An earring for your perusal...

[JoshuaRed]

This is a self portrait by the artist Godfried Schalcken (1643-1706), painted circa 1670. Clearly not a sailor, and it's a bit prior to the GAOP, but it does show the ol' gold hoop earring worn for fashion's sake...I throw it out there for those who are seeking alternative controversial debates to the Boots. Enjoy! :)

[kass]

Hey Josh, is this the entire portrait? Because if there is more of his clothing to see, I'd love to see it.

Tell ya why I ask: He looks like he may not be dressed as himself. Now I don't know about the 1670s, but in the 18th century, it was common to be painted as someone else (like a historical figure or a mythological character) or dressed in a costume from another period of history. Now regardless of the fact that the 18th century is a lot closer to the 17th century than we are, boy do they get the clothing WRONG!!! It wasn't so important to them to get the details historically accurate. They just liked the "vibe" of those earlier eras (kinda like some of us, eh?)

Anyways, the shirt he's wearing looks so early 16th century German that I'm having Landsknecht flashbacks. And I can't make out the details of his outer garment, but it looks very much like something you might see on a Burgermeister... or even Henry VIII!

Neato! Thanks bro!

Okay. Enough of a break. Gotta go check the pattern paper...

[JoshuaRed]

Good observation Kass. He was a student of painters who studied with Rembrandt...and this outfit does look a bit like that...perhaps it's an homage...

This is the whole portrait, so you'll have to go just on this. It's part of a set, the other painting being a portrait of his wife.

[Fox]

That was my immediate thought too Kass (oh no, now your'e in my head too!). I think it's the square neckline that just screams "16thC!"

I love those pseudo-historical portraits - generals in "Roman" armour is a classic.

As for the earring, nice find! IF it transpires that the portrait is "set" in the 16th century then it may be that the earring is part of the costume and thus irrelevant (hang on, no, we know from this picture that Kidd liked to dress in 16thC clothes, maybe he had one! )

But seriously, if he really is wearing an earring in the 1670s then he's probably wearing it for personal preference rather than for the sake of "fashion". A great piece of evidence to support the theory that now and again occasionally people might have worn earrings during the (nearly) GAoP. :)

[Caraccioli]

Yeah, what Ed said. Earrings were in fashion pre-GAoP.

[kass]

Good observation Kass. He was a student of painters who studied with Rembrandt...and this outfit does look a bit like that...perhaps it's an homage...

This is the whole portrait, so you'll have to go just on this. It's part of a set, the other painting being a portrait of his wife.

Interesting... Because he's dressed 100 years earlier than Rembrandt (he was 1630s; this looks 1530s). However, Rembrandt was one of those famous Dutch painters who painted his patrons as pseudo-historical and mythological characters. Rembrandt always annoys me because I do 1630s and his paintings tell me nothing about what people really wore then...

I wanna see what his wife is wearing. Got a link?

Ed, darling, I'm in everyone's head...

[JoshuaRed]

Being an artist he may have been trying to show how "ironically uncool" was, or how non-conformist he was, or perhaps it was simply what he liked. Regardless, he's definitely showing it off - it's darn near the focal point. The clothes definitely are not 1670s...is the earring? Who knows. He has another self-portrait from 1679 in contemporary clothing, but his wig covers his ears, so we'll never know for sure.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Don't know if this will help, as I'm new to cyberworld, so I'm still trying to figure out how to use this darn thing. Anyhow, I have a book, Two Centuries of Costume in America that has a chapter on the vanities of men titled ; Muffs and Earrings. In it are five prints showing men wearing earrings. They are as follows;

Adam Winthrop-grandfather of John Withrop- 1498-1562

Chandos portrait of William Shakespear- shows him with earring.

Robert Carr-Earl of Somerset- 1587-1645

M. St. Quily- drawn 1801

Capt. George Taylor of Salem, Mass. - 1769-1819

On the fronticepiece of the chapter;

Superbus swaggers with a ring in his ear;

And likewise as the custome is doth wear

About his neck a ribband and ring;

Which makes me think he's proud of a string.

" Epigrams", Hutton, 1619

I hope this is some help at least. Wish I knew how to get these prints from my book onto the screen for everyone. The two volume set was published by Corner House Publishers, and "written" by Alice Morse Earle.

Capt. Bo

[JoshuaRed]

Kass, when I said homage to Rembrandt, this is kind of what I was thinking:

Still can't believe I'm posting about Rembrandt HERE

[Fox]

Thanks for the info Bo. If you did a Google image search for the paintings you'd probably find most of them online somewhere, then you could post them here.

The list of paintings rather intrigues me though, and bears out current thoughts on earring use: in a chapter specifically about earrings the author has not found any portraits between 1645 and 1769 (in reality, the dates of painting are probably considerably wider, say, up to 1800). They just weren't fashionable during the GAoP! :)

I love Rembrandt, but I gotta say that I like Vermeer even more.

[JoshuaRed]

I would be hard pressed to choose between Vermeer and Rembrandt. Though Durer may be my all time favorite.

[Fox]

Durer certainly has charm. I nearly bought a book which had every known Durer picture in it. Just didn't have the spare £90...

David Teniers the Younger is another favourite of mine, Franz Halz, and of course the two Breughels. For maritime painting you can't beat the Van de Veldes (IMHO).

[greenighs]

Durer certainly has charm. I nearly bought a book which had every known Durer picture in it. Just didn't have the spare £90...

David Teniers the Younger is another favourite of mine, Franz Halz, and of course the two Breughels. For maritime painting you can't beat the Van de Veldes (IMHO).

Maritime and Turner go hand in hand for me. The light just blazes in his skys, his seas have such movement.

[kass]

Oh my God! It's Rembrandt in 1640 in 1530s German dress!!! What he's wearing is unmistakably 1530s German, so if your lad is copying this picture specifically, that would make perfect sense, Josh!

Me, I prefer Vermeer to Rembrandt, but I'm not an artist. I just love how many costume and furniture and table-settings details Vermeer gives. Bruggel is another one of my faves, as is Durer. Man, that lad could draw/engrave!

But I wouldn't be anywhere without Hals.

[JoshuaRed]

Here's another half-baked thought: The famous illustrators of the Brandywine school used to keep their studios FULL of old clothes, stage props, costumes, etc. I seem to recall reading that Wyeth for instance had many original 18th century articles of clothing from the Revolution era, probably all family hand-me-downs. These "props" turned up in many of the paintings.

I wonder if the Rembrandts and Vermeers of their era kept closets full of old hand-me-down clothes to use merely as attractive drapery for models, because it "looked cool" and not for any higher purpose or intent.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

This is just abit away from the subject, but can anyone tell me when it became "tradition" to "earn" the wearing of an earring after sailing 'round the horn?( Cape Horn ) Is this an old sailors "tradition" or is it more of a modern "fad" thing?

Capt. Bo

[Fox]

$64billion question!

Depending on who you talk to the earring is earned for different things. The most common is rounding the Horn, but crossing the Equator, crossing the Straits of Gibraltar, and going on the Gosport Ferry are all other possibilities.

We do know that as late as the early 19thC earrings were considered unusual, even remarkable, so we can say that it certainly goes back no earlier than that. The earliest references to the "tradition" seem to come from the very late 19thC - 1880s-90s.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Thanx Foxe!

I served four in the US Navy, and when we crossed the Equator it was quite a celebration, and first timers-Pollywogs- were "initiated" to become "Shellbacks". I won't go into the gory details of initiation rites, but earrings were certainly NOT a prize at the end!

Again, thanx for the input...Bo

[JoshuaRed]

LOL I'd say 1964. :)

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

"64 you say? Works for me! I was three so it would become part of my own "era" of maritime history. Hey... We gotta have somethin to tell the grand-kids!

As for the original text of the thread, I'm also old school "biker", but I don't wear my earring at the publik events as it isn't proper, especially for a land lubber. The Half beard is bad enough, but I ain't shavin! Gotta have some way of filterin the critters outta my soup!

The more I'm around here, the more I feel like it's time to explore yet another area of history. My She Mate is gonna have a fit when I start building a new kit and start attending a different set of events... But I did warn her in advance of the nuptuals.

Capt. Bo

[kass]

I wonder if the Rembrandts and Vermeers of their era kept closets full of old hand-me-down clothes to use merely as attractive drapery for models, because it "looked cool" and not for any higher purpose or intent.

Rembrandt certainly had a closet full of "costumes" in which to dress his models. Matter of fact, I am hard-pressed to name a Rembrandt portrait in which the sitter is wearing the dress of the 1640s. This was the fashion then -- to be painted as an Ottoman princess or in drapery evoking the ancient Greeks. Painting in character is one of Rembrandt's things.

Vermeer on the other hand usually painted people in the dress of the day doing ordinary, daily things, like playing music or drinking with friends. The only notable exception is "Girls with a Pearl Earring" who is wearing scarves wrapped around her head in a decidedly non-Dutch manner.

It may have been the style by the 1660s to paint "after the life". And by the third quarter of the 18th century, people are being painted as "Cavaliers". You know the famous "Blue Boy"? Painted in the 1770s but he's wearing vaguely 1640s dress.

[Fox]

Matter of fact, I am hard-pressed to name a Rembrandt portrait in which the sitter is wearing the dress of the 1640s.

There are a few: Doctor Nicolaes Tulp Demonstrating the Anatomy of the Arm, Jan Rijcksen and Griet Jans, The Mennonite Minister Cornelis Claesz. Anslo, but of course the most famous is The Militia Company Of Franz Banning Cocq.

Did you know there's a group in Holland who are "Night Watch" re-enactors. They go around doing living histories as Banning Cocq's company and of course they DO know what everyone in the company wore. People think that we're sticklers for details!

[kass]

Oh Foxe! Don't baffle me with logic. I'm postulatin' here!

Seriously, yeah, I knew they existed. But when you have a Rembrandt in your head, no one is wearing the dress of the period.

Except the Night Watch...

I really prefer Codde's Meagre Company (or Hals Banquet of Some Other Officer Types). My husband always makes his clothing demands based on these.

[PoD]

Just to open an old thread again. I have just found this picture in the british museum. A Dutch sailor no less with an earring in from 1695:

http://www.britishmu...ject_image.aspx

[Fox]

Just to open an old thread again. I have just found this picture in the british museum. A Dutch sailor no less with an earring in from 1695:

http://www.britishmu...ject_image.aspx

Oh there's so much good stuff in that picture! Nice one PoD.