Calico Jack

As BlackJohn pointed out, a Careening camp is also an excellent reason to have everything, including the proverbial kitchen sink, from aboard ship. In such case, the more the better! Make liberal use of any small props and tricks you can think of, to increase the effect of the camp. Makes it nicely Authentic, too.

Scurvy and the like are fun, even to establish a small part of the camp as Scurvy-ridden [blacken teeth]. Depending on your surgeon, Scurvy can even be considered communicable [!]. As mentioned in an earlier post, whilst the "quarentine" sign is appropriate enough for our Navy camps, it seems less likely for a pirate hospital... A surgeon's station nearby would be a good indicator in exchange. Lots of your surgeon's chosen remedy [purgatives, or bleedings, or exercise and fresh air] too.

In all, I think your careening camp might be the most useful excuse of the many possible at any rate. So... tangent done, and back to the topic at hand? Good "easy" and "cheap" tricks to indicate a nautical/maritime encampment of pirates, as distinguished from the [pick a navy, and navy] Navy?

[grins] Staying slightly off-topic, I certainly agree that not all started as skilled sailors. Farmers' sons, fishermans' sons, inkeepers' sons... Similarly, some "impressments" were not of skilled sailors, either. One notable for me was a number of Lunenburg NS farmers, who were impressed by a Halifax press gang during a night of boozing following the weekly market. Their story even made it to the local Admiralty Court, which is how it made it into the historical record. That said, those farmers were rated Ordinary, which means 'though they were not good sailors, they were sailors none-the-less. Plus, by the time they made it home, at least several had rated Able, so were at least passable sailors.

Unless taken aboard as a Marine, or as a Warrant Officer equivilant, even those tailors, haymakers and tinkers would be sailors. They might not start out very well at it, but even Rogers suggests that they will be passable once they have got their sea legs. He even hopes to be successfully manned with this motley crew.

A few privateers do seem to have had a "shares" notation for Marines, as differentiated from sailors [the way a Quartermaster, say, is differentiated], but most seem not. What pirate Articles survive also seem to imply that rarely were a Marines equivilant considered, as separate from actual ship's crew.

To use the automotive turn of phrase again from my comparison in the post above, many drivers are poor drivers. This does not mean they are not drivers. Some poor drivers even learn to be good drivers, 'though not all by any stretch. Those that do not, remain drivers, but only poor ones.

Diego brought up the idea of mending nets once at a festival in California.  I know that it is a careening camp, but could we feasibly have someone mending a net, and has anyone ever done so?

Netting and net mending are quite simple, depending upon which knot you choose to be using. I often teach netting with the museum [since we don't just focus on pirates]. The technique I use and the netting needle I use are broadly appropriate as far back as the vikings in Newfoundland, so should be appropriate for the GAoP as well, but folks will want to check it.

One typical knot:

And a needle design for something "personally made" rather than bought:

Me, I prefer the French Hitch knot for netting, as it is simple, easy to do even in the dark below decks, and is easy to teach. Also called the Ring Hitch, you can see it here. And at the bottom here:

Whew!

The question fo wooden or iron barrel hoops [which crops up now and again] might be answerable by someone who visits and asks in Missouri -

In Lebanon, tour the largest barrel factory in the world at Barrels of Fun. Independent Stave Company produces more than 50 percent of the barrels made worldwide. Tours highlight the care and skill involved in producing these barrels used to age fine bourbons and wines. Viewing windows and TV screens offer a “live eye” look at the production process. A cooperage museum spans 4,000 years of cooperage history.

[Emphasis mine.]

Also not picking on anyone, but for what it might be worth, here are my observations:

This is not the excuse we have been using.  Most landings would take place at port.  It would be rare to set camp and the reasons extreme usually.

Camping was unusual. Camping in port... hmmm... I'm going to have to think about that. In port... I think I'd be on the ship, or getting s--tfaced in a tavern.

First, do notice that you both said exactly the same thing here, but phrased it as a debate. Both suggest that most times when ashore, you would be in port [what sort of port, naturally differs sometimes between pirates/privateers/navies, but port none-the-less]. Both suggest that camps would be unusual. AnnaMarie suggests that a camp as we think of it would be more likely when careening, BlackJohn suggests most common when assaulting a town but that it would not be as we think of it.

Therefore, let us all set up the following: this discussion appears to be about Careening camps, then. This is appropriate, since the companion threads are in regards to the PiP Careening Camp.

When you go bare minimum, you'll have to rely on your knowledge of the era as opposed to doing show and tell.

Alas, when you go bare minimum, you also rely on the audience's knowledge of the era to some extent as well. More show and tell means less reliance on the audience already being informed. And as someone who works in museums, I hold grave misgivings about the general public's historical knowledge and understanding of most any era.

On the other hand, all pirates had to do was kill people and steal their stuff, or just threaten them and steal their stuff, and get rip-roaring drunk. Therein lies the big difference between pirates and normal sailors.

It is true. Normal sailors did not often steal their stuff. Unless, of course, said normal sailors were privateers, most of whom appear to be "normal sailors" out to make some quick money during a given war, by sailing under a privateer.

I sometimes believe the whole pirates are sailors line, but then I read primary source and I have my doubts. They are similar to sailors, but I don't believe they are the same. If they were the same, would they ever have turned pirate?

Take out the words "pirate" and "sailor" and instead insert "student" and "drug dealer." They are criminals, but this likely does not make them less sailors. Especially including the many accounts of sailors "taken" or "offered" during captures. Those sailors who sign on the Account from captured ships were, in fact, sailors. Else they would not have been sailors on the captured vessel. Ned Low [my personal favourite] seemed to acquire many of his crew(s) in just such a fashion.

[EDIT: Ooh! Better comparison! There is a young fellow recently in the local news for street racing his car and causing a horrible accident. Take out "pirate" and "sailor" and instead instert "street racer" and "driver"! Difficult to be a Street Racer car versus car, without being a Driver as well...]

who cares........

And Hand, amongst others, I care [grins]. But I think the debate, such as it is, entails less about "period" and more about "event." That is to say, BlackJohn, I've noticed in other trheads your large concern about not just what year is being represented, but also what specific event. Is is a careening? A siege? A night in port? The sack of a specific town? Which captain(s) was historically involved in that event? This is a common question amongst Civil War reenactors, who generally even have scripts as to which soldiers go where on the field and who "dies" when. Do you folks have a specific careening in mind for the 1720 [not 1729][grins] careening camp?

And finally... using some quick secondary source searching, I've come across citations from North America claiming Ditty Bags to be from the first world war, citations from North America claiming Ditty Bags to be from the 1850s, and citations from the UK claiming that Ditty Bags appear in books from 1700 "about" the navy... but being pieces of poor scholarship, they do not give a citation for the books in question from 1700. I'm having some research done by me and others over the next bit to try to track down just how far back does the ditty bag go. Because I want to know if it is accurate, as well as atmospheric. [grins]

Which would be located??????????

A few different spots, in truth. The shot with the boat was Louisbourg, Nova Scotia [as was the first, wee little tent]. The tent with the brown canvas included is at Fort Anne, Nova Scotia. I don't think she included pictures of any of our other "usual" encampments.

Aye. A very good site indeed. It crops up from time to time in discussions on the Pub at fairly regular intervals. What I would rather is that people would buy me boats just like those at regular intervals.

Agreed. Folks should buy him boats like those at regular intervals. And at irregular intervals, at times which don't fit into that schedule, I suppose I will accept gifts of the others [grins].

Actually, really want to find a way to convince the Museum to build one of the 1700s Navy Longboats. They are good for the 1800s too, which means we could use it at most any of the reenactment events that we go to...

Yah..... the 9 and 0 key are too close together........

Aha! Well, that makes a difference. I'm on more certain ground with costuming approaching the "French and Indian War" period in the middle of the century. Ten years' difference makes a small difference for men's, and likely a large difference for women's costuming. Still, I'll now start thinking 1720 instead of 1729.

My own pirate interests are principally Ned Low and company [spriggs, etc]. That hits as late as 1725. Heck, Low only hit Shelburne NS in 1722. As such, I just figured that you folks had some local pirate down there in the late year of 1729, and were using him as a template for the camp.

I believe Reconstructing History also sells the proper reed as well....

Yes, but again, part of the point is that the list should be inclusive, for those who cannot afford the prices of, amongst others, Kass. A combination of Mary Diamond's list with the "cardboard mock-up fake" might then suit the intention of the thread. I think, if 1729 is the aim of this list as well, that a bonnet of some sort under the straw hat would be necessary as well [thus saving any money elsewhere would be a good thing]. Time invested is another consideration. Bare minimum standards.

The aim of the original thread was, it seems, to find a minimum standard which is easily attainable for those who are arriving and wanting to shift from RenFaire to PC for the event, and who might thus be lured into eventually doing Period Correct more often...

Yes, women's costume is necessarily more extensive than men's, but we still must be able to build a relatively simple list that won't require hundreds of dollars and weeks of effort.

Again, as "poise" and "élan" go, mannerisms are an excellent and inexpensive addition to a character's "costume," so can anyone give a few good mannerism hints? The equivilant to Sterling's note on "how to bow."

Hey... that's a bailing hook...... I used one (well two ) of those to load feed (straw and hay) when I worked in a feed store......

Well, as mentioned, cargo hooks have been around since at least the mid-1800s; whilst they are symbolically the icon of longshoremen and dockers [even being the symbol for the 1930s longshoremen's union and strike in the 'States], they have likely been picked up as a useful tool by any occupation which deals with moving bales or bundles, whether a ship is involved or no. I've used one myself [!], but alas, that only dates it back to this past decade or so [grins].

But that still does not answer the question of dates and period. How far back do dockers'/stevedores'/lonshoremen's cargo hooks go? Anyone have an answer?

this Lady really knows her stuff...

She does, 'though as these threads are looking for bare minimum standards for involvement [so as not to drive off those new to the hobby with large investments], and as women's clothes have much more involved than do men's clothes, requiring new folks to shell out 12 per yard for linen rather than 3 per yard for a linen/cotton blend might not make it the most accessible.

The stays concern is the most valid - a lack of stays beneath your clothes [which is, after all, where stays belong in an historical costume] is noticable. Stays are, however, not the simplest of projects, nor something that can be knocked up in a couple of hours for those first looking into shifting into Period Correct events.

Ladies - has anyone here found a good way to simulate stays? Is it possible to pull a good "fake" on stays, since they will be under clothes? Consider it similar to using machine stitching on inside seams, to save time and effort. Since only the effect of the seams is visible, and not the seams themselves, most will accept such a "fake." So how about with stays? How can they be "faked" so as to not require an advanced bit of tailoring effort, or large sums of money?

[Edit the first: As for poise, it is true that poise is free, but it is also true that not all folks of period are ladies or gentlemen - some are even lower class. That said, lower class in 1729 is not the same as lower class today. Mannerisms change, and that I think is the intent of the je ne sais quoi. Figure out the mannerisms of your period, and use 'em as you can. They are free, and add lots of authenticity to even the minimum standards of garb.]

[Edit the second: By the way, thanks Hand for starting these discussions. Folks must be interested - they even get debate going! That's a sure sign of interest.]

By which do you mean a longshoreman's cargo hook, such as this one?

There is of course the not-terribly-useful-but-ubiquitous Wikipedia article here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Longshoreman%...%E2%80%99s_hook and a slightly more useful Smithsonian look at more modern cargo hooks at http://americanhistory.si.edu/onthemove/co...object_178.html

I am not sure, however, just how far back the longshoreman's hook goes. 1800s? Certainly. Earlier? I don't know. Anyone have the scoop on that? Anyone know any dated artifacts to push well past the 1850s?

Honestly, I am not certain that Tiger Bill's cap is proper for our time frame... I think they came later and would be grateful to anyone that can confirm that for me...

Well for a look at Stocking Caps and where they come from, check out

http://www.nachtanz.org/SReed/thesis/sdreedthesis.pdf

Stocking caps are specifically explained and explored starting page 33. As regards Stocking Caps such as this one, the thesis comes to the conclusion that they were still rare in the 1490s and early 1500s. In part this was geographical, being most common in Burgundy/Flanders/Netherlands.

Red was more common than brown as you near 1500 [though was common, apparently, from 1400 on at least], and red more common than brown in Burgundy/Flanders/Netherlands as well. Most Stocking Hats had tassels, again looking at 1490 to 1519. Not sure that the info confirms anything for anyone, save that between 1490 and 1519, the woolen stocking hat with tassel, in red or brown, with limited decoration, was appropriate. Honestly says nothing for 1729, of course.

One more source gives that hat style as accurate for GAoP. It's a re-enacting group, admittedly, as well, but supporting evidence: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/TheArchangel...tes_privateers/

although I am not against folks going barefoot ON LAND... I adhere to the belief that shoes are a MUST onboard ship

Monmouth cap/thrum cap/or simple cocked hat

Hm ... I think you got your shoes backwards - that is to say, shoeless on deck is why holystoning exists. Leather shoes on salt-spray decks quickly leads to no shoes. Barefoot in the ratlines seems to be more common historically. And again, you don't holystone the deck to keep splinters out of the sailors' soles, but rather out of their feet. Shoeless on land is what would be odd....

[Edit: In the many discussions on the topic in Captain Twill, visual and documentary evidence is available to support the idea that some sailors wore shoes on deck, whilst others were barefoot. Rather than discount either set of evidence arbitrarily, the assumption must be that both were options.]

As far as the hats, the Monmouth is the best , and covers a VERY broad historical period. It is however a pattern that is [legally] very tightly controlled, and thus potentially quite expensive for those living outside the UK. Lots of "fakes" are readily available, even as patterns off the internet. Like real linen [blends and fakes can be as cheap as a dollar or three a yard, where real linen is often 12 dollars or more the yard, which is no small difference for many who are not exceeding wealthy]. The Monmouth is reasonably "fake"able, however, and a number of folks can give good ways to fake the cap [whether by knittiong a SIMILAR but not exact pattern, or by using a lanolin-in wool tuque and wearing the fold on the inside].

Just to carry around ?

Ah, you're showing your reenactor colours, Hand. P'raps they plan merely to hang it on a wall and never carry it at all. [grins] Of course, I'd suggest hanging the Real Thing myself, but there you have it.

Collector of movie replicas rather than player with the toys, or collector as an investment. But Hands' suggestion still holds. Why not go the extra and get a "replica" that is the "real thing" instead?

<<Period Buckle or lace-up shoes are strongly encouraged

Sandals or bucket boots will pass, but only because the ground is coral (Safety First)>>

As a note [yes, this is not the "real list"], might also want to mention when someone can do without [at many events, say, "barefoot" is perfectly acceptable, and quite affordable].

<<If you have any questions, or for availability of loaner garb post in the Careening Camp thread.>>

The "loaner" notation is quite encouraging, and will give chance to discuss with those unsure, what they do already own, whether or not they realize it.

<<It takes time to put together good authentic garb, But with encouragement and helpful advice (not criticism) our hobby and the number of authentic Pyrates will grow.>>

Agreed. This is true of all reenacting, so pirates would be no exception.

<<think we also might need a few pictures showing minimum garb.... and then what a few additions to the garb can do..... >>

Excellent idea. Even a "shirt and britches and barefoot" shot, for the bare, bare minimum; to compare with a very few [but visually interesting] period "accessories" or "enhancements" to that minimum. Retain the intent to show how it can be within a reasonable budget of money, time, and effort. Remember not to scale up the "additions" shots too high [not "compare this minimum to this shot of someone who has spent 485 work days, and $512481 dollars" but "compare this minimum to this shot of someone who has added these couple of extras that they made over a couple of weekends"]. After all, the guide seems to be aimed principally at those being introduced to the historical pirate reenactment; just a reminder [probably un-necessary] not to lose sight of your audience.

I also understand the need for a good "fake" [cottons instead of some linens, etc] for some gear. I also recommend setting a simple list of bare minimums - inclusions rather than exclusions, with some suggestions for optional additions or replacements, and a couple of period images ["this is what we are aiming for"] if possible, for inspiration. This can accomplish two things additionally: it can help remind people to dress as crew [can't have all captains]; and it can help people remember that when wearing "fakes," you need to be able to explain to the public what is NOT accurate about your costume, when curiosity is roused [materials chosen, "pattern is off by four years from 1729," etc].

Oh, and agreed, the images are great!

Without reprising nine pages of the thread, has anyone cited Hogarth? I've been going through Hogarth's paintings and engravings, in regards to costuming [1730s stuff, just-post GAoP], and note a couple of images with revealed tattoos. A tattooed child [a six pointed star upon the abdomen] in the Rake's Progress series, and a former criminal [cross and initials on the bicep] in the Four Stages of Cruelty series [the latter from 1750, the former from 1734.

Just post GAOP ['though involving a local favourite, and a "notorious" pirate, Ned Low], in 1722 Philip Ashton, merchant seaman and schooner fisherman, was impressed by Edward Low, and on his eventual escape and return to Marblehead, wrote an account of his experience.

Yes, assuming one example to be a general trend is a very dangerous thing, and is NOT good history, however Ashton was (a) not navy, and (b)lower-middle class [if not lower class] and was in fact, it is strongly implied, able to write himself, as opposed to dictation.

Now, that said, it is possible that his account was a fiction ['though unlikely], and it is possible that his account was dictated to a second party for the writing of it, however, it would appear that at least one lower-middle-class fisherman was able to write [and thus likely, to read]. Perhaps the exception, rather than the norm, but a possible example. Surgeons [see the surgeons thread] were of course also notoriously literate. Many of the accounts we have from the time are "memoirs" from surgeons [Alexandre Exquemelin, and a few others].

[Edit: additional, to cite "Wages" from the flags thread over in Plunder: "In history, it is usually safest to go with general practice than to postulate what "might" have been done that deviate from "normal," esp. when PERIOD sources make little to nothing on anything unusual. People tend to ONLY note things that are "odd" PRECISELY because they are DIFFERENT from norm." Exactly.]

Surely in the hundreds of ship's surgeons some of them may have used something to create a portable kit. (Or maybe not - perhaps all surgery was confined to the location on the ship where they were performed. It's hard to re-focus your perspective when we've had portable medical units for so long.)

Army surgeons would likely have had want of something somewhat portable, but I don't see that maritime surgeons would much have felt need. A surgery is not particularly portable, but men are. Rather than take the surgery up on deck, bring the wounded down to the cockpit... And how often would you be wandering off ship so far that you would need a "portable surgery" instead of that on ship? [Only, alas, when re-enacting]. For re-enactments, I usually stretch history so far as to allow for a quarantine/surgery tent ashore [cinematic equivilant being the self-surgery displayed in the film "Master and Commander: Far Side of the World], which gives an excuse to have a medical chest and surgery set up off-ship, even if admittedly not the best excuse. That seems to work, and gives an opportunity to explain how it would rarely have been used [the temporary surgery ashore would rarely have been used, not the quarantine tent, which would have].

Bleeding bowl and lancet appropriate to your period would be quite portable, 'though, I suppose.

Is a pouch period correct for GaoP? (M&C takes place later than that.) Does anyone know what sort of pouch it would be? I'd carry a chest but...what a pain in the neck it would be to haul around with  you, you know?

Bad news in one regard - Barber surgeons were using chests of medicaments as far back as Mary Rose, in the early 1500s. See http://www.maryrose.org/visiting/tour5.htm for an image of some of the medicine jars and tools. Good news in another regard - those jars and tools should not be too difficult for you to acquire or recreate.

That is indeed a good book. I'm in the process of looking for a more aesthetically pleasing one, though.

Ah, one of the good things about the Gutenburg Project - download in straight Text format, and you can use a word processing program to make it as pretty as you like - even to publish it in a book format, for good-looking reading [grins].

Ahoy, folks. Another odd request. If anyone is able to help me track down the text of the script to Farquhar's 1706 play "The Recruiting Officer" [a play which remained popular right through the Napoleonic era], I'd be much appreciative. I am looking to craft a prop copy.

Many thanks, gentlemen. I may in the end cave and simply build a stock, but the barrel-knot cravat and some others were still being used amongst the "non-coms" like the naval surgeons, in the Royal Navy even at Trafalgar, so I may still aim to do a cravat [2" by 30", and such].

The illustration is most helpful for the stock, however. That'll help when I get 'round to having the stock as a solid option.