Swashbuckler 1700

Thanks. Interesting that how Osprey books makes me this talkative. Firstly I say that it seems that the new more accurate style is, at least party, merit of the other author of "Pirate: The Golden Age", David Rickman. He has made a lot of study in pirate reenacting forum of "Pirate Brethren". I think Konstam himself has focused on more general things and David in the clothing and such. At least David wrote the clothing section of "Pirate". However in this new Blackbeard book Konstam is the only author. Having read the other book I make notes of the hats you mentioned: The large fronted cap is probably supposed to be a leather cap with red cloth facing as mentioned in the RN slops. In the earlier book there was guessed that the caps would have been something like "Jockey caps with upturned peaks". Also the illustrations showed them as leather caps. And the similar fur hats can be seen earlier than 1730s actually as early as 1690s, if not even earlier http://www.reconstructinghistory.com/image_lib/EnglandsSafety.jpg and about the straw hats: Also I think the illustrator(s) got confused as in the earlier book there were a lot of tan brimmed wool hats based on this one http://www.gentlemenoffortune.com/images/bk-ptg-navy.jpg. and see the picture in "Pirate: The Golden Age" http://www.edinburghwargames.com/J57%20Images/Recruitment002.jpg They look a lot like straw hats and in the book the authors didn't say what kind of hats they were. Add this the hats of "Blackbeard Terror at Sea" http://www.linternaute.com/television/dossier/05/barbe-noire/images/3second.jpg And you have sailors wearing different versions of those hats and some hybrid hats. So the hats are understandable. As for the clear straw tricorns: who knows if they aren't really inaccurate, but there is no actual evidence for them, at least related to seamen or pirates, so I consider them unrealistic. There is a better picture of the new Blackbeard book which I saw in the Google books preview and there was similar hat than in the miniseries. And I must say that well there is nothing actually "Wrong" with the navy blue coats of RN officers. Like I have said in "Uniform colors" thread some English navy officer favored blue in their clothing even before the uniforms of 1748. However it was not uniform and many officer dressed also in reds, greens or browns. There was a picture in the new book that is not shown here were there was captain Brand dressed like the uniform of 1748 and the text said it to be navy uniform of post-captain. Also Maynard of the last picture of my original posts is wearing rather similar suit but a plainer coat. Just if you wonder where I see the naval officers.The only real error is that they are called uniforms otherwise they could well be wearing dark blue coats. And The Blackbeard's fine suit looks quite OK to me, at least -without the boots. My humble opinion though.... For closer look I recommend Google-books preview.

I don't own much Osprey book, no more than the pirate book (I have discussed a lot about it as you may know) but I have always looked previews etc for interesting books etc. Now this belongs to Twill as the book is not fiction (well at least it tries to tell the truth) The book is a part of the new "Raid" series and its name is "Blackbeard’s Last Fight – Pirate Hunting in North Carolina 1718" ( http://www.ospreypublishing.com/store/Blackbeard%E2%80%99s-Last-Fight-%E2%80%93-Pirate-Hunting-in-North-Carolina-1718_9781780961958) Author: Angus Konstam Illustrators: Johnny Shumate Mark Stacey Now my personal thoughts about the book while I don't yet own it. At first I was quite pleased. I looked the book cover and I didn't saw the same terrible, mythical pirate cliche look with earrings etc. which was troubling Konstam's earlier books (like this ). Then the author made a far better book. "The Pirate The Golden Age" was good and rather accurate, while I have criticized it quite a bit. My only real complaint about that book was, and still is, the fact that the authors were, I feel, too picky about the evidence and made the pirate appearance and weaponry perhaps too homogeneous. This Blackbeard book, however, seems to be a small step back to Konstam's older more inaccurate books. Firstly I can see that two things were used to create the illustrations. The first one is the earlier Konstam book "The Pirate: The Golden age" (nothing wrong with that) and the other one is, I could bet, BBC's miniseries about Blackbeard "Blackbeard The Real Pirate of the Caribbean". The series is also know as national Geographic's "Blackbeard Terror at Sea". The series was good and pretty accurate but there were "errors" like bucket boots, earrings and straw tricorns. Here is the intro of the series is you are interested http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vJI4Qj9uR9s Now some may wonder why I think so, as it is not officially said anywhere. Well look it yourself: the book's cover illustration. Vs James Purefoy in Blackbeard terror at Sea. See the style the hat and even the same Scottish style metal pistol. I haven't seen the whole book yet but I have seen a couple of illustrations in book previews. There are no earrings, tattoos or too much bandannas as Konstam knows that they are rather unrealistic.So the book is fairly accurate. But still in the new book there are elements especially the cavalry style boots, sailor's ponytails and straw tricorns that are more or less inaccurate. Also I have read some segments of text and there is said, clearly, that RN officers had official navy uniforms in Blackbeard's time. The text was pretty much like this "Here we have Captain Brand wearing Royal navy post-captain's coat. But his sailors didn't have uniforms." The truth is that Navy had no officer uniforms yet, not until 1748. That is firmly established fact. I think the reason for the uniform error was the miniseries again. There were RN officers with navy blue coats. In Konstam's earlier book British Naval officers had no uniforms and lieutenant Maynard was wearing non-uniform clothes not navy blue uniforms of 1748. Well here, in a picture which Osprey has put in their site about the book, we have BB wearing bucket boots like he does in that series (I have seen it many many times) So all in all I just tell you that there is a new book out there. I cannot make actual reviews as I haven't read the whole book but I just said what I thought about the historical accuracy of the book based on the facts I know about it. Now I have nothing against the author or anything but I wonder why this Konstam's book is less accurate than the previous one. In any case this is accurate compared to many other works so thanks for that to the makers and Osprey. The books seems interesting and I think I will buy it someday.

Indeed true... But now, here, we are talking about Gaop pirates which means westerns pirates of the late 17th and early 18th century. And back to the topic about Gaop era: In his book "Scourge of the Seas: Buccaneers, Pirates and Privateers" August Konstam states clearly referring to some period source: "A number of Africans, including escaped plantation slaves as well as new arrivals, did succeed in becoming pirates in their own right. One exaggerated Jamaican newspaper article of 1725 reported bands of African and African-American pirates marauding the Caribbean and eating the hearts of the white men they captured."

Well, the four largest nationalities make logical sense. They were all part of the United Kingdom as of the Union Act in 1800. If you add them all together, you get 720 crew members from the UK. Out of the total of 883, that's 81.5%. I don't get the impression it was unusual for people to wind up in different navies, either. Several of the military sea-surgeons I studied were in foreign navies during their lifetimes. Looking at the other nationalities by % (and ignoring the unknowns who could have been anything, including English): 22 American - 2.5% 7 Dutch - 0.8% 6 Maltese - 0.7% 4 French - 0.5% 4 Swedish - 0.5% 4 West Indian - 0.5% 2 Canadian - 0.2% 2 Danish - 0.2% 2 German - 0.2% 2 Indian - 0.2% 2 Norwegian - 0.2% 2 Swiss - 0.2% 1 African - 0.1% 1 Brazilian - 0.1% 1 Jamaican - 0.1% 1 Portuguese - 0.1% Total Identifiable Non-UK Sailors: 7.1% Interesting btw (getting to this topic again) Note the practically similar numbers of non Uk pirates in Rederiker's study. (in Rederiker's pirate study) Other (Dutch, French, Portuguese, Danish, Belgian, Swedish, African...) - 6.9% So was piracy as multicultural business as later Nelson's navy? In any case these numbers don't tell all. But they are clearly indicative so I would say that about 5-10% of pirates in Gaop were not from Britain or her colonies. So perhaps fever than sometimes implied by some historians....

Nothing groundbreaking but something more to this old thread too late for gaop but it seems to me that scarfs were used to cover many wounds including eyes No date but it is made by Thomas Rowlandson (13 July 1756 – 21 April 1827) likely not much after the battle (1798) This is even later but a Trafalgar veteran circa 1844

I must correct myself. There is at least an ealier picture of a tricorn with the similar tread thingy that is clearly attached to the crown of the hat. Circa 1720 http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1477998&partId=1&searchText=south+sea+bubble&view=list&page=1

Since unfortunately I cannot edit that post anymore I must post this in new post. The Sequel, or the Banker a Bankrupt http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3072520&partId=1&searchText=sailor&view=list&page=16 "Satire on a corrupt banker, William Belchier, showing creditors assembled in the ante-room to his banking house: three sailors complaining that there is no "Progg" (i.e. booty) to be had from their privateering; a middle-aged man wringing his hands while bewailing the loss of his "whole Fortune" while another man consoles him with the hope that money will be paid "by & by";" So if the date circa 1733 is correct (but something in this looks like a little later I dunno) here we have almost Gaop sailors wearing slops-trousers, jackets, tricornes and neck-clots. The sailors must be the men in the right side. Nothing really special though.... This is also interesting as it has Dutch sailor http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3070209&partId=1&searchText=sailor&view=list&page=4 Later than Gaop but it is showing us a cook, captain and sailor http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3275971&partId=1&searchText=sailor&view=list&page=6 Also I feel that the date 1746-1751 might be a little too early but I dunno....

More stuff The Battle of The Texel, 11 August 1673 picture crica 1685 The 'St Andrew' at Sea in a Moderate Breeze circa 1673 A Dutch Bezan Yacht and many other Vessels in a Crowded Harbour beside a Tavern circa 1669 Turtle hunting in 1740s http://jcb.lunaimaging.com/luna/servlet/detail/JCB~1~1~3556~5630001:-top--Maniere-de-Varer-les-Tort%C3%BCes-?sort=Normalized_date%2CCreators%2CPublisher%2CTitle&qvq=w4s:/when/1701-1750;q:caribbean;sort:Normalized_date%2CCreators%2CPublisher%2CTitle;lc:JCB~1~1,JCBBOOKS~1~1,JCBMAPS~1~1,JCBMAPS~2~2&mi=257&trs=268 The Battle of Barfleur, 19 May 1692 (paining 1693) Hats on French army officers in Barcelona, 1705 Not sure have I posted this before I think I haven't so The Battle of Vigo Bay, 12 October 1702 painting circa 1702-3

I am pretty sure there is no actual thread for this but if you know better put this in correct place. I found no thread for this simple issue Alright so I think the general consensus seems to be that the prey ships usually surrendered to pirates after some warning shots etc. So all in all there weren't that much fighting. However there are cases when there was resistance. I have posted this not rare quote before but I think I post it here too: In an account of the engagement between the English East India Company ship Cassandra and the pirate Edward England in July 1720, Captain James McRae described how his opponent attacked with two vessels, one of 30 guns and the Fancy of 34 guns. Originally from old account but now as it was on book "Scourge of the Seas: Buccaneers, Pirates and Privateers" By Angus Konstam (Osprey, 2007) "For though we did not doubt that he [the Greenwich] would join us, because when he got about a league from us, he brought his ship to, and look'd on, yet both he and the Osunder basely deserted us, and left us engaged with barbarous and inhuman enemies, with their black and bloody flags hanging over us, without the least appearance of escaping being cut to pieces. But God, in his good Providence determined otherwise, for notwithstanding their Superiority, we engaged them both about three hours, during which the biggest received some shot betwixt wind & water, which made them keep off a little to stop their leaks. The other endeavoured all she could to board us, by rowing with her oars, being with half a ship's length of us above an Hour, but by good Fortune we shot all her oars to pieces, which prevented them, and by consequence, saved our lives. About 4 o'clock, most of the Officers and men posted on the quarterdeck being killed and wounded, the largest ship making up to us with all diligence, being still within a cable's length of us, and often giving us a Broadside, and no hope of Captain Kirby coming to our Assistance, we endeavour'd to run ashore; and tho' we drew four foot of water more than the pyrate, it pleased God that he stuck fast on a higher ground than we happily fell in with; so was dissapoint'd a second time from boarding us. Here we had a more violent engagement than before. All my Officers, and most of my men behav'd with unexpected Courage,&- as we had considerable advantage by having a broadside to his bow, we did him great damage, so that had Captain Kirby come in then, I believe we should have taken both, for we had one of them for sure, but the other pyrate (who was still firing at us) seeing the Greenwich did not offer to assist us. He supplied his Consort with three boats full of fresh men. About 5 in the evening, the Greenwich stood clear away to Sea, leaving us struggling hard for life in the very jaws of death, which the other pyrate, that was now afloat, seeing this, got a warp out, and was hauling under our Stern, by which time many of my men were killed or wounded, and no hopes left of us from being all murdered by enraged barbarous Conquerors, I order'd all that could, to get into the longboat under the cover of the smoke of our guns, so that with what some did in boats, & others by swimming, most of us that were able reached ashoar by 7 0' clock. When the Pyrates came aboard, they cut three of our wounded men to pieces. I, with a few of my people, made what haste I could to the Kingstown, 25 miles from us, where I arrived next day, almost dead with fatigue and loss of blood, having been sorely wounded in the Head by a musket ball."

Going round the horn again on this issue I see. It's about that time of year anyway... Yea, some pirates raided fishermen, but that doesn't mean that pirates would want to take them. These boots are definately work specific clothes for fishing. From the boots for fishing I've seen in this period, they would not be good for climbing rigging or walking about on land. They are good for standing in while working with fish though. Unless the pirates decided to go commercial fishing, they wouldn't have a use for these boots. And now, to repeat what many have said on this forum since 2006 (hey, three more years and we can say 'disputing boots for pirates for a decade'!) - Just because pirates encountered a particular thing or group doesn't mean they are going to take it or wear it. The first image that came to mind was if robbers encountered a man who worked with hazardous chemicals, "oh yea, I'm wearing that Hazmat Suit all the time now." If they aren't going to use it and isn't something that's going to garner easy profit, then why would they take it? When the pirates went back to places where merchants would engage in illicit trade with them - I've yet to see "fishermen's boot" as a highly desired commodity. My point was not to defend boots but thinking that fishermen sometimes joined the pirates and they might have boots just because they had no better footwear.I have never actually liked the look of any boots anyway. I just felt that there is the "could". I agree as you clearly know better. Well I think I share the thoughts of one writer here about the boots. Thought I think the writer has exaggerated the use of the sea boots. In the book (which I have never been too keen to believe too much) "Pirate: The Golden Age" by Osprey, is said and speculated: “Water-resistant leather sea boots appear in early 18th-century images of Spanish and French sailors, and were likely used by some other mariners, including pirates. Since these were only needed for the worst weather, and seldom appear in personal inventories, perhaps these too were kept in limited numbers aboard ship and used whoever was standing watch. Thought the wearing of horsemen’s boots by pirates and other seafarers is part of the mythical pirate “look”, it is completely unsupported by either research or reason.”

New trailer All in all while that is not a game-play trailer the game seems epic (It seems also quite historical if we don't get to nitty gritty stuff like ship riggings or style of the some uniforms or swords styles. It is a game after all and well there is Assassins ....)

Coat of Arms of the South Sea Company 1711-12 http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/36062.html There the right figure with fishing net seems to have a pair of leather boots. "fisherman completely clothed, with cap boots fishing net etc" If fishermen had seem form of boots pirates could, many pirates like Low and Roberts robbed fishermen rather constantly. However in any case those are not bucket boots but a more simple ones.However nothing leads to think that boots were notably popular.

Ok Glad to know. And more pictures Sir Jeremiah Smith (the Royal Navy officer) circa 1666 by Sir Peter Lely" A three-quarter-length portrait to left in a brown silk coat fastened with gold clips and with a gold-tasselled red sash round his waist. He is leaning forward onto a stone plinth, his right hand fingering his neck cloth. His telescope rests on the plinth in front of him, and there is a ship beyond. In the right background is a globe and brown draperies." http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/14504.html Thing I see notable: The eagle head sword and the telescope since this is one of the earliest pictures of naval people I have found with telescopes. The sword reminds me of this Here "Men in a Boat Near Two Dutch Ships" 1652 Nothing extraoldinary here. Well quite early telescope here too. And the boat seems to be deformed by a perspective error. BTW is that a broom in the boat? Novissima et accuratissima insulae Jamaicae descriptio so simply Jamaica in 1675 map. Careening ship in late 18th century "A Ship Hove Down and Burning Off"

I have, I think, posted this before but not here so: from The four years voyages of capt. George Roberts. 1726 Robert wrote how pirates "greeted" him "He [pirate Russel] immediately call'd me, saying "You dog! You son of a b***! You speckled-shirt dog"

Again I am obsessed with hats of early 1700s I found this that might explain a bit http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Early18thcenturyWars/message/1029 I am not sure what it is but there is said a think that seems to be true. In early 1700s tricorns were a bit looser since the sides weren't actually attached to the crown. Looking picture here it seems that the Bonnet picture of 1725 is one of the first pictures where anything related to the X threads. http://howstuffworks.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/ih156562.jpg ' However looking at this example I have linked before circa 1700-1709 it looks still really compact: http://www.hermitagemuseum.org/fcgi-bin/db2www/descrPage.mac/descrPage?selLang=English&indexClass=SUIT_EN&PID=JRT-16753&numView=1&ID_NUM=10&thumbFile=%2Ftmplobs%2FKHUKHTXMQH5QGEBL6.jpg&embViewVer=last&comeFrom=quick&sorting=no&thumbId=6&numResults=36&tmCond=hat&searchIndex=TAGFILEN&author= Also here we can see many types of tricornes. some more compact (right side) some really loose(a soldier in the middle). Watteau, Jean-Antoine (1684 - 1721) I don't know the date but it is done before 1721 as the artist died then.

Indeed I think this got over-analyzed there. The comments on the clothing were interesting, although I thought they got a bit overwrought in places. If the commentators are correct, this was not every day garb as I think we had discussed previously. (This is my basic concern with most period portraits though, particularly commissioned pieces. The artist goes out of their way to make the subject look better and more ornate than they normally would have been, so the clothing may not be truly reflective of reality. It would be a good representation of the finest clothing of the period as well as the high-fashion styles, though.) Well I am not so sure about that. The captain is wearing a cap and slippers which are, as far as I know, rather casual clothing rather than the finest clothing. Certainly he wouldn't sleep with that clothing but when he would have been in front of the Parliament (he was also a MP) he would have, I think, used his wig in his head, an actual justacorps coat and a hat under his arm, like other MPs in most pictures. I think this is the finest version of casual gentleman gear. But probably most captains didn't even own this fine suits... After all Graham was a Lord.... Also note that the cap is just like this earlier example Turban style "nightcap" worn in indoors, 1696. http://www.costumes.org/history/leloir/vol10/38_1696velournightcap.jpg and nightcaps weren't the best clothing gentlemen had as it was used when you were out of sight in your home, or indeed in your cabin, when you didn't need to make a really good impression. Same with slippers I think. Correct me if needed. I think the armored Tordenskiöld picture is more one of those pictures with non-everyday clothing.

A pirate related in my opinion 1720 Painting of Peter Wessel Tordenskiold (lived 1690-1720) who was an eminent naval officer in the service of the Royal Dano-Norwegian Navy during The Great Norther War (1700–21) ' Same man without full armor and hat in 1719 '

And I found the answer to that uniformity here http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66293.html And also I found out the Wiki has some great info about the one painting we have bee looking for a long time https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Captain_Lord_George_Graham_in_his_Cabin

A beautiful vessel model circa 1723 http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66379.html French man-of-war, ca.1700 http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/66379.html

I am not sure why I studied this but well.... And I am sorry if I am unclear It seems that "barge crews" who rowed "barge" boats had many different types of caps, at least during the mid and late 18th century. Many of them where peaked (like Lord Anson's barge crewmember above) sometimes the caps were like like grenadier caps (like here). It seems that people here are not ordinary RN sailors but some barge men who had uniforms like said in this other example here " The 18th-century admiral’s barge carried by men-of-war was a richly ornamented craft. A smartly dressed and well-drilled barge crew was considered to be a status symbol amongst the ships of the fleet and often oarsmen were dressed in a uniform designed and paid for by the admiral himself." Also Thames watermen who are more or less related to barge boatsmen used (at least later) and still uses a form of cap that is interesting. http://www.watermenshall.org/ (note how similar these are http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4084/5021679416_facb286799_z.jpg and these men http://www.watermenshall.org/events1.html) So all in all there is a lot of caps and a lot of rowing men but that is any of this related to 1706 RN slop contract is unclear.... I think But if so then the caps here http://www.nationwidebooks.co.nz/assets/images/products/9781849084970.jpg can be accurate And I almost forgot: Well an example of one style of cap... Thought there is no links to the RN slop caps of 1706.... Here is a particularly ugly bargeman's cap (in my personal opinion as I think jockey cap or baseball cap styled hats are ugly and boring). Circa 1795 and there is even some leather in it.. somewhere. http://collections.rmg.co.uk/collections/objects/71260.html This cap belonged to a member of Samuel Hood's (1724-1816) barge crew. It is made of wood that has been steamed, shaped and covered with brown velvet. The brim is of stiffened leather and has also been covered with brown velvet as well as Viscount Hood's crest, which has been embroidered in stumpwork. The interior of the hat is lined with linen and has the maker's label as well as the owner's name, John Lea. There are two holes for ribbon ties at the back which would have served to secure the hat. Officers often dressed their barge crews in non-regulation clothing such as this hat.