kass

Hector is correct. Extant garments that have no been finished do not have the buttonholes cut. And some that *have* been finished do not have some of the buttonholes cut -- for example the decorative buttonholes at the back and side vents on some frock coats, or even all the buttonholes on later frock coats that are held closed by hooks. From a practical point of view, your buttonholes come out more regular if you don't cut the slit first. My buttonholes went from quite dreadful to pretty good when I stopped cutting the slit first. To contradict the handout a bit, there are many buttonholes that have a bar tack on both ends, and others that have a "fan" on both ends, as well as this kind with one of each. So know that there is not just one way to do it. If you want to see lovely closeups of buttonholes, Hart and North's "Fashion in Detail" shows lots of them up close and personal.

"Twonk" dear. Different animal entirely.

Just because I love 'em doesn't mean I don't charge for 'em. I UPSed your pattern this morning.

I am a complete twonk. I love doing eyelets... and buttonholes.

Greg, you just need a bigger signature! Then none of your replies will be small!

That would be awesome!

Here's an alewife with no "distended abdomen"! (me as alewife at the Bachmann Tavern, summer 2002)

Oh shoot! Guess I should have read their website more closely. I knew they always have a backlog, but I had no idea they weren't shipping new orders. We've bought barrels from Townsend. They're okay. They're not as historically accurate as anything Five Rivers makes (of course nothing Townsend sells is, really...). You can also contact brewing supply places. Often they sell cooperage. Just make sure you ask for wooden barrels. The word "cooperage" in the brewing industry means all bulk containers. So if order a cask without specifying, you might get an aluminum one. Try googling "oak, cask, cooperage, US" and you should come up with some links. Regarding Captain Tightpants -- there are mitigating circumstances to his reply to The Chapman of which I am fully aware, and I will not moderate him because of that situation. His anger is directed at one person and one person only -- and it is justified by more than you see here. My apologies to anyone else who is offended. Please do not take it personally; his words are not for you. You're just going to have to trust me on this one, guys.

Box weave... Still never heard of it. We tend to call that weave "monk's cloth". But I guess that doesn't describe it very well if you've never seen monk's cloth. Anyway, gabardine is an excellent, excellent tropical weight for summer. Wool flannel is what I wear all summer long. It's heavier than gab, but not too heavy. Kersey, Welsh cotton... definitely not summer weights.

Gabardine is a fine worsted wool twill most often used for making suits today. It dates back as far as twill weaves do -- farther back than you can imagine, Jack. The patented word "Gaberdine" (note the "e") refers to something quite modern -- a suit wool invented in the 19th century by Thomas Burberry of trench coat fame. Poplin -- the wool/silk blend -- is very early as you say. It is NOT the cotton or poly poplin you'll find in fabric stores today. Kersey was a very common wool used by sailors because it is tightly woven and water repellant. Welsh cotton/Welsh plain is a fuzzy wool (not cotton) used for linings. It's soft and springy and will keep you warm even though wet. Again, popular among sailors. Plain (tabby) weave wool has been in use since the beginning of time. Wool flannel (NOT the stuff your cotton PJs or sheets are made from) is available in abundance and dates to a very early time. Wool flannel (as it is called today) is typically a 2/1 twill, but 3/1 and 2/2 twills were also in use in the 17th century. There are a ton more wool types used in the Golden Age of Piracy, but these are the big ones. And I know just where you can get some! (See the link in my signature) What do you mean by "box weave"? I'm a weaver and I've never heard of it.

The BEST period cooper I know is Five Rivers Chapmanry. Here's their website: http://www.5rivers.org/ They're in Canada but you can select American dollars (or Pounds Sterling, or Euros...) as your currency on the front page and it will convert the site.

Women certainly didn't stay hidden at home, particularly not working class women. This is a Victorian notion -- not a Golden Age of Piracy one -- and Hector has been wise to question it. Stays typical of this time period were back lacing. But also remember that the extant stays tend to be those of the upper class. If we move slightly later in time -- to the 1750s -- there are extant stays that are back-lacing but have a small opening center front as well. This smaller opening is only 5-6" long -- just long enough to make access to the breast possible. I believe stays of this type are housed at Williamsburg. To reflect an earlier time period, the stays typical on common women of this period (say 1660s) are front lacing. Not just on mothers. On most of the women we see in genre paintings -- working women. When we see their stays, they lace in front. There's a painting by De Hooch from 1659 called "Nursing Mother" that shows a woman with her jacket open revealing half-laced red stays. Of course this is too early for the period we're discussing. And Hector's picture is too late. But if we make the leap (not always a good idea) that there was a continuum between the two, I think we have our answer. Recently I made a set of GAoP stays for a customer but I made them front lacing since she is a nursing mother. She reported that she nurses her infant son while wearing them at events and they make it very convenient for her. So WOO HOO!!! Experimental anthropology!

Wow, Jack! It looks totally amazing. I'm shocked that this is your first time working with stays. Kass

I can't speak for everyone of course, Rats, but the Pirate Brethren do some events that are early teens and some that are 1690s. They are usually 1710s. That's why I wanted to warn you. The Slop Contracts that talk about thread buttons are 1724 which is way late for most people I know doing this period.

Hey Jack! It's hard to see detail from the pics (white does that, you know), but they look really good. That's pretty much how I would have made them. How do they feel under your breeches?

Oh, you mean Dorset buttons! I know what you're talking about now, Rats! No. Not on Slop Contract clothing. The Slop Contracts specify "thread buttons". Not the elaborate "takes 12 hours" Dorset buttons. I mean, think about it. The Admiralty issues these Slop Contracts for common sailors' clothing. Not officers. The guys who don't have suitable clothing when they come aboard. Do you think they're going to specify these elaborate buttons that we seen on the gorgeously embroidered and gold laced frock coats that are in museums? Nuh uh. And I'll tell you something else -- if they were made with Dorset buttons, the jackets wouldn't have cost 9 shillings and 6 pence! They'd be ALOT more expensive. So Dorset buttons -- great for upper class frock coats and shirts. Wrong for Slop Contract gear. Also be aware that thread buttons are not specified in the Slop Contracts until 1724. The previous Slop Contracts that mention buttons at all (1706 and 1717) specify brass or white tin, not thread. Are you portraying that late?

The two men in justacorps on this page seem to have rounded cloth buttons.

There's a sticky at the top of this forum, shadoes, called "Handstitching Basics by Kass". In there, I teach you how to make a simple pincushion using period stitches. If it suits you, please use it. There are more articles for beginners here: Reconstructing History for Beginners

Thanks, Hurricane, William. We live but to serve. As Chole said, the two handles are for passing the drink to your comrades. You can hold one and the person to whom you're passing it holds the other. Or you can have a tug of war with it. Or would that be a "tyg of war"... Apparently passing a drinking vessel around was very common. This is also where "take 'im down a peg" comes from -- it meant to drink the next bloke's portion (to the next peg) to punish him. Two handles also gives the mug a longer life. Many a mug I've stopped using because I broke the handle. On this one, you can just keep using it. And as Chole mentioned, all our pottery is microwave and dishwasher safe. It's also made using food-safe, non-lead glaze so there are no worries there.

Some extant sails are made from widths only 2 feet wide. Standard linen (flax or hemp) widths during this period were less than a yard wide. When trying to replicate period widths, I cut my fabric and flat fell it back together. This hemp canvas would take two seams per width.

Hey kids! We've got some new products I wanted to show you. A GAoP Cistercianware Tyg: 17th century Borderware: English Delftware: Bohemian Glass: And the piece de resistance, the Port Royal Penis Cup! The rest are on our website. Just follow this link Or go to reconstructinghistory.com and click "Goods" in the green bar.

Yeah, that's why I'm asking, Michael. You see, I've heard stories about uniforms being supplied to the common soldier during the Revolutionary War. I don't know the answer and I'm disinclined to believe hearsay. And since uniforms aren't my interest, I don't have the resources to look this up. As late as WWII, British officers were having their uniforms made by tailors and this tradition was long-standing. In another discussion, Foxe posted some information about Naval officers of small means buying second-hand jackets and having them remade rather then footing the expense of commissioning new garments. But that is officers... The first inkling of "uniforms" for common soldiers happened in the English Civil War when garments were ordered for certain regiments. But these were not uniforms per se, but rather garments constructed from the same cloth by the same tailors at the same time. When the same regiment reoutfitted a few years later, their "uniforms" could be very different indeed. Does anyone know the first instance of specifications for uniforms for common soldiers? And when did uniforms start to be issued to soldiers?

I'd be seriously concerned with how it would drape, Atala. As you know, denim is fairly stiff by nature, even when well-washed, and frock coats look best when they have lots of swish. Linen might be a decent alternative. But you run into the same problem there. Linen has some swish, but only at lighter weights. In a weight heavy enough to make a good-looking frock coat, you're talking canvas and that doesn't swish at all... How does your customer feel about 100% cotton velveteen? It's heavy, but it will give a good look. And since it's cotton, it will breathe better than any synthetics you might use.

Time to bring up the inevitable question -- how "uniform" were uniforms? We know for a fact that our Rev War units are better equipped and better dressed than the real thing. In our time period, when the idea of issued uniforms was just coming in, just how many soldiers would have been identically dressed? Was it the case back then that officers used their personal funds to have their uniforms made by local tailors? When did "enlisted men" start getting issued uniforms, and was that date the same in the Colonies as in the motherland?

Since this is Plunder and not Twill, I'm not going to continue the debate about historical accuracy. Middlesex has trade guns with a cut-back stock. We have them with the stock that continues the length of the barrel. Buy whichever you prefer. Isn't choice a wonderful thing? :)