NF New Confederate uniform book 'Never In Rags'

Non-Fiction
One of my favorite pictures and it's been posted on other threads but clearly shows these men were not in rags at the end
5321900031_06d31b8098_o.jpg
 
if one read the official records about the gettysburg campaign, there are of mentions of Union soldiers without shoes before the battle.
Some units simply where close to the date where they should be issued news shoes. then the campagin started at it was not done. So they wore out...

Mentions of CSA soldiers without shoes don't show up until during the retreat.
(but they got plenty of issues with lack of horse shoes, and the artillery are loosing horses to this even before the battle)

This was not because the two sides did not have shoes... but it was a logistical issue where the armies was simply not able to issue them when the armies was in the field and marching daily.
 
Shoes wear out quickly on campaign. Both Confederate and Union soldiers at time wore worn out shoes or even went barefoot. This is particularly true because of the poor quality of some Confederate shoes. How often do we hear of poor barefoot Union soldiers? Yet some Union soldiers went barefoot . Much of this ragged, barefoot Confederates is over stated.
Well said. US troops were often sans shoes as the shoes of the era wore out very quickly when compared to modern shoes. The men of the era were also often used to going without shoes across the summer & men of the Deep South sometimes went sans shoes all year long.

The western troops of 1864 after Nashville have been mentioned. Hood was at the end of a very long supply line and the QM of the western CS was considerably less effective, or competent, than their ANV counterparts. Hoods army after Nashville was in full retreat with their logistical base a wreck or running away ahead of the men who needed new shoes, jackets etc. But all in all throughout that campaign CS soldiers were not barefoot or in rags.
 
Getting clothing to soldiers who need it is an age old problem that still pips up in modern wars. My unit was in the desert for less that 5 months, yet our uniforns were going quickly. One of my soldiers had the soles come off his boots. If we did not have duck tape me would have been barefoot. I probably would not allowed this to occur and would have some how found a civilian shoe store that carried size 13EEE shoes. We were not going to get boots in that size from any army depot.
 
Oh Lord......................

LOL................

Looking at some of these post, it is clear the "yankee" history is......

The union army was......

Outnumbered
under supplied with food, clothes and arms
Their horses were thin as fence rails
Oh woe is me.......................


What about all those 1,000's of letters complaining of no shoes, or blankets, or tents ?

What of those letters from Union civilians speaking of "those ragged, dirty, shoe less rebels" ?

Ahhhhhhhhh thats right.............Let's just sweep them to the side, under the rug, and out of sight..........lol

If the Confederate Soldier was well supplied, let's put the true reason it was.......

Good old Uncle Sam............The yankee solder's and generals had a very hard time keeping control of their supplies, for some reason their supplies (food, clothing, arms) just could not retreat as fast as the soldiers could.

Now with all fun aside........

Was every Confederate soldier under supplied? shoe less? or arm less?.....................No.............But let's not LIE and make the Confederate armies the grandest, most well supplied armies in history.........


Respectfully,
William
Justice is Blind.JPG
 
Strangely though, all photographs of confederate soldiers, just caught and / or dead, show 99% of the shoes, something does not come back. Surely during the retreats or the end of a long military campaign the soldiers were not in the best conditions of clothing, equipment, and shoes, but I'm sure the same thing happened to unionist soldiers coming back from a long campaign. Surely the boys in blue had a higher frequency of spare parts.
 
Getting clothing to soldiers who need it is an age old problem that still pips up in modern wars. My unit was in the desert for less that 5 months, yet our uniforns were going quickly. One of my soldiers had the soles come off his boots. If we did not have duck tape me would have been barefoot. I probably would not allowed this to occur and would have some how found a civilian shoe store that carried size 13EEE shoes. We were not going to get boots in that size from any army depot.

thumbsup.gif
thumbsup.gif
thumbsup.gif
thumbsup.gif
thumbsup.gif


Even in today's conflicts boots don't last long.

I remember one seven day mission where our uniforms were literally torn to shreds by the terrain we were going through. We were dam near naked when we extracted.

Combat adds wear and tear to uniforms.
 
Oh Lord......................

LOL................

Looking at some of these post, it is clear the "yankee" history is......

The union army was......

Outnumbered
under supplied with food, clothes and arms
Their horses were thin as fence rails
Oh woe is me.......................


What about all those 1,000's of letters complaining of no shoes, or blankets, or tents ?

What of those letters from Union civilians speaking of "those ragged, dirty, shoe less rebels" ?

Ahhhhhhhhh thats right.............Let's just sweep them to the side, under the rug, and out of sight..........lol

If the Confederate Soldier was well supplied, let's put the true reason it was.......

Good old Uncle Sam............The yankee solder's and generals had a very hard time keeping control of their supplies, for some reason their supplies (food, clothing, arms) just could not retreat as fast as the soldiers could.

Now with all fun aside........

Was every Confederate soldier under supplied? shoe less? or arm less?.....................No.............But let's not LIE and make the Confederate armies the grandest, most well supplied armies in history.........


Respectfully,
William
View attachment 143434
I have actually read thousands of letters and diaries. Have you? I readily admit most are of US soldiers and rarely is their mention of your mythical ragged rebel with such low self respect that he would wear rags.

I have also studied every CDV I could find of soldiers in the field. When it comes to CS soldiers in the field they are usually POWs. These are pictures easily looked at on line, I expect you could use google if you were really interested in research. I'll take photo evidence & actual research over your Lost Cause approved narrative any day of the week and twice on Sunday.

Respectfully... If we're being honest you're not.
 
Oh Lord......................

LOL................

Looking at some of these post, it is clear the "yankee" history is......

The union army was......

Outnumbered
under supplied with food, clothes and arms
Their horses were thin as fence rails
Oh woe is me.......................


What about all those 1,000's of letters complaining of no shoes, or blankets, or tents ?

What of those letters from Union civilians speaking of "those ragged, dirty, shoe less rebels" ?

Ahhhhhhhhh thats right.............Let's just sweep them to the side, under the rug, and out of sight..........lol

If the Confederate Soldier was well supplied, let's put the true reason it was.......

Good old Uncle Sam............The yankee solder's and generals had a very hard time keeping control of their supplies, for some reason their supplies (food, clothing, arms) just could not retreat as fast as the soldiers could.

Now with all fun aside........

Was every Confederate soldier under supplied? shoe less? or arm less?.....................No.............But let's not LIE and make the Confederate armies the grandest, most well supplied armies in history.........


Respectfully,
William
View attachment 143434
Despite the name of the book I don't think the point being stated is that they were never in rags. They certainly were dirty, scruffy, sometimes ragged when the campaigning was rough, but not always, and not to the extent that many have made them out to be. Their appearance varied and changed over time depending on where, who, and when. I do believe it when the Rebs themselves said they were in poor condition on certain occasions, but I know they weren't in that condition all the time - they don't say that either. Nothing is being swept under the rug, just analyzing the facts to get a better idea what they looked like.
 
Despite the name of the book I don't think the point being stated is that they were never in rags. They certainly were dirty, scruffy, sometimes ragged when the campaigning was rough, but not always, and not to the extent that many have made them out to be. Their appearance varied and changed over time depending on where, who, and when. I do believe it when the Rebs themselves said they were in poor condition on certain occasions, but I know they weren't in that condition all the time - they don't say that either. Nothing is being swept under the rug, just analyzing the facts to get a better idea what they looked like.
Shhh, how dare you use reason and research.

Had the ragged barefoot rebel have been the norm instead of the exception pictures of him would have been plastered all over by US newspapers. But the ragged rebel mythos doesn't really get started until the Lost Cause narrative got going. Now we have Lost Cause idolizers trying to keep the myth alive. The only way to do that is to lie to themselves and everyone else. But they do it "respectfully" to hide behind a pretense of honesty and integrity.

The reality is the CS made Herculean efforts to arm, equip & clothe the men on the sharp end. They were hampered by the inept & the corrupt.
 
Despite the name of the book I don't think the point being stated is that they were never in rags. They certainly were dirty, scruffy, sometimes ragged when the campaigning was rough, but not always, and not to the extent that many have made them out to be. Their appearance varied and changed over time depending on where, who, and when. I do believe it when the Rebs themselves said they were in poor condition on certain occasions, but I know they weren't in that condition all the time - they don't say that either. Nothing is being swept under the rug, just analyzing the facts to get a better idea what they looked like.


Oh I totally agree that ALL Confederate soldiers were not in ragged, rugged, dirty condition, nor were they all hungry, shoe less, or inadequately armed. That just was not so, but it appears that some, and the title wish to portray that it was a very, very few. It was not all of them at anytime, it was not some of them all the time, but it was much more than a "few" and more often they did without, than they did not.

Campaigning, weather, and the everyday wear and tare always has an effect on the physical condition of the soldier, the clothing, and the equipment. There are facts that show Confederate Regiments receiving a full allotment of clothing. How long did the clothing last? How good was it's quality? How long in between the next resupply?

It seems to be a myth making, that the Confederate Soldier was well fed, well clothed, well armed, and never had any wants.........Analyzing the facts?..............All the facts or pick and choosing facts to fit an agenda?

If one wishes to say that at times, any Confederate soldier, or regiment may be well clothed and supplied, at other times, any Confederate soldier, or regiment may be in ragged worn out condition................I totally agree.............


Respectfully,
William
Burning Of Chambersburg, Pa.jpg
 
Shhh, how dare you use reason and research.

Had the ragged barefoot rebel have been the norm instead of the exception pictures of him would have been plastered all over by US newspapers. But the ragged rebel mythos doesn't really get started until the Lost Cause narrative got going. Now we have Lost Cause idolizers trying to keep the myth alive. The only way to do that is to lie to themselves and everyone else. But they do it "respectfully" to hide behind a pretense of honesty and integrity.

The reality is the CS made Herculean efforts to arm, equip & clothe the men on the sharp end. They were hampered by the inept & the corrupt.


So the letters, and reports throughout the war, and many by Union civilians of the ragged, tattered, dirty conditions of the rebel solder are all lies? :smile:

It is Liars who wish to make myths to portray their Union as..............

Outnumbered
out gunned
under supplied

So as to attempt to explain why it took them 4 long years to win the war, they should have had no problem winning.................

Respectfully,
William
Ambrose Wright.jpg
 
So the letters, and reports throughout the war, and many by Union civilians of the ragged, tattered, dirty conditions of the rebel solder are all lies? :smile:

View attachment 143485
And we got mentions in the OR of ragged, dirty and shoeless union soldiers.

Campaigning in the musketperiod was dirty and shoes and uniforms don't last that long.
This was an issue for both sides.
And much of the time, the issue was not lack of materials, but logistical and operational issues that made issuing the materials to the soldiers problematic.

When the armies was in camp you issued new clothing and shoes. It was hard to do when the army was in the field for obvious logistical reasons.. like the fact that things that can go "Bang" is more important and you wanted to limit the number of wagons your had.
 
And we got mentions in the OR of ragged, dirty and shoeless union soldiers.

Campaigning in the musketperiod was dirty and shoes and uniforms don't last that long.
This was an issue for both sides.
And much of the time, the issue was not lack of materials, but logistical and operational issues that made issuing the materials to the soldiers problematic.

When the armies was in camp you issued new clothing and shoes. It was hard to do when the army was in the field for obvious logistical reasons.. like the fact that things that can go "Bang" is more important and you wanted to limit the number of wagons your had.


Thomas,

I agree whole heartily and have never denied that Union solders also suffered, but to attempt to make like the Confederate solder was always well supplied and clothed, never in rags or under supplied, as some here attempt to do, and as the title of the books in discussion suggest "Never in rags" is just pure lies.

Respectfully,
William
Justice is Blind.JPG
 
sound like you have not read the entire topic...

(the writer made this comment -
"‘Never in Rags’ – a provocative title purposely chosen to promote discussion, debate and heated argument within the Civil War fraternity.")
 
Last edited:
sound like you have not read the entire topic...

Never in Rags...............Is what catches everyone's attention. As if, the Confederate Army was NEVER in rags..........

So Thomas........

Was the Confederate soldier always well supplied, always well clothed?

Was there at times the Confederate Soldiers was well supplied, and well clothed?

Were their times that some Confederate Soldiers were well supplied and well clothed, while at the same time some Confederate Soldiers were not well supplied or well clothed?


Respectfully,
William
Barkesdale.jpg
 
Never in Rags...............Is what catches everyone's attention. As if, the Confederate Army was NEVER in rags..........

So Thomas........


View attachment 143515
And you have still not read the whole topic.

The writer don't claim that they where "never in rags".
It is just the title of a book. A title deliberately selected to provoke... as he told us in a post.
(And the title obviously work)

What he do claim is that the situation was not as bad as how you want us all to think.

In this topic he have already provided 10x the evidence of how things where than you have.
I will trust a guy who provide evidence over one who dont and just call everyone else fools and liars.
 
Oh I totally agree that ALL Confederate soldiers were not in ragged, rugged, dirty condition, nor were they all hungry, shoe less, or inadequately armed. That just was not so, but it appears that some, and the title wish to portray that it was a very, very few. It was not all of them at anytime, it was not some of them all the time, but it was much more than a "few" and more often they did without, than they did not.

Campaigning, weather, and the everyday wear and tare always has an effect on the physical condition of the soldier, the clothing, and the equipment. There are facts that show Confederate Regiments receiving a full allotment of clothing. How long did the clothing last? How good was it's quality? How long in between the next resupply?

It seems to be a myth making, that the Confederate Soldier was well fed, well clothed, well armed, and never had any wants.........Analyzing the facts?..............All the facts or pick and choosing facts to fit an agenda?

If one wishes to say that at times, any Confederate soldier, or regiment may be well clothed and supplied, at other times, any Confederate soldier, or regiment may be in ragged worn out condition................I totally agree.............


Respectfully,
William
View attachment 143461
Point is they were better uniformed than is commonly thought. Yes, there are accounts of Confederate soldiers ragged, shoeless, etc., but there are also accounts, records, reports, that suggest they were relatively well supplied - no, not always, but better than is widely believed. In the later stages of the war they were in fact better uniformed than ever before, with clothing depots in the East and West, imported uniforms and cloth being shipped in. I don't think the argument made by the OP is so much that they didn't ever get dirty, ragged and torn, but more so that they were sufficiently supplied by the systems in place.

We should keep in mind that "well uniformed" can mean several things: 1) clean, not ragged and dirty; 2) sufficiently supplied with clothing; 3) same color and cut.

1) Could vary depending on who, when and where, but certainly not always dirty and ragged. 2) As the war progressed they were better supplied by the depot system. 3) Depends on who, when, where, but not really until late in the war; the ANV was (finally) largely uniformed in cadet gray by war's end.
 
Back
Top