Holes & Tears in Uniforms

[RobertDickson_18thMO]

Hello,

There has been great discussion between us ACW reenactors here in the UK about whether soldiers patched their uniforms when they ripped or got holes in or whether its more authentic to leave them in that condition.
There are people who agree on both sides and I just wanted to clarify who is right.

If anyone could help or answer would be most appreciated.

Thanks.

- Robert Dickson

[Tyler Underwood]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Uniforms were property of the government and you were alloted a specific amount of each item per year.
If an item was damaged and unserviceable before it's intended replacement date a report of servey needed to be done to determine If it was how the item was ruined.
Soldiers took care of their clothing and gear.
Have a look at this article that was published many years ago.

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/forum/showthread.php?8274-Patching-your-Uniform-by-Dane-Krogman

[RobertDickson_18thMO]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Uniforms were property of the government and you were alloted a specific amount of each item per year.
If an item was damaged and unserviceable before it's intended replacement date a report of servey needed to be done to determine If it was how the item was ruined.
Soldiers took care of their clothing and gear.
Have a look at this article that was published many years ago.

http://www.authentic-campaigner.com/...y-Dane-Krogman

Thanks, you confirmed my suspicions. Many have tried to argue it looks more 'period' to have damaged clothes, I disagreed.

This has given me more confidence in my assumptions on the issue.

thanks again,

- Robert

[NMVolunteer]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

And if the damage could not be attributed to normal wear and tear, they would charge the cost of replacement to the soldier. Companies frequently had company tailors to fix up damaged uniforms or make an oversized uniform fit. Besides, soldiers wanted to look presentable.

[Regimental Colours]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Numerous documented uniforms exist showing field repairs to them.

Also battle damage was repaired whenever possible. Case in point is the George Murray (114th Pennsylvania) uniform.

"seriously wounded at the Battle of Chancellorsville in May 1863 when a bullet pierced his chest, shattering his right clavicle and damaging his left lung."

http://slaughtermurray.umwhistory.org/murray

[RobertDickson_18thMO]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Thanks this answers my suspicions.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Regulars in the U.S. army, and soldiers of the Confederate army after the establishment of the depot system in late 1862, were authorized to draw a set number of clothing items per year, or enlistment. Prices were adjusted annually based on the army's cost of procurement. If you didn't draw your full allowance, you would receive extra money when your clothing allowance was settled. If you overdrew the allowance, the deficit came out of your pay.

Confederate troops before the depot system received a "commutation allowance" with which to buy uniform items. From what I can tell (based on books like Grisamore's) this often went to company commanders as a fund with which to equip their men and could be provided in kind.

Federal volunteers received a monthly clothing allowance of $3.50, raised in '64 to $4. Same rules applied -- under-draw and you get the balance, overdraw and it comes out of your base pay.

A curiosity of the Confederate allowance is that it provided for items like leather stocks and overcoats which the government could seldom provide. But the benefit of having those items on the schedule was that it allowed a little give in the allowance for items that did wear out prematurely.

On active service neither the straight issue nor monetary allowance proved adequate. A further problem for Confederate quartermasters later in the war was that, due to the drop in the CS dollar, the official price for clothing was well under the black market rate, which led to men selling their issue clothing -- I think shirts and drawers especially -- on the side.

All of that is to say that, north or south, soldiers had a direct interest in maintaining their clothing. Neither government simply gave things away.

[LibertyHallVols]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Great post, Schnapps!

From an interpretive perspective, well worn, but well cared-for clothing and equipment make you look more believable an less like a character on a movie set. Moreover, those repaired holes give you a great discussion point for the public when talking with them about issues like clothing allotments and the soldiers liability for lost and damaged items.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Hallo!

Well covered.

I would add a comment about "Time and Place."

Meaning, much can depend on the time and place of the event or scenario, and the particulars of the unit being portrayed. A freshly mustered unit is not going to have the types or numbers of field service say rips and tears, or fire ember burn holes, that a unit that has marched and campaigned for months and then is on the other side of a rough battle.

This brings back memories from when I was a "kid' in the late 1980's and the Lost Cause Myth of the Universal Ragged Confederate was in full bloom. And some lads were simply whip-stitching or Frankenstein-stitching giant square and rectangular patches, often in bright contrasting colors, over non-existent rips, tears, and holes.

:) :)

Curt
Blind Cannibal Assassin Mess

[Tyler Underwood]

Re: Holes and tears in uniforms.

Hallo!
This brings back memories from when I was a "kid' in the late 1980's and the Lost Cause Myth of the Universal Ragged Confederate was in full bloom. And some lads were simply whip-stitching or Frankenstein-stitching giant square and rectangular patches, often in bright contrasting colors, over non-existent rips, tears, and holes.

:) :)

Curt
Blind Cannibal Assassin Mess

Curt, you are making me squeamish thinking about this!

[rmilstead]

Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

Folks,
I am attaching pictures of a patch and a piecing on the Henry Hollyday RD Trousers documented in Ross Kimmel's 1989 MC&H article on Maryland Infantry uniforms and which appear in the new book by Don Troiani and Earl Coates, Civil War Soldiers. Certainly the execution of the patch is quite nicely done using very similar material, as can be seen. The piecing appears to have been done during the manufacturing at the Richmond Clothing Bureau.

Dick Milstead
Company of Military Historians
Liberty Rifles

[rbruno]

Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

Dick,
Do you think his pants were issued with the patch? The material does seem to be almost exact which makes me wonder how Hollyday would get that material in the field. But, it seems hard to believe it would be issued this way. It is a very neat patch and the cuff is well done as well.

[rmilstead]

Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

Rob,
I will give you a qualified possibly! I have discussed the patch with several other researchers (i.e. Ross Kimmel, Dan Wambaugh) and their leanings are to a field repair. My first take was similar to yours, i.e. that like the obvious piecing on the other leg this could have been a "factory" seamstress patch to salvage a damaged piece of fabric ("waste not want not" theory of clothing manufacture). The material is remarkably similar. As can be seen where the stitching on the patch had broken and I lifted it up to photograph the unexposed fabric in the patch itself, actually the patch had vegetable/logwood dyed gray wool fill on a light brown warp when new which has faded on the rest of the pants. They are both "cassimere" type weave. The real answer is unknown but it is clearly an example of a neatly done patch that could have been done in the field by a competent worker.

The comment in one of the posts above relative to "Company Tailors" is perhaps true for Federal troops (especially the Regulars) but I have never seen a reference to that in CS units. That isn't to say there were none only that I personally haven't found any specific references to them in the Confederate Army (but I would love to find such). What I have found are a few cases of soldiers, particularly officers, using local seamstresses or tailors to make changes to their clothing. My suspicion is that simple patching could have done by the more capable men themselves or by others in the unit who informally filled the role of "company tailors."

One last point, several of the Richmond jackets I have studied exhibit minor tears or holes that appeared to be "in service wear and tear." I am not referring to insect damage or punctures (from bullets or bayonets). The 5th Maine Museum jacket has several of them which could have occurred before it was "taken" from that Rebel prisoner at Spotsylvania. That jacket was probably issued less than two weeks before the battle.

Hope that helps.

Dick Milstead
Company of Military Historians
Liberty Rifles
Hardaway's Alabama Battery

[RobertDickson_18thMO]

Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

I suppose that, like somebody previously stated, it depends on the situation but generally I feel its not more authentic to intentionally have holes and broken uniform which is what was being debated here in the UK.

thanks.

[CompanyWag]

Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

The matching material for the vast majority of field repairs came from canabalizing worn out uniforms, but here is a case where the soldier removed material from the piece itself to make a repair.

I own an original haversack carried by Minor Hupps, 8th Iowa Infantry, when he was captured at the Hornet's Nest at Shiloh. There is a small hole in the bottom of the haversack which Hupps mended by removing the cloth reinforcement panel for the closing buckle and using it to patch and reinforce the bottom of his haversack. It is sewn in the usual manner by turning under all the edges of both the hole and patch and then hand stitching in place. The identity of the reinforcement panel is betrayed by the presence of rust stains from the removed tin button for the liner.