Uniforms Home guard uniforms North and South.

Thanks for all the great info on TST! I've been cobbling together a fatigue/field service uniform for the Lone Star Republic Texas army, ca. 1837-1839. There was a dress uniform too, which is mighty complicated. I've finished the cap and I am working on the uniform jacket, although I have to skimp on some features, like the epaulets or shoulder straps and so on...

As I age, a home guard or TST impression becomes a possibility to remain in the living history neurosis, erm, nerd spiral, uh, hobby...

Am I seeing things on the 1850s-era fatigue uniform? It looks a deeper blue than the sky blue of the Mexican War roundabout jacket and trowsers? Or is it the same color...? I know that at least one Pennsylvania Union volunteer regiment requested--and got!--the Mexican War-color for its uniforms instead of the much, much more common dark blue jacket and sky blue kersey trousers. Apparently some used dark blue wool for pants as well...

Great thread on less formal military service during the Civil War!

the "sky blue" jackets and trousers of the ante-bellum army were probably darker than most reproductions, or most modern artists, choose to depict. Consider blue cloth was then colored by indigo, where modern dyes vary in composition and application. .Here are a couple antebellum paintings for comparison of the color.

A detail from an 1840 painting of a soldier in camp at Sarasota, FL by Capt. Seth Eastman of the 1st Infantry:

1628108700387.png


Gen. Taylor's Headquarters during the Mexican War, notice the dragoon NCO at left:

1628108628885.png



And here is a photograph i took of an original 1832 pattern artillery fatigue jacket at the Smithsonian many, many years ago...
1628108802331.png


James Marshall,
Hernando, FL.
 
Last edited:
The Seth Eastman painting is one of the few examples of illustrations of soldiers wearing the Model 1833 folding shako/fatigue cap/ "hog killer" hat. It is known that hundreds of these were acquired by the Texas army. I have researched this hat, but the primary sources are vague, simply recommending "according to regulation" and not much else. For mine, attached a small lone star in place of where the company letter would have been on a U.S.-issued example. My brim is not kerry green like the example at West Point, simply reasoning that suppliers may have taken liberties with the hats provided. I've got Texas buttons to hold the chin-strap on either side of the hat.

Interesting that indigo was used... I know that modern dyes began to be used by the 1850s, but don't know when it became common for uniforms.

Respectfully, I think that the Dragoon and staff officers of Zachary "Old Rough and Ready" Taylor are wearing dark blue uniform coats or jackets, while infantry dress would have been lighter, yes?

Also, I think that the arm of service for your 1832 jacket from the Smithsonian is infantry, is it not? White lace and piping and white metal buttons? If not, I am sorry for my confusion. So your 1850s fatigue uniform has a darker blue piping and no lace on the collar.

The Texas infantry fatigue jacket was gray with black piping and lace. The real oddity is that the shoulder straps/epaulettes bent at the neck and fastened with buttons to the standing collar. Also Texas NCOs wore their red sashes knotted on the opposite side from U.S. practice. Most strange. White metal buttons with "Texas" on the top, a star in the middle and "ARMY" on the bottom. Later buttons are thought to have had an "I" for infantry in the lone star, but the Republic was so in debt and broke no one really knows how many may have been actually purchased and so on... Artillery used gilt metal/ brass buttons, as did Dragoons.

One dispute is "cadet gray" or a blueish gray. Some sources argue that this color was worn by Dragoons, including fatigue uniforms. Hard to say. Interesting that there were still decade old uniforms in storage in San Antonio when David Emanuel Twiggs surrendered on the eve of the Civil War... I'm sure a lot of that stuff persisted into use on some of the more distant frontier forts, no?
 
The Seth Eastman painting is one of the few examples of illustrations of soldiers wearing the Model 1833 folding shako/fatigue cap/ "hog killer" hat. It is known that hundreds of these were acquired by the Texas army. I have researched this hat, but the primary sources are vague, simply recommending "according to regulation" and not much else. For mine, attached a small lone star in place of where the company letter would have been on a U.S.-issued example. My brim is not kerry green like the example at West Point, simply reasoning that suppliers may have taken liberties with the hats provided. I've got Texas buttons to hold the chin-strap on either side of the hat.

Interesting that indigo was used... I know that modern dyes began to be used by the 1850s, but don't know when it became common for uniforms.

Respectfully, I think that the Dragoon and staff officers of Zachary "Old Rough and Ready" Taylor are wearing dark blue uniform coats or jackets, while infantry dress would have been lighter, yes?

Also, I think that the arm of service for your 1832 jacket from the Smithsonian is infantry, is it not? White lace and piping and white metal buttons? If not, I am sorry for my confusion. So your 1850s fatigue uniform has a darker blue piping and no lace on the collar.

The Texas infantry fatigue jacket was gray with black piping and lace. The real oddity is that the shoulder straps/epaulettes bent at the neck and fastened with buttons to the standing collar. Also Texas NCOs wore their red sashes knotted on the opposite side from U.S. practice. Most strange. White metal buttons with "Texas" on the top, a star in the middle and "ARMY" on the bottom. Later buttons are thought to have had an "I" for infantry in the lone star, but the Republic was so in debt and broke no one really knows how many may have been actually purchased and so on... Artillery used gilt metal/ brass buttons, as did Dragoons.

One dispute is "cadet gray" or a blueish gray. Some sources argue that this color was worn by Dragoons, including fatigue uniforms. Hard to say. Interesting that there were still decade old uniforms in storage in San Antonio when David Emanuel Twiggs surrendered on the eve of the Civil War... I'm sure a lot of that stuff persisted into use on some of the more distant frontier forts, no?

According to an article in Military Collector and Historian magazine on the 1850s sky-blue jackets, the army first employed the large surplus of war with Mexico 1832 pattern jackets.. removing the tape trim, and adding the 1851 branch colored braid to the seams. These jackets were all issued by later in the decade, but there is reference that as late as 1857-58, more were produced and forwarded to allow for uniformity among units on the frontiers, etc.

The original jacket image is an artillery jacket. the yellow tape has faded, evidently from long display, etc. you can see the original yellow color under the buttons. Correct, the infantry jackets were trimmed white, 1832 to 1852. Here is an example of an infantry jacket... notice the shoulder-strap buttons on the collar. The Texas Republic jackets were probably similarly patterned.

1628111934898.png

1628112090698.png


The strap buttoned on the collar of the earlier 1821-32 army fatigue jackets too evidently:

1628112289665.png
1628112325372.png




yes, the Dragoon's fatigue jacket is dark blue, but the Walnut Springs image shows in full color a period depiction of the sky-blue cloth pantaloons...

When the US Army adopted the 1832 uniform, replacing gray pants and fatigue jackets with sky-blue, there was some complaint about it. Gray pantaloons with a blue coat were regular wear among citizens. The sky-blue was more particularly military (and the cloth more expensive). the Texas Republic might have adopted the gray as the cloth was readily available at New Orleans, etc...

the leather forage cap of the army (I have never seen a period reference to them as "hog-killer" and suspect it is a reenactorism), was just a copy of the common sporting caps of the period. Here is an 1832 hatter's ad image showing the style. Often called a "morocco cap" or "gig top" etc.
1628112612150.png


Here's a chap wearing one in 1831, a year before the US army adopted the type for a forage cap.
1628112756532.png



James Marshall,
Hernando, FL.
 
Here is an example of the 1850s pattern fatigue jacket for infantry, as mentioned in previous thread. They were "officially" replaced by the dark blue sack coat for fatigue dress after 1858. There is trim down the button-hole side of the front, not seen in this image.

View attachment 409963
I'd noticed that as well, and I'm not aware of piping down the front being a thing with them, but everywhere else is right, and the cuffs are identical. That collar's size folded does look right to me as well.

There were "Old Pattern Jackets" Infantry and Artillery still in stores at the Alamo, unissued and damaged, and while I've known a lot of folks to believe with their hearts them to be Mex. War jackets, the M1852 existing, and this image's jacket being so dang close I'd bet they were issued.

Perhaps the one in the photo is a variant or modification? I need to go back and re-read some source material.
 
Here is samples of the cloth made in northern mills for the "southern market" viz., principally for slave clothing. These samples are from Hazard's mills in Rhode Island. Sometimes called "negro kerseys." Soldier's clothing in the period was also made of coarse, twilled kersey. The Texas Republic's agents likely bought similar goods from the merchants for the Texas Republic's military clothing.

1628113030672.png
 
I'd noticed that as well, and I'm not aware of piping down the front being a thing with them, but everywhere else is right, and the cuffs are identical. That collar's size folded does look right to me as well.

There were "Old Pattern Jackets" Infantry and Artillery still in stores at the Alamo, unissued and damaged, and while I've known a lot of folks to believe with their hearts them to be Mex. War jackets, the M1852 existing, and this image's jacket being so dang close I'd bet they were issued.

Perhaps the one in the photo is a variant or modification? I need to go back and re-read some source material.
The 1852-58 US Army sky blue jackets have the branch trim on the front of the button-hole side too, where it would show when worn. It is not seen in the image I posted, because the button side is laid over it. Here is a closeup of what the 1850s trim looked like... from an Artillery fatigue jacket:

1628113571882.png


1628113694371.png


The above were "old pattern" by 1861, having been officially replaced by the US Army's dark blue fatigue blouse in 1858.
 
Remnants of Military left-overs aside, the "home guards" of the South, speaking generally, were likely rather plainly dressed given the many sources describing the paucity of resources and requisite makeshifts for clothing, shoes, etc. Also consider that even the soldiers of the "Provisional Army of the Confederate States" were frequently indifferent to the niceties of military dress. As one Texan noted of his company of volunteers for CSA service: they thought soldiers should have uniforms, but could not decide on the pattern or color. Their captain remained silent as every man gave an opinion. Finally they agreed, “that each man get just was suited his fancy and have it made up in any style he chose—jes’ so it was uniform.”

This self-determination as regards "uniform" was common in the early republic. It was noted, for example, that per the US Constitution (and the CS Constitution for that matter), the federal government had no authority over the uniform of the militia of the several States. This was a power reserved to the States or to the people thereof. [See, Dearborn, Henry A.S., Digest of the Militia Laws of the United States and Massachusetts, May, 1840, Dutton and Wentworth, Boston, MA, 1840, 12.]

A review of various State laws shows the people of most States, through their representative civil government, required only militia officers to wear uniforms, and generally suggested they be like those of the US Army (or the CS Army from 61-65 in the South). States varied. Some required copies of the Army regulation uniform, others suggested a blue coat, sword, etc. The enlisted militia could dress as they pleased. The elite uniformed volunteer companies of light infantry, riflemen, artillery, or cavalry generally adopted a unique uniform, subject to any existing State laws on the subject.

Per the Constitution, militia are not "troops." States could not keep troops in time of peace without federal permission... in time of war, they sometimes did. Where some States raised their own "State troops" etc., they sometimes provided regulations for their uniform, etc.

And recall that federal volunteer troops during the War of 1812, Seminole Wars, and war with Mexico, dressed as they pleased for the most part; with some units presenting a military appearance (at least by companies), and others quite the opposite.

I mention the above, because the "home guards" of the 61-65 period were frequently derived from the militias of the States, and so as likely as not to do without particular uniforms in the military sense.

Regarding reenactment interpretation, my own opinion would be, where interpreting a particular region or locality's wartime "home guards", if there is no particular evidence of any uniform, to do without and wear common period men's clothing...

1628116783464.png


J. Marshall,
Hernando, FL.
 
Last edited:
my own opinion would be, where interpreting a particular region or locality's wartime "home guards", if there is no particular evidence of any uniform, to do without and wear common period men's clothing...
Agreed.

The home guards were normally the very last used men to attempt trying to protect something.
(They were not even close to a local militia).

Old men and very young boys for the most part.

I doubt any "Home Guard" even discussed a uniform.
As long as their squirrel rifles and shotguns were in good shape, I bet that's all they were concerned about.

I'm not disparaging Home Guard units at all .... many caused havoc against regular troops.
(There's nothing worse than a bunch of grouchy old men and 14 year little boys that feel immortal).

"If they are well armed".
 
Last edited:
Home guard uniforms would much would depend on the area and the time frame. At least here in Michigan home guard units fell in to five categories.

1) Companies of the Michigan Active Militia were either older militia companies who had not went to war or newly formed militia companies formed to be in the Michigan Active Militia. The Michigan Active Militia was intended to defend the Canadian border and did not remain on "active duty" but trained twice per week and were expected to be a a high level of readiness. These were armed by the state and all wore uniforms.

2) Pre Civil War militia (both state controlled Michigan Uniformed Militia and Independent Militia) that either could not find a regiment to join or opted not to join a regiment going to war. These would have had some style of uniforms. The official Michigan Uniform Regulations were not well enforced and some companies had one dress uniform and a fatigue uniform that might or might not be gray and in the style of U.S. Army uniforms. Often Independent Militia companies hoped to find a slot in the Michigan Uniformed Militia where they would receive state arms, equipment, and some funding, so they often adopted the gray uniforms specified in the Michigan Uniform Regulations. Michigan had recalled all state owned arms so Michigan Uniformed Militia companies who did not go to war had difficulties getting proper arms.

3) Home guard companies formed around a fire company or some society. Fire companies probably often wore their fire company fatigue uniforms while acting as home guard companies. Some clubs had "uniforms" to wear in parades and such, so may have worn these uniforms for home guard duties. These often had some type of arms but usually it was civilian arms or obsolete arms.

4) Home guard companies formed early in the war. Often these were older men or young men and boys. Some adopted some type of uniform but most did not. Many were poorly armed if armed at all.

5) Civilian home guard units formed by cities or such. Often these were citizens who received a bit of military training so they would be ready if called out. These units often had no uniforms and no arms.
 
Thanks for all the great info on TST! I've been cobbling together a fatigue/field service uniform for the Lone Star Republic Texas army, ca. 1837-1839. There was a dress uniform too, which is mighty complicated. I've finished the cap and I am working on the uniform jacket, although I have to skimp on some features, like the epaulets or shoulder straps and so on...

As I age, a home guard or TST impression becomes a possibility to remain in the living history neurosis, erm, nerd spiral, uh, hobby...

Am I seeing things on the 1850s-era fatigue uniform? It looks a deeper blue than the sky blue of the Mexican War roundabout jacket and trowsers? Or is it the same color...? I know that at least one Pennsylvania Union volunteer regiment requested--and got!--the Mexican War-color for its uniforms instead of the much, much more common dark blue jacket and sky blue kersey trousers. Apparently some used dark blue wool for pants as well...

Great thread on less formal military service during the Civil War!
The regiment Michigan supplied for the Mexican American War were issued dark blue uniforms made up in Detroit.
 
At least here in Michigan
No doubt.

Seems your Michigan Home Guard units were more like the pre War militias all over the country.

Although down here, we had a plethora of pre War militia units, (many wearing sometimes outlandish uniforms).

The Southern "home guard" units at the end were more like the Nazi Volkssturm units during the final days of WWII.
 
No doubt.

Seems your Michigan Home Guard units were more like the pre War militias all over the country.

Although down here, we had a plethora of pre War militia units, (many wearing sometimes outlandish uniforms).

The Southern "home guard" units at the end were more like the Nazi Volkssturm units during the final days of WWII.
Common law in the 18th Century, and in the early republic, considered all able-bodied men ages 16 to 60 part of their State's militia; although most States only organized the portion 18 to 45, who were subject to the arms, organization, and discipline established by Congress. From 1792, the arms included:

provide himself with a good musket or firelock, a sufficient bayonet and belt, two spare flints, and a knapsack, a pouch, with a box therein, to contain not less than twenty four cartridges, suited to the bore of his musket or firelock, each cartridge to contain a proper quantity of powder and ball; or with a good rifle, knapsack, shot-pouch, and powder-horn, twenty balls suited to the bore of his rifle, and a quarter of a pound of powder; and shall appear so armed, accoutred and provided, when called out to exercise or into service, except, that when called out on company days to exercise only, he may appear without a knapsack.

The federal militia laws had largely been nullified by the various States in the 1850s; and the common militia musters no longer enforced in favor of further organizing the uniformed volunteer companies...

In Florida, you could not vote unless enrolled in the State militia, of which their were 20 regiments by 1861. There were some uniformed "volunteer" militia companies, but many of these were the first to enlist into Confederate service. The "beat" or common companies were poorly organized, but they did have officers, etc., and State law did not dictate any uniform for enlisted men. The military mobilization of volunteers for Confederate service, and the draft after 1862 removed most of the military aged men 18-45 from the militia; so the late-war home-guard companies in the Sunshine State were mostly boys and older men. It should be noted that during the War of 1812, and during the Seminole Wars, units of militia "exempts" were occasionally formed and recognized by their States, and/or mustered into federal service... being made up of men over 45 or otherwise not able-bodied.
In late 1864 Governor Milton of Florida attempted to reorganize the Militia of Florida by recognizing the various home-guard companies (even though they were not organized per the legal militia organization on the books; and with men and boys outside the age limits). The State modified the law to allow for this to a degree, and some of these companies saw action at the battle of Natural Bridge, etc.

During both World Wars, the States of the USA all organized volunteer home-guards, called particularly "state guards" during World War 2 to distinguish them from the "National Guards" of their States.

J. Marshall,
Hernando, FL.
 
Here is samples of the cloth made in northern mills for the "southern market" viz., principally for slave clothing. These samples are from Hazard's mills in Rhode Island. Sometimes called "negro kerseys." Soldier's clothing in the period was also made of coarse, twilled kersey. The Texas Republic's agents likely bought similar goods from the merchants for the Texas Republic's military clothing.

View attachment 410052
Most definitely. Bruce Marshall, Uniforms of the Republic of Texas and the Men who wore them (Atglen PA: Schiffer, 1999) has several shipping lists and returns or other documents about the uniform materials, footwear, headwear, clothing, etc. imported by the Lone Star republic for use in uniforms, and a copy of the republic's regulations and so on.
Thanks for the samples or swatches!

It was once supposed that the New Orleans Grays who came to Texas during the revolution were using U.S. gray fatigue uniforms, since they managed to convince some Tsalagi/Cherokee that they were U.S. regulars. It is now understood that they simply bought work clothes at the equivalent of an "outfitters" in New Orleans. This type of gray jean was the common attire for slaves and roughnecks along the Mississippi, "mechanics" and other workers.
 
Bruce Marshall, Uniforms of the Republic of Texas and the Men who wore them (Atglen PA: Schiffer, 1999) is probably the best resource for Republic of Texas uniforms. The 24 full color uniform plates painted by Bruce Marshall are nice and the text with the uniform plates helpful. The book is well documented.
Texas.png


There are a few other sources and a few uniform plates most of which seem to support Bruce Marshall.
 
Philip Haythornwaite covers the uniforms of the Republic of Texas in World Uniforms and Battles 1815-50. with a single full color uniform plate showing three men. There is also a short text. Michael Chappell was considered a leading uniform artist at the time this book was published and his rendering of the Republic of Texas uniforms is well done.

texas 2.png


The uniform plate for the Republic of Texas was used for the dust cover. Love the pistol of the soldier on the right.
 
Thank you very much @major bill
Unfortunately, the regulations go to incredible detail about officer’s uniforms, but remain rather vague on those of NCOs and enlisted ranks. And there are no clear images or surviving uniforms, just a handful of relics and a range of shipping manifests and merchant sales records showing who made what and shipped it to Texas.

Bruce Marshall does have several illustrations, many of them open to interpretation and so on. He does use an illustration that portrays a Texas infantryman in a Model 1833 so0called “hog killer” that has a tin or white-metal lone star as a cap badge. There would have been arm-of-service-color buttons on the chin-strap as well: white metal for infantry, brass/yellow metal for everything else. The dress uniform was mighty snazzy, with a dark blue single-breasted tail coat with ten buttons and a stand collar that could be clasped closed at the front. It had white worsted loops, and a white worsted star on each tail, which fell to within three inches of the bend of the knee. There was a leather shako that had a star-burst and lone star badge. The letter of the company was supposed to be in the middle of the star. Underneath the badge, there was supposed to be the number of the regiment. There was a white tuft or pompom or toorie but a larger plume for officers. The trousers were matching dark blue with white worsted stripe down the sides. Corporals had chevrons below the elbow, sergeants had them above the elbow. One epaulette and one shoulder scale for officers, with captains and lieutenants differentiated by what side it was on… Nothing confusing there… Oh, and NCOs had red sashes, as did officers. Just to be different or Texan or whatever, the knot was apparently on the right for Texans, while literally every other part of the world it is on the left?
 
<snip>

the leather forage cap of the army (I have never seen a period reference to them as "hog-killer" and suspect it is a reenactorism), was just a copy of the common sporting caps of the period. Here is an 1832 hatter's ad image showing the style. Often called a "morocco cap" or "gig top" etc.
View attachment 410050

Here's a chap wearing one in 1831, a year before the US army adopted the type for a forage cap.
View attachment 410051


James Marshall,
Hernando, FL.
Edgar M. Howell and Donald E. Kloster, United States Army Headgear to 1854, Vol. I (Washington DC: Smithsonian Institution, 1969), p. 36 "Leather Forage Cap, 1833-1839":

"No reasons are known for this rather radical change in style of the forage cap--adopted in pattern form in mid-1832 for both the officers and enlisted men of the infantry and artillery--ecept for repeated complaints regarding the practicability of the old pattern. There is no known foreign influence in this instance. ... "
NM.0033959.jpg

In the course of researching the leather forage cap (aka. "hog killer" or whatever, possibly a modern term), and thanks to the internet and availability of digitized images, I was able to look into a hunch I had about a type of Scandinavian hunting cap known in Swedish as a "kaskett." Unhelpfully, some of the descriptions use date ranges like "1830-1860" for some of these hats. One is supposedly from 1815, however. The accession dates are all from the 20th century. So either the "kaskett" influenced the folding leather forage cap, or I've got it the wrong way round, and the only people who thought it was a practical hat were Scandinavian farmers and seal hunters? I think these images are all copyright protected, but they should be watermarked.

NM.0111478.jpg
NM.0105463.jpg
 
Back
Top