If Mick Jagger wore Confederate trousers...

[WoodenNutmeg]

OK, so the title is a come-on, but I have always found it strange that while Confederate trousers easily have the ability to be reproduced, or better yet, altered as "tight" fitting pants, Union/Federal trousers do not (note this applies to infantry only, as we all know how the sailors and horsemen dressed). Now, while I understand that Federal trousers were not manufactured as tight fitting pants during the war, I find it odd that Federal trousers were not commonly altered to be worn tightly in direct feud as to how they were made.

http://www.sonofthesouth.net/leefoundation/gettysburg/confederate-prisoners_small1.jpg

Shelby Foote has made numerous comments on the battle dress of Confederates, in some detail (in reference to the photo above most specifically), however, comparison to Federal attire in this capacity (pant styles) seems to be lacking. I find it hard to believe that while Confederates can be considered notorious alterers of clothing (whether it’s jackets, shirts, blouses, or pants), Federal troops cannot.

I base my only possible conclusions on regimental standards. As the war dragged on, it is my feeling (and I base this on evidence) that as Confederate uniformity somewhat failed, the “leniency” of uniform dress was accepted. This doesn't seem to be apparent, however, and therefore certainly not rampant among Federal troops, most likely as a result of high aspiration feelings toward Union dress (i.e. Federal troops did not wear different shades of blue in the same fashion that the Rebels wore grays, browns, jean, etc).

But, my original point into trouser alteration remains pivotal. If Rebel troops altered their pants for either adjustment and/or style (and yes, Confederate troops did alter their uniforms for style as opposed to comfort), why was this not considered common practice among Federal troops? Were uniform guidelines that strict amongst Federal commands that if a private's trouser legs were too wide for his liking, alteration was not permitted to the definition of tightness?

I will be very interested to see any and all responses to this.

[reb64]

really what is there to do with them, they are still gonna be sky blue

[WoodenNutmeg]

I have no idea what that means.

[Mothers-Finest]

Well I am sure that Union did alter their clothing. Look at some photos and you can see this. I believe ''correct me if I am wrong'' what you are saying maybe is that there is not as info. on union men altering their cloths. I believe their is a pic. of men sitting in camp with a man up front sewing his shirt. It is a neat pic. please someone post if you know what I am talking about. But again look at some pics and you can see how the legs look if they are big or some what tight.

[brown30741]

I believe it was the Company Wag that years ago had an amazing article in Federal field alterations (including trowsers, fatigue blouses, and greatcoats). Does anyone have that reference handy?

Also, any references to Confederate field alterations would be great, too.

[WoodenNutmeg]

Ooo, very interested.

Do hope that someone can reference that.

[TimKindred]

Comrade,

I believe that what you are refering to "tight" trousers may simply be their issue look. The style known as "Richmond Depot" is based upon current pants fashion for that period, whereas the Federal issue trousers were still made to older, out-dated designs calling for a much fuller cut.

Basically, tailors in Richmond simply switched fabric and kept producing the styles they were already making when the government came calling for uniforms.

"Todd's American Military Equipage" has a synopsis of this in the preface as well as in the respective chapters, and is worth the time to locate and peruse.

Respects,

[WoodenNutmeg]

Thanks for the literary lead...sounds interesting.

[Jim Mayo]

As the war dragged on, it is my feeling (and I base this on evidence) that as Confederate uniformity somewhat failed, the “leniency” of uniform dress was accepted.

I am curious, what is your evidence that uniformity failed as the war went on? Most of the prevalent thought is that uniformity increased in the ANV especially in 1864 on with the introduction of English Army Cloth in 1863. Also the function of the CS Quartermaster dept. became more efficient as the war progressed. While domestically produced material may not have been the same color because of the variety of sources, the uniform coats and trousers cut and style were somewhat consistant to respective depots. The Western armies, while not supplied as well as the ANV certainly were receiving uniforms from the different depots as well. I am not considering use of civilian garmets to be a factor in uniformity since this thread is about altering issued uniforms.



But, my original point into trouser alteration remains pivotal. If Rebel troops altered their pants for either adjustment and/or style (and yes, Confederate troops did alter their uniforms for style as opposed to comfort)

Again for my own information I would like to know the source of this information. Not trying to be contrary but I have never come across any references to enlisted soldiers altering uniforms to be stylish, (unless early war) but only for fit and comfort.

It may be noted that the three prisoners in the above image have worn these uniform trousers for some time. They have been exposed to the elements and to fording rivers for at least the amount of time it took to march up from Virginia. This probably caused some shrinkage. In addition different depot trousers could have been cut slimmer than others. I believe the NC issue trousers had more of a straight leg than the RD trousers.

All things to consider.

[WoodenNutmeg]

Thank you, Jim...some great points!

I am curious, what is your evidence that uniformity failed as the war went on? Most of the prevalent thought is that uniformity increased in the ANV especially in 1864 on with the introduction of English Army Cloth in 1863. Also the function of the CS Quartermaster dept. became more efficient as the war progressed. While domestically produced material may not have been the same color because of the variety of sources, the uniform coats and trousers cut and style were somewhat consistant to respective depots. The Western armies, while not supplied as well as the ANV certainly were receiving uniforms from the different depots as well. I am not considering use of civilian garmets to be a factor in uniformity since this thread is about altering issued uniforms.

I should have put "failed" in quotations when I wrote my original text because I agree with you 110 percent. As the war moved along, Confederate uniform innovations and manufacturing, in my opinion (and I assume yours) were far more advanced and attractive than Union ones. Depot jackets and trousers, as you exampled, are classic attributes to this reality. In using the word failed, I had simply hoped to convey the reality that Confederate uniformity dwindled as time went on. That is to say, that instead of a "Sea of Gray" one could witness a sea of browns, grays, butternuts, and jean. Is that perhaps clearer? I should have realized the imperfections of my writing, I apologize.

Again for my own information I would like to know the source of this information. Not trying to be contrary but I have never come across any references to enlisted soldiers altering uniforms to be stylish, (unless early war) but only for fit and comfort.

If I can conjure up some Internet based resource today, I will do so, but no promises. Aside, you might explore some Shelby Foote writings, as he has been known to comment often on Southern soldiers and their understanding of uniform importance in relation to their personal image. There is a really good diary too (though the author's name now eludes me), in which the owner makes constant reference to the "dashing" ways and "slim downed" dress of the Confederate infantrymen in comparison to the Federal soldiers for until a certain point were her only familiarity.

It may be noted that the three prisoners in the above image have worn these uniform trousers for some time. They have been exposed to the elements and to fording rivers for at least the amount of time it took to march up from Virginia. This probably caused some shrinkage. In addition different depot trousers could have been cut slimmer than others. I believe the NC issue trousers had more of a straight leg than the RD trousers.

Very interesting observations, Jim!

All things to consider.

Indeed.