|
1858 Forage Cap
Pat Hutchins
The most thoroughly documented research of the 1858 forage cap appears to
be that of "United States Army Headgear 1855-1902; Catalog of United
States Army Uniforms in the Collections of the Smithsonian Institution, II"
by Edgar "Dixie" Howell, originally published in 1975, with the third
and last printing being in 1980. In it, he devotes an entire section to the
"1858 Forage Cap." Howell’s findings were based on contemporary written
material, notably the Quartermaster Corps correspondence files at the
Archives, and on his observations of the specimens in the national
collection at the Smithsonian. After a lengthy discussion attempting to
ascertain the 1858 cap’s development history, including General Order No. 13
of 1858, which gave the original regulation of the cap’s use, Howell says
the original caps’ pattern called for "a visor ‘cut to slope,’ or convex,"
which would correspond with the visors on the "Type I" caps.
Initially the regulations called for colored welts on the caps, to which
Howell has this to say: "Although the author has never seen or heard of an
authentic regulation issue cap with the colored welt, there is no question
that they were issued, the first such being ordered as early as 16 December
1858, 84 caps for Company E, 1st Infantry, and in January caps specifically
for infantry, engineers, and artillery. The caps were manufactured at
Schuylkill Arsenal at an initial cost of $.85, the cost dropping to $.57 a
year later. General Order No. 4 of 26 February 1861 brought an end to the
colored welt, stating that thereafter forage caps were to be made with a
dark blue welt."
Howell continues: "The earliest found detailed specifications for the cap,
those in the 1865 Quartermaster Manual, state [that the caps should have] ‘a
visor of stiff glazed leather…in form of a crescent.’ A number of specimens
of obvious regulation origin have been examined, including one sealed
sample, and their general construction and basic measurements vary little
except in relation to cap sizes. This is somewhat to be wondered at when one
considers that these must be taken as a cross-section of several million
made during the period by a number of different contractors…. Although the
cap was originally ordered to have a visor ‘cut to slope,’ that is, somewhat
convex, about 50 percent of those examined have visors completely flat.
While the 1865 Quartermaster Manual does not precisely describe the shape of
the visor, it does say that it was to be two inches wide in the center. Of
the caps examined, all the convex visors are exactly 2 inches wide in the
center, while the flat visors measure 1 5/8 inches in each case. A check of
all clear group pictures in Miller’s Photographic History of the Civil
War shows the convex to outnumber the flat visors in a proportion of
something better than two to one. The one pattern cap, or ‘sealed sample,’
of regulation style examined carries a convex visor, two inches wide in the
center."
Many different manufacturers, both contracted to the government and
private purchase, turned out products to create variants and muddy the
waters. Howell does remark on the difference in disk widths, crown heights,
and visors in all the samples he examined, but without laying stress on
them, except to point out the greater number of curved visors found in
photographs. He viewed all this apparently as manufacturing differences.
The definitive guide to what the Army thought the forage cap should look
like are the quartermasters' sealed pattern samples. The only known example
for the 1858 forage cap still in existence, is the quartermasters' sealed
pattern in green cloth for the Berdan’s model in the collection of the
Smithsonian. This war time pattern has the curved ("Type I") brim on it. A
photo of the Berdan’s sealed pattern cap can be found on page 90 of John P.
Langellier & C. Paul Loane’s book "U.S. Army Headgear 1812 – 1872"
The next model of cap recognized officially by the Army, after the 1858
model, is the 1872 version. This, says Howell, "was little more than a
continuation of the nonregulation 'chasseur' or 'McClellan' pattern so
popular with officers during and after the Civil War and which hatters had
been advertising during the late 1860s. Indeed, the 1872 regulations used
the term 'chasseur.'"
The "official" specs for the 1858 forage cap, from beginning to end, called
for a brim that resembles what reenactors now referred to as a "Type I".
That other variations on this existed is undoubted, as Howell himself
remarked.
Assuming that he was basically correct in his information, we can derive
the following:
--Some of the 1858 forage caps were indeed made at Schuylkill Arsenal.
--What reenactors have classified as the "Type I" cap (round brim) probably
best represents the "official" pattern of the forage cap and would be
suitable for an early war impressions, and equally valid throughout the war.
--The colored welt, at least by regulation, was supposed to be out of
service by the time the war actually began. For immediately pre-war
scenarios, it would probably be correct.
--The differences between what reenactors call Type I and Type II caps were
due to the fact that they were produced by a variety of contractors, and not
to official regulation changes.
|
