Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Holes & Tears in Uniforms

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

    Originally posted by RobertDickson_18thMO View Post
    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.
    It's authentic, if acid-washed jeans represent the proper cycle of wear and tear on denim pants. Soldiers did not intentionally poke holes in their trousers, so it would make sense if we did not do the same. Wear and tear from activities at events are another matter altogether, but that only occurs over time.
    Michael Denisovich

    Bookkeeper, Indian agent, ethnologist, and clerk out in the Territory
    Museum administrator in New Mexico

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

      " Wear and tear from activities at events are another matter altogether, but that only occurs over time. "

      One hopes that's the case but I once received a very nice Federal frock from a gentleman I shantn't name on Friday and wore it to a LH at Fort Donelson next day. Sitting by the fire I smelled bacon cooking and realized the greasy rag on my thigh was burning and I could see sky blue pants through the frock. The unnamed gentleman sent me a piece of fabric and I patched it from the inside. I wouldn't have done it on purpose but it did add character.
      John Duffer
      Independence Mess
      MOOCOWS
      WIG
      "There lies $1000 and a cow."

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

        Paul brings up a point I was thinking about and wasn't sure if it happened. I have seen returns, as many of us probably have, of worn out equipment and ordnance being sent back to the depots for repair or probably for parts. But, I don't think I have ever seen a report of worn out uniforms being returned. Has anyone come across original documentation of uniforms being returned? If not, then if soldier "A" had a worn out pair of pants and was issued new pants, and soldier "B" just had a hole, could "A" give "B" his pants to make a patch? If that was the case and the soldiers were originally issued the pants at the same time, I guess it is very possible for the patches to match the rest of the material in the pants or whatever was being patched.
        Rob Bruno
        1st MD Cav
        http://1stmarylandcavalry.com

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

          Another thought: Companies employing soldiers as tailors performing alterations of issue clothing for fit would have a ready source of odd pieces of uniform cloth for repairs. If these soldiers also performed major modifications (IE: removing the skirt of a uniform coat or cape of a great coat, etc.) even more material would become available for use. It would not be hard to imagine soldiers so detailed being provident enough to save these larger scraps for future use.
          Paul McKee

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

            Originally posted by rbruno View Post
            Paul brings up a point I was thinking about and wasn't sure if it happened. I have seen returns, as many of us probably have, of worn out equipment and ordnance being sent back to the depots for repair or probably for parts. But, I don't think I have ever seen a report of worn out uniforms being returned. Has anyone come across original documentation of uniforms being returned? If not, then if soldier "A" had a worn out pair of pants and was issued new pants, and soldier "B" just had a hole, could "A" give "B" his pants to make a patch? If that was the case and the soldiers were originally issued the pants at the same time, I guess it is very possible for the patches to match the rest of the material in the pants or whatever was being patched.
            There might be a report of uniforms being inspected and rejected before issue, but they were treated differently from other items of equipment. In the U.S. army, clothing was personal property paid for from the soldier's clothing allowance, and any upkeep thereafter his responsibility.

            Haversacks, canteens, knapsacks, tentage, tools, &c. were also provided by the Quartermaster, but were classified as company property or "camp and garrison equipage." They belonged to the company and the soldier only paid for them if they were lost or damaged through his neglect. If responsibility was questioned, a Board of Survey might be held to determine who paid.

            Ordnance was handled similarly, but all ordnance was the personal responsibility of the last officer to sign for it -- typically the captain. If it was damaged, lost, or destroyed, he had to explain why, or charge it to the responsible enlisted man (through court martial or Board of Survey), or pay for it out of his own pocket.

            This didn't hold true for both sides throughout the war. By December 1863 (G.O. 158), canteens, haversacks, and knapsacks in the Confederate army were included on the schedule of costs for Ordnance. In the U.S. army, I've seen entries in late '64 that included haversacks and knapsacks on Inventories of Effects for deceased soldiers. When the U.S. army demobilized in 1865 honorably discharged soldiers were allowed, under separate general orders, to keep their knapsacks and haversacks and, if they desired, buy their weapons at substantially less than cost, with the leathers thrown in for free.

            This all involved a lot of bureaucracy in the way of quarterly, monthly, bimonthly &c. returns, especially on the federal side where pay was more regular and the dollar held more value. But what started before the war as a way for the bean counters in Washington to keep track of every tent peg and tompion from Walla Walla to Fort Huachuca ended up being a fairly good system for maintaining property management and personal responsibility throughout the war -- not to mention a running concept of who needed more what where and when -- in an army of previously unimagined size...
            Michael A. Schaffner

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

              I think looking at photographic evidence helps support the argument that uniforms were well cared for. Look at the 3 confederate prisoners at Gettysburg. While nothing is known, it would not be a far assumption that they were wearing the same suit of clothes they started the campaign with. From what I can see, they look in pretty good condition given the campaign, weather, and a battle. I have zoomed in on a pant leg and see no tears, or patches. Now I know this is a very small sampling, but it does show that uniforms were certainly cared for as well as footwear.

              Click image for larger version

Name:	3 Confederate prisoners.jpg
Views:	1
Size:	64.2 KB
ID:	225541
              Don Woods
              Member ABT

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

                Originally posted by john duffer View Post
                " Wear and tear from activities at events are another matter altogether, but that only occurs over time. "

                One hopes that's the case but I once received a very nice Federal frock from a gentleman I shantn't name on Friday and wore it to a LH at Fort Donelson next day. Sitting by the fire I smelled bacon cooking and realized the greasy rag on my thigh was burning and I could see sky blue pants through the frock. The unnamed gentleman sent me a piece of fabric and I patched it from the inside. I wouldn't have done it on purpose but it did add character.
                Duffer,

                One can imagine such an accident resulting in the metamorphosis of a frock into a jacket!
                ...and we know there is evidence of such conversions!
                John Wickett
                Former Carpetbagger
                Administrator (We got rules here! Be Nice - Sign Your Name - No Farbisms)

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Holes & Tears in Uniforms

                  That thought had occurred to me also, since there were unusable uniform material around, wouldn't it make sense to use the fabric or leather for repairs as it would have been issued around the same time

                  Sargent Michael P. Sweeney
                  9th Virginia Company C
                  Chesterfield Yellowjackets
                  "We Sting!"



                  “Major, tell my father I died with my face to the enemy.”
                  Col. Isaac Avery Co. E N.C. infantry
                  (Written in his own blood: Battle of Gettysburg)

                  Comment

                  Working...
                  X