Accurate "Deckhand" Garb

[Captain J. Savage]

So I'm trying to find some accurate garb more fitting for a deckhand than a seasoned captain. That said I'm thinking breeches, a loose shirt and rope sandals for the rare occasion that I'm not barefoot. Anyone know of good online shops known for the quality/durability of such products?

Also, can anyone point me to GAoP nautical equipment? (Spyglass, Compass, etc etc)

[Capt. Sterling]

Kass's stuff... Reconstructing History... www.reconstructinghistory.com

[William Brand]

You might also want to consider a monmouth cap, boarding axe, and sailor's bag.

[pyrateleather]

Here are some decent Rope Sandles, you can remove the tag.

I wear these and love them, they look great, but does anyone know how historically accurate they are?

Here is another site but they are a lot more expensive.

[Patrick Hand]

So I'm trying to find some accurate garb more fitting for a deckhand than a seasoned captain.

It depends... are you going "Authentic" or "Hollywood"....

If your going authentic, you want to check out the post in CAPTAIN TWILL

if your going more Hollywood, then go to PLUNDER

Both have a clothing topic listed at the top....

"PYRATE garb/Clothing INDEX" in PLUNDER

"Clothing index" in CAPTAIN TWILL

"The Mercury, 1720 Clothing and Weapons" in PIRATES IN PARADISE FESTIVAL will also be covering "authentic" crew clothing

[Silent]

I know there is a big debate weither pirates whore boots or shoes but I wont get into that here.

[Captain J. Savage]

I know there is a big debate weither pirates whore boots or shoes but I wont get into that here.

Yeah that's why I'm goin' barefoot or sandaled, lol. The only stuff I like from the period would not be considered authentic or even practical.

Thanks everyone.

[Silent]

Good luck

[Evil Tiny]

I would be thinkin' that 'stolen' make the best garb. Me, I just goes with what fit and comfy. Slops, shirt and sandles & leather belt

[capnwilliam]

I know there is a big debate weither pirates whore boots or shoes but I wont get into that here.

Pirate captains wore shoes. Pirate crewmen went barefoot aboard ship, and wore shoes, if they had them, when they went ashore.

There, that ends the debate!

Capt. William

[CrazyCholeBlack]

Pirate crewmen went barefoot aboard ship

um sorry, the debate on that one goes the other way IIRC. They would have worn shoes unless they absolutely positively couldn't get any. Something 'bout the lines being tough on the feet and such.

One thing to think about when putting together "low level" ie deck hand (or street person really) clothes, think about the wear. These aren't going to be brand spanking new items. Don't feel afraid to put some patches on your slops as if they've been worn out & repaired. Don't be afraid to get your shirt filthy dirty & for the love of Pete, please don't bleach the thing after all that hard work.

If you need inspiration, look at the clothes that modern construction workers wear. Look at how worn out, stained, ill fitting & patched up they get. Imagine that, only 300 years ago.

[Matusalem]

Check out this John Singleton Copley painting (it's 1778, not GAOP), noitce the man with the sailor slops over his breeches:

[Fox]

Hmmm... sandals... I don't recall ever having seen evidence of such in the GAoP. And any regular (traditional) sailor will tell you that shoes are infinitely preferable to bare feet under almost any conditions - but especially so when working aloft. IIRC, of the many dozens of period seamen depictions only one has been offered of a bare-foot sailor. Also, we have numerous records of complaints from seamen about inadequate shoe supplies. The logical conclusion: sometimes seamen went barefoot, but rarely, if ever, through choice.

As noted, the painting Watson and the Shark considerably post dates the GAoP so its relevance is limited at best, but it's also worth noting that it's debateable whether those are breeches or drawers beneath his slops.

[Matusalem]

Mr. Foxe comes through again! Thanks!

[Fox]

You're welcome as always

[pyrateleather]

A little off the subject but that is a great painting, after I read this thread I was interested to find out more. There are several pages of history about it here

[capnwilliam]

Pirate crewmen went barefoot aboard ship

um sorry, the debate on that one goes the other way IIRC. They would have worn shoes unless they absolutely positively couldn't get any. Something 'bout the lines being tough on the feet and such.

What about their feet getting toughened by the work?

I've done stage hand work. I once worked with a guy whose hands were so calloused from handling rope that he could haul on it all day (raising stage curtains and such: his usual work duty), it could tear through his grip: not a blister. My hands would have been bleeding within an hour.

Capt. William

[capnwilliam]

Check out this John Singleton Copley painting (it's 1778, not GAOP), noitce the man with the sailor slops over his breeches:

Aye, tis a pretty painting, to be sure: but do you recall think a workaday sailor regularly wore such pretty shoes? While out in a little boat like that? His shoes would be soaked through, in short order.

Capt. William

[Captain Jim]

Conjecture and anecdote without historical reference will get you nowhere, Capt. William. As the good Foxe has noted, the record tends to support the idea that sailors wore shoes, and complained a lot if shoes were in short supply.

Judging from the rest of the clothing of the man in the bow, I think that he is a deck officer and the good, thick, well-oiled leather of his shoes need fear nothing from a little (or a lot) of salt water.

Anecdotally, however, having thick callouses on your feet will do nothing to prevent a stubbed or broken toe from kicking all of the various fixtures found on or near the deck of a ship.

[capnwilliam]

Conjecture and anecdote without historical reference will get you nowhere, Capt. William. As the good Foxe has noted, the record tends to support the idea that sailors wore shoes, and complained a lot if shoes were in short supply.

Judging from the rest of the clothing of the man in the bow, I think that he is a deck officer and the good, thick, well-oiled leather of his shoes need fear nothing from a little (or a lot) of salt water.

Anecdotally, however, having thick callouses on your feet will do nothing to prevent a stubbed or broken toe from kicking all of the various fixtures found on or near the deck of a ship.

I have seen portraits of elaborately garbed common seamen in the Mariner's Mirror. These did not, despite being historical references, convince me that ordinary deck hands of the Elizabeth period actually dressed that way. Artists of every era have taken artistic license to make their subjects more colorful and interesting.

I can't imagine how shod feet could get the purchase on lines that bare feet could.

As for seamen complaining about the quantity and quality of issued shoes: this would not prove that they wore shoes every day. Wouldn't they want to have a nice pair to wear when in port?

If our shod rescuer is a deck officer, then by definition he isn't a deck hand, and wouldn't be tasked with climbing the rigging. And if he saw someone in the water being threatened by sharks: well, I dare say he wouldn't delay rescue attempts by stopping to remove his shoes first!

I agree with you about bare feet and injury: I never even walk around my own living room barefoot! But many people don't share this fear, or aren't as clumsy as I am!

Capt. William

[Matusalem]

"Anectdotal":...if you have seen the movie Master & Commander, you heard Russell Crowe speak of "our wooden world". Stubbed and broken toes aside, nothing would be more (excuse the pun) of a thorn in the side than errant splinters on deck. calloused feet are no match for slightly protruding timber slices. Trust me... I work in wood. There's nothing worse than splinters. Whether the deck is made of oak, mohogany, pine, teak, etc. ,makes no difference. At sea, decks get wet. That means a lot of sliding around, so feet are often not too well planted.

[Mary Diamond]

A little off the subject but that is a great painting, after I read this thread I was interested to find out more. There are several pages of history about it here

Well done on locating the historical information, PL! Most interesting ~

[William Brand]

A little off the subject but that is a great painting, after I read this thread I was interested to find out more. There are several pages of history about it here

Nice...thank you for the link.

"John Singleton Copley's Watson and the Shark was inspired by an event that took place in Havana, Cuba, in 1749. Fourteen-year-old Brook Watson, an orphan serving as a crew member on a trading ship, was attacked by a shark while swimming alone in the harbor. His shipmates, who had been waiting on board to escort their captain ashore, launched a valiant rescue effort.

John Singleton Copley, Watson and the Shark, 1778. National Gallery of Art, Ferdinand Lammot Belin Fund 1963.6.1"

[Fox]

The thing with climbing rigging bare-foot is that it's not about the rope wearing on the skin, it's about the way one's foot bends about the rope, and the way the rope bends about the foot. It's kinda difficult to explain unless you've done it, but if you've got a ladder at home with particularly narrow rungs try climbing it barefoot and you'll get a small taste of what I mean. Then remember that ratlines bend under the weight of the climber so take a length of rope with an end in each hand, spread your arms, put your foot against the rope and push as hard as you can and you get a small taste of the feeling of the rope bending around your foot. Better stil, make a rope-ladder and climb it barefoot, then climb it shod, and see which is easier. In terms of grip there's really not a great deal of difference, if any. I spend a lot of time working aloft and never go up without shoes, and FWIW I know that Gary of the Royaliste has posted the same here in the past: "I go aloft daily in everything from tennie's to wellington's, depending on work to be performed, but never barefoot...".

The nature of the complaints and the frequent calls by senior officers for the admiralty to provide some form of footwear suggest that shoes were more essential than just something for the sailors to wear ashore.

[Capt. Sterling]

It's kinda difficult to explain unless you've done it, but if you've got a ladder at home with particularly narrow rungs try climbing it barefoot and you'll get a small taste of what I mean. In terms of grip there's really not a great deal of difference, if any. I spend a lot of time working aloft and never go up without shoes, and FWIW I know that Gary of the Royaliste has posted the same here in the past: "I go aloft daily in everything from tennie's to wellington's, depending on work to be performed, but never barefoot...".

FWIW: I am not nearly as experienced as either Foxe nor Gary but from having had the chance three times now to climb rigging, I whole heartedly agree. My first reaction was to try it barefoot and boy was I sorry, I couldn't get my shoes back on fast enough... and I do spend the vast majority of my day barefoot so there's no way my feet aren't "tough enough".