# buttons on sleeves **URL:** \ **Category:** Cecil's Columns/Staff Reports\ **Created:** [May 13, 2009, 8:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/buttons-on-sleeves/496337 "2009-05-13T20:27:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![md2000](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/73ab20/32.png) [@md2000](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/md2000)\ **Post date:** [May 27, 2009, 9:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/buttons-on-sleeves/496337/21 "2009-05-27T21:10:44Z")
> [@Bookkeeper](#): > > I’d question whether this was all that new. After all, the French alone in the Napoleonic Wars had over 3 million men under arms, and the major European powers had already been there and done this - the US just wasn’t affected at the time, being involved only in the small scale sideshow of the War of 1812. The main difference with the US Civil War was probably that the ongoing improvements in technology meant the actual manufacturing process was significantly more mechanized. Yes, but… The Grand Armee that invaded Russia was about 270,000 plus a few hundred thousand allied troops if you can trust Wikipedia. In the days before railroads, you have to wonder what the logistics of feeding half to 3/4 of a million men on the march was like. I assume they moved in a wide front, not a single column. How the heck did you even know where you were going, in the days before Shell Oil or Michelin road maps? How good was the highway signage? Any highways? How did you feed that mob? I assume in general, the 3 million French were spread across Europe with only a few thousand in most locations. Feeding that size of army if it squattd in any location would be horrendous. One senses the locals did not take kindly to foraging, but passive-aggressive was the limit of their resistance capability. Also, the sewing machine appeared between 1815 and 1860. Industrially produced clothing and shoes started to appear. the Napoleonic war armies must have had all hand-sewn uniforms! The prof I talked to was not suggesting factory clothes were a result of the civil war, but that the “standard size” concept was. Before that, I suppose each factory did what they wanted - the war and government money just meant they suddenly discovered economies of scale and the need for standards. Meanwhile railroads and steamships meant the supply of those armies was far easier. Factories powered by steam could churn out guns and other supplies far faster. Killing became an industry rather than a handicraft. To get back on topic - a perusal of images of Civil War uniforms seems to show this was a transition era. The fancier uniforms seem to show either the fully folded back cuffs - somtimes with a ring of buttons round the sleeve to hold the cuff up; plus, cuffs much like modern dress shirts, slit and with buttons for easy “roll-up” when getting your hands into things. Some fancier ones have piping or even a different fabric to “fake” the folded-back see-the-lining look. Some obviously cheaper more hurried styles (lower class?) have plain square sleeves, with or without a set of buttons on the cuff to fake button-up cuffs. I suspect this was the transition point. Your “Sunday goin’ to church” clothes, like the cheap lower class uniforms you wore in the war, didn’t need functional cuffs; just that optional fake elegant-look as if they were buttoned up. I suspect some guy in the war department said “Hey, we can save 20 cents a coat if we don’t want the cuffs to open!” and back in civilian life, this is what passed for dressed up in the boonies. Hey - my dress shirts vary from just-one-button-cuffs, to ones split more than halfway down the forearm with an actual button halfway along the split, to double-button longer cuffs… The more features, the more upmarket the shirt was. I haven’t found a “dress shirt” look with stretchy non-buttoned cuffs yet, but I’m sure someday they’ll make them. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/buttons-on-sleeves/496337.md?page=1)