Western Federal Headgear Observations

[jake.koch]

Perhaps like many of you, when I made the switch to the dark side of the hobby almost five years ago I asked somewhat naively what the best hat to get for a western federal impression was. Fortunately I didn't ask on line so I didn't get a rousing chorus of "use the search button" :tounge_sm. After talking with some buddies recently the question came up as to whether Hardees are overdone. I went the old-fashioned route and went through some pictures in several Civil War Photographic books and on-line in the LOC site. I looked to see if there was a similiar thread but had no luck, if this is repetitive I apologize.

My method may not have been perfect, however what I did was go through identified Western Theater photographs or photographs of soldiers identified to western troops.

I threw out any that were identified as being from 1861 as I was searching for generic mid to late war impressions.
If I could not identify what type of hat they were wearing I didn't count them.
I tried not to include officers.
If I could not tell if the hat was a black slouch or an altered Hardee I gave the nod to the Hardee.
There are also three pictures I did not include in the count that were of battalion to regimantal sized organizations. Two were from near Vicksburg in 1863-64. In one of these the troops were all wearing forage caps, and in the other the men were all wearing Hardees. The third photograph was from Chattanooga in 1863 and showed troops wearing all forage caps.

Essentially this is for a generic, non unit specific impression. I in no way intend this to be a challenge to impressions for units that have proven equipment that can be traced to a specific time and place.

Out of 539 persons viewed -

142 were wearing some form of a Hardee

203 were wearing Forage Caps

177 were wearing a Dark Slouch Hat

17 were wearing a Light Slouch Hat

I was rather surprised to see such a large amount of Forage Caps, however I had guessed that there would be more Dark Slouchs than Hardees. Take what you want from the information, hopefully it is helpful.

[LHV1861]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Jake,
Thanks for sharing this info. I have actually wondered this myself, ie: the over abundance of Hardee hats for Western Federal impressions. Very interesting the amount of forage caps, I always assumed Hardees and slouches were the most prevalent out West.

[ScottCross]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

About twenty years ago I did a similar survey of headgear of western Federals. I had meant to publish my findings in The Compnay Wag, but the publication went belly up and I never did. I have no idea where my old notes are anymore. My recollection of the results were that the majority of hats were Uniform Hats (including altered ones), followed by dark civilian hats, forage caps, and then lighter colored civilain hats. Now where would i have put those notes?

[jake.koch]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Scott,

I'd be interested to see that. My look was by no means an in-depth study.

[Garrett Silliman]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Jake,
Thanks for sharing this info. I have actually wondered this myself, ie: the over abundance of Hardee hats for Western Federal impressions. Very interesting the amount of forage caps, I always assumed Hardees and slouches were the most prevalent out West.

They were among certian troops on certain campaigns - like anything else it comes down to context. I'd be curious to know among the photos surveyed how many depicted with forage caps were of AoP troops transferred to the west.

[brown]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Garrett
I've often been interested in the same. The was the theory on the AoP guys showing up in Lookout Valley and then fighting on Lookou Mountain. But then all the white star photos I've seen from 64 & 65 show an overwhelming majority of brimmed hats (dress hats in various forms followed by civilian hats). Who's in to h with Doug Cubison?

[jake.koch]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

From the pictures I looked at, and this probably reenforces what we probably consider common knowledge, the Forage caps seemed more prevalent in the photos taken around Chattanooga, although there were still a great deal of them in the Army of the Tennessee photos, a whole regiment worth at Vicksburg. I think you are right about the fellas that came west and eventually became the 20th corps. I personally think within the Army of the Cumberland there were many forage caps as well.

[brown]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Jake,
We've got some evidence with the A of C wearing forage caps later in the war (look at pictures on Lookout) and the 105th Ohio forage cap in EoG. However, the labeling of said forage cap raises some questions and I wonder if any one knows the owner. The caption does not say it was worn in the Chattanooga campaign, just that the unit was in that campaign. Anyone have additional info on that piece? The 105th Ohio received an unit wide issue of "black hats" with the specific dimension of a dress hat described during the campaign prior to Chickamauga (near the construction site now called University of the South if memory serves me), according to the letters of a private named Merrill.
Are forage cap prohibitions wrong? Yes, in most cases. But I still see far more individual and group cases of hats in 1863 and 1864 for the A of C. Really like your survey and would love to see you continue it b/c one size certainly does not fit all and you've provided good info in that arena.
I miss the Wag and hope to see Scott's stuff, too.

[PvtHull48thovi]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Well I may be of no help here, but I do know for a fact that the 48th Ohio in Banks army were issued hardee hats just before the beggining of the Red River Campaign During 1864. And the other 80 percent of Federals during the campaign were also issued Hardees or slouches of some sort.
Just my two cents worth!

[Jim Moffet]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

While I certainly wouldn't decry the value of this broad analysis, I think one needs to examine the context of the individual photos. The 3 regimental photos noted in the first post suggest to me that orders were issued, prior to the images being struck, to standardize headgear, generally into forage caps. Officers like uniformity, even if the men preferred a more 'functional' or 'protective' slouch. I have no difficulty imagining that the same western Federal unit that wore all forage caps for a formal portrait in the afternoon might be seen in an array of slouches that evening after the parade was dismissed. What they wore when they marched out of camp and onto active campaign, I argue we cannot say with certainty. But our personal modern experiences surely note that a forage cap is more easily stowed in pack or roll, while the slouch had better be worn.

A good deal of 'informed speculation' has gone into unit impressions for a given time of the war. There was, and indeed, still is, an ongoing discussion as to what headgear western regiments in the Army of the Potomac wore '63 to Appomattox. Prior to our last event in Pennsylvania for "At High Tide", this was a hot topic. Photographs of the First Minnesota around the time of the Gettysburg Campaign are rare: certainly none in the field. Most of the '63 photos of members of the unit are Philadelphia studio images of recovering wounded men, on leave from local hospitals. They are all in fresh new uniforms and forage caps - some with an extensive array of hat brass. Some modern observers take that to infer that they wore similar caps on the campaign - it is, after all, the only photographic evidence we have. Others argue that whatever filthy and tattered clothing and headgear worn when arriving at hospital had been discarded by hospital staff, and new clothing issued when the injured man became ambulotory. What headgear had been thrown away is lost in time. Col. Colville wrote to Batchelder shortly after the war that most of the men wore slouch hats, but the one company [C] that routinely rotated to brigade/division Provost & HQ guard still had both caps and frocks. When the veterans built their monument 40 years later, there is a slouch carved into the stone, and the bronze statue displays a forage cap.

Jim Moffet
Minnesota First, Co. A
Western Brigade

[Abrams]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Just thinking out loud here, but how many hats would a soldier normally carry? I would think the Forage hat might be able to be flattened and carried in a pack without too much damage to the hat, but the desire to lighten the pack would make it a challenge to retain more than just the hat you preferred to wear most of the time on your head. I mean, if guys ditched extra gear like blankets, shirts, etc, only the fear of being inspected and held responsible financially for the missing hat could keep it on hand, if it was not the primary head cover.

I would think that many would wind up with only one hat after some hard marching. So having a hat for an afternoon of picture taking that would be different from the one normally worn would seem to me to be the exception. I have never read where anyone mentions having more than one hat on hand or issued. Maybe they did, and I just have not stumbled across that reference yet. I have read where the issued clothing was critiqued and noted as to the numbers of shirts or socks, and in some cases, the good/poor quality of the items. Never have I heard of a second head cover being on hand, borrowed or issued. Maybe they borrowed hats from other units nearby for photos to try and achieve a uniformity? No idea, but I could see it happening, especially between companies of the same regiment.

But then, admittedly I am no expert, and have no documentation. I just love hats, and I work to keep them in nice shape between events. I cannot imagine how anyone campaigning would be able to care for, or would want to care for, more than one hat at a time.

Interesting discussion.

[Cyclesmith]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

It would be interesting to apply the context of the photos to the tally of hats... I think that would be an interesting addition to the research if you can figure out what units had what hats, where and when... and see if there is trend among active combat unit vs. unit not in active combat. Or... what if you just looked at units on Lookout Mt???


Hope you counted this one... one of my favs. Look at the hat on the musician!!! Cracks me up....

[jake.koch]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

I specifically tried to stay away from looking at the East because I usually portray a Western Federal, but I also know it gets much more technical there as well, such as the orders circulated amongst some of the corps of the Army of the Potomac in 64 ordering the men to use only forage caps. I remember some of the research sent down through our chain of command at High Tide when we were portraying the 1st Minnesota that spoke of them wearing slouch hats on campaign and on duty, but that the men were reprimanded when they didn't wear forage caps to inspection or drill, if memory serves me right those specific instances occured on the Penninsula. Maybe some of the other Stillwater Guards remember the specific information on this.

As far as the context of the photos I looked at, they were between the Mississippi River and the Appalachians. I threw out any photos from 1861. There was a pretty good mix there but I believe that most would have been more photos from the Army of the Cumberland, with at least a third and possibly more from the AOtT. It seems to me they (the AOtC) were more disposed to forage caps than the Army of the Tennessee, even before the arrival of the 11th and 12th Corps in the fall of 63 however that may just be slightly educated speculation on my part.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

Just another tidbit for the pot from The Civil War Diary of Allen Morgan Geer (Andersen, Mary Ann, ed. Cosmos Press, New York, 1977).

Geer enlisted in the 20th Illinois in 1861and served throughout the war, rising to first sergeant and, finally, Lieutenant.

This comes from his journal entry for April 7, 1863: "Hats are furnished the regt at choice at $1.60, but caps must be the uniform in dress parade." The official cost of a uniform hat at the time (G.O. 202, December 9, 1862) was $1.68, so I think he may have garbled that a little.

The way Geer states it implies that the hats are provided as a convenience, but the caps required. If the hats are a convenience, then it wouldn't seem to matter to his chain of command whether or not the men purchased civilian hats, but I bet the government ones were cheaper. Or maybe there weren't that many other choices of haberdashers in the field.

[PogueMahone]

Re: Western Federal Headgear Observations

... I bet the government ones were cheaper. Or maybe there weren't that many other choices of haberdashers in the field.

Think of all the first hand accounts of PoWs having hats taken and soldiers rushing a store in some town and cleaning it out. I bet those hats were cheaper than the government hat.