I would like some expert opinions....

[mdbucktail]

Having looked over quite a few pics of 1st Sgt's, in researching my impression, I have noticed quite a few who's trowsers do not have the NCO stripe. Having just been promoted to this rank I wish to keep my impression as accurate as possible. In reference to the common soldier of the Army of the Potomac. I would appreciate some expert opinions on this.
While I feel I should wear the stripe.... I am still learning and would like to hear your learned opinions.

Thank You All.

[JimConley]

Pard,
I am by no means an expert but may be able to shed light for ya. As you said, you've just been promoted. As time went by for boys in the service, the same thing would happen. Men who were enlisted privates or at a lower rank would be promoted in the field based on their ability for the position. That may be one of the reasons you have noted photos of men not wearing striped trousers. If those were the trousers issued to them, why not keep them? I'm sure that chevrons and other insignia did a fine job of noting someone of rank. Anyone else have anything to add?

[Pvt Schnapps]

As you might imagine, uniform regulations could be unevenly enforced in the field. Here's an excerpt from The Civil War Notebook of Daniel Chisholm (W. Springer Menge and J. August Shimrak, eds., Ballantine Books, New York, 1989), that seems to indicate that chevrons were more common than the accompanying stripes:

“Saturday, Jany 14th [1864] We have special orders for every non commissioned officer to have chevrons on their arms and stripes on their pants. The quarter master hasn’t any, we have to take old blouses and make them ourselves. It is laughable to see all the boys at work with their needles. You may depend some of the stitches are long.”

[bluebellybugleboy]

sir : as stated earlier my Mr. Conley. you need to look back on who you are representing .if you are doing an impression of a certain soldier you need to look at his past . an instance is if he was given the rank when he enlisted by his peers then he would probably have the stripes down the leg . if he was an enlisted man that was given the position because of the death of a non-commission officer or the such then he probably would still have the enlisted trousers. all he has to do is sew the on the chevron's on his coat . if he isn't issued the a new coat immediatly .
If I'm not mistaken then the stripes are sewn into the trowsers . but I just heard a friend of mine say that .

[Yellowhammer]

Regarding the promotion argument, wouldn't an Orderly Sgt generally be promoted from among the existing Sgts within a company/battalion? As such, wouldn't he already have stripes on his trousers?

[JustRob]

Service branch welting was sewn into the seams of officer's trousers and cannot be added on. NCO trim, on the other hand, is sewn on top of the seam, and can be added and removed as you wish.

While this answers the question of whether it could be done, it does not answer the question of whether it was done. You see both usages in photos.

While only a hypothesis, I would agree with the line of reasoning already proffered. A newly formed unit or a parade setting would likely see more consistent use of NCO trim, while a regiment on campaign or field promotions would see less use of it.

[Yellowhammer]

Okay, we need to clear a few things up:

Rob,

You posted: "An instance is if he was given the rank when he enlisted by his peers then he would probably have the stripes down the leg . if he was an enlisted man that was given the position because of the death of a non-commission officer or the such then he probably would still have the enlisted trousers. all he has to do is sew the on the chevron's on his coat . if he isn't issued the a new coat immediatly .
If I'm not mistaken then the stripes are sewn into the trowsers . but I just heard a friend of mine say that ."

First, Privates and non-commissioned officers (Corporals and Sergeants) are all enlisted men and all wear the same pattern trousers. Rank is differentiated by Corporal's trousers having a 1/2 inch wide stripe and Sgts having a 1 1/2 inch wide stripe. However, there are no other differences between Private's, Corporal's, and Sergeant's trousers.

As I posted before, an individual promoted to Orderly Sgt would very likely already be a Sgt and therefore would already have trouser stripes. It would be an extreme situation that a private would be promoted over all the surviving corporals and sergeants in his company.

[hireddutchcutthroat]

Okay, we need to clear a few things up:

Rob,

You posted: "An instance is if he was given the rank when he enlisted by his peers then he would probably have the stripes down the leg . if he was an enlisted man that was given the position because of the death of a non-commission officer or the such then he probably would still have the enlisted trousers. all he has to do is sew the on the chevron's on his coat . if he isn't issued the a new coat immediatly .
If I'm not mistaken then the stripes are sewn into the trowsers . but I just heard a friend of mine say that ."

First, Privates and non-commissioned officers (Corporals and Sergeants) are all enlisted men and all wear the same pattern trousers. Rank is differentiated by Corporal's trousers having a 1/2 inch wide stripe and Sgts having a 1 1/2 inch wide stripe. However, there are no other differences between Private's, Corporal's, and Sergeant's trousers.

As I posted before, an individual promoted to Orderly Sgt would very likely already be a Sgt and therefore would already have trouser stripes. It would be an extreme situation that a private would be promoted over all the surviving corporals and sergeants in his company.


IMO NCO stripes are under represented in authenic Federal ranks. Unless it can be documented as not being worn by a given unit, they should be worn.

[Curt-Heinrich Schmidt]

Hallo Kameraden!

This can be a discussion like in "Gulliver's Travels" over which end of an egg is the proper one to open... ;-)

Ultimately, perhaps, this comes down to three generalizations, which may vary from unit, time, place, circumstances, and the man:

1. The Regulations being followed.
2. The Regulations being ignored.
3. Specific unit, time, place, circumstances, supply, strictness of company/regimental commanders.

Period regulations are specific. Yet, period studio and field images show sergeants and corporals with their chevrons and stripes- as well as sergeants' and corporals' positions in company formation with men not wearing either.

IMHO, beyond the above, it is hard to make a pronouncement or opinion that is "accurate" to every unit, time, place, circumstances, and man.

According to Para. 410 and 411, Reg. 73 and 79, NCO's are appointed by the commanding officer of the regiment, however company level are appointed on the recommendation of the company commanders (although as a "check," as the Colonel is advised not to oppose the recommendations of the Captains except for "manifest reasons.") Captains have the exclusive right to appoint their own 1st (Orderly) Sergeant from the Sergeants (Reg. 80).
The "merits of the candidates" are judged. Generally, a man demonstrating the desired skills, abilities, merits, and experience would be reviewed for the next most responsible rank so that the "rank and file will feel that the gate of preferment is open to them, and thus the greatest stimulus be given to meritorious conduct and ambition."

As a company commander, IMHO, it would do much damage to promote a Private to Orderly Sergeant skipping all of the more knowledgeable, experienced, and "track records" of the senior corporals and sergeants.

I also would agree, that by and large, chevrons and stripes are underepresented in certain segments of the CW Community- but over-represented ad nauseum in others.
I also freely admit, and confess, that I am lazy and do not care to hand-sew chevrons and trouser stripes on an doff, on an event/function by event/function basis where I may be a private this week, a corporal in three weeks, and a sergeant in five, and back to a private in seven. ;-) (So, I like to keep a "set" of the proper clothing as needed..) :-)

Curt-Heinrich Schmidt

[BarryDusel]

I've seen references to orders being issued reminding NCO's that they are to have chevrons,and other designations of rank attached to their uniforms. A really good example comes from the orderly books for the 53rd Pa Infantry.Although, this is dated for May 1864 and we know what that month did to the US 2nd Corps.So I'd suspect they are making new NCO's daily. As was touched upon earlier, campaign would dictate a different situation then garrison, etc.Anyway, As this discussion speaks to trowser stripes I would also like to touch on the subject of some soldiers having trowser designation but no chevrons. There is a CDV of 4 members of the 1st PA Reserves, B Coy. taken in 1864. This CDV is at Carlisle BTW in the collection.

[ThehosGendar]

In Joe Bilby's Remember You Are Jerseymen (that, of course, I can't find right now), there's an image of three corporals from the First New Jersey Brigade outside of Trenton in summer of 1863. Only one of the group is dressed according to regulations, with stripes on the coat and trousers. One corporal is wearing chevrons with no trouser stripes, and the other is wearing trouser stripes but no chevrons on his coat. To make things even more interesting, two of the men are wearing knapsacks without rolls, and the other is wearing a groundcloth over his shoulder as a very deflated blanket roll.