Swashbuckler 1700

It is not big shame...

Well mr. Lavery is expert (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Lavery) and what Brit.Privateer and Foxe said agrees with him.

Well they were wrong.... not the only time. I told that I am not best person to talk about this and that was the case . Thanks for correction....

So was sailors life during GAoP or in later time like seen in this But enter there at your own risk it maybe really disturbing http://joyfulmolly.wordpress.com/2007/07/03/resourceart-even-more-18th-century-naval-naughtiness/ You have been warned I am not responsible for this.

Sorry but I must say that often pirate/weapon tv documents say that when shot hits to ship there were "deadly" wood splinters flying everewhere. It is true but actually they were not really deadly since they did not fly straight or with a high velocity . So they rotated around and the force when it hits to you is not deadly but some cases the wound may require a patch. Mythbusters have tesed it with cannons and this is the result. But you know more about surgery and all so I am not the best person to peak about this. Sorry for oftopic but Documentary was good.

Perhaps since I know quite a bit of stuff and pictures.. Thanks for confidence.

And those thinks like are 1730s pics good for GAoP are just my thoughts but picture's date is not my opinion but truth. Still no bad feelings!

I hope that there were not sarcasm there Perhaps but it is not just my believes of that Woode Rogers pic but it is the truth. Ask about Foxe if you need. No bad feelings

I am about to tell terrible truth that that Guayaquil pic is not from GAoP . Foxe has admitted it somewhere and there was some museum fail that happened. That pic is from 1760s or 1770s even wiki has got it right http://en.wikipedia....i/File:Guay.jpg and here http://jcb.lunaimagi...blisher%2CTitle and e.g. Woodes hairstyle is not from the period so artists did not know too well what things were like in Roger's time. Artwork describes Woodes Rogers and his men in 1709 but it is not too accurate or from that period but it is made in late 1760s so 50 after.... So the date 1712 is not real since there has been said that it is from Rogers's journal bublished 1712 but it is not there it is from later editions. Also (sorry) Both Ivanhenry's and Foxe's gallery have wrong dates for that Woodes pic... In Ivanhenry's site also this pic that makes pair with the another one is got a wrong date http://jcb.lunaimagi...2~2&mi=8&trs=28 but both sites are good since this is only error that I have found. This leave us even less pictures from the period but there is still some pics and pics from 1730s and 1740s are quite good source but when pic is 50 years ofperiod it is not good but it is still a little illustrative......

Quoting B. Lavery's book " Ship" "(In) The period from 1650 until the advent of steam, around 1830.... there was very little specialization of type in merchant shipping, and vessels like East Indiaman or collier were defined by the size or cargo space rather than by any special features of desing."

I am about to tell terrible truth that that Guayaquil pic is not from GAoP . Foxe has admitted it somewhere and there was some museum fail that happened. That pic is from 1760s or 1770s even wiki has got it right http://en.wikipedia....i/File:Guay.jpg and here http://jcb.lunaimagi...blisher%2CTitle and e.g. Woodes hairstyle is not from the period so artists did not know too well what things were like in Roger's time. Artwork describes Woodes Rogers and his men in 1709 but it is not too accurate or from that period but it is made in late 1760s so 50 after.... Also (sorry) Both Ivanhenry and Foxe's gallery have wrong dates for that Woodes pic... In Ivanhenry's site also this pic that makes pair with the another one is got a wrong date http://jcb.lunaimagi...2~2&mi=8&trs=28 but both sites are good since this is only error that I have found. This leave us even less pictures from the period but there is still some pics and pics from 1730s and 1740s are quite good source but when pic is 50 years ofperiod it is not good but it is still a little illustrative...

(no offence to anyone) About the GoF site I think it does exaggerate a little bit the importance of "slop" clothing but it is not bad since slop clothing was popular in reality....

I also like to start sailor wig conversation since I have found references to it like this: English Merchant Seamen 1650-1775, pg 91-92: "Foodstuffs, especially cheese and bacon, were also sold to sailors and debited against their wages by captains and pursers, as were many other things such as bedding, clothes, tobacco and drink...Some sailors were almost completely outfitted from the ship's stores, such as William Cotter of the snow Lawson who in six months bought a quilt, a wig and twenty items of clothing for a total of £7." Thank for this guote to Brit.Privateer This is also interesting http://pyracy.com/in...s-effects-1722/ Also this practically Gaop pic is interesting man seems to have a wig (BTW there is person on the rigth with typical short hair)

hmmm.... quite fine silk clothing there hmmm...... reminds me of your " What can whyda told to us? " conversation.....

Hello Some pics here http://www.piratebre...ats/hats01.html. Good site is http://www.gentlemenoffortune.com/ but (no offence to anyone) like all sites or books it should be treated with criticism since there is some tiny tiny errors there.... Hair was in this age often short and there were not much ponytais or even less pigtails which were in sailor use later 18th century. Black Beard had huge breads with his beard but Jack Sparrow style was not at least popular if used at all. It seems if wig was used there were no real hair see this tread http://pyracy.com/in...sting-pictures/ ....

Reason for that there were only few Dutch is that that United Provices (people often dont't rememder that "Holland" was actually republic in tis time) did not done same blunder with unemploiment privateers that English and French did. I have found Gaop pirate crew that had large number of spaniards but I dont know where..... I am not fully convinsed of that johnson's theory but indeed it is partly true. I think t´hat Bart Roberts had even Greeks but it is only recollection so I am not sure.... In any case there were some Dutch here and there in GAoP..... "In late September 1720, Captain Nicholas de Concepcion and 140 pirates (Spaniards “and others of diverse Nations”) cruised the waters of Virginia and the Chesapeake Bay aboard a well-armed Spanish brigantine from Saint Augustine." This story is from bage and it seems to bee real... http://www.cindyvall...ackpirates.html

That's precisely it! Yes, there are pictures of people with earrings (though I will note that several of those posted by PoD are from the late 16th to mid-17thC, when we know earrings were generally fashionable), but that doesn't make them widespread. Yes, there are pictures of Dutch sailors wearing them, but how many of us play Dutch pirates? I know of no evidence for Anglo-American sailors, 1690-1730, or indeed pirates of the same period, wearing earrings. End of. So no, we can't say that no pirate of the period sported an earring, but we can say for absolute and definite that they weren't common in any way, and we can definitely say that all the convoluted reasoning, such as prevention of seasickness, has absolutely no basis in historical fact. That such a respected journal as the National Geographic can blithely state not only that pirates wore earrings, but also why, is an illustration of just how far the rot has spread. I've long cherished a plan, for when I'm doing 16th century events, to mock up some dodo feathers and leave them in a mess around the fire, over which I'll have a turkey spit-roasting... Not talking reenacting but history there were Dutch pirates (Robert's and e.g whydah crew) and there were actually even few indians aboard but indeed earrings were not ïn commonplace in GAoP. Other stuff like rings and fine buttons ot buckles were in more popular use but earrings were rare...

More paintings here http://www.sailingwarship.com/

Dutch sailors on the north in late 17th century. Note that one wears cap that is quite simiral to that one in captains head... . Whaling flag is also interesting just a flag of United provinces with fish/whale in the middle......

Good "...the two women... were then on board the said sloop, and wore mens jackets, and long trousers, and handkerchiefs tied about their heads..."

good.....

Hey parrot reference!!!! I think that ofcource they were chickens aboard..

To summary my stance towards earrings: Yep those pics are quite good sourse for earrings. They seems to be the Dutch style since there those pics of Dutch. see this pic in this tread http://pyracy.com/in...al/page__st__20 . But it is good to note that it seems to mainly Dutch style and there were indeed some Dutch pirates but real popularity of earring seems to be quite small. Also this kind of earrings are different that those Hollywood's or Pyle's hoops. Still it really well plausible that some pirates had earrings and since there is these pics it is not completely myth. Two different artists have put earrings to sailor so it is certainly not artistic error and thus good evidence.

around....