|
Post by jagjetta on May 30, 2007 13:29:27 GMT -5
The cap in question would probably have not been the M1833 hogkiller but rather a leather version of the civilian "forage" cap... the M1839 cap.... When I started putting together my physical impression for a ranger in Hays' company I had a leather cap made up by a friend and I wore the hell out of it. It did get a bit warm in the summer but not unbearbly warm... Scott, I have no doubt that a round cap (or "wheel cap" as I so unfortunately labeled these caps in an article with pattern for Midwest Open Air Museum Magazine back int he mid 1980s) COULD be made of leather. However, in all of the original caps that I have examined, original accounts of clothing I have collected, ledgers I have purused or daguerreotypes I have scrutinized, I have not encountered any reference to a "leather" cap being worn by a North American. With such a bold statement as that, though, I know I am setting myself up for a fall! This does not include references to leather shakos, hard caps (as worn by late 18th and Federal period horsemen or the pattern of 1833 dragoon cap, though. Oilskin and painted cloth, as you well know, are not anything like leather (nor was it sold or marketed as such). It does not behave like leather. Oilskin (often referred to as "tarred" cloth in period accounts) will breathe. Painted cloth, on the other hand, is not real good for anything exposed to direct sun but is ideal for such things as floor coverings or window coverings (painted side NOT facing the sun! ) However, I will say that I have examined pre-1860 cap covers that was indeed made of painted cloth. It was stiff and cracked and not pliable, a feature of painted cloth that occurs in a matter of years, and not decades or centuries) Believe me, I certainly am not trying to nit-pick...quite the opposite! If you have reference to a leather cap being worn I would love to add it to the never-ending study of mid-19th century clothing. As an aside, I have found that references that are "recollections" written in the 1880s and 1890s tend not to be as trustworthy as ledger/diary entries. All of the hardcore Alamo students will probably vouch for that statement when they consider it in the context of Davey Crockett's "peculiar round hat" and how it emerged, in time, into a "coonskin cap". John A-g
|
|
|
Post by jagjetta on May 30, 2007 13:38:21 GMT -5
Heh-Heh!! How Darn quickly I must stand corrected! Well done, TRK! Sure-as-shootin, the reference says "BLACK LEATHER CAPS." Goll dang it. I am getting too old to be taught new tricks.
Thank you so much! The forum ROCKS as far as research goes! This is a question that could have remained open for months in the old "send a letter, receive a letter mode."
Leather caps it is! John
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on May 31, 2007 10:52:13 GMT -5
Just curious, were the collapsable forage caps worn by the army during the Second Seminole War made of leather? They look as if they were. Maybe a few of them made their way into Texas. Jim
|
|
|
Post by jagjetta on May 31, 2007 11:07:30 GMT -5
Jim, Yes, the caps you are describing were indeed made of leather (these are the "pattern of 1833" caps). It is perfectly plausible that they made their way to Texas/Mexico.
The forum is a blast! I have poked around in Seminole War histories more in the last two weeks then I have in my whole life...all a result of questions and ideas brought up on the list.
John
|
|
|
Post by TRK on May 31, 2007 11:44:04 GMT -5
If you believe the watercolors Sam Chamberlain painted (possibly during his stint with the dragoons in Mexico, or shortly thereafter), the Massachusetts Volunteers were wearing the 1833 leather caps while stationed in Monterrey in the summer of 1847. Chamberlain's book, My Confession (Texas State Historical Association edition), has at least one or two watercolors showing Mass. Vols. at a fandango, wearing gray uniforms and the aforesaid caps.
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on May 31, 2007 17:40:57 GMT -5
I paid a visit to the Dade Battlefield today and took a few pics. Take a look in the "Images" section. There was a nice display of a Seminole War era US Army uniform (made by Steve Aboldt) that includes the aforementioned forage cap.
Jim
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Jun 1, 2007 7:18:30 GMT -5
Mr. Kailbourn,
Thanks for that... I had always thought those caps looked liek the hogkillers to but wasn't sure. I thought maybe it was just my imagination!
John,
I've found that if you use silk for the cloth base to paint it remains fairly pliable as opposed to a cotton or hemp. I've seen references to the French using silk for their oilcloth shako covers and it works well in the experiments I've tried. As Mr. Kailbourn posted there are a variety of descriptions of rangers and their clothing in Mexico, these taklen with the information he recently found regarding drawing of federal issue clothing paints a very colorful picture of the MAW Texian ranging companies!
|
|
|
Post by jagjetta on Jun 1, 2007 9:09:55 GMT -5
Scott, That is great info on the silk! I had never encountered that one. Those clever French folks... John
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Jun 1, 2007 9:55:49 GMT -5
I had always thought those caps looked liek the hogkillers to but wasn't sure. If you've ever been in Monterrey from, say, April to November, I can imagine those big leather caps would also be mankillers. Gets mighty warm down there. Oh, and Scott, you can call me Tom.
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 1, 2007 11:06:44 GMT -5
While browsing on another forum, I saw these "hogkillers" referred to as "universally unpopular". There was also a comment that these caps weren't seen much after 1842. Can anyone provide any information about these comments? Granted, the hats look odd to modern eyes, but why did the soldiers dislike them? Even though their design was apparently flawed (from what I've read, they weren't really 'collpsable', as intended), surely they must have been less cumbersome than a shako. Jim
|
|
|
Post by jagjetta on Jun 1, 2007 19:29:57 GMT -5
Jim: Anecdotal references to the pattern of 1833 leather forage caps seem to be quite illusive, considering how distinct the caps must have appeared to people.
Major John Garland, the head of the Clothing Bureau in Washington did write about the cap to Callender Irvine, Commisary General of Purchases and Capt. Charles Thurston, stating that the cap was, "of leather with a patent leather visor...made with one fold at the top; the only ornament...the letter of the Company placed in front." (Garland to Thurston, 23 Apr. 1833; Garland to Irvine 10 Aug 1832, both in CLothing Bureau LS, RG92 in the National Archives. Quoted in Edgar M. Howell and Donald E. Kloster, United States Army Headgear to 1854 (Washington: Smithsonian Institution Press, 1969, p. 38).
Howell and Kloster included an illustration of Seth Eastman watercolor of a U.S. infantry soldier wearing one of these caps in Florida, ca. 1840-1841.
I went back through Bruce Marshall's book, Uniforms of the Republic of Texas, 1836-1846, and on page 8, he references an invoice in the Texas State Archives from the Texas agent in New Orleans, Thomas Toby & Bro. that indicates in July 1836, he sent four boxes containing "500 leather caps" to Galvaston and billed President Burnet for the shipment. No description of the caps is known, but very clearly indicates that they were leather.
Fascinating stuff! John A-G
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 1, 2007 19:57:24 GMT -5
John: I found this reference in Don Troiano's "Soldiers in AMerica, 1754-1865", p. 121: "Since 1833 the army had worn a collapsible leather model that the superintendent of West Point Military Academy found "most unbecoming," although he believed it had "great merit on the score of economy and durability." Other officers clearly found fault with the leather cap and numerous complaints concerning both its appearance and durability led the Secretary of War in 1839 to approve adoption of a new form proposed by Maj. Gen. Alexander Macomb." Stuart Reid speculated in his Osprey book on the Texas Army that some of the US Army "deserters" that crossed into Texas may have worn the 1833 model cap as well. In Steve Hardin's "Texian Illiad", there's a Gary Zaboly illustration on page 176 that depicts just such an incident. Jim
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Jun 7, 2007 13:57:21 GMT -5
Buck Barry, a Texas Mounted Volunteer, wrote that in the Battle of Monterrey in late Sept. 1846, the most valuable thing the U.S. Army captured was Mexican enlisted men's and officers' uniforms. The Texans were badly in want of clothing, so they appropriated the uniforms. Barry wound up with "two pairs of pants, one soldier's coat, one officer's coat, a linen shirt, and a hat." On his way home to Texas, he put on the Mexican uniform and wore it during his travels, including through New Orleans, and got lots of glances and comments. (See James Kimmins Greer, ed., Buck Barry: Texas Ranger and Frontiersman [Lincoln: University of Nebraska Press, 1978], pp. 45-46.)
Almost two years later, upon his return to Bexar from the war, Col. Jack Hays was wearing a fine coat that had been captured from Santa Anna. (Greer, Col. Jack Hays, 213-14)
A little off topic, but didn't Sam Highsmith wind up with Santa Anna's gala uniform coat, captured at San Jacinto? I seem to recall seeing a photo taken decades later of Highsmith wearing the coat.
|
|
|
Post by Jim Boylston on Jun 7, 2007 15:06:58 GMT -5
If you dig this up you have to post it! Jim
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Jun 7, 2007 19:05:42 GMT -5
Jim, there's a small, vignetted photo of Highsmith in Santa Anna's coat in the photo spread in Recollections of Early Texas: The Memoirs of John Holland Jenkins, edited by John Holmes Jenkins III (Austin: University of Texas Press, 1958). According to the credit, the photo was reprinted from Homer S. Thrall, A Pictorial History of Texas, 1879. Supposedly the coat burned up in the state capitol fire of 1881 See: www.tsha.utexas.edu/handbook/online/articles/HH/fhi11.html
|
|