Ok here is a question posed to our very astute cw historians cs patterns

[csuniforms]

OK-- This is a question that has vexed me for years... In June of 1861 the Confederate Quartermaster issued a set of CS uniform regulations. In September of 1861 a book of lithographs were printed detailing this uniform and a set of patterns were included in the back of the book. As the War went on-- Depots were established in different parts of the Confederacy where jackets of "different patterns" were produced by the different Depots-- to the point whereas today, we refer to them as RICHMOND DEPOT-- COLUMBUS DEPOT--etc. THE QUESTION--

WHY DID THE QUARTERMASTER DEPARTMENT OF THE CONFEDERACY "NOT" ISSUE AN ORDER TO USE THE "SAME PATTERN" FOR PRODUCTION IN ALL THE DEPOTS? A CONFEDERATE ARMY PATTERN ADOPTED. A SYSTEM SIMILAR AS WAS USED BY THE FEDERAL ARMY, IE PATTERNED FROCK COATS--BLOUSES--JACKETS?

I never understood this and was wondering if someone out there had a letter or QM correspondence as to why an official CS Army pattern was not issued...???

CSuniforms
TOM ARLISKAS

[Archie R. Lib]

Hey Tom. I'm sure there are those who know more about this than I and will chime in, but the answer seems to be pretty simple I think.

The Confederacy had better things to do. They needed to procure armament, try to create consensus out of a congolmeration of states suspicious of any move towards centralization, and had to deal with almost immediate territorial, campaign and strategic issues that really saw no let up for 4 years. The Federal government was in a much better position both economically, industrially and politically (with a much more accepted centralized approach) to enforce more strict uniform regulations, and could probably turn away or refuse non-compliant products if necessary. Event then, though, remember that there were several "variations" even in just the US fatigue blouses (ex - Cincinnati, Schuykill, Martin contract, etc.), plus various "State" jackets that were not exactly in line with the Federal regulations except by virtue of their color.

But anyway, I honestly believe the Confederacy was happy to be getting ANY uniform items from all their various available sources as long as there was some semblance of uniformity (namely, the color). Trying to enforce uniformity would have been akin to herding cats. I think the Quartermaster Dept was busy enough just focusing their energy and efforts on foodstuffs, accoutrement and arms for the armies in the fields. Trying to force regulation everywhere would have deflected energies best used for more important and critical supplies.

Just my 2 cents. Keep your powder dry.

[csuniforms]

Dear Rich-- that is what I thought too! Then in researching the operations of the CS QM Dept.-- they had a very good system in place for moving QM goods all over the South in areas not occupied by the Federals... The printing and distribution of "A PATTERNED JACKET" would have been very easy--- even a written descripiton of one detailing number of buttons, facings, etc. was never found...and could be sent by mail or courier very easily... but was not!!??

CSuniform
Tom Arliskas

[Archie R. Lib]

Yes I see what you mean. It seems simple. But if they had done that, well, there would still be the matter of enforcing the uniformity regulation somehow. And that would mean they would have to institute some kind of overall quality control or inspective mechanism...To them this probably just meant more manpower taken away from operational components of the war effort.

Your point is totally valid. I think these were probably things they thought of or considered, but I also think they were energies and efforts they honestly may have felt better used or prioritized elsewhere. Especially as the war entered its second or third year. They would be happy to take whatever the commutation system would offer, or that the depots could crank out (in whatever configuration) to keep their soldiers clothed and fighting. They could provide the raw materials and then distribute what they could as they could.

R

[floridawar]

Hello, Mr. Arliskas,

As noted, the CS Army published a pattern for the uniform tunic in '61, and in late '62 legislated that all CS troops, volunteer included, would recieve uniforms from the CS Army, but on the same day in Oct. 62 that the latter law took effect, another was passed which stated in part that the CS govt. "clothing required to be furnished to the troops of the provisional army under any existing law may be of such kind, as to color and quality, as it may be practicable to obtain, any law to the contrary notwithstanding." and which I interpret to mean the uniform regulations were thus negated as reqarded issued clothing. Regarding why so many CS Govt. jacket patterns... I would suspect that the CS Govt. simply "nationalized" local production with a minimum of interference. In Harold Wilson's "Confederate Industry" p. 99 he notes that QMG A.R. Lawton in December, '63 ordered the standardization of patterns for jackets regarding sizes, etc. to reduce waste in cutting, etc. etc.
Regarding the whole issue, I understand the depot designations are modern ones, developed by Les Jensen in order to establish a provenance for existing originals rather than completely define the details of CS QM production. Though we put a great deal of importance on them, the differences between the CS depot patterns are cosmetic; they are essentially the same; a gray (or whatever color) jacket. This is how the CS Govt. considered them, as no matter what region they were made in, or depot issued through, or troops by which worn, the Govt. considered them only, "jackets" and issued an recorded at a set value against the allowances of the men; and any other bureaucratic issues regarding their details of pattern or trimmings were not necessarilly of first importance. I've looked through lots of clothing reciepts from military records of Confederate units, and was frustrated by the lack of detail regarding the notices of issued "jackets" until I realized the details I was interested in were not important to the CS Quartermasters!
In "Ploughshares into Swords" by Frank Vandiver, p. 73, it is noted by Gorgas that President Davis early on in the war dictated by "practical sagacity" gave the following notice regarding the importance of the various bureaus:
"for the infantry, men must first be fed, next armed, and even clothing must follow these; for if they are fed and have arms they can fight." So from the top down, the Subsistence and Ordnance departments had full sway, and the QM, as regards clothing, was considered of last importance.

cheers,

ARchie Marshall
Buzzard Club
Tampa Bay, East Florida

[David Fox]

To merely augment that which has been set out above, adding a twist in emphasis: The idea of uniformly uniforming a newly created Confederate army was proposed and acted upon in peacetime, relatively and in fact. The resultant dress regulations came out before Bull Run. The intended beneficiaries were initially to be the tiny regular Confederate Army. Then things rather got out of hand....

[rake]

A bit more to add - while the drawing in the back looks like a pattern - it is not. It is a tailor's plate, which is a different thing. The tailor' plate gives an idea as to the shapes of the parts of the pattern, but the scale between the pieces in not consistent.

When I first started in the hobby, I had access to some projection equipment, and thus blew up the tailor's plate to my size, thinking it was a pattern. The parts of the jacket (which I took from the frock illustration) did not fit together.

My current patterns are based on the plate, but I had to size each piece individually, to get the size 1, 2, 3, and 4 dimensions to be correct.

After that, it turned out OK

csofficer.jpg

[csuniforms]

Very Good-- I never considered the October 62' order stating any jacket will do--- and so why even send out patterns if anything will do was in effect! QM Lawton did try to bring back blue trousers in 1864 and that was a bust--- stating "gray was better"-- I did remember hearing that somewhere patterns were given out to the women working for the Depots-- but just where right now I will have to look up--

Thank You for your input and I have to agree with all of you that pattern consideration took a very low priority in the QM Department

CSuniforms
Tom Arliskas

[Curt Schmidt]

Hallo!

Just an aside...

I think at times we suffer in History from having the result or the effect, but not always the casue. So, we are forced, in the absence of known documentation to infer backwards.

One possible inference is that we might be looking at a "states' rights" kind of thing going on where a large centralized national army was not only not desired or wanted but with a vision that the war would be quickly over the Central Government was not that keen on spending limited money and resources to amass warehouses of military goods.
And by the end of 1861 rolled around, followed by the campaigns and battles of 1862 that changed the commutation system to the depot system, things had changed too much for the "perfect ideal" of essentially an Austrian looking national and states' armies.

Curt

[floridawar]

--- and so why even send out patterns if anything will do was in effect!

Howdy, Mr. Arliskas & associates;

The statement in "Confederate Industry" suggests lawton sent out patterns in various sizes to reduce waste in cutting government cloth, and not to produce a uniform standard. This may have referred to the pattern layout, with the pieces designed to fit a certain way in cutting to reduce the resulting scrap to the smallest possible. Example pattern layouts can be found here: from Compaing/Devere, 1856;
http://hearth.library.cornell.edu/cg...ge=root;size=s
Researching the authors source in "Confederate Industry" might clarify what information Lawton sent the Qtr. masters as regards patterns, layouts, etc.. Perhaps he simply sent a layout like that seen in the attached link... Regardless, there were ALOT of tailor's drafting systems in use during the period, and as noted by persons unnamed more familiar with the subject than myself, the regional differences in uniform garment patterns (north or south) likely have something to do with which system the consulting tailor employed. A few of these systems have been reprinted by R.L. Shep in recent years, and most include roundabout jackets, etc. A potential problem develops in using pattern alone to define a provenance. Lately, I notice Fred Adolphus has located a provenanced CS jacket which he believes is certainly a Trans-Mississippi product, but which bears pattern details similar to Mr. Jensen's "Charleston" Depot type. I'm under the impression that such shared details are not in themselves indicitive of a common production, as two competent tailors using the same system hundreds of miles apart could hypothetically have produced similar detail to a pattern. For example, I notice that Devere's 1866 reprint by Shep includes a draft for British Army tunics or jackets, which includes the same details Jensen ascribes to the Atlanta/Charleston jackets, as regards the collar etc.

cheers,

J. Marshall