Footwear

[Rusty Barrels]

Forgive me for probably asking a question thats been asked and answered a million times before, but what did sailors wear for shoes onboard a ship, I can't believe they wore boots except maybe the caption but hitting the rope would seem hard, didn't they wear some kind of moccasion

[kass]

Rusty, first let me congratulate your powers of logic. It doesn't make sense for pirates to wear boots on their ships. That's why they didn't do it. And neither did their Captains wear boots. In the Golden Age of Piracy (1680-1725), boots weren't fashionable. They were pretty much worn while you were riding a horse and then removed. The shoes typical of this period were the kind with buckles on the front.

Our idea of pirates wearing big, over-the-knee boots comes more from Errol Flynn movies and Disney than from history. We all have this picture in our heads of what pirates wore, but little of that is real.

Here's a great resource for pictures of seamen from this time period: Foxe's Mariners of the Golden Age of Piracy

Take a look at what they're wearing on their feet and you won't go wrong.

Also if you search in the Captain Twill forum on the word "boots", you'll find a whole discussion about this subject.

NOTE: I'm not sure this question belongs here in Plunder, so if the moderators would like to move it to Captain Twill, we could continue the discussion there.

[Matusalem]

Feet........principally.

It was much easier to climb the yardarm with bare feet than shoes.

I noticed, while watching Master&Commander (1805 era) some of the youger crew looked like the shoes they were wearing had thin soles, like capezio dance shoes. They didn't look like the typical buckle variety of 18th century. Aubrey wore boots but that is a military outfit. I think boots are more for cavalry, and 'JMO', the bucket boots look more like Three Musketeers. I have a theory that when Disney made up Capt. Jack Sparrow, they almost copied the Captain Morgain character off the rum bottle because it's so instantly recognizable.

[HarborMaster]

Musketeers were more 1650's I believe ., just short of GAoP.

They were french But the boots were cool.

Master and commander is about 1805 Nelsons day.., Napoleonic wars., about 100 years after the GAoP.

Pussers made Rum exclusively for the British Navy for 300 years.

Captain Morgan loaned his cape to Will Turner.

[Fox]

The Three Musketeers is set in the latish 1620s I believe (at least, the sequel "20 Years After" is set in the 1640s). Either way, nothing to do with pirates so I'll stop.

Speaking as someone who regularly climbs rigging I'd say that shoes are essential, bare feet are just too damn painful. Others may have different experiences, but I know Royaliste will agree with me. If you don't have rigging handy, try climbing a steel rung ladder in bare feet, then imagine the rungs are made of considerably thinner rope, and you'll see what I mean.

Most of the pictoral and written references point to typical shoes of the period - leather soles, straight lasted (ie, they have no left and right), either buckled or laced. Occasionally short ankle boots turn up in the period, essentially the same design as the shoes, but slightly taller.

[Capt. Sterling]

Feet........principally.

It was much easier to climb the yardarm with bare feet than shoes.

I noticed, while watching Master&Commander (1805 era) some of the youger crew looked like the shoes they were wearing had thin soles, like capezio dance shoes. They didn't look like the typical buckle variety of 18th century. Aubrey wore boots but that is a military outfit. I think boots are more for cavalry, and 'JMO', the bucket boots look more like Three Musketeers. I have a theory that when Disney made up Capt. Jack Sparrow, they almost copied the Captain Morgain character off the rum bottle because it's so instantly recognizable.

Careful about basing ideals on Hollywood's twist on historically correct... although they may often make the claim that they have made their garments period correct that is sometimes all it amounts to...just a claim....

[Matusalem]

I Think the bare feet part is undeniable. At least that's what I learned on a field trip class to the Nantucket whaling museum when I was in high school.

[kass]

Matusalem, you would do well to listen to what Foxe has to say in his post. He is someone who works on a galleon every day. I would tend to believe his experiences.

Also, he knows a whole lot more about GAoP sailors than anyone we know. :)

And a Nantucket Whaling museum has nothing to do with what sailors did in the GAoP, although I expect that if they didn't go barefoot in the rigging in the GAoP, they didn't in the 19th century either.

[Fox]

I Think the bare feet part is undeniable. At least that's what I learned on a field trip class to the Nantucket whaling museum when I was in high school.

Why trust one museum over another? If you visit the Golden Hind Museum you'll be told that going in the rigging in bare feet is excruciatingly painful.

[Matusalem]

Foxe, I don't doubt your word one bit. Yes, I was told that whalers were bare-footed. To what extent, I couldn't tell you. When we Yanks fought you Brits back in the 1770's, Many of George Washington's soldiers were bare-footed, even during a snowy winter, because they couldn't afford shoes. Same with Confederate soldiers during the American civil war...That's supposedly why the Battle of Gettysburg happened. I am even surprised to see news footage of Iraqi insurgents running around barefoot while firing machine guns.

I, myself, walk around barefoot frequently in the summer, and by summer's end, I can walk on gravel without feeling a thing because of the callouses. The skin toughens up after a while. Even dog's feet are accustomed to rough surfaces because they walk on them all their lives.

Modern life tells us to wear shoes, so we are so unnacustomed to building up our feet to tolerate walking on rough surfaces. As for me right now, it hurts to walk barefoot on my patio.

[kass]

But being barefoot because you cannot afford shoes is a whole different story than going barefoot in the rigging because "it's easier"...

Hmmm... Lemme see...

G.E. Manwaring, “The Dress of the British Seaman from the Revolution to the Peace of 1748,” Mariner’s Mirror, The Journal of the Society for Nautical Research, Volume 10, 1924. pp. 31 – 48.

p. 38.

Original source: Ducane MSS. [Hist. MSS. C.] pp. 28 – 29

Admiralty Slops contract dated 3rd February, 1724/25

Double soled Shoes, round toes . . . 3s. 8d.

Brass Buckles, with iron tongues . . . per pair, 2s.

Funny that the Royal Navy provided specifications for shoes if no one ever wore them on their ships.

And dog's feet are made out of different stuff.

[Matusalem]

Navy Requirements, Kass.....British navy requirements.

I would think that pirates were a bit more rag-tag. That was the point I was trying to make about Washinton's army. They, at times, were underfed, undersupplied, and often without shoes (which was not by choice).

[kass]

Sorry, Matusalem. I'm not buying it. Any reliable source will tell you that pirates often started their lives in the navy or on merchant ships. This is why pirate clothing doesn't differ materially from other mariners' clothing.

Also, pirates took huge hauls in gold and other commodities (they didn't do it because it was a laugh, after all ). Do you mean to tell me that they couldn't afford shoes? Sorry. That doesn't make any sense.

#1 - The historical records show shoes were provided to sailors.

#2 - The pictorial record shows sailors wearing shoes.

#3 - Living historians who have actually done the work of period sailors are telling you that their hard calloused feet didn't make a bit of difference in the rigging.

You know what occurs to me? I once read an account of a whaling ship taking a whale. They said the decks were awash in blood until the whale could be properly cut up and packed away in the hold.

Do you think it might be possible that whalers took off their shoes during this process? Shoes would be very slippery on a bloody deck! And perhaps your tour guide had no first hand experience aboard a ship and assumed that sailors always went barefoot?

Anyway... Believe what you like. That's all I have to say on the matter.

[Fox]

I, myself, walk around barefoot frequently in the summer, and by summer's end, I can walk on gravel without feeling a thing because of the callouses. The skin toughens up after a while. Even dog's feet are accustomed to rough surfaces because they walk on them all their lives.

Modern life tells us to wear shoes, so we are so unnacustomed to building up our feet to tolerate walking on rough surfaces. As for me right now, it hurts to walk barefoot on my patio.

I walk round bare foot all the time too, but the discomfort caused by rigging has little or nothing to do with how hard the skin is.

The problem is that you're putting all your weight onto a tiny area of your foot, so your feet bend uncomfortable over the ratlines, then the ratlines bend under your weight and start to dig into the sides of your feet, squeezing and biting into the flesh...

The other thing is that there's really no reason to go bare foot in the rigging. It's often cited that you have better grip with bare feet, but rope grips pretty well, and you really don't need your feet to grip anything anyway. Seriously, think of climbing a ladder. In fact, like I said, take your shoes off and climb a ladder.

I'm not convinced that bare feet make much difference on a slippery deck either. Speaking purely from personal experience I'd say that once the deck gets slippery the difference is marginal at best. I'd weigh the protection shoes give to cold and wet feet against any difference in slip...

I can think of reasons for seamen to have bare feet sometimes:

Simple lack of shoes is a good one. Occasionally we read of complaints that seamen don't have shoes because they've worn out and replacements are unavailable (which strengthens the argument, why would anyone complain if seamen habitually went bare-foot anyway?).

Bare feet are quite sensible in boat work. Given that in an open ship's boat you might find inches of standing water in the bottom it makes sense not to put your shoes in it (skin dries so much quicker than leather), and when it comes to landing a seaman is likely to be wading through water. I frequently take my shoes off and roll my trouser legs up for boat work.

But bare feet through choice for climbing rigging? Nah. Neither the evidence nor practical experience bears it out. It's a myth, and even museum staff are apt to repeat myths (more often than I care to point out!).

An interesting but off topic sidelight on our modern shoe wearing habits: I read a report a while back that suggested that the layer of cartilage in our feet has grown significantly thinner in the last hundred years or so as a result of the change from leather to rubber soles.

[Cpt. Alva]

Interesting Parallel between Pirates and Musketeers....

since Disney produces so many 'costume dramas' they have warehouses full of set dressing, costuming, etc.

if you look at ol' Captain Jack Sparrow's Baldric buckle, in the first film, it's IDENTICAL to Oliver Platt's Baldric Buckle from "The Three Musketeers"

the only difference is that they turned it on its side!

my guess is that they simply 'raided the warehouse' as it were, and picked things that 'looked piratey'.........

of course I'm sure contemporary illustration, and popular culture influenced the look as well.......and I wouldn't put the Rum Bottle theory out of the realm of possibility........

[kass]

Oh my God, Alva! I never thought of that!!! I've often heard that given as the reason why documentaries are badly costumed -- because the film company just raids their wardrobe department for whatever "looks right" because the costumed actors are just meant to be "background" -- but it never occured to me that a company with as huge a budget as Disney has would borrow stuff from other productions. But there you have the proof of it with that buckle! That's incredible!

Good show, mate!

[Fox]

... but it never occured to me that a company with as huge a budget as Disney has would borrow stuff from other productions. But there you have the proof of it with that buckle! That's incredible!

Hey Kass, why should you be surprised? I mean they reused plots, scenes, stunts and music... why not costume?