|
Post by TRK on Sept 16, 2007 11:12:28 GMT -5
Woollen jackets don't figure at all (officially) although as I said its possible that they were cut down from previous issues. Recruits would have been issued either with these, or probably more likely with the canvas jackets and as I recall a stock of these was found when Bexar surrendered. Indeed, the inventory of military stores that Cos turned over to the Texans at the capitulation of Bexar (Appendix 5 in Chester Newell's History of the Revolution in Texas [1838], 207-208), lists "49 duck jackets" and "63 duck jackets" (=112 duck, or canvas, jackets total). The only other outerwear listed in the inventory was "15 coats."
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Sept 25, 2007 0:24:22 GMT -5
I've also wondered about fatigue caps. We know the Mexican Army had at least some difficulty clothing its troops, but did each one have a fine leather shako?
The only written or illustrated headgear I've seen for soldados from the 1820's until the 1840's is various shakos and the French-styled bonnet du police fatigue cap. However, Hefter seems to indicate that the "wheel cap" style of fatigue cap was worn in the 1830's, and Chartrand mentions a French account of Mexicans defending Vera Cruz in 1838 wearing white fatigue caps with red bands. I'm wondering if the latter type isn't made of canvas, and similar in appearance to what was worn by British infantry in the mid to late 1840's.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Sept 25, 2007 0:48:09 GMT -5
I've also wondered about fatigue caps. We know the Mexican Army had at least some difficulty clothing its troops, but did each one have a fine leather shako? I'm willing to be convinced about leather ones if anyone can turn up examples, but most that I know of as worn by various armies were actually felt, albeit frequently with a leather top. It was also quite common in the British army especially when serving in hot climates to wear just the shako cover stretched over a light frame of spilt bamboo; thus preserving the appearance of the shako without its weight.
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Sept 25, 2007 8:51:55 GMT -5
Stuart,
Are you questioning the existence of leather shakos? If so don't forget the 1821 US Bell Crown... pretty much everything but the appointments were made from leather.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Sept 25, 2007 9:43:04 GMT -5
Not questioning the existance of leather shakos per se. I'm obviously aware of the US 1821 pattern for starters. I'm just pointing out that we shouldn't automatically assume that all shakos are by definition made from leather.
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Sept 25, 2007 14:49:40 GMT -5
I'm away from home for the next couple of days, but when I get back, I believe I have on file a contemporary reference to Mexican shakoes constructed of interesting materials (not leather), although it dates to 1846-48.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Sept 25, 2007 22:59:26 GMT -5
There are quite a few images of soldados wearing covers over their shakos, but they do appear to have leather brims protruding from underneath the covers.
I think the regulation for the Mexican shakos says "cowhide" according to Hefter, but I'm thinking regulations and reality didn't always see eye to eye.
I'd be interested to see what they were making shakos from in the war with the US. I've seen one or two from that era that were all leather, but by that time, that wasn't uncommon.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Sept 26, 2007 0:33:51 GMT -5
Leather was certainly used for peaks and various other trimmings, including sometimes the top in the British and other European armies. All-leather shakos weren't very common as they tended to be too heavy, too labour intensive and too expensive. The original Austrian ones were leather but very small, as were the British 1799 pattern copied from them. We very quickly switched to felt, while the Austrians went through a period in helmets before returning to shakos and this time using felt. The French and everybody else meantime were using felt although often with leather tops.
So if the Mexican army were wearing all-leather ones they were bucking the trend (including the French and Spanish they were copying).
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Sept 26, 2007 7:16:32 GMT -5
Re. oddball shakoes, Manuel Balbontin, a Mexican artillery officer who served, among other battles, at Buena Vista [la Angostura] in 1847, wrote an excellent memoir of the Mexican War, La Invasion Americana. 1846 A 1848. Apuntes del Subteniente de Artilleria Manuel Balbontin (Mexico: Gonzalo A. Esteva, 1883). On p. 77 he is in the middle of a critique comparing the U.S. and Mexican armies of that time, and he comments [my translation]:
"It is customary to give luxurious uniforms to the troops who are in garrison in the large cities, to wear at the civil and religious festivities, but those in the hinterlands at times lack that which is most necessary. Thus, it follows that in the army that marched to la Angostura [i.e., Buena Vista], there were entire battalions which were clad in shoddy frock coats, which lacked blankets, and whose shakoes were of palm leaves lined with printed calico." (emphasis added)
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Sept 26, 2007 7:52:05 GMT -5
Presumably woven. I've come across this before in the East Indies. Had these guys been serving in Yucatan I wonder?
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Sept 26, 2007 15:19:23 GMT -5
Yes, most likely woven, and much like a straw hat in composition.
I doubt that any of these troops had recently served in Yucatan.
|
|
|
Post by mustanggray on Sept 26, 2007 15:58:42 GMT -5
Not questioning the existance of leather shakos per se... I'm just pointing out that we shouldn't automatically assume that all shakos are by definition made from leather. Stuart, Good point... didn't know we were assuming that. The US bellcrowns seem to have been popular with militia units and the 1813 pattern(I believe that's the date) US shakos were also all leather. Of course while it's not a shako the old hogkiller was all leather.
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Sept 26, 2007 23:40:47 GMT -5
I think at least to some extent, the form dictates the material. Most of the shakos mentioned here as being all leather are usually somewhat smaller than the French/Spanish/Mexican design that is larger at the top than the bottom. The major exception are the flared tarbucket or bellcrown types of shako, but I'm pretty sure these are all leather due to their unique shape. The shorter and smaller types that were used before and after the era of large shakos seem to be made either from felt or leather. I've seen many caps made of cloth that resemble the US hogkiller hat as well.
I've seen pics of a couple French shakos that seem to be made of oilcloth covered cardboard. One is an officer's shako from the 1830's, has a stovepipe shape, and seems to be tied around the body of the shako. I suppose this could just be a cover, but it is very close fitting, and there is no evidence of a leather structure underneath that I can see. The other is the later type used in the 1850's-60's that looks a lot like the American 1858 forage cap in form, for lack of a better way to describe it. This oilcloth covering the back of the shako is partially torn away, leaving the cardboard body exposed.
|
|
|
Post by stuart on Sept 27, 2007 0:41:23 GMT -5
I'd agree with all of that and add in complaints during the Napoleonic Wars about shakos becoming deformed after being soaked in rain, either because the felt wasn't thick enough or because the cardboard stiffening had soaked and collapsed. This in turn led not to an improved shako but to the introduction of oilcloth covers.
Its also worth mentioning perhaps that from a distance it can be difficult to distinguish between oilcloth and leather and that what might appear in a picture to be leather is actually oilcloth.
Like the French and Spanish armies the Mexicans also made use of white cotton or linen covers and I'd suspect that what was under them is anybody's guess
|
|