Gentleman of Fortune

As you can tell by the pictures that Foxe's posted, bands aren't needed for a sea chest. I think people confuse two different things though. A sea chest is what sailor would put his belongings in (i.e. clothes and personal items) which is what Foxe's has posted. The other chest we are thinking about is the "pirate chest" that we think of when we talk about burried treasure. I think that kind of chest might be a more secure variety with banding and what not. I seem to recall them being called a "coffer". Seems like the simple sailors sea chest would be the easiest to build. GoF

My experience is that a straight lasted shoe will be slightly larger than a regular r/l shoe.... Since it has to accomodate either of your feet. You usually wear them on the same feet and break them in to the individual right left. But its not really as scarry as it sounds. I have not recieved the sample yet, but when I do, I will post pictures. GoF

Ineresting topic... but not my cup of tea. I will say this... When I lived in the UK, there was an excellent show on TV about homosexuals in the 18th century. All the "coffee houses" where the upper classes would go and dress up like females and and do what they *do* (this included re-enacting fake births). There seemed to be a tolarance up to a point. I think they called them Molly Houses. (I just watched the show for the costumes... they were awesome..... no really!)

no need to apologize for doin' what your doin' mate. I think you are making a good move with doing a coat using KASS patterns though (if that is what you meant). Fantasy or Factual, a coat is going to cost real good money. An authentic one will give you more options later.... if you want to dable in authentic piracy. Hats can be made realitively inexpensively (hat blanks are around $30). You might want to PM harbor master on the leather tricorn. I think he has owned/bought several types and swears by them (I an not sure who he reccomends though......) Good luck, (and post pics!) GoF yeah.. that bastard

Now its seems like i got to apologize for posting these days.... I just got back to this thread, and I usually start reading from where i left off (or last posted). Then I think some, and chew my cud.... and then post my freakin opinions. so, for those that feel that things that were said "two days ago" are off topic now and we don't need to go back, just scroll down and skip my posts. The Harbor Mastor said Whats your point? Yes, levis have been around over one hundred years. So have a lot of things. The "rub" comes (using your levi analogy) when someone is trying to (or claiming to) portray a cowboy of circa 1875 and wears a pair of modern 501 jeans. Now to some of you, they are the same, but to others, they are totally different jeans. Even their retro 1873 line is not like the original pair. I could list some of the discrepancies, but you probably don't care and I am tired of doing everyone elses homework. 100 years is a lot of time to change, tweak, and modify, all in the name of fashion. Its true for 1873-1973 and it was true from 1673-1773. Capt Bo Well you are not the only multi period, multi decade of experience re-enactor to saddle up to this bar.... so we will scoot down and make you some room. But you can't be so naive to believe that this is the ONE re-enacting period where there aren't those that try to base their imrpession on historical facts and those that base their impression on fantasy? Really???? Every period, if it has more than three people doing it, has different levels of acceptance and different guiding principals. Its alive and well in pre-roman re-enacting all the way up to those that do Vietnam living history. The interesting phenomena is that different re-enacting periods seem to get the refugees from other periods. When I was doin' WW2, from time to time, we would get an influx of Civil War re-enactors who were tired of being pushed toward authenticity and for some reason they didn't think it existed in WW2 (WW1 re-enactors were known to be authenticity hard-asses so they didn't go there). InWW2, there are lots of groups that don't push authenticity, so some found homes but they were really dissapointed that there were factual and fantasy types there too. So don't be too discuraged mate, becuase the piracy tent is big enough for everyone. We will continue to discuss the minutia of historical representation in an open forum, and you will hear the ocasional sizzling sounds of "pirate sacred cow" myths on the Webber of authenticty, but don't take it too hard or feel unwelcome. Besides, if we are not tying this all to some historical context, wouldn't we be better off gluing on our vulcan ears and going to the trek conventions? GoF

.....Ok I hear what your saying Jib, but the reality is your questioned was answered by the fourth post, and, it seems by your post addressing me, it should have ended right there. But unless you are new to forums, you should know that, once you hit that "create post", or "add reply" button, the cat is out of the bag and Pandora's Box is now open. So we went from "What was the period before the Golden Age Called" (Jib) to "We need to cover more re-enacting periods" (CapnWilliam) to "Lets do Modern Pirate" (Coastie) then, back to Buccaneer (several post later thanks to P Hand and RumbaRue) and finally, to the magic 13th post from DasNDanger where she asked and followed it up with That led to a whole slew of questions and statements about how the Buccaneering period is "so much better" than the GAoP... but the boot question was never really answered. Then, some character named JIB states... so, Mr Jib, that seems to be where the thread got back on the boot kick. Remeber too, that not all of us are on the same time zones, those of us in Europe are 6 hours ahead of EST, and since most of the Americans are on the web during the work day, a lot happens while we are in bed. So, to you, a discussion may have ended. But to some of us, we have just read it ,and it has just begun (again). Ask Mr Foxe stated, currently, there seems to be several boot threads and several authenticity-fantasy discussions going on. I would imagine if you looked back through the archieved post, you will find that the same discussions were being tossed about YEARS ago (on this forum and others). But to new folks, its.... new. So about every 5 weeks we get the bucket boot question. Every 3 months, the earing question comes up. I am not sure why I am being singled out here Jib, as your orignal questioned was answered and the topic had been Shanghai'd several times before I got to the buffet table. And when I finally got to it, I felt the need to respond to several points that had been made since the last time i laid eyes on the thread. Again, It seems that I must choose my words more carefully as I seem to be being misunderstood AGAIN. If you have read my posts, you should see that I find that the "pirate" tent is truly big enough for everyone. And I have stated many times that, in a sense, both sides need each other.... I am cool with the fantasy types out there that do their own spandex thing and call themselves pirates, and I am not trying to pee in anyones breakfest cereal of choice. BUT, If someone asks about Boots (for the 37th time this year) I will tell them that there is no evidence that bucket boots or riding boots were worn by sailors aboard ship. At best, we have one picture of some french sailors with some natives on land... but that is one out of thousands of sailors. The thing is, I say a lot of things that people don't want to hear, and it makes me the instant ass hole. I guess i could just shut the F up or smile and nod when the throngs of "pirate" re-enactor/ festival attendies go on and on about piracy and that everyone "knows" that pirates wore boots and had earrings. I promise though, I won't post on any more of your threads for fear of bringing them down to high school level. PS Engima Ok, I only have the older book (#67 that is just Pirates but I find it pretty weak. Osprey has its place, especially if you are in to figure painting. And its usually the first book folks that have decided to become "serious" about any particular topic buy to hold them over till they get other books. But with descriptions like it doesn't exactly give us much to chew on.... again, its just rehashed stuff from other books.

I am not sure that i count Hogarth too much. Here is why He was born in 1697 and was trained as an engraver... and apparently had his buisness up and running around 1720. But there isn't anything significant by him till the very end of 1729 with the Beggers Opera, with the bulk of the stuff he is famous for (Rake and Harlots Progress, and Marriage a la Mode) in the 30s-50s. Timing here is important here because fashions and styles start to change (in the 1720s as a whole as we are leaving the Baroque and reminants of the Baroque and getting firmly planted in the Rococo period. For some things it might seem minor (like gentlemen start to wear their stockings tucked under their breeches instead of pulled over the tops of them, but other things are major, like the cut and lenghts of clothes and hairstyles. Hogarth's Soliciting Votes (that is the name of the second one you have pictured), it is dated 1754, so its clearly out of the GAoP. Which one do you think might be the sailors? There are two men with blue aprons that are talking to a gentlemen that seems to be wearing a riding coat/overcoat and riding boots. Not sure what this proves. The other Hogarth is weird. There seems to be two versions This one and this one Not sure what Hogarth's 1751 Beer Street has for GAoP relevancy... Isn't that a soldier wearing the boots? The fencing painting is pretty cool too.... for a 1787 painting (if I am reading the date in the bottom right corner right). Kass covered the other ones.... Keep up the good work though Pete, you are making this interesting. GoF

I am begining to wonder if it really is Rene'. I would have thought it would be a famous enough statue to find out if it really was him. I am thinking its somebody else. Still post GAoP though.... GoF

René Duguay-Trouin. A French Pirate (1673-1736). He was GAoP, but sadly, I don't think that the sculpture is... the boots look to be left/right and not straight lasted. I searched the net as well but could come up with nothing on that statue. Not sure if this is a contemporary picture or not.. Your statue picture is from the Dorlington Kindersley Eyewitness Guides (#59) ... why yes Foxe. That is where I get all of my information....

Boots.... Our next speculation (not mine, mind you) is that there are these ever elusive soft high sailor boots... I am not too sure about that. It infers that they are some sort of sailor specific item. Wouldn't those show up in wills or probate info? Wouldn't there be at least one documentable picture with these being worn? Until proven othewise, I will cling to my belief that, if they were ever worn at all, they were an extreme anomaly and at best constitute a fraction of 1% of sailors. GoF

When i first read them, I really enjoyed them. Some of the stuff was great (the SEP... Someone Elses Problem)... But I just tried to re-read them a few months ago, and it bored me. I guess I knew what to expect from it. It was kind of like a friend forgetting that they have told you a particular joke and tell it again (and again) and you feel like you have to laugh, but it aint funny anymore. But, by all means. Enjoy them the first time around... And when your done, try a John Irving novel. GoF

Could you elaborate a bit? Do you mean he is critical of your work in progress kit, or that he doesn't like buccaneers infringing on his turf or ??? I think that everyone's kit is "a kit in progress" and I don't fault folks for trying and being at a different spot along the route/way to being correct. Its the ones that aren't even trying that get my goat! GoF

Pete..... got to commend you for your efforts. If a picture of a GAoP sailor with bucket boots is ever going to be found, I bet its you that finds it! The picture of the man in the Yellow justaucorps is very interesting. Its not just "some guy with a justaucorps and boots", Its William of Orange at the Battle of Boyne. I am not sure when it was painted, but the battle was fought in 1690. If you want to see more monarchs with justaucorps and riding boots, then google William III, Louis XIV. George I, or just about any monarch (or General) and, if they are on a horse, then they will have Cavalry Bucket Boots. So, except for proving the point that Justaucorps and Boots were worn together, it really doesn't move the sailor/boot debate any closer to the goal line (whatever the hell that is). The boots in the painting (and any GAoP Painting) are tools used for riding horses. I think we can all come to the agreement that boots were worn for riding during the period. But a picture of a period Blacksmith might show him with a heavy leather apron. Can we then justify the use of a heavy apron for a sailor? A coffee house employee? A coachman? We can't claim that sailors or anyone else wore a blacksmith apron unless they were doing black smith work. What we are really trying to decide (or what the debate is really about) is: Druing the GAoP, were bucket boots/cavalry boots worn by people that are not on horseback or in a riding situation as every day clothing as part of a "fashion statement"? That is what it really gets down to, because every re-enactor justification for boots is that 1) they stole them from a fashionable gentleman 2)they are imitating the upper classes 3)that because they are pirates, they wear what they want to wear. All the evidence that we have is that boots as a fashion statement (that is not for riding) don't appear till way after the GAoP. People who were riding horses (and could afford them) wore boots with spurs, but those going into town to visit the coffee house or to deal with merchants, or to go to court, or to go to a ship all seem to wear shoes. And If everyones kit was as good as William III's, I would keep my mouth shut and just say, "wow.... look a the Monarch!" . But sadly, its not the case. So get the bucket boots... and a horse too! And a really nice embroidered Justaucorps, with matching breeches, smallsword, waistcoat, swordbelt and hat.... and you will have a perfect GAoP era gentlemen's riding impression. I think that there is a big difference in the man on horse back and these pirate "re-enactors". ***PICTURE REMOVED BECAUSE IT OFFENDED FANTASY PIRATES SORRY*** ***PICTURE REMOVED BECAUSE IT OFFENDED FANTASY PIRATES SORRY*** ***PICTURE REMOVED BECAUSE IT OFFENDED FANTASY PIRATES SORRY*** ***PICTURE REMOVED BECAUSE IT OFFENDED FANTASY PIRATES SORRY*** ***PICTURE REMOVED BECAUSE IT OFFENDED FANTASY PIRATES SORRY*** Again, browse through an early edition of Johnson which has contemporary pictures of pirates (or at least the best guesses of contemporary artists), and your vast collection of original 1690-1720 artwork and show me 1 (one) picture of a GAoP sailor wearing riding boots? If a calvaryman walking through a cartouche on a 1700 map, or a Monarch ( or other member of aristocracy) on a horse is all you need to justify a pirate, or even a pirate captain wearing bucket boots then go right ahead. I would love to hear the answer when a member of the public (or other re-enactor) asks at an event: Joe Public (or ?) "wow... cool boots, where did you get them?" Boot Clad Pirate "Thanks... a place called pirateswearboots.com" JP: "Hmmm.... did pirates wear boots like that?" BCP: "Well, I saw on a forum this picture of William of Orange riding a horse and he had boots.... they were not really boots like this, but theywere boots.... and I think there is a tiny picture of some cavalry guy on a map walking through the scene that has boots on.... again they were not boots like this.... but, they are cool aren't they?" JP: "Yes..... when was spandex invented?"..... GoF

and Rummy3 Barbados Sam Hawkyns Captain Siren of the Poesidon Redd Oktober ACE Captain P.E.W. Cascabel I think that is all... I am working on the poll question that will act as the vote counter! GoF

So far... we have Bonny Red Weasel Hurriacane William Red Wake Pirate Pete Red Handed Jill Skull Pyrate Carter

The boot topic seems to be a moving target... I hope that it has finally found a home. Maybe it could be a sticky topic..... since there is always so much discussion about it. My next question is: Why do so many folks want to include bucket boots in their pirate costume/kit? The only thing I can come up with is that they personally think that bucket boots are cool or There are so many "other" pirates wearing them, that it must be the thing to wear. or Collective pirate "wisdom/mythology" states that of course pirates wore boots. I have never met (or read on forums) a boot enthusiast that has actually posted or attempted to post, historical documentation about the use of boots (except for Pirate Pete... but he seems to be more of a Devil's Advocate, not a boot enthusiast). I have to think that its a lost cause... those that are interested will make an attempt, do their own research, ask the right questions, and come to their own conclusions. I hate to think that its a dead horse... but its dead. GoF

Pirate Pete.... I think that you might be on to something.... Foxe has made some comment as well about "soft boots". Apparently though, the only evidence we have are some french sailors (but not on a ship). This may bear some looking into (at least the boot advocates). I think I sent the PM to your Pyracy Pub mail.... check there! I think you may have answered my question. There is a Batavia Wreck Museum in Australia that has the collected items recovered from the 1629 wreck. There is also a Batavia in Europe which may have a museum that these boots are from... so they probably are not connected. We will have to ask Charity to be certain, but if you google batavia wreck you can follow the leads to the museum and, in turn, a data base of the recovered items. GoF

Oh boy... Well, your right, that is your opinion Personally, (as in, "in my humble opinion") I don't care much for the clothes, and the ships are that ornate-full of carving style that is a little over the top. I don't know if we can say for certain if you mean piracy flourished before the GAoP... I think it has more to do with how many out-of-work sailors that you have on hand than anything else. Are they focusing on the GAoP? My contention is that very few people do either of the periods right. It all devolves into a bastardization of history that, when not based on historical fact, has a better home at a D&D/star trek convention than attaching itself meaninglessly to a historical time frame. You answered your onw question. People have confused styles, history, facts, etc becuase the bottom line is that people really spend little time researching history to create a perosona/image of ANY historical period. There are several "pirate" books out there, but they just rehash the generalized pirate history. There are none that deal with clothing, equipment, and documentable evidence of the GAoP (or buccaneering) periods. Instead, people may read about the life of Blackbeard, and fill in the gaps with "collective pirate mythology" that has its basis in Hollywood (or its Victorian era predesessors) and stand by it like it has been written on stone tablets. They work backwords.... I want to wear bucket boots and earings, now find me a period where that existed. And if they can't find one, then it doesn't matter. Which is why there are far more people that role play fantasy pirates because what they do (or what they really want to do) is put themselves in the pirate fantasy world that they created in their minds. The fantasy world where ALL pirates were part of egalitarian crews and everyone's main goal was thumbing their noses at totalitarian goverments. Where piracy wasn't a means to an end, but a political statment. All thats ok... again there is plenty of room for all. But it creates a lot of toe stepping on when both groups discuss (or try to discuss) the minutia of actual piracy. Now, there are thoes that depend on Pirate Fantasy for a living, and they are in a totally different group all together. ACE of Harbor Bay can make a living off of a Jack Sparrow interpretation. I am not blind to the fact that more people (i.e. the American public) are more interested in Johnny Depp (and in turn Ace of HB) then they ever will be of Greg and his authentic pirate kit. But what my secret hope is that Ace gives them the Dog and Pony show and gets them interested in Pirates. They eventually might google Pirates and come up with several groups in their area and just may join. And there might even be a very small percentage that find my website and become interested in pursuing a historical piracy impression. What i can't help laughing at is that if re-enactors spent HALF the amount of time researching and creating their historical Piracy clothing and equipment as ACE does on his Jack Sparrow kit, we would have a lot less discussion here about authenticity! When you are re-creating a character like Jack Sparrow, you cant really expect to make a living at it if you don't look like Jack Sparrow! Have you seen Ace's kit? My goodness! He has the coat, the sash, the doo rag, the jewlrey, he seems spot on to me! IS anyone going to hire a Jack Sparrow that has a green justaucorps? Or one with a Yellow sash? Have you ever seen two Jack Sparrows run into each other at an event? My Goodness they are much more critical than I would ever be! I got to learn to keep my post shorter.... rant over. GoF

Foxe. Hard to make out with my crappy eyes, but what are you using for buttons? GoF

I vote Joshua Red for senior class president! GoF

Well, it depends on what you mean by exaggerated.... I think that in the pictures that you are talking about, the artist is poking fun of the excesses of English dress and illustrates this with the figure having every possible frill and ribbon on his clothes. The other pictures show typical gentlemen's clothing for the mid-17 century. I wish they had more working men's clothing as that would be more sailor like. Foxe has listed cloting from wills and such on this site before. I think that gives us a pretty good idea what kinds of clothes that the sailor had in his possession. If they had fancy bucket boots for going ashore, they would have been listed in their effects when they died. But we are not seeing that (or Foxe is holding out on us ) GoF

I'll second Capt'n Willam on that. For me, the Buccaneering Era was about (mostly) English Pirates depriving of the Spanish of its gold/silver/treasure from the Americas to Spain. Later, during the golden age, its out of work sailors that are commerce rading on the eastern seaboard of the colonies and in the caribbean. That, of course, is over simplification. But, during the Golden Age, the great conflicts between France, Spain, and England are simmering but not boiling, so they are decreasing the size of their Navies so huge amounts of skilled seamen are now out of work and are turning to Piracy. Foxe has posted so figures on the number of out of work British seamen in other posts if you dig around. Currently, the Buccaneering period is underrepresented in the living history community. The only ones I can think of is Foxe and Co, Patrick Hand, and Hurricane (who is quietly corning the market on the Captain Morgan persona!). GoF

But wait... there is more! Somethings a little too fishy about the bootlegging story. I wonder what kind of things that you could put in your boots to smuggle that wouldn't making running a ship (or even walking) near impossible. Can you imagine trying to run from authorities with bottles of rum tucked into your thigh high boots??? Anywhoo... The other thing that gets my Y-fronts all knotted up is that fact that some people are trying to use the existance of this boot in the 1630-1670 context: To justify this boot in the 1690-1720 context: Am I the only one who sees a difference in the style and construction of these two boots???? And besides, we are not talking about folks whose kit is spot on in all other regards... For every bit of kit they have, they have stretched the boundries of historical accuracy so it doesn't matter anyway. I think we can come to agreement that for Historical Interpretation of a 1690-1720 sailor, English Civil War style Cavalry boots are at best extremely rare and certainly undocumented. So if you are dead set on wearing them, all you have to do is say: "My Pirate Costume is not really based on historical fact, but more on my interpretation of the modern ideas of the "spirit" of piracy. Thus, I represent the fantasy aspects of what the Golden Age of Piracy should have been, not what it truly was." And that would nip any of my authenticity pontifications in the bud. Unless I was asked to make constructive critisism about their kit, I would keep my Friggin mouth shut. Because, there is plenty of room for everybody under the umbrella of "Pirate Festival" participants. GoF To me way, ay, ay, ay, ay, ah! We'll pay Paddy Doyle for his boots.... To me way, ay, ay, ay, ay, ah! We'll all drink whiskey and gin! To me way, ay, ay, ay, ay, ah! We'll all, shave under, the chin! To me way, ay, ay, ay, ay, ah! Who, stole Paddy Doyle's boots?...

Akk... boots. I sent a PM to P. Pete about the Bucket Boots from the Batavia. I went to the Batavia museum site and poured over the archives of wreckage finds and, while there are listed several fragments of shoes.... there is nothing that states a "pair of boots" were found. So are those boots that you have pictured from "Batavia Musuem" from the wreck of the ship in Australian waters whose museum is in Australia, or from a musuem in Sweeden? And The ship was wrecked in 1629 and people lived in and around it for 6 months or so until they were rescued, so its impossible to tell how they were obtained... as part of the wreckage recovery or boots that were near the site, but not part of the actual Batavia's inventory. I think that we are all agreed that bucket boots could have been worn prior to 1680 aboard ship, the trick will be finding good proof of their use on board by seamen in the GAoP. But to do that, we have to rush by blindly all the documented proof of sailors, pirates and captains wearing shoes. I would not put too much faith in the Cartouche picture of "boots" though. I would find it highly unlikely that someone in the sailor profession would be wearing boots WITH SPURS onboard ship.... Unless they road seahorses? GoF

If you haven't browsed Wm. Booth Draper , its well worth a look. Most of his descriptions are for F&I or Rev War but most of the stuff can be found earlier in our period. GoF