When is an "Issue" Shirt Not

[bob 125th nysvi]

an issue shirt or not the only type.

Need a little help here, maybe in discussion form.

I want to upgrade my impression by aquiring an "issue" shirt and many people immediately start saying, 'oh you have to get a dommet wool shirt, that's the issue shirt'.

But wait .......

West Point Military Museum has a blue 10 ounce wool flannel shirt they identify as a "contract issue" shirt.

And quite honestly boys, I'm taking the word of the people at West Point over ANY reenactor as to whether or not is is an issue shirt.

So it appears there were at least 2 "issue" shirts.

And it seems that both shirts were actually issued in great numbers.

But I am wondering about that shirt at West Point. CRRC2 identifies a "knit" shirt as being issued and the author says he hadn't seen one nor was aware of the existance of any (although he concedes some must exist) could the West Point shirt be an example of the mystery "knit" shirt.

Either way I'm leaning toward acquiring an example of the West Point shirt as it doesn't appear to be as unpleasent as the dommet shirts and it is generally a little more reasonably priced.

And yes examples of it are produces by reputable vendors.

However there is another issue here. Most of the sources I've seen claim "the" shirt was issued in one size. While there were variations based on manufacturers the issue for me is I am at the top (or over) "the" issue size. And I'm talking about chest here, I've long ago given up on sleeve length.

So how do you think the army would have handled me? Made me rummage through the pile until I found one that "fit"? Tried to squeeze me into whatever they had on hand? Or told me to get one from home?

And yes it matters BECAUSE I'm going to have to deal with some know-it-all NCO/Offcier (probably some short guy to boot) who will either claim I'm 'farby' because it ain't 'dommet' or I look 'unsoldierly' because it doesn't fit.

Privates I can ignore.

And I'm not looking for 'buy from' type replies to this. I've narrowed my search down to about 8 reputable sutlers (some of whom make both types). What I'm looking to do is now decide which 'type' to get and then make the final decision from there.

[Memphis]

Bob,

You are on the right track with the notion the US Army had more than one kind of issue shirt, and the various articles about issue shirts point this out. The most common reenactor repop issue shirt is probably the Saroni; however, a number of very nice contract variant shirts have been offered, to include knit shirts and comfy wool flannel shirts in a variety of colors, such as red, tan, blue, and gray. The domet flannel shirt is a thing to be experienced, but it is warm in the winter and wicks away moisture as designed.

The research I have read claims the army had a one size fits all situation with the domet flannel, but that makes it a tent on some men, and a throat choker on others.

[Rob Weaver]

There's a knit shirt illustrated in one of the Lord's volumes. Or did you mean that knit shirts weren't issued?

[OVI]

I break it down to the shirts you could or would've gotten from the QuarterMaster which are the issue domet flannel or the contract varients mentioned earlier in different colors. The other source obviously was a private purchase or homemade shirt. I own at least one of each and wear them as the scenario requires or at my own discretion.

Kent Dorr - Ohio
"Devils Own Mess"

[Pvt Schnapps]

I'm going to paste my response from the last time a similar topic came up, about two weeks ago. That time you asked a slightly different question, but substantively the same answer applies. For further information, it would not be too difficult for you to do additional research in the ORs, available on line from Cornell University and easily searchable. Chris Daley also has information on his web site that provides a useful starting point:


***
I don't have the numbers here with me, but one day I went to the trouble of counting shirts contracted for by the US govt in '61 and '64. It was interesting to see the changes from the earlier contracts to the later ones.

In '61, as I recall, about 80% of the shirts were domet flannel, the rest being wool flannel. I calculated the number of shirts based on yardage contracted for because at that time the government issued separate contracts for fabric and for making said fabric into shirts.

Interestingly, although the vast majority of contracted shirts in 1861 were domet flannel, the numbers would not have provided sufficient shirts to complete an annual issue to all the men raised that year, which implies that large numbers continued to rely on civilian shirts or state issued shirts (William Ray mentions flannel shirts received from both Wisconsin and the US govt).

In '64 the majority of contracts are for gray wool flannel shirts, followed by "white domestic flannel" (no longer domet), followed by knit. I assume that the knit shirts were wool, not the cotton knit ones that we've seen recently (not that there's anything wrong with that -- have one myself).

While the classic pre-war shirt may have been hand-sewn domet flannel, a machine sewn wool flannel shirt should be fine at any point in the war. A civilian shirt should also be acceptable, though they are almost certainly over-represented -- the government procured more than 3.2 million shirts in the last year of the war alone, and some of them had to have been worn.

Even when the choice is for a civilian shirt, I think many of these would have been similar to those issued by the army, if only because wool flannel was the material of choice for outdoor work.

Several vendors make wool flannel shirts. Since the material differs so much from one lot to the next, I'd advise you to if at all possible buy one in person so you know what you're getting. A good wool flannel needn't be heavy or itchy to be authentic. If anything, the opposite is true. I have three of Chris Daley's, all different, all good.

You can minimize shrinking by washing the shirt as little as possible and, when you do wash it, do so by hand, gently, in warm (not hot or cold) water. Hang it up out of direct sunlight and stretch it a little while still damp.

Enjoy!
__________________
M. A. Schaffner

[Bill_Cross]

Herr Schnapps, the "Red Menace," writes:

A good wool flannel needn't be heavy or itchy to be authentic. If anything, the opposite is true. I have three of Chris Daley's, all different, all good.

I cannot speak to Chris's shirts, since I have preferred to make my own (a half-dozen "white" domet flannel and one "gray" one), but I can point out that my experience in hot weather situations is that the so-called "itchy" shirt of domet flannel is actually more comfortable than any civilian cotton shirt. This is because the cotton will get soaked with perspiration, then stay clammy next to your skin. You'll continue to perspire, but not cool down (and certainly not dry out without removing said garment and hanging up to dry).

The Issue Shirt of domet wool will "wick" away the sweat and cool you better. It will even dry out why still being worn. I ignore advice about washing in warm water or using Woolite, as soldiers of the era washed their clothes (if they washed them at all) in whatever was at hand, occasionally even boiling to kill lice. I wash mine in cold water to prevent shrinkage, then hang it up to dry, outside if the weather is warm. Over time, my shirts HAVE lost their natural lanolin, but have softened and are quite comfortable. I prefer doing Federal in the Summer for the very reason that the Issue Shirt is superior to any private one a Johnny would've gotten from home.

This information has no bearing on shirt numbers or what is "authentic" for your impression, but is offered as part of the intangibles in making a purchase decision. Since the Issue Shirt is acceptable at all events, recommend it for any FederaI kit.

[bob 125th nysvi]

I'm going to paste my response from the last time a similar topic came up, about two weeks ago. That time you asked a slightly different question, but substantively the same answer applies. For further information, it would not be too difficult for you to do additional research in the ORs, available on line from Cornell University and easily searchable. Chris Daley also has information on his web site that provides a useful starting point:


***
I don't have the numbers here with me, but one day I went to the trouble of counting shirts contracted for by the US govt in '61 and '64. It was interesting to see the changes from the earlier contracts to the later ones.

In '61, as I recall, about 80% of the shirts were domet flannel, the rest being wool flannel. I calculated the number of shirts based on yardage contracted for because at that time the government issued separate contracts for fabric and for making said fabric into shirts.

Interestingly, although the vast majority of contracted shirts in 1861 were domet flannel, the numbers would not have provided sufficient shirts to complete an annual issue to all the men raised that year, which implies that large numbers continued to rely on civilian shirts or state issued shirts (William Ray mentions flannel shirts received from both Wisconsin and the US govt).

In '64 the majority of contracts are for gray wool flannel shirts, followed by "white domestic flannel" (no longer domet), followed by knit. I assume that the knit shirts were wool, not the cotton knit ones that we've seen recently (not that there's anything wrong with that -- have one myself).

While the classic pre-war shirt may have been hand-sewn domet flannel, a machine sewn wool flannel shirt should be fine at any point in the war. A civilian shirt should also be acceptable, though they are almost certainly over-represented -- the government procured more than 3.2 million shirts in the last year of the war alone, and some of them had to have been worn.

Even when the choice is for a civilian shirt, I think many of these would have been similar to those issued by the army, if only because wool flannel was the material of choice for outdoor work.

Several vendors make wool flannel shirts. Since the material differs so much from one lot to the next, I'd advise you to if at all possible buy one in person so you know what you're getting. A good wool flannel needn't be heavy or itchy to be authentic. If anything, the opposite is true. I have three of Chris Daley's, all different, all good.

You can minimize shrinking by washing the shirt as little as possible and, when you do wash it, do so by hand, gently, in warm (not hot or cold) water. Hang it up out of direct sunlight and stretch it a little while still damp.

Enjoy!
__________________
M. A. Schaffner


Other sources indicate that the precentage of knit to dommet shirts at 46% to 40% for the eastern depots indicating in the AoP that the dommet shirt was at best an equally issued shirt not one in overwhelming numbers and that is what causes my question.

[bob 125th nysvi]

There's a knit shirt illustrated in one of the Lord's volumes. Or did you mean that knit shirts weren't issued?

that the knits weren't issued.

It is just that the shirt in the West Point Museum is not identified as being of dommet flannel but of a different flannel.

I had never seen an actual image of a "knit" shirt as opposed to an illustration so I was wondering if the one in West Point was a "knit" shirt.

[Duff]

I think the reason that peaple stress getting the issue shits is because its is vastly under-represented. Look at pictures of troops without their coats on. Most of them have white shirts on. These shirts are most likely issue shirts.

Sure, there are other shirts. But the pictures don't lie. Most men had the white shirt, and some men had Civilian shirts. That is the opposite in reenacting.

Does anyone know which depot the "west point" shirt came from, and when its design went into production? It may only be correct for certain theatres of the war at certain times if it was only produced in one place.

[reb64]

Id wear a farby sutler muslin shirt other than a domet made shirt. they are itchy, shrink terribly and i suspect were disposed of soon enough.

[TheQM]

I own a domet flannel issue shirt, a wool contract shirt, and a knit contract shirt. When I'm doing a Federal impression, I wear the wool contract shirt in moderate weather and the knit shirt in hot weather. When it's cold, I wear both the knit and wool contract shirts. I keep the domet flannel shirt in my pack, so I can tell people I actually have a domet flannel shirt.

If I was freezing to death or my other shirt was soaking wet, I might wear the domet flannel shirt, but that hasn't happened yet.

Domet flannel does make excellent gun cleaning patches.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Other sources indicate that the precentage of knit to dommet shirts at 46% to 40% for the eastern depots indicating in the AoP that the dommet shirt was at best an equally issued shirt not one in overwhelming numbers and that is what causes my question.

I'd be interested in that source, what years it covered, what it meant by "eastern depots" (I assume New York and Philadelphia), and -- most of all -- percentage of what? The charts in the ORs are often frustrating because they refer to clothing on hand or received, not necessarily issued. They raise the possibility that an item on hand in large numbers (say neck stocks) is on hand not because it was manufactured in huge numbers, but because it wasn't issued.

I'm not aware of any source that indicates that more knit than flannel shirts were issued (what were the remaining 14% anyway?). I suppose it's possible, but it would be interesting to know what year they're talking about.

The stats I cited earlier came from an examination of contracts issued in '61 and '64, and reported to Congress by letters from the Secretary of War, the first dated April 21, 1862, the second March 3, 1865. They're imperfect in their own way, but I think give some rough indication of the trend from domet flannel to wool flannel and knit.

For all depots, the number reported on hand at fiscal year end, June 30, 1865, were 1,130,482 "flannel" (no distinction made between domet, wool, or "white domestic"), 394,125 "knit", and 17,687 "Zouave, gray." (OR, Series III, Vol. 5, p. 278). A separate letter to Congress, the Annual Report of the Secretary of War, dated March 5, 1865, and covering the fiscal year ending June 30, 1864, lists 4,743,603 "Shirts, flannel" issued and mentions no knit shirts at all, which means either none of the knit shirts contracted for were received and issued before July 1864 or, more likely I think, they simply lumped them all together in one category, without regard to domet, wool, white domestic flannel, or knit.

That conclusion seems reinforced by attachment 13 to Meigs' annual report for 1865, which gives the total number of articles of clothing purchased by the depots of New York, Philadephia, and Cincinatti since May 1861. This just lists "Shirts": 11,091,639 (OR, SIII, Vol 5, p. 285).

How that eleven million broke down is probably more interesting to us than it was to the Quartermaster General but, from what I've seen, a wool flannel shirt is good for the whole war, either as state or federal issue, or private purchase. Domet flannel shirts would dominate federal issues for at least the first couple of years of the war. Private purchase cotton shirts would probably appear throughout the war, but would become increasingly expensive and thus, I think, unlikely to be worn in preference to a decent issue shirt. I think knit shirts were probably wool, something like merino, and I don't know of any reproductions.

As to my own preferences, I agree with Bill. Domet flannel makes a great cleaning patch.

[Southern Cal]

I turned my domet flannel shirt inside out and literally sanded it with 60 grit garnet paper. A deal of "lint" came off and the scratchiness was reduced by 50%. I washed in cold water with Woolite, and later rubbed a light coat of lanolin onto the inside of the shirt. Lanolin can spot through if one isn't careful with its application. With shirt turned back out it just looks like I've spilled some bacon grease in a few spots. Anyway, I ended up with a domet flannel shirt that's tolerable to wear. The last time I related this process, someone offered up the term "teazle" and that the sandpaper treatment simulated the work of a "teazle".

Besides making a good cleaning patch, regularly wearing a domet flannel shirt on bare skin would make waxing unwanted body hair unnecessary for "high maintenance" males.

[PVT.THIB]

I suppose my skin is more tolarable because I have never had any problems with my issue shirt. The first time I wore it, it was a bit scratchy but after repeated wearings (no washings in between) it has become very comfortable. I would prefer it over any of my civilian shirts!

[tpallas]

I think one factor that often gets overlooked in Federal impressions is uniformity of issue throughout the unit. Lots of focus is placed on the individual and not enough on the mess/company/whatever as a whole.

For instance, a Federal sack coat of any pattern is acceptable as long as it comes from a certain list of manufacturers. In reality, units would receive equipment and uniform issue from depots en masse. Although the next issue may come from a different depot, the majority would still have that original issue. Thus I suspect that units during the War had mostly domet flannel depot shirts, or mostly gray wool contract shirts, etc. For all the reenactor's desire to attribute every little detail to a photograph or account, history does not always provide such evidence, and common sense must be used to fill in the gaps.

[fedpard24]

I wear my Issue shirt all of the time. If you are worried about the itchy and scratchy material, purchase yourself a period undershirt and guess what? Problem solved. I have made a couple of these and I wear them year round under whatever shirt I am wearing depending on my impression. Just a thought.

Sean Cooper

[Regular3]

I wear my Issue shirt all of the time. If you are worried about the itchy and scratchy material, purchase yourself a period undershirt and guess what? Problem solved. I have made a couple of these and I wear them year round under whatever shirt I am wearing depending on my impression. Just a thought.

Sean CooperI agree ... That's why I wear my Issue (under)shirt year-round. :mrgreen: I've owned three Domet flannel shirts and sold them all after one wearing.

The Canton flannel shirt is a bit heavier than Domet flannel, but I guarantee it will never be scratchy.

[Swag]

I have one of Mr. Daley's contract issue shirts and its outstanding, very comfortable to wear and absolutely no itching. One thing I just want to point out you keep brining up the Shirt being held at West Point, remember that this is only one example of a contract shirt, rather limiting your research on said "shirts." I suggest looking at some more sources.

[Bill_Cross]

If Duke were still alive, he'd be muttering something about "aching volvos...."

Gents, sleeping on the ground is #$@&ing uncomfortable. Eating salt pork and hard crackers is disgusting. I get cold at night. I'd much rather sleep in a nice bed in a motel than out in the elements. Rain poured through the seams in our sheebang at the Antitiem preservation march a few years ago. This isn't your vacation, this is RECREATING THE CIVIL WAR. Do you want to wear the clothing THEY wore, or be comfortable???

Please take my hyperbole with a grain of salt, but this discussion is starting to remind me of-- well, I won't go there.

Itchy shirts are what THEY wore. Salt pork and hard crackers is what THEY ate. If you want Pop Tarts, that's fine. But THEY didn't have sandpaper to smooth over the inside of their shirts, THEY didn't put lanolin on them, THEY just wore 'em. Buy one, wear it for a weekend, and be that much more authentic in your impression. Trust me, you won't die.

I know this isn't the Authentic Campaigner site, but come on, fellers!

[Pvt Schnapps]

I hate to say this, but the contracts I've seen refer to cotton and wool (domet) flannel, and wool flannel, and knit (wool) shirts. I haven't seen anything that would indicate that canton (cotton) flannel was used for anything but drawers, or that there ever was anything called an "issue" "undershirt", or a knit cotton shirt (much as I love mine).

That doesn't mean you couldn't wear a canton flannel shirt or knit cotton shirt that you'd bought somewhere or your loved ones had sent from home, just that neither would be something that was ever issued by the United States government.

If somebody has a source that says otherwise, I'd love to be corrected on this. I'm kinda fond of canton flannel and knit cotton myself.

Also, the whole matter of uniformity is easy to overstress. Clothing was mass-produced in this era, but not on assembly lines, and not of material that standardized to the extent we're used to today. I would suspect that even a single bundle of shirts -- or blouses or trousers for that matter -- from the same depot could easily represent several lots of fabric cut by a number of different tailors and assembled by a myriad of seamstresses using combinations of hand and machine work. Once that bundle was broken down and distributed to a unit in the field, and once that unit had been in the field for six months, receiving several additional partial issues, "uniformity" would take on even more of a relative connotation.

[Pvt Schnapps]

If Duke were still alive, he'd be muttering something about "aching volvos...."

Gents, sleeping on the ground is #$@&ing uncomfortable. Eating salt pork and hard crackers is disgusting. I get cold at night. I'd much rather sleep in a nice bed in a motel than out in the elements. Rain poured through the seams in our sheebang at the Antitiem preservation march a few years ago. This isn't your vacation, this is RECREATING THE CIVIL WAR. Do you want to wear the clothing THEY wore, or be comfortable???

Please take my hyperbole with a grain of salt, but this discussion is starting to remind me of-- well, I won't go there.

Itchy shirts are what THEY wore. Salt pork and hard crackers is what THEY ate. If you want Pop Tarts, that's fine. But THEY didn't have sandpaper to smooth over the inside of their shirts, THEY didn't put lanolin on them, THEY just wore 'em. Buy one, wear it for a weekend, and be that much more authentic in your impression. Trust me, you won't die.

I know this isn't the Authentic Campaigner site, but come on, fellers!


There's a wonderful line in "Hardtack and Coffee" where Billings refers to flannels as resembling sandpaper "if they were what he drew from the government stores," meaning "they" didn't necessarily do so, if they could afford an alternative.

But then I gotta admit. The one I bought from you I ended up selling to Josh.

[Bill_Cross]

There's a wonderful line in "Hardtack and Coffee" where Billings refers to flannels as resembling sandpaper "if they were what he drew from the government stores," meaning "they" didn't necessarily do so, if they could afford an alternative.
My wife is amazed that I would sleep on the ground at all.

"If the boys of 1865 came back, they'd laugh their asses off at you for not going to a motel. They sure would have."

And she's right. So I propose we have the battles, then change out of our uncomfortable woolens and go stay in motels overnight, reassembling on the field of battle the following morning. It would end the need for blankets, there would be no arguments about cots or coolers, no fist fights over A-tents vs. shelter halves.
But then I gotta admit. The one I bought from you I ended up selling to Josh.
What else can I expect from a sneaky Red? ;) And don't forget your annual dues!

[bob 125th nysvi]

I think one factor that often gets overlooked in Federal impressions is uniformity of issue throughout the unit. Lots of focus is placed on the individual and not enough on the mess/company/whatever as a whole.

For instance, a Federal sack coat of any pattern is acceptable as long as it comes from a certain list of manufacturers. In reality, units would receive equipment and uniform issue from depots en masse. Although the next issue may come from a different depot, the majority would still have that original issue. Thus I suspect that units during the War had mostly domet flannel depot shirts, or mostly gray wool contract shirts, etc. For all the reenactor's desire to attribute every little detail to a photograph or account, history does not always provide such evidence, and common sense must be used to fill in the gaps.

Their initial equipment probably would have come from one supplier.

But since different men needed different replacement items at different times a unit would have been equipped with a variety of items from a variety of manufacturers right after its first battle.

[Regular3]

"If the boys of 1865 came back, they'd laugh their asses off at you for not going to a motel. They sure would have."

And she's right. So I propose we have the battles, then change out of our uncomfortable woolens and go stay in motels overnight, reassembling on the field of battle the following morning. It would end the need for blankets, there would be no arguments about cots or coolers, no fist fights over A-tents vs. shelter halvesGood grief. Nobody is proposing we throw the authenticity baby out with the bathwater. But soldiers have always and will always opt for comfort over Regulation correctness if (a) it's available, (b) they can afford it and (c) they can get away with it - that is, if the first sergeant doesn't smoke their behinds for it.

[Bill_Cross]

Darrell, I appreciate what you're saying. We all make compromises to authenticity, even the hardest hardcores. But I guess the eagerness by some on this thread to come forward and proclaim their shortcuts amuses me a bit, and would have amused my late friend, Duke. He was once banned from this place for spelling out the Volvo allusion, and admitted often being a hot-tempered Scotch-Irish South Carolinian.

And as I've said elsewhere on this thread, what you sacrafice in skin abrasion with a domet shirt you more than make up for in cooling effect. The wool is FAR superior to cotton in hot weather. Canton flannel, for example, would also be a disaster, as it's not only hot, but heavy, at least the weight used in drawers.

[Memphis]

What next, "Saab" stories? :razz:

[Pvt Schnapps]

Darrell, I appreciate what you're saying. We all make compromises to authenticity, even the hardest hardcores. But I guess the eagerness by some on this thread to come forward and proclaim their shortcuts amuses me a bit, and would have amused my late friend, Duke. He was once banned from this place for spelling out the Volvo allusion, and admitted often being a hot-tempered Scotch-Irish South Carolinian.

And as I've said elsewhere on this thread, what you sacrafice in skin abrasion with a domet shirt you more than make up for in cooling effect. The wool is FAR superior to cotton in hot weather. Canton flannel, for example, would also be a disaster, as it's not only hot, but heavy, at least the weight used in drawers.

As I recall, the original question was what kind of shirt the government issued to the troops. I'm going to go back to my notes and see if I can come up with some better numbers from the '61 and '64 contracts, so I can flesh out what I said above about domet flannel, wool flannel, and knit.

In the mean time, while I disagreed with Darrell about whether one should call a canton flannel shirt an "issue" shirt, I don't take issue with anyone wearing a shirt made of period materials in a period manner. This really seems one area of the uniform where the soldiers had, and exercised, some discretion (socks were probably another, given the alleged quality of those issued by the government).

As for the domet flannel shirt, if they were really that comfortable, or even bearable, we'd all wear them. I wore mine to many an event. I even slept in one that Saturday night at ReconIII and felt fine. But I made the mistake of trying to wash it afterwards. My next experience with it was at an August event. I stood it well enough Friday, changed into a dry shirt to sleep in, then tried to put it back on Saturday morning. In searching for an analogy I'm stuck on damp fiberglass dishrag.

I don't recommend anyone spend $150 on a shirt they'll be miserable in. Especially when historically valid alternatives exist for early war use, and when late war use is questionable. There are plenty of other ways to work on your authenticity. For starters, for about a tenth of that amount you can get a pen, inkwell, and some ink.

Then if you want to call me a farb, you can write me a letter in proper period style.

[Regular3]

As I recall, the original question was what kind of shirt the government issued to the troops.The Regular Army used the Domet flannel shirt from around the beginning of recorded time until 1872. As Mike stated in his earlier posts, there were numerous other shirts purchased and issued throughout the war ... And probably nearly as many privately purchased by soldiers, or made by loved ones and shipped to them.

As for the Canton flannel undershirt not being issued, there would seem to be grounds for dispute, as on page 317 of Army Blue, The Uniform of Uncle Sam's Regulars (and everyone else during the Civil War) there's a photo credited to the US Army Quartermaster Museum of a fellow wearing a complete set of Canton flannel underwear - drawers and a shirt that looks identical to the one I own. I can only speculate as to why it doesn't show up in the records, but the Army left a lot to speculation in those days. (I still chuckle at the specification in the 1861 Regulations that says haversacks will be marked with black letters and numerals - Think about it)

For what it's worth, Jarnagin is the only source I know of for reproductions of that particular pattern and material. There were undershirts or "bottom shirts" in patterns and materials other than that one, notably one found in the museum at Gettysburg NMP.

[bob 125th nysvi]

I think the reason that peaple stress getting the issue shits is because its is vastly under-represented. Look at pictures of troops without their coats on. Most of them have white shirts on. These shirts are most likely issue shirts.

Sure, there are other shirts. But the pictures don't lie. Most men had the white shirt, and some men had Civilian shirts. That is the opposite in reenacting.

Does anyone know which depot the "west point" shirt came from, and when its design went into production? It may only be correct for certain theatres of the war at certain times if it was only produced in one place.

that the Military Museum at West Point, almamater of Robert E Lee and US Grant would find a one off and bill it as representative of the type of shirts contracted for by the US Army during the civil war.

Do you?

Or that reputable sutler like NJ Sekela would pick a shirt that isn't documented.

Do you?

Besides which you can't really tell WHAT the color of those shirts are from the period photos. They could be white, or a light grey or any number fo similiar colors.

[jademonkey]

For what it's worth, Jarnagin is the only source I know of for reproductions of that particular pattern and material. There were undershirts or "bottom shirts" in patterns and materials other than that one, notably one found in the museum at Gettysburg NMP.

If you are refering to the canton flannel bottom shirt in the GNMP Todd Morris (Morris Clothiers) and Brian Merrick (Corner Clothiers) both reproduce this garment.

[Bill_Cross]

As for the domet flannel shirt, if they were really that comfortable, or even bearable, we'd all wear them. I wore mine to many an event. I even slept in one that Saturday night at ReconIII and felt fine. But I made the mistake of trying to wash it afterwards. My next experience with it was at an August event. I stood it well enough Friday, changed into a dry shirt to sleep in, then tried to put it back on Saturday morning. In searching for an analogy I'm stuck on damp fiberglass dishrag.
I disagree, simply because of all the complaints about the shirt. I'm sure there are many who come into the hobby and attempt to upgrade their authenticity, but hear all the negatives about the "itchy shirt" and default to other materials. I made my first shirt simply because I wanted to have what THEY wore.

Did you somehow do something to turn yours into the shirt equivalent of a rabid dog? I wasn't there at the washing, and can't say. Mine have been washed numerous times with no appreciable change in texture (I'm not half the man Wishbone Waymer is).

There are plenty of other ways to work on your authenticity. For starters, for about a tenth of that amount you can get a pen, inkwell, and some ink. Then if you want to call me a farb, you can write me a letter in proper period style.
I would agree. But some items like a lid and a shirt are easy to find, easy to do. Learning to write in a period manner is a formidable task, and I decided to purchase CW fonts for my computer years ago instead of doing what you have done.

And I would never call you a farb, because you're an expert in one of the least-studied and most under-rated aspects of our hobby: paperwork. Anyone can learn about guns and leathers and uniforms, the hard work has already been done. But how many of us know what form to send out for reporting casualties, requisitioning supplies, etc.? Amos Reynolds still talks about how you swamped him with red tape at McDowell 2003. ;)

[Southern Cal]

If Duke were still alive, he'd be muttering something about "aching volvos...."

Gents, sleeping on the ground is #$@&ing uncomfortable. Eating salt pork and hard crackers is disgusting. I get cold at night. I'd much rather sleep in a nice bed in a motel than out in the elements. Rain poured through the seams in our sheebang at the Antitiem preservation march a few years ago. This isn't your vacation, this is RECREATING THE CIVIL WAR. Do you want to wear the clothing THEY wore, or be comfortable???

Please take my hyperbole with a grain of salt, but this discussion is starting to remind me of-- well, I won't go there.

Itchy shirts are what THEY wore. Salt pork and hard crackers is what THEY ate. If you want Pop Tarts, that's fine. But THEY didn't have sandpaper to smooth over the inside of their shirts, THEY didn't put lanolin on them, THEY just wore 'em. Buy one, wear it for a weekend, and be that much more authentic in your impression. Trust me, you won't die.

I know this isn't the Authentic Campaigner site, but come on, fellers!

Sarcastic remarks like "Pop Tarts" are generally counter-productive if one wants others to take seriously what one has to say. What I offered up earlier for consideration was merely one particular way to wear an authentic garment without all the discomfort. Some folks might want to know that before they buy an expensive cotton civilian shirt. When I wear my domet flannel shirt around no one knows that I smoothed out the innards. The whole point is that I'm still able to wear an authentic issue shirt. I don't wash it either, just rinse out the BO in water. But wait, didn't the real soldiers boil their shirts?

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

I've been following this thread with great interest, since shirts are my "thing", and there have been several great points that I wish to reiterate. One, if you are serious about your Federal impression, one should (Iwon't say "must") have a domet flannel issue shirt, at least in your knapsack or possesion if not on your body. The numbers bear out the fact that this was indeed one of the most issued pieces of clothing for a soldier. Those that have mentioned that they are easier to wear with an undershirt are indeed correct. There is hardly an event that I do Federal that I'm not wearing either an issue shirt or a contract variant shirt of flannel, with or without a knit cotton undershirt in the summer or a canton flannel undershirt in the winter. I remember distinctly wearing the same domet shirt at the 140th Gettysburg from Wednesday afternoon through the last battle of Sunday with little ill affect. In this day an age of vendors, good Fed shirts are readily available, be that an issue or contract variant. For those who just can't tolerate the feel of either, and I grant that there are many, I won't look down on anyone who chooses to wear a civilian or private purchase shirt (as long as it is of correct construction and materials) for whatever events they choose, but I would still hasten to recommend at least possesing a flannel shirt to show the difference. There is an oft quoted remembrance from a Confederate officer who mentioned that the only way to tell the difference between the dead at Gettysburg was the fact that the Federals were wearing wool shirts. This tells us two things - alot of jackets or coats were taken off due to the heat, and that there was a predominance of wool shirts on the Yankees. The joy of this hobby is that we have freedom of choice, but I would hope that federal impressions will opt for a more correct choice to bolster their impressions and to augment other civilian or privately purchased shirts.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Just some notes while I work up the QM contract info.

First, thank you Bill for getting me started in the whole clerking thing. Little did you know what sort of bureaucratic Frankenstein you were creating <g>

Second, Southern Cal, I applaud your efforts to make your domet shirt wearable. I consider what you did to be the functional equivalent of breaking it in by wearing for several weeks, without actually having to wear it for several weeks. I can't see anything wrong with that.

Third, Darrel, I believe that there was a discussion some time ago on the AC forum about the GNMP canton flannel shirt. It's 19th century, but it has no civil war or other military provenance. If it works for you, great, it's just not something that was issued.

Fourth, Mr. Lamoureaux, I agree with your statement so far as it would relate to flannel shirts generally, but not domet flannel specifically. In comparing the 1861 and 1864 documents one thing that really jumped out at me was that while the earlier contracts specifically mention "cotton and wool flannel" (the word "domet" doesn't appear), by 1864 it's just plain flannel, "shirting flannel," or "domestic flannel." Some of this might be cotton and wool flannel, but it's no longer specified or apparently required.

Part of the reason, I think, has to do with the price of cotton. Prices are rising generally anyway, but cotton is skyrocketing. For example, canton flannel drawers that contract for 90 cents each in early 1864 go for $1.90 each by the end of the year, by which time the Army is procuring knit woollen drawers in response. Also, while the army overwhelmingly prefers cotton and wool flannel in 1861, actual contracting that year fell far short of the need. The balance had to be met with state issues and the soldier's own resources.

The classic domet flannel shirt might have dominated in 1862 and 1863, but from what I can see there weren't enough to go around in 1861 and the army had largely switched to gray flannel and knit by 1864. After the war there seemed to be a return to the old standard, but only for a few years before a dark blue flannel shirt became the new model.

[Bill_Cross]

Sarcastic remarks like "Pop Tarts" are generally counter-productive if one wants others to take seriously what one has to say.
Sir, if your skin is that thin, I won't need real bullets to wound you mortally at the next event! ;)

As I said in another post, we ALL make compromises. Yours are better than those who won't even consider an issue shirt, and I don't judge you so much as censor your rushing to proclaim your shortcuts. Perhaps I'm too embarassed to proclaim my own. But my sarcasm is directed at the notion we should seek comfort in our reenacting, cut corners to accommodate our 21st Century habits and predelictions, etc. We're talking about less than 48 hours in most cases for an event, and with mainstream ones, probably a lot less than that spent in mufti. Surely at least you younger fellers can stand to wear the "hair shirt" for a weekend in honor of the boys of 186X?

Plus I have tried to point out that, in certain weather, the domet shirt is superior to a cotton one for keeping your body temperature regulated.

No need for "ice angels" if you aren't overheated, yes?

But enough said by me. I am unsubscribing from this thread so as not to be tempted to put in further 2 cents. At this point, I'm up to at least four bits. ;)

[Pvt Schnapps]

Gee, Bill, a simple "sorry" would have been easier. At least Southern Cal still wears the durn thing :)

I'm seriously considering private purchase fustian for the summer months. And, at the risk of wandering totally off topic, anybody know anything about hemp shirts in the period?

[Southern Cal]

I think hemp shirts could be rolled and smoked if the tobacco ran out. Actually, I've heard of hemp being used as garment material but I can't find any further information either other than hemp makes good thread.

[Ross L. Lamoreaux]

Mr. Shaffner, you bring up some excellent info - thanks for that. I would also venture to add , and it is entirely speculation, that there probably was more flannel contract variant shirts than domet issue shirts later in the war from the standpoint of manufacturing - the issue shirt was entirely handsewn, therefore labor intensive, where the contract variants were mostly machine sewn and quicker to put out. Earlier in the war, many companies and depots were still using contract seamstresses working from home (or the factories) who did alot of handsewing, but as the contracts got bigger and the government money was flowing, more mechanization allowed for machine sewing more goods quicker.

[Pvt Schnapps]

Mr. Lamoreaux, I came across some numbers that underscore your point about the prevalence of a government issue shirt in the Federal ranks. While the government couldn't get enough to go around in the beginning of the war, they had contracts out for more than four million in 1864 and a stock on hand of about 1.4 million by war's end, which tells us that the vast majority of the 11 million purchased did in fact end up on the backs of the soldiers.

But beyond that, the issue shirt was a real deal economically. Each year the government set the cost of clothing for soldiers based on contract prices for the previous year. This would be deducted from the soldier’s clothing allowance ($3.50 a month for volunteers) as the items were drawn. For 1864 the relevant prices, from G.O. 364 of November 12, 1864, were $1.53 for flannel and $1.27 for knit shirts.

But while the government procured some flannel shirts for as little as $1.37 in January 1864, by August costs considerably exceeded two dollars – in one case just over three. Knit shirts similarly rose from as little as about $1.30 in February to as much as $2.34 in August.

If these at all represent the commercial cost of shirts, a soldier did quite well to draw against his clothing account. The monthly $3.50 had not increased since the beginning of the war, but at least the government only charged the soldier the previous year’s prices, which ran from just half to two-thirds of the current contract costs, which were themselves probably somewhat lower than retail prices.

The soldier didn't get a lot of breaks during the war, but the cost of the issue shirt was one of them.