Here are two pictures (both have no ID) of a couple federals wearing some unique looking coats:
The first image caught my attention because this fellow had modified his blouse by moving the upper button over a good deal. This was common practice to make large coats fit better. Also flipping up of the collar on a sack coat is fairly common (and honestly I am surprised I don’t see more reenactors doing it). However, both show up in portraits pretty often if one looks at enough of them.
What does stick out as unique to me is the construction of this fellow’s sack coat. For the life of me I don’t think I’ve ever seen a seam in the front of a sack coat. My question to those who know more about construction techniques, federal contracts, etc is: Is this coat cut from some rarely seen pattern or is this just simply an extreme case of field tailoring an already large coat?
The second image is of a federal who has tailored his regulation great coat by adding some sort of fur (my guess would probably be bear?) to his cuffs, lapel, collar. Not unseen, but neat none the less.
The first image caught my attention because this fellow had modified his blouse by moving the upper button over a good deal. This was common practice to make large coats fit better. Also flipping up of the collar on a sack coat is fairly common (and honestly I am surprised I don’t see more reenactors doing it). However, both show up in portraits pretty often if one looks at enough of them.
What does stick out as unique to me is the construction of this fellow’s sack coat. For the life of me I don’t think I’ve ever seen a seam in the front of a sack coat. My question to those who know more about construction techniques, federal contracts, etc is: Is this coat cut from some rarely seen pattern or is this just simply an extreme case of field tailoring an already large coat?
The second image is of a federal who has tailored his regulation great coat by adding some sort of fur (my guess would probably be bear?) to his cuffs, lapel, collar. Not unseen, but neat none the less.
Comment