Bandana as Headgear

[Fred Adolphus]

I have been studying a Gilbert Gual lithograph that depicts a Confederate soldier wearing a red bandana as a hat (ala Aunt Jemima). Thomas Arliskas pointed this feature out in a description of Confederate prisoners of war. I also noticed on the film "Birth of a Nation", filmed in 1916, that a prominently featured Confederate soldier, as well as numerous extras, wore bandanas as headgear. Many black field hands are depicted in contemporary photos with bandanas, as well. I have never seen a reenactor wearing a bandana, however. I wonder if this might be virgin territory for some pioneering living historians? It certainly seems authentic and documentable!
Thoughts? Comments?
Sincerely,
Fred
P3

[HOG.EYE.MAN]

I normally wear mine round the neck but sometimes i soak it in water and tie it round my head on hot days.

Is this still a common practice out there?

:sick:

[pbhatfield]

I remember hearing among 'hard cores' and other such n'yer do wells for years that the red bandana was not a period item, and have witnessed dozens of campaigners literally laughing out loud at guys showing up at events with those on. However, apparently, someone forgot to check the original sources.

On the other hand, I doubt that everyone had one on either in most regiments. Another point to ponder is that the modern 'bandanas' or 'do rags' may not contain the same kind of designs, and are probably ironed into the fabric whereas the originals may have been woven. I am not expert in this area, but the thought crossed my mind to mention it before everyone runs out to Wal Mart and shows up with bright red hankys on their head at the next campaigner event...cheers all.

[JacobReichwein]

I think it's entirely understandable, however those neon colored ones that are 'made in China' are obviously not the ones they had. Is there any way you could get that photo on here for us?

[Joe Walker]

Fred-

I remember the paintings, as well as one from a cyclorama of the Nashville battle depicting Union men wearing them. I seem to remember there may be a union soldier in the Atlanta cyclorama wearing one. These were large handkerchief type cloths that could have doubled for bandages, face cloths, sweat bands as well as "head covers". The "bandanna" may be a western or mexican term. The wearing of these seems entirely plausable. If you recall, the officer from Co E of the 4th Texas was shot dead (and is still buried there) in the Devil's den after wetting a white one in the creek and wrapping it around his head.

Joe Walker









Joe Walker











.

[sam.p]

I also would like to see a photo of the Gilbert Gual lithograph. Along those lines, John Pelham once wore a red and blue necktie (regimental Grenadier Guards) around his hat. It had been given to him temporarily from a visiting Englishman (a Captain Phillips). Reference Jeb Stuart the Last Cavalier by Burke Davis. Let's see if anyone now shows up wearing ties around their hats.

Cordially,
Sam Patterson

[Charles Heath]

There's also a nice account of a rather well known federal officer at Antietam donning a bandana or handkerchief as headgear. Wish I could remember which.

One of my prize reenacting possessions is a linen handkerchief from Chris Utley, and it gets a workout in hot weather, and it came in very handy at last year's 1857 Ohio Camping Trip event. Come to think of it, I'm starting to get the idea the WIG is concerned about my personal grooming, as I get a handkerchief from a box from home at one event, some soap at another, and the greatest joke of all was a nice comb at Fort Granger, but I digress. Okay, if you insist -- how about some kindly Lilac Vegetal, or some brutish Bay Rum?

Phil, I'm trying to remember the three things that zapped the modern bandanas. One was the style of print, the second was the size (evidently the modern ones are too small), but cannot recall the third strike. In any case, a good rag is a fine thing to have in the field.

[FranklinGuardsNYSM]

There's also a nice account of a rather well known federal officer at Antietam donning a bandana or handkerchief as headgear. Wish I could remember which.

Likely Edward Cross, of the 5th NH, and his famous "this is my last event" premonition prior to the Wheatfield, in which his usual red one was replaced with a black one.

[DJCasey]

Likely Edward Cross, of the 5th NH, and his famous "this is my last event" premonition prior to the Wheatfield, in which his usual red one was replaced with a black one.


Cross was wounded in the head at Anteitam attacking the Bloody Lane, which is why he donned the red bandana. After that he adopted it as his "war paint," wrapping his head in a red bandana again at Fredericksburg attacking Mayre's Heights, where he was again severly wounded, and Gettysburg in the Wheatfield, where he was killed.

[Hardtack Baker]

Hello,
The subject of handkerchiefs is very interesting. My sister's sister-in-law in Colorado is a collector and does talks on the subject. I will consult her further about the Civil War era, which she includes in her talks. However, to add a bit to the discussion, I'm reading parts of a book she gave me, "Handkerchiefs: A Two Hundred Year History"... (I attempted to send this through last night, but had trouble. If repeated, please remove. Thanks for your patience with an avid civilian newcomer.)
The source states that kerchiefs appeared in Europe around the middle of the seventeenth century, but popularity did not increase until the late eighteenth century. English printed kerchiefs dominated in America's early days. There were a number of reasons. Textile printing was complicated and expensive. It required technical skill, sophisticated technology, and large amounts of capital, all of which were lacking in America before 1800.
Also, England, tyrants that they were, tried to monopolize and protect their corner on the market. As late as 1782 an English statute prohibited the export of "any blocks, plates, engines, tools, or utensils used in, or which are proper for preparing or finishing of the calico, cotton, muslin, or linen printing manufactures, or any part thereof." But, determined Americans got around the rules.
John Hewson, an early immigrant and friend of Benjamin Franklin, risked the penalties of fines and prison to set up a textile business in 1774, and advertised in Franklin's "Pennsylvania Gazette" among is other goods, "patterns for printing handkerchiefs." Hewson joined the Pennsylvania militia in the Revolutionary war, was taken prisoner by the British in 1778, and had his printing equipment destroyed. He escaped a few months later and continued in the business until his death in 1810. This makes me appreciate the sacrifice of early civilians. (Hewson is attributed with printing the earliest known kerchief in our country with an American theme or pattern...it was a block print of George Washington riding on a horse and carrying a sword in his right hand. circa 1775. Who knew the lofty aspirations of the lowly handkerchief!)
Fast forward to the mid 1800's. As cotton production increased and lent to inexpensive cotton cloth, technology such as the cotton jenny (allowing one person to operate eight spindles at once), the cotton gin, a water powered spinning frame, other industrial espionage matched the explosion. Earlier, Secretary of the Treasury Alexander Hamilton and assistant secretary Tench Coxe saw how this would give America economic independence. They organized the American Manufacturing Society, and attempted to learn Europe's secrets. They even offered financial rewards for people to bring and set up the technology here.
As far as handkerchiefs, the earliest were printed with wooden blocks. By the 1850's copper engraved plates were preferred. The image or design was carved or incised into the particular block. Copper plate printing had the advantage of sharper, more detailed images. They were more durable than wood blocks, too.
Despite the revolutionary process of copper cylinders to print textiles, handkerchiefs continued to be printed by the traditional means of wood block and copper engraved plates. Early handkerchiefs were in monochrome...either red, blue, or brown. The most common dyes were made of madder, quercitron bark (that's black oak), and indigo. Brighter aniline dyes were experimented with in the 1830's and really replaced the older dyes after 1856.
Handkerchiefs were printed mainly by women and children. They roller inked the block or plate (mounted to wood, I assume), pressed it on the piece of cloth by hitting the back a couple of times with a mallet. By this means they were still mass produced. Printed kerchiefs, with designs or actual scenes, coincided with the revolutionary beginnings of our country, as well as the rise of the textile industry. America and textiles shared an intimate connection, reflected in the numerous patriotic printed kerchiefs. Noah Webster wrote: "Every engine should be employed to render people of this country national and to inspire them with the pride of national character."
As to the red handkerchiefs in question, this might be one clue as to the time frame: "Operating out of Riverpoint, Rhode Island, S.H. Greene and Sons produced the first "turkey red" handkerchiefs ever printed in the United States. In the late 1860's, according to Hillary Weiss, the company had hired the Scottish master of "turkey red," Robert Reoch, who had perfected the enormously complicated process for achieving the fiery red color." Greene and Sons had an ancestral family connection to George and Martha Washington. Later, the company of S.H. Greene and Sons advertised that it received the only medal for handkerchiefs awarded by the United States Centennial Commission. Simon Henry Greene (1799-1885) was involved in the textile business most of his long life. Greene's family had Revolutionary war heroes, his father created the second cotton mill in Rhode Island. Simon took over his partner's share of the business in 1842. In 1869 his four sons came into the partnership.
Another Company that produced and labeled turkey red handkerchiefs was Tacony Print Works of Frankford, Pennsylvania. (before the mid-1860's?) Most of this book deals with specific imagery on handkerchiefs, rather than patterned prints, as well as the field of children's handkerchiefs. So, I will try to research into the Civil War era, and contact some of these sources I know who present on the topic of handkerchiefs. Perhaps I will have more to share then that helps with the overall question of who used what specific handkerchief, how was it made, and how did it look from 1861-1865?
Thanks for your patience with the lengthy backround, which I find pretty fascinating.
Humbly, Mrs. Marie McNamara

[Fred Adolphus]

Thanks for all the replies. There are two lithographs by Gilbert Gaul that depict Confederate soldiers in bandanas. They are "Confederate Line of Battle" and "Holding the Line all Hazards". Both can be veiwed online. I couldn't figure out how to attach images on this reply.
Fred

[pbhatfield]

I have to get one of those, Marie...thank you for the detailed input! Now if we just had someone who could make us correct 'sojer hankies' ;)

[pbhatfield]

Lilac? Bay Rum? Charles, thats harsh..I am thinking, perhaps errouneously, that Yorktown Visitors Center at the battlefield park has an example of a woven 'kerchief, though I cant recall if it is from the 1850-1865 period. Sorry to be so cluttered, gang, but it may also have been the "Jeff Davis Capture site" musuem in Georgia - I drove through there once, and they had an amazing little musuem with tons of original period clothing including hankies and an early frock coat in mint condition. At any rate, I suspect that even with copper plated prints, which is an interesting idea that Marie brings up, those werent the same as our modern versions - I want to see some photos or an original.

[AZReenactor]

Nick,
Can you provide a source for these assertions, particularly regarding them being made of scraps of shirt cloth.

I'd also be curious to see the source that indicates "any square piece of cloth would do."

[RJSamp]

Nick,
Can you provide a source for these assertions, particularly regarding them being made of scraps of shirt cloth.

I'd also be curious to see the source that indicates "any square piece of cloth would do."

:bright cotton scarf: a large square of brightly colored cotton or silk cloth worn over the hair or around the neck"

Bandana
or Bandanna A pocket-handkerchief. It is an Indian word, properly applied to silk goods, but now restricted to cotton handkerchiefs having a dark ground of Turkey red or blue, with little white or yellow spots. (Hindû, bandhnu, a mode of dyeing.)

Source: Dictionary of Phrase and Fable, E. Cobham Brewer, 1894

ban·dan·na /bænˈdænə/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[ban-dan-uh] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–noun 1. a large, printed handkerchief, typically one with white spots or figures on a red or blue background.
2. any large scarf for the neck or head.

Also, ban·dan·a.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1745–55; earlier bandanno (second syll. unstressed) < Hindi bdhnū tie dyeing]
Tie Dying, as in patterned dyed shirt cloth.

Bandana's (from the Hindi, enter the lexicon about 1752) are brightly colored silk or cotton squares used around the neck or face. Calico prints in cotton were a favorite (see the 1911 Oxford Dictionary from England). Cotton shirt cloth would work just fine. Common sense alone would handle both your requests for a source and the 'assertions'. We have pictures, paintings, diary writings, dictionary entries, newspaper articles....the guys knew how to use scissors and sharp knives to cut fabric (I'll let you find a source to prove or disprove that 'assertion')....they were good judges of using canvas duck vs cotton squares over their faces on hot days with clouds of dust and marching in 3 inches of dust. (the canvas or wool or jean cloth would be uncomfortable, the cotton shirt cloth works much better). Huck towelling would be a trifle thick...as would carpet, cotton blankets, and draperies. Cotton sheets would work fine, but then again, a cotton sheet is very similar to shirt cloth is it not?

John Henry Otto "Diary of a Dutch Mudsill" writes of march dozens of miles in thick choking dust....they covered their faces with cotton cloth liberated from near to the line of march homes.....

[AZReenactor]

RJ,
Thank you posting the definitions to add to the discussion. However, I must disagree with your opinion that "common sense" should be sufficient. Aside from the fact that it really isn't all that common, there is that old problem that a great deal of reenactor "common sense" has proven to be a slippery slope too often leading to such things as flat fly porches on wall tents, wrought iron campfire implements, rendezvous chairs, canvas covered coolers, surplus army cots hidden in personal wedge tents, and sundry other reenactorisms and suppositions that have become far too rarely questioned "facts" by not being carefully examined.

While I appreciate that there may well be basis for making the assumptions that Nick put forth, I think we are still a long ways from regarding them as accurate and correct. I questioned not the possibility that Nick's information might be accurate, but rather its assertion as fact. (As I also do a California miner impression I'm particularly interested in information regarding their practices and sincerly would like to know the source regarding them.) While your definitions may prove helpful I think you are jumping ahead and connecting dots that may not result in an accurate picture in the end.

A couple thoughts to consider regarding these specific assertions. What were most shirts made from in the 1850s? How common was cotton print fabric used for shirting as compared to linen, wool flannel, or hickory cloth? Its fine to say fellows knew how to use knife or scissors but still quite a leap to say that 49ers actually actually did to cut up shirts into bandannas. How much easier and less expensive would it be to purchase kerchiefs or bandannas printed and made for that express purpose already or to make them directly from raw cotton shirting rather than from material that had already been turned into a garment. Before making the leap that "any square piece of period fabric would be correct" (would not that group also include canvas, wool, jean cloth, huck toweling, carpet, cotton blankets, draperies and even domet flannel?) I think it important to dig a little deeper and find some examples of what actually was used to make kerchiefs and bandannas.

My issue is not with kerchiefs or bandannas. They were certainly much more common and necessary items in an era before Kleenex and paper towels. The utility of these everyday items is well established and I have and still do utilize them in the field. (My favorite is even constructed from printed cotton shirting material although I also like to carry a silk one on ocaision.) In the dust, sun, and heat of the southwest a good kerchief is an invaluable and even necessary item. From the history of their manufacture and production that has been shared in this thread alone, it would seem that printed hand kerchiefs were some of the earliest manufactured textile goods in America. Considering their commonness and utility how likely was it to make them from old clothing compared to being constructed for an express purpose.

My question wasn't whether a square piece of cloth is a handy item, even as apparel and head wear on occasion, but what the basis for the assertions stated as fact were. Before folks go out cutting up shirts to wear on their heads because they read on the AC that it is the new kewl thing to do, I think a little more research and investigation is worthwhile, don't you?

[Secesh]

Let us not forget that Gilbert Gaul did not serve in the War and painted his works many years after...The fact that an artist may choose to include something in his work does not make it a God-given fact. I am not saying soldiers at one time or another didn't do it, but on the other hand the photographic evidence does not show this to be a very common practice or occurrence....thanks.

[AZReenactor]

Here is a brief little article that is post war but may give some insights.

The Manufacturer & Builder Vol II, issue 4 (April 1870) Page 121 (http://0-cdl.library.cornell.edu.source.unco.edu/cgi-bin/moa/pageviewer?frames=1&coll=moa&view=50&root=%2Fmoa%2Fmanu%2Fmanu0002%2F&tif=00127.TIF&cite=http%3A%2F%2Fcdl.library.cornell.edu%2Fcgi-bin%2Fmoa%2Fmoa-cgi%3Fnotisid%3DABS1821-0002-268)

Striping Calico.

There is a style of printing, in which dischargers are employed to remove color after the cloth has been printed or dyed. These dischargers are of the nature of bleaching-powder, and chlorine or chromic acid is frequently used for the purpose. They are usually applied in the following manner: Several folds of the colored cloth are placed between metal plates, in which the pattern has been perforated, and they are then subjected to very great pressure. The discharging liquid is then applied at the top, and soaks through those portions of the stuff which are exposed by the perforations in the plates, removing the color. The other parts, protected by the immense pressure exerted, escape from the action of the discharger. In this way the well-known bandanna handkerchiefs and similar fabrics are produced.

Suspended from a curtain-rod are cans containing the coloring fluid, which passes by a funnel down into small tubes or pencils; these come in contact with the stuff, and may be regulated by the workers with the greatest nicety. After the striped pattern has been printed in the first instance, it is sometimes desired to give variety to the stuff by printing bands or stripes of other colors between those it has already received. For this purpose the rentreuse, or retaking machine, as it is termed, is employed, and worked in the manner shown in our illustration.

http://lh5.google.com/azreenactor/RxjZ7at3API/AAAAAAAACvs/DwKvcGSD2jc/Striping%20Calico.jpg?imgmax=400

These are the chief methods of applying colors in pattern to the material, but modifications are adopted for particular descriptions of stuffs. With some of the finer muslins, for instance, the colors are precipitated on to the material by the action of steam.

[VIrginia Mescher]

how was it made, and how did it look from 1861-1865?
Mrs. Marie McNamara

I recently purchased a book titled, The Useful Arts Employed in the Production of Clothing (1851)and in the cotton section there was a sub-section on bandanas. Since it was 5 pages long, I'm not including the entire transcription but only a portion and the rest is summerized.

"The term Bandana is of Indian origin, and is applied to pocket handkerchiefs of a peculiar kind, both of silk and of cotton, made in India; . . . The ground of the handkerchiefs was usually red, blue, or purple; and the pattern almost always consisted of spots, either white of yellow. The color of the handkerchiefs was uncommonly permanent and enduring."

The article continued to describe the process used to make the bandana fabric. The process was called "discharge printing." The cotton was dyed red or blue and as many as 14 pieces of fabric (12 yards each but no width was noted but after reading the size of the bandanas on the Bertrand [see below] I expect that they were 27 inches.) were stacked upon one another and put into a press. The press was a specific type where the pattern for the bandana was die-cut into the top section of the press and a bleaching solution of chlorine was allowed to flow through the holes in the press. To prevent the solution from bleeding outside the desired pattern, the press was hydrostatic press and the amount of pressure used was almost 800,000 pounds. After the chlorine was put through the fabric, water was then sent through to wash off the chlorine.

This one factory that was being described had 16 presses and made 19,200 yards of bandana fabric in a 10 hour day using only four workmen.

The fabric was shipped in pieces uncut and the purchaser could buy as many portions as he or she wished and only needed to hem the top and bottom since the sides were selvage edges.

BANDANA HANDKERCHIEF - Silk [washing silk] handkerchiefs of a plain or TWILL weave, originally made in India, but later made in England. They came in black
and prints (Encyclopedia of Domestic Economy by T. A. Webster and Mrs. Parks. 1847).


In my database Historic Accounts (1859-1861) there were a number of handkerchiefs and bandanas sold. There were 11 sales of bandana (some were multiples in one sale) and 307 sales of handkerchiefs (some were multiples in one sale.)

A silk handkerchief sold for $ .50 up to $1.00 and bandanas sold for anywhere between $ .63 and $1.25 each. Linen handkerchiefs sold for between $ 12 1/2 and $ .25 cents. Cotton ones sold for between $ .25 and $ .38. Linen cotton ones sold for $ .12 1/2 and
$ .38. Other handkerchiefs sold were pocket handkerchiefs with no specifics, cambric, worked, ladies', boys, Turkey cotton , bordered, hemstitched, black and white silk, colored cotton, fancy, small, child's colored silk, and lawn. Calico print or checked or gingham handkerchiefs were not mentioned.

On the Steamboat Bertrand (sank in 1865) were a number of pieces of bandana
fabric and handkerchiefs.

The handkerchiefs were black silk, with two selvage edges, two hemmed
edges, with dimensions of 32 1/4" by 31 1/8" inches.

The description of the fabric is from the Bertrand records. "Material -
Silk. Color - Red, white, brown. Description - Fabric has pattern of
uncut blocks of approx. 7 bandanas, pattern is of white rings with brown
except around center in diagonal rows on red background with a border
consisting of narrow faint stripe of brown, wider saw tooth edged white
stripe, 2 chain rows of ovals with dashes on them, followed by scalloped
brown edge with elongated brown dots on white background. Length - 13-14'
[entire piece of fabric with each panel measuring between 23 1/2" to 24"].
Width - 27"." [A closeup of this fabric looks like diagonal rows of
eyeballs, white with brown centers, on a red background, with a brown and
white border.]

Description of second piece of bandana fabric from Bertrand. "Material -
Silk. Color - Red and white. Description - Pattern printed on fabric is
in square sections set at 45 degree angle to grain fabric occurring 7" apart
which consist of 24 small white diamonds with red dot in center, with
diagonal rows of same diamonds occuring between square sections.
Dimensions. - Width - 27". Length - 13-14'." [This fabric was not divided
into sections as the first piece was and the pattern consisted of large
blocks made up of small white squares bunched together, with the small
squares having a red dot in the middle. Between the large composite blocks
was one small white square with a red dot in the center.]

From the [I]Charleston Daily Mercury May 2, 1854 (From Vicki Betts' newspaper database.]
"Handkerchiefs, cotton, fast colors, 32 x 30 inches, weight not less than
2 oz. each, texture 8 x 8 to 1/8 inch
Handkerchiefs, fancy silk, fast colors, 28 1/2 c 27 inches to weigh not
less than 5 oz. 140 grams per piece, texture 8 x 11 to 1/8 inch"

If I find anything else, I'll be glad to post it.

[AZReenactor]

Virginia,
Excellent information. So much better and more precise than any "old square piece of fabric will do." Thank you so much for sharing it.

[Moonshine]

Found this and some others at various estate sales here in Calif. They aren't the typical bandanna print or handkerchiefs seen. The clover leaf print is EXACTLY like the one from Union EoG. I plan on using these for a book I'm working on which shows pictures of and explains Civil War soldiers personal items. Handkerchiefs and the like are some of the things I'm trying to show. But first, I have to get other things taken care of...

Anyway, enjoy!

[VIrginia Mescher]

Found this and some others at various estate sales here in Calif. They aren't the typical bandanna print or handkerchiefs seen. The clover leaf print is EXACTLY like the one from Union EoG.
Anyway, enjoy!

Thank you for posting the images. Could you also post the dimensions when you get the chance? Also, are all four sides hemmed or are just two edges hemmed?

Thanks.

[Moonshine]

I'll check for sure this weekend on dimensions and hemmed vs. unhemmed. Others I have are hemmed on all 4 sides.

The dimensions are smaller than I thought they'd be for this particular handkerchief. One other I have is HUGE and dwarfs this one considerably.

I'll post later this weekend or next with more concrete dimensions and details.

[DougCooper]

As Virginia describes (thanks!!) if there was a standard size it was 32" on a side. Pat McDermott, an 1860's material culture guru many of us remember from days past, studied original examples and patterns, both domestic and imported, and his research identified that dimension, likely having much to do with its purpose - as a head covering. I would give much to have some of the fabulous printed reproductions he made.

[Moonshine]

The sides are sewn on 2 ends and measure 19" x 21.5".

The other(s) I have measure more around the "common" size with dimensions of 29" x 24".

BTW, none have an "Elephant" logo, "Tuside" or "ColorFast" mark on the borders.

Hope this helps!

JR

[Moonshine]

Didn't know I had 2 more photographed.

These 2 are the BIG ones!!!

[Joe Walker]

I have a Pat McDermmont handkerchef- It is silk

Joe Walker

[Prodical Reb]

Herre is a link to an original Hankerchief/bandana at the Museum in Oshkosh, WI. I was surfing thru items in the museum furnished in the link about the Iron Brigade uniforms currently on the A/C forum here.

http://www.oshkoshmuseum.org/Virtual/exhibit3/e30207b.htm

Hope you all enjoy it. Scott Cross is the Museum curator and a member here on the A/C forum. I would guess you could ask him any pertinent questions as he is a great guy!

[jchristiansen]

I remember reading in "Uniforms of the Civil War" by Philip Hawthornthwaite a description of an outlandish bandana worn by an Iowa soldier, I believe. I don't remember the exact color scheme, but it was something along the lines of a yellow neckerchief that depicted a blue steamboat steaming down a green river, billowing red smoke out the stacks. Wasn't able to locate my copy to confirm. Regardless, an interesting example of the colors and patterns that could be printed, although this is likely an exception to the norm.

On somewhat of a tangent, there's also the early war photos of the Clinch Rifles with their paisley shirts. I think those patterns were printed on.