CS Hooded overcoat

[Enfilade]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

What many seem to miss is that the Weller Overcoat, was specifically made for a whole regiment. The size of that regiment, even assuming it was at close to full strength during 1861, would maybe be around 600-800 men??? Then where do they get them made? Wasn't every state and the CS government trying to make everything possible for the army with any and all fabric available? And if that is so, where would there be a merchant capable of making this many overcoats at once? Who would be able to do it? Would they come form a small village or town? Would they be made in a Depot? How about Nashville or Memphis? The WALMART DEPOT? I say that is jest, but you get the drift.

This would have been a huge undertaking. Let alone divide $10,000- by 800 men and that would be worth close to a month's pay per man even if Major Hewitt didn't pay for them. And if there was many of these garments made, then why wouldn't there be some made later in the war that at least another overcoat like it would have survived?

All the "suppose for a moment" and "what ifs" and "maybes" just have me very skeptical as to this being a garment that soldiers would be wearing anywhere and everywhere in any type fabric or color because it was a neat hooded parka. I agree with Paul that in every explanation you can come up for wearing this overcoat, many other questions arise against it. I agree with Ian that any garment could be made from a gifted tailor just by going on a picture. However, military reenactors trying to emulate soldiers on campaign at any given theater of operation would have a hard time explaining this one-time issue overcoat. Just my humble opinion.

Regards,

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles

http://www.northstaterifles.com

[estephenson]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

I fully agree that the coat is overdone in the hobby, and I would never argue otherwise. I was simply stating that it is a possible garment that would have been seen. France was the birth place of almost all fashion in this time period. That is a fact. Look at our neat little kepi's, look at our Zouaves, etc.

Mark, your question on where they would find someone to produce that many lies in the construction methods used. If I remember correctly the coat is entirely machine sewn with the exception of the buttonholes. This screams ready made garment house to me.

Paul, almost every item issued during that time period, both north and south had a linage of civilian usage. Federal army was roughly 15 years behind civilian fashion (example is the Fed issue shirt which is a cut on the square pre 1840's shirt) Frock coats are civilian garments with the exception of the mitlatirized collar. Shell jackets are modified frock coats without skirts. Fatigue Blouses would be the newest addition to the federal uniform at that is derived out of a simplified sack coat from the 1850's. The southern army was no different other then having no existing heritage to fall back on, they used current cutting plates. They were not reinventing the patterns.

[Ian McWherter]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

France was the birth place of almost all fashion in this time period. That is a fact. Look at our neat little kepi's, look at our Zouaves, etc.

I think fashion historians would disagree. England was the world's fashion leader well into the 20th century. France in the mid-19th century was hugely influential with military fashion, but every French male citizen wore English fashion, just read up on Anglomania that swept France in the late 18th and early 19th century. As I stated in my earlier post there has been lots of confusion over the years as to which country led the 19th century world in civilian fashion France or England. The fact that the fashion plates we're all familiar with were produced in France only adds to the confusion. These fashion plates, while manufactured in France, were produced with the collaboration of English tailors and fashion desginers, while in some cases the fashions may have been French inspired, they were for the most part solidly English.

Tailors didn't need to make patterns based on the fashion plates, because as I said the fashion plates were published with pattern drafts for all the garments illustrated in them.

I really don't have a dog in this fight, I think the Weller Overcoat is a great Orphan Brigade garment. I believe in documenting every piece of my uniform and equipment, to use this coat for any other impression would be a stretch, stick with solid documentation not speculation. Until other information can be uncovered this coat will should remain unit specific.

The following is from R.L. Shep's "Federalist & Regency Costume:1790-1819" pgs. 5-6:

We have a tendency to think of the words "French" and "Fashion" in the same breath. And it is true that France was the leader of fashion and, in terms of women's clothes at least, is now a leader of fashion. In the world of the 18th century Louis XIV made all the aristocracy of France attend him at Versailles. There they all wore fancy court dress, complete with ruffles, embroidery and fashions that looked backward-not forwards.

Meanwhile, In England, all this had changed as the court was not the centre of social life and the aristocracy did not spend their time at court. They spent their time on their estates, in the country, and they dressed accordingly. Men appeared at court in what might be called "country fashions" and even if women, when being presented at court, had to dress more fancifully, they too had altered their dress to suit their lives on their country estates.

The upshot of this was that after the French Revolution when it was dangerous, if anything, to wear French finery, people started to adopt English styles of dress. One only has to look at some of the names of the styles... "Robes-Redingotes," "Spencer," "Robe dite a l'Anglaise," "Le'vite a l'Anglaise," "Franc a l'Anglaise," to realise this. Mila Contini says: "The Revolution had from the start declared war against all the fetters and chains imposed by the tyranny of fashion... A uniform dress was created that would be the same for all, drawing no distinctions between the classes: for men the bourgeois fashion, and for women extreme simplicity, influenced by English fashion. Since the time of Colbert in the 17th century, France had had unchallenged supremacy in the world of fashion, just as Italy had in the 16th century. In the last decade of the 18th century France, preoccupied with political problems, left the field to England."

Even though France and England were at war during a good deal of this time, the French fashions were influenced by what they called "l'anglomania" and the fashions turned right around and came back to the English magazines as French fashions. Laver puts this very well: "It is one of the curiosities of social history that the French, so completely convinced that there is no culture but French culture, so chauvinistic, so provincial even, in their estimate of what goes on outside France, should yet suffer from recurring bouts of what they themselves recognize, by the name they give it, as a kind of madness, namely anglomania. It raged in the 1790's, in the Directoire period, and the fact that the two countries were at war for nearly 20 years seems to have made no difference to the admiration which Frenchmen felt for the Englishman's clothes. When contact was re-established in 1814, and again in 1815, after the brief interlude of 'the Hundred Days', it became plain that if English women decided, once and for all, to adopt French fashions, French men were equally determined from then on to dress a' l'anglaise, with the nagging suspicion that, try as they would, they were not quite managing to do so."

Uzanne, a noted French writer on fashion, says: "Anglomania raged, swaying fashion and habits just as powerfully as the mania for the antique. In the eyes of certain fashionable ladies, nothing that was not in vogue in London could be either pretty or in good taste. So much so that certain French tradeswomen crossed the Channel, so as to be sure of giving satisfaction to their customers."

If the English and European writers see things in this light, many American writers of college texts do not. They have somehow come to the conclusion that the people in Jane Austin's novels, who were after all English, wore Directoire fashions!

[tmdreb]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

Is it just the hood that's got everyone's panties in a wad on this one? I wonder how many other items that can only be documented to a single impression have found their way into people's kits, even those posting here.

And I also do not own, nor have I owned a Weller or other hooded overcoat.

[mslaird]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

I beg to differ sir.
The 2nd Kentucky Infantry was indeed issued this coat. It was not an anomole to just Weller or a few in the 2nd Kentucky, or a group of civilians offering them warmth, etc.Z(IMHO). It was described by Ed Porter Thompson in his "History of the Orphan Brigade":

"When the winter campaign of 1861 opened, the Confederate Government had not found it possible to furnish such clothing as was absolutely necessary to protect its soldiers from the riggors of a winter in Kentucky and Tennessee, and Major Hewitt generously supplied every man in his own regiment with an excellent overcoat, at enormous expenditure, which has been variously estimated at from ten to twenty thousand dollars; and the command was thus rendered more comfortable during the bitter trial at Donnelson, in which the elements seemed to combine with the efforts of the Federal forces in visiting suffering and destruction upon the unfortunate garrison."

Now, we don't know for certain if this is the same overcoat as Weller's, but the evidence sure points that way. And if there is another such overcoat anywhere out there similarly made, no one has found it yet. But we do know that the Orphan Brigade fought exclusively in the Western Theater. And we do know that the 2nd KY Infantry was issued a Civilian Overcoat made specifically for them. Bought and paid for by it's Major. Does that make it an exclusive event oriented garment? In my opinion it does. Does that mean that no other overcoat was similar to it? No. But if you are using the same pattern, fabric, etc., and making the "WELLER OVERCOAT", then why would you not make the "Weller Overcoat"? I don't care to have to make excuses why I'm wearing a garment at an event or explain the possibilities why it could be appropriate when its really not. Now, can we say without question another like it in the civilians hands never existed? Of course not. But you have to admit that this issued garment that is named the "Weller Overcoat" because of it's wearer, was specifically issued, and specifically worn, and was specifically made.

Sorry, but I must differ in my opinion with you as this was an "issue garment".

Regards,

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles
http://www.northstaterifles.com

This is the only point that I have contention with. This statement deals in an absolute and that is something that the historical documentation, in this case a quote of another historian, does not give us. We do not know from the quote given that the overcoat was made specifically for the regiment or if the overcoat was an already existing product produced by the manufacturer that was purchased for the regiment. It could also have been ordered for the regiment through the same system used by other confederate states, for example, by placing the necessary needed items in a newspaper advertisement to gather in several small manufacturers to contract to make the coat. Research through the sources used for said quote would satisfy that question. We also do not know if this is the only fabric that the coat was made from due to the constant confusion of satinet, cassimere, linsey-woolsey, kersey and jean cloth due to the similarity of the weave of the material in documents from the period. I have looked at clothing reciepts and clothing issuance records that reflect "cashmere"? Could be a misspelling of cassimere, could be the genuine article. I don't know. It could also be that the person who transcribed the original book kept by Captain W.F. Patton about his company did not read his handwriting well enough and guessed. This is the crux of our problem. THere are too many variables. While Mark's point has weight and merit, this quote does not solidify the point that only the 2nd Kentucky had the Weller Overcoat. It has been established that this overcoat was available in other areas as a civilian garment. To maintain that absolute point is similar to saying that Columbus Depot Jackets were only issued to Georgia regiments or Richmond Depot Jackets were only worn by the Army of Northern Virginia when those are just a type of jacket and not a regional limitation. The naming of the Weller Overcoat is just another use of the standard method of taxonomy for the civil war garments. Rather than saying overcoat, hooded, one each... we call it the "Weller" overcoat because, as several have said before me, that is who had the surviving example that we have of that type of coat. I personally am fond of the Atlanta Historical Center "Smith" overcoat without its cape. That particular coat is a common civilian pattern overcoat from the period, an elongated double breasted frock coat some could say, as well but there are always those who will maintain that "we can only document that coat to private snuffy smith of Charlie Company, 1st Battalion, 9th Infantry Regiment, of the 142nd Danville Trainbusters Field Artillery Brigade etc, etc, etc." I believe that Dan's example of the Hussar styled coat is a better one of a unit specific item in use during the period. Back on point, I do agree that the "Weller" overcoat is largely represented but, in the end, does it take away from our shared passion that one more person has chosen to use this particular overcoat that will keep said person warm during a winter event. I can only recall seeing one of them at the last winter event cold enough to warrant an overcoat. I also remember that I would have been happy as I could be to have had an overcoat of any type during that particular event as it was 14 degrees and I was clad in a shell jacket and trousers. My blanket roll over my shoulder was the only thing that helped keep me warm that weekend! I seem to remember the arguments ad nauseum over the overabundance of federal items in confederate use and about the many differing positions over the equippage of the Missouri State Guard...

Good points and discussion all, I have learned a great deal from the posts and from the pictures posted.

[Stonewall_Greyfox]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

This is the only point that I have contention with. This statement deals in an absolute and that is something that historical documentation does not give us. We do not know from the quote given that the overcoat was made specifically for the regiment or if the overcoat was an already existing product produced by the manufacturer that was purchased for the regiment. It could also have been ordered for the regiment through the same system used by other confederate states, for example, by placing the necessary needed items in a newspaper advertisement to gather in several small manufacturers to contract to make the coat. We also do not know if this is the only fabric that the coat was made from due to the constant confusion of satinet, cassimere, linsey-woolsey, kersey and jean cloth due to the similarity of the weave of the material. This quote does not solidify the point that only the 2nd Kentucky had the Weller Overcoat. It has been established that this overcoat was available in other areas as a civilian garment. To maintain that absolute point is similar to saying that Columbus Depot Jackets were only issued to Georgia regiments or Richmond Depot Jackets were only worn by the Army of Northern Virginia when those are just a type of jacket and not a regional limitation. The naming of the Weller Overcoat is just another use of the standard method of taxonomy for the civil war garments. Rather than saying overcoat, hooded, one each... we call it the "Weller" overcoat.

Good points and discussion all.

I mostly agree with the above statements...but what I fail to see where we have established that "this" overcoat...or style like it, was available in other areas of AMERICA...let alone the South throughout the war.

What was established previously in the thread is that a hooded-type overcoat or something like it...was one of the "latest" fashion trends in Europe (England-France) ca. 1864 when the plate was commissioned...and that the "Weller" overcoat pre-dates this fashion trend having been issued rather early in the war...from whence the pattern came, who knows at this point?

Maybe someone will have a picture...sketch, letter/diary entry, showing that this style overcoat isn't just an anomaly to the 2nd Kentucky Inf....after all that's how we have been able to extend the reaching of the various clothing shops (Richmond, Columbus, Charleston...etc.) applicability in many cases beyond the confines of their "backyards"...because we have photographic evidence...official records/letters, requesting or recieving clothing from these other locals...or even pretty good descriptions of what was being recieved in a few cases.

This is certainly a healthy discussion...and hopefully will continue to progress in such a manner...

Thanks for keeping this civil!!!

Paul B.

[Secesh]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

The bottom line is that anyone who wants one (I do not) is going to buy one anyway, regardless of documentation and historical usage...part of that "gotta have it" mindset.

[FloridaConscript]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

The bottom line is that anyone who wants one (I do not) is going to buy one anyway, regardless of documentation and historical usage...part of that "gotta have it" mindset.

I think part of that "gotta have it" mindset comes from the fact that it was the only available CS overcoat for sometime. I may be wrong, but I certainly don't recall a number of options being available.As we all know quality makers are few and far between in our little area of the hobby, so when a Childs or Daley or whoever, has a pattern for, or is able to reproduce a real deal CS overcoat, people buy what is available. We DO know that a hooded overcoat was worn by a Confederate soldier between 1861-1865. wearing a copy of that overcoat to an event at say, petersburg circa 1864 is much mroe correct than wearing another pattern, but whose material and workmanship is substandard.

or you can just "do without", which may lead to high levels of desertion, especially amongst Finegans brigade :)

[Enfilade]

Re: CS Hooded overcoat

THere are too many variables. While Mark's point has weight and merit, this quote does not solidify the point that only the 2nd Kentucky had the Weller Overcoat. It has been established that this overcoat was available in other areas as a civilian garment. To maintain that absolute point is similar to saying that Columbus Depot Jackets were only issued to Georgia regiments or Richmond Depot Jackets were only worn by the Army of Northern Virginia when those are just a type of jacket and not a regional limitation.

If one regiment from Kentucky has a diarist account that states that his unit, the 2nd KY Infantry, received an overcoat for the winter of 1861, and we know that Weller being in that same unit was wearing an overcoat and was wounded at Donnelson with said overcoat. And that this same surviving example is the only one like it we've come accross in Confederate Civil War History, then what is the liklihood of someone wearing the Weller-Type Civilian Overcoat in in the Overland Campaign? Or what about Petersburg Winter of '64? Crimea? WW2? This isn't anything like a Depot style jacket made for Thousands of troops that span the whole Army, who were moved around constantly for strategical reasons. We are specifically calling out the use of this overcoat other than the 2nd KY. Your argument is somewhat like the question whether bagpipes were used in battle during the Civil war. I'm terrible with stats, but I have to believe that they would be very close to none. But I'm no Statistician by any means.

You know, we had this same argument over on the "If A Flying Frog Had Wings Forum" earlier today. I believe the "Wouldn't Bump His Ass Every Time He Jumps" members were out numbered though.:D

Mark Berrier
North State Rifles
http:www.northstaterifles.com