Greg, here is what I see:

Look at the top of the the clearly visible lozenge.  You will see that the measurement from the shoulder seem to its top is equal to the disputed one on the left arm.  I see a mirror image from arm to arm.  The lozenge is there, but it is hard to see at the angle of the pic and the tilt of the sergeant.  If he stood up straight, I believe you would see it much clearer.  

I also do not believe an orderley would wear improper stripes, but who knows back then.

Man, this could be our first real debate on the fourm   !

Quote :

Ken Cornett wrote : Greg, here is what I see: Look at the top of the the clearly visible lozenge.  You will see that the measurement from the shoulder seem to its top is equal to the disputed one on the left arm.  I see a mirror image from arm to arm.  The lozenge is there, but it is hard to see at the angle of the pic and the tilt of the sergeant.  If he stood up straight, I believe you would see it much clearer.   I also do not believe an orderley would wear improper stripes, but who knows back then. Man, this could be our first real debate on the fourm   !

I have been staring at that photo, both of the ones posted by Ron, and for the life of me I can't see the diamond on the left arm.

And as I was putting some new lines on the coat to see if I could prove my point, I see the statement that Charles made.  
The way the sleeve is wrinkled, the 3rd line that appears to be the top chevron is the upward slash of the top left of the diamond.



So much for our first debate.  

--Last edited by lhsnj on 2007-04-24 16:16:53 --

RE-ESTABLISHING COMMON GROUND

Quote :

Man, this could be our first real debate on the fourm   !

Can we all agree that he's wearing a frock coat?  

Ron Myzie
edited to eliminate a whole bunch of spaces  

--Last edited by Ephraim_Zook on 2007-04-26 14:56:04 --

Speaking of improper, yet documented, Orderly Sergeant insignia, every few years the fad of wearing "just the diamond" races through the hobby. For the photo fans, this is a good time to post several period images with that type of rank insignia.

Because I'm more literate with a dip pen than a computer, I'll just post a couple of links to the LOC site and let someone else follow up.  Lozenges-only seemed to be a late-war thing, on a par with just leaving the insignia off entirely.

First, here's a shot of some Bucktails ("Bogus Bucktails" of the 149th PVI) in 1864. Note that the NCO on the far left wears a 5-button private purchase sack coat with two or three outside pockets (one stuffed with papers), an NCO belt, and lozenges only.

Also, quite apart from the topic but rather interesting, several of the men have the combination circle/cross corps badges of the units transferred from the 1st to 5th Corps in March, 1864. The color of these is difficult to discern in a B&W photo, but they began in the 3rd Division of the 1st Corps, then served in the 4th, 3rd, and 1st Divisions of the 5th Corps. So, in theory, the badge was a blue circle superimposed with, successively, a green, blue, and red maltese cross. Altogether a neat photo:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?ils:2:./temp/~pp_FHBH::

Here's an even clearer shot of the lozenge on its own (note the soldier on the far left, in an issue sack coat), from a photograph of officers and NCOs of the 1st Massachusetts Cavalry at Petersburg in 1864. This sergeant, unlike the Bucktail, wears striped trousers. Oddly enough, they appear to have the dark, infantry NCO stripe.  He too appears to have a book or bundle of
papers in his pocket:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?ils:14:./temp/~pp_K2FO::

If you have trouble with these, try http://lcweb2.loc.gov/pp/cwpquery.html and search on the units.  

--Last edited by Michael Schaffner on 2007-04-26 16:51:30 --

Sorry Robert, I missed your question.  No I won't be making the Chicky event. Yes I did get your message and I am thinking about how I want to do it.  I'll get back to you on it.

...and sometimes the old boys were told not to wear their rank insignia:

Quote :

HDQRS. NORTHERN DISTRICT, DEPT. OF THE SOUTH, Folly Island, S.C., July 1, 1864. Capt. C. P. McKENNA, Company G, New York Vol. Engineers, Chief Engineer Northern Dist., Dept. of the South: The general commanding directs that you, with the men of your company, provided with the three days' rations, &c., ordered for the expedition, report at the white house at 10 o'clock this evening; that you have the lumber and materials necessary for repairing the bridge from Cole's Island to James there (at white house)at that time, and that you must not commence to move up to the white house until after dark. The general further directs that if you can find time this afternoon you will proceed to the lookout on the right of Cole's Island, with two of your sergeants, for the purpose of looking at the bridge which is to be repaired. The sergeants must not wear their chevrons, nor must anything be worn which will indicate to the enemy that you or the sergeants belong to the engineers. W. B. DEAN, Lieut., 127th New York Volunteers, A. A. A. G.

Source: O.R.-- SERIES I--VOLUME XXXV/2 [S# 66]
UNION CORRESPONDENCE, ORDERS, AND RETURNS RELATING TO OPERATIONS IN SOUTH CAROLINA AND FLORIDA AND ON THE GEORGIA COAST, FROM MARCH 1 TO NOVEMBER 13, 1864.--#7

Guys:

Here's my take on the image. I think the guy on the left of the image is part of the artillery. Look at pictures of artillerymen with their coats and trouser stripes and you may notice a similar likeness in the color of those and the ones this gentleman is wearing in the photograph. Even though it is an infantry group, it is not odd for an artilleryman to visit an infantry camp. Could be a messenger or something in that nature. Red often times takes on a darker shade than blue in black and white photographs. I put my photography expertise to work on that observation. Look dad, college did pay off! The gentleman also appears to be wearing a pair of white dress gloves. His hands are more under exposed than the rest of the officers and NCOs in the picture. If he was not wearing gloves, then his hands would take on the same exposure qualities as the rest in the photograph. If you also notice, his shoes/boots are more polished than those of the other subjects in the photograph making me think that he has either not seen that much of service or he is in a garrison situation.  The "sergeant" in question in the middle does in fact have two diamonds on his sleeves. The angle at which he stands makes it hard to see, but their there.

Thats just my $.02 and opinion. Of course, everyone's guess is as good as mine. It would make it a lot easier on us all if we were there when the picture was taken, but that would take the fun out of threads like this.