Material Culture and the Civil War: Using Uniforms and Equipment to Understand the Lives of Soldiers By Daniel

Sauerwein The use of material culture offers a unique avenue to study the lives of Civil War soldiers. They wore and carried a wide variety of equipment to help them fight and survive in camp and in the field. The material culture for Civil War soldiers is best divided into two groups of objects: the uniform clothing worn by soldiers and the items and equipment used in daily life.1 Since, according to former Tarleton State University librarian Ken Jones, the Union army consisted of almost 1,700 regiments of infantry, and it stands to reason that the majority of Confederate regiments were infantry, the uniforms and equipment used by infantry soldiers will be the examples considered in exploring the material culture of soldiers.2 As far as uniforms and equipment for soldiers was concerned, the Union had a tremendous advantage. It was able to draw upon its increased industrial ability as well as the tradition of the Union army for the design and materials used in its military equipage. In contrast, the Confederacy equipped its soldiers, at least initially, locally.3 Uniforms represent an important part of the material culture of soldiers, as they were, at least for enlisted men, the majority of available clothing for them in the field. They were also a source of
When discussing uniforms and equipment, photographs of original artifacts from various museums and private collections included in David Millers The Illustrated Directory of Uniforms, Weapons, and Equipment of the Civil War (Osceola, WI: MBI Publishing Company, 2001) and William C. Daviss Rebels & Yankees: The Fighting Men of the Civil War (London: Salamander Books Ltd., 1989) will be cited. 2 Union Army Regimental History Index, http://www.tarleton.edu/~KJones/unions.html (accessed 10 April 2009). 3 David Miller, Ed. The Illustrated Directory of Uniforms, Weapons, and Equipment of the Civil War (Osceola, WI: MBI Publishing, 2001), 10, 130.
1

great pride to some soldiers. Leander Stillwell, a soldier serving in the Sixtyfirst Illinois Infantry, recalled in his memoirs that, I got behind a big bale of stuff, took off my citizens apparel and put on my soldier clothes then and there,and didnt I feel proud!4 Given that this particular account was written about over fifty years after the event, it illustrates that uniforms had significance to soldiers. Both sides attempted to standardize their uniforms, especially the colors used. According to regulations, Union uniform coats were to consist of the colors dark blue and sky blue and Confederate uniforms cadet gray, with Confederate trousers being of sky blue cloth.5 While these were standard colors used by each side, other color variations for uniforms existed on both sides, particularly the Confederate military.6 The coats and trousers were usually made of kersey, which was a tougher woolen cloth, or, in the South, cotton.7 Production of uniforms, at least in the North underwent a rapid change at the beginning of the war. The call for troops created an urgent need for uniforms. Initially, the Quartermaster Department of the Army could not compete against states also ordering cloth to equip their regiments. This
Leander Stillwell, The Story of a Common Soldier of Army Life in the Civil War, 1861-1865, 2d ed. (Kansas City, MO: Franklin Hudson Publishing Co., 1920; reprint, Alexandria, VA: Time-Life Books, Inc., 1983), 15. 5 United States War Department, Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861, With an Appendix Containing the Changed and Laws Affecting Army Regulations and Articles of War to June 25, 1863 (Washington: Government Printing Office, 1863), 463, 465, http://name.umdl.umich.edu/AGY4285.0001.001 (accessed 10 April 2009); Uniform and Dress of the Army and Navy of the Confederate States (New Hope, PA: The River House, 1952), 3-4. According to Frederick Todd, American Military Equipage, 1851-1872 (Providence, RI: The Company of Military Historians, 1974), 58, the US Army issued dark blue trousers from 18581861, but during the war issued trousers using sky blue as the color. 6 Miller, 130. 7 Todd, 42.
4

resulted in cases of troops receiving inferior uniforms that wore out quickly. However, the industrial power of the North was able to cope with the demand and was soon producing more than enough to adequately clothe the troops. This also removed another problem resulting from the competition between state and Federal governments, which was a mismatch of uniforms. The ability of the Quartermaster Department to secure increased uniform production allowed for an increased standardization for the uniforms. It also allowed the soldiers to receive the regulated clothing allotment, which consisted of:
5 dress hats with trimmings 5 forage caps 5 frock coats (or jackets) 13 pairs of trousers 10 sack fatigue coats 2 blankets 2 stable-frocks (for mounted men)8 15 flannel shirts 11 pairs flannel drawers 20 pairs of bootees 20 pairs of stockings 2 leather stocks 1 great-coat

The above list is what a soldier on a five year enlistment was authorized and the amounts allowed of various items seem to indicate how often they were used by the soldiers and how long each item, or pair of items was expected to last. The uniform coat was an important part of the soldiers uniform. It provided the soldier their uniformity and consistency of appearance. However, the coat presented a challenge for designers, as preserving uniformity and appearance while maintaining the comfort and efficiency of the soldier was a concern. During the war, there were several styles of coats used, but for this examination, the two main coats utilized by Union infantry, the frock coat and
8

Todd, 40-41.

shell jacket.9 The frock coat was single-breasted and consisted of a row of nine buttons, as well as a stand-up collar that was not too tall as to restrict movement. This coat was the standard military uniform coat for the Union army.10 According to Frederick Todd, there is some conflict over the extent to which this coat was used by Union troops. He cited John Billings claim that most regiments did not use the frock coat, choosing the sack coat, which will be discussed shortly, instead. Todd noted that clothing records indicated that most soldiers only drew the frock coat for winter encampments and either turned them in or discarded them, only to draw them again at the end of the campaign season. He concluded that the idea that the frock was rarely used after 1861 was distinctly incorrect.11 The use of the frock during the winter makes sense, as the descriptions of both coats in the Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861 seem to indicate that the frock coat was a slightly heavier garment than the sack coat, which would make it much more useful to a soldier during cold winter weather.12 In contrast to the frock coat, the sack coat, sometimes referred to as a blouse was a looser fitting garment that was used primarily for fatigue duty, as well as an initial issue to new recruits. This coat was simpler than the frock coat, consisting of flannel and only having four buttons instead of nine. One advantage this coat had over the frock was economic, as sack coats only cost $2.10, compared to $6.56 with frock coats, and the coats were manufactured
Todd, 50; Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861, 463-4. Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861, 463; Todd, 55. 11 Todd, 57. 12 Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861, 463-4.
9 10

in three to four sizes, which allowed more to be produced. These economic factors allowed so many sack coats to be produced that almost all Union soldiers owned and wore them, which allowed the sack coat to gain wide popularity among soldiers.13 While the two main coats used by Union forces were fairly standardized by regulations, the Confederate armys coats had greater variety in material used, color, and style, despite regulations. Several examples of Confederate coats are varying shades of grey, as well as browns and butternut. The coats appear to be made of a coarser, lower quality fabric. The differences in color and material used likely reflect the increased reliance on local sources noted above, as well as a lack of wealth on the Southern side.14 Trousers were another important part of the uniform. As mentioned earlier, they were made kersey, which was a tougher fabric. Union trousers were sky blue in color and contained buttons for suspenders, as well as a slit in the back, sometimes supported by string, which allowed for expansion of the waist.15 According to regulation, Confederate trousers were to be made of sky blue cloth (no indication was given as to what type of cloth was to be used).16 Even though regulations were not specific for the Confederate side, it is safe to assume that their regulation trousers were made of the same

Todd, 57. Miller, 130-133; William C. Davis, Rebels & Yankees: The Fighting Men of the Civil War (London: Salamander Books Ltd., 1989), 42-3. 15 Todd, 58-9. 16 Uniform and Dress of the Army and Navy of the Confederate States, 4.
13 14

material as their Union counterparts. As with Confederate coats, Confederate trousers also came in other colors and materials.17 In addition to coats and trousers, two other components of the uniform allow for an interesting material culture consideration, shirts and headgear. While shirts seem rather plain and unoriginal for a material culture study, they represent an important aspect to the soldiers life, a potential connection to home. While not every shirt used by soldiers represented this connection, examples do exist. Union regulations prescribed flannel shirts and soldiers typically had three styles of shirts available. One was a dress shirt made of linen, the second was a flannel pullover undershirt, which was usually the standard shirt issued, and the third was a double-breasted firemans shirt made of flannel or merino.18 In the Confederate army, plain white cotton shirts became quite popular and both sides discarded their flannel and wool shirts for cotton. This was due to issues of comfort and hygiene, as while woolen shirts conducted heat and absorbed moisture well, while retaining heat in cooler weather; they also were a source of vermin and were difficult to launder. In addition to the issued shirts, homespun shirts were used by soldiers and came in the designs noted above. These homespun shirts, often in a plaid design, offer an interesting material culture comparison.19 Unlike the government issued shirts, the homespun shirt represents a connection to home and family for the soldier. John Billings, a veteran of the Army of the Potomac mentioned how soldiers often requested shirts from home, which
17 18 19

Miller 130-1. Revised United States Army Regulations of 1861, 474; Todd, 67-8. Todd, 67-8.

were sent with other comfort items to them in the field.20 While he did not indicate why soldiers requested shirts from home, several possibilities exist. Soldiers may have been unhappy with their issued shirt, or were near running out of shirts, as they were only allowed forty-two dollars of clothing each year, and, according to Billings, were charged any amount over that initial forty-two dollars. Since Billings also mentioned that if soldiers did not draw the full amount for the year, they could receive the difference in cash, so soldiers may have requested shirts and clothing from home in an effort to earn money from not drawing off the allotment from the government.21 Perhaps the simplest reason for a soldier to request clothing from home was to have something to wear made by someone who knew and cared about them, as such items may have been sources of strength and comfort during hard times, a reminder of happier days. Based upon Billings and Todds mention of homespun shirts, these garments form an important group of artifacts into understanding the lives of soldiers. Just as there were a variety of shirts available for uniform wear by soldiers, both government-manufactured and homespun, the headgear for uniforms had variety and surviving pieces indicate much about the soldiers who donned them. There were two main styles of headgear used during the war by Union forces, the dress hat, commonly known as the Hardee hat, named for William J. Hardee, who the hat was associated with, and the forage

John D. Billings, Hard Tack and Coffee (New York: George F. Smith & Co., 1888; reprint, Old Saybrook, CT: Konecky & Konecky, 2004), 218. 21 Billings, 316-7.
20

cap.22 The Hardee hat was usually a parade hat, but some units that achieved distinction during the war adopted them, like the famed Second Wisconsin Infantry, which was part of the renowned Iron Brigade, which was also known as The Black Hat Brigade for its use of the Hardee hat.23 Thus, a Hardee hat usually conveys being part of a select unit, but this does not mean that forage caps do not as well. Forage caps, while plainer than the Hardee hat also indicate many things about soldiers. Headgear, both the forage and Hardee hat, usually contained distinctive insignia to identify what branch the soldier belonged to, as well as the number of the regiment, and, in some cases the letter for the soldiers assigned company. For infantry soldiers, their headgear contained the bugle in a round hunting horn pattern, which was brass for enlisted men and three and a half inches wide.24 Headgear is a useful tool to identify the original wearers unit, at least for the Union army. For Confederates, this was not the case as often, as while their regulations stipulated identifying features for forage caps by using color to denote branch, they used a wider variety of hats, with many using soft brim hats and straw hats, which may not have indicated what unit they belonged to. The collection of artifacts from the Museum of the Confederacy contains several different styles of headgear that have no reference to branch or unit on them.25

22 23 24 25

Todd, 62, 65. Miller, 94. Todd, 86-7. Todd, 64; Miller, 120-1, 152-3.

The uniform clothing allows one to gain an intimate connection with Civil War soldiers on both sides. The items worn varied from standardized government equipment to homespun items. These items indicate much about a soldier, including whether they belonged to a famous unit or not and if they had loved ones at home supporting them. Since many artifacts in museum collections appear better preserved, based upon examination of photographs of them in Millers and Daviss works on soldiers and equipment, they do not reveal what the soldier experienced in combat and seem to indicate that the soldier did not suffer in combat, which may be refuted by other evidence. While uniforms were an important part of the material culture of soldiers, they carried a wide array of equipment, both military and personal. The accouterments consisted of those items carried habitually by the soldier on him, not including his clothing and arms.26 Several items revolved around meals. These included plates, cups, coffee boilers, and utensils. Many of these items were made of metal, though some were ceramic. The Museum of the Confederacy has several camp artifacts from Union soldiers, which include those relating to mealtime. Many of these artifacts appear in decent condition, with rusting occurring, as well as tarnishing. The coffee boiler is a rather simple, pitcher like container that appears to be able to hold several cups, which was important given that the dining situation in most camps revolved around the mess of several soldiers.27 The plate and utensils have lost luster and have small amounts of rust, but are still in good condition.
Todd, 185. Miller, 454. Leander Stillwell provided a description of messes consisting of between four and twelve men. Stillwell, 35.
26 27

Philadelphias Civil War Library and Museum has a collection of Confederate camp artifacts, including eating utensils, which are in the same condition as those in the Union collection, but there are fewer of them, which indicates a relative scarcity of supplies for the Confederate soldier, as many household items were used by the men.28 Other military equipment served to make the soldier functional on the march and in battle. Soldiers carried knapsacks and haversacks to carry rations, personal effects, and other items needed for life. Soldiers typically hated their knapsack, as well as many other items, and attempted to do without them in an effort to travel lighter. There were several variations on the knapsack and haversack, with most being made of cloth or canvas. Some commanders allowed their men to dispose of their knapsacks and roll their equipment into their blanket and sling it over the shoulder. Despite this knapsacks were used through much of the war.29 The haversack was made of cotton, like the knapsack, and was used to carry the soldiers food and eating utensils. Some soldiers organized the materials inside the haversack to keep it clean, while most allowed them to get quite dirty.30 While the knapsack was sometimes considered a disposable item by soldiers and the haversack was neglected, the items carried within them of a personal nature allowed each knapsack or haversack to become a reflection of the individual soldier. Some soldiers carried several personal items within their equipment. Cherished items, objects of entertainment, and objects of vice were just some
28 29 30

Miller, 456. Todd, 202, 204. Todd, 211.

10

of the items that comprised an informal component of the soldiers equipment. These items offer insights into some of the activities soldiers engaged in, as well as to what people or things were important in their lives. The collections of personal artifacts from both sides housed at the Museum of the Confederacy and the Civil War Library and Museum contain a wide array of different objects. Soldiers on both sides, as indicated by the artifacts photographed by Miller, carried Bibles of varying sizes, as well as manuals.31 The presence of books indicates that the soldier in question was literate, which hints at greater formal education than his comrades. These allowed the soldier to pass the time by either studying the materials necessary to be a good soldier, or gain spiritual guidance. Specifically, many troops carried Bibles on them as a form of protection, even if they were illiterate.32 Bibles likely were cherished items for soldiers, especially if they were gifts from home. Photographs were sometimes found in a soldiers personal equipment. These would have been highly treasured items for the soldier, as they were either photos of loved ones or a personal portrait of the soldier himself.33 These connected the soldier to his home and, in the event of his death, or when he returned home, connected his loved ones to his life in the army. If a soldier did carry a photograph, it is likely that that picture would have held as much importance to him as the Bible, if not more.
Miller, 454-459. R. Lee Hadden, Reliving the Civil War: A Reenactors Handbook, 2d ed. (Mechanicsburg, PA: Stackpole Books, 1999), 70. 33 Davis, 240-1; Miller, 455.
31 32

11

Other items carried by soldiers were of a more entertainment nature and allowed soldiers to pass time either in solitude, or with fellow soldiers. Some men carried paint sets and developed artistic skills.34 Others carried chess boards. Still others carried musical instruments, like the guitar and flute that are part of the collection of Confederate personal artifacts from the Museum of the Confederacy.35 These objects brought happiness as well as a necessary diversion from the horrors of war. Some objects carried by the men reflected some of the vices of the era. These items, while providing opportunities to escape the tedium of soldiering, were also sources of concern to some men. Soldiers occasionally had decks of playing cards and pipes on their person. These allowed them to partake in the vices of gambling and tobacco use. Soldiers sometimes discarded these while marching to battle, as they did not want such items sent home as part of their personal effects should they die.36 This fear likely reflected the religious conviction of the soldier and the larger society. All of these objects allow the unique personality of the soldier to come out from behind the military artifacts. Soldiers placed different value on the different personal objects they carried, especially given the willingness of some to discard certain items. These artifacts illustrated the various activities soldiers employed to pass time and interact with each other, and are an important part of the soldiers uniform and equipment.

34 35 36

Miller, 458-9; Davis, 240-1. Miller, 458-9. Hadden, 70.

12

The uniforms and equipment of Civil War soldiers are important tools for understanding their lives. The wide variety of designs and materials used in the uniforms of infantry soldiers illustrate the differences between the Union and Confederacy. The Union relied on more mass-produced and standardized equipment, which reflected its increased industrial capacity, as well as its reliance on the existing systems and guidelines used to equip the Regular army. In contrast, the Confederacy, while having some standardization relied heavily on homemade items. The objects carried by soldiers on both sides allow their equipment to reflect them as individuals, as well as providing comfort and entertainment. The artifacts observed are in relatively good condition and may indicate that the soldiers who owned them survived, though what is lost through any preservation efforts employed by museums is unclear. Exploring Civil War soldier uniforms and equipment is an interesting way to use material culture to enrich the growing field of study into soldiers, as well as how to preserve their legacy.

13