A Short History of Uniforms - Part 2 - From War Garb to the Early Beginnings of the Uniform

Common badges for armies and troops were customary early on; the cross was the unifying symbol of the crusaders. After the conquest of Jerusalem (1099) several knightly orders were founded, e.g. the Order of the Temple (1120), the Order of St. John (1120) and the Teutonic Order (1190). These martial associations had a uniform habit: for example, the Templars wore a white cloak with a red eight-pointed cross. The Teutonic Order also wore a white cloak, but with a black cross.

Already in the knightly era similar signs and colors can be observed among knights and their retinues (e.g. in the heraldic colors). At the same time heraldry emerged — the study of coats of arms and their use. This was a highly official matter and fixed rules applied to the design of arms. In the military context the coats of arms carried, for example on shields, served to identify the armed man to friend and foe.

In the late Middle Ages the colorful cloth gained a certain importance as war dress. The emerging towns also clothed their municipal military (town servants, also town attendants, town trumpeters) in uniform colors, in interaction with the rise of the cloth trade and the increased use of dyes. Many examples are handed down for this, e.g. for the Swiss or the Nurembergers in the 15th century. Particularly popular were the color red and also divided colors, e.g. black-white (Basel) or red-yellow (Stuttgart).

Here too so-called decorative slashes in clothing can be observed, albeit still very restrained. These are not functional slashes intended to improve the mobility of the garment.

Furthermore, the war dress — for example the slashed and jagged attire of the Landsknechts — already showed a certain uniformity. This developed particularly among the German Landsknechts into a colorful war costume characterized by an abundance of fabric.

Originally the clothing of the Landsknechts corresponded to civilian fashion, but the mercenaries developed a veritable clothing luxury that significantly influenced their outward appearance.

However, the Landsknechts did not invent decorative slashes; this fashionable feature migrated from civilian dress into soldier clothing. Still, these slashes were realized in particularly varied ways in Landsknecht attire and marked the mercenary as an individual fighter.

The exaggerated war dress was also a status symbol. In civilian fashion the decorative slashes were kept considerably plainer.

Headgear consisted of caps that developed into decorative feathered berets. In a well-known Landsknecht song it says: "From the beret the feather sways." The beret is probably of Italian origin. It was originally a flat — round or square — head covering made of felt, cloth, velvet or silk — without a brim. In the Landsknecht period the feather-decorated beret became increasingly flamboyant.

Legwear was initially tight and was later replaced by the trunk hose. Bear-claw shoes were worn with these.

The gradually developing uniform followed the practicality of warfare, but also fashion and contemporary taste; civilian fashion influenced military fashion and vice versa. Thus the slashed clothing mentioned above of the Landsknechts probably imitated the dress of the upper Italian urban nobility. Conversely, the trunk hose was initially common in soldier dress and migrated from there into civilian fashion. It replaced the so-called "Heerpauke," a men’s hose resembling two balloons and originating from Spanish court dress. The trunk hose subsequently became established among both lower and upper social strata.

Even at the beginning of the 17th century fashion and status dress, court and war attire were still very similar.

Typical civilian and military attire of that time included a coat and a koller of sturdy buffalo leather, cloth trunk hose, colored stockings and a wide feathered and upturned hat.

Typical early Baroque fashion elements visible here included broad-brimmed hats, collars adorned with lace, the doublet and wide knee-breeches as well as rapiers. The doublet, as the principal independent outer garment since the 16th century, developed in the High Baroque into the sleeveless waistcoat, which was then worn under the actual coat (justaucorps).

In the 17th century infantry often wore only half armor; in particular the pikemen protected themselves with gorgets, shoulder plates (spangröls), upper arm protection and the reduced thigh pieces. A morion was regularly worn as well. Over time this protective armor was further reduced in favor of mobility. Under the half armor a leather koller was often worn. This was a sleeveless garment. It had replaced the doublet as the main outer garment. Over time the leather koller — initially not yet among cavalry — was displaced by a cloth camisole.

Musketeers were regularly equipped with matchlock firearms and were unarmored; at least around the mid-17th century they generally no longer wore actual protective armor. The matchlock musket weighed about 8–10 kg. For this reason it was rested on a forked rest when fired. The loading process consisted of over thirty individual actions and was very complex and time-consuming. During this phase the musketeers were necessarily protected by the pikemen. In the preceding image the musketeer’s bandolier with the leather-covered wooden charges is visible. These containers held the measured powder for a single shot and were colloquially called the "12 Apostles." The complete equipment also included the powder flask for the fine priming powder and a leather pouch for the lead balls. The Swedish musketeers were later equipped with lighter rifle models.

The clothing pattern shown earlier for pikemen and musketeers corresponded, for example, to the outward appearance of the Brandenburg regiment Hillebrandt v. Kracht, founded in 1626. The equipment of this formation at that time is described by Alfred Dieterich in his history of the Grenadier Regiment King Frederick the Great (3rd East Prussian) No. 4 (Berlin 1928) as follows:

"For clothing (liberey) the men uniformly wore a blue, color-lined coat of cloth (kosiake), whose skirts reached almost to the knee as protection against the weather, with iron buttons, wide cloth knee-breeches, cloth or knit stockings held by knee bands, leather shoes, and at the neck a broad turned-down collar of white linen...."

... The clothing pattern shown earlier for pikemen and musketeers corresponded, for example, to the outward appearance of the Brandenburg regiment Hillebrandt v. Kracht, founded in 1626. The equipment of this formation at that time is described by Alfred Dieterich in his history of the Grenadier Regiment King Frederick the Great (3rd East Prussian) No. 4 (Berlin 1928) as follows:

"For clothing (liberey) the men uniformly wore a blue, color-lined coat of cloth (kosiake), whose skirts reached almost to the knee as protection against the weather, with iron buttons, wide cloth knee-breeches, cloth or knit stockings held by knee bands, leather shoes, and at the neck a broad turned-down collar of white linen.

The musketeer wore a felt hat with a plume and under the coat, as needed, a leather doublet (belly vest) as well as across the right shoulder a crossbelt bearing a three-foot-long rapier; over the left shoulder a leather bandolier from which ten wooden charges filled with powder together with a match hung, a leather pouch (with lead balls and spare matches) and a powder flask hung.

The pikeman, when armored, did not wear a coat but a leather colett, over which a breastplate (armor consisting of gorget, breast and backplate and thigh pieces of applied lames) and an iron morion with a comb, as well as over the right shoulder a cross-hanging baldric for the thrust-sword with a large guard. A backpack was added for the march.

Non-commissioned officers wore colored vertical stripes on coats and breeches as insignia, also numerous shoulder cords and braids.

The officers’ dress was more richly equipped and otherwise left to their discretion. The insignia were: gorget, a sash and a broad-brimmed hat with flowing ostrich plumes" (p. 15)."

At the end of the 16th and beginning of the 17th century the cavalry consisted of lance riders, heavy cuirassiers, pistol-armed horsemen (carbineer/arquebusier- or bandolier cavalry) and dragoons. Lance riders carried the long lance without pennon, but they had already disappeared by the start of the Thirty Years’ War. The heavy horse still predominantly wore full armor (plate armor).

The visored helmet was soon replaced by other helmet types, in particular by the zischägge — a special form of morion derived from Turkish models. This usually consisted of a hemispherical helmet bowl with a long articulated or laminated neck guard and cheekpieces as well as a flat eye-brim with an adjustable nasal bar. The latter could be individually adjusted with a winged screw. This helmet form persisted until the end of the 17th century. Over time armor disappeared entirely or one wore only a cuirass. The gorget of the harness remained, however, as the officer’s gorget. The gorget later belonged, alongside the sash, the portepee and the espontoon (a pole weapon, formerly the partisan), to the common rank insignia of the officer corps.

Wearing iron gauntlets was later abandoned at least for the sword hand, since it was sufficiently protected by the guard of the long rapier. In the illustration one can see that the rider no longer wears armor for the lower legs (leg defenses); these were covered by the boots.

During the Thirty Years’ War and in the further military conflicts of the 17th century all kinds of troops fought on German soil. Thus exotic fashion influences also became noticeable, e.g. through the Slavic auxiliaries dressed in national costume (Pandurs, Croats, also hussars, uhlans and Cossacks). From this influence the hussars and uhlans would later enrich the diversity of the cavalry. The original national costume became formative for this branch of arms.

The mercenaries wore the clothes they brought with them; only in armament and equipment did a certain "uniformity" arise due to a particular way of fighting — i.e., for tactical reasons. Furthermore, subsequently the princely employer or the regiment owner or colonel initially provided the armament and later also the clothing. This ensured a certain quality. From the centralized procurement in this context — by an official instance or the war entrepreneur — followed a standardized mass production and thus inevitably a certain uniformity. Even great commanders such as Wallenstein (Albrecht Wenzel Eusebius von Waldstein, *1583 in Hermanitz on the Elbe, +1634 in Eger) sometimes took care of details; he once wrote: "... Have ten thousand pairs of shoes made for the men, so that I can distribute them to the regiments later ... The shoes should always be diligently tied together so that one knows which belong together" (quoted in: Wallenstein. His Life told by Golo Mann, 1971, p. 35). Clothing remained, however, part of the mercenary’s or soldier’s pay and wages continued to be deducted regularly even in the 18th century.

Over the course of these long military conflicts the beginning of a standardization of war dress can already be observed. The common features of war dress in the 16th and early 17th centuries shown so far, however, did not yet constitute a uniform regulated by decree; they were also international, i.e., there were no country-specific differences. The similarity of war dress in the sense of a certain uniformity regularly resulted from the specific requirements of the respective arm of service.

Because of this lack of distinguishing features before the introduction of a regulated uniform, the need for differentiating insignia existed.

These could be sashes or simple straw badges or agreed special appliqués.

Walter Fuchs cites the war articles of Emperor Charles V from 1546. They prescribed: "Item every man shall have a red cross sewn or affixed to his clothing and also a red band over his harness. But anyone who does not have these shall be held as an enemy." In the Common War Ordinance and Police of 04.08.1558 the German mercenaries in Spanish service were required: "Finally every soldier, whether mounted or on foot, shall wear two of the customary Burgundian-red field signs, namely one on the hat and the other across the body, so that if it comes to a clash with the enemy the friends may be recognized before the enemies." Preben Kannik refers to a decree by King Frederick II of Denmark from 1563, according to which "everyone — in the king’s army — should wear a sign on his hat, his clothing or over his harness in the form of a red and yellow sash or a field sign." Later blue/brown-yellow sashes were worn. In the 16th century imperial troops wore red and the Spanish contingents Burgundian-red field sashes. French troops adopted white field sashes. Among Saxon troops this was yellow, as was the case for those of the Schmalkaldic League.

At the Battle of Breitenfeld in 1642 the Imperial troops carried a white band on the hat and the Swedes a straw tuft as a distinguishing sign. At the Battle of Warsaw in 1656 both the Swedes and their allied Brandenburgers wore a straw tuft. Also at the Battle of Lund in 1676 against the Danish army the Swedish army is said to have worn such an identifying sign. Under Charles X Gustav of Sweden blue-yellow (previously only blue) sashes were worn. The Swedes did not wear green sashes.

But even after the introduction and development of diverse uniforms there could be a need for special common field signs to be able to clearly identify allied units and to prevent deadly misunderstandings (numerous examples of used common field signs can also be found in Kling, Cuirassier and Dragoon Regiments pp. 135 ff.).

Early on, however, officers were especially marked by special insignia, e.g. sashes of different colors, armbands or feather plumes and ribbons on the headgear. Officers were in any case distinguished by richer equipment of their clothing.

The introduction of the uniform corresponds with the emergence of standing armies. Isolated approaches can already be seen earlier in the outfitting of guard units (house troops) acquired by princely persons for protection of the person and as an instrument of power. Early examples in this context are the Swiss Guard of the Papal States (founded 1606), the Royal Yeomanry/Gentlemen-at-Arms in England (established 1485), the Royal Noble Guard in Spain (established 1646) or the famous Royal Musketeers in France (founded 1622). Since binding prescribed uniforming of officers was not possible at that time, the Spanish royal noble guard and the French musketeer corps wore the so-called tappert or casaque, an overcoat worn over other garments and providing space for common insignia and thus representing a kind of uniform. It is reported that the bodyguard of the Brandenburg Elector Georg Wilhelm, when it accompanied the elector to the Polish royal election in 1632, was uniformly dressed in dark blue.

Already in the transition from the Middle Ages to the early modern period absolutism developed as a form of rule. This state form of monopolized power rested on a standing army, judiciary and police. But the equipment and maintenance of a standing army required sufficient financial means and again a capable administration to procure those funds and control the money flows.

The absolute state needed, for its claim to power, a military force internally (against the estates) and externally (against rival states).

This claim to power was represented in particularly impressive fashion by a uniformly dressed army.

With the emergence of standing armies after the Thirty Years’ War the need for adequate and, for idealistic and functional reasons, desired uniform military clothing thus increased. The mass production of clothing and equipment resulting from this increased (state) demand favored the development toward uniformity, and with the shaping of a "special military dress" a military clothing industry also emerged (Gisela Krause).

However, the necessary financing and required administration were initially highly inadequate. Economic possibilities were also limited, for besides an already developed manufactory sector there was still a relatively rigid medieval guild system. There was no shortage of labor, however. Practical necessity found appropriate ways and solutions.

The enormous quantity of required clothing could be procured in various ways, centrally or decentrally — as mentioned — by authorities or individual regiment owners. Numerous contracts from the 17th and especially the 18th century on the outfitting of military units have come down to us in this context, sometimes with intermediary publishers who committed to supply finished uniforms. While the production of uniform cloth often already took place in manufactories, the actual making of the uniforms was mainly handcraft work, sometimes even home-based work, particularly the embroideries and passementerie. Thus the state demand for uniforms, for other military equipment and for soldiers’ provisions also promoted the domestic economy at various levels and developed into a considerable driving wheel of the home economy.

The first beginnings of a general (!) uniforming are already observable in the disciplined Swedish army under King Gustavus Adolphus. However, a general uniform was only introduced in Sweden under Charles X Gustav in 1655, whereby its colors were determined by the coats of arms of the respective province. A uniform blue dress was only introduced in Sweden around 1690.

In the nascent uniforming the civilian coat (allegedly originally the French peasant dress) became dominant or the essential garment, together with the long-skirted waistcoat (kamisol); only the cavalry retained the cloak. This coat underwent an identical development in both civilian and military spheres.

Wolfgang Quincke describes this in his Handbook of Costume Studies (p. 187) as follows: "The coat was now the casaque again worn over the doublet, the short tight frock that the soldier from the peasantry had brought with him. Essentially our modern coat was thus created; it is hardly accidental that it emerged from soldier dress and at the same time represents the origin of the uniform. The justaucorps was made of cloth, frieze, camlet, linen and featured sleeve cuffs, pockets and on the right shoulder a buttonhole of long ribbon loops in contrasting color, as well as braid trimmings and was belted around the hips with a sash of wool or silk, gold cloth or lace fabric, the descendant of the field band already mostly worn about the hips in the previous period. The sleeves were wide and at first reached only to the elbow. From there to the wrist the shirt sleeve retained its right. The shoulder straps originally served to hold the rapier bandolier on the right shoulder so that it would not slip down. Here lies the origin of the epaulettes.... The justaucorps reached to the knee." The coat was initially worn closed and then from 1680 worn open at the front. The doublet, which in the meantime had become the waistcoat, took on over time a similar shape to the coat, i.e., it became longer and later received rich embroidery and pockets.

The coat regularly had a lining of a different color, which showed when the collar, sleeves, breast flaps (lapels, revers) and skirts were turned back. The turnback also served to protect the edges of the still relatively loose fabrics. This function was also fulfilled by various trims of (colorful) braids, galloons and embroidery, for officers usually in gold or silver.

The skirts became ever shorter and narrower, yet still turned back. The neckcloth had already become the red or black neckband.

He wears a broad-brimmed hat decorated with feathers, a neckcloth, a long buttoned coat with large sleeve cuffs, a broad rapier bandolier worn from right to left, and heavy riding boots with gaiters. Also of interest is the long hair style decorated with ribbons.