Dissecting the Pirate: 2 Guayacil

[Gentleman of Fortune]

This is a fovorite of mine (really Foxe) it Depicts the Raid on Guayacil.

FROM FOXE

Brief history: Woodes Rogers commanded a privateering voyage in 1709 or thereabout, raiding the West coast of South America. one of the successes of the voyage was a raid on the port of Guayacil which is depicted here in an engraving from Woodes Rogers' 1712 published account of that voyage.

ok lets talk about what we see.

[JoshuaRed]

GOF this is one of my faves too. Lotsa stuff in here! For starters, you can see the battered cocked hats and nondescript clothing of the sailors. The man on the left, holding the necklace up has a unique jacket though, with those two rows of buttons? It may be run-of-the-mill, but I've never seen it before.

I love the apprehensive look on the women's faces. Fear mixed with curiousity. :)

Back to the sailors: I see basic trousers/slops, short jackets, and cocked hats. Since this art is from Woodes Roger's book, is it safe to assume that he would have been involved in the commission of an artist, and thus supplied the details of the scene? I think so. Rogers was a straight-up kinda guy, seems to me that he would not want his experiences to be grossly misrepresented or exaggerated too much...so in my book, this pic is one of if not the best references we have for a sailor's shore-going rig smack in the GAOP.

[Gentleman of Fortune]

The cocked hats...

What caught my interest was how low the crown is. Most repros available all seem to be from the same style hat blank with a high (5 1/2" crown). These seem to be more of a flatter, shorter crown 3"?

The one with his hat off and puting something in in... doesn't seem to be a cocked hat. Maybe a Peter t Great knit??? . Or a battered round hat. Also, woods is the only one with trim on his hat (ooops just saw the one on ground) and his hair is pulled back and tied with a ribbon.

Personally, I don't think that they got the best artist that they could of... but like Foxe has said all along, it could have been drawn by someone that was never near sailors/caribbean.

All the trousers seem to be highwater, below calf and above ankle... not too good of a hem job either as they all appear kind of ragged edged

Double buttons... I don't think so. If you look to the right, the guy pointing has a similar coat but what I think we are seeing is the artist inablility to show the button hole clearly, we are seeing the "shadow" of the ends showing... So I think it is a badly drawn row of button HOLES.

To me it seems like they (the group of pirates) are wearing short jacket (no pockets?), and a waistcoat under that.... then shirt. Am I seeing this or just think I am seeing it?

Also, the neckerchiefs on all of their necks are white/off white. I saw this discussion in another thread but when do black scarves come in to the timeline?

[JoshuaRed]

I thought black scarves came into vogue to mourn Nelson's death?

Yeah, the hats do look low and flat, though that could be artist's attempt at making them look battered and worn. Also, most of the sailors have laced shoes instead of buckles.

[Fox]

The Artist: I've been slightly misquoted here. I agree that it's unlikely the person who did this engraving had been to the Caribbean (or indeed Pacific in this case). BUT, I believe the book was published in Bristol, or possibly London; either way Bristol and London were the two largest sea-ports in the country in the early 18th century so it's probable that the artist was very familiar with the clothing of seamen. So, whether Rogers was involved himself or not I think this is probably still a fairly reliable picture of English seamen of the early 18th century.

Hats: The first thing that strikes me is the complete difference between the mariners' hats and the officer's. The mariners' are smaller for a start, more battered and less trimmed.

Personally I don't see a knitted hat. the guy putting a string of pearls into his hat looks like he's holding a cocked hat like all the others to me

Other garments: I'm inclined to agree that they seem, to be wearing trousers (little surprise there), waistcoats, shirts and coats. However, in fairness I think one would be hard pressed to use this picture of evidence of waistcoats if there were any argument. Waistcoats are suggested by the bulk and the fall of the garment under the coat, rather than anything definitely shown.

I don't think the figure on the left has two lines of button holes; partly because it's not something I've ever seen from this period before, but also because the two lines are two close together to make it a double breasted coat (such as we see in later prints), and there doesn't seem much point in a double row of buttons otherwise.

The coats shown in this engraving go some way to backing up what I was saying on another thread about seamen's coats being more like smocks that have been opened at the front than like civilian coats made shorter. The lack of pockets, the general shapelessness, the lack of turned-back cuffs etc. all go to support that. It's worth comparing the seamen's coats in this picture with the civilian coat the officer is wearing - the artist is clearly capable of drawing coats properly fitted, so we must assume that his depiction of the baggy shapeless seamen's coats is deliberate. It's worth comparing the seamen's coats in this picture with those Bonny and Read are wearing in the engravings on the other thread. Except for a small opening at the side which is absent in any of the Guayacil coats they are more or less the same.

I don't think there's a whole lot to say about the trousers except to note that the ragged bottoms show that the trousers are made that length, they're not longer trousers rolled up.

Neckcloths: given that the engraving is in greyscale, and the only thing we can say with any certainty is that the hats are the darkest things being worn by the seamen, and that everything else they're wearing could be the same colour - I'm not prepared to give any opinion on the colour of neckcloths. They're not black, they might be white or off-white, but going solely on this picture they might equally be red, blue, turquoise, pink or a range of different colours. We just can't tell.

Shoes: In wills and suchlike you quite often find shoes and buckles listed seperately, and often left to different people. It would be reasonable to infer (backed up by this picture) that buckles and shoes were not inseperable, and for many seamen the buckles were simply decoration to be worn when swanning around Port Royal in their best togs. When working, whether on board ship or raiding Guayacil it would make more sense to lace one's shoes up and not risk losing or damaging the expensive buckles.

Other stuff: I first saw this engraving years ago, and I love it. It's one of those pictures that you spot something new in (almost) every time you look at it. What I've just noticed is what looks like a cane lying between the two privateers in the second picture. Presumably if it is a cane one of the privateers has put it down while he frisks the ladies. We quite often see canes being carried by seamen ashore in later 18thC engravings, and I always carry a stick at living histories - basically because it makes me feel tough and I find it useful for all sorts of things. Nice to have a period depiction though!

[Fox]

Just to keep this going a bit:

By the time Rogers left Cork at the beginning of his voyage the combined crews of the Duke and Dutchess numbered 333 (including officers I believe). Among the stores taken on at Cork were 12 dozen stockings, 150 "capps" and 50 red coats.

[Matty Bottles]

Just a note about the walking stick/cane...I'm pretty sure Boswell comments on Samuel Johnson's tendency to carry a walking stick, and his willingness and skill in braining ne'er-do-wells with said stick....

[JoshuaRed]

William Dampier also noted how he was forced to beat his Lt. George Fisher with his cane on the Roebuck.

[Fox]

I was debating whether to start a new thread with this picture or whether to tack it onto this one. The re-awakening of interest in this thread has decided me.

The British Sailors' Loyal Toast 1738

I find this picture interesting because it shows seamen in dress essentially similar to that depicted in the Guayacil engraving - except for the length of the trousers. Basically it shows a continuity of fashion amongst English seamen through the major part of the GAoP.

Since some of the detail is slightly better in this second picture perhaps we might add it to the melting pot.

[Gentleman of Fortune]

Does that look like striped ticking shirts under the jacket?

Also, all the cuffs seem to be the mariners style

Does the Admiralty contract call for Dorset buttons at this point?

GoF

[JoshuaRed]

Also looks like the chap 3rd from the left is wearing his cocked hat backwards, as mentioned somewhere else on this board.

[Fox]

The 1730 slops contract calls for "thread buttons" on the kersey jackets. What exactly is meant by that is debateable.

It looks to me like the fella on the far left also has his hat on "backwards", also the man second from right. The rest all appear to be wearing round hats (a good bridge then between the Bonny and Read pictures and the Guayacil engravings), so it is in fact 100% backward cocked hats. By comparison I'd say that at least 2 of the Guayacil men have their hats backwards, one definitely has his hat facing forwards, one is debateable but I think has it backwards and 3 have taken their hats off so we can't tell. I'm not counting the officer.

I'd say that the first, second and fifth men from the left in this picture definitely have mariners' cuffs on the jackets, but it's difficult to tell on the others, they could just be turned back

GoF, why haven't you commented yet on the picture I posted of a black seaman? I've been awaiting your response with anticipation

[dasNdanger]

Here's a link for 'thread buttons'...perhaps this is what they mean...

http://www.woodedhamlet.com/buttons_clasps...ad_buttons.html

I have a good copy of this picture...will look it over and see what I can come up with...

das

[dasNdanger]

Hats: From my copy of this picture, it appears that all the men are wearing cocked hats, except for one..the third from the right, counting the officer. His hat is...well...flat, perhaps a 'cap' of some sort. The two on either side of him are wearing their hats backwards, and the one to his left (our right) seems to have an 'emblem' of some kind on the front of his hat...it could even be a buckle - it seems to have that sort of shape. And yes, it's interesting that the officer's hat (captain??) is more ornate, especially considering that all pirates were supposedly 'equal'.

Shirts: It's really hard to tell what's a shirt and what's not...but clearly, in my picture, the 'officer/captain' is wearing a ruffled shirt, judging by the sleeves. A bit of a dandy he is, eh?? I can't tell if it's a ruffle down the front of his shirt, or his neckerchief.

Hair: The only one who seems to have a queue is the officer/captain, the rest seem to wear their hair loose. None have facial hair.

Trousers/breeches: Everyone is wearing trousers (as already noted), but the officer/captain seems to be wearing...dang, it looks like nothing, but I guess it may be breeches, though I can't make out a distinct 'hem' around the knee area...Could he be trouserless?? Is tht what his crewmate is pointing at?? And what is that long garment he has on under his coat? A waistcost of some kind?? Looks like it has an ornate or ruffled trim.

I think all the 'stripes' in this picture are just crosshatching, and not ment to indicate stripes.

Another thing I notice is that some of the pirates look rather 'portly', not drawn and gaunt and underfed. Not sure if that's artistic license, or a literal representation of what these men looked like.

das

[Belladonna Bess]

Maybe this has been discussed on other threads and I'm just an ignorant newbie, but I'm curious about the lack of facial hair that dasNdanger mentioned.

I find it hard to believe they would have all been clean-shaven. Was there some artistic convention, or is this another example of the artist only ever seeing pirates all dressed up on shore?

If there is another thread I haven't seen, please refer me to it and I will read it and shut up.

Thanks.

[Fox]

I don't think it's artistic convention particularly. Many voyages included surgeons (Rogers' definitely did) who were also still barbers at this point (something for the weekend sir?). Many wills and suchlike reference razors, so there is no reason to suppose that the men didn't shave themselves. Blackbeard's beard would hardly have been worth commenting on if seamen habitually wore beards.

Also, there are a number of pictures of seamen drawn or painted by men at sea with them, and these can be supposed to represent perhaps the most accurate pictures we have. The Gabriel Bray paintings of the 1770s don't show a single man with a beard (not that I've spotted anyway), and here is another picture from the GAoP, painted from life by Duplessis in about 1700 showing a French seaman half way through a long voyage.

[JoshuaRed]

As far as I know, the fashion of the time dictated that only godless heathens went around unshaven. I recently read somewhere (forget source) that in New England men went clean shaven so as not to offend the Indians, who apparently were apt to kill white men with beards. *Shrugs*.

But it was probably mostly just fashion. Shaving no doubt helped the sailors while far away from home and civilization feel more connected and well, more "civilized".

Course on the flip side, I'd be willing to bet that many a lazy sailor would let the beard flow once away from his nagging wife, provided he sailed under a captain who didn't mind.

The reason no artist depicts beards, is probably because the natural tendency was towards depicting Englishmen in the best possible light (with the exception of Hogarth, which is why he stands out) and showing the folks at home their valiant brave men out there braving the world and looking good at the same time.

[dasNdanger]

I think it was also the fashion of the day to go clean-shaven. Back in Drake's time, beards/goatees are shown on many men, but a hundred years or so later, most men (sailors or not) are shown clean shaven.

As far as Indians go, they can not, as a rule, grow a heavy beard. Johnny Depp, even at about only 1/4 Cherokee, is a good example of that...he can't grow a thick, full beard to save his neck! Most Native Americans found facial hair of all kinds 'offensive', and if you examine photographs of Plains Indians from the 1800s, you will notice that - not only did they pluck out (with clamshell 'tweezers') their mustaches and beards, they also plucked out their eyebrows!! Among the western tribes facial hair was really offensive, and one threat made to young Apache boys to dissuade them from smoking (or was it drinking??) too young was that if they did, they would grow facial hair! Only a few tribes allowed mustaches or eyebrows to grow out. I'm not as familiar with eastern tribes as far as facial hair goes, but it makes sense that they too found heavy facial whiskers offensive, especially considering so many easter tribes even removed the hair from their heads.

It would make sense that pirates would try to 'blend in' with society to avoid detection, so to keep up with the same style of dress AND grooming would be logical.

das

[Fox]

The reason no artist depicts beards, is probably because the natural tendency was towards depicting Englishmen in the best possible light (with the exception of Hogarth, which is why he stands out)

How many Hogarth men have beards?

[JoshuaRed]

No, I meant that Hogarth was the execption because he showed an honest, gritty portrayal of the citizens of England, instead of sugarcoating life. :)

[Fox]

Precisely Josh, so if Hogarth generally shows people clean shaven in all his honesty and grit it can be fairly assumed that clean shaven was the order of the day and it's not just artisitic license on the part of other illustrators (which I don't believe anyway...).

[JoshuaRed]

No you're right Foxe, and I wasn't disagreeing with you. I think what I was trying to say about Hogarth should have been a separate point from the beard issue and I just didn't convey it very well at all.

What I was getting at was that in the era, there really was no such thing as "candid" art that would show something as brazen as a beard on a proper Englishman. It would be like painting a sea captain shirtless and barefoot. And Hogarth on the other hand, DID show the candid side of English life, which itself is devoid of beards. So it is quite safe to assume that beards were rare.

My first post made it sound like it was an artist conspiracy to erase those tasteless foul beards from society, which was wrong. Sorry!

[dasNdanger]

Okie dokie - does anyone know when this illustration was made of Roberts' crew relaxing on the banks of the Calabar River??

http://www.piratehaven.org/~beej/pirates/i...ges/bartdnr.jpg

I'm curious because it shows most of the men with facial hair, and sashes about the waist, and long trousers. Any ideas??

das

[JoshuaRed]

That's 19th century through and through. I could be wrong, but I THINK it was for "The Pirates Own Book" which was 1837, right? Anyone? Another pic that I think is from this book is the pirates riding monks, as well as the pirates "sweating" the captain around the mast.

[dasNdanger]

K - thanks. I got that picture from a website (my photobucket account was acting up, so the link is from the site), but I've seen it elsewhere. I was wondering in what style those illustrations were, since I've seen several.

So, we can safely assume that the facial whiskers and other details are not in keeping with the GAoP, but with a 19th century interpretation of what pirates once looked like.

Funny thing is, their appearance reminds me of the face cards in a deck...very similar style of artwork.

das