proper foot wear

[vamick]

Re: proper foot wear

Greetings:


For your amusement, here are two shots from the field. The fellow in the tinted ferrotype is George Ayling of the 1st Mass. The tin is inscribed at Potomac Creek, May 21, 1863 (just after their return from Stoneman's Raid). Note the interesting suspender flap on his mounted trousers.

Enjoy!
Andrew German

ALSO..howabout that cut down holster for the colt .44 a real 'field expedient'

[majdoc]

Re: proper foot wear

I think it was noted before. If riding most of the time boots short or up to the kness would be fine. But if doing infrantry and marching a lot brogans are the way to go. I have used both riding and walking, the shorter boots can be used for marching. I'd say when you can be sure you have both.

[kyhiland]

Re: proper foot wear

You want shoes!!! as that is what was being issued for the most part to Confederate cav! I have seen tons of issues and almost all were for shoes!

Would a Confederate trooper have been allowed to keep the footwear he was wearing when he enlisted? Specifically, I'm thinking about a moderately successfull farmer and merchant from C. Ky. in his early 30's. He certainly would have had the means to purchase his own pair of boots. I'm sure he would have already had a pair when he enlisted.

Second question, how long would a single pair of well-made civilian boots have lasted with daily wear before they would have needed replacing (either with another pair of private-purchase boots or with issued shoes)?

[T.Kern]

Re: proper foot wear

It sounds like many are looking for excuses to wear boots. There are plenty of reasons to wear them, however as the war goes on it is very unlikely the average trooper had them for several reasons. Yes, of course you would keep the boots you enlisted in and the clothes and ...whatever. That is assuming the guy had boots to begin with, he may not have.
How long do they last? Working on my horse farm I have worn out a pair in a year or less, and this not wearing them all the time. I suspect most soldiers wore them everyday. Then two options, get them resoled or new foot wear. Both of these could be problem, finding leather in a south starving for it made it difficult to get sole leather and then find a cobbler to do the repair (while on active duty?). Next, the huge cost of boots, with CS currency rapidly losing it's value and the scarcity of leather, the price went through the roof. As I said, one account was boots cost $450 in 1864 Richmond, and how much is a private making?
Even if they were more available, images and receipts say otherwise. The picture of Boston's squadron, captured at Aldie June of 63, appears to show no one but the man in civilian attire in boots. A good wartime image of a company of troopers in the field. Yes, they may have had short boots on with trousers out but that pretty much rules out knee highs. Also, hundreds of shoes are being shown as drawn by cav regiments, Hundreds in a few returns! Are these not being used? of course they are wearing them. Why shoes, because it doesn't take as much leather to produce. I have never seen boots listed in returns after 61, that doesn't mean it didn't happen though. English imports show them coming in, but this is probably an English style, so again not high boots.
To sum up. sure boots were around and used but the evidence seems clear, boots would have been the exception to the rule for an enlisted man. Not as rare as Jaguar trousers but another Hollywood myth to debunk. Most of the guys I see out there don't even have period boots anyway.
Todd Kern

Would a Confederate trooper have been allowed to keep the footwear he was wearing when he enlisted? Specifically, I'm thinking about a moderately successfull farmer and merchant from C. Ky. in his early 30's. He certainly would have had the means to purchase his own pair of boots. I'm sure he would have already had a pair when he enlisted.

Second question, how long would a single pair of well-made civilian boots have lasted with daily wear before they would have needed replacing (either with another pair of private-purchase boots or with issued shoes)?

[Custerboy]

Re: proper foot wear

California volunteer cavalry regiments were given the option of boots or shoes. I'm researching which were more popular.

[T.Kern]

Re: proper foot wear

yes, the federal supply was different than the South.

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: proper foot wear

Hallo!

In the Federal OR’s for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1865, approximately 8.3 million pairs of bootees (2.2 million were pegged, 6.1 million sewn) were purchased; 2.6 million pairs of boots (1.1 million pegged, 1.5 million sewn) were purchased, and approximately 155,000 pairs of brogans were purchased.

Curt
Boots on the Ground Mess

[T.Kern]

Re: proper foot wear

What do they consider the difference between a brogan and a bootee?

Hallo!

In the Federal OR’s for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1865, approximately 8.3 million pairs of bootees (2.2 million were pegged, 6.1 million sewn) were purchased; 2.6 million pairs of boots (1.1 million pegged, 1.5 million sewn) were purchased, and approximately 155,000 pairs of brogans were purchased.

Curt
Boots on the Ground Mess

[tmattimore]

Re: proper foot wear

I have rarely seen the term brogan used in military documents or returns mostly booties or shoes. I have also never seen the term bootees used in civilian footwear documents usualy shoes, strong shoes and on occasion brogans. Most likely they were invoiced as brogans and they were then listed as such. Heer Schmidts figures show the proportion for the last year, of those boots made many if not all were 10 to 12 inch tall. I do not belive any of what we now call cav boots would have been purchased.
As to longevity it is not likely that a boot would have lasted more then three months under combat conditions
Tom

[RJSamp]

Re: proper foot wear

When Pleasonton relieved Colonel Brown of his Brigade the morning of October 23, 1864 Byram's Ford, Big Blue River, Missouri.....he came up to Phillip, who would be the new brigadier and asked what he was doing. Phillip replied that he was changing from his boots to his slippers in order to lead a dismounted charge against the confederates.

In the 21st Infantry Wisconsin book, the Private (Otto, the Author) turned down his first pair of "Government Shoes" in favor of his own boots. They wore out in a few months (actually he ruined the heels/backs of the boots standing too close to a fire), and he drew a pair of Governments. Then he took a pair of boots off of dead CSA officer and wore those.

I simply wear brogans, haven't had any trouble with the horse equipments yet.....

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: proper foot wear

Hallo!

At any rate, Quartermaster records sometimes show the term "brogans" as listed separately from "bootees" on records and contracts- and sometimes also list "negro brogans." I assume, or infer, from the distinction, and the lower prices, that they were a "lower" quality and "lower" priced shoe.
IMHO, the records are not entirely clear.
As with many "terms," custom, education, usage, habit, etc., seems to have all contributed to a "confusion of terms" at times (such as gun, musket, rifle-musket, rifled-musket, rifled and sighted musket, rifle, artillery rifle, fusil, fusee, fuzee, musketoon, carbine...)

Shoot, IMHO, "History" is not always clear let alone the Civil War Community on "shoes, bootees, and brogans..." ;) :)

From the February 2, 1833 edition of the BATON ROUGE GAZETTE:

Selling off at Cost! The subscribers wishing to relinquish their present line of business, offer to sell their stock of Hats, Shoes and Clothing at cost, to wit; 2 cases Fur Hats, 4 cases White Wool Hats, 2 cases Black Wool Hats, 4 cases boots, 3 cases Calf Brogans, 1 case Ladies Walking shoes, 100 pairs Russett Brogans, 100 pairs Negro Brogans, 50 pairs Pramella Shoes, 100 Pairs Mens Calf shoes, 1 case Umbrellas, and the remaining stock of seasonable Clothing, Ball and Briesler.

And another:

Surviving business papers regarding the confinement of Archibald Calder Baynard (b. 1798) as a patient in the state mental hospital in Columbia. Benjamin T.D. Lawton assumed responsibility for overseeing Baynard's financial affairs during this time. Receipts dated October 15, 1842, document the purchase of forty-three pairs of "Negro Brogans" for $38.70.

Curt
I say Potatoe, You Say Potato, Mess

[tmattimore]

Re: proper foot wear

From The Organization of the Boot and Shoe Industry in Massachusttts Before 1875. By Blanche Evans Hazard

"The shoe which Henry Wilson" (later to be vice president of the U.S. ed note) "manufactured was a cheap brogan for Southern plantation slaves, needing simply cutting, closing of short seams on uppers, and lasting, in order to make them ready to ship. His customers were in Boston, Hartford, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Camden and Charleston, S.C., Augusta and Savannah GA., Montgomery ALA., St Louis and New Orleans"

" His output increased from 18,000 that year,(1838) his first year of manufacturing, to 58,000 pair in 1845: and from employing 18 hands in 1838 he raised the number to 52 in 1845. By 1847, he made 122,000 pair with 109 hands working for him."

It is just my opinion but I belive the term brogan became so associated with cheaply made shoes for the slave and West Indian trade, that it was avoided as much as possible in purchasing records in spite of the fact that the above description applies quite well to the wartime contract shoes purchased in vast quantities.
Tom