hat = cover
door = hatch
floor = deck
barracks = hootch
fatigues = utilities
Etc ,Etc, Etc


Never a soldier = how insulting !!!!= ALWAYS A MARINE !!
How surprised I was when I hit the Nam and observed the lack of "high and tights" on all of my fellow Marines -- also the facial hair -- I tried but had just turned 18 so was unable?? I recall commenting to a buddy of mine – " I don't think we are in Kansas any more" ???
I also witnessed Tunnel rats carrying sawed off 12 guages -- me thinks not issue???

I actually only wore my cap in whatever camp I was in -- Like you -- no hat for me most of the time either --bandana alot though.
Aye Aye Sir !!!
Russ Dunaway

Great photo. What is that huge structure behind them, some kind of shelter?

That is an awning, a fairly common structure you can see in many Civil War photos. Here's another example but without the leaves and branches over it.
link Made to keep the sun, and perhaps some of the weather, off of them.

Head gear of the ANV on campaign. I'd say these guys were veterans.

link

I'd swear some look like they still have black powder on their faces.

That is an outstandingly clean print! Beautiful. This group seems less beardy than many.