montea
Junior Member
Posts: 87
|
Post by montea on Apr 19, 2009 11:54:02 GMT -6
Ever since I was a nerdy nine-year-old shouting "They didn't have Winchesters during the Civil War" or some other irritating thing at the television set, I've been miffed and confused by Hollywood's insistence on putting a yellow neckerchief on every U.S. Cavalry trooper. As far as I know, scarves, handkerchiefs, and bandannas have never been standard military issue, at least beyond boy scouts.
Is there anyone out there who would like to defend, explain, or comment? MA
"A child said 'What is the grass?' fetching it to me with full hands. I guess it is the handkerchief of the Lord. And now it seems to me the beautiful uncut hair of graves."--Walt Whitman
|
|
|
Post by stevewilk on Apr 19, 2009 14:16:17 GMT -6
My guess is this has its origins in the John Ford trilogy; who's idea this was or where they got the idea of yellow I wouldn't know. Ford's movies of course were in black and white; I think the trend really took when color film was introduced. Then along came the spoof F Troop; where they all wore yellow bandanas. This may have had something to do simply with yellow making a more attractive and uniform appearance as it matched the cavalry branch trimmings for chevron and trouser stripes.
If you look at photos of troops in the field you often will see some sort of bandana around the neck. Of course these were never issue items; men wore them to protect the neck from sunburn or bandit style over the face to avoid sucking in all the dust on the march. They could also be worn pirate style on the head, ala Reno after he lost his hat. Soldiers could soak them in cold water and wear it on the head underneath their slouch hats to keep cool. (On one campaign Mackenzie's men soaked sponges in water and stuck them under their hats.) They of course had other uses such as bandages or even to strain water or coffee.
The more modern films such as Dances With Wolves, Geronimo, or Buffalo Soldiers get away from the yellow scarf. BTW it's the Cub Scouts who wear the yellow; Boy Scouts wear red.
|
|
|
Post by conz on Apr 19, 2009 17:48:44 GMT -6
I agree that most all the Soldiers and officers in the Cavalry wore scarves...it would be highly unusual if they didn't, for the reasons Steve said.
Some of them may have been yellow...how popular was that color back then? I don't see many references to color in my readings.
Historians say the scarves were often red or blue or brown...sometimes checkered red and white, or blue and white.
The question is not whether scarves were worn or not whilst on campaign...the only issue is their color.
Is it really that important if they were yellow ones, or red ones?
Clair
|
|
|
Post by stevewilk on Apr 19, 2009 19:47:10 GMT -6
I've read somewhere that white was a popular color along with red and polka dot or checked. Whatever the sutlers were able to procure. There may have been yellow ones too; but the point is historical accuracy, of which most Hollywood westerns had little of. It paints a silly caricature of the frontier soldier looking like a Cub Scout. Maybe that's what was intended. Anyway these bandanas were worn only in the field. Many westerns portray troopers in garrison wearing them along with walking around in shirtsleeves and suspenders.
There were plenty of frontier army vets living into the 1950s and 60s who could have been consultants for movie makers. But if you have a budget, as in the case of "B" movies or so called "spaghetti westerns" you aren't going to bother outfitting your soldier extras with accurate blouses and forage caps etc. Too costly; so you dress them in dark blue Dickies work shirts. From what I recall of the Ford movies at least he was somewhat accurate as far as garrison attire, including dress uniforms.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Apr 20, 2009 9:38:59 GMT -6
Custer usually wore a red skarf so who would authorize yellow?
What about the pants? The later Custer dress photos, including the one with Libbie taken in his study at FAL (GAC reading a book) has Custer wearing a wide red stripe on his pants. I thought that was the artillery color. The 1864 Brady photo of Custer standing next to a seated Libbie has Custer in what appears to be 2 thin yellow stripes on his pants. Custer's seated photo in late CW (with 2 stars on his shoulders) with Libbie seated and Tom standing behind him has 2 thin yellow stripes on his pants. The photo of Custer, Tom, & Libbie at the camp at Big Creek in 68 has them wearing light blue pants with no stripes. The photo of most of the officers in dress uniform on the steps of some quarters at FAL taken prior to the campaign in 76 shows Custer in what looks like a wide yellow stripe and you see Yates in the middle front sitting on the steps in what looks like a big red stripe and the same as Bronson, an infantry officer on the extreme left. Sort that out.
bc
|
|
|
Post by stevewilk on Apr 20, 2009 10:04:40 GMT -6
BC, due to the exposure time or whatever relating to photography of the period, yellow often came out looking dark. The photos are black and white, so how can you say the stripes are red? I also thought they were red in my newbie stage. Infantry stripes were dark blue so they would appear dark anyway.
The 1872 uniform regs changed officer's trouser stripes to one and half inches wide. They previously were one eighth(?) inch width; more or less a pinstripe down the seam of the trouser. So it may not be visible in the Kansas photo if indeed regulation trousers are even worn. Some officers complained that the new regs made them more conspicuous on the battlefield and that they were too similar to sergeant's stripes, which were one inch wide. Indeed some NCOs exceeded the one inch width.
The Civil War is another thing entirely with volunteers and such; all sorts of uniforms styles were worn; I am not expert on these so cannot comment.
|
|
|
Post by bc on Apr 20, 2009 10:39:54 GMT -6
Understand the exposure issue, Steve, but the stripes don't match the color of the shoulder straps. Wouldn't exposure time apply to all parts of the photo? Most of the straps appear to be a light color in those black and white photos. Wouldn't that exposure principle apply to the lighter colored hats, etc? Just commenting and said about all I know on the subject. Looks to me like Custer and his officers wore whatever they wanted to.
bc
|
|
|
Post by El Crab on May 13, 2009 5:48:31 GMT -6
What drives me banana sandwich about the old cavalry movies is the pants. They always look like leotards, skin tight with a big, fat stripe down the sides. When it would appear troopers and officers wearing the normal blue, wore baggier, looser pants. That, and suspenders.
So maybe that's the gripo ultimo. The John Wayne Cavalryman: tight, fitted pants, suspenders worn visibly and a big, yellow hankerchief.
|
|
|
Post by Melani on May 13, 2009 16:48:01 GMT -6
There has been a certain amount of discussion in reenactor circles about suspenders. They were in use during the Civil War, but based on various photos, they may have been out of fashion by the 1870's, even though the trousers still had suspender buttons.
|
|
|
Post by AZ Ranger on May 13, 2009 20:05:36 GMT -6
Another use for a bandanna is thermal regulation. A silk scarf will hold in body heat if in the gap around the the collar. and wet one will help one feel cooler.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Cloud on May 14, 2009 16:27:40 GMT -6
Right. Why I love Re-enactors. Vector in on the historically correct width and color tone of a stripe on a pair of pants, worry about the validity of suspenders in the 1876 Army Vogue. Burn the wires over yellow accessorizing of the neck.
If you're going to wedge 300 pound, 50 year old oinkers in them trousers, it don't matter if the neckerchief were teal and orange and served in the winter season as the main course sail of a Tall Ship. It's absolutely historically and laughably inaccurate (and arguable animal abuse) to view these monstrosities as Living Historians unless everyone, including what we're told are the women, have chosen to portray Grasshopper Jim Brisbin after downing a jug of mayonaisse slathered over half a bison.
The width and color of the stripe? Look at the photos of the guys who wore them in 1876. Skinny, skinny guys, for the most part. And young. -er, anyway. Look at the muscle tone of these guys in those movies. Absent the stunt guys like Yakima, they're dude ranch fodder.
|
|
|
Post by wolfgang911 on May 18, 2009 13:57:23 GMT -6
well anyway the ford era shows the cavalry as nice clean guys with a short haircut and nice clean bandanas to go with that, no big moustaches and bears either all you need to clean up their %&à"@:-( image;.. the handkerchiefs they needed those not only for cooling but also for snif snif wiping tears after stupid mistakes, running into he wrong village, hunting down the women instead of the men being a little drunk like at bear river and so forth, they had to cry now an then and there were no kleenex :-) if my flag was yellow and the strip on my pants were yellow (if I had one) i would definitely put on a yellow handkerchief
|
|
|
Post by Melani on May 19, 2009 10:36:33 GMT -6
So glad to hear you're color-coordinated, wolfgang.
|
|
|
Post by Yan Taylor on Aug 2, 2011 7:53:11 GMT -6
Hi, when I look at the Indian drawings of the BLBH, the troopers all had dark blue jackets on and wore the old type little caps, I thought that Custer's men wore there shirts because of the heat and had large floppy hats, and some may have worn straw type hats, have the Indian painters added these items our were the people who drawn them not present at the battle. Regards Ian.
|
|
|
Post by fuchs on Aug 2, 2011 23:33:57 GMT -6
have the Indian painters added these items our were the people who drawn them not present at the battle. If I remember correctly, people depicted in those ledger drawings were not necessarily sketched the way they looked at a specific event, but could also get depicted in an "archetypal" style. This would not mean that the painter didn't know better, but decided do do it that way for one reason or another. Which ledger drawing did you refer to specifically?
|
|