Jump to content

Army Nameplate


seanmc1114
 Share

Recommended Posts

Not sure if this is the correct subforum for this question, but I was wondering if anyone knows when the black nameplates were first authorized and then required for wear on U.S. Army dress uniforms and khaki shirts. I'm assuming it was probably the late 50's or early 60's.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I was wondering if anyone knows when the black nameplates were first authorized and then required for wear on U.S. Army dress uniforms and khaki shirts. I'm assuming it was probably the late 50's or early 60's...

Here's a picture (attributed to 1958) showing the name tag being worn...and not being worn. To my knowledge, wearing the black nameplate was optional by Army regulation (until at least the early 1980s).

 

post-1963-1259623143.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The black name tags were introduced along with the Army Green uniforms around 1956-57. They were optional but not at the individual level but on a command level.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry I guess I could have been clearer on that. The individual solider could not decide if he wanted to wear a name tag or not any more than he could decide if he wanted to wear collar insignia or not. A commander could decide if his command would wear them or not. I am not sure at just what level they had this option but when I was stationed in Italy as part of SETAF name tags were not part of the uniform and no one wore them. Every other unit I was in wore them but I seem to remember seeing other units with out them. This is not to say that you won't see people with missing name tags for what ever reason or unauthorized name tags, I knew one guy that had his first name on his, he thought it was cool. When you showed up for a formation you had better have it on or not as required and it better have the right name. I would say that the great majority of units did wear them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for your amplification, QED4, but that's not the way I recall my time in the Army (1961 - 1983): The black plastic nameplate was by Army regulation optional for everyday wear on the Army Green and khaki uniforms, just as were decoration and service ribbons, qualification badges, overseas service stripes, right-sleeve SSI, and enlisted service stripes. I believe something like "...may be worn..." was the terminology of the time. Could the wear of these optional uniform items be prescribed by local commanders? Sure but I rarely encountered this other than for certain ceremonies and formations and at some service schools.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate all of the input from you guys. Just to clarify why I am asking, I am recreating the various uniforms my grandfather would have worn during his military career from World War II through his time in the National Guard and Army Reserve. I have two of his original black nameplates.

 

One of the uniforms I am putting together is the khaki long-sleeved shirt he would have worn around 1956 or so in the Georgia National Guard. I have a photo of him from the local newspaper in 1962 and he is wearing the nameplate, but I was really wondering how early they would have been used. In other words, did they even exist in 1956? I guess the picture of Elvis posted by Wailuna clearly indicates they were in use as early as 1958.

 

I am putting together a tan dress uniform with Corps of Engineer buttons to represent his time as an engineer company commander in the mid-60's. I'll definitely use one of the nameplates for that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I was really wondering how early they would have been used. In other words, did they even exist in 1956?

Emerson's Encyclopedia does not appear to directly address the nameplate but it is shown being worn (and not being worn) in many pictures from mid-1950s on. The earliest probable sighting, attributed to 1955, shows the C.O. of 20th Infantry wearing what appears to be a black nameplate on the right pocket flap of his khaki shirt (Fig. 74-20, p. 548).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...