Issuu on Google+


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

2


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest In This Edition

To Advertise: Send advertising inquiries to: Connie Payne - digesteditor1@gmail.com Phone: 231-519-6614 Advertising rates can be found on our website at: www.citizenssoldiersdigest.com

N

To Contribute: Contact any of the editors to submit an article for consideration, or to inquire as to writers guidelines. Articles can be submitted via email to: Bill Christen: gwjchris@earthlink.net Craig Barry: craiglbarry@aol.com Connie Payne: digesteditor1@gmail.com Lynn Kalil: gtysbrglek@aol.com Or send to: The Watchdog Review PO Box 1675 Warren, MI 48090-1675 Writers guidelines are also available on our website at: www.citizenssoldiersdigest.com

N

For general business and Publication sales, contact: Bill Christen: watcdogreview@sbcglobal.net or (586) 801-6199

N PRESERVATION CONTRIBUTIONS Since The Citizens & Soldiers Digest is presented with no subscription rate, we kindly ask our web visitors to consider making a tax deductible preservation donation of a minimum of $10 or $15 dollars per year. Checks or Money Orders (payable to The Watchdog) should be sent to the PO BOX listed above. Payments can be made though PayPal (http://PayPal.com) using watchdogreview@sbcglobal.net as the “pay to” e-mail address. At the end of the year, the Watchdog Review trustees will make donations to at least four preservation sites or activities.

3

From the Editors

4

Preservation

5

“Their Words”

7

The William and Robert Cook Letters

8

Sky Blue Trousers in the ANV

10

A Closer Look at Ribbons

14

A Historical Look at Ketchup

20

Notes on Little Boys Clothing

24

Hemlock Leather

28

Presbyterian Institutions Suffer from Kentucky’s Largest Civil War Battle

37

Aurally: Reviews of Recordings of Civil War Music

40

Short Hair Help for Civil War Styles

41

Military Swords & Sabers

44

Military Photo Analysis

48

Contributors

- Stuart Sanders - David Burt - David Jarnagin - Anna Worden Bauersmith - Marta Vincent - John Braden - Julie Brown - Doug Dickerson

- Glenna Jo Christen - Bill Christen - Craig Barry

Covers Front:LOC:LC-DIG-

ppmsca-26953 (digital file from original item).

Back: Todd Harrington

THE WATCHDOG REVIEW: Board of Trustees William Christen - Craig Barry Connie Payne - Lynn Kalil The Citizens & Soldiers Digest is a publication of The Watchdog Review, an IRS approved 501(c)3 educational non-profit corporation. Its mission it to raise funds for preservation of Civil War battlefield sites and other historical sites related to the social and material culture of the 1850-75 period of United States history. Using publications, demonstrations, lectures and consultation, the Watchdog Review staff hopes to educate the public and create an awareness of the need for preservation, conservation and increased scholarship about this period in United States history.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

4

From the Editors

FROM BILL: The new Citizens and Soldiers Digest gets a very loud ARF! I am impressed and very, very pleased with the reception of the Digest. I feel that Connie and Craig have done an excellent job in launching this new publication. The number of readers at the site and even requests from those willing to pay for a subscription is significant. I would also like to thank those readers who have sent in a preservation donation as a mark of their gratitude. The idea that we are providing information to everyone in the Civil War (re)enacting community without regard to membership in any strata of the hobby’s society is notable. This should be considered a first step in an effort to bring the community together in the remaining years of the 150th anniversaries and, perhaps, inspire us in the wake of a seemingly diminishing interest in Civil War (re) enacting, or perhaps (re) enacting in general.

fondlyreferred to as “The Digest”) We knew when we started this that we wanted to provide as much solid, sound information to you for as little money as possible, being VERY aware of the financial challenges that many of us have. Several comments from readers have expressed their appreciation for the free online information, links to museums, seminars, preservation news, educational venues, etc. We have linked many groups and organizations to our site, and have set up a Facebook page to share website updates and information. The actual magazine has been read by thousands, and the comments coming in are very positive. We are finding, however, that reenactors still want their magazine “in hand”, and we are aggressively working with vendors in the field to get print copies to reenactors. The #1 question we are asked is “How do I subscribe”?

Rest assured, as the magazine matures, we will be reevaluating our subscription process. In the meantime, here is the list of vendors who are currently carrying The digest in their businesses: Ortega Traders James Country Mercantile Fall Creek Suttlery Regimental Quartermaster Hansens Mercantile Miss Theresa’s Sutlery Material is coming in, support is growing by the day, and we simply want to say THANK YOU for the opportunity you are all providing us. We also ask for your patience with us as 3 ordinary people juggle and balance jobs, life, our love of history and this wonderful new publication all at the same time. It has been a pleasure getting this publication off the ground and watching it grow!

Craig Barry (left) and Jason Dickerson. Shiloh 150th

Thank you, all!

FROM CONNIE & CRAIG Hello everyone! We couldn’t let this edition pass without expressing our heartfelt THANKS to each of you for the outstanding support you have shown to the new Citizens & Soldiers Digest (already

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

FROM THE CIVIL WAR TRUST Cedar Mountain and 2nd Manassas The Civil War Trust is proud to announce two great preservation campaigns tied to the 1862 battles of Cedar Mountain and Second Manassas. Now is our chance to save 13 historic acres at these two battlefields on their 150th anniversary. See how you can help save this hallowed ground.

5

18th Georgia and Hampton’s Legion, marched over this ground as they began their fateful attack on John Pope’s lightly defended left flank. Just beyond our target tract, the Texans, Georgians, and South Carolinians engaged the 5th and 10th New York regiments who were attempting to hold back the Confederate avalanche. In just 10 minutes of violent combat, more than 500 New Yorkers were killed or wounded. Now we have the chance to reclaim key battlefield acres associated with this famous and bloody attack. Join us in our efforts to save this hallowed ground.

Save the Very Center of Cedar Mountain



Donate $50 or more and get a Civil War Trust hat!

What Henry Hill is to First Manassas or The Angle is to Spotsylvania Court House, Crittenden’s Gate (or “The Gate”) is to the Battle of Cedar Mountain. It was here that Stonewall Jackson came close to being killed or captured; Jackson’s staff made a headquarters of sorts in an overseer’s cabin next to The Gate; General Charles S. Winder went down mortally wounded at The Gate; and thousands of Confederate soldiers moved past The Gate en route to positions around the famous Wheatfield.



3 Acres Targeted



$5 to $1 match - $76,000 needed

Now we have an opportunity to save 10 vital acres of the Cedar Mountain battlefield on its 150th anniversary. This new tract abuts land that was preserved by the Trust and it fills the fourth corner of The Gate site. Join us as we work to save this historic battlefield land. 

A $5 to $1 match greatly magnifies the power of your donation



10 Acres Targeted



$24,000 needed

Reclaiming Manassas On the 150th anniversary of the Battle of Second Manassas, we have the opportunity to reclaim 3 lost acres of this 1862 battlefield. Late on the afternoon of August 30, 1862, men from John Bell Hood’s Texas Brigade, which included the

www.civilwar.org ARMY OF THE OHIO Army of Ohio completes preservation fundraising for the 23rd Ohio battle flag; Announces adoption of 25th Ohio battle flag Columbus, Ohio – The Army of the Ohio is pleased to announce they have raised the necessary funds to allow for the conservation of the 23rd Ohio Volunteer Infantry (OVI) battle flag from the American Civil War. In addition, the group has announced it will continue its preservation efforts by adopting the 25th OVI battle flag. The group adopted the 23d OVI flag in January 2011 and has since raised $14,755 of the estimated $29,000 needed for the conservation of the nearly 150 year old silk regimental flag. The remaining funding came from a grant from the Army Historical Foundation, an anonymous donation to the Ohio Historical Society and from the general flag fund of the society, who operates the Save the Flags Campaign.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

“One of the goals of the Army of the Ohio is to honor the memory of Ohio’s Civil War Soldiers,” says Col. Bob Minton, commander of the Army of the Ohio and Fostoria, Ohio resident. “The simple way to accomplish this is through accurate portrayals of them at reenactments, but to be able to preserve this distinctive symbol of the war is essential to telling the Soldiers story to future generations.”

6

from Ohio and surrounding states. Currently infantry, artillery and cavalry units from Ohio, New York and Pennsylvania comprise the group. FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT: Bob Minton at bminton@embarqmail.com or 419-420-2673 or Joshua Mann at jdmann15@hotmail.com or 419308-7660. Find us on the web at www.armyoftheohio. com or on facebook at Army of the Ohio Civil War Reenactors.

The 23rd Ohio was organized at Camp Chase, Ohio on June 11, 1861 and served in the eastern theater, fighting at South Mountain, Antietam and Winchester. The members of this regiment gained distinction in military and civilian life. The first commander, William Rosecrans, became a noted general. The 23rd Ohio is also the only unit in the history of the Army to contain two future presidents: Rutherford B. Hayes and William S. McKinley. The 25th Ohio was also organized at Camp Chase, Ohio on June 28, 1861 and served in the eastern theater. At the Battle of Gettysburg in July 1863 the regiment sustained a loss of 179 of the 220 officers and men it went into battle with. The 25th remained in service until April 1866 and had eighteen color bears killed or wounded, including eight at Gettysburg. Minton said the groups fund raising efforts took them to numerous events across Ohio and New York selling T-shirts, mugs and selling raffle tickets for Civil War artwork. Additionally, members conducted preservation marches and sought donations from individuals and groups. The group will continue to sell these items to raise the estimated $29,000 required for the 25th OVI flag. The 23rd Ohio flag will be taken to a conservator later this summer where it will be stabilized in order for the flag to be displayed. The Ohio Historical Society’s flag collection is one of the largest in the country. It includes the Ohio Adjutant General’s collection of 553 flags, three quarters of which are from the Civil War. Since the inception of the Save the Flags campaign, 21 of the flags in the collection have been treated and housed in frames for display purposes. The Army of the Ohio was organized in 1999 to combine the strength of American Civil War reenacting units

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

The Citizen

Their Words

Contributed by Mrs. Christen

7

The Soldier Jones, Edmond Hardy 64th GA Infantry Friday, October 30th, 1863 Punchbole Wacale [Wakulla?] County

Ashkenazi, Elliott, ed. The Civil War Diary of Clara Solomon: Growing Up in New Orleans 1861- 1862, Louisiana State University Press, Baton Rouge, 1995. Pg.65 Mon. July 8, 1861 [(mention of sheer dresses in hot weather] I am very warm as I have on a barêge, all my muslins being in the wash. Unfortunate state of existence. Flora McFlimsy, what would you say!!!

Florida

Pg. 67 Tues. July 9, 1861 [some shortages already] Ma marked our chemises — She made a mistake by putting my name on Fanny’s and Fanny’s on mine — She remedied mine very nicely. …— Ma went out this afternoon to Rosenbergs. She did not get any shoes as he had none and said they were very dear and scarce. I have been so particular about getting them, that I suppose I will after all, get none. Ma bought a very pretty dress for herself.

this is to inform you that yours came safe to hand I was vary glad indeed to hear that you was all well you stated that you had not recd but one letter from me since I left home I am vary sorry that my letter does not come through safe. I hav answered every letter punctual that I have recd from you. I hope this will reach you safe and find all well. I have recd 3 or four letters from you since I hav been here and answerd them all punctual. I received the stamps and money that you sent me. This leaves me in vary good health at this time only I am a little sore from marching to this place through the deep sandy roads which is about 12 miles from hour camp. We have dru a suit of clothes which was vary acceptable to the most of the men As to myself I had abowt as many as I could toat. I have now got 3 suits of clothes and 2 blankets with other little things to toat but I have not thru anything away yet. I pay 15 cts a garment for washing.

Pg. 69-70 Thurs. July 11, 1861 This morning Fannie went to change the corsets and shoes. I have not been successful in obtaining the last named articles. She procured a perfect pair of corsets. [later] Pa came home to dinner, he brought a box of “Condensed Milk” — What recollections did it recall! How vividly arose to my mind the circumstances under which I had first “seen, tasted and liked it.” Pg. 76 Tues. July 16, 1861 Yesterday for breakfast, Ma opened the “Condensed Milk” — I do not think that it is all their fancy painted. We did scarcely any sewing. Ma was fixing her preserves, when she found that the buckskin, which she had over her nicest bottle of figs, had been completely gnawed away by the rats. She declares she will not eat them. It is a shame. Pg. 78 Thurs. July 18, 1861 Pa brought home a paraphene candle. Pg. 89 Fri. July 19, 1861 [sewing machine] Not much sewing today. Made an underbody for Alice and some other little things. The machine has been useless as it has the greatest kind of fits. It would not sew at all. It needs repairing. We have all endeavored to remedy it, but failed.

My Dear wife

If you hav not got anything from the county yet You had better get your pa or sume man to se Newt and find out something abowt it. Write to me soon as you receive this and direct your letters as before. Give my love to all and reserve a large portion yourself. I remain yours as ever until death. E. H. Jones Public Domain.

Link Source: http://extlab1.entnem.ufl.edu/ Olustee/letters/ejones.htm h tt p :/ / w w w. s o l d ie rs tu d i e s . o rg /i n d e x . p h p ? a c ti o n =v iew_ letter&Letter=35

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

The William and Robert Cook Letters

The William G. Cook Letters

have not been corrected to retain the flavor of his written words. In many cases capitalization and punctuation has been corrected or added (i.e., proper names or periods at sentence breaks). Clarification is provided when necessary in footnotes and with comments in brackets [ ]. The letters are arranged in chronological order. Someone (probably at a later date) numbered the letters, but not these numbers are not in date order.

William G. Cook was a soldier in the Fortieth Indiana Infantry regiment during the Civil War. His letters and those of his father, Robert Cook (written during a trip to Chattanooga to care for William) have been preserved and passed down through the descendents of his sister, Mary E. Cook. Pat Hedges Christen, the greatgranddaughter of Mary Cook, currently owns the letters. The letters were transcribed, indexed and annotated by Glenna Jo and Bill Christen. William Cook’s spelling errors

The entire Cook Collection consists of: • Thirty-six letters written by William Cook from 12

Editors note: Space added in between apparent “paragraphs” by the editor for ease of reading

Letter 1 (“No. 2” written in pencil at the top of the letter) Written on “Port Royal 1861!” patriotic paper and envelope (FIG 1). The letter was probably written while Cook was at Lafayette, Indiana. Envelope addressed to: Mifs Mary E Cook Reserve Indiana Thursday morning Dec. 12 1861 Well Sister This Being a verry nice morning And I was on guard last night and the rest of them is out on drill and there is nobody to bother me and I have a verry favorable opportunity I will write you a few lines to let you know that I am well at the present and I spose you are well also. I wrote a letter to Adaline last Tuesday. I thought that dock was going up Wednesday morning but he did not go. Father, general and george and the rest of them got here last night. I suppose you heard that we got our overcoats. If you did not I will tell you. I reckon you

• •

8

December 1861 to 19 October 1864. Six letters written by Robert Cook while he was in Chattanooga after William had been wounded at the battle of Missionary Ridge. Numerous letters, documents and family photographs. One cabinet card photographic image of William G. Cook [made from crayon drawing based on an 1861 tintype [original in the possession of Robert Cook, Seattle, Washington].

had a good time at the turkey roast at Jo Days the other day. I did not write to Carley from the fact that I did not know where he was but Adaline told me where to write to and I will write to him the first chance I get. I got a letter from cass and I wrote a letter to her. and also to tom. You wanted me to write to me [you?]about Samuel Swoveland and whether he is getting better or not. he has been at the hospital ever since we moved down here until yesterday. he come up here and he got his overcoat and he is gitting better. he has had the measles and I suppose you are verry sorry at least you said so. We heard that thad Keys wife was sick verry bad sick but we dident know that she was dead until you told us. I have not got nothing much of importance to write at this time but maby against the next time I will have more to write. You said that your letter was a suprise and I guefs [guess] that this letter is one too so I guess I will bring my letter to a close. we have not got much chance to write to you. not as much as you have to write to us. we have to write between times. You must not forget to write to me occasionly along so that I will know something about you. I guess I have told you all I know or

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

think about now. Father and general will tell you the balance. general is out a seeing them drill as it is something new to him. I have not time to write to adaline any thing just now. I wrote her a letter the other day and I guess It will do for her if she is not very particular. Tell Will that I will write to him the first chance I get. I am not In as big a hurry this time as I was the other time that I wrote to you. so no more at the present. From William Cook To Mary E Cook you must write the first chance you get. NOTES: 1. Mary E. Cook is also referred to as “Mollie,” “Molly,” “Liz,” and “Sis.” She was born on 8 March184 and married Thomas Mearing on 2 November 1868. Mearing was a soldier in the 107th Illinois Infantry. 2. Mary Cook, or someone in the family, preserved the letters and perhaps the first letter William wrote was lost. 3. Based on the date of this letter the 40th was still in Lafayette, Indiana 4. What appears to be “Mifs” or “Miff” is typical of early nineteenth-century handwriting practices for a double “ss.”

The William and Robert Cook Letters will be showcased in each edition of The Citizens & Soldiers Digest until completion Photo Top Right: William Cook late war Photo Below: William Cook early war Photo Bottom Right: Envelope and first page of Letter 1

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

9


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Sky Blue Trousers in the ANV

By David C Burt In the Ron Maxwell film Gettysburg,1950s virtually every Confederate soldier shown on the screen seems to be wearing sky blue trousers. This film is now widely panned as being far from authentic in terms of uniforms as well as the infamous depictions of costumequality beards. [1] Additionally, apart from a few incidents of Confederate Soldiers capturing Federal uniforms, just how likely would it be for soldiers in Robert E. Lee’s Army of Northern Virginia to wear sky blue or royal blue trousers? Conventional wisdom in the hobby seems to be that Confederates were outfitted in grey jeans-wool with matching trousers, which faded to “butternut” with exposure to the sun, since the dyestuffs were vegetable based. Actually, Confederate Infantry Dress Regulations published on June 6, 1861 specified sky blue trousers over a grey frock coat for enlisted men, since at the time the Union had adopted uniforms of navy blue jackets and trousers. The vast majority of uniforms for the ANV were supplied from the Richmond Depot. Prior to 1862, the Richmond Depot produced a large percentage of the trousers in sky blue and grey broadcloth, per the regulations. However, as time went on more and more of this fine broadcloth was diverted for use in making officers uniforms and it became increasingly rare in enlisted men’s clothing.

From early 1862 most of the fabric from Southern mills used for making uniforms was wool/ cotton blends or fustians, such as jeans wool (75/25) and cassimere (50/50). [2] However, some fine woollen broadcloth was still manufactured domestically. The cloth was produced by such firms as the Danville Manufacturing Co, and the (Crenshaw) Woolen Mfg Co, both of which were located in Virginia. If the blue woollen cloth was being produced, then it was probable blue woollen trousers were still being produced at Richmond Depot through this period. By October 1863, large amounts of imported sky blue and royal blue woollen kersey began to arrive from England. A receipt ledger at the end of 1864 shows cloth from England coming into the Richmond Depot listed as “English Blue Cloth,” “Pilot Cloth,” “Blue Trowsering,” and “English BluePrivates.” In fact, these light blue cloths were the second largest wool fabrics imported from England behind the blue-grey broadcloth. The darker broadcloth was sometimes referred to as British “cadet grey” in period accounts. This should not be confused with the modern army cadet gray as is used by the US Military Academy at West Point, New York. It is unquestionable that the wool imported by the Confederacy and used at the Richmond Depot was a dark bluish-gray or at least this is how it appeared to period observers, especially when viewed at a distance of more than five feet. There are also references in the

10

ledger to “sky blue” cloth in smaller but still substantial quantities, similar to Federal sky blue and intended mostly for trousers. Surviving examples of blue trousers from the Richmond Depot include a pair worn by Private Henry Redwood who served in the 3rd Virginia local Defence Troops. They are sky blue woollen cloth, with inner facings and pockets of light brown cotton Osnaburg with japanned tin buttons. [3] Another pair belonged to Cpl T.V. Brooke of the Richmond Howitzers issued to him in 1864. Again, the material is sky blue wool kersey, inner facings and pockets of off white cotton, again with japanned tin buttons. Both of these pairs of trousers are virtually identical. Yet another surviving pair belonged to Private Alfred May of the 61st NC Infantry. The 61st NC only served briefly with the ANV from Oct-Dec 1864. This two month window had to have been when Pvt. May received the trousers, and they have striking similarities to Richmond Depot issue. Again, they are sky blue in colour, crudely made woollen pants with a cloth back belt associated with the Richmond Depot, japanned tin buttons and off-white inner facings and pockets, again virtually the same construction as the previous two pairs. A pair of “readymade” royal blue trousers worn by General William Dorsey Pender was imported to the Confederacy from the British firm Isaac, Campbell and Co. These trousers were

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

11

Trousers of Private Alfred May, 61st NC Inf. intended to be for enlisted men with pockets and inner facings of light brown cotton, japanned tin buttons featuring a label marked “Campbell and Co”. It is possible S. Isaac, Campbell and Co also exported thousands of such pairs to the South for enlisted men. An Illinois Infantryman who talked to some pickets of a South Carolina Regiment in 1863 described them as “better dressed than we are, their uniforms being apparently new.” D. Augustus Dickert, Co H 3rd S.C. recalled in his memoirs that their uniforms consisted of a “…dark blue round jackets, close fitting, with light blue trousers…the uniforms of the Eastern Troops made quite a

contrast with the tattered and torn jeans of their Western brethren.” [4] Another soldier remarked that his newly issued uniform consisted of a blue-grey jacket and trousers that did not match, strongly suggesting that the trousers were a lighter blue colour. A soldier in the 2nd Georgia, Bennings Brigade, (Longstreet’s Corps) wrote, “Sometimes the (CS) Govt would get a supply of fine cloth, and we would get uniforms almost to blue.” It is documented the ANV got Richmond Depot (type II) just prior to Chickamauga and then new suits again later in the war from the Tait and Hebbert (type) “readymade” uniform contracts, but the later issuance consisted of matching dark blue

broadcloth jackets and trousers. These blue-grey Tait-type uniforms were found on ANV soldiers killed in the trenches around Petersburg, Virginia in late 1864. It was becoming increasingly confusing for both sides to march out on the battlefield in light blue pants with a darker bluish-grey jacket, even if the style of those jackets were a different cut or fit. On September 21, 1864 a letter written by Quartermaster General A R Lawton, to his European purchasing agent Major James B Ferguson in Britain, stated (in part)”…you need not contract for blue cloth for pants, as the grey makes up to more advantage.” [5]

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

So unofficially, allowing time for the letter to reach England, as of the late 1864 any additional purchases of sky blue kersey for the CS ended. However, there is generally a lag between purchasing cloth overseas and when the uniform goes out the door. Further, it would be way out of character for the Depot to discard fine wool cloth regardless of the shade, and there is certainly no evidence of that! Therefore, sky blue trousers continued to be produced until very late in the Civil War, but exactly how many more pairs of light blue trousers were made from the existing inventories of sky blue and royal blue cloth is not known. How were the trousers made at the Richmond Depot during the mid-to-late Civil War? The manufacturing process worked as follows; cloth was cut from bolts at the Richmond Depot. One individual with a pattern proceeded down a table cutting out the front portion of the trousers.

Another employee with another bolt of cloth went down another table cutting out the backside for the trousers. Since cloth dyed in the Confederacy was inconsistent when it came to dye lots, the resulting trousers could be a “twotone” garment. The leg seams on RD trousers were usually split about one inch from the bottom. With the front and back cloth cut, all of the pieces along with buttons and thread were packaged in butcher paper and outsourced to a piecemeal worker or “outworker” for assembly. Outworkers were civilian women who were paid by the “piece” meaning the garment. Preference for this sort of work from the home seems to have been given to war widows with children to support. If the outworker possessed a sewing machine, the garment was machine sewn, if not the garment was hand-sewn. This is how the majority of domestic garments were assembled. The Richmond Depot employed several thousand

12

outworkers. The workmanship of the finished trousers obviously varied depending on the skills of the seamstress. This explains the comments made by some soldiers when they wrote of their new uniforms as being “shoddy” while others noted theirs were “wellmade.” [6] The materials used for trousers produced at Richmond Depot, from most common down to least were as follows: 1. Jeans cloth, cut to Richmond Depot Pattern trousers. 2. Cassimere, cut to Richmond Depot Pattern trousers. 3. Kersey, cut to Richmond Depot Pattern trousers. 4. Other issue, i.e., wool jeans, kersey, satinet or cassimere civilian trousers. 5. Wool civilian trousers. [7] Buttons for the braces (suspenders) would have been included on issued trousers, one per side, front and back. Since braces were not an item of issuance by either side the soldier was left to his own devices. Replacement buttons were ‘catch as catch can.’ Summary and Conclusions The commutation system operated in the East as well as in the West and TMD. Early in the war, many former state militia troops rushed to enlist and “subserve the cause of the Confederacy,” and they wore a variety of different outfits in different shades at different times. Although there was an attempt in the Eastern theater to have a more uniformed approach, it was not widely in place before late 1863. Confederate dress regulations

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

published in mid-1861 specified sky blue trousers for enlisted men. [8] The official CS dress policy was not changed or modified until (at the earliest) September 21, 1864 and then only in the defacto sense. Judging from extant pairs as well as written evidence, it seems that many pairs of Confederate trousers issued to troops in the ANV were made from sky blue kersey, or one of several shades of medium to “dark royal” blue kersey or “blue trowsering.” These trousers were regular issue made in the Richmond Depot pattern, which copied the popular civilian trousers of the day, including a belt and buckle (on the back) for adjustment. In the last six months of 1864, the ANV received 104,199 jackets and 140,578 pairs of pants. [9] Were most Confederate trousers were made of grey or brown jean-cloths or cassimere? Yes, as discussed previously, for the most part these materials were more common hence, there were more trousers made of these materials. However, to answer the question, the Richmond Depot did produce blue trousers, they did exist and in substantial numbers. Hence, as to the use of sky blue trousers in the ANV, whether fact or fiction—it is definitely a fact. However, it is not quite that simple. One caveat is that if you choose to wear sky blue trousers for a mid-to-late war ANV impression, they should a reproduction made in the Richmond Depot pattern. It is best to avoid the use of the Federal Arsenal reproduction sky blue trousers, which were distinct in various details. For example, the

vast majority of Richmond Depot trousers featured pockets of the “Mule Ear” style, not the diagonal slit found on the Federal Arsenal version. The back of the Richmond Depot trousers had a cloth belt and buckle for adjustment rather than the “yoke” type string adjustment found on Federal issue trousers, and so on. [10] The broader point being, sky blue trousers from the Richmond Depot were in use by the ANV, but they were not the same construction as most of the Federal Arsenal trousers. NOTES 1. The much discussed fake beards worn by all the major characters in Gettysburg (1993) appeared to be WalMart Halloween costume quality, and provoked unintended hoots of derision in the worst moments. The mostly inferior (pre-quel) Gods ‘n’ Generals (2003) did have better beards. The Ted Turner film company actually employed a make-up person who was in charge of beards at G n G. 1. “Fustian” refers to twilled cloth such as jeans and cassimere, both wool/ cotton blends. With fabric of this type, the warp (threads attached lengthwise to the loom) is wool yarn, and the weft (threads that are weaved under and over the warp) is cotton. It is a stout but respectable cloth used for labourer’s garments. Some other fustian fabrics are linen and wool (linsey/woolsey) or linen and cotton. 3. “Japanned” refers to the heavy lacquer coating that dried to a shiny shellac-like finish. When used on metal, it serves as rust-proofing. The name comes from goods imported from Japan (and other Asian countries) with this finish. 4. Augustus Dickert, History of Kershaw’s Brigade, Elbert Aull Publishing, (Charleston, SC) 1899, p. 268.

13

5. The War of the Rebellion, A Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies, published by the US Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, (1900) Series IV vol III p. 674. Note: In that same letter of September 24, 1864, Ferguson was admonished to get the best quality wool he could find, just not sky blue. 6. There is a marked difference between uniforms issued by different CS Depots at different times. Also, states like NC, had their own Depot (in Richmond) to outfit NC troops, regardless of what Army or theater of war they were in. 7. John Nevins. Mid-War Trousers in the Army of Northern Virginia, The Dispatch, Vol XXIII, Issue VI, August 2001, p.4-6 8. Ibid, Nevins, p.5 9. There is always a wider disparity in the ratio of uniform jackets to trousers, in favour of more trousers. Because of the hard use trousers received, they wore much more quickly than jackets, and needed replacement more often. 10. Ibid, Nevins, p.5

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

A Closer Look at Ribbons

By Anna Worden Bauersmith According to George Cole, author of Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances a ribbon is “A strip of fine fabric, as silk, satin, or velvet, having two selvages.” (Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892.) Two key points are consistent through the century – Ribbons are silk and ribbons have a finished edge. These narrow strips of fabric are found through-out the nineteenth century in a span of widths from the smallest fraction of an inch to many inches for a vast array of purposes. Whether a ribbon is used to tie a sewing case closed, secure a bonnet to your head or become a sash around your waist, it deserves a closer look as each can be a remarkable work of art. Anatomy of a Ribbon Ribbons are woven similarly to silk fabric. Warp threads run the length of the ribbon. Weft threads run the width of the ribbon. In ribbons, the warp is also be called organzine; the weft is called tram. Marabout is used for gauzes. The selvage is the edge of the ribbon. This selvage can be straight and plain or have loops called a picot edge or have scallops.

14

 The type of weave  The way the edge is woven  The finishing and blocking

Finishing a ribbon includes a process to smooth and stiffen them. For example “Satins are soft and flossy when taken out of the loom; to smooth and stiffen them, they are calendered, or pressed between heated steel cylinders, and afterwards dressed, or passed over a small cylinder covered with flannel, which is moistened with a size made from buffalo hides, and then over a large one of heated steel. Gauzes also are dressed, and sometimes even lutestrings. The French goods are in general better dressed than the English. Types of Ribbons There were a great number of types of ribbons available in the nineteenth century. Just as with comparing the silk available now, a great many of the weaves and finishing methods have become very difficult to come by. These are some of the ribbons you most likely would have used in the mid-century for your wardrobe. (additional ribbons or ribbon type materials were used for other purposes.) Chine - A fancy ribbon where figures are painted or printed on the warp while it is on the ribbon.

A ribbon’s appearance is determined by a number of factors:  The twist and thickness of the warp  The twist and thickness of the weft

Clouding - A coloring technique used to vary the color in a ribbon. This coloring technique takes place at the thread dying stage. “The silk, already warped,

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

15

is tied up and wound closely round with packthread at regular intervals of more or less than an inch, so that the intermediate spaces only are penetrated by the dye.”

warp-threads passing over two of the shoots at once, taking up one only: this often finishes the edges of a ribbon.”

Damask - Ribbons with woven designs. These can be geometrical or floral frequently using combinations of leaves, sprigs and flowers. “In superior French ribbons groups and wreathes of flowers are executed with the richness and variety of hand-embroidery. The French are continually introducing novelties in colouring and in texture. In one of recent appearance the ribbon is laid over with a slight covering like crape, by means of a warp of hard-silk woven in loosely over the other; in another ribbon is made by stamping to assume the appearance of lace.”

Loves – A gauze like ribbon made organzine and hard dyed weft. These are considered an inferior gauze.

Double Lisse – Double warp ribbons. These were once considered the best ribbon. Made in Tours, France in the 1700s. (The Penny Encylcopedia ) Ferrets – Ribbons which are coarse and narrow, shot with cotton. They are used for shoe-strings and bindings. Floret Gauzes and Taffeties – Light ribbons made with organzine warp and marabout weft. In other words, the warp of a sarsenet ribbon and the weft of a gauze ribbon. Garnitures – “French fancy ribbons are generally made and sold in garnitures, that is a broad and narrow piece taken together of the same pattern.” (The Penny Encyclopedia) Galloons and Doubles - Ribbons which are strong and thick. These were used for bindings and shoe strings. Galloons are the narrower ribbons. Doubles are the broader ribbons. Gauze – Transparent ribbons made with a fine hardtwisted silk thread called marabout woven in a plain weave. Finer gauzes have over 80 threads per inch. “The plain gauze ribbons made at Coventry called China gauzes are chiefly those used for mourning – white, black and lavender, with satin or ground stripes.” (see www.met.org # C.I.38.23.167) Grogram (Grograin) – “By grogram (French grosgrains) is meant a variation of the texture, caused by the

Lutestring – Plain weave ribbons with regular alteration of warp and weft. Generally wider than 12d (1 7/12 inches ) and “in general of stouter make.” These are the most common ribbons found Moiré - A coloring technique more often seen on gros grain ribbons. This is the French term for clouded or watered silks. “The goods are woven in what the Lyons weaves call en jumelle, that is, in double widths, two pieces being woven together. This is necessary in order to obtain the bold waterings or moirage, which process depends not only on the quality of the silk, but greatly in the way in which they are folded when subjected to the enormous pressure in watering. When the pieces are being folded, care is taken that the grains of one piece shall fall into the cavities of the other, and vice versa, for if they ride one across the other the watering will be spoiled… After being properly folded the silk to be moiré d is wetted slightly, and then submitted to an enormous pressure, generally in hydraulic machine, The pressure (generally from 80 to 100 tons per piece) applied on the material being uneven, the grain is flattened in the parts desired and the result resembles waves, or moisture drawn into curious lines..” (Cole, George S.. A Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances. Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892) Moiré Antique or Long Moiré – A coloring technique using an engraved brass roller paired with a plain surface. The ribbon is passed under the engraved roller under great pressure. The coloring is “more scattered, longer and in finer, but not less effective, lines” than other moiré techniques. (Cole, George S.. A Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances. Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892)Purl or Pearl Edge - A type of ribbon edge of small, fine loops. This effect is created by weaving the edge over horse-hairs which are later removed.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Petershams or Pads – Stout thick ribbons used for the waist. Possibly derived from the French padou “a course ribbon used by tailors, made of linen and silk, often stiffened by gum” Picot - A type of edge of a ribbon comprised of small loops forming the ornament. The picot edge is larger and thicker than a purl edge. The edge may also have small stitches of knots. (Cole, George S.. A Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances. Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892) Ruban Anglois – Type of ribbon with fine quality organzine warp and China shoot. They were light in texture. (The Penny Encyclopedia) Sarsenet – Plain weave ribbons with regular alteration of warp and weft. Generally wider than 12d (1 7/12 inches ) and “in general of stouter make.” These are the most common ribbons found.

16

Satin – Ribbons with a glossy appearance. The warp is primarily seen from the surface as it passes over the weft. The type of satin is determined by the number of times the shoot/weft crosses the warp, such as in 5-lisse satin the warp is crossed once every 5 times. “The French satins are lighter in make than the English, but they have a peculiar richness and lustre, owing to their superior silk. French ribbons in general have less weight of silk than the English.” Scallops – A type of ribbon edge with a scalloped edge. “. The shoot in this case stops short of the edge of the ribbon, catching in an additional thread of silk, sometimes of a different colour, which it draws in in its place, and which is delivered from a bobbin at the back of the loom, and is in a manner darned into the ground of the ribbon.” Shot - A ribbon with variation in colouring where the warp and weft are different colors. Taffetas – A plain weave ribbon with about 51 threads per inch. Velveteen – A later 19th century ribbon which technically is not a ribbon as it does not have two salvage edges. Velveteen ribbons are cut in strips from velveteen yardage. These “ribbons” are sized to prevent raveling. (Cole, George S.. A Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances. Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892) Watered or Watering - A coloring technique where a pair of woven ribbons is passed between two rollers. One of the rollers is heated creating irregular pressure as the ribbons are pressed against each other. This produces a wavy appearance in the coloring. The ribbon can also be wet when passed through the rollers. “The air in trying to effect its escape, drives before it the moisture, and hence causes the appearance of the curiously tortuous lines, resembling waves. (Cole, George S.. A Complete Dictionary of Dry Goods and History of Silk, Cotton, Linen, Wool and other Fibrous Substances. Chicago: W. B. Conney,1892) Types of Ribbon - Designs and Pattern Taking a closer look at the designs and patterns in ribbon, continued...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

we see how the look of the ribbon is determined by a combination of the weave and the finishing processes including rolling and printing. Here are just some of those ribbons. Stripes Stripes were most often woven into the ribbon. Striped ribbons can be monochromatic or polychromatic. In striped ribbons of a single color, the stripes are woven into the ribbon such as stripes of satin weave or stripes with a damask design. In multi-color ribbons, the ribbon may be of one weave or multiple weaves.

17

Plaids Plaids can be woven all in a plain weave or with some portion in a satin weave. A plaid like design can also be created by cross damask stripes over color stripes. Plaids can be symmetrical or asymmetrical in ribbons, though symmetrical ribbons seem to be more common.

ABOVE: In this plaid example you can see satin stripes running through the plaid. The ground is a blue and white check style plaid woven with two colors (white and blue). The ribbon has both warp and weft running stripes in the same colors as the ground plaid. This plaid was woven in at least two color sets, this blue and a lighter blue. ABOVE: This example of a striped ribbon has two areas, one blue and one brown, with clouding where the color varies across the area. The narrower stripes have a twill weave.

Moiré, Watered Silk and Clouded Ribbons Each of these techniques create a variation in the coloring of a ribbon. Moiré and watering effects are created during the finishing process by running a ribbon, sometimes wet, through heated heavy rollers. The pressure of the rollers combined with the moisture and heat create the water like look to the ribbon. The moiré and watered effects work better on a gros-grain ground due to the texture of the ribbon creating more continued...

ABOVE: This ribbon is mostly one color with three different weave patterns, a taffeta with a moiré effect and two satin weaves, creating the stripe. (The left edge is stitched under. It matches the edge on the right.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

friction with the rollers during the finishing. The clouding effect begins a the thread dyeing process. The tread is dyed at regular intervals in different shades or colors. This thread is then woven into a ribbon with a graduated look to the color.

ABOVE: This example is striped ribbon with a moiré finish. The finish created a watered look with light and dark gray ripples through the center of the ribbon.

18

Damask Damask ribbons came in a wide range of designs. A damask ribbon could have small motifs arranged at regular intervals throughout the whole ribbon or in a stripe pattern. A damask design may border a plain centered ribbon. This border could be quite narrow or rather wide. A combination of damask motifs may create a striped pattern. A damask pattern may create an overall pattern on a ribbon such as a basket weave or zig-zag. “Damask is a term generally applied, not so much to the weaving of threads of different colours, as to the formation of a pattern by peculiar mode of weaving threads of the same colour. Table-cloths present a beautiful instance of this in linen; and the furniture employed frequently for beds, windows, sofas, and chairs, illustrat es the same peculiarity in silk. Such fabrics are not much used at the present day for ladies’ dresses. “ (The Useful Arts Employed in the Production of Clothing. London: Parker, 1851.)

Jacquards Jacquard woven ribbons were most often floral designs with occasional birds and insects. Stripe, plaid and geometric designs were also woven with a jacquard loom. Frequently the design was woven on a plain color ground such as solid black or solid white. Please take time to see the examples listed below at the Victoria and Albert Museum. These ribbons were exhibited at the 1851 Great Exhibition. They demonstrate fine examples of two different looks of jacquard ribbons woven in Coventry, detailed polychrome floral designs and two color geometric designs. IMAGE RIGHT TOP: This example shows a polychrome floral design on a black taffeta ground. This design runs across the ribbon rather than with the length of the ribbon which was more common. The color palette includes blue, green , pink, white and gold. IMAGE RIGHT BOTTOM: This example shows the front and back of a wreath and flower design. The design is woven in a tapestry weave rather than Aulaunce where the threads would not be as neat on the reverse side.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Floral Floral designs can be all over, as motifs or in stripes. A floral design can be woven into a ribbon (see jacquard) or printed on a ribbon. Flowers can be small or large, at times in bunches and other times in a design that runs the length of the ribbon.

ABOVE: This example shows a pink/rose floral all over design printed on a taffeta ribbon. The design has a slight watered look to it that could have been done during the finishing process. The flowers are rather small in bunches. LEFT: This example shows a floral design that runs the length of the satin ribbon. The flowers are larger than the example above.

Closing This is just a sampling of the ribbons used in the nineteenth century. There are a great many more including sheers as well as sheer combinations, Petersham ribbons most commonly associated with belting, grosgrain (grogram), and velvets. I invite you to visit an extension of my blog (http://19thcswatchbook. wordpress.com/) to view more ribbons as well as ask questions. You can also find a comparison of nineteenth century ribbons to twenty-first century ribbons.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

19


Sept/Oct 2012

By Doug Dickerson

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

A Historical Look at Ketchup

20

became ketchup. Soybeans did not grow easily in Europe, so British The other day we had cooks substituted other products, friends over and laid out a like anchovies, mushrooms, kidney smorgasbord of foods, including the beans, and, later in the 18th century, traditional grilled hamburgers. As walnuts. British colonists brought our guests were fixing their plates, their ketchup recipes to America.”6 one noticed that we had not put out Andrew F. Smith, an ketchup. Isn’t it interesting how expert on tomatoes and tomato condiments play such an important product, remarks about the history role in American cuisine? So, what of ketchup; “In the beginning, about ketchup? Where did it come ketchup was not thick, sweet, from? Has it always been the way or tomato-based. Early recipes we find it now? Was it around published in Great Britain during the War Between the in the eighteenth century States? fashioned ketchup from The truth is that kidney beans, mushrooms, ketchup is not an American anchovies, and walnuts.”7 creation, neither has it always As an example, Smith offers 1 been tomato based. As far Eliza Smith’s recipe, “To as the origin of ketchup is make English Katchop”. concerned, there is consistency Written in the Compleat among historians. Almost all Housewife; or, Accomplished concede that the tasty sauce had Gentlewoman’s Companion its genesis in China in the form (published originally in of a “fish sauce”. Purportedly, London in 1727), this recipe the word ketchup came from contained “twelve to fourteen the Chinese word, ket-tsiap. anchovies, ten to twelve According to Steven Raichlen shallots, white wine vinegar, of the Baltimore Sun, British two types of white wine, and seafarers brought the exotic spices galore (mace, ginger, sauce back from Malaysia in cloves, whole peppers, a th the 18 century. whole nutmeg, lemon peel, This is consistent and horseradish).”8 This is with etymological studies a far cry from the tomato of the word “ketchup”. ketchup I used on my One dictionary states that hamburger the other day! the word originated in the There does seem to be some English language between debate about how ketchup 1705~1715, and was derived was perceived in the early from Malay kəchap fish days. For example, Andrew sauce, perhaps, which was Figure 1http://www.websters-online-diction- Smith writes: “In England borrowed from dialectal ary.org/images/wiki/wikipedia/en/thumb/e/ ketchup’s popularity spread “Chinese kéjāp (Guangdong) eb/Mushroom_ketchup.jpg/180px-Mushroom_ketchup.jpg or ke-tsiap (Xiamen), akin to continued... Chinese qié eggplant + chī juice.”4 With an origin in the Orient, several have stated that the original ketchup was like soy sauce or Worcestershire sauce. 5 Burt Wolf writes in his interesting article, “Time to Play Ketchup, the History of the Tomato:” “British explorers, traders and colonists moving through Asia came into contact with ca-chop. And when they got home they attempted to recreate the recipe, which

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

quickly. In 1743 Sarah Harrison, from Devonshire, professed that ‘Kitchup” and “Mushroom Kithup’ were staples, and she advised the readers of her HouseKeper’s Pocket-Book to lay a store of them. Presumably, due to the general availability of commercial ketchups, she did not even bother to offer recipes but recommended purchasing them from a reputable grocer, such as the ‘Chandler’s Shop’.” This would seem to indicate that the condiment was ubiquitous and common. In contrast to this, however, Burt Wolf, once again quoting Smith, states: “Up until about the Civil War, the three main ketchups, which were all gourmet foods, were walnut ketchup, mushroom ketchup and tomato ketchup. If you went into the best restaurants of America at that time, at the bottom of their menus, they proudly announced that they had all three of these ketchups available.”9 Perhaps it would be good to understand the role of ketchup in the 18th and 19th centuries. It appears that ketchup was not so much used as a condiment to apply to already cooked foods, but as a flavor enhancer which was added during the cooking process. For example, when examining one of the most popular cookbooks of the day, The Virginia Housewife, Mary Randolph (first cousin of Thomas Jefferson) uses various types of “catsup” in her dishes for the purpose of adding flavor. For instance, her recipe for gravy soup was: “Get eight pounds of coarse lean beef - wash it clean and lay it in your pot,, put in the same

ingredients as for the shin soup, with the same quantity of water, and follow the process directed for that. Strain the soup through a sieve, and serve it up clear, with nothing more than toasted bread in it; two tablespoonsful of mushroom catsup will add a fine flavor to the soup.” 10 So the question you may have is....how did tomato ketchup end up winning the day? This is an interesting question because there was a time in early America when tomatoes (or “love apples,” or to the French, “pomme d’amour”11) were considered toxic. Some conjecture that this was due to tomatoes’ close resemblance to the Deadly Nightshade plant.12 The story of how Americans overcame their tomato paranoia varies from region to region. Since each of these stories are regionally based, perhaps there is an element of truth in each. For example, in Virginia the story goes that our third president personally and directly addressed the tomato myth. However, the story itself may be mythical in nature. In an article about The Miller-Claytor House, the Lynchburg Historical Society writes: “Legend has it that Thomas Jefferson ate a tomato from

21

its garden to prove to an Owens child that ‘love apples’ were not poisonous; hence the house acquired the nickname ‘Tomato House.’””13 In actuality, Jefferson was known to be an expert in the cultivation of “tomatas”. The Monticello website contains the following comments about the purported French aphrodisiac: Jefferson was a pioneer grower of “tomatas.” Beginning in 1809, he planted this grudgingly accepted vegetable yearly, usually in square X near the midpoint of the garden. Jefferson’s daughter, Martha, and daughters, Virginia and Septimia, left numerous recipes that involved tomatoes, including gumbo soups, cayenne-spiced tomato soup, green tomato pickles, tomato preserves, and tomato omelettes. Tomatoes were purchased in 1806 for Presidential dinners. Randolph’s The Virginia Housewife has seventeen recipes for tomatoes, including gazpacho, gumbo, and catsup. In an 1824 speech before the Albemarle Agricultural Society, Jefferson’s son-in-law, Thomas Mann Randolph discussed the transformation of Virginia farming due to the introduction of new

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

crops. He mentioned how tomatoes were virtually unknown ten years earlier, but by 1824 everyone was eating them because they believed they ‘kept one’s blood pure in the heat of summer.’’”14 Perhaps the best known story of an American publicly challenging the tomato toxicity myth is that of Robert Gibbon Johnson. On September 26th, 1820, he purportedly stood on the steps of the Salem, New Jersey courthouse and ate a basket of tomatoes before hundreds of onlookers. The onlookers waited to watch Johnson die in writhing agony…but instead he lived. Some say the story lacks historical credibility; however, according to Andrew Smith, the city of Salem has been holding a Robert Gibbon Johnson Day since 1987.15 With tomatoes now considered safe for consumption, companies started commercially canning whole tomatoes. However, not wanting to be wasteful, companies started taking tomato “trimming” and bottling ketchup. The first to do so was Bunker and Company in 1834. A source in England writing about the history of Heinz ketchup wrote: “The first commercial tomato ketchup was marketed by Bunker & Co. of New York in 1834, and many others followed its lead. Early production used as its base what were colloquially referred to as trimmings from canned tomato production - that is the rotten, green or diseased tomatoes and tomato segments which were rejected from the filling line.”16 Interestingly, there may

have been an earlier producer of bottled ketchup. According to Smith’s research, others were advertising bottled ketchup as early as 1830. In Pure Ketchup he writes: “During the 1820s American commercial bottling operations were launched almost simultaneously in Boston, Baltimore, and New York. The earliest bottling of ketchup trailed behind these efforts by a decade. In 1830 an advertisement in the New England Farmer promoted the sale of ‘Tomato Ketchup’ for fifty cents or thirty-three cents, depending on bottle size. Bottled tomato ketchup was marketed in New York by Bunker and Company by 1834 and was sold in Hartford four years later.”17 Others joined with Bunker, and by 1839 William Underwood (of Underwood Deviled Ham fame) was selling a two pound bottle of ketchup for $3.25 and shipping his product to the Deep South.18 Although H. J. Heinz did not start bottling ketchup until 1869, he was influenced by Underwood’s product. In a biography on Heinz, Quentin R. Skrabec writes about this influence: “Underwood’s ketchup was an ‘evaporated’ product, where by slow heating water was removed to thicken it. The customer could then add water to return it to the desired consistency.” He continues, “Underwood not only used glass, but labels to brand and advertise. The evaporated product also allowed consumers to make heavier tomato based sauces at home.” According to Skrabec, Underwood’s success with this new approach “offered Heinz a real idol to follow.”19

22

It is highly likely that Underwood’s ketchup product was used by both sides during the Civil War. But how was it used? A dab or two on a piece of hardtack? Or perhaps added to one’s scrambled eggs? More than likely ketchup was added to stews and meat dishes to enhance flavor. This is confirmed in the Spauldings’ Civil War Recipes, Receipts from the Pages of Godey’s Lady’s Book. One recipe included in the book is a Tomato Sauce that is much like what we think ketchup should be. This recipe from 1862 was made in the following way: “Take seven pounds of ripe tomatoes, with the outside skins taken off; put them in a preservingkettle, with four pounds of sugar, and boil until the sugar penetrates the tomatoes; then add one pint of vinegar; one ounce of cloves, and one ounce of ground cinnamon; boil thirty minutes, then put them up on stone jars and seal up close. They will keep any length of time.”19 Interestingly, the sauce is said to be “especially good with cold veal or fish”. 20 So, next time you enhance a burger and fries with your favorite version of this favorable sauce, remember that its history is rich and its varieties are many. Truly, ketchup has had a fascinating history that continues with us even today. FOOTNOTES 1. For a list of over 15 different ketchup recipes, please see: http:// w w w. c i v i l w a r i n t e r a c t i v e . c o m / Ketchup.htm There you will find recipes for such ketchups as: mushroom, oyster, fish, walnut, plum, and peach)

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

2.http://articles.baltimoresun. c o m / 1 9 9 1 - 0 8 - 2 5 / features/1991237166_1_ketchuptomatoes-heinz 3. http://dictionary.reference.com/ browse/ketchup 4. http://www.foodhistory.com/ foodnotes/leftovers/ketchup/01/ 5 . h t t p : / / w w w. b u r t w o l f . c o m / whatweeat/newsletters/Tomato.pdf 6. Andrew F. Smith, Pure Ketchup: A History of America’s National Condiment, with Recipes. The University of South Carolina Press, 1996, p. 4. (This is an excellent source of information on ketchup.) 7. Ibid, p. 12. 8 . h t t p : / / w w w. b u r t w o l f . c o m / whatweeat/newsletters/Tomato.pdf

9. Mrs. Mary Randolph, The Virginia Housewife: Or, the Methodical Cook. Plaskitt, Fite, and Co., 1836, p. 14. 10. http://www.thefreedictionary. com/love+apple 11.http://www.tomatogardeningguru. com/history.html 12. lynchburghistoricalfoundation. org/millerclaytor/ 13. http://www.monticello.org/ site/house-and-gardens/thomasjeffersons-favorite-vegetables 14. Andrew F. Smith, The Tomato in America: Early History, Culture, and Cookery. The University of South Carolina Press, 1994, pp. 3~4. 1 5 . h t t p : / / w w w. s e e d q u e s t . c o m / processingtomato/news/heinz/ p1003.htm

23

16. Ibid, p. 33 17. Ibid. 18. Quentin R. Skrabec, H.J. Heinz: A Biography. McFarland & Co., Inc. p. 38. (Skrabec also states: “In 1870, Underwood had a trademark in its ‘Underwood Devil.” The Underwood Devil remains the oldest trademark in use in the United States, and is best known today on its ‘Deviled Ham.’” 19. Lily May Spaulding and John Spaulding, editors. Civil War Recipes, Receipts from the Pages of Godey’s Lady’s Book, The University Press of Kentucky, pages 119~120. 20. Ibid.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Notes on Little Boys Clothing

By Mrs. Marta Vincent

“Boys in Suits”

Young boys from about age 4 through about age 10 wore clothing that, while distinctly boyish, was still predominantly made at home, or at least made by a seamstress rather than a tailor or ready-mades purchased from a store. Since boys in this age range were still growing fairly rapidly, their clothing often had some growing room built in. While these boys did also wear long trousers, often they were dressed in short pants that were meant to end somewhere below the knee. Sometimes they were gathered into a band at the knee and became Knickerbockers, but more often they were simply worn straight and got shorter as the boy grew taller. Tunics and button suits were very popular for boys up to about age 8, but after that their clothing quite closely resembled that of their father. For special occasions, little boys were often dressed in suits that imitated more adult styles, but designed for bodies that had not yet developed a discernible shape. Accommodations were made to keep everything together and neat. For little boys, an underbody or blouse could be worn so that his underdrawers and trousers could button to its waistband; then a vest and jacket would finish the outfit. No matter how active the child, he’d remain neatly together. For very young boys, trousers often did not have a fly opening, but instead simply had a slit in the front seam – or “convenience opening”, which made toileting easy for a boy whose fingers were not able manipulate buttons easily. Since trousers for boys of this age were usually blousey, the opening does not show. IMAGE RIGHT: Young boy in 3pc suit worn with white blouse under. Cannot tell if the trousers are fly front or not. Blousey trousers in Knickerbocker style.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

24


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

25

IMAGE LEFT: Young boy in Suit worn over white blouse with full sleeves. Knickebocker style blousey trousers

Boys from more affluent families tended to wear more childish clothing longer than boys from working class families – especially for special occasions; and there was no strict age when they transitioned into adult styles. That was a decision made within the family. The several pieces of the New KayFig Pattern KF681 for a little boy’s 4 piece suit pattern are designed to work together, or to be used to add to the other pieces which may already be in the boy’s wardrobe, and the underbody or blouse can just as easily be made up for a girl to wear. continued pg 27...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

IMAGE RIGHT: Youngest boy in center wearing 3 pc suit. Cut away jacket shows vest buttoned underneath over white blouse. Blousey knickerbockers style trouser pleated into waistband. IMAGE BOTTOM LEFT: : German boys (ca’62). Boy on left wearing 3 pc suit. Cut away jacket shows vest buttoned underneath over white blouse. Blousey short pants. IMAGE BOTTOM RIGHT: Small boy in short pants buttoned to white blouse with cut away jacket over.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

26


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

A style note: The shirts worn by boys were most often called blouses, not shirts; where the ones worn by girls were called bodies or bodices. All cdv’s are from my personal collection, and all of the other illustrations are from extant sources. IMAGE LEFT: Younger boy wearing blousey long pants pleated into waistband and buttoned to white blouse with short jacket over. IMAGE RIGHT: Little boy on right wearing short trousers buttoned to white blouse with matching jacket over. IMAGE BELOW: Young boy wearing blousey knickerbockers style trouser buttoned to white blouse with matching jacket.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

27


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Hemlock Leather

28

THE FEDERAL ORDNANCE DEPARTMENT’S “OTHER” WAR By David Jarnagin Most of us know that the use of leather in the construction of weapons and equipment for warfare dates back thousands of years to the earliest days of man. However, you may not know that the process of tanning the raw hides of animals into leather using bark and other vegetable materials remained remarkably the same until only about one hundred fifty years ago. It was not until the late 19th century that significant industrial changes and a natural calamity forever changed the methods, quality and even appearance of leather. Today, much of the traditional tanning methods are largely forgotten even by commercial leather producers. More significantly for Civil War historians and collectors, our knowledge of war time leather manufacturing, the considerable problems leather tanning and dyeing wrought upon the Federal Ordnance Bureau and the tremendous effect on today’s artifacts is also largely unknown. That is, until now. In the mid-19th century the tanning processes were achieved by repeat soakings of the animal hide in the bark from trees mixed with other ingredients which generate an acidic chemical reaction that slowly turns the hides into leather. The “tannin” found in the bark is the central ingredient that preserves the hide- first by stopping natural decay then leaving the leather both flexible yet durable enough for extended use. The bark taken from Chestnut Oak and Hemlock trees

were the two most commonly used by American tanners of the time. Chestnut Oak was mandated by the Federal War Department during the war because of its more acidic nature which aided the tanning process but more importantly, for its ability to hold the black leather dyes. It remained the most popular for only a short time after the war until significant industrial changes gradually replaced it and finally a natural blight in 1904 virtually wiped out the Chestnut Oak tree in America. The use of hemlock tree bark was also a big part of the mid19th century commercial leather tanning business. 1. However, one of the more obscure aspects of war time military leather production was the peculiar problems that the use of Hemlock tanning caused the Federal Ordnance Department.

Bark removed from trees, stacked and ready for drying. After drying it would be ground into powder for use in the tanning process.

To be sure, leather tanning was big business by 1860. The 1860 U.S. Census lists over sixtythree million dollars worth of leather sales most of this in the manufacture of shoes and boots by the 12,486 footwear firms then in the United States. 2. In 1858 alone, 610,000 ready-made boots and shoes were “exported” to Europe! 3. For commercial tanners of the era the use of Hemlock tanned leather was clearly more profitable than Oak. In the 1860’s it normally took from five to seven months to tan a hide. Since Hemlock had a higher percentage of tannin than Oak it thus shortened the tanning process by a month or more. Another advantage was that Hemlock tanned hides tended to be heavier and therefore brought more money because hides were sold by weight at that time rather than by square feet as they are today. However, the most interesting aspect of hemlock tanned leather and one that created enormous troubles for the Federal Ordnance Department during the war and for collector’s today, was the inert tendency for the dyes of Hemlock tanned leather to fade, often quickly, from black to brown. A serious problem then and one today that often leads collector’s to misidentify artifacts as Confederate, re-dye them or worse, even reject as illegitimate otherwise quality artifacts. During the war, hundreds of thousands of troops signed up for service in the Federal armies and of course, they all needed

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

leather accoutrements. Since the regulations called for black leather accoutrements and equipment the U.S. Army tried to keep hemlock tanned leather from being used due to the fading problem. 4. However, this quickly became impossible to control. Huge amounts of leather were quickly needed and contract tanners were very skillful at subverting the ordnance department rules by substituting hemlock for oak. Quality control was further complicated by the fact that leather was dyed and finished at the tannery before equipment manufacturers received the hide, so the Ordnance inspectors could not easily tell what type of tanning agent had been used. According to Ordnance records, hemlock leather could be “doctored” or bleached to match the color of oak tanned leather before being dyed. This could be done to such a degree that even expert inspectors had difficulty telling the difference. 5. The following post war Ordnance Department report shows the extent of the problem. “It is certain that large quantities of “doctored” hemlock-leather were sold for oak leather during the late war. In some cases where it was used for scabbards, or

iron and steel came in contact with it the alum and salt and vitriol, &c.., used to bleach it, rusted the iron and steel, and so betrayed its illegitimacy; but thousands of sides were sold and used in blissful ignorance by all except the seller. If only deceit were practiced, it would not be so utterly objectionable, but the quality of the leather is injured by this doctoring, and it further deteriorates by age.” 6. The artifact photographs in Figures 2 and 3 illustrates that

29

issue by showing cracks and deterioration in the grain surface caused by the interaction of bleaches or “doctoring” and, the common acids used in the tanning process. There is evidence that the Ordnance Department knew that hemlock leather was often bleached to help it pass as oak tanned. At least one leather contractor, Henry W Oliver warned the Ordnance office in April of 1864 that, “Eastern manufactures use inferior hemlock, continued...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

bleached stock.” 7. There was another type of tanning process that should be mentioned“Union-tanned” leather or “mixed” tannage. This method used a combination of both hemlock and oak bark as a tanning agent. The tanners of the time believed mixing hemlock and oak barks would produce leather of better quality than either bark by itself. Ratios of hemlock and oak barks would vary but leather produced in this manner apparently still had fading problems inherent with hemlock and were thus not acceptable to the Federal government. 8. In December 1863, 546 cartridge boxes manufactured by contractor James Boyd were rejected as being made of mixed tanned leather. Boyd wrote to George D Ramsay, Chief of Ordnance in an attempt to get the cartridge boxes accepted anyway by arguing the difficulties of maintaining a supply of oak tannage. “In making our proposal to

furnish these accoutrements of mixed tanned leather, our object was not for the purpose of putting in stock that would cost less than oak, but because we can always obtain a sufficient supply of the mixed tannage in our market, & cannot obtain the oak, but we have put in the pure oak whenever we could obtain a lot that was suitable for any part of the work, as good oak leather cuts to better advantage than the mixed tannage.” 9 Nevertheless, shortages no doubt often forced the War Department to accept equipment of inferior leather. In fact, the Ordnance Bureau goes so far as to list all three types of leather in a July 1864 advertisement for contract bids stating, “Separate bids will be received for the manufacture of these accoutrements of pure oak leather, of mixed tannage oak finish and all hemlock.” 10. After tanning, the next step was for the leather to be dyed black to meet the regulation standard. At the time of the Civil War, the most common leather dyeing formula of

30

the period combined a skillful blend of craftsmanship and a chemical reaction between the natural tannin found in bark and various other components, most notably iron mordants. When the iron comes in contact with the tannin, the leather turns black. This process, when done correctly on oak tanned leather, produces a deep, rich and permanent black color. But, it was far less successful on hemlock tanned leather. If the tanners were so skillful in producing leather dye, then why was hemlock tanned leather so incapable of holding dye? This question required an investigation into the chemical reaction processes of the period dyeing formulas. Experimentation by the author with several formulas including those found in some rare 19th century tanning books rediscovered what the early tanners knew all along - that hemlock tannin would not seriously bond with the iron mordants to change form and thus turn the leather black. However, it is clear tanners

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

routinely dyed hemlock leather to black. But how? Once again, a formula from the old tanning books provided the answer in the form of a recipe for “stained” leather. This formula utilized logwood and Sal soda which when combined with hemlock leather tannin formed a chemical bond that would turn the leather black- if only temporarily. It also had the additional advantage of adding weight which was important because leather was sold by the pound until about 1885. Unfortunately, logwood eventually oxidizes, causing the iron to change form again and gradually return the leather from black back to brown. 11. (Figure 4) There is strong evidence of a second way that tanners blackened leather at the time of the Civil War. Most leather dyes were used on the grain side or smooth of the hide. However, this second type called “waxed” used common lamp black that was worked into the flesh or rough side of the leather. Waxing actually works quite well because the rough surface gives greater adherence to the lampblack.

12. Nevertheless, unscrupulous contract tanners would often wax hemlock tanned leather on the smooth side of the leather giving it the black appearance it needed to pass inspection. This apparently fooled the inspectors- at least temporarily. Unfortunately, as the finish wears off the lamp black returns to powder and falls off giving the leather a patchy, three-dimensional look. At first, this erroneous dye treatment was

31

thought to be rare during the war however, after examination by the author of over one hundred artifacts a large quantity show this type of finish suggesting that it may have been a fairly common finish for hemlock tanned leather. (Figure 5) Interestingly, experiments by the author with the leather dyeing formula found in The Ordnance Manual for The Use of the Officers of the United States Army found it

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

hopelessly inadequate for dyeing leather. However, experiments with other formulas found in the early tanning books were far more effective and predictable. But why? Modern tanners suggest the reason was that early tanners were very evasive, competitive artisans that jealously guarded their trade secrets including dye formulas. They speculate that the Ordnance officers writing the manual relied upon these tanners to provide the dye formulas published in the manual. Modern analysis of this formula shows it to be, well, little more than simple black ink. There was one other problem ordnance officers noted concerning

the use of hemlock tanned leather. As noted in the Ordnance Report above, “doctored” hemlock tanned leather “used for scabbards, or iron and steel came in contact with it, the alum and salt and vitriol, &c, used to bleach it rusted the iron and steel .....” Actually, it was not the bleaching that caused the rusting of metal but rather the overuse of acids added in the tanning process. Normal vegetable tanning, such as with oak, is accomplished in an acidic condition, with a pH in the 3.5 to 5.0 range. Hemlock bark has a problem in that it will not turn acidic on it’s own so the tanner routinely added sulfuric acid to facilitate the tanning process. However, the over use of this acid will certainly cause cracks in leather, as well as rust any

32

iron or steel coming into contact with the leather if not neutralized. Thus affecting the quality. See Figures 1 & 2. The fact is, tanners did not use “alum and salt and vitriol” to bleach the leather as has been noted above, but rather were simply tanning Hemlock using too much sulphuric acid. Acid that later affected the quality of the leather. This represents yet another instance in which the ordnance officers misunderstood the tanning process. The use of alum, salt and vitriol is not used to bleach leather but rather used an entirely different “mineral” tanning process of the period called “Hungary” tanning. 13. Collectors should note that

Join Us! We are an organization formed in 1949 dedicated to the study and preservation of military history and material culture of the Americas. Our objectives are to promote and advance the research of military history and traditions through publications, exhibits and meetings. We are collectors, historians, writers, artists, modelers, and those involved in living history. We offer a legacy of scholarly standards and first class publications. We publish the quarterly journal, Military Collector & Historian and an ongoing series of color plates, The Military Uniforms in America. We also maintain a website that hosts a forum where questions are asked and answered. We host an exciting, event filled annual meeting.

We invite you to join our ranks!

THE COMPANY OF MILITARY HISTORIANS For a free sample issue of our journal, contact David M. Sullivan, Administrator P.O. Box 910 Rutland MA 01543-0910 Phone: 508-799-9229 E-mail: cmhhq@aol.com or DSulli7875@aol.com

http://www.military-historians.org

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

artifacts of the Civil War era found to be of the proper patterns and manufacture, but brown in color ,are likely of hemlock tannage and still a very collectable item. More than likely they slipped through

the inspection process or were purchased by states outside the Federal ordnance system. In fact, hemlock tanned leather artifacts may even have a greater value due to the fact that hemlock tanned

33

items were generally rejected by the Ordnance Department. So, the next time you see a lovely brown cap pouch, cartridge box or belt, remember that it has a great history

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

all its own. So please leave it brown. (Figure 6) Just how much leather was required to equip six hundred thousand Federal soldiers in the first year or so of the war? To give you an idea, the U.S. Army’s 1862 Ordnance Manual lists the amount of leather required to make each of the military accoutrement items. According to the manual, the shell of eleven cartridge boxes could be cut from one side of heavy bridle leather. For the inner cover and pockets the manual specified that fifty of each item could be obtained from each side of light bridle leather. To make 600,000 cartridge boxes, approximately 54,546 sides of heavy bridle leather and 24,000 sides of light bridle leather would be needed. So, just for cartridge boxes a total of about 78,546 sides of leather were needed to equip the Federal Army. When one then considers what was required to make other items including cap boxes, belts, shoulder straps, bayonet scabbards, saddles, bridles, saddle bags, artillery harness and more, the demand for leather was staggering and must have nearly overwhelmed the Federal Ordnance system and the tanners ability to supply them! 14. There can be no doubt that the northern tanning industry provided an invaluable service to the war effort, but not without questions of profiteering by some of their brethren. As can be seen, some contract tanners of the period were very adept (and apparently quite successful) at substituting hemlock tanned leather for oak, and then giving it the appearance of being

properly dyed black. It also appears that ordnance officers were often being deliberately confused and misled by the tanning industry in order to accept improperly dyed hemlock tanned leather. This most certainly widened profit margins at the expense of the regulations and, sometimes, the quality of equipment being issued. Yet it may have been condoned to some extent. Although it is not clear how successful ordnance inspectors were at detecting poorly dyed equipments, the large number of surviving hemlock tanned equipments and contemporary documentation clearly indicate a significant number were made and issued into the field. One can only speculate but, given the heavy strain on tanneries and the colossal need for leather, it is probable neither the Ordnance Department nor their finishing contractors had the luxury of being too picky when it came to the leather they received. About the author: David Jarnagin is part owner of C & D Jarnagin the nation’s largest manufacturers of 18th and 19th century military reenactment clothing and equipment. For twentytwo years David’s domain has been the company leather shop where they make authentic cartridge boxes, cap boxes, belts, bayonet scabbards, knapsacks, shoes and more. A passion for the study and experimentation with period leather tanning, dyeing, equipment manufacture and of course, the handling of thousands of artifacts have made David uniquely qualified in the subject of 19th century leather processes and leather equipment. Author’s Note: The author would like to thank the following people for their gracious and immeasurable assistance

34

in the research for this article: The Hon. Zadock Pratt of Pratt Tanneries, Prattville, N.Y.; Paul D. Johnson; Fred Gaede; Shep Hermann; Phil Varnick, Mike Cunningham and, for his writing and editorial contributions, Ken R. Knopp. I would be remiss if I did not thank all the Ordnance officers that kept the great records that made this article possible. For more information and color pictures of the above please see www.jarnaginco.com/hemlock.htm

FOOTNOTES: 1. Professor H. Dussance, Chemist, A New and Complete Treatise on the Arts of tanning, Currying, and Leather Dressing. (Philadelphia, Penn., Henry Carey Baird, T.K. and P.G Collins Printers, 1867), pg. 428. “A very large majority, perhaps eight-tenths, of all calf skins taken off in this country are tanned in hemlock bark.” 2. Professor H. Dussance, Chemist, A New and Complete Treatise on the Arts of tanning, Currying, and Leather Dressing. (Philadelphia, Penn., Henry Carey Baird, T.K. and P.G Collins Printers, 1867), pg. 20. 3. Thomas, P. Kettell, Eighty Years’ Progress of the United States. (Hartford, Conn.,, L Stebbins), 1867, Pg. 316. 4. Paul Johnson, Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, (Lincoln, R.I., Andrew Mowbray Publisher, 1998), Pg. 176. 5. Notes On Leather, Ordnance Notes, No. LXXII, National Armory, Washington, October 10, 1877, pg. 576. Ordnance Memoranda forwarded to Chief of Ordnance Brig, Gen. S.V. Benet by J. G Benton. Lt. Col. cmdg. National Armory in Philadelphia, Pa. Authorized for publication by the Secretary of War. Photo copy of original in possession of author. 6. Quartermaster Report, January 20, 1877,. John F. Ridgers, Captain and Military Storekeeper, Philadelphia

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

35

continued... Depot of the Quartermaster’s Department to Brig, Gen. M.C. Meigs, Quartermaster General, U.S.A. Washington DC.. Page 257. Photocopy of original in possession of author. 7. James Boyd & Sons to Ramsey, Boston, Mass., April 30, 1864, National Archives Washington DC, Record Group 156, Entry 21, Box 233, Document #0-27. Paul Johnson, Civil War Cartridge Boxes of the Union Infantryman, (Lincoln, R.I., Andrew Mowbray Publisher, 1998), Pg. 235. 8. Campbell Morfit, The Arts of Tanning, Currying and Leather Dressing, Theoretically and Practically Considered in All Their Details, (Philadelphia, Pa. Henry Carey Baird, 1852), pg. 88. 9. James Boyd & Sons to Ramsey, Boston, Mass., December 24, 1863, National Archives Washington DC, Record Group 156, Entry 21, Box 215, Document #B-536. 10. Ramsey to Editor, Morning Chronicle., July 4, 1864, National Archives Washington DC, Record Group 156, Entry 13, Volume 3, Box 324. 11. Professor H. Dussance, Chemist, A New and Complete Treatise on the Arts of tanning, Currying, and Leather Dressing. (Philadelphia, Penn., Henry Carey Baird, T.K. and P.G Collins Printers, 1867), Pg 428. “But if hemlock leather is used as at present, so imperfectly blacked that a few days wear will change the color to a foxy brown” 12. Campbell Morfit, The Arts of Tanning, Currying and Leather Dressing, Theoretically and Practically Considered in All Their Details, (Philadelphia, Pa. Henry Carey Baird, 1852), pgs. 493-495. 13. Campbell Morfit, The Arts of Tanning, Currying and Leather Dressing, Theoretically and Practically Considered in All Their Details, (Philadelphia, Pa. Henry Carey Baird, 1852), pgs. 415-432. 14. Ordnance Manual for the Use of the Officers of the United States Army, Third Edition, (Philadelphia, J.B. Lippincott & Co., 1862), pg. 231

PHOTO CAPTIONS: Figure 1. Bark removed from trees, stacked and ready for drying. After drying it would be ground into powder for use in the tanning process. Figures 2A & B. Hemlock tanned 1859 pattern two rivet bayonet scabbard. Note acid damage in bottom photo. Figure 3: Hemlock tanned Watertown Arsenal cartridge box. Note cracks in leather due to acid damage. Figure 4: Top photo is of a chestnut oak tanned musket sling. Bottom is a hemlock tanned musket sling with a “stained” finish. Figure 5: Close up of a hemlock tanned pattern of 1859 bayonet scabbard with what’s left of lamp black finish applied to the grain surface. The remains of this type of finish gives it a 3-D appearance. Figure 6: Photos of two 1864 dated Watertown Arsenal cartridge boxes side by side. The box on the left is Chestnut Oak tanned and still retains its dark black dye finish. The one on right is Hemlock tanned that has turned its signature brown. Fading on Hemlock leather will result regardless of the finish applied to the leather.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Special Offer 2-issue Free Trial Subscription to

Civil War News

The monthly current events newspaper features:

 Calendar of events  Book reviews, letters  News, photos & features  Columns about medicine, preservation, firearms, images, round tables, The Watchdog  150th & other news briefs  Display & classified ads Facebook.com/CivilWarNews

Call or go online for a

FREE 2-issue Trial Subscription

Mention this ad to receive $5 off gift subscriptions!

(800) 777-1862  mail@civilwarnews.com

www.civilwarnews.com

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

36


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Presbyterian Institutions Suffer from Kentucky’s Largest Civil War Battle

By Stuart Sanders During the mid-nineteenth century, Danville, Kentucky, located in the center of the Bluegrass State, was a community with strong Presbyterian roots. Many of the town’s early settlers were Scots-Irish Presbyterians, and, in the spring of 1784, the Reverend David Rice established the state’s first Presbyterian church there. According to Rice, frontier Kentucky was in desperate need of religious guidance. After preaching at several settlements, Rice noted, “I found scarcely one man and but few women who supported a credible profession of religion . . . Some were given to quarreling and fighting, some to profane swearing, some to intemperance, and most of them totally negligent of the forms of religion in their own homes.” By the 1860s, however, Danville was a religious and intellectual enclave, with several Presbyterian institutions providing the bulwark. These included the First Presbyterian Church, the Danville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, and Centre College, a Presbyterian-affiliated school. Although Danville was relatively quiet during the early stages of the Civil War, on October 8, 1862, the commonwealth’s largest battle was fought ten miles away at Perryville. With more than 7,500 men were killed and wounded, Perryville quickly became overwhelmed with casualties. Therefore, homes, barns, churches, and businesses in surrounding communities were given

over to the ill and injured. Danville was no exception, and the town’s Presbyterian churches and schools became greatly impacted by the Battle of Perryville. Shortly after the battle, the Union army marched through Danville. Upon entering town, these soldiers passed the Centre College campus. Founded in 1819 and affiliated with the Presbyterian church, the school’s trustees and the college president were Presbyterian ministers. Union authorities quickly converted the college buildings into makeshift hospitals. They determined that the main college building, a Greek Revival structure known as “Old Centre,” could hold 150 patients. “I saw the poor, sickly wounded soldiers all over the building,” former student E. W. C. Humphrey commented, “and the use which they made of the building was about as severe as it could have been.” A first-floor chemistry laboratory became, one student noted, “a dead-house or post mortem room . . . I have seen more than one post mortem examination held in this room while I was passing through.” Sadly, many patients died on campus. “I have seen soldiers—the bodies of soldiers taken out of there in the hearse for burial;” student A. B. Nelson noted, “I would see them every day or two.” Another former student remarked that Old Centre was full of “some very sick soldiers; plenty of them that died.” Campus caregivers also succumbed to disease. Union soldier Charles Orcutt worked as a nurse on campus, died of “neural-

37

gia of the heart,” and was buried in the town cemetery. College president Lewis Warner Green, a Presbyterian minister, died from an illness—possibly typhoid—that he contracted while helping sick troops on campus. The Union army occupied the building until late June 1863, more than eight months after the Battle of Perryville. Upon their departure, Old Centre was in shambles. G. W. Welsh, a sophomore in 1862, recalled that “There was not much left except the walls. The desks and chairs were practically used up. Some of the class rooms that had heavy oak benches were simply defaced by names being cut on them. The large majority of the benches in the old chapel were useless, badly broken up.” Union troops remained on campus until February 27, 1863, and classes did not resume in Old Centre until September 1863, nearly one year after the battle. Soldiers also had destroyed nearly 2,100 feet of locust plank fencing on campus, chopped down apple trees, and left the college lawn barren. One student remarked that “There wasn’t grass enough left to keep a goose alive after [the soldiers] moved” off the college lawn. Danville’s First Presbyterian Church, located next to the college, became crammed with sick Union soldiers. One resident described the church as “a very fine structure.” In 1862, the building contained a large sanctuary with a balcony on three sides, each supported by brick pillars.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

The sanctuary seated more than seven hundred people and included “very nice pulpit furniture.” G. W. Welsh saw Federal soldiers in the church as he walked to his classes. Pews were jammed together to provide beds for the casualties, and, one resident remarked, the sick “occupied both in the auditorium and the gallery.” Used for five or six months, the building was left in shambles. Stoves, pews, and the pulpit were destroyed, windows were broken, walls were scribbled upon, and plaster was damaged. Danville resident Patty Engleman lamented that “it was in such a condition you would not want it for a church.” In fact, many members were wary about re-opening the sanctuary. Welsh stated that “a great many people [were] afraid to attend services at that church until it was scraped and painted and varnished and cleaned” because they feared lingering diseases. Repainted and re-plastered, it took nearly a year for the church to be repaired. W. W. Tompkins said that even as late as January 1864, “all the churches [in Danville] were going through repairs from the damage that had been done.” In addition to Centre College and the First Presbyterian Church, the Danville Presbyterian Theological Seminary became occupied. Established in 1853 by the Reverend Robert J. Breckinridge and Centre College president John C. Young, the school trained clergy from across the region. The seminary initially operated on the Centre College campus but soon moved to an historic setting a half-mile away. Their main building was central to Kentucky’s founding. Constructed

prior to 1792, when Kentucky was still part of Virginia, the structure was Kentucky’s first state house. There, the commonwealth’s first constitution was adopted, and, when used by the seminary, the building included two chapels, fifteen rooms, and dormitory and classroom space. After the Battle of Perryville, the main seminary building and two other structures, a five-room frame building and a small brick building, housed patients. Tents were scattered across the lawn, and residents frequently saw recovering soldiers sitting on benches under trees on the campus. Although most hospital buildings in Danville contained Union patients, wounded and sick from both armies were housed at the seminary. Mary Harris, who nursed the injured and wrote letters home for some soldiers commented, “I was in that building every day, and I bathed the brow of many a soldier in there, both Federal and Confederate.” The enemy troops did not intermingle. Local tailor Abraham Barker had a theory about this separation, noting that “they had them in different sides to keep them, I reckon, from fighting.” Dr. A. N. Read of the U.S. Sanitary Commission visited part of the seminary and noted that seventy-nine patients were packed into five rooms. All of them had beds (unlike many Danville hospitals) and twenty-six nurses provided care for them. When Read later returned to tour the entire site, he found that the seminary was “occupied half by federal and half by rebel sick. Of the federal there were 95 in two rooms . . . [with] men generally on bunks, no bedsacks, no pillows, some without blankets; their clothing, such as

38

they had worn in the field [was] generally much soiled; cooking done in the open air in a few camp kettles. Confederates in ten rooms . . . Their condition similar to that of the federals, except things were more filthy, their clothing much poorer.” The sick suffered from typhoid, pneumonia, and dysentery. Furthermore, many of the wounded were in critical condition. Read reported that those in the seminary “were all badly wounded.” In addition, Mary Harris remarked, “They were all to pieces—some of them shot to pieces, some of them with shell and some with bullets; there were amputations.” Dr. Read believed that of the Danville hospitals, including the courthouse and churches, the seminary was “the best of the series,” because all of the other hospitals were “far too much crowded.” The seminary buildings, like all of the makeshift hospitals, suffered from extensive damages, and the school was unable to use the buildings for nearly two years. In fact, the seminary was the last Danville hospital to be cleared of soldiers. This hospital did not close until 1864, more than a year after the Battle of Perryville. In 1907, the Danville Seminary merged with the Louisville Presbyterian Seminary. What happened to Presbyterian institutions in Danville is illustrative of how other communities also suffered after the Battle of Perryville. With hundreds of sick Union soldiers housed in the First Presbyterian Church, Centre College, and the Danville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, the denomination encountered severe financial setbacks after the occupation. Even worse was the

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

terrible human toll. As Elizabeth Patterson, the wife of a Centre College mathematics professor noted, “Not a day passed without one or more funerals.” Despite the risks—as evidenced by the death of the Reverend Lewis Warner Green—Danville’s Presbyterians made great sacrifices to help their fellow man after the Bluegrass State’s largest battle. Stuart W. Sanders is the author of Perryville Under Fire: The Aftermath of Kentucky’s Largest Civil War Battle, published by The History Press. FOOTNOTES: 1. For Presbyterianism in Danville, see Richard C. Brown, The Presbyterians: Two Hundred Years in Danville, 1784-1984 (Danville Presbyterian Church, 1983); Calvin Morgan Fackler, A Chronicle of the Old First Presbyterian Church, Danville, Kentucky (Louisville: The Standard Printing Company, 1946). Rice quoted in Brown, The Presbyterians, 4-5. 2. For the Battle of Perryville, see Kenneth W. Noe, Perryville: This Grand Havoc of Battle (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 2001); and Stuart W. Sanders, Perryville Under Fire: The Aftermath of Kentucky’s Largest Civil War Battle (Charleston: The History Press, 2012), 11-22. 3. For the antebellum history of Centre College, see Hardin Craig, Centre College of Kentucky: A Tradition and an Opportunity (Louisville: Gateway Press, 1967), 1-40; and William Weston, Centre College: Scholars, Gentlemen, and Christians (Danville: Centre College, 2010), 13-24. E.W.C. Humphrey quote from E. W. C. Humphrey testimony, “Central University of Kentucky vs. The United States,”

Congressional No. 13,028, National Archives Record Group 123, Records of the United States Court of Claims, National Archives, Washington, DC [hereinafter cited as Centre College War Claim]. For general information about how Danville was affected by the Battle of Perryville, see Sanders, Perryville Under Fire, 103-116. 4. A. B. Nelson testimony, Centre College War Claim, National Archives; Orcutt information from Christen Ashby Cheek, “Memoirs of Mrs. E. B. Patterson: A Perspective on Danville During the Civil War,” The Register of the Kentucky Historical Society 92 (Autumn 1994): 397; Lewis W. Green information from Sanders, Perryville Under Fire, 113. 5. All information from witness testimony, Centre College War Claim, National Archives. 6. “Trustees of the First Presbyterian Church of Danville, Kentucky, vs. The United States,” Congressional No. 13,066, National Archives Record Group 123, Records of the United States Court of Claims, National Archives, Washington, DC [hereinafter cited as Presbyterian War Claim]. 7. Testimony from Presbyterian War Claim, National Archives. 8. Welsh and Tompkins testimony from Presbyterian War Claim, National Archives. 9. For the Danville Presbyterian Theological Seminary, see Calvin Morgan Fackler, Early Days in Danville (Louisville: The Standard Printing Company, 1941), 241-244; and Richard C. Brown, “Danville Theological Seminary,” in John E. Kleber, ed., The Kentucky Encyclopedia (Lexington: The University Press of Kentucky, 1992), 253. 10. Harris and Barker testimony from “The Directors of the Presbyterian Theological Seminary of Danville, Kentucky, vs. The United States,” Congressional No. 13,016, National

39

Archives Record Group 123, Records of the United States Court of Claims, National Archives, Washington, DC [hereinafter cited as Seminary War Claim]. 11. “Operations of the Sanitary Commission at Perryville, Ky.,” Report No. 55, Documents of the U.S. Sanitary Commission, Volume 1 (New York, 1966): 13. Sanders, Perryville Under Fire, 109. 12. Read quoted in Sanders, Perryville Under Fire, 109; Harris Testimony, Seminary War Claim, National Archives; Brown, “Danville Theological Seminary,” 253. 13. Cheek, ed., “Memoirs of Mrs. E. B. Patterson,” Register of the Kentucky Historical Society, 395.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

40

Aurally:

Reviews of Recordings of Civil War Music A series By John A. Braden

“HERITAGE” STRING BAND I’ve been able to find only the last two of this group’s three recordings. The second recording (copyright 2004) is a 65-minute CD entitled “Campfire Songs and Letters.” I don’t know where the “letters” comes from, since the recording is all music (17 pieces with male vocals, one instrumental). The selections include two Civil War pieces (both northern), a medley that includes postwar songs, ten prewar pieces that remained popular during the war, and five songs whose wartime popularity has not been documented (such as the song “Shenandoah”). The recording is done in a “camp” style: male singing with instruments that might appear in camp (violin, banjo, harmonica, etc.). One exception (which detracts from the authenticity of the recording) is frequent use of a bass fiddle: an instrument that most assuredly would not have been hauled into a Civil War camp. The quality of the instrument playing is excellent, the singing good. The rousing performance style makes the recording entertaining to listen to. As a result, I would give this CD a “B+” on performance quality. However, because of the bass fiddle and inclusion of songs whose period use is questionable, I would give the CD a “C+” on authenticity. The band’s third recording (“Rolling Home to Old New England,” released in 2007) is a still more dubious investment for those interested in Civil War music, since only six of the 15 pieces were popular during the Civil War.

On the other hand, the 56-minute CD contains six instrumental dance medlies (two of which are waltzes), thus making it is useful as a reenactor “dance recording” for when live music is unavailable. Like the second recording, the music is performed in a “camp style”: male voices accompanied by instruments that might be found in camp, such as accordion, banjo, harmonica and violin. Unlike the second recording, this one is more neutral between north and south. Unfortunately, the band’s singing and instrument playing slipped with its third recording, enabling me to give it only a “C” on performance quality. In addition to the few pre-1865 offerings, the use of a bass fiddle and occasional changes from authentic notes and lyrics lead me to rate this a “D+” on authenticity. The band’s website is no longer good, but the recordings may still be purchased from CDBaby. com.

COATES BRASS BAND In 2012 this recreated regimental band (led by Douglas F. Hedwig) issued its first CD. Entitled “Quickstep - Brass Band Music of the American Civil War,” it features compositions and arrangements by Thomas Coates, band leader of the 47th Pa. Inf. Regt. Band. The arrangements (some reconstructed, as most Civil War arrangements must be) have a period flavor. The 17 pieces (all performed with period brass instruments) run the gamut from quicksteps to dance numbers to religious hymns. As might be expected from the source, the pieces are slanted to the Union. All reportedly date from the “Civil War era” though, without stating sources

or composition dates, it is possible some postwar arrangements crept in. Because of that caveat, I give the recording a B+ on authenticity. The performance quality is very good for nonprofessionals (only a few rough spots); I’d give the performance a B+. The CD can be ordered from the publisher (MSR Music LLC, 8 Dover Circle, Newtown, CT 06470; www.msrcd.com ) or the bandleader (Douglas F. Hedwig; 575 N. Birch Road, Patterson, NY 12563; www.douglashedwig.com). mailto:dhedwig@gmail.com

ALL WILL PROSPER This 33-minute CD (released in 2011) illustrates what is wrong with farby music like that assembled by Ken Burns for his Civil War special: it inspires others to produce still more farby renditions. Although Keith Kenniff (a.k.a. “Goldmun”)’s instrument playing is good, the nonperiod arrangements rate a “D” on the authenticity scale. The songs (both north and south) are played slowly on a squeaky guitar accompanied by a piano, producing an effect something like a slow music box. Of the 15 pieces, ten are Civil War era, one is modern, and the rest are pre-Civil War. The CD is available from the publisher: Western Vinyl; 4409 Merle Drive, Austin TX 78745; www.westernvinyl.com .

A 43-page booklet reviewing in tabular form over 500 recordings of Civil War music is available for $8.00 (which includes postage) from John Braden at 5519 Taylor, Fremont, MI 49412.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Short Hair Help for Civil War Styles

By Julie A. Brown Imagine, if you will, a typical twenty-first century lady readying herself for her first (or second, or fiftieth...) Civil War reenactment. Her dress is perfect, even the buttons, having being taken from a properly documented pattern. Her shoes are well-researched and her bonnet is stunning. Every single undergarment is correct down to her hand-stitched corset and the number of petticoats she’ll be wearing. When she puts it all on, she stands in front of the mirror and gazes at her dress. The effect is incredible! She looks as if she has just stepped out of the pages of Godey’s Lady’s Book except...her hair is cut in a modern layered style and only comes to just past her ears. In a moment, the spell is broken and not only does she feel self-conscious about her appearance, others may notice as well. I can completely sympathize! As a beginning reenactor many years ago, I made some dreadful mistakes with my hair. My clothes were fine but in the early nineties, hair spray and layers were in control and Civil War style wasn’t exactly chic in high school. I’m woman enough to admit it now and ever since I did the research in the later nineties, I’ve made sure that when I’ve dressed up, my hair would have been acceptable to Sarah Josepha Hale herself. Unfortunately, we live in a time where many of us who do dress in those lovely hoops and flounces on the weekends also live in the modern world with modern

jobs and modern hairstyles. For some women it’s not a problem. They enjoy having and maintaining long hair without bangs so their Civil War styles are more accurate. For many of us, though, long 1860s hair can be a downright pain and we enjoy having easy-to-carefor styles. Day caps can cover a multitude of sins, but what about when you’re sitting in the shade at your tent or attending the evening ball? As one of the few links that the public has to the past, you want to create an accurate picture of what a Civil War lady would have looked like and hair is one of the most important parts of the package. That is where this article comes in. This will be the first article in a short series about creating Civil War styles with short hair. In this first piece, I’ll simply be covering the simple basics on how to attach false hair to existing short hair in order to create a period style. In later articles, I will cover special occasions and different techniques, such as making your own hairpieces and ratts in detail. Some very short styles make it impossible to clip or tie in extra hair pieces, but many types of short hair can be pulled back and added to in order to create the illusion that the wearer has more hair. The basic rule of thumb is that if your hair is long enough to part down the middle and pull the sides back in a ponytail, you should be able to get away with adding in some false hair. If your hair is shorter than that, you may need to invest in a long wig for these events, since it’s very difficult to hide such

41

short pieces. Here is an example of shorter hair that will work well with adding in false pieces:

There are many cheap, but nice, synthetic, hair pieces that can be bought at your local beauty supply shop for under $20.00. Since the hair is going to be twisted and/or braided into a style, there are even some believable pieces for under $5.00. They don’t feel like real hair, but since the average person is not going to be putting their grimy paws on your chignon, you’re probably safe. They clip easily into little nubs of pony tails and stay fairly secure. They are sold in long tails and can be braided and washed, just not curled, unless they’re made of real human hair. Check your label on the package or you could end up with a melted mess of plastic! The first step in any Civil War hairstyle is form. It’s fairly basic for this time period. The hair is parted straight down the middle. In order to make sure that the part doesn’t close up on itself, I like to part down the middle and then from

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

ear to ear. This makes it smoother on the sides and also allows you to insert ratts (more on ratts below) if you choose. If your hair is very short, ratts may not be an option. You may need to just pull it all back into a ponytail and go from there, but that is entirely accurate as well. Many photos of ladies that I’ve seen from this period do not have ratts. If you do not wish to use a ratt, after parting your hair down the middle, simply brush it all smoothly back into a ponytail and secure tightly with a rubber band, but make sure that your part is visible! The object of this particular look is to add width to the face, something that our twenty-first century minds have trouble grasping, but there you have it. A “ratt” is a small mound of hair wrapped into a very thin hair net (NOT a snood!) and its purpose is to be pinned under hair styles to give them shape. They can be made by saving your hair from your hairbrush and wrapping it up, which is nice, because it’s your own hair, or by snipping off a small bit of the false hair that you will have purchased for this style. Here is what a small ratt looks like:

If you have shoulderlength hair, or even a bit shorter, you should be fine. Part your hair down the middle and then from ear to ear. It should look something like

this:

Gather the back section of your hair into a neat, tight, ponytail and secure with a rubber band. (No, they didn’t have rubber bands, but they didn’t wear layers, either!) If you are choosing to wear ratts, this is the time to insert them. Brush the side section of hair up smoothly, insert the ratt underneath, and smooth the side section over the ratt.

42

the ponytail base with a hairpin. Do the same thing to the other side. It should look similar to the photo below. Now you’re ready to add your new hair to the mix!

The end of your new long tail of hair should either be wrapped in a rubber band or sewn onto a small hair comb. I personally prefer the ones attached to rubber bands because it makes life easier when I’m trying to pin it in place. Pin the banded tail of the hair into your ponytail with one or two pins, depending on how fine your hair is.

You may need to pin it in place, depending on how secure it is. Give the end of the side section a twist or two and pin it securely into

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Separate the new tail into two sections. This is so your bun does not end up looking like a large lump sticking out of the back of your head. Either braid or twist one of the sections all the way down to the tip and then carefully wrap it around the base of the ponytail, including where you pinned the side pieces. It’s important to cover all pieces of the ponytail base, including ends that are sticking out. Tuck the end of the first section underneath the rest of the hair and secure with two or three pins. It should look something like this:

Braid or twist the second section of hair and do the same thing, being careful not to lay it squarely on top of the first section. The point is to look like you have a lot of hair, not a giant knob. (Sorry to keep harping on that but I see it everywhere!) Pin it very securely with hair pins until it feels like it’s not danger of falling off anytime soon. You should have something that looks like this:

43

Or this:

Notice how the hair that was originally in the small ponytail gets incorporated into the large knot at the end. If you choose a color close to the color of your own hair, it will blend very nicely. I hope that you’ve enjoyed this basic introduction to working with shorter hair. In the next article, I plan to show, step-by-step, how to properly make a ratt and how to dress up your style for the Saturday night ball. Enjoy continued...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

Military Swords and Sabers:

continued...

your new creations! Sources

44

The PS Justice Contract

All photographs are the property of Julie A. Brown. Leisch, Juanita. Who Wore What? Women’s Wear 18611865. Thomas Publications Gettysburg, PA. 1995. Severa, Joan. My Likeness Taken. Kent State University Press. Kent, OH. 2005. Severa, Joan. Dressed for the Photographer. ent State University Press. Kent, OH. 1995. Dalrymple, Priscilla Harris. American Victorian Costume in Early Photographs. General Publishing Company, Ltd. Toronto, Ontario. 1991. Julie A. Brown has been studying period hairstyles since 1995. As a cosmetology school graduate, she began holding workshops for fellow employees and teaching classes to the public in 1996, branching out to holding workshops and lectures for various historic sites and organizations, such as The Henry Ford and the Midwest Open-Air Museums Coordinating Council, a division of ALHFAM, of which she is a member. In 2011, her first book, Put Up Your Hair: A Practical Manual to Nineteenth Century Hair Styles was published by Heritage Books.

By Craig L Barry “Military men make short speeches, and as for myself I am no hand at speaking anyhow. The time for war has not yet come, but it will come and that soon; and when war does come my advice is to draw the sword and throw away the scabbard.” Major Thomas J. Jackson, Professor of Natural and Experimental Philosophy (Physics) and Instructor of Artillery, Virginia Military Institute. Early April 1861. As the quote in the heading suggests, swords have long held an association with war. To “draw the sword and throw away the scabbard” suggests a fight to the finish. Traditionally intended for close encounters, swords and sabers were formidable military weapons but resulted in comparatively few combat injuries during the US Civil War, even among Cavalry. The, rifle, pistol and carbine were the primary weapons of mounted infantry and cavalry. There were exceptions, such as the engagement at Brandy Station. Here is one account from the battle: “I saw one of them coming at me with his revolver aimed at me. I drew my saber and forced my horse to full speed. My horse struck his horse and at the same time I struck him with my saber. Both horse and Yankee fell to the ground. I dismounted and picked up his revolver and it had two cartridges in the cylinder. I don’t know why he did not shoot me. I had struck him on the collar of his coat or it would have been all day with him. I helped him up and made his horse get up. I also helped him mount his horse. He told me he belonged to the [6th Pennsylvania]...This was the only time I used my saber during the war.” (1) Civil War muster-out-rolls often tell a sad tale. While combat injuries from saber wounds were rare, the records indicate the following for Lt. William J Rabb, 10th New York Cavalry Co D: “Killed at Brandy Station, Virginia by

a saber thrust through the body while lying under his horse; he would not surrender.”(2) The demands of outfitting a large army resulted in an increase in imports, as well as domestic military sword and saber production. Many of the Confederate imports were British, but both the CS and Federal government received foreign imports from Solingen, Prussia (now Germany). As Birmingham was to the production of the commercial P-53 Enfield, Solingen was to military blade production. There also were hundreds of thousands of edged weapons produced by a variety of commercial contractors from Ames Mfg of Chicopee, Massachusetts to Tiffany’s of New York City. (3) A necessary distinction should be made between “saber” and “sword”, hence some working definition of the terms and some background information may be useful: continued...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

Saber (sabre): American spelling ends –er, and will be used here. The saber features a long curved single edged blade and a large hand guard covering the knuckles. Mounted troops were generally issued sabers (not swords). Due to the nature of cavalry combat the principle design of the weapon is for “slashing” with the sharpened convex side of the blade. The origins of the weapon are somewhat unclear but the seminal design(s) appear to go back as far as the “scimitar” used by Central Asian cavalry during the Middle Ages. Two common cavalry sabers of the Civil War period are the US 1840 “heavy” cavalry saber with a 36” blade, affectionately known as the “old wrist breaker”, and its replacement the “New Model” US 1860 “light” cavalry saber with a shorter 32” blade. The US 1840 was itself a replacement for the first recognized US cavalry pattern, the 1833 Dragoon saber. The primary difference between the US 1840 and US 1860 besides the length and shape of the blade (and by association the scabbard) is the shape of the grip. The designation of “heavy” and “light” do not refer to the weight of the saber per se, but rather the military distinction of shock impact during a charge. For example, a “heavy” cavalry unit was heavily armed, and a “light” cavalry unit was more lightly armed. (4) There was also a US Model 1840 “heavy” and “light” artillery saber, which could be distinguished from the Cavalry version by virtue of having no basket surrounding the grip. These were intended for all mounted members of field artillery units, including musicians. The design most closely resembles the French artillery saber of 1829. Obviously the cannons were the primary combat weapon for artillery units and the sword functioned more as a traditional symbol of rank and respect. The production figures for these models suggest that since fewer sabers were produced than there were numbers in the artillery branch of service, hence not every member of the mounted artillery units received one. Sword: This weapon is traditionally a straight, long edged blade with one or two edges and a sharpened tip. It is designed for both “cutting” and “thrusting.” The US Model 1832 foot artillery sword was based on the

45

French design of 1816, which was itself essentially an updated version of the Roman gladius. Federal versions of this sword are usually marked with an eagle, while those produced at Confederate arsenals were typically unmarked. The most common swords of the Civil Warera were the US 1850 Army Foot Officer sword carried by non-commissioned officers (NCOs) and the US Field Officer and Staff sword, which were carried by commissioned officers, both with a blade of 32”. (5) These were not merely ceremonial or signs of rank, and there are recorded instances of swords in use during infantry engagements when the fighting became close range, or hand-to-hand. Cutlass: Technically this is a form of thick, short saber known primarily as a naval side arm. Often associated with pirates, the cutlass as shown in theatrical films is almost always historically inaccurate, post-dating the period portrayed. (6) These will not be discussed here. PS Justice, The “Scandal” and The Saber Contract of 1861 A little background on P.S. Justice is in order. Federal contractor Philip S. Justice of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania produced military arms including 1840 heavy cavalry sabers, light artillery sabers, saber bayonets, muskets and rifle-muskets. Some of the muskets produced resulted in a minor scandal early in the war, and legal proceedings afterwards that made it all the way to the US Supreme Court. Among all the hundreds of thousands of domestically produced U.S. Civil War Federal government contract muskets, some of the most controversial are the weapons produced by P. S. Justice of Philadelphia early in the Civil War. Phillip Justice also completed contracts for 13,685 US Model 1840 (wrist breaker) cavalry sabers and 1,050 light artillery sabers during 1861. The blades are found stamped in two styles, both of which read P.S. Justice/Philada, but one has the lines both parallel, the other has the first line as an arc with the second as a line. The picture shown (see Fig 1) is of the first marking, which was applied to the US Model 1840 cavalry saber blades imported from the Prussian mass producer Schnitzler and Kirschbaum. (7) Since 1841 “S & K” had been producing US Model 1840 heavy cavalry sabers for the US continued...

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

government on contract. This mark is far more common than the second, which suggests the majority of the blades were imported, and P.S. Justice performed what was primarily an assembly operation, just as with the musket contract. Since the sabers were inspected in Prussia none of them had any US markings or inspection marks. The fallout was concerning the condition of the muskets produced under another early 1861 contract.

46

The P.S. Justice contract muskets are considered by some to have been the worst of all arms delivered to the Ordnance Department during the US Civil War, and given what Eli Whitney (Whitneyville) Armory produced during that same time period, this is a bold claim. Claud E. Fuller in The Rifled Musket (Stackpole 1959) calls the Federal handling of the PS Justice musket contract “...a striking example of the apparent confusion that existed in the Ordnance Department (which) seems to have resulted in an injustice in this case.”(8) Ergo, no justice for Justice? The pun is likely unintended on the part of Fuller, who maintained a number of Civil War-era Whitney produced rifles/ muskets in his famous collection, but none from P.S. Justice. After the Mexican War, when the Federal government began an assessment of their inventory of old .69 caliber smoothbore muskets. As a result, a significant number were condemned and auctioned off for as little as $2.00 per stand of arms. (9) P.S. Justice obtained some of these along with a quantity of other condemned parts from which he produced an amalgamated military firearm.

Image courtesy Library of Congress, “Unidentified Union Soldier with Cavalry Saber.”

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

47

continued...

He rifled the barrels (at least the first couple inches), added rear ladder sights and sold them back to the government for $20.00 per stand. The government inspected the arms, but apparently not too closely and not with gauges. The contract terms were sufficiently vague to permit some variability in the final deliveries, and the arms produced under the first P.S. Justice contract could generously be termed “non-standard” (10). The “scandalous” arms were subsequently issued to the 58th, 88th, and 98th Pennsylvania Volunteers; if one can depend on the regimental records. The soldiers were critical in their assessment of the arms, voicing complaints that the muskets “blew up in their hands” and they were afraid to use them, or they “fell apart.” There is a good deal more to this story than belongs here. It is unfair to categorize the P.S. Justice “amalgamated” .69 caliber muskets as top grade US armory quality arms, they were not. They were however inspected and deemed “well finished” by the US Ordnance Department. Since there was a degree of variation in the dimensions of the guns and bayonets, most were numbered to identify which bayonets belonged to what musket and therefore had the best chance of fitting. There is some evidence the Pennsylvania Volunteer units were dissatisfied partially because they had been promised the new US Model 1861 rifle-muskets, which were still some months from being widely available. The government ordered a reinspection of the PS Justice muskets, and they were subsequently deemed “a worthless lot of arms, unfit for service and dangerous to those who used them.” (11) The problem was that the government had already inspected, issued and paid for the muskets in question, so they retroactively deducted over $10,000 in payments due from other pending contracts, leading to the legal action after the Civil War which ended up in front of the Supreme Court in 1871. One end result of the P.S. Justice “scandal” was a more formal Federal arms inspection process consisting of five “grades” between “1” and “4” (12). There were no registered complaints about the sabers. Surviving examples appear to be very good quality weapons. Even though the quality of the sabers was acceptable, another result was P.S. Justice received no future government contracts for the duration of the Civil War.

FOOTNOTES 1. Whittenburg, Eric J. “Chapter 3: The Battle of Brandy Station”. www.gdg.org/research 2. Fox’s Regimental Losses, Chapter VII, Muster out rolls. www.civilwarhome.com. 3. Tiffany’s, the famous New York jeweler made edged weapons during the Civil War. 4. Stone, George Cameron. A Glossary of the Construction, Decoration, and Use of Arms and Armor in All Countries. Courier-Dover Publishing (1999), 648 pgs. 5. Ibid; an ancient weapon, the “root” of the word “sword” comes from a term meaning to “wound or injure”. Bronze Age swords were originally made shorter in length because longer blades exceeded the tensile strength of the metal then in use. The Greek hoplite “ixphos” and the more famous Roman derivative called the “gladius” served for many years as the standard military infantry side arm of the ancient world. 6. Somewhat off the subject, but according to DVD version of the Disney film Pirates of the Caribbean, “Captain Jack” Sparrow uses a saber while the other pirates primarily use the cutlass. The DVD states he prefers the greater reach as an advantage over opponents. 7. McWaters, Michael. Manufacturers of Regulation Model Enlisted Swords during the US Civil War. www.angelfire. com/wa/swordcollector/. 8. Fuller, Claud E. The Rifled Musket. Stackpole books, 1958. 9. Defined as complete set for one soldier, as a musket, bayonet, cartridge box and belt; in this case, apparently meant the musket and bayonet alone. 10. One charge was that the rifling only went 3” down the barrel. P.S. Justice disputes this. Another was that the bayonets were substandard and bent like soft lead…this is doubtful. Bear in mind these bayonets were not forged by Justice and were originally US government surplus. The metallurgy would not have changed. Another charge was that the rear sights were merely “soldered” to barrel, which is true because it is exactly what the contract stipulated and so on. 11. Ibid, The Rifled Musket. 12. This is not a typo. The five grades were 1, 2, 2 ½, 3 and 4.

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

48


Sept/Oct 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

MilitaryPhoto Analysis

Unidentified Western Confederate Soldier with Musket Image courtesy LOC By Craig L Barry This is an interesting image for several reasons. First, let’s consider the 5 button jean cloth sack coat worn by the Confederate soldier. Note the “fallen collar” and five button single breasted front. North Carolina was best known for issuance of a version of the sack coat as part of their uniform during 1861-1862, but clearly this is not a North Carolina state issued sack coat. For one thing the mathematics of the garment relative to sleeve, shoulder and body are wrong. The buttons are incorrect and there are no epaulets on the shoulder. It is most likely a jean cloth “suit” (note matching trousers) either made for the soldier or brought from home. The sack coat, a loose fitting singlebreasted garment without a waist seam, first appeared in American pattern drafting systems during the 1840s. According to Tom Arliskas “…the sack coat was an article of clothing commonly used in the early years of the Civil War, 18611862. There are many descriptions of Confederates wearing sack coats, at the Battles of Fort Donelson and in the East, Jackson’s Valley campaign and at Antietam...The use of civilian clothing by Confederate soldiers is also found in many contemporary descriptions.” [1] Collars were generally stitched by hand so the draper (tailor) could continue to shape the collar pad to ensure that it hugs the neck. The fit is quite good here, perhaps leaning a bit more support toward

the suit being a private purchase/ tailor-made. The soldier dresses it up nicely with what appears to be a polka-dot bow tie. This is also unusual as the most common men’s neck tie was solid colored, usually black or brown. The soldier sports a chin curtain or Donegal beard, meaning a full beard without a mustache. Abraham Lincoln is often pictured with a beard of this type, but he was obviously not the only man in the mid-19th century to wear that style. For example, the chin curtain it is still very common among the Amish. The easiest way to grow a chin curtain as pictured here is to grow a full beard and then shave off the mustache. This soldier also has a “chin strip” extending up vertically from his goatee which appears nicely cultivated, meaning he grew and then narrowed the “chin strip” of his beard that way. A key thing to remember, courtesy of the sine quo non of modern Civilian (re)enacting Susan Hughes, is that every soldier was a civilian before he enlisted. This young man obviously paid considerable attention to his personal appearance. His hat is the civilian style and he appears to have one side pinned up with what appears to be a secession cockade. Secession cockades, which were popular early in the war at least through most of 1861, were a rosette of ribbon with a pin on the back. One soldier noted at the time, “The Kentucky girls made Cockades for us, and almost every soldier had one pinned on his hat.” [2] Sometimes they were worn on the jacket and each southern state seems to have had

49

unique variations as well as some Northern states (though obviously not secession cockades). Enough of this cockade can’t be made out clearly to determine what state it represents, but the meaning of the secession cockade was understood as “no submission to the North.” In Baltimore, Maryland during September 1861, several gentlemen wearing secession cockades were assaulted and beaten, while in St Louis, men were attacked for wearing either a pro-Union or secession cockade in the wrong part of town. [3] The socialist German immigrant population of St Louis was staunchly pro-Union. The rest of St Louis, Missouri was not. [4] The soldier is not wearing any of his accoutrements besides the waist belt. It appears to be a smooth leather belt with a plain rectangular plate, though the stock on the musket obscures the details of the plate. If it were the common “Atlanta” rectangle you should be able to see at least part of the CSA lettering from what little can be seen. Hence, it is a good bet the belt buckle is unmarked. Plain rectangular belt buckles were produced in Rome, Georgia and widely issued to the Army of Tennessee as well as various state militias. In the soldier’s hands is cradled the standard infantry arm of the Confederacy early in the Civil War, the US 1822 (sometimes called the US 1816/22) conversion musket. This old style musket is not in and of itself necessarily helpful in determining an exact time period

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War

continued...


July/August, 2012

The Citizens & Soldiers Digest

continued...

for the Confederate soldier in the image. The other details in this image suggest that he is most likely an AoT soldier in the fall of 1861, though not because of the old style musket. The US 1822s, both in flint and converted to percussion were still in use by the Army of Tennessee through mid-1864 in the trenches outside of Atlanta. Back in the fall of 1861, a quarter of the AoT was still unarmed. The situation was critical enough that by winter, Albert Sidney Johnston considered disbanding some of his still unarmed volunteer troops. [5] Hence, this soldier having in hand a nearly forty year old smoothbore musket which began its military service as a flintlock and perhaps saw action in the Mexican War was not anything to complain about. The 10th TN stationed at Fort Henry was considered “the best equipped regiment in the command” and they were mostly armed with “Tower Muskets from the War of 1812, previously used by militia.” [6]

50

FOOTNOTES: 1. Thomas Arliskas, Cadet Gray and Butternut Brown, Thomas Publications (Gettysburg, PA) 2006, p. 36. Arliskas also says if (re)enactors dressed like the descriptions of the day record they would be told to go over to the civilian impressionists. Depends on time period and theater, really. 2. http://home.freeuk.net/gazkhan/index.html, see section on “Secession Cockades.” 3. Arliskas speaking on the subject of cockades at the Midwest Civil War Civilians Conference in Springfield, IL in late January 2011. 4. A pro-Confederate citizen of St Louis opined that the best way to be rid of all the German Union sympathizers was to close down the breweries “…and they will all die within a week.” (Anecdotal) 5. Larry Daniels, Soldiering in the Army of Tennessee, UNC Press (Chapel Hill, NC), 2003, p. 39-40. 6. Ibid, Daniels, p. 40

A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War


A Reliable Resource for all things Civil War



September Ocrtober 2012 Citizens & Soldiers Digest