Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

[robwall1861]

Does anyone have current contact information (email or Facebook) for Andrew Doddington? I'd like to see if he is still making shelter half's and if so I'd like to try and get an early war one.

Thanks in advance.

Sincerely,
Robert Wallace

[spadegrip]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

S&S sutler in Gettysburg sells his shelter halfs.

[advanceguard]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Have you considered making one? It really isn't that hard....and a fraction of the price!! You can find everything you need, advice wise, here on the A/C.

[rmilstead]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Are Andrew Doddington's IIa's correctly sewn on the long width seams? According to Fred Gaede's book these should be rolled and hand sewn. Most of the repros I have seen are machne sewn which (based upon existing original examples) wasn't done until the late war type III's. To be really authentic these seams need to be hand sewn.
Dick Milstead
Hardaway's Alabama Battery
Baltimore Light Artillery
Compant of Military Historians

[Scott Sheets]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Dick, I think Geades book is contradictory on the long seams. In one place he makes it sound like they should be hand sewn. Later he mentions all long seams machine sewn. I'm away from my books for a week in Mexico. When I get back ill post the relevant quotes.

Scott Sheets

Any thoughts on the seams from others?

Sent from my SCH-I400 using Tapatalk 2

[rmilstead]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Scott,

While some points in Fred's text are confusing, I believe that he is pretty clear on this detail, i.e. the finishing on the long width hem seams. The quote from his text (pg. 62 1st edition June 2001) is:
"Hems to finish the width (top and bottom 'ends' of the fabric) were invariably rolled 1/4 to 3/8 inch and finished by hand (italics mine) on Type II halves, but were generally finished by machine on later Type IIIb halves."
As the studied tent data base included 7 Type IIa and 6 Type IIb shelter halves out of the 32 total studied this would seem to be based upon a fairly representative sample. I have known Fred for a number of years and generally he is very precise in his study of such details.

Again my impression (which admittedly may be incorrect) is that the reproductions of Type II's made by most vendors out there are machine sewn on the hems at the ends. I was hoping there might be a vendor who does this by hand as the originals apparantly were done.
Dick Milstead
Hardaway's Alabama Battery
Baltimore Light Artillery
The Company of Military Historians.

[Illini77]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Have you considered making one? It really isn't that hard....and a fraction of the price!! You can find everything you need, advice wise, here on the A/C.

The thought of making my own shelter half had never occurred to me, but the possibility of saving money is quite attractive to me. I have been looking around the AC for some more information and besides some very specific advice, such as where to buy bone buttons, it seems that everyone just says buy Fred Geade's book "The Federal Civil War Shelter Half." Am I missing the step-by-step posting on the AC that describes how to make a shelter half or do I really need to buy Geade's book?

Bryce Hartranft

[Illini77]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Thoughts on Silas' reenacting links and more specifically his post about type IIa federal shelter halves.

The idea that there were different shelter halves and that they had names is new to me. Any suggest reading to learn more about the topic? I know about Geade's book already btw.

[Huck]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

A Survey of Civil War Shetler Halves pg 3.pdfA Survey of Civil War Shetler Halves pg 1.pdfA Survey of Civil War Shetler Halves pg 2.pdf[ATTACH]43452[/ATTACH
]
Here is an old "probably 20 plus years" article on shelter halves.

[Scott Sheets]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Hi Dick, back from Mexico and able to get at my book. I agree the quote below is very clear, where Fred cast's confusion on the situation is earlier on Pg. 53. The paragraph describes the use of cotton drill in Type II haves, making the 3 panels necessary. He writes

"Generally the long connecting seams of the panels, as well as the hems at the ends of the seams, were sewn by machine, even though the rest of the half may have been finished by hand (as were all buttonholes and grommets). However, three halves in the Database (Nos. 6,8 and 13) had these long seams done by hand..."

I think the problem is he generalizes Type II halves on pg. 53 as having machine sewn seams and hems, and the later states 'invariably' hand sewn hems. I personally have a hard time with the 'invariably' part. I have read a fair amount of Fred's other work, and have nothing but respect for his knowledge, writing and research, is is incredible. But I have also found there are no absolutes, we learn new things about the same objects constantly. The two quotes are why I have a hard time believing all Type II halves had hand sewn hems. I can buy that they could have hand or machine sewn hems, just not 100% one or the other on all halves.

BTW, this is a great discussion, it's not often that we read the same book two different ways.

Scott,

While some points in Fred's text are confusing, I believe that he is pretty clear on this detail, i.e. the finishing on the long width hem seams. The quote from his text (pg. 62 1st edition June 2001) is:
"Hems to finish the width (top and bottom 'ends' of the fabric) were invariably rolled 1/4 to 3/8 inch and finished by hand (italics mine) on Type II halves, but were generally finished by machine on later Type IIIb halves."

[rmilstead]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Scott,
I see the quote you are referring to but I believe that Fred is talking about the long connecting seams but agree the wording is confusing. The three specific shelter halves he refers to (6, 8, and 13) are type II examples that are completely hand sewn. The problem is that the universe of known type II shelter halves are what were included in Fred's data base (at least those known when he wrote the book). While it is easy to speculate that there were type II shelter halves that had machine stitched width hems unless one actually exists that is all that it is, pure speculation. What originally caused me to make my comments is the my belief thet none of the vendors are producing shelter halves with hand sewn hems. Maybe there is one out there and I was trying to see if there was. Plenty of vendors provide completely hand sewn garments including long interenal seams which are nearly impossible to detect because many of those in the hobby demand that they be done that way for authenticity reasons. However, on these hems which are quite visable (like top stitching) the same people allow machine stitching when it isn't correct based upon existant examples. Perhaps there is a niche there for somebody.
I expect that I may see Fred Monday or Tuesday as mutual friend recently passed away and there will be services both days. If I see him I will ask to get clarification.
Dick Milstead
Hardaway's Alabama Battery
Baltimore Light Artillery
The Company of Military Historians

[Scott Sheets]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Dick,

First, I am sorry to hear about your mutual loss. Any clarification Mr. Gaede can offer would be great. I took another look through the book last night to look at photo's. Please look at the photo's of Half No. 9 on pg. 40. Fig. 46 shows machine shown connecting seams, felling seams and hems. This along with the slightly conflicting wording is why I feel that machine sewn hems are correct for type II halves. Half No. 9 is a IIb. The paragraph on Pg. 62 states that all type II halves had hand sewn hems, the photo's of half No. 9 contradict them.

Now, I completely agree with you that a type IIa half made with machine sewn seams and hand finished hems would be a great product and absolutely correct, I just don't think it fair to assume that any type IIa reproduction half made with a machine sewn hem is incorrect based on the current evidence.

BTW, I'm really enjoying this discussion. It's always good to have a reason to get back in a book and re-read and think more.

[rmilstead]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Scott,
Point taken on that specific example. I stand corrected. Please note that example #9 is not only a type IIb (Cincinnati Depot most likely) but is also different from every other type II(b) in the data base in that it has reinforcements at the corners on both sides. From the examples presented, Cincinnati Depot shelter halves also seem to exhibit the most construction variability among the Type II population with 2 being completely hand sewn. Still I believe that my point is still valid relative to specific IIa reproductions (of which most currently reproduced shelter halves seem to be).
Probably I am beating a very "dead horse" here. You know, based upon some observations reported by Charlie Childs, machine stitching appears on some domestically produced Confederate uniforms but was typically used for top stitching with hand sewn long internal seams because they didn't yet trust it to last in field use. How many guys would accept that on their 'authentically' reproduced CS uniforms, I wonder?
Dick Milstead
Hardaway's Alabama Battery
Baltimore Light Artillery
The Company of Military Historians.

[Scott Sheets]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

Dick,
The Cincinnati halves are very interesting to say the least. I'm working on making a set of those now complete with darkening the buttons. I really want to do a correct blue line Type III set, but none of the vendors have the blue line duck in the correct 33.5" width.

Your right about the machine top-stitching. That would be a hard sell to some people. I took about a ten year break from the hobby, I'm simply amazed at how much more research is out there now. I was surprised at how much more evidence there was for machine sewing.

[GreencoatCross]

Re: Type IIa (Early War) Shelter Half

I want to make an observation about tent #9 from Gaede's database. The current owner allowed me to study this tent in person after he purchased it from the former John Henry Kurtz collection. Apart from being machine sewn instead of hand sewn like the majority of surviving "Type IIb" shelter halves, tent #9's corner reinforcements are NOT original to the tent. Upon examination I found that the reinforcements do not actually cover the corners of the tent material but the original corners are missing. The corner reinforcements are double layered because the tent material itself was either damaged or cut out, then covered over and expertly finished by hand. The buttonholes and grommets in replaced/repaired corner reinforcements are not consistent with the workmanship found on the surviving original buttonholes on the three edges of the tent. Further, there are other small areas of repair along the edges, including buttonholes, that were worked by the same hand that replaced/repaired the corners reinforcements.

Because this tent is machine sewn it is possible that it was originally a part of the only contract let in the west for tents delivered to Cincinnati, that of John M. Wade of Cincinnati. Half of the contract called for "50,000 double seam....To be the same as those now being manufactured at the U.S. Tent Manufactory in Cincinnati, OH." Of course it could also have been made in-house at Cincinnati. Although there is no evidence supporting the idea, the expert repairs might have been carried out at the sub-depot in Louisville, KY which was actively engaged in repairing tents during the war.