"A Uniform for the ANV. " Topic

FWIW, here's a very interesting article by Fred Adolphus, a leading expert on Confederate clothing and equipment.

He suggests that the Richmond Depot had settled on a "style" of uniform for the ANV by late 1863 and that, by the time the Wilderness rolls around, the majority of Lee's army would have been clothed in a similar style and color, at least for jackets and caps. It's worth the few minutes to read and contemplate.

link

Great article and an accurate one.

Very interesting. You make a good case.

Also very interesting. The three articles you have posted sure add a lot to our knowledge of Confederate uniforms.

I've forwarded all of them to our collection curator since we have several Confederate uniforms/pieces in our museum collection (Miss. Dept. of Archives & History).

Thanks,

Jim

So what happened to the eye witness reports that disagreed with this theory?

What paint color is "cadet gray?"

Cadet grey is a grey with a bluish cast to it, similar to modern West Point and The Citadel dress uniforms. It was the color of the majority of CS officer uniforms, and multiple examples of it can be seen in the clothing of Lee, Stuart, Longstreet, etc at the Museum of the Confederacy in Richmond.

Here is an original officer's jacket made in this color:

Here is a sample of Cadet Grey broadcloth from a modern mill. This is closer to what you see in the original uniform's interior seams, etc, and how the uniform would have appeared new, prior to being exposed to the elements:

Lastly, here is an image of Lee after the surrender, wearing his uniform and digitally colorized.

Here's JEB Stuart's uniform at the Museum of the Confederacy:

link

Dan 055 writes:

So what happened to the eye witness reports that disagreed with this theory?

The theory put forward is one based upon solid research, as well as for the late period of the war. It considers a specific "style" of uniform for the ANV, but not for the AoT, AotG, or other state forces.

State troops, newly raised and forwarded to the ANV would have been wearing whatever their state issued them from their own stores and depot(s). Not all units would have been completely outfitted, but considering the staggering amount of fabric both manufactured and imported, along with the amazing amounts of clothing, both produced by the CS as well as manufactured uniforms shipped in the abroad (especially the Peter Tait goods) the vast majority of Confederate troops in the ANV would have been very well clothed, and of a uniform "style" and color by the time the Wilderness campaign begins.

By uniform, we must remember that the idea of an exact match between dye lots was unheard of. When the author says "Cadet Grey" he is referring to a shade that could run a gamut from light to dark, one batch slightly more bluish-grey, while another more greyish-blue, but all obviously centered around a known and desired hue. Considering the fact that different organic dyes were used, different sheep with varying amounts of lanolin in their wool, vary hardness of water, varying mordants, and even the types of container used for the dying process (stone, copper, clay, etc) would all have an impact on the final color of the lot of fabric being dyed.

Plus, the uniforms would have been of what today is known by collectors and researchers as either the "Type-II" or "Type-III" jacket, and although made to a standard pattern, variances would occur between seamstress's abilities and speed of production.

Same with accouterments. Researchers and archivists, collectors, and so forth have all sorts of nomenclature to identify the different styles and makers of cartridge boxes, cap boxes, belts, scabbards and what not. However, to the soldier, it was a cartridge box, or a belt, etc.

For our sakes, the only thing we need concern ourselves with is the color the leather was dyed, or whether it was oiled instead. In fact, as research has shown, much of the "russet" or "brown" accouterments were originally dyed black, but as the blacking wore off over time, what was left was a darkish brown shade, rather than an actual, original color of the materials.

But uniformity for accouterments meant usually everyone having a similar "set" of gear, rather than actual maching styles. For example, as long as the box was built to hold the proper caliber of ammunition, when a request for, say, 250 cartridge boxes came in, the QM or Ordnance officer filling the request simply took the first 250 boxes he had available and shipped them to the unit requesting them.

But back to the original point: Some variance did occur in all the armies. Having said that, the idea of the ragged, rugged, rebel barefoot and carrying grandpa's squirrel rifle is a direct result of the post-war mythos of the Lost Cause. Modern research shows that the opposite was the norm.

V/R

The ragged reb was a very true creature and did exist, however it was mainly in 1862 during the Antietam campaign when the supply system pretty much broke down as it was early and hadn't been geared up for a long term war yet. It also existed at the very end of the war as the two great Southern armies were finally beaten and in full retreat.

I am however, not sure about the original premise of the article. I know for certain that North Carolina continued to produce uniforms for her own troops until the end of the war. They did supply uniforms to Longstreet's Corps when it was freezing after the Knoxville debacle. Also, the gray of that uniform was so dark that some of Longstreet's men in the Wilderness were mistaken for Union troops.

I've also read that German prisoners during WWII were supplied with NC uniforms captured near the end of the war. So there were lots of them.

Actually, the uniforms that Longstreet's men wore at Chickamauga were issued from the Richmond Depot prior to their leaving to join Bragg's men. The uniforms were made up from the large stores of English Army cloth that had been imported for the previous several months, and was now arriving in batches of several thousand yards per week.

The English Army cloth had a pronounced bluish tint to it, and was, as you say, darker than the other grays in use, especially by the Columbus and Atlanta depots which supplied much of Bragg's troops.

These issues to Longstreet started shortly after December of 1862, while much of the Corps was encamped around Fredericksburg. Polley, the Hood's Brigade biographer, as well as Harold Simpson, both mention these issues.

By the time of the Wilderness Campaign, the majority of Longstreet's Corps would have been wearing clothing issued by the central government out of Richmond, possibly supplemented by issues from other depots such as Columbus, Charleston, etc.

It is true that by the time of Antietam, Lee's forces were of a motley appearance. The commutation system had been discarded and the central government issues had yet to be fully ramped up. However, there were some states like North Carolina and Georgia which continued to provide sufficient clothing for their troops, while other units, like the Texans and Floridians who were too far removed to receive adequate and timely provisioning from their respective states. It's one of the reasons that the central government stepped in and took over much of the issuing of clothing from early 1863 to the end of the war.

Those times when uniform issues, as well as rations, became difficult were due, in almost every case, to the lack of adequate transportation for the supply system, and not due to production of the needed articles. Lee himself writes of this on numerous occasions and those accounts may be found amongst his reports in the book "The Wartime Papers of RE Lee". Interestingly enough, Lee mentions that his army never lacked for sufficient amounts of ammunition, or medical supplies. Interesting reading, to be sure.

V/R

TK- Great information, thanks for that! Clears up a lot of misconceptions that have become commonplace.

A very interesting thread (no pun intended).

TK-While I agree with much of what you have said, I believe the Confederate army of 1864 wasn't quite as "uniform" as you suggest. At the outset of the campaign there would have been soldiers and even units that were not with the army when they drew their new uniforms. Then once the campaign got under way uniforms would have been damaged or lost. For U.S. troops a source of replacements would have been the merchants who travelled with the army. For Confederates it would be whatever they could procure.

"Actually, the uniforms that Longstreet's men wore at Chickamauga were issued from the Richmond Depot prior to their leaving to join Bragg's men."

I wasn't referring to what they wore at Chickamauga. After that there was the siege of Chatanooga then Knoxville. After Knoxville the corps was in terrible shape and was resupplied from NC sources. Hence the darker gray they were wearing during the Wilderness.

Bill N:

I agree. Have you read the article I linked to? His argument rings very true that the Richmond Depot had begun to prioritize construction of clothing to use the stocks of English Army cloth to manufacture coats and caps, and then the remnants of that material along with other stores of cloth to make trousers.

However, the sheer amount of clothing produced far exceeds the numbers of Lee's men in 1864, and shows that there would have been little difficulty in providing sufficient clothing to keep the men in fairly good stead.
From this article:

link

I quote this portion:

Second, research in this area has been affected by a school of thought that contends that Confederate resources, across the board, were uniformly inadequate to supply the army's needs, and that what Johnny Reb did receive in the way of clothing came overwhelmingly from the home folks. Obviously, in such a situation, there were no uniforms. Therefore, there's no point in looking for them.

Certainly, this school of thought was spawned and influenced by post-war Southern historical writing, much of which was directed towards justifying the Confederacy's efforts. Out of this school came the emphasis on the "ragged rebel." While certainly truthful at times, such as during the Sharpsburg campaign, the "ragged rebel" came to personify the Confederate soldier for the whole war. For southern apologists, it was a perfect image. Not only was the "ragged rebel" appealing as a staunch individualist fighting for his independence despite a lack of almost everything with which to do it, he also served as a plausible explanation for Confederate defeat. The more ragged and lacking he was in basic equipment, the more glorious his victories and the easier to accept his defeat. Other factors, such as unequal heavy industry, railroads, armament production and naval power were certainly far more powerful in their effects on the war effort than the clothing on the soldier's back, but the "ragged rebel" stood as a convenient symbol that has unfortunately obscured much of what the Confederacy accomplished, and has even diverted attention from some of the other things that went wrong." 4

Strangely enough, much of the legend-building was accomplished by a limited number of individuals, many of them the sons and daughters of the veterans.5 Most of the veterans themselves, in their reminiscences, never addressed the problems of supply at all, and of those that did, a surprising number challenged the prevailing view. As an example, W.W. Blackford, who served on General J.E.B. Stuart's staff, noted:

"…In books written since the war, it seems to be the thing to represent the Confederate soldier as being in a chronic state of starvation and nakedness. During the last year of the war this was partially true, but previous to that time it was not any more than falls to the lot of all soldiers in an active campaign. Thriftless men would get barefooted and ragged and waste their rations to some extent anywhere, and thriftlessness is found in armies as well as at home. When the men came to houses, the tale of starvation, often told, was the surest way to succeed in foraging… " 6

A close look at contemporary Confederate records, in­cluding those for the blackest period of the war, reveal some startling statistics. For example, during the last six months of 1864 and including to 31 January 1865, the Army of Northern Virginia alone was issued the following:

104,199 Jackets 140,570 Pairs of Trousers 167,862 Pairs of Shoes
157,727 Cotton Shirts 170,139 Pairs of Drawers 146,136 Pairs of Shoes
74,851 Blankets 27,011 Hats and Caps 21,063 Flannel Shirts
4,861 Overcoats

These were field issues only, and did not include issues to men on furlough, detailed at posts, paroled and exchanged prisoners or any other issues. Moreover, these were over­whelmingly central government issues, and did not include issues by any states except part of North Carolina's. During this same period, Georgia provided to the Confederate Army as a whole, over and above the figures quoted above:

26,795 Jackets 28,808 Pairs of Trousers 37,657 Pairs of Shoes
24,952 Shirts 24,168 Pairs of Drawers 23,024 Pairs of Socks
7,504 Blankets 7

At this same time, field returns showed the Army of Northern Virginia with a maximum strength of 66,533, including 4,297 officers. 8 Obviously, because of personnel turnover, the actual number of people in the army was somewhat greater; but at the same time it is obvious that with the exception of overcoats, hats and caps, and flannel shirts, many of which had already been provided, the Army of Northern Virginia was not only well supplied, but in some cases extravagantly so.

Moreover, while the statistics quoted above are from the records of the Quartermaster General, there is evidence that at troop unit level, the material was being received and there was a perception of abundant supplies. On 3 October 1864, a board of officers was convened in Corse's Brigade, Pickett's Division, to examine a lot of 226 jean jackets to determine whether they were fit for issue. If unfit, the jackets would have been condemned and more requisitioned. This quantity would have outfitted nearly a fourth of the brigade, and is highly doubtful that experienced officers would have even considered condemnation of such a large amount of clothing had it been difficult to obtain. Obviously, it wasn't. 9 This same brigade announced in February, 1865 that officers could buy shoes from the brigade quartermaster, ".. .the immediate wants of the troops …being supplied…" 10

While certainly there were various instances of this or that man or this or that unit being in a "less than desireable" state, when examining extant records and images, it seems to be that such instances are the exception, rather than the rule.

One final point, as I've commented elsewhere: "Uniform" was not the same as "uniformity" and certainly was not understood then in the context we understand it today. See my comments further up on this thread for an understanding of what i'm going at here.

Respects,

Interesting thread – most of what I have read would support the "ragged Rebs" being an 1862 thing with the ANV of 1864 being reasonably well clad – until 1865 when the supply system totally collapsed

In fact, I have read some accounts in which Union troops kitted themselves out with trousers captured from Confederate depots

Actually, Lee's men, in 1865, were VERY well clothed, and shod as well, as the images of CS dead at Petersburg attest.

Thing is, for the ANV, they fell back upon their supply depots as they retreated towards Richmond, and were only a short distance from ALL of their clothing & ordnance while at Petersburg.

In fact, as the ANV passed through Richmond, there are accounts of the QM workers throwing blankets, coats, etc at any man who wanted one, as the army passed directly by the warehouses, saying that whatever they couldn't give out or ship out was going to be burned.

The AoT had a similar experience as it retreated towards Savannah. After leaving Atlanta, there were still quite a lot of available uniforms and other clothing, shoes, and equipment, all available through the Columbus, GA, depot(s) and the Charleston Depots and other stores warehouses along the way.

It wasn't until they retreated north from Savannah that supplies became more difficult to obtain, and then it was mostly food that was harder to come by.

Sherman's men did take a lot of CS clothing, especially trousers, from depots before they were burned. Sgt Rice Bull, of the 123rd NY infantry writes about this in his memoirs "Soldiering". He also states that when they got to Savannah, that each man was issued with new uniforms and any gear or weapons that were problematic were also replaced, as the QM and Ordnance departments had sent shiploads of gear down to Savannah to meet the army.

The federals also wore out a LOT of their clothing marching up through the Carolinas, due to the wet spring conditions, and the fact that large swaths of forest land and brush had been set alight by the retreating confederates, as well as miles and miles or roads were blocked by felled trees, and bridges torn apart or burned, though some smaller bridges were also ripped apart by spring flooding. By the time the federal armies got up to Bentonville, NC, they were in bad shape as far as clothing went.

V/R

So from the old butternut mix we had always heard or read about, does anyone have good examples of what a unit would/should looked like in any of these "better equipped" periods for ANV and did the Va units look different than the NC,SC and from above replies…. the Fl and TX until central supply kicked in?
This would be "In regards to painted troops(units)" is preferred.
I hope to start my ACW armies later this year after Historicon.

thanks
MG
"typ NAP guy"