Gentleman of Fortune

HM.... Well I don't know about it being off topic. Lets see where it all went to hell.... at the 5th Post in this thread, I said: 1)It depends on what kind of boots you want 2) The historical record doesn't support boots on ships 3) If you were going to wear boots, then period appropriate boots would be what I got (and then a link to the boots) What the hell happened in Post #6? GoF

ZWN... No, I think I understood what you were saying... maybe my reply was weak. I think you are trying to say, if boots were really common and they were given to often and hard use, that could account for the fact that none survived to be examples of GAoP foot wear. Is that right? My reply was meant to say, if the above scenario was true, then even if none survived, they would still "survive" in the written/pictoral record. If boots were worn by 10 percent of sailors, then we should find 10 percent of the pictures of sailors wearing them. And, if something was known exclusively to sailors, then we would think that an artist depicting a sailor would use those "keys" to frame his subject. The common mythology overtakes this at times, especially with regards to boots. But when we take that "mythology" and then look at the evidence, we get a different picture. Some have speculated that Pirate Captains would have pick of the lot and get the best of everything. So, it would stand to reason that the Most Famous Pirate Captains, when depicted in period art, would have boots. No? But when we look at period art, what we see Captains dressed like common sailors or like Gentlemen... Captain Avery (from an early Johnson?) Teach or Teach Roberts Bonney I'll conclude with Bonney as it is documented that she was trying to disguise herself as a man. Thus, was probably wearing clothes that were common enought NOT to make her stand out. As Foxe says, we have lots of pictures of period seamen. Only one shows boots (not being used aboard ship). I will add that we Cannot be for certain whether the Frenchmen with the boots were sailors or not, but they seem to be part of the personel on the voyage. I would hate to do the actual math to get the right numbers, but it would have to be a fraction of 1%. GOF

A moderator accidently deleted one of the contest groupings. There were 18 entrants and the polling software only allows for 10 choices (and 10 graphics per post) so the contest was split into 3 groups, then the winners of each group would square off. Since one group was deleted, I thought the only fair thing would be delete them all and re-do it.... It was a bitch to get up and running so I am going to wait till I have the energy to do it again (maybe sunday) GoF

Sailors... and except for the French guys in Capotes with natives, not GAoP sailors.... GoF

Foxe... you are fast! Now hold on... I can't let this pass. We have not determined that sailors "wore boots". We have yet to find any concrete evidence of sailors from the GAoP, let alone pirates wearing them. If anyone should know this, it should be you. You have spent more time trying to prove it than anyone. But remember, as far has historical evicence, 1629 and 1829 are almost 100 years out of period for this discussion. If you have convinced yourself that a picture of some obvious calvarlymen of the 1640s or some Napoleonic era sailors with boots justifies shipboard boot use for 1717, than this discussion isn't going to get much further. Did you know that there are probably 10 times the amount of pictures of Naval officers/captains in ARMOR than there are of them wearing boots??? Admiral Russel 1693 Admiral Shovell 1702 Again, if they were Fashionable, wouldn't the guys who could afford to be depicted in the lastest fashion be wearing them? GoF

ZWN... Interesting but not likely. They seem to be totally absent for the written/pictorial record. If they were even "fairly common", I don't think that Pirate Pete would be having such a hard time finding a picture. Our ability to think "historically" gets clouded with common lore and what we want to believe happened. As Americans, we really pride ourselves on our individuality. We try to translate our own sense of "individuality" (that has taken 300 years to develop) to what people back in 1700 would have thought and and the way they would have acted. From what we can tell, it seems that boots were worn with regards to horses and riding. Most of the time we see them, they have spurs attached. Now we have to include that in the pro boot argument as well. But I am suspecting that the pro-boot crowd would say that a sailor is just copying landsmen fashion. GoF

actually... not a bad question Carter..... see, you are being turned to the dark side.....

I will go back and look at POTC tonight (if the Warden lets me) and check that scene out. I think that the common theory is that sailors went shoeless. But "common theory" proves more often than not wrong when looking at GAoP and Piracy... To be honest, I would rather defer that question to Foxe, Royaliste, Hawkyns and maybe even Francois... Those folks that have spent more time on ships undersail than the scant few times that I have (as more of an "observer" than sailor i might add). We know that shoes were available to sailors, and it would make sense to me that they were worn while performing duties of a sailor. I would think that, except for the summer months in the Caribbean it would get pretty freakin cold with all that water and low temperatures to go around barefoot. The other interesting note is that the only type of footwear that has ever been recovered from a known pirate ship wreck was a shoe, from the Whydah 1717. Not a cavalry boot, not the mysterious deep sea fisherman soft boot. A shoe. hmmmm...... GOF

........Ok So you have never had anyone ask you about what you were wearing or wanting to know more about piracy or what you are doing? wow..... It must be an east coast/west coast thing because events (fun or historically based) that I have been to, the "public" ask lots of questions as to your clothing, history of piracy etc. Now, they are not always the best or most thoughtful questions, but they do ask. You might have "gone through" 220+ post, but it doesn't seem like you have read them. You are getting something out of those discussions that isn't there. We HAVE NOT seen pictures of any sailors (despite Pete's best efforts) wearing cavalry bucket boots (or any other boots for that matter) for anything closer than maybe 1670ish. Again, we DON’T have that proof! Did I miss a picture of the 1689 New Years Eve party aboard ship???? So don't pretend that you have gotten close to the GAoP, as its disingenuous. Look, again, nobody is saying you can’t wear what you want to wear. But you have to remember that there is a small element that is involved with Pirate re-enacting that is trying to get as close as possible to capturing the history of Piracy and representing it via creating/wearing clothing that is as close to the original clothing worn during the GAoP as they can. Those people use documentation, whether it’s a will, engraving, description or artifact to support what they wear. If you can’t document it, than it is in the realm of speculation until it can be proven otherwise. And if it IS proven, then they look at how common place it was. If it wasn’t common, than even if it existed, it is usually on the no go list for an authentic re-enactor (usually). Boots are not even in that category. At best they would be extremely rare for use at sea during the GAoP. So unless you are re-creating a gentlemen in his riding kit, its off the board. But, for those of you that are portraying the “spirit” of piracy and not any particular era, and for who its really all about going out in costume for a good time and a laugh…. Do what you like! For me though, I would find it hard to go into a school classroom, or give a public demonstration and IMPLY that I was a pirate from the GAoP if I was wearing a collard shirt, CA Boots, 1797 pattern naval cutlass, Fez, and who knows what else…. I’m just sayin’ GoF

The Pictures 1) What is your proof that these are from the shipwreck Batavia? We have discussed this before and your reply seems to be that "they were e-mailed to me from somone in the Netherlands." Batavia is a city in the Netherlands and also the name of a ship that was wrecked in the 1629. HERE ARE SOME LINKS TO BATAVIA WRECK Overview There online database for artifacts recovered. Batavia Artifact Database They have links to other wrecks with recovered artifacts and one is listed as boot conc. (That would be concretion or with a sediment buildup). Its not from the Batavia, and it ain't the boots you pictured.) To settle this, I e-mailed the Batavia Wreck Museum in Australia and included the pic. I guess we should know soon enough (and I will post their reply when I get it... yeah or nay ). 2) This is one of Foxe's pictures (I think) and he says that they are French Sailors. I would love to know more about the picture, but I definitely think its early or at least pre-1700 (or someone just like painting early guns). They ain't on a ship, that is for certain, and they are wearing clothing that is highly unusual. I guess sailors of any period also have the "proof" they need to wear a Capote style blanket robe as well. So far this is your best "proof" yet IF they are in fact sailors and IF it is in Fact GAoP. So if you go on a hunting party with naked natives in a Capote, boots seem to be de rigueur. 3) and the rest..... You yourself said they were post GAoP so I won't go into detail on them. Look, I understand that its your personal goal to find the holy grail here. And I am not the boot anti-Christ. I just don't think that when someone is trying to re-create a period in history to reflect a specific time/era, they can't base a kit off of their personal theories without more concrete proof. And As I will state again, for those that scan over post without reading them, people will use picture 2 to Justify ANY FREAKIN BOOT THE WANT TO WEAR. You yourself stated that the boots seem to be But folks don't want to hear that either because that is not the kind of boots that they can buy from CA Boots. For me, just because something was worn pre GAoP and POST GAoP is not proof that it was worn during GAOP... I will stick by Boots during the GAoP were a tool. A specific tool for riding horses and not part of a fashion statement. Now, they may have been fashionable for Early to mid 1600s and we know they were fashionable again in the late 1700s to the early-mid 1800s, but NOT during 1690-1720 time frame. IF they were so friggin popular and notable to sailors (like the fantasy crowd would like us to believe) why wouldn't any of the Pirates in Johnson's book be pictured with them? Seems like they missed a Great opportunity to show how Teach, Rackam, Bonnet, and the rest took all this fancy stuff from rich people, or how fashion conscience they were..... But they didn't. GoF

I think you could use just about any medium to heavy weight linen, fustian, hemp or sail-cloth. I would love to get some made of of flax sailcloth. My thinking would be that they would be "sailor" made slops out of what was readily available and it would stand to reason that sail cloth would be available aboard ship. The problem (for me) is that noone makes proper sailcloth anymore. It was a particular weave and weight. The Admiralty had specs on acceptable cloth for Royal Navy sails (even for 18th Century). I have lots of linen. If you interested PM me. GoF

This might make it easier... http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TraditionalBuccaneers/ Great idea MJ! GoF

Uhmmm..... do to technical problem, one of the heats of the signature graphics contest was "accidentally" deleted.......... The only way to make it fair is to delete all of them and start over. So, I will try to have the contest back up and running by close of buisness on Friday, 3 March. Sorry GoF

CC We'll, maybe you give Hollywood more credit than I do for doing their homework. Personally, i think they get it wrong far more than they ever get it right. They aren't in the buisness of getting it right though, they are in the buisness of entertaining, and thus, they use their poetic liscense to create fantasy stuff that appeals to the masses. For those that try to base a pirate impression on what is historically accurate, they have to keep withing the bounderies of what is "known" to be correct. The facts are that we have no evidence that sailors wore riding boots aboard ship during the GAoP... which was 60 years later than the 1628 Batavia wreck. Also, I would like to add that the calvary boots pictured by P Pete have not been identified as found from the 1628 wreck. The only types of footwear recovered from the Batavia wreck are fragments of shoes. P Pete got the pictures (aparently) from another forum member that lives in the Netherlands.... Which means that they could have come from a museum in Batavia... not the Batavia wreck. By all means, wear boots if you your heart and feet tell you too. The reality is that there are very few (if any) pirate events that call for historically correct re-enactors. But just be prepared to explain when asked, that there is no evidence for cavalry/riding boots being worn aboard ship during the period of 1690-1720. GoF

Duncan Not sure what you mean.... I think the fold down collar is F&I or later.... Kass will have a better Idea, but I am guessing that the earliest a fold down collar shirt would be "common" would be 1760ish. That is when we also start to see collars on the coats too. I might be off by a few years, but i am fairly certain that there are no fold down collar shirts in the GAoP period. So, I am kind of confused by "all shirts that I have looked at online for the period show the fold down style" If you mean, all the patterns available from vendors are the fold down style, then that may be true. That is because, there are few (if any) dedicated GAoP vendors out there (at least, vendors that are selling reliable GAoP clothing and equipment). Most vendors are targeting the F&I and Rev War crowd, as they have a larger base of authenticity minded customers. At the present time, there are probably less than 100 authentic GAoP era re-enactors that do pirate (at least in the US), and the market is mostly for ren-faire types who focus on having fun and not stitches per inch. Now, I know that some of you will acuse me of trying to re-kindle the fantasy-factual war, but I am not, I am just trying to say that that the vendors will respond to the demand. If the customers don't know and don't care, then why stock things that maybe harder to make/less profit margin and have small volume of sales? Kass has already posted a free shirt pattern and directions to make a GAoP shirt, you can find it here http://www.esotericcreations.com/index.php...rticle=12&mn=ht GoF

Mick That concerns me too. I think that if the latch is not cut to size when the shoe is made, it may affect the appearance if you want to cut it down..... Especially on a larger sized shoe. It may end up looking "cut-down" and thus a little funky. That and the fact that they have increased their price their "early" shoe to almost $150 on their "basic" shoe. It looks like a pair of size 12, straight lasted, smooth-out shoes that you would have to cut the latch down yourself now sets you back $187 ($195 for amrored heels) and take 6 weeks (at least). Hmmmmm... Suddenly, that group shoe buy on a pair of shoes copied from the ones recovered on an acutal pirate ship don't look too bad at $135. GoF

The last e-mail (last week) that I got said that he was finishing up a large commercial order and then going to work on/send my sample. I would love to give a date.... but since it would be a pure guess, it would be a trap for me that I set myself.... That being said, in his communications with me, it sounded like if we had the 30 orders required, he would start getting shoes out from 6 weeks of that order. That is probably the same amount of time it would take to have anyone else make the shoe too.... Josh, do you remember how long yours took? The trick is getting the 30 orders. I have about 15 that I would consider firm. And a lot of folks are waiting on the sample to make up their minds. Will post more when I know (you can never go wrong with 2 pairs of shoes though!) GoF

Pete... what is your day job then? you too William RW! GoF

Wow... Josh beat me to it, but saved me some typing. Currently, there is nobody making specifically GAoP shoes, except by special order. There are some that make an "early" shoe, but since their bread and butter markets are F&I and Rev War the tend to be later shoes modified to look like GAoP era shoes. There are several original shoes and info at my site http://www.gentlemenoffortune.com/footwear.htm and http://www.gentlemenoffortune.com/shoeproject.htm and Josh's are as good as any currently out there. You want a decent sized tounge, and some height to the heel. For commoner's shoes as stacked leather heel is appropriate. The latch (the parts where the buckle attaches) should be fairly narrow. I would say that you don't want to go larger than 1". The kicker is, no one has the right buckles for our period *** EDIT**** I am carrying correct GAoP Buckles... Take a look at my site (scroll down) http://www.gentlemenoffortune.com/footwear.htm GOF

Contest is in full swing.... go to Rabble Rousing to vote! there were more entrants than the software would allow so I broke them into 3 heats. Check out each one and Vote! GoF

Contest is in full swing.... go to Rabble Rousing to vote! there were more entrants than the software would allow so I broke them into 3 heats. Check out each one and Vote! GoF

Boy... you guys are really good at making and changing rules on somebody elses contest! sheeshhh.... But in the brotherly (and sisterly) spirit of piracy Here are the last of the nominations... Mad Jack Mad Grace Oakum Patrick Hand Francois I am going to work on the ballot right now... good luck to all! GoF

Good points HM.... I hadn't even thought about how heavy a big ol' chest would be loaded with stuff (especially gold/silver). That being said, the coffers can be pretty big, but a non-maritime one was probably not meant to be moved (whereas a sea coffer would have to be portable). There is an Abbey ruin in Castle Acre (UK) that still has a huge coffer in one of the rooms. The coffer must have been assembled on site as its too big to get through the door! GoF

Now you know you have been searching tooooo hard for bucket boots when that comes up! classic.... He is on the way to a ren fest no doubt. GoF

And it is from 1679.... which is kind of Early GAoP. Wierd sleeve thing though... GoF