Unidentified armed Union soldier wearing fur hat

United States Army Headgear 185501902, Catalog of United States Army Uniforms in the Collections of the Smithsonian Institution, II:

The Winter Cap

[...] the leather forage cap [i.e. the "Model 1833 hog killer"], which replaced [the 1825 pinwheel chacko] it in 1833 (replaced by another pattern in 1839), had in the dragoon model (but not that for other troops) a flap in the rear, which could be let down some 6 inches to protect the neck. All troops were prescribed a band of fur to be attached to the bottom and tied in front. [...] Just prior to the Civil War General W. S. Harney's winter campaign in the Oregon and Washington Territories and the Mormon Expedition brought some relief in the form of "great coats with capotes or hoods and "caps with ear pieces (old pattern forage or last pattern cap)." ...

1. The hat in question is not a piece of regulation headgear. It is either a civilian hunting type of cap or fur hat, or a militia cap for winter duty of some kind. My sense is it is a form of fur cap like the "seal caps" of the New Orleans Greys in the Texas Revolution, or something akin to the Alabama "raccoon roughs" volunteers.
2. The hunting shirt, or pull-over shirt is of a piece with known Civil War militia, irregular, guerrilla, bushwhacker type over shirts. In this case, I would think that a careful, meticulous examination might find similar if not identical hunting shirts in period photos. For instance, photos from the same collection of mobilized militia/ volunteers wearing Corsican-style caps under a tri-corn felt hat appear to be from the same unit.
3. The single-action, cap-and-ball revolver, side knife or dagger, and front pockets of the overshirt with a watch in one side, and a cloth handkerchief in the other appear to be items from the period of the early Civil War.
4. The cravat, or bow-tie and shirt appear to be from the early Civil War-era.
5. The overall style of the photo, and the fact that it appears in the collection of Civil War photos, or more exactly ambrotypes from the LoC collection, militate it being a Civil War-era militia or volunteer.

So: 1) what evidence is there of it being a Union volunteer vs. a Secessionist?
2) Can the hunting shirt be narrowed down to one or another group of militia or volunteers?
3) Are similar or even identical fur or fur-lined caps identifiable, or is this photo a "one off?"
4) The use of "1" or "1st" might help narrow it down?

Well the "1" could be an "I". Company letters on the front of head wear were common at the start of the Civil War.
 
Two more clues to help tell us what this intriguing O.P. photo is all about is the case & mat that the soldier tintype is housed in. The case is typical to the 1850 and 1860 period and the same type of hinged case was used for daguerreotype, ambrotype and tintype photos alike. Daguerreotype and ambrotype photos were glass and nearly all were placed in cases, but by 1860 both these type photo processes had ended, replaced in the war years by the cheaper and more durable tintype and paper cdvs. In 1860 these protective cases would be used solely for tintypes and by 1870 these wooden and thermoplastic cases were virtually phased out; tintypes beginning in about 1870 were then placed in paper sleeves by the photographer as would be some cdvs. Many tintypes from 1870 until their phase out in the early 1900s were sold without any sleeve at all, because as previously stated, tintypes being made of metal, were quite durable as is.


1581996979533.png



Now let's look at the mat. The mat is what is known as a stamped foil mat. Prior to 1860 the mats in these cases were always plain (i.e. smooth, if you will). 1860 marks the beginning of the stamped foil mat which lasted for no more than 10 years as all cases housing these mats as previously stated were phased out (obsolete) by 1870.

Look carefully as here are tintypes of two c.w.soldiers in cases with mats that are nearly identical to the O.P. tintype:

1581998112881.png



1581998179969.png


My conclusion: Providing the O.P. tintype and the case it currently is in are original to each other, the O.P. tintype image can definitely be dated circa 1860 - 1865.
 
I posted this photo recently in another thread but these Seminole War-era reenactors at the scene of Florida's Dade's Massacre are wearing exactly that headgear:
View attachment 347122
Actually, these sturdy older guys are wearing a mix of Model 1825 "pinwheel" or "chako" forage caps--distant ancestor of the peaked cap--and the unsightly folding shako of leather known as the Model 1833 leather forage cap or "hog killer"--as in, "that hat is so ugly I'd not wear it to a hog killing." The Texas Army is known to have used the Model 1833s after independence from Mexico. The ear flaps hunting cap or "seal skin cap" or "walking hat" did have a brim, but had folding ear flaps too. Some apparently resembled the "wheel caps" worn by mechanics and so on, others were apparently straight up Elmer Fudd hunting hats.
 
Actually, these sturdy older guys are wearing a mix of Model 1825 "pinwheel" or "chako" forage caps--distant ancestor of the peaked cap--and the unsightly folding shako of leather known as the Model 1833 leather forage cap or "hog killer"--as in, "that hat is so ugly I'd not wear it to a hog killing." The Texas Army is known to have used the Model 1833s after independence from Mexico. The ear flaps hunting cap or "seal skin cap" or "walking hat" did have a brim, but had folding ear flaps too. Some apparently resembled the "wheel caps" worn by mechanics and so on, others were apparently straight up Elmer Fudd hunting hats.
The 3rd and 4th NH Infantry went to war with “Deer Slayer” caps, almost a Sherlock Holmes affair with brims fore and aft, made of a brownish gray mystery material. The soldiers were less than satisfied, when they were brigaded with other regiments, in federal issue gear.
 
The 3rd and 4th NH Infantry went to war with “Deer Slayer” caps, almost a Sherlock Holmes affair with brims fore and aft, made of a brownish gray mystery material. The soldiers were less than satisfied, when they were brigaded with other regiments, in federal issue gear.
A little more on the New Hampshire State issue cap:

“The most distinctive part of New Hampshire's state issued uniforms was an unusual cap called a New Hampshire Cap that was similar to the unusual caps first issued but later rejected by Berdan's Sharpshooters. One New Hampshire soldier described his cap as: 'A helmet like structure of waterproof cloth with a visor before and behind, the top resembling a squash and the whole lined and padded. This was the New Hampshire cap and although it would do in a row to keep blows from the head and was good to protect the neck from rain, yet in summer it was a sweltering concern.'

The hat visors were made out of leather, while the flaps at the back were made out of the same material as the main body of the caps. The caps had leather chin straps which were fastened with a buckle. New Hampshire troops were later provided with regulation dress that had a few subtle differences from standard Union Army uniforms. Frock coats did not have piping on the cuffs or collar and the shoulders had shoulder straps with pointed ends, held in place by a small button which didn't reach quite to the collar. Source, Mine Creek Battlefield.
 
… Also very important, you should realize that the cravat of the 1860s was frequently tied very distinctlly in such a way (just as displayed in the O.P.) that the finished product showed two "bows", but only one hanging loose end, as the other end is actually formed into one of the bows. There are good videos on youtube that demonstrate the cravat tying of the 1860s. I might add that the 1860s tied cravat has a very unkempt, almost sloppy look to it which you see in all the Civil War period photos of men.
I've mentioned this before, but in the collections of the Chicago Historical Society is a round leather box containing one of Lincoln's pre-tied collar-and-tie combinations. It was hinged at the back and placed around the wearer's neck where it was secured by hooks-and-eyes! It was also permanently tied in a then-fashionable way, askew. I believe it's being worn in this famous photo of Lincoln taken around the time of his visit to Gettysburg:

th.jpg
 
Last edited:
The 3rd and 4th NH Infantry went to war with “Deer Slayer” caps, almost a Sherlock Holmes affair with brims fore and aft, made of a brownish gray mystery material. The soldiers were less than satisfied, when they were brigaded with other regiments, in federal issue gear.
I have a sneaking suspicion this is nothing but one of the variants of the notorious Whipple Caps we've discussed frequently here on the forums.
 
I have a sneaking suspicion this is nothing but one of the variants of the notorious Whipple Caps we've discussed frequently here on the forums.

I think so as well. When I get home tonight I will look in to it.
 
I have a sneaking suspicion this is nothing but one of the variants of the notorious Whipple Caps we've discussed frequently here on the forums.
I thought so as well, but there is a sketch with one of the articles (couldn’t find it again) but it does not look like the Whipple. I’ll see if I can dig it back up when I get home.
 
I thought so as well, but there is a sketch with one of the articles (couldn’t find it again) but it does not look like the Whipple. I’ll see if I can dig it back up when I get home.
I've mentioned before a really awful drawing that was unfortunately used as the basis for a now highly misleading plate allegedly showing a New Hampshire soldier in one of English author Phillip Haythornewaite's interminable books about uniforms from the 1970's; in reality it was nothing but another Whipple cap.
 
Frank Leslie's Illustrated showed the hat, but the accuracy is open to question. This is how the hat was shown in the regimental history The Third New Hampshire and All About It (published 1893). Many people see this is partly accurate. The New Hampshire Havlock Hat differed from the standard Whipple Hat in that the crown was made from six pieces. Period photographs seem to show a much different side and back visor/skirt. If the image below had the rear visor extend neared to the front visor and the sides and back of the rear visor more rounded, and the front visor shorter and more rounded, then the drawing would not be too far off. The Havelock-pattern hats for the 4th New Hampshire was made by Purinton & Ham. I would have to research if the Purinton & Ham made all the New Hampshire Havelock Hats but I think they may have.

hat w.jpg


Period photographs show a less rigid crown ""a helmet-like structure of ... waterproof cloth, with a visor before and behind resembling a squash, and the whole lined and padded."
 
I've mentioned before a really awful drawing that was unfortunately used as the basis for a now highly misleading plate allegedly showing a New Hampshire soldier in one of English author Phillip Haythornewaite's interminable books about uniforms from the 1970's; in reality it was nothing but another Whipple cap.
I loathe that book...
 
Back
Top