GAR or Indian Wars kepi??

[kotkinjs1]

Hi all, I picked this up on a chance, not exactly sure of its legitimacy. I'm leaning towards GAR kepi with 31 being the post number in some state. It was advertised as a 1870-80s Indian War kepi however. From what I can tell, it matches a model 1872 kepi but I'm unfamiliar with the specifics and standards of how there were 'adorned,' i.e. unit numbers, branch insignia, etc. Any ideas? Thanks in advance!

 

[major bill]

I am leaning military post Indian Wars. US Army officer buttons, not GAR buttons. The crossed sabers. This appears to me to probably be a 1889-pattern officer's forage cap or perhaps a 1889-pattern enlisted cap with officer buttons and cord added?

 

[Patrick H]

I'm sorry to say that I don't know what to tell you about your kepi. It looks like it's in real good condition. My hunch is the same as yours: GAR. But that's nothing more than a hunch. You'll probably have your answer later today. In the meantime, welcome!

 

[1867crete]

Think major bill spot on? The cord seems off to me? But fantastic find none the less! Congrats on a great piece!

 

[zburkett]

Fantastic find. Is it possible that the crossed sabers are a later addition?

 

[UCVRelics]

Very Nice. The lack of GAR buttons does not negate it as GAR but the lack of a GAR anywhere else on the kepi leans me toward @major bill assessment.

 

[E_just_E]

The 31st US Cavalry was active during the civil war and after that, only 2 years: 1874 and 1898.
Might be of one of those years. Otherwise might be a military academy of some kind cadet kepi.

 

[Patrick H]

I told you a real expert would be along. Major Bill just convinced me!

 

[major bill]

I told you a real expert would be along. Major Bill just convinced me!

I am not positive it was not worn by some GAR. The officer buttons could have been used by a GAR member. This could well be a militia forage cap as well. To me the key would be if the crossed sabers were added later. I would not think the GAR would have used cross sabers.

I am no expert but have talked to a few experts. One problem even for the experts is surplus caps and hats were widely available for years as was surplus insignia. If one took a real surplus cap an added real insignia, how would we know it? Wear is one way but if a cap was not worn much, it would not show much wear.

If this is a 1889-pattern forage cap remember while the Army was replacing them with the 1895-pattern cap, the 1889-pattern lingered on in the militia for some time.

 

[major bill]

GAR items are not as well documented as Army issued items. The GAR posts could have different uniform items. It is possible that some GAR posts would have purchased Army items and converted them for GAR use.

My problem with the cap in the OP is that someone went to the trouble of having the wreath and number embroidered on to the cap but did not bother to have "GAR" embroidered as well? This is possible but gives me additional pause to believe it is a GAR item.

My next question is can anyone assure us that this is a 1889-pattern and not a 1872-pattern cap? Do we have a crossed saber expert on the forum so we know the possible years of the crossed sabers?

 

[mofederal]

I would have to agree with Major Bill. It looks more Indian Wars, for all of the reasons cited. I think if it was GAR. it would have an embroidered GAR on the front. I do think it is a great piece though, whatever year pattern it is.

 

[zburkett]

I'm the first to admit I don't know so I am asking, are those enlisted or officer crossed sabers? If I'm not mistaken the officer sabers were smaller. If that is true then you have officer buttons and enlisted insignia. Maj. I'm sure you know. Thanks.

 

[Package4]

Unfortunately the construction, disk, sweatband, and brim identify this as a private copy 1872 cap, many of these were utilized as GAR and I believe this is a GAR Post 31 kepi. Very, very, rarely were there ACW period kepi's that were directly embroidered, a little more common, but still rare. during the Indian War period.

 

[major bill]

Package4 is probably right on this one. He is knowledgeable in this area.

 

[Billw12280]

I agree with the 1872 assessment and believe this is a GAR kepi that has had things added to make it appear as something different. IIRC the gold officer cord was not used extensively until mid to late 1880s and I don't remember ever seeing it used on a cap with the leather chinstrap. The crossed sabers appear to be the 1872 model but I think they are for enlisted. I also believe during the Indian War period the insignia was designed to be worn on the front of the cap not the top?

 

[Package4]

I agree with the 1872 assessment and believe this is a GAR kepi that has had things added to make it appear as something different. IIRC the gold officer cord was not used extensively until mid to late 1880s and I don't remember ever seeing it used on a cap with the leather chinstrap. The crossed sabers appear to be the 1872 model but I think they are for enlisted. I also believe during the Indian War period the insignia was designed to be worn on the front of the cap not the top?

I don't believe that anything was purposely added, it was very common for ACW vets to purchase the current style kepi and use it for their purposes. In this case I would imagine that the vet had it somewhat commissioned for the particular Hall and then added the branch insignia and gold chin strap. I have seen many similar pieces, the real finds are those that were original ACW pieces, whether surplus or the vet's actual headgear with added GAR insignia. I stumbled upon a couple great pieces that way. Some of the vets no longer had the means to purchase ancillary wear and repurposed both uniform and headgear for their GAR events.

 

[Package4]

Hi all, I picked this up on a chance, not exactly sure of its legitimacy. I'm leaning towards GAR kepi with 31 being the post number in some state. It was advertised as a 1870-80s Indian War kepi however. From what I can tell, it matches a model 1872 kepi but I'm unfamiliar with the specifics and standards of how there were 'adorned,' i.e. unit numbers, branch insignia, etc. Any ideas? Thanks in advance!View attachment 167470 View attachment 167471 View attachment 167472 View attachment 167473 View attachment 167474 View attachment 167475 View attachment 167476 View attachment 167478 View attachment 167479

Is there a makers stamp embossed on the sweatband, if so, consider it post war and GAR. A very nice piece and true to the advert.

 

[kotkinjs1]

Thanks all for the replies. Package4, no, no embossed maker's stamp. So what it seems to be is a GAR cap from Post 31 from some state using a model 1872 kepi as a foundation. Although it was advertised as an 1870s-80s Indian Wars kepi the consensus seems to be pretty firm against it and that makes sense from the reasoning provided here. Thanks again for the help!

 

[Package4]

Thanks all for the replies. Package4, no, no embossed maker's stamp. So what it seems to be is a GAR cap from Post 31 from some state using a model 1872 kepi as a foundation. Although it was advertised as an 1870s-80s Indian Wars kepi the consensus seems to be pretty firm against it and that makes sense from the reasoning provided here. Thanks again for the help!

It is an Indian War kepi used as a GAR piece, no harm there. Very nice piece and representative of the 1872.

 

[James N.]

Fantastic find. Is it possible that the crossed sabers are a later addition?

... The crossed sabers appear to be the 1872 model but I think they are for enlisted. I also believe during the Indian War period the insignia was designed to be worn on the front of the cap not the top?

Whether a later addition or not, they're definitely later themselves being the M.1872 pattern.