The Necessity Of A Vest?

[IrishRifles]

Other than maybe for a ball or some other formal event, is a vest a necessary requirement to a Confederate uniform?

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo!

Short answer: NUG vests were not a government issued item of clothing.
However, lads with the money, access, and inclination could do private purchase.... or sent from home.

Many times, we Moderns having access and disposable income likely have more vests in the field than they did.

Curt

[lincolnsguard]

How about, "No."

[NYCivilWar]

Many times, we Moderns having access and disposable income likely have more vests in the field than they did.

Curt

I personally think waistcoats were worn much more than we actually see them in the field today. Now I am not trying to overgeneralize here, but a waistcoat was much more of an "essential" in a man's wardrobe in the 19th century (in any social class) than it is today. Take a look at photos, paintings, fashion plates even run-away slave ads. But let's go back to the original question. And let's use some photographic evidence via the LOC.

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...em/2012649108/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...9121/resource/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...8991/resource/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...6149/resource/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...6138/resource/

http://www.loc.gov/pictures/collecti...8533/resource/

These are just a few images from the Liljenquist Family Collection of Civil War Photographs. Didn't go through them all, but these images show Confederates wearing waistcoats. Now these are photos taken of soldiers with their jackets unbuttoned. Who knows how many waistcoats are hiding under buttoned jackets? Did every soldier wear one? No. Was it "typical?" We probably will never know. Did Confederates wear wasitcoats during the war? Yes, some did. Take a look at some Union photos, both studio portraits and of soldiers in the field, you'll find many waistcoats on Billy Yank too.

My thoughts,
Kyle M. Stetz

[indguard]

I wear a civilian waistcoat with every uniform, Union or Confederate.(I am not a fan of the military ones with the full up-and-down buttoning) It wouldn't feel properly dressed without one.
One reason is simply extra pockets!

WTH

The HauteCoture mess

[kealbo]

Sure there are gonna be more posts form more knowlegable folks than me,but I understand it was also a way to take off your coat without showing your underwear,hehe.In the field,I dont know how lax the regular soldiers got with each other and social norms,but it seems I have see a great many vests in photos.Of course these portraits would have been mostly taken in town and a vest would have been absolutely proper,in that setting.In camp,on the march,I really dont know.I have seen many reenactors in camp when ladies were present,with just shirts and I bekieve that is wrong.My .02.

[Frederick14Va]

The vest/waistcoat was moreso the habit of inherited social habits of the era than a matter of regulation or necessity. As mentioned it was commonly viewed as improper for a gentleman to be out and about only wearing his shirt, (with trousers). By victorian era standards the shirt was considered to be ones underwear... It was acceptable in familier company or while engaging in ones vocation to wear the waistcoat. But more commonly if a gentleman was about his business in town he would normally be found wearing a hat and coat as well... As with anything in war time, things may relax a bit from social graces, whereas you also see photos of men in standing around in the background of camp settings wearing only the shirt... Portraits or intentionally posed photos they usually are properly attired... Reenactors generally under represent the common use of waistcoats.

[Bear Flagger]

Where is documentation that a shirt is underwear? I have heard that urban legand for over twenty years, but have never seen it in a primary source. I have seen photographs, and refrences to not wearing a coat while working.

All the photographs linked to are all early war. The waistcoat will be thrown to the side of the road right after the overcoat.

[Bloated_Corpse]

The waistcoat will be thrown to the side of the road right after the overcoat.

I disagree. There certainly is documentation of clothing being discarded on the march, even by veteran troops, espcially after a winter of accumulating extra stuff. But, like anything else, it cannot be considered as a universal practice. Even a third of an army dropping overcoats by the side of the road (Army of the Potomac at on the march to Chancellorsville, for example), that still leaves most of the army with an issued piece of equipment. Throw away an overcoat, face a stiff fine later on... if you survive. Throw that frying pan away, sure.... keep the overcoat until officially ordered to put it into storage for summer campaignin'.

Throw your vest away? The vest that Ma sent you!?! The vest you paid good money for? No, sirree! Vests are very lightweight. No point in throwing away something doesn't weigh much and was provided by a loved one or you bought with your own money. Hardly takes up any space in the pack, and heck... you can wear it instead of carrying it.

[Bear Flagger]

Following regulations is nice when the longest walk in the weekend is from sutlers row to camp. On day 2 of a week long march coat buttons become questionable.