I have enjoyed time spent with all of the above at events; campaigners, main stream and Farbasaurus'. I have enjoyed the time spent speaking with and interacting with the folks, from both sides of the fence. I have seen very little dressing down first hand, but have read many, many threads on various sites where the mowing scythes come out in force. As my wife delves deeper into the hobby, she is encountering the same sort of cyber superiority.



I believe the folks who, from the safety of their computer, absolutely attempt to destroy ones ideas, or hard work both a great disservice to the hobby in general. I will give an example of something was telling me the other day. A lady shared a picture of a dress she had made, and considered it her favorite dress. The pattern was period correct, the trim was period correct. The donnybrook arose over whether the material was period correct. The way the discussion went, a few "experts" went on like the woman was wearing an ABBA spandex hootchy mamma suit.



In my opinion, this was a golden opportunity to encourage a fairly new person in the hobby and suggest, in the most friendly manner, that the person might want to consider making their next dress in that pattern from wool. Instead, a woman who worked for weeks was "virtually" assaulted and is giving serious consideration of never attending another event. As Mason, I am keenly aware of diminishing membership and see the hobby in the same boat. More should be done to encourage new folks, and their ladies, instead of driving a wedge. The guys will always be interested, but if you can get the ladies behind you, or at least tolerate their guys going off, the kids generally follow. That is the way to keep the hobby going.



There are a number of reasons folks make the selection of materials or kit items they do. Many are grounded in the realization they just do not have the money to purchase the materials or items which are historically correct, so they make do with something more economical. Sometimes, the materials themselves are no longer available, since the modern world no longer has a massive demand for the material or item. Finally, there are times when the experts just have it set in their minds that their way is the right way and there is no way anything else is accurate.



For instance, peg soled brogans. Go to any unit site and they will say that peg soles are more accurate than anything else. Yet, some time last year, a member of this group, posted some statistics from the Federal Quartermaster Corps. Of the 7 million plus pair of brogans manufactured and issued during the war, only 289,000ish were peg soled. The rest were sewn. So in the eyes of some experts, the 6.7 Million ish men who received brogans during the war, got the wrong thing. Another example, I was looking over a sutler's collection of shirts. They were finely made of quality materials and nice buttons. He and I were talking about the work my wife had done on my shirt. After his initial, great job comment, he immediately went to the buttons, stating "a shirt like that would have had small glass buttons, why do you have tin buttons?" My response was honest and straight forward, "I told my wife to use tin buttons for two reasons, I like the way the look and I can button my shirt. My big crippled hands would never get those little shinny buttons buttoned." When I got home, I looked up a few sites who had shirts similar to the sutler, who was doing a hard sell on the fellas and found the exact shirts he was selling for $95.00 1880's Wahmaker shirts.



Another issue with the fashion police. Who really knows what was available and what was not. My wife has a fabric reference tome, covering fabric designs from the 17-21 century. As you may imagine, most of the fabrics and designs we see today were not in the book. Does that mean they do not exist? I read an account of a calico textile manufacturer in England, who visited France four times a year in the late 17 early 1800. According to this fabric design bible, there were about 20-30 calico patterns from 1760-1880. A strict interpretation would say, if the pattern is not one of the 20-30, it never existed. But the first hand account of a manufacturer who would visit France four times a year to see what they were doing solely in calico, leads me to believe much of what was out there was ever changing and never made the books.



Photographic evidence is great, but must be thought through. Folks who had their pictures taken, no cheap thing in those days, made a point of wearing their best. Museum pieces, specifically ladies dresses, little of no wear in the train (something rarely seen in reproduction dresses.) Additionally, there appear to be no stains. So 6-12 inches of fabric, which would have dragged the ground behind the lady is neither soiled or frayed, this in an age of no paved side walks.



I think folks made do with what they had. Sure they tried to emulate the latest Paris fashion, but made do with what they had and what they could afford. Federal issue is one thing, but when looking into the items a soldier received from home, who really knows. Boys from the South, anything would be possible.





One last thing thing ( I know I am rambling) To this day, I wear cloths which were in style in the early 20th century. My closet is full of Filson garments which are no different today than they were in 1907. I have two Strollers which would not be out of place in pre WWI Scotland or England. I still wear shirts, pants and boots which are older than my sons. My rambling point here is the world did not halt and begin spinning anew in 1861 and folks who think they know everything probably do not. One thing is for sure, never say never. It might be rare, but rare is not never.