Disunion follows the Civil War as it unfolded.

While the colors blue and gray are almost iconically associated with the opposing ground forces of the Civil War, early in the conflict many regiments reporting for duty on either side were much more colorfully attired. Some rebel troops wore blue, some northern troops wore gray, units on both sides sported every shade of red, green, black, white or even tartan, and uniform patterns were almost completely non-standardized.

This discordant variety of military garb reflected not just diverse aesthetic sensibilities but, in some cases, ideological ones as well, and was a virtual barometer for the lack of strong central organization in either the Confederate or Federal camps. Uniforms for volunteer units were produced not according to the specifications of national war departments but to those of state militia authorities or even units themselves, and were issued not from central quartermaster depots but from local storehouses — or even ordered from tailors by individuals.

These disparate supply systems were not well suited to clothing the many troops that would ultimately be called into service for the war or to supplying them for the extended period it would last. And even the centralized mechanisms that were in place early in the conflict did not reflect the organization that would be required to outfit the two great military machines that eventually faced each other.

Library of Congress

As late as April 1861, for example, the Confederate Quartermaster General was placing orders for regular army uniforms that included blue battle tunics. And the Confederate system of “commutation,” in which the government reimbursed volunteers for providing their own uniforms, ensured that many troops wore civilian clothes, in whole or in part, the first year or two of the war.

Some of the most familiar of the exotic uniforms, of course, were those worn by zouaves — light infantrymen clad in baggy pantaloons, gaiters, braided jackets, sashes and tasseled fezzes or turbans, clothing more typical of North Africa than North America. Such uniforms were, in fact, inspired by those first worn by French colonial troops in Algeria in the decade before the U.S. Civil War, and both the Union and Confederacy had units that wore them.

While the zouaves’ colorful uniforms are well known, they were not unique in their diversity, and atypical uniforms, many with an ethnic emphasis, were used by units on both sides. Some were patterned on those worn by various European troop types, especially skirmishers (e.g., French chasseurs, German jaegers).

The 79th New York Volunteer Infantry, the “Highland Guard,” provides a particularly colorful example. Formed under the auspices of state militia authorities in 1858, it was essentially a Scottish-American tribute unit that took its numerical designation and the tartan for its uniforms from the British military’s 79th Regiment of Foot, the “Cameron Highlanders” (it was even backed in part by the brother of Secretary of War Simon Cameron). Beyond these cosmetic commonalities, however, it had no actual connection to the original Scottish unit and was more or less a privately funded social club.

Library of Congress

Official uniform for the New York Highland Guard’s soldiers included wool trousers patterned with the chiefly red-and-black plaid tartan of the Scottish 79th; a dark blue jacket with red cording and red cuffs, and collars with white piping; a dark blue boat-shaped Scottish cap called a glengarry, complemented with a plaid band; and low-quarter leather shoes with false buckles.

New York State Militia guidelines precluded unit members from wearing kilts, but they ignored these provisions and did so anyway when on parade, wearing non-standard civilian-pattern versions in the same tartan as their trousers, holding them up with suspenders. They paired these with red and white diced hose and sporrans — pouches worn with kilts that took the place of pockets — made of nappy white horsehide and accented with black tassels.

Related Disunion Highlights Explore multimedia from the series and navigate through past posts, as well as photos and articles from the Times archive. See the Highlights »

Another New York unit distinguished by its couture was the 39th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment, colloquially known as the “Garibaldi Guard” or the “Italian Legion.” Many of its members were, in fact, already combat veterans, followers of revolutionary leader Giuseppe Garibaldi during the Second Italian War of Independence. They showed their commitment to Garibaldi’s ideals by adopting blousy red shirts similar to those they had worn as soldiers in Italy. (There was also, interestingly, a Louisiana-based “Garibaldi Legion” of Italians that fought for the Confederacy and wore red jackets.)

Southern militia and volunteer units were just as likely to have atypical uniforms as their northern counterparts, and also included both zouaves and other sorts of troops. A notable example of the former was “Wheat’s Special Battalion,” a Louisiana infantry outfit made up of largely of immigrants, street thugs, dockworkers and military adventurers.

At the other end of the social spectrum stood the Washington Artillery, a New Orleans militia battalion that had been formed in 1838, fought in the Mexican-American War of 1846-48 and functioned as an exclusive men’s club. Prospective members had to apply, pay a fee and be accepted by an examination committee.

The Washington Artillery dress uniform included a dark blue frock coat with red collar, sky-blue trousers (with a gold stripe along the outer seam for officers and a red one for enlisted men), and a red kepi with a blue band and a brass device consisting of crossed cannons and the letters “WA” (augmented with a pelican for officers); enlisted men’s uniforms also had red cuffs. Brass buttons, belt buckles and epaulettes (gold for officers) — emblazoned with various forms of pelican or the letters “WA” or “NO” as appropriate — buff white leather accoutrements (black for officers), and white gloves and gaiters completed the ensemble.

The Clinch Rifles of Augusta, Ga., was another unit formed by the social elite of its community and, when the War Between the States began, its uniform was patterned after the newest U.S. Army infantry uniform. Following the European tradition for infantrymen, however, the frock coat and trousers were forest green in color with gold braid trim, as was the forage cap, or kepi, worn by such troops even for dress purposes (and generally only in the field by regular units).

Soon after the first shots of the Civil War were fired, the exotic uniforms began to disappear and, as the war escalated and then ground on for months, then years, these colorful outfits became increasingly rare. Many of them were not practical for combat, were too expensive or logistically difficult to maintain or replace, or were too easily confused with enemy uniforms (as was the case with the uniforms of the Washington Artillery).

Some units did maintain muted versions or elements of their original uniforms, especially those organized as zouaves, whose uniforms had the benefit of being generally well-suited to hot weather and rough terrain. Predominantly, however, the realities of supplying great armies dictated that the opposing central governments overseeing the war efforts issue clothing in the uniform styles and colors that are most often associated with them. Countless patterns converged into a much narrower range dominated by standardized frock coats, jackets, trousers and forage caps, and the broad palette of colors was reduced, for the most part, to just two.

And so the festive diversity of uniforms largely vanished, leaving the opposing ground forces clad primarily in the two familiar and iconic colors. And with the colorful pageantry went the idea that the war was a grand adventure, displaced by the brutal realization that it was something far more grim and industrialized, fought not by individuals but by monolithic forces of blue and gray.

Sources: James P. Gannon, “Irish Rebels, Confederate Tigers: A History of the 6th Louisiana Volunteers, 1861-1865”; New York Historical Society; New York State Military Museum and Veterans Research Center; Don Troiani, et al, “Don Troiani’s Regiments and Uniforms of the Civil War”; Michael O. Varhola, “Life in Civil War America.”

Follow Disunion at twitter.com/NYTcivilwar or join us on Facebook.

Michael O. Varhola is a writer, editor and publisher who lives in the hill country north of San Antonio, Tex. He is author of “Life in Civil War America” and “Everyday Life During the Civil War,” is a co-author of “Armchair Reader: Civil War,” and has written many articles on the conflict.