NF New Confederate uniform book 'Never In Rags'

Non-Fiction
Hi. I have just caught your posts. The second print of ‘Never In Rags’ has now been completed and is available at a much reduced price....$90 including $30 shipping to the States. The second book, ‘Confederate Uniforms during the Maryland Campaign: September 1862’,will be out later this year, priced at approx. $35-$40.
 
Last edited:
Hi
My latest book ‘ Never In Rags’, described by William Frassanito as “The most comprehensive study of Confederate uniforms, and their distribution, ever undertaken”, has recently been published. It is the first in a nine volume series. Each volume comprises over one thousand pages of uniform issue tables, photographs, color plates and eyewitness accounts. Volume one covers uniform issues to Confederate forces in the East (from Virginia, down through the Carolinas and Georgia to Eastern Florida in 1863).
All reviews have been excellent. The latest from Civil War News states “This book has considerable merit. As a reference tool, this book is well worth the cost. It is easy to read and has some of the best graphics I have seen”.
It is available in hardback from Military Book Publishing in the UK
Thank you
Jeff Dugdale
Mr. Dugdale how or where do I go to purchase your book ? I’m in US
 
@tullock

Does anyone have or have access to this book? I looking for information for a couple of regiments as I research some ambrotypes.

Thanks
 
Looks to be a wonderful book. So you are suggesting that at no time were Confederate soldiers in tattered uniforms?

You dismiss all the sources (letters,diaries) that speak of being shoe less, or pants worn out, shirts with holes in them ? The many letters requesting clothing items from home?


6223 Jackets and coats
8947 Pairs pants
7576 Pairs shoes and boots
8172 Shirts
7284 Pairs socks
7548 Pairs drawers
5504 Hats and caps

These were typical regimental issues to all Confederate units at this point in the War.


Still think Confederates were dressed in rags?

Yes at times I do think so......................Too many sources telling us of how they were dressed and how they looked, sources from both sides.......................

Can you tell us what quality these items were? How long they lasted ?

Sounds like another attempt at myth making. "How well the CSA Armies were supplied and dressed"..............



View attachment 109320
Respectfully,
William
You said: "You dismiss all the sources (letters,diaries) that speak of being shoe less, or pants worn out, shirts with holes in them ? The many letters requesting clothing items from home?"
And photos of Confederates, prisoners and otherwise.
I think someone has a "disconnect" from reality, probably looking only at the sources that support his idea and not looking at the "big picture."
 
You said: "You dismiss all the sources (letters,diaries) that speak of being shoe less, or pants worn out, shirts with holes in them ? The many letters requesting clothing items from home?"
And photos of Confederates, prisoners and otherwise.
I think someone has a "disconnect" from reality, probably looking only at the sources that support his idea and not looking at the "big picture."
mmmmmm...What my books show (and prove without doubt) is that the average Confederate soldier was adequately provided for with clothing throughout the war. At times there may have been some shortages, and some soldiers did receive clothing from home, mainly shirts, socks, underwear etc., but on the whole the troops were well attired in stout uniforms from military clothing facilities. Many years ago I too was of the same opinion as yourself until I really started to research this fascinating subject. After 45 years of intense study my conclusions (although not in line with everyone) do tend to steer towards the suitably dressed reb. In my studies of the many photographs of Confederate prisoners and casualties (literally hundreds of soldier images from Antietam, Gettysburg, Chattanooga, Petersburg etc.) I have found only 2 shoeless soldiers, no patched uniforms, no rags, only well attired soldiers. The numerous clothing issue tables in my books show regular issues to all units, the diaries and memoirs (which I have read in their thousands) show only around 3% of soldiers complaining of poor clothing. And we must not forget that ALL soldiers throughout the ages have complained about something...clothes, food, discipline etc. (GIs in 1944 constantly complained of worn out boots and clothing). The few examples which you have studied are generally from sources which still tend to propagate the 'Ragged Reb' myth. My last book 'Confederate Uniforms During The Maryland Campaign', really is an eye opener, offering copious amounts of tantalizing data proving that Lee's Army at Antietam (supposedly at its lowest ebb of the War) was in a fairly decent condition. Here are three very interesting observations from different periods of the War, especially for you ...

"Judging from what I saw here, I should say that army correspondents had been in the habit of greatly misrepresenting the facts, in relation to the men composing the rebel army...

"The notion which I find almost universal in the North, that the Southern Armies are clotheless and shoeless, let me here observe, I cannot but regard as a dangerous delusion."

"Everything was moving along with the regularity of a well organized parade. By the time I got back home any notion I had had of seeing an army fortelling defeat by signs of impoverishment and exhaustion was dislodged from my mind. We had been fed on lies."


Try to 'disconnect' yourself.

Thank you for your input.
 
Last edited:
mmmmmm...What my books show (and prove without doubt) is that the average Confederate soldier was adequately provided for with clothing throughout the war. At times there may have been some shortages, and some soldiers did receive clothing from home, mainly shirts, socks, underwear etc., but on the whole the troops were well attired in stout uniforms from military clothing facilities. Many years ago I too was of the same opinion as yourself until I really started to research this fascinating subject. After 45 years of intense study my conclusions (although not in line with everyone) do tend to steer towards the suitably dressed reb. In my studies of the many photographs of Confederate prisoners and casualties (literally hundreds of soldier images from Antietam, Gettysburg, Chattanooga, Petersburg etc.) I have found only 2 shoeless soldiers, no patched uniforms, no rags, only well attired soldiers. The numerous clothing issue tables in my books show regular issues to all units, the diaries and memoirs (which I have read in their thousands) show only around 3% of soldiers complaining of poor clothing. And we must not forget that ALL soldiers throughout the ages have complained about something...clothes, food, discipline etc. (GIs in 1944 constantly complained of worn out boots and clothing). The few examples which you have studied are generally from sources which still tend to propagate the 'Ragged Reb' myth. My last book 'Confederate Uniforms During The Maryland Campaign', really is an eye opener, offering copious amounts of tantalizing data proving that Lee's Army at Antietam (supposedly at its lowest ebb of the War) was in a fairly decent condition. Here are three very interesting observations from different periods of the War, especially for you ...

"Judging from what I saw here, I should say that army correspondents had been in the habit of greatly misrepresenting the facts, in relation to the men composing the rebel army...

"The notion which I find almost universal in the North, that the Southern Armies are clotheless and shoeless, let me here observe, I cannot but regard as a dangerous delusion."

"Everything was moving along with the regularity of a well organized parade. By the time I got back home any notion I had had of seeing an army fortelling defeat by signs of impoverishment and exhaustion was dislodged from my mind. We had been fed on lies."


Try to 'disconnect' yourself.

Thank you for your input.
Let me first say that I believe that everyone would benefit from owning Jeff's wonderfully researched books, I have both volumes in my reference library and await further tomes. The research is incredible and information invaluable. I believe he is mistaken in his views of the ANV in the Maryland campaign. Sharpsburg shows that just over 1/2 of the army was present for battle, the balance straggled for want of shoes, clothing, food and just plain worn out.

Lee himself told Davis that the army was nowhere near ready to venture North due to supply issues, mainly shoes, but it had to be done to relieve Virginia.

Citizens of Frederick Maryland wrote in numerous passages of the ununiformed dirty and barefoot rebels and some units told their soldiers that they did not have to cross the Potomac if they were not properly shod.

While at the Best Farm on the Monocacy, General John Robert Jones, a division commander in Jackson's command, said, "Never has the army been so dirty, ragged, and ill-provided-for as on this march."

From the National Park Service Harper's Ferry website:

"One glance at Lee's veterans suggested that his Harpers Ferry mission was impossible. Short on food, destitute of clothing, and many shoeless from hundreds of miles of marching, Lee's ragged army appeared physically incapable of meeting the campaign's tight deadline. Nevertheless, on September 10, Lee bade his detached columns farewell as they left Frederick and pressed on toward Harpers Ferry."

From Frederick citizens:

An unnamed citizen of Frederick City noted: "I have never seen a mass of such filthy strong-smelling men. Three in a room would make it unbearable, and when marching in column along the street the smell from them was most offensive... The filth that pervades them is most remarkable... They have no uniforms, but are all well armed..."

Jacob Engelbrecht, a civilian wrote that "Many [Confederate soldiers] were barefooted and some had one shoe & one barefoot-they really looked "Ragged and tough."

"The first 8 or 10 thousand got a tolerable good supply of clothing and shoes and boots but the stores and shops were soon sold out." This forced many shops to close their doors. Many of the Confederate soldiers paid for these items using Confederate C-notes, which were worthless in Maryland.

As the Confederate army marched out of Frederick, many of barefooted soldiers marched upon the National Pike. The macadamized road tore their feet up, forcing many to march along side of the road. Shotwell, a Confederate soldier in the 8th Virginia Infantry, was shoeless and could not keep up with Longstreet's wing as it marched to Hagerstown. In Funkstown, a civilian offered his boots to the soldier but they were four sizes to big. The soldier gave them back realizing that the oversized boots would make his feet blister and bleed even more.

Harper's Ferry:

Gen R E Lee to John G Walker, Major-General, C. S. A. Division Commander "Battles and Leaders":

"Besides the men and material of war which we shall capture at Harper's Ferry, the position is necessary to us, not to garrison and hold, but because in the hands of the enemy it would be a break in our new line of communications with Richmond.

A few days' rest at Hagerstown will be of great service to our men. Hundreds of them are barefooted, and nearly all of them are ragged. I hope to get shoes and clothing for the most needy. But the best of it will be that the short delay will enable us to get up our stragglers — not stragglers from a shirking disposition, but simply from inability to keep up with their commands. I believe there are not less than from eight to ten thousand of them between here and Rapidan Station."

Jed Hotchkiss, Stonewall Jackson's famous mapmaker recalled the condition of those Confederate soldiers. "Our soldiers are as dirty as the ground itself and nearly the same color. The enemy looked at them in amazement." During the Confederate occupation of Harper's Ferry, the stores containing weapons, cloth and equipment were taken. As orders came for the Confederate concentration of Sharpsburg, General A.P. Hill's Division was left behind to parole the captured Union soldiers. They would arrive on the Antietam Battlefield late in the afternoon of September 17th, many of them wearing Union blue uniforms taken at Harper's Ferry.

There are so many more, but I believe that it is R E Lee's testament that speaks volumes:

Lee also knew that his Army of Northern Virginia was in sad shape after months of almost continuous campaigning. He noted in his letter to the President that "the army is not properly equipped for an invasion of an enemy's territory. It lacks much of the material of war, is feeble in transportation, the animals being much reduced, and the men are poorly provided with clothes, and in thousands of instances are destitute of shoes...".
Robert E. Lee, in a letter to President Jefferson Davis, 3 September 1862

There are literally hundreds more. Pictures of the few dead are not indicative of the whole, those that were on the field were able to keep up because they were supplied with shoes.

I do not believe there needs to be a contentious debate on this subject so please let's keep this civil, Jeff has done a tremendous service to the research community, that has yet to be equaled, in terms of clothing issues.
 
Don't know where I read this, but when the Confederates at Fort Henry evacuated to Donelson, they were described as using carpet material to cover themselves with as they had no coats. The same witness said they were a pretty ragged bunch. Granted, that was early in the war and many regiments were still dressed in civvies, not having been issued uniforms. This was especially true of Tennessee. But photos of Tennesseans taken in the prison camps show they were dressed, but hardly any of them looked like later uniforms. A general whose name I forget, told Col. Fremantle at Shelbyville, that his soldiers preferred to wear homespun rather than issued uniforms. The colonel described the rank and file as being dressed in all manner of brown and gray. But certainly not rags.
 
Let me first say that I believe that everyone would benefit from owning Jeff's wonderfully researched books, I have both volumes in my reference library and await further tomes. The research is incredible and information invaluable. I believe he is mistaken in his views of the ANV in the Maryland campaign. Sharpsburg shows that just over 1/2 of the army was present for battle, the balance straggled for want of shoes, clothing, food and just plain worn out.

Lee himself told Davis that the army was nowhere near ready to venture North due to supply issues, mainly shoes, but it had to be done to relieve Virginia.

Citizens of Frederick Maryland wrote in numerous passages of the ununiformed dirty and barefoot rebels and some units told their soldiers that they did not have to cross the Potomac if they were not properly shod.

While at the Best Farm on the Monocacy, General John Robert Jones, a division commander in Jackson's command, said, "Never has the army been so dirty, ragged, and ill-provided-for as on this march."

From the National Park Service Harper's Ferry website:

"One glance at Lee's veterans suggested that his Harpers Ferry mission was impossible. Short on food, destitute of clothing, and many shoeless from hundreds of miles of marching, Lee's ragged army appeared physically incapable of meeting the campaign's tight deadline. Nevertheless, on September 10, Lee bade his detached columns farewell as they left Frederick and pressed on toward Harpers Ferry."

From Frederick citizens:

An unnamed citizen of Frederick City noted: "I have never seen a mass of such filthy strong-smelling men. Three in a room would make it unbearable, and when marching in column along the street the smell from them was most offensive... The filth that pervades them is most remarkable... They have no uniforms, but are all well armed..."

Jacob Engelbrecht, a civilian wrote that "Many [Confederate soldiers] were barefooted and some had one shoe & one barefoot-they really looked "Ragged and tough."

"The first 8 or 10 thousand got a tolerable good supply of clothing and shoes and boots but the stores and shops were soon sold out." This forced many shops to close their doors. Many of the Confederate soldiers paid for these items using Confederate C-notes, which were worthless in Maryland.

As the Confederate army marched out of Frederick, many of barefooted soldiers marched upon the National Pike. The macadamized road tore their feet up, forcing many to march along side of the road. Shotwell, a Confederate soldier in the 8th Virginia Infantry, was shoeless and could not keep up with Longstreet's wing as it marched to Hagerstown. In Funkstown, a civilian offered his boots to the soldier but they were four sizes to big. The soldier gave them back realizing that the oversized boots would make his feet blister and bleed even more.

Harper's Ferry:

Gen R E Lee to John G Walker, Major-General, C. S. A. Division Commander "Battles and Leaders":

"Besides the men and material of war which we shall capture at Harper's Ferry, the position is necessary to us, not to garrison and hold, but because in the hands of the enemy it would be a break in our new line of communications with Richmond.

A few days' rest at Hagerstown will be of great service to our men. Hundreds of them are barefooted, and nearly all of them are ragged. I hope to get shoes and clothing for the most needy. But the best of it will be that the short delay will enable us to get up our stragglers — not stragglers from a shirking disposition, but simply from inability to keep up with their commands. I believe there are not less than from eight to ten thousand of them between here and Rapidan Station."

Jed Hotchkiss, Stonewall Jackson's famous mapmaker recalled the condition of those Confederate soldiers. "Our soldiers are as dirty as the ground itself and nearly the same color. The enemy looked at them in amazement." During the Confederate occupation of Harper's Ferry, the stores containing weapons, cloth and equipment were taken. As orders came for the Confederate concentration of Sharpsburg, General A.P. Hill's Division was left behind to parole the captured Union soldiers. They would arrive on the Antietam Battlefield late in the afternoon of September 17th, many of them wearing Union blue uniforms taken at Harper's Ferry.

There are so many more, but I believe that it is R E Lee's testament that speaks volumes:

Lee also knew that his Army of Northern Virginia was in sad shape after months of almost continuous campaigning. He noted in his letter to the President that "the army is not properly equipped for an invasion of an enemy's territory. It lacks much of the material of war, is feeble in transportation, the animals being much reduced, and the men are poorly provided with clothes, and in thousands of instances are destitute of shoes...".
Robert E. Lee, in a letter to President Jefferson Davis, 3 September 1862

There are literally hundreds more. Pictures of the few dead are not indicative of the whole, those that were on the field were able to keep up because they were supplied with shoes.

I do not believe there needs to be a contentious debate on this subject so please let's keep this civil, Jeff has done a tremendous service to the research community, that has yet to be equaled, in terms of clothing issues.
Thank you Ray for your gracious comments. Will we ever agree on the ANV in Maryland? Without going too deeply into it I will offer the following...

Uniform issues to the ANV June-August 1862....63,044 jackets, 86,128 pairs of pants,61,124 pairs of shoes, 110,460 shirts.

Here is part of a superb article by Richard Pougher in which he explains how Northern civilians simply got it wrong when describing Confederate troops…..

The Civilian Impression of the Confederate Soldier To begin with, let us look at how the civilian populace viewed Confederate troops. Universally, these initially seem very critical. Several such recollections are as follows.

"They looked like an army of tramps, but in spite of their raggedness they had an air and dash that the Yankees could never achieve for all their fine uniforms. They were dirty, unshaven and hairy."

Another witness reported, "...

"A dirtier, filthier, more unsavory set of human beings never strolled through a town"

A third commentary refers to the Army of Northern Virginia as a

"horde of ragamuffins".
In addition, there is the following account left by a man of education pertaining to Confederate troops in Pennsylvania in 1863.

"Most of the men were exceedingly dirty, some ragged, some without shoes, and some surrounded by the skeleton of what was once an entire hat, affording unmistakable evidence that they stood in great need of having their scanty wardrobe replenished; and hence the eagerness with which they inquired after shoes, hat and clothing stores, and their disappointment when they were informed that goods of that description were not to be had in town; and it ought not to have surprised us that they actually took shoes and hats from the persons of some of our Franklin County cousins, whom they considered more able to endure the loss than we, whilst they permitted us to escape that infliction."

To a civilian's eyes and mindset, these quotes are probably fairly accurate. The problem lies with the recorders themselves in that they are indeed civilians and unaware of the realities of war. The people who left these impressions were basically from nice, rural areas, who, until the Army of Northern Virginia passed through their region, probably had not seen many if any soldiers actually on campaign. In essence, they were unused to seeing real soldiers, and they suffered from a preconceived notion, based on limited contact, of how troops should appear. If they had actually seen any before, for most, it was a matter of watching a white gloved, spit and polish drill unit at the county fair, or seeing a newly mustered command leave for the front in their fine new uniforms and equipment. They maintained a fantasy image, with all the glitter, shine, and romance, of how soldiers should appear. This, of course, was nowhere near reality. In the last three quotes (the only ones dated) a major emphasis is placed on the Confederate troops being dirty, and this was very likely the case. Prior to Antietam and Gettysburg (the points in time to which these quotes refer) the soldiers under consideration had just carried out some very long, hard marches over dusty roads when dry and muddy ones when wet, and in the case of the latter campaign, in extremely hot temperatures. Without the opportunity to launder their garments, the result was an army whose members were, indeed, in want of a bath and doing some washing. Yet, being dirty, in and of itself, does not signify that the men were deficient in uniforms and equipment, or that any articles of either in their possession had digressed beyond a state that a good cleaning would not cure. Weight of emphasis is next placed on the fact that they looked like "tramps" and "ragamuffins". Their being dirty would certainly enhance both these impressions. As to the former term, while not having the word "tramp" as a noun, a contemporary edition of Webster's dictionary does define it as a verb meaning "To travel; to wander or stroll." "Tramper" is the noun form (from which it would seem the term "tramp" 334 is a shortened, colloquial variation) and this is referred to as "A stroller; a vagrant or vagabond." These two descriptive nouns are given very similar definitions. For the former, it is "An idle wanderer; a vagabond, one who strolls from place to place; a sturdy beggar; one who has no settled habitation, or who does not abide in it." The very nature of the appearance of a soldier well kitted out for a hard campaign goes far to create the same impression defined by Webster. With all the various pieces of equipment slung and strapped to their persons, there can be little doubt that they did create the illusion of destitute, migrant individuals who carried all their worldly possessions with them. In fact, in a certain sense, this is exactly what they were. They were men frequently on the march who carried only that which was necessary to survive in their current lifestyle. Again, however, this does not indicate a deficiency in or poor state of clothing and equipment. In fact, the more a soldier carried, the more this image would be enhanced.^ As to "ragamuffin" , Webster's defines this as "A paltry fellow; a mean wretch." While "paltry" can mean ragged, it is also indicative of "mean; vile; worthless;" etc. In turn, "mean" possesses a number of definitions conveying basically the same implication; "Wanting dignity; low in rank or birth;", "base", "contemptible", "Of little value; humble; poor;". A "wretch" is simply "A miserable person; one sunk in deepest distress." In any case, while "ragamuffin" might imply actually being ragged, it can just as easily indicate something really quite different - in essence, a simple low-life - without necessarily meaning that physical trappings are in poor condition. In this sense, this is 335 probably a fairly apt description of Confederate or any other soldiers on campaign who are dirty, hungry, ill-kempt, in ill-fitting issue uniforms, with all their gear on them. In essence, they could easily appear destitute, "low in rank", "base", "Of little value; humble; poor;", etc., in a civilian mindset without actually being so in a military, and without being deficient in anything.^ One of the dated quotes refers to raggedness, shoelessness, etc., and a need for clothing because of wear and tear on that immediately possessed. This detailed description, however, is intriguing in that there is a noticeable difference between the use of the word "most" when referring to the Confederates being dirty, and, simply, "some" when commenting on raggedness and lack of shoes. We have no idea how many "some" implies, but in conjunction with the previous use of "most" it strongly indicates a much lesser figure. In any case, the implication is that only "some" were ragged and only "some" were shoeless. Considering the amount of marching these men had done in the weeks previous to the writer's observations, it is not unlikely that "some" had worn out a pair of shoes or torn a pair of trousers. Yet, there is no indication that these men were not initially issued what they required prior to the onset of the campaign, and it certainly does not indicate that the Southern troops as a whole were deficient in anything. It must also be remembered that at the times when these quotes were recorded the Army of Northern Virginia was in the process of invading the North. The supply lines were stretched extremely thin at best. Consequently, failure to fill any needs for shoes or uniforms was undoubtedly far more a matter of not being able to get requisite 336 items to the troops rather than the items not actually existing. To sum up, the impressions left by civilian witnesses are not terribly acceptable for the simple reason that they did not understand what they were seeing. What they were actually saying in their reminiscences is that they were shocked at the reality of how a fighting army appeared on campaign. That which they observed was typical of any army on hard, active service at any point in history. There is no indication that they saw anything out of the ordinary or any serious signs of want, need, or deficiency. They simply saw reality, and it surprised them due to their own ignorance and naivete.


And from my own book some positive viewpoints from more reliable witnesses…

"As line after line reaches the Maryland shore, we rend the air with cheers, the bands playing "Maryland, My Maryland". Our army is in fine health and spirits.
"

Lt. Alfred Malory Edgar of the 27th Virginia.

"There are some ideas in the North which people would do well to disabuse themselves of. It is not true that the rebels are half-starved, it is not true that they are half clad, nor is it true that a great majority are fighting against their will.
On and near the battlefield I myself saw granaries and barns filled with corn and grain of different kinds, I saw rebel soldiers as well clothed as any of our own men."


William Henry Hurlbert, New York Times Correspondent

"When the Army of Northern Virginia left the vicinity of Richmond to enter upon the first Maryland Campaign, it was in excellent condition"

Lieut. Colonel E.E. Morrison. 15th Virginia Infantry.

"All this stuff about their extreme destitution is all bash. I have been all over the battlefields of Maryland and I have yet to find a Rebel even meanly clad or shod. They are as well shod as our own men. They are dressed in gray"

Union Surgeon James Langstaff Dunn MD. 109th Pa. Vols.

"During the first two years, the captures (of blockade runners) were so infrequent that, it may safely be stated, never before was a Government at war so well supplied with arms, munitions, clothing and medicines – everything in short, that an army requires".

Major Cabel Huse
NEW UNIFORMS ISSUED. JULY 8TH 1862

"As for myself, I had but one suit of clothes to my name and I had been wearing them for six weeks dead ahead. Soon our camp was filled with goods, and in a few days each "reb" had on a clean shirt and a brand new suit of "Confederate Uniform", and a new pair of shoes. With clean clothes on, and plenty to eat, we began our important operations."

Private Robert Campbell Company 'A' 5th Texas Infantry

Typical issues to an ANV regiment in 1862….

37TH VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT

JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH 1862

ISSUED… 37 coats. 345 pairs pants, 467 pairs shoes, 122 shirts, 177 pairs socks,

165 drawers, 27 overcoats, 67 blankets.

APRIL, MAY, JUNE 1862

ISSUED… 97 jackets, 44 'dress' coats, 343 pairs pants, 649 pairs shoes, 353 shirts, 585 pairs socks, 284 drawers, 35 overcoats, 6 blankets.

JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER 1862

ISSUED… 34 jackets, 213 pairs pants, 226 pairs shoes, 146 shirts, 246 drawers



And as for the Northern Army during the same campaign….

"..In the severe marches preceding the battle of Antietam, the men were exhausted, thinly clad, many of them with bare feet.."

"..My men fought in the battle of Antietam very ragged, more than forty of them without shoes and I was compelled to equip thirty recruits from the bodies of the slain.."


"..All the troops I have seen, with the exception of the new regiments, are ragged, dirty, dressed in every kind of clothes imaginable, the officers hardly distinguishable from the men.."

"During the Campaign the men wore a single uniform until it was patched rags and ribbons, and a mass replacement was issued only when nudity threatened"
.
 
Last edited:
I wonder...we all know the lack of uniform shade the typical domestic jeans uniform had. This would have been the most common uniform still at this point. Could it be that onlookers were simply looking at the various shades of Confederate trousers and jackets, in various states of fading and thought that to appear "ragged, dirty, dressed in every kind of clothes imaginable" when contrasted against the general uniform appearance of the Union men? Also various shades of tan/brown could be simply mistaken for "dirty," especially if you were under the impression the CS army wore gray.

Also remember at this time, various state issued and home supplied uniforms would have been in use still. I know the NC Depot had only just transitioned from sack coats to the six button shell jackets, of which there were a few different transitional designs before settling on the final one.(Antietam is the last battle I can justify wearing mine to, as a reenactor). Frock coats were being procured by the men throughout the conflict, as well as many other jackets and coats that don't fit any government or state issued pattern, the commutation system never went away entirely.

None of this means ragged. Not entirely uniform, but certainly not ragged. Dirty? Well yeah, they were dirty from the march. However simply being a little dirty doesn't mean your clothes are falling apart, it's just some superficial dirt. There are plenty of accounts of even northerners describing their own Union men in a similar way, dirty and ragged. Perhaps most people just thought soldiers on campaign looked that way? Definitely accounts of southerners describing "the Yankees" as being dirty, ragged, and sorry looking...perhaps it's just bias against the enemy, or some form of simple chirping, like when sports fans say the another team's fans look like a bunch of sorry looking *expletives* for wearing team gear.
 
I wonder...we all know the lack of uniform shade the typical domestic jeans uniform had. This would have been the most common uniform still at this point. Could it be that onlookers were simply looking at the various shades of Confederate trousers and jackets, in various states of fading and thought that to appear "ragged, dirty, dressed in every kind of clothes imaginable" when contrasted against the general uniform appearance of the Union men? Also various shades of tan/brown could be simply mistaken for "dirty," especially if you were under the impression the CS army wore gray.

Also remember at this time, various state issued and home supplied uniforms would have been in use still. I know the NC Depot had only just transitioned from sack coats to the six button shell jackets, of which there were a few different transitional designs before settling on the final one.(Antietam is the last battle I can justify wearing mine to, as a reenactor). Frock coats were being procured by the men throughout the conflict, as well as many other jackets and coats that don't fit any government or state issued pattern, the commutation system never went away entirely.

None of this means ragged. Not entirely uniform, but certainly not ragged. Dirty? Well yeah, they were dirty from the march. However simply being a little dirty doesn't mean your clothes are falling apart, it's just some superficial dirt. There are plenty of accounts of even northerners describing their own Union men in a similar way, dirty and ragged. Perhaps most people just thought soldiers on campaign looked that way? Definitely accounts of southerners describing "the Yankees" as being dirty, ragged, and sorry looking...perhaps it's just bias against the enemy, or some form of simple chirping, like when sports fans say the another team's fans look like a bunch of sorry looking *expletives* for wearing team gear.
The idea that citizens could not tell the difference in a well clad soldier and one not so much is ludicrous. The citizens of Frederick, MD whose comments have been used were used to seeing soldiers on a daily basis. In fact many were in the Southern army.

When the commander of the Army writes a letter to his president discussing these issues, I think there might have been a problem. Jeff shows issues of clothing, but this was an inordinately active period of campaigning. Unlike reenactor gear, ACW uniforms did not fair well under active campaign, shoes lasted around 6 weeks, even less on macadam roads. A common theme of Southern commanders during this campaign was a lack of food, clothing and shoes.

The Nation Park Service, General Lee, President Davis disagree with Jeff’s assertions and I haven’t even delved into my Maryland library for instances. Being lucky enough to support the Antietam NPS for many years as a living historian we are routinely invited to sit in on author and historian seminars and talks, every single one discusses the acute straggling due to poor supply, mostly shoes.
 
I have spent years studying the photographic evidence from Antietam and my findings are presented in the 'Maryland' book's Photographic Section which deeply scrutinizes all images. Of the one hundred or so bodies where the uniforms can be made out with any degree of certainty 95% wear Richmond Depot issue clothing (i.e. Type II jackets and pants) or State issue uniforms. With the exception of two figures, all the uniforms appear to be in good condition, no patches, no rags, no rips or tears. Only two men are not shod, but both wear socks without holes, indicating that their shoes were taken off them after they had fallen. With this kind of evidence I feel there is no clearer indication of a well clad army.
I feel the overriding factor in the mis-identification of Southern uniforms by civilian eyewitnesses appears to be dirt, along with the Richmond uniform's very plain design, akin to civilian labourer's work clothes, as several witnesses testified to.
 
Last edited:
I have spent years studying the photographic evidence from Antietam and my findings are presented in the 'Maryland' book's Photographic Section which deeply scrutinizes all images. Of the one hundred or so bodies where the uniforms can be made out with any degree of certainty 95% wear Richmond Depot issue clothing (i.e. Type II jackets and pants) or State issue uniforms. With the exception of two figures, all the uniforms appear to be in good condition, no patches, no rags, no rips or tears. Only two men are not shod, but both wear socks without holes, indicating that their shoes were taken off them after they had fallen. With this kind of evidence I feel there is no clearer indication of a well clad army.
I feel the overriding factor in the mis-identification of Southern uniforms by civilian eyewitnesses appears to be dirt, along with the Richmond uniform's very plain design, akin to civilian labourer's work clothes, as several witnesses testified to.
Jeff,

You fail to take heed of the evidence of how many became shod along the way. Frederick was cleaned out of clothing and shoes. Only half of Lee’s army was on the field due to straggling, so 100 bodies of 50% is certainly not indicative, not to mention that 20% of those bodies are artillerists, who did not have to walk.

At least three of those bodies are wearing federal gear and most of the bodies, the footwear is not available to view. A very small sample size overall.

Your Northern ragged soldier comparison proves my point, if Northern troops were ragged and barefoot in their own backyard with secure lines of supply, imagine a Southern Army with very tenuous lines of supply. They fought and marched continuously the Spring and Summer of ‘62.
 
Jeff,

You fail to take heed of the evidence of how many became shod along the way. Frederick was cleaned out of clothing and shoes. Only half of Lee’s army was on the field due to straggling, so 100 bodies of 50% is certainly not indicative, not to mention that 20% of those bodies are artillerists, who did not have to walk.

At least three of those bodies are wearing federal gear and most of the bodies, the footwear is not available to view. A very small sample size overall.

Your Northern ragged soldier comparison proves my point, if Northern troops were ragged and barefoot in their own backyard with secure lines of supply, imagine a Southern Army with very tenuous lines of supply. They fought and marched continuously the Spring and Summer of ‘62.
The shoes on the troops in the photos are military and almost identical to each other and certainly not all shop bought. In fact I have documentation that many Southern soldiers bought female shoes from the shops in Frederick, I'm assuming for the loved ones at home.

Very few of the bodies in the photos would be artillerists. The soldiers near the caissons are from Kershaw's Brigade as they fought in this exact area and most are wearing the dark English cloth jackets provided by the Richmond Depot in July and August.

Only one body wears a Federal sack coat,while two others might be wearing Federal overcoats, which was common place, usually worn ove their Confederate issue uniforms, and as for 'a small sample' the evidence provided is for 100% of the photographed bodies. It's surely not a coincidence that nearly all the soldiers are wearing Confederate military clothing, or did the cameraman knowingly only focus on well uniformed bodies?

My point on the 'ragged Yanks' was to prove that, the generally well attired Northerner, could also be mis-identified as 'ragged' by poor civilian observations or were these typical soldier complaints.

Virginia lads certainly looked smart.....

"…We passed through Frederick city on the morning of September 12th 1862, and the Twelfth Virginia made a handsome spectacle…"

Private Philip Francis Brown. Company 'C' 12th Virginia Infantry Regt.

And maybe an answer to the shoeless Reb...

"while our feet were tortured by the heat and dust to such an extent that we were forced to walk in barefeet with shoes tied together, and thrown over our rifle"

Private Philip Francis Brown. Company 'C' 12th Virginia Infantry Regt.

The following list is a small sample of ANV regiments which received 'top up' clothing issues in the few weeks before Antietam, having already received fresh uniforms in June.

8TH ALABAMA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY, AUGUST 1862
ISSUED…89 jackets, 265 pairs pants, 182 pairs shoes,180 cotton shirts, 182 pairs
socks, 260 drawers, 11 caps.

3RD SOUTH CAROLINA INFANTRY
AUGUST 12TH 1862
ISSUED… 296 jackets, 210 pairs pants, 96 pairs shoes.

2ND MISSISSIPPI INFANTRY BATTALION
AUGUST 4TH 1862
ISSUED…160 jackets, 328 pairs pants, 250 drawers

53RD VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 23RD 1862
ISSUED… 140 jackets, 190 pairs pants, 87 pairs shoes, 190 shirts, 82 pairs socks

8TH FLORIDA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JUNE, JULY 1862
ISSUED…1,005 jackets, 1,005 pairs pants, 892 pairs shoes, 500 linsey shirts, 270 drawers.

22ND GEORGIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 22nd 1862
ISSUED…100 coats, 250 pairs pants, 90 drawers, 83 shirts.

28TH VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT )
JULY, AUGUST 1862
ISSUED… 88 jackets, 182 pairs pants, 78 cotton shirts, 34 wool shirts, 36 pairs
socks, 135 drawers, 55 caps, 92 blankets.

56TH VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 25TH 1862
ISSUED… 413 jackets, 350 pairs pants, 22 shirts, 12 drawers.

SOUTH CAROLINA PALMETTO SHARPSHOOTERS
JULY 21ST, AUGUST 9TH, SEPTEMBER 4TH/9TH 1862
ISSUED…378 jackets, 37 uniform coats, 420 pairs pants, 8 pairs shoes, 4 pairs boots, 51 shirts, 44 drawers,1 overcoat.

8TH GEORGIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 17TH – AUGUST 27TH 1862
ISSUED…30 jackets, 46 pairs pants, 276 pairs shoes

3RD ARKANSAS INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY, AUGUST 1862
ISSUED…154 jackets, 377 pairs pants, 263 pairs shoes, 441 shirts, 104 pairs socks, 424 drawers, 30 caps.

25TH NORTH CAROLINA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JUNE 8TH- AUGUST 23RD 1862
ISSUED…934 jackets, 891 pairs pants, 1,108 pairs shoes, 1,084 shirts, 994 drawers, 934 caps, 48 overcoats, 77 blankets, 40 ponchos.

60TH GEORGIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 30TH 1862
ISSUED… 141 jackets, 166 pairs pants, 94 pairs shoes, 139 shirts.

2ND VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 13TH, 30TH, AUGUST 14TH 1862
ISSUED… 13 jackets, 143 pairs pants, 126 pairs shoes, 47 overshirts, 3 undershirts, 87 drawers.

27TH VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 11TH – JULY 31ST 1862.
ISSUED…43 jackets, 211 pairs pants, 180 pairs shoes, 22 cotton shirts, 98 overshirts, 138 drawers, 26 pairs socks.

42ND VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY 11TH / 31ST, AUGUST 1ST 1862
ISSUED… 66 jackets, 206 pairs pants, 195 pairs shoes, 115 shirts, 159 pairs socks, 192 drawers, 1 overcoat

37TH VIRGINIA INFANTRY REGIMENT
JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER 1862
ISSUED… 34 jackets, 213 pairs pants, 226 pairs shoes, 146 shirts, 246 drawers.

1ST LOUISIANA INFANTRY REGIMENT
AUGUST 14TH 1862
ISSUED...177 jackets, 207 pairs pants, 217 shirts, 213 pairs drawers, 118 caps.

20TH NORTH CAROLINA INFANTRY REGIMENT
AUGUST 17TH 1862
ISSUED… 361 jackets, 359 pairs pants, 294 pairs shoes, 341 shirts, 339 drawers, 319
caps.

23RD NORTH CAROLINA INFANTRY REGIMENT
AUGUST 12TH - 20TH 1862
ISSUED… 355 jackets, 347 pairs pants, 5 pairs shoes, 227 shirts, 240 drawers, 332 caps.

Surely, these uniforms would not have worn out in a few short weeks?
 
Last edited:
Back
Top