"Color of Union trousers vs. Confederate trousers" Topic

I am interested in the color comparison of the sky blue trousers of the Union versus the light blue of the Confederacy. In matching to vintage trousers I find the Vallejo Pastel Blue seems a near perfect match for the Union sky blue, but wonder if that would be the best color for using on Confederate trousers? If not does anyone have a suggested color?

Thanks,

Terry

I thought Confederates didn't wear blue trousers much after the opening salvoes?

I'd imagine if the CSA used sky blue pants they would probably be captured stock.

I was under the impression that dye lots varied wildly on both sides. I've looked at (supposedly) historically accurate replicas for Union trousers and found a surprising range of blues. "Lighter than navy" was about the only thing to describe them all. I will watch this thread with interest, as I would appreciate clarification as well.

link

link

To add to the confusion – one man's CSA trousers with a variety of blues and blue gray. Late war, bottom of the page:

link

The official uniform of the "regular" Confederate army included light blue trousers. I'm guessing that they meant them to be just like the Union's ones, for simplicity's sake.

That said, most volunteer units were initially uniformed privately or by their states, with whatever appealed to them and/or was available. Eventually the Confederate War Department provided replacements, and I suspect that these were gray or blue-gray. Also, many Union stocks were captured and used.

After one week in the field/march/campaign, dirt was the predominant color.

Gentlemen, some really excellent feedback. I was looking for more of what would have been CSA regulation since I will be doing a unit in the proposed gray frock coat with light blue facings, cap top and trousers. I know this was truly more of a proposed uniform than one that saw much reality, but it will make for a nice looking unit. Thanks again,

Terry

If any Confederates ever wore sky blue trousers as per the official regulations, it was because they raided Union depots or took them off the battlefield.

For Confederate uniform & equipment info go to this website:

link

Lots of info for painting ordinary Rebs.

I read something once about the light blue dyes turning a bit greenish as they weathered/faded. I know I painted up a few regiments with that in mind-used a green wash.

Rebs who used Union clothing would try to boil the blue color out of it

Always worth boiling another chaps trousers -especially if he died in them!!

Longstreet's Corps went west in sky blue pants in 1863. Many Confederate units continued to wear them long after 1861. Many first hand accounts exist of Longstreet's men and what the soldiers already out west thought of their uniforms when they arrived.

"Longstreet's troops had recently been newly uniformed, consisting of a dark-blue round jacket, closely fitting, with light-blue trousers, which made a line of Confederates resemble that of the enemy, the only difference being the "cut" of the garments—the Federals wearing a loose blouse instead of a tight-fitting jacket. The uniforms of the Eastern troops made quite a contrast with the tattered and torn homemade jeans of their Western brethren." Augustus Dickert, 3rd South Carolina Infantry, Kershaw's Brigade

"Our first impression was partly caused by the color of their uniform, but more by its uniformity, and the superior style of their equipments, in haversacks, canteens, and knapsacks. The contrast between them and Gen'l Bragg's motley, ragged troops was striking in the extreme." Army of Tennessee artillerist

The Yankees, too, noticed and were confused by the appearance of Longstreet's men. At Chickamauga the men of the 125th Ohio hesitated to fire on Hood's advancing troops because of their uniforms.

"Those moving battalions did appear to wear blue, dusty blue, and probably they were clothed in blue jeans. The were Longstreet's men, just arrived from Virginia. We had never seen a Confederate clothed otherwise than in butternut or gray." Charles Clarke, 125th Ohio

Even General Ulysses S. Grant experienced an embarrassing encounter when he arrived in the area weeks later.

"General Longstreet's corps was stationed there at the time, and wore blue of a little different shade from our uniform. Seeing a soldier in blue on this log, I rode up to him, commenced conversing with him, and asked whose corps he belonged to. He was very polite, and, touching his hat to me, said he belonged to General Longstreet's corps. I asked him a few questions—but not with a view of gaining any particular information—all of which he answered, and I rode off." General US Grant

An example of the uniform in question. The scan is a little washed out, in fact the colors were a bit more pronounced.

Different battle but same light blue pants can be seen.

jpipes that is interesting. It also argues for a distinctly different appearance between the eastern and western CSA armies.

I have heard and read/seen somewhere that a lot of uniforms imported from England in the last couple years of the war, were dark blue shell jacket and a vivid sky blue trousers. I've seen pictures of them somewhere and they could easily be mistaken for Union uniforms. And yes, heard they were distributed to Longstreets Corps.

The "blue" jackets that Longstreet's corps was issued were made from imported "English Army Cloth" tens of thousands of yards of this material, as well as bales of ready-to-wear clothing of the same material came into the Confederacy from early 1863 until the end of the war.

It was a bluish-grey material and the included image is of an original jacket produced with this material by Peter Tait & Co,

here's an image of the inside of the collar of a similar jacket. Note the deep bluish-grey coloring.

link

Most, if not all, of those trousers issued with the English Army Cloth jackets were actually a mid-blue jeans cloth material. It was a darker blue wool weft woven onto a cotton warp. The unbleached cotton lightened the darker blue thread and gave it the mid-blue/grey appearance.

Here's a good example.

link

It is true that exposure to the elements caused fading of the colors, due to their organic/natural dyes. However, this didn't result in a Robin's Egg shade or even lighter blue. It tended to, as posted above develop a greenish-greyish shade. Added to this was the effects of red-clay mud, road dust and other grime & grease, and by the end of a campaign, most trousers (on either side) tended to be of a shabby dust-greyish blue with stains of reddish/terracotta along the lower portions of the trousers, as well as knees and butts.

Terry,
What unit will this be?

Tom

TKindred: interesting info! Thanks.

If you put a drop of grass green in your light blue that will do it.

Just out of interest – why are some US commenters using the word 'trousers' instead of 'pants'?

Because, technically, that's what they are?

"Pants" would be short for "pantaloons," I suppose.

Trousers was also the term used by the military during that period. I still use it today.

You will also, if you study the material culture of the ACW, come across the terms "jeans" and "jeanscloth". It is sometimes called "slave cloth" and, somewhat archaically, "homespun, though it isn't the same as the 18th century term.

All of this refers to material that is made up of both wool & cotton, with one used for the weft, and the other for the warp. It has a somewhat coarse feel to it, and you can, if you look closely, see the diagonal weaves of the two materials.

Often, this material was made of natural, unbleached material which have it a very light, greyish color. More often, it was vat dyed in an entire bolt, though occasionally, it was piece dyed as garments were made up. From time to time, it was also made up of plain cotton thread, but with dyed wool.

It was inexpensive material to make, wore very well, but like all materials with natural dyes, faded with exposure to both sunlight and the elements.

Trousers in this period were also quite high-waisted and came with buttons for suspenders, also called braces. Interestingly, neither side issued suspenders. Most fellows used the adjustment belt or cords in the back to keep them well-fitting and many also used a thin leather belt, worn just under the suspender buttons in lieu of suspenders. the buttons resting on the top edge of the belt.

But I digress…….

Trousers was the common term then, and still remains so among many folks.

"I read something once about the light blue dyes turning a bit greenish as they weathered/faded. I know I painted up a few regiments with that in mind-used a green wash."
Spot on, Happy Little Trees:
When my wife, I and our partner were in a reenactors fabric supply business, she obtained a few small snippets from an inside seam (unexposed to light and without a lot of direct contact with weather) of a pair of original non-issued "sky blue" trousers that were being deconstructed and reconstructed by a private military clothing museum restoration team. Our partner's father, an industrial chemist, did some chemical analyses on the samples, which turned out to have copper sulphate as one of the dye components, hence the peacock blue coloration. Also, my wife found that there were 49 _documented_ different shades of "sky blue" wool as issued during the war by the Federal Army for its troops. Sooooo…mix up a BUNCH of sky blues and paint away! You're probably going to match somebody's pants!

Also, for a long while the conventional wisdom amongst reenactors was that the uniforms were sewn with brown thread, because people who had gotten opportunities to examine period uniforms saw the brown seams with their own eyes. Sorry to say, the threads started out blue or black and over the decades they slowly faded to a brown, since the dyes held onto the wool faster than to the cotton thread.

The thing to remember about all those different shades was that it was virtually impossible to get matching fabric from one bolt to the next. So many variables went into the final article. It wasn't until the modern use of computer-assisted aniline dyes that producers were able to get consistent color from one lot to another.

So many variables to deal with. Starting with the type of wool, and the amount of lanolin in it. Even from one herd to another with the same breed, differences in feed could affect the lanolin content. THAT affected how well the dyes took hold.

Then you have the water and how much and what type of minerals might be in it. Then there is the type of vat to be used: stone, iron, copper, all also had an effect upon the final product. The mordant also impacts the resulting material. Then, finally, comes the material used to produce the dye itself.

Most sky blue material was manufactured with indigo, which
used urine as a mordant. In fact, virtually every pair of modern blue jeans from high end makers like Levi Strauss, uses indigo with a urine mordant.

The indigo was diluted with other chemicals, as noted by capncarp. Then the cloth was immersed and the waiting began.

Originally, when the US Army went to sky blue trousers with the December 1861 uniform changes, the material was to be made with unbleached wool mixed with indigo dyed wool (warp & weft) to produce what the regulations called "Saxon Blue". This, due to the massive increase in the army, was mostly disregarded in lieu of vat-dyed cloth.

A good primer on clothing & equipment is "Todd's Military Equipage 1851-1872". Originally issued in 3 volumes, there is a good single-volume abridged work available at many NPS bookstores as well as online. It was produced by The Company of Military Historians and well-footnoted and with an excellent bibliography.

link

Hello Tim,

I'll second your recommendation for Todd's Military Equipage. My copy is well worn after all these years.

The use of a thin belt to hold up one's trousers in a new one to me. I'll have to try it out as I hate wearing suspenders. Either a shell jacket or a sack coat is confining enough, especially once all one's traps are added. Thanks for the suggestion.

The 'sky blue' Union trousers were specified as Saxe blue'which was a medium blue/grey.
The Tait uniforms came in a variety of dark blue/grey,dark grey and mid grey,both with collar and round cuffs in black and royal blue.
They seem to be of a similar pattern to the 'Richmond depot'
shell jackets.
Some of Longstreets troops were issued with a Chasseur style uniform,dark blue jacket and lighter blue trousers.

Mugie, what's your source? I always thought that the Tait jackets were dark blue w hint of grey.

Not questioning. Just curious. (And impressed).

The Tait jackets came with either blue or red collars and epaulettes. These could be either solid color or piping. It was either one or the other. A couple of extant Tait jackets have, as is seen in several Richmond Depot jackets, their epaulettes cut off close to the shoulder seam. It's posited that this was done as a response to losing a button to hold them in place. But the practice might also have been to keep them in line with the newer, 2rd pattern jackets from Richmond. Who knows for certain?

Anyway, here's a bit on the red-trimmed Tait jacket:

link

Chris Daley's research page is an excellent source of studies of original uniforms.

cjdaley.com/research.htm

Delta acrylic ‘Cape Cod Blue' is a perfect shade for the trousers, whether jean material or not. With the addition of a little white, black or blue, you can vary the shade to match most pictures and photos of the trousers.

link

It also argues for a distinctly different appearance between the eastern and western CSA armies.

I think that's now more or less a given. The Western armies were at the back of the line for all manner of things as units were further from State supplies and key manufacturing areas.

Also I fancy when it came down to it State Governors were less inclined to send stuff away from what most of them would have felt the heart of the war, not to mention the seat of government.