Striving for accuracy....

[dasNdanger]

In the Great Earring Debate, JoshuaRed asked me this question, and I figured the answer would be so OT that I decided to start a new thread.

Yes, but if you so desire to experience what your ancestors felt, and how they lived, wouldn't it behoove you to strive for accuracy, to best experience what their clothing/life was like? If that is what you desire, and sounds like it is, then isn't draping fantasy/farce over the accurate stuff just further removing you from the past you yearn to savor?

Well, yes and no. First off my costume - if you saw it - is far from what is considered 'fantasy' wear...but it's probably not what you would consider authentic, either. The 'male' version is simply full, shin-length trousers (not slops or linen, but they're a rough cotton and pass okay), a long, full-sleeved, shirt with laces at the collar, (no ruffles), a vest, and usually primative, leather sandals because I have yet to find the right shoes, and I don't do boots. A pistol, some accessories for it (oil flask, powder horn (or 'flask'), extra shot), and a leather money pouch, fixed-blade knife, and a mug - just 'cause EVERYONE has one - and NO EARRINGS. Probably a few other things I can't think of off the top of my head. If I do the 'female' version I have all that stuff, just in a skirt and shirt that looks more like dumpy farmer's wife garb than wench-wear, and I add some jewelry - so it might lean more toward fantasy, not sure.

Yes - I would like to experience what my ancestors felt, but I have to do it as myself - which means that there are things I won't do today, and wouldn't have done back then (I'm sure I would have been beheaded or something early on, seeing as how the flow and I do NOT get along... ). So, when I say I want to experience that life, I keep in mind my own personality...and adjust accordingly...thus the no hats, no boots, no loopy earrings - those are things that I don't care for, and would do without regardless of fashions or trends. I don't want to transform myself into something I'm not, but instead, through donning an 'appropriate' costume, transport the person I am back to another time - a la Kirk and Spock, or something like that.

Now, although I am white, my great-great-great grandmother was of African descent (wanna hear the story about her and Teddy Roosevelt's pa - or was it his uncle...?? Anyway... ). And seeing as how she was from Charleston, SC - and seeing as how that port once welcomed pirates sailing up from the Caribbean - and seeing as how about a third of pirates were of African decent - maybe I can entertain the idea that some of my ancestors came from Africa via the islands, or at least they may have entertained a pirate or two somewhere along the way, if they were never one themselves. That being the case, it's very easy for me to imagine 'my' piratical persona to be adorned with wooden and clay beads instead of gold chains and gemstone rings, or to wear sandals instead of European buckle shoes. So - where do we ultimately decide on what's authentic?? It MAY be accurate for someone like me, despite my Scottish, Danish, and German ancestory, to wear something a bit different because I can also identify with my African ancestors and take into consideration what they may have worn if they escaped slavery and found freedom aboard a pirate ship.

So, I guess what I'm saying is that within the realm of authenticity, there's a lot of leeway based on personal choice and differences in cultures of the day. For instance - has anyone ever depicted what a true buccaneer looked like?? An island hunter - I can imagine him looking like a cross between Robinson Crusoe and a Mountain Man, or something along those lines, and he probably looked much as he did hunting wild cattle as he did when he took to the seas to terrorize the Spanish. So, wouldn't it be safe to say that aboard a pirate ship there may have been many different styles? Some with earrings, some without, some with a bone or tooth necklace, some with gold, some in European gents garb, and some in sailor's slops. Some may have strung coins to wear - where?? In their ear? On a chain? Sewn into their clothes to hide them from their mates?? Who knows.

I understand the ratio thing that GoF mentioned in the Earring thread - that if the majority are doing something that only the minority had done, it gives an unbalanced impression as to the popularity of a practice or style. But can't this be also true in the case of those striving for authenticity??? If one's imagination is limited to what is depicted in a few crude illustrations, or a few incomplete documents, might not those who are attempting to be accurate in their costumes also be falling prey to the very same ratio issue?? THIS is where I exercise my personal preferences over what has been documented. I often wear sandals - not documented as authentic, as far as I know, perhaps not even practical...and certainly not 'fantasy' wear. But maybe, somewhere between the Orient and the Caribbean, a sailor wore them aboard ship during the time in question. The same with the earring issue, or anything else that COULD have been worn or used during that period of time based solely on the fact that it was available during the age in queston, even if it was not traditional. If such 'alternatives' are used sparingly, they can only enhance the full effect of the diversity found within a pirate crew, IMHO...

Okay - didn't realize how well I can ramble on after midnight... sry...

das

[Gentleman of Fortune]

Whoaaa Nelly....

Let me first say that I am not trying to turn anyone to the "dark side" and convert anyone to my brand of re-enacting religion. I just want to provide some food for thought here.

I think that we are constantly in danger of interpreting Early 18th Century culture and customs through our 21st Century ideas and biases.

Let me splain’

We often let what we think is cool now interfere with what was common-culture-fashion-ideology in the late 1600/early 1700s.

We think it is cool to wear a sash, earring, and big bucket boots because that is what we have grown up thinking that pirates/seamen looked like. We have RARELY been given (by Hollywood anyway) an accurate interpretation of what really existed. We latch on to these “myths” and don’t want to let go because they just seem soooo much cooler to us. Plus the fact that any particular event you go to you will see the vast majority of “pirate” reinforcing the fantasy which adds to the collective “group think” of what really existed.

That PLUS our modern day mentality is “individuality over all”, which really puts us behind the eight ball when we are striving for authenticity.

Then there is the “if I were a pirate in 1717 I would have done it this way….” To that I say, no, you probably wouldn’t have done it any other way than what was done then. You might not like hats now, but if you were RAISED up in the early 18th Century, you would have known nothing BUT wearing hats. It would have been a non-issue to the 1717 version of dasNdanger.

I am stumbling for a good analogy ( I have a newborn son and a 2 ½ year old so my wife limits my computer time !)…

Ahhh here is a modern one. Have you ever seen pictures of modern day cultures eating weird foods. I once saw a photograph of a man (from somewhere in Africa) eating what appeared to be some sort of caterpillar out of a can. Now this was a commercially produced “can” of caterpillars in a tomato sauce…. You would have thought it was Cambell’s Fresh Caterpillars with garlic & herbs… now with 20% MORE caterpillars by the looks of the can. Egad.

Now, my young white American ass saw that picture and said, yeechh. I would never eat a caterpillar, regardless of how “authentic style” the tomato sauce was.

BUT, if my same young, white American ass had grown up in Rhodesia, it probably would have been a non-issue to me to eat Caterpillars.

The same thing with life in the early 18th Century. You would do, what they did because that is all that they knew of what to do.

If it was not the fashion for XYZ culture to wear plates in their lips, regardless of who your great granddad slept with, you probably would not have announced it to the world by dressing up like savage from the “uncivilized” world.

Throw a “class conscious” world into the mix and you really muddy the waters. It is hard to understand for most Americans because of how our society is structured. Sure we still have “classes” but the difference is that most Americans, even if they are from the lower rungs, feel that they can move up in the class system if they work hard enough or get lucky.

This is not the case for 18th Century Europe and the Americas (and to a lot of degree parts of Europe today). If you were of the lower classes, you had no illusion that you were someday going to marry the Duke’s daughter and have a seat in Parliament! It’s a hard thing for the American mind to grasp but believe me its true.

So, it is unlikely that a sailor would try to dress up like someone from a higher station and walk down the streets of Portsmouth. (maybe things were done differently on some lawless Caribbean Island though….

Enough for now…..

[PyratePhil]

Since my comment on the "Earring" thread was seen as off-topic, I'll try again here...

It just amazes me that whatever field I decide to get involved in has these debates, in one form or another. I see them as massive wastes of time and energy, yet here I am talking about them. Maybe it'll help put them to rest, or at least get my viewpoint off my chest.

1. Research -

Research is a highly iffy thing. You can come up with references, line drawings, bits of handwritten notes, etc. and claim that this PROVES it's how things were. Bull. All it proves is that for THAT person, at THAT moment in THAT place, it might have been so. It doesn't address whether it was TRUE or not - just what the author/speaker/etc. believed at the time. It REALLY doesn't prove any universal trends or customs.

Remember that history is written by the winners. That gives a uniquely narrow point of view, if not, on occasion, totally false. Also think of the filter of time - I believe that we DO interpret historical events through our modern eyes, no matter how hard we try to do otherwise.

Take Shakespeare - he wrote gutteral humor for the common man, yet here we are today, putting him on a pedestal as a great bard. He was nothing more than a Jeff Foxworthy/Robin Williams for the times...a blue collar type who has been promoted to CEO only because of people's PERCEPTIONS and INTERPRETATIONS...doesn't mean that he WASN'T a great writer...but also doesn't mean that he WAS...

2. WHAT-IF -

No matter what arguments you can form to defend your viewpoint, another can come along and blow holes in it. The ol' What-If technique. You'll see this being used more by us Fantasy types than the Accuratists. "Hey, my character found a cell phone on the beach in 1716 - well, what if it were teleported somehow from the future? It's possible..."

Using a silly example like that perhaps weakens my idea here, but there are finer points that can be rightly defended through use of this technique. Case in point - earrings. Come on - don't point to a drawing in a book, or a snatch of logbook writing, and set it as the ne plus ultra of the times. There are millions of what-ifs involved in an argument like earrings. But to stand fast and stubbornly declare that THIS is the way it was, is silly.

3. The Great Yin/Yang -

Fantasy vs. Accuracy - they'll never get together. Oh sure, they might come right up to the border and gaze at the other side, but entrance is NOT allowed. Yet the majority of fights do not start on this front; rather, they seem to start within the sole domain of the Accuratists. They strike each other with their research factoids until one is bludgeoned into submission, then they use that victory to proclaim their Truths. Riiiiight.....

The Fantasy folk, on the other hand, do NOT have that problem, except perhaps on a very minor scale. Which brings me to...

4. WHY do you do it?

Again, my main argument is to look at your own motivations for pyrating, and form your path from those.

Entertainment - if you're out to bring laughter and wonder to the masses, do like Shakespeare - appeal to the common idea of what a pyrate is. Bucket boots, parrots, earrings - go the lot! People will KNOW that you're in the guise of a pyrate - they won't need to waste time figuring out "Hey, is that a homeless guy, or what?"

Education - here's where the Accuratists shine. As far as their research takes them, they can enlighten the masses and forge on with the goal of conveying the Truth. Again, just realize that there are many Truths...

Edutainment - a blend of both. You can, I think, be from either camp here, but might be subject to "boo's" and "hisses" from the other side.

Inward Knowledge - doing this to find out what it was really like back then , or wondering how it would feel? Then you probably need to go to the Accuratist's side. Again, recognize the limits of available knowledge before you stand up and proclaim "THIS is how it was".

None of these is right or wrong - merely different shades of the same basic color. But it's in the nature of humans to one-up each other, to compete, to indulge their egos...personally, I don't have time for all that, so I'm happy with my lot as a Fantasy type. In my mind, I try to embody the basic NATURE of a pyrate and express it through my actions. Costume, weaponry, etc. are just props. Putting on a cape and tights and calling myself Batman does NOT make me him - but I can more easily get into character - so use the props, but realize that they're not the end game - it's the intent.

[Fox]

One of the arguments I keep seeing put forward in one form or another is "how can we possible tell from the few scraps of paper and handful of poorly executed drawings which survive to us from that time?"

I think it's really important to say here that the evidence we have is considerably more than that! We have hundreds, even thousands of wills and suchlike surviving to us, listing in great detail exactly what these people owned, we have a fairly decent number of pictures of varying quality from crude woodcuts to fine watercolours, showing common people. The evidence IS there for those who can be bothered to look for it.

The argument that fantasy pirates are more recognisable I also disagree with, based on personal experience. I always wear authentic gear whether I'm doing living history or entertainment, and whatever the circumstance I am always instantly recognisable as a pirate, even when I'm not playing one! Heck, I've been accused of being a pirate in my 1650s gear, which looks nothing like "Hollywood" pirate clothing.

[Gentleman of Fortune]

I'll say again that I am not trying to convert anyone... but this is the forum for discussion on authentically portraying sailors of late 17th and Early 18th so I feel invited to let my humble opinions fly....

I agree with what you are saying PP, in the sense that at a certain time, the leading minds of the world thought that the Sun traveled around the earth. It was heresy to think otherwise... now, after improvements to science technology (yada yada) we know better.

So where does one base an impression of Golden Age Piracy? On the documented evidence of what existed or in the creative side of your brain that "thinks" or "feels" it should be done a certain way.

That’s why there is Chocolate AND Vanilla. But I am beginning to think its all a moot point anyway. Has there ever been an Authentic Pirate event? Has anyone heard of such a thing where the announcement for the event said "pirates and pirate hunters in authentic clothing only".

I don't think that it has happened... yet.

As I said before, I used to be heavily into WW2 living history. The events were good, but just not "authentic" enough for the hard core types (to which I belong), so we hosted our own event at the Ft Bragg Combat village.

It was a great event.... but only about 60 folks showed up for it (Compare that to the Indian Town Gap event in PA where you get 1500 folks). The ITG event is notorious for allowing anyone with the registration fee to participate. Authenticity is nice, but your $25 bucks is more important to them.

I learned a lot from our little event. The first being that a very small percentage of the group doing a particular time period care enough to research every detail to be as authentic as they can be. And the corollary to that is "why bother" to put all that effort in when 95% of the other events one can go to don't give a rats ass about how authentic your kit is?

And the other thing is, a lot of people that WERE striving to have an authentic impression were too intimidated by our Authenticity standards, and were afraid to go. That really shocked and bothered me. I knew a lot of folks who I was hoping that they would come and didn't. I asked them later about why they did not come and I got answers like "I have a degenerative foot disease and I can't wear period style jackboots so I didn't think I would be allowed in" and, “my tunic was made out of Swedish wool and I did not think that it would pass the authenticity inspection."

Now I knew these guys and thought that there kits, on the whole, were very good and that at least their hearts were in the right place and were moving in the "I want to be an authentic re-enactor" category.

But the bottom line was that the good and the bad stayed away.

Bringing it back to Pirate though, one thing that boggles my mind is that why do folks think that authentic gear is any less cool than fantasy stuff? I mean if you are going to spend money on a pirate kit, why wouldn't you want it to look like a real pirate would have looked instead of some "I want to be a Jack Sparrow nock off? That I don't understand.

And to your Batman analogy....

Putting on a cape and tights and calling myself Batman does NOT make me him

And if you are going to a Batman Faire and you have worked tirelessly to have a good Batman impression and there are guys there wearing leather thongs and red ski masks because they think its cool and its what Batman should have worn, then while they are within their right to do so, they really look nothing like batman.

And if 60% of the people at the Batman Faire are wearing leather Thongs and Red ski masks, the public, who may know nothing about Batman, are going to start thinking that Batman wears a leather Thong and a red ski mask....

[blackjohn]

3. The Great Yin/Yang -

Fantasy vs. Accuracy - they'll never get together. Oh sure, they might come right up to the border and gaze at the other side, but entrance is NOT allowed. Yet the majority of fights do not start on this front; rather, they seem to start within the sole domain of the Accuratists. They strike each other with their research factoids until one is bludgeoned into submission, then they use that victory to proclaim their Truths. Riiiiight.....

The Fantasy folk, on the other hand, do NOT have that problem, except perhaps on a very minor scale. Which brings me to...

I'm not so sure of that, if the stories I've heard about Star Wars groups is true... "Stormtroopers didn't have that type of blaster..."

So I don't think being dogmatic is solely in the realm of the Accuratists. In fact, if one was to label me, one would probably put me in that group, but I don't want to be dogmatic -- about this, or anything for that matter.

(In my world view, everyone has to follow their own path... I don't like to preach my version of the path, because it is my version, not yours. What's right for me may be wrong for you.)

Fwiw, I believe alot of this just boils down to fear. Note GoF's tale of the cool WWII event that was billed as being for the authenticity minded... many didn't attend purely out of fear.

But whadda I know... as I've pointed out in the past, I'm just another dude with a keyboard...

And why is it that I keep hearing the immortal words of Shatner the Great... "Get a life!"

[Mission]

if you're out to bring laughter and wonder to the masses, do like Shakespeare - appeal to the common idea of what a pyrate is. Bucket boots, parrots, earrings - go the lot! People will KNOW that you're in the guise of a pyrate - they won't need to waste time figuring out "Hey, is that a homeless guy, or what?"

Let me go back and read that again...

I agree with Phil; this whole argument is sort of a waste of time and psychic energy. We can't possibly know what someone three hundred years ago thought, did and felt. We can hardly figure out what they wore (the whole painful earrings debate comes to mind). If historians can't even agree on a minor point like that, how can anyone claim to be truly, 100% authentic to the times? Maybe you can announce that you're 10% more authentic than the guy with the bucket boots, parrot and earring ("Just one calorie, not authentic enough.") based on the limited knowledge we have.

The one thing that impressed me about my tour of duty at another, scholarly pirate site is how little we really know.

To borrow a quote from the wise PyratePhil's post:

...look at your own motivations for "pyrating, and form your path from those.

As for Star Wars, having moved around the edges of that world awhile ago, all I can say is that they have better reference material. We know what a stormtrooper's blaster is supposed to look like. We have lots of footage, models, displays at the Smithsonian and figures to offer as examples.

[dasNdanger]

And 60% of the people at the Batman Faire are wearing leather Thongs and Red ski masks, the public, who may know nothing about Batman, are going to start thinking that Batman wears a leather Thong and a red ski mask....

*ponder the image of hundreds of men in leather thongs and red ski masks....*

HEY??! Where??!! WHEN??!! HOW DO I GET TICKETS???!!!

Well, I'm totally convinced no one gets what I'm getting at...so...lemmejustsaythis...

First, GoF - no worries - never thought you were trying to convert anyone. But I do have to personally disagree with the opinion that - if I had lived X amount of years ago I would have done such and such. I am, as I said somewhere else, a non-conformist right from the womb - and my poor aged parents are STILL pulling their hair out. So, I know, down inside, that I would not follow certain FASHION codes (such as hats), regardless of the society I was raised in (if I have this same head it's really a moot point because I swear I have little tiny hands under my hair that push hats off, cant' keep 'em on my head even if I wanted to)...so I know hats wouldn't even be an issue. And I'm sure that many a pirate opted not to wear one. It's not a matter of 'adapting' or 'accepting' something because I was raised around it. My mother and sister are big hat wearers, they have tried to make me the same way - but it ain't happening. In the coldest, sub-freezing weather, I'm outside without a hat (and making everyone crazy as they insist I'm gonna catch a deadly bug if I don't cover me head). Now, I use that solely as an illustration for we know that not all pirates wore hats, right?? RIGHT??

HOWEVER, when you are speaking about food - well, that is a different thing. It goes beyond the 'hat' issue (hat, as it represents fashion as a whole). It took me three tries before I came to discover that Guinness is a gift from God, and now wouldn't think of having anything else with a burger down at the local. For some interesting reason, we - perhaps out of sheer survival - seem to adapt much easier to new and/or exotic foods. ..more so than we are willing to adapt to styles of clothing.

I'm just gonna interrupt my own thoughts with this point: there are two types of people - those that strive to fit in, and those that don't. I'm definitely in the 'don't' group - so fashion (which is what this convo is about) - regardless of what is popular or trendy - is of no interest to me, and not even in this society where conforming is SO essential. Whether it be the SUV, or the belly ring, or the clunky platform shoes - if you wanna look in vogue, ya gotta have these things (well, 4 years ago ya did, not sure what's in fashion now...). I am sure there were pirates who, like people today, were just like that, willing to go with the flow, just as I am certain that there were others who, like myself, bucked every fad and fashion statement to come down the line and did what they dang well pleased. This is my basic point...it really has nothing to do with fantasy - I'm not talking about cookie cutter images of pirates in EITHER catagory - what I am talking about is expressing your own individuality REGARDLESS if you chose the fantasy route, or the authentic route.

Following me so far?? So - if, within the boundraries of, say - authenticity - there is room for VARIETY (especially since from what I underatand, many a pirate flew below the radar as he drifted between piracy and legit lifestyles, never to be captured or his possessions documented ...), then I would encourage the variety. For instance, I'm sure a slave aboard a captured ship or in a sacked port, if offered freedom aboard a pirate ship, would gladly go with the clothes of a slave on his back. OR...he might want to pay back his master by pilfering his fancy dress and leave the rags behind. Either way, both could be considered authentic garb for a pirate.

I Do understand the documentation issue, and the Batman analogy - and agree that it must be used to a certain extent. For instance, jsut because fine dresses were in fashion and available, it doesn't mean that pirates wore them (except on very special occasions! ) Just because beads and trinkets were being shipped to the New World to bribe Indians, doesn't mean that pirates started making jewelry out of them if they stumbled upon such a cargo. Yeah - if you're not careful, you could end up with something that DOES look like good ol' Cap'n Jack..

(On a side note, a year or two before POTC came out, I met a man who lived in Zimbabwe for many years. He was older, and white, with a full head of greying blond dreadlocks...and HE had trinkets tied into them. When I saw Jack Sparrow I had to laugh, because I knew it had been done before. My point - it's really hard to say when the firs person on earth came up with such an idea...so maybe Cap'n Jack isn't as Hollywood as one might think...)

Good lord - I am SO rambling...and yes, this is really all big waste of time - ISN'T IT GREAT??!!!!!!! WEEEE!!

das

[Fox]

If we can't even agree on a minor point like that, how can anyone claim to be truly authentic? Maybe we can announce that we're 10% more authentic than the buy with the bucket boots, parrot and earring

If it were a case of 10% I'd be inclined to agree, but it isn't. Some of the fantasy people I've come across have not one single piece of authentic kit. I'm not talking about the difference between one group having hand sewn costume and another having machine sewn, I'm talking about people being 90-100% inaccurate.

We can't possibly know what someone three hundred years ago thought, did and felt. We can hardly figure out what they wore (the whole painful earrings debate comes to mind). If historians can't even agree on a minor point like that, how can anyone claim to be truly, 100% authentic to the times

My whole point is this - we can get a lot closer to knowing what people were like than anyone here seems to accept. With regards to the great earring debate it seems to me there are two main camps: one camp says"a few people probably wore earrings, but there's really no evidence of it being a fashion so it would be wrong to associate pirates with earrings in any significant way", the other camp says "I don't give a damn about evidence, I'm just gonna assume pirates wore earrings because I'd like to believe they did, and anyway if they didn't why do we think they did then?" That's not historians disagreeing!

I don't claim to be 100% authentic, and I don't think anyone should really. What I can say is that in re-enactment terms I know that nothing about my kit is inauthentic, every single piece of it can be shown to be authentic by a verified source. It wasn't at all hard to do that, and it cost me a lot less than what some people I know have spent on their "fantasy" kit.

As for Star Wars, having moved in that world awhile ago, all I can say is that they have better reference material. We know what a stormtrooper's blaster is supposed to look like. We have lots of footage, models, displays at the Smithsonian and figures to offer as examples

With pirates and seamen of the period we have reams of documentation, dozens of period pictures, surviving items kept in various museums, and immense amounts of archaeological evidence. It just seems that ignoring that evidence is a legitimate way to get away with wearing bad gear. The difference is of course that as there was no uniform there is no definitive answer, there were thousands of different designs of cutlass. What we can say though is that certain things are definitely inauthentic - percussion pistols, 19th century cavalry sabres, stuffed parrots, spandex jump suits...

I don't have a problem with people playing Hollywood pirates, I really don't, but I would rather they didn't pretend that they are authentic, and I would really be much happier if they didn't try to tell me that I can't possibly know what is and isn't authentic when I've spent several years of my life dedicated to finding out just that.

I don't know how many people here read NQG, but there was an article in it a couple of years back about the differences between ren-faire and living history, looking at the pros and cons of each approach. The end conclusion was that each has its place, and in the right place each can be the best thing, but that they must never be confused for one another. I wrote the article, and I hope that someone remembers it, because it expressed my views far more eloquently than I'm doing now.

[JoshuaRed]

if I had lived X amount of years ago I would have done such and such. I am, as I said somewhere else, a non-conformist right from the womb - and my poor aged parents are STILL pulling their hair out

I'm sorry dasNdanger, but I just completely disagree. Please understand it's nothing personal! I like your posts and what you have to say.

I've had this argument before on other boards with other folks.

To me, it's impossible to say one can transplant their 21st century persona to another time. You simply cannot be the same person back then. We are all products of our culture, environment and how we were raised. And in those days, non-comformity was usually beaten out of young uns long before they could do any damage with it.

To say "If I lived back then I'd...." is a perfect paradox. If you did live then, who can say what you would do, how you would feel, etc.

[Wartooth]

To me, it's impossible to say one can transplant their 21st century persona to another time. You simply cannot be the same person back then. We are all products of our culture, environment and how we were raised. And in those days, non-comformity was usually beaten out of young uns long before they could do any damage with it.

Uhhh ... yup! :) Environment and social standing were everything. Who's to say what you would be thinking, let alone doing in that era. Impossible to tell.

I'm always told I can't wear a "pirate captain's hat" since I don't dress like a pirate captain. Well pardon me ... I'm not even a pirate. I wear a tricorn, because I focus on the 1750's-1810's. All men and boys were pretty much socially required to wear a tricorn and waistcoat in public. I would prefer not to wear one at all, but know its not acceptable.

Then again ... for someone who studies the later era such as myself, there is a MUCH greater abundance of artwork and literary descriptive material to work with.

Wartooth

[Gentleman of Fortune]

JoshRed... my points exactly.

We look at the past through our 21st century bias.

A lot of what we do, say and think would have had us burned at the stake in 1700.

[Hawkyns]

Chucking my two penn'orth in here. I'm going to agree with Foxe, but that's no surprise to any of you, right?

There is a lot of documentation out there, for many, many things. Some things were in vogue the entire period, some things floated in and out, and some things were specific to a certain class, like seamen. The chore is to figure out what *your* persona would have been wearing, carrying, or doing, at a certain point in history. THAT is where the individuality comes. For instance, when I'm wearing my Elizabethan rig, it would look different from Foxe's, even though we are both Elizabethan Englishmen. His is from a higher strata of society in southern England. From his pictures, it's quite a showy outfit, and very nicely made. I'm from the yeoman class in the north of England. Grey coarse wool, blue wool statute cap, rough leather jack, and hemp shirt. I carry a well made but simple hanger, rather than a rapier. I have a small chest with few possessions, those that would be within the pocket of a gunner on a privateer's ship.

There are plenty of ways to personalise your kit and stay within the bounds of documented practice. The chore is to do the research. My best calcualtion is that I spend 10-15 hours reading, researching, and constructing, for every hour that I spend in kit at an event. For me, the research and pursuit of the persona is as much reward as putting on the kit and serving the guns or participating in a good brawl. I have boxes of kit that have been used in the past but are no longer valid, due to more research.

There is plenty of room for fantasy pirates. The difference is the venue. If I'm at a renfaire or pirate gathering, the fantasy kit predominates and I am in the minority. That's fine, the punters come to be entertained and to indulge *their* fantasies. When I'm on a ship or at a historic site, however, I expect everyone to be as authentic as possible. Anything else would be an insult to the site and the organisers.

Then, doing it historically becomes a duty to those who have gone before, to tell their story as truthfully as possible.

As far as mindset goes, we can never be 100%. We have not their experiences and emotions to draw on. We can, however, do the best we can by reading diaries and journals, read the books of period authors, sing the songs they sang, drop our lifestyle down to their level as much as possible. The more we can experience of what remains of their world, the better clue we have to their mindset. That requires putting aside the 21st c. Scrap your ideas of comfort and convenience, scrap your modern ideas of freedom and individuality, accept the strictures of the society you wish to emulate. It's bloody hard, uncomfortable, and sometimes depressing, but the result is worth it.

Hawkyns

[dasNdanger]

okayokayokay...you guys STILL aren't getting me...it's my fault - I talk in circles sometimes...

1. Forget EVERYTHING I've said previously.

2. Think...time travel. When I get into costume, I don't get into 'character' - it's more like transporting the person I am now back 300 years in time. I don't want to become 'Splitbelly Sally', but I want to - as myself - experience what it may have been like for ME (the person I am now) to live back then...and that is why I TRY (within the limitations of my budget) to be as authentic as possible - but allowing for my own personal taste (if that personal taste is within the boundaries of what could have been authentic in that era). In other words, if I think a pirate might have worn an earring because they did prior to the Golden Age and after, and IF I want to wear one based on my personal tastes, then I might - BUT (regardless of my personal taste) I'm not going to wear fishnet stockings and a clunky bling-bling skull-and-crossbones pendant around my neck because it would not fall within the boundaries of what could be historically accurate.

I am well aware that society, education, etc effected what a person became way back when. However, I am not convinced that these people were fundamentally different from you and I. The impression I get from talking with people about past cultures (not necessarily here) and from watching documentaries is that there seems to be a tendency to put important significance on everything a person did, wore, made...and to 'sterilize' their society based on what is popularly known about it. For instance,to say that 'all' Victorians were reserved and prudish would be wrong, but yet that is the way they are depicted. That becomes a stereotype and does not allow for natural variety within the group.

And there is always variety. You will have your rebellious women, your spineless men, your bullies, your jesters, your athletic sorts and your lazy arses, your brilliant eccentrics and your fools. I guess this is basically the part where I have trouble with the 'authenticity' angle. I don't buy that society, education, enviroment etc squeezed everyone into the same mold. There is still personal choice, self-will (or lack thereof) and many other inborn tendencies that have a part in making a person an 'individual' within a stereotyped society. And as such an individual, I strongly believe that, had I lived back in those days, I would be basically the same sort of person I am now. Although, I must admit, I probably would have been making my living on my back, since I wasn't motivated enough in modern society to get a decent job, so lord knows I wouldn't have been good for anything else back then. But I would have a heck of a sense of humor over my miserable existence, of that I'm sure!! :)

das

[JoshuaRed]

Excellent post, Das, and well put. I agree that one cannot pigeonhole personalities into one all encompassing type for a given era. I think the point I was trying to make is that individuality in MOST Anglo cultures prior to the 20th century tended to squash indivuality like a bug. Rebellious behaviour and strong displays of indiviuality simply were not tolerated by many groups, among them the colonists, whether puritan or not. Therefore, adding a streak of rebellious individualism to one's overall look COULD be viewed like the notorious Earring in that it's askewing the typical pirate of the period, leading people to believe that all pirates were this way. SO - having ONE boisterous, rebellious, outspoken pirate per group would be ok, but once more than a few began to portray that, it's over. :)

That said, you are right in that you needn't apply this stringent thinking to your kit, nor should you ever have to, as long as total authenticity isn't one's goal, which you've stated it isn't. So, cheers!

[dasNdanger]

WEEEEE!! We have an accord!!

That said, you are right in that you needn't apply this stringent thinking to your kit, nor should you ever have to, as long as total authenticity isn't one's goal, which you've stated it isn't.  So, cheers! 

No - stringent authenticity is not my goal (at this point in time), but I certainly lean more toward authenticity (or at least an impression of authenticity) than I do 'fantasy'. However time, skill, energy and especially budget don't allow me to go totally authentic. That's where I use cotton instead of linen or a replica pistol instead of a real one - from afar most people can't tell the difference.

I would be interested in seeing are some examples of authentic costumes, so that I can determine the differences (outside of fabrics used) between the re-enactors costumes, and the faire-goers. Are there specific links here that you could point me to - I have dial up (26K connection) at home (where I do most of my browsing) and it takes forever to search things out on my own sometimes...

Thanks

das

[hurricane]

I continue to laugh at these threads... especially when people start saying things like, "I don't have a problem with people playing Hollywood pirates, I really don't, but I would rather they didn't pretend that they are authentic, and I would really be much happier if they didn't try to tell me that I can't possibly know what is and isn't authentic when I've spent several years of my life dedicated to finding out just that."

It sounds like the old, "I don't have a problem with ______ people, as long as they don't live in my neighborhood." A silly statement if ever there was one.

If you've ever been to PiP, you'd see both sides working together and respecting their individual pursuits - died in the wool re-enactors playing right alongside those that just stopped by FantaSea Weddings down the road. All having a great time. Too bad the author of that quote would never consider hanging out with those fantasy peasants.

Without going into an endless diatribe here, I agree that there is no solution here. They are entirely different pursuits and a fantasy pirate would feel just as lost in a period pirate encampment as a re-enactor would posing for pictures with the family (if I hear one more silly statement like "what's that strange device you have in your hand," I'm going to run someone through.)

And while I agree there's a lot of research available, it is a mere snapshot of a time we are no longer privvy too. It would be something akin to looking at the year 1969 a hundred years from now and assuming that everyone in the 1950s to 1980s dressed like hippies, did drugs and protested. Even with the best research available, it's difficult to capture what really occurred or didn't occur at a particular period of time. We like to lump everything together and make sweeping statements about what it was like in the mid 1700s, say, but that would differ greatly even within a 10 year range... time has never stood still and never will.

And revisionism is a part of history, even when you lived through the period. Most of what we learned in history (if you were in school in the 70s say) differs greatly from what kids today are learning. In some cases, there's a lot more information. In others, you wonder what the researcher was smoking. Has anybody read a school history book on the 60s lately? I don't remember it being like that at all and I was there. It's like watching episodes of The Wonder Years or that insipid 70's Show and declaring that that's the definitive way things were.

The truth is, no one knows exactly. We have small snapshots of history left by the chroniclers of the time. Yes, it's a great body of work and we're learning more all the time, but it's still a small snapshot that is based on what people actually took the time to record at the moment.

An example: Go to your grandfather's house. Read all his letters, go through all his photos, souvenirs and memorabilia, ask him for his memories. Take as much time as you want. Then write up a biography of this life and show it to him. I'll bet you he'd laugh at all the things you missed concerning his 80 years. It would be tough to do if you just stuck with his life, let alone trying to extrapolate how life was elsewhere based on his information. All we're talking about is a few more grandfathers who left their stuff lying around for us to find. That's history!

Why don't we share some useful information about what history does tell us rather than try to beat down the other's side. It's a chasm that will never be forged....

-- The Captain

[Gentleman of Fortune]

Uhhhhh... captain.... who is beating down the other side?

This IS the forum for discourse like this... there are other forums for back slapping lets all get together for pirate “one-ness” Kum-by-ya stuff…

It seems your too busy laughing to actually read the threads…. So thanks for reposting a lot of what has already been said.

We have already stated that there are too sides and that there are horses for courses, chocolate and vanilla yadda yadda yadda.

I know that I am not going to dissuade folks from doing what they are going to do, we were just continuing the discussion as to the motivations.

Part of what makes the hobby fun for some of us is the research of that snapshot in time. We like the history of it as much as we do putting on the clothing and going to the event. Some, in this post, are saying that its not just a snap shot, but a mountain of information from all kinds of sources that fit together like a jigsaw puzzle to give you a better idea of the picture. You just have to look and be willing to accept what you find.

I for one am just Gobsmacked that someone interested enough to “craft a persona” and travel hundreds of miles to participate at an event spends more time researching their kit via POTC than reading Captain Johnson.

No body has suggested yellow stars to be worn on the garb of the unauthentic.

PLUS

As I said in an earlier post, 95% of the events you go to are come one come all events. Do you know of any that are exclusive to those that rank authenticity as a goal to strive for? Not only have we hung out with the fantasy peasants, but we have shared the flagon, camp fire, and the Kum-By-Yas.

You are right that no one knows “exactly”, but there are some who make a hobby out of finding out as much as they can.

And they might even come to this forum and say, “you know, I have spent the last 12 years reading every will, broadsheet, diary and book. I have seen thousands of prints and woodcuts, have my library card for the Greenwich Maritime Museum where I have spent days pouring over every scrap of information they have, and still I find no evidence that earrings were part of naval fashion during 1690-1720”.

And as sure as the sun will come up tomorrow, someone who has not spent 10 minutes reading an eyewitness book on the subject will chime in that “Of Course they did”, everybody knows that pirates wore earrings!”

Egad.

We just trying to “share some history”, but both sides have to be open minded to get anything out of it.

Still we got to the same events, and drink the same grog, and everyone is still happy right?

[JoshuaRed]

And while I agree there's a lot of research available, it is a mere snapshot of a time we are no longer privvy too.

Exactly why some of us try not to wear what we can't prove. Doesn't mean that it didn't exist, just that we can't prove it did. If that casts me off to one side of the chasm, so be it. I'll still be partying on with all the Sparrowites at PiP one of these years!

[dasNdanger]

I for one am just Gobsmacked that someone interested enough to “craft a persona” and travel hundreds of miles to participate at an event spends more time researching their kit via POTC than reading Captain Johnson.

OO-OO-OO-OO!!! *waves hand wildly in the air* I have ANOTHER question!!!!!

I have held off on reading 'Captain Johnson's' A General History...yadayadayada...Pyrates because I have heard debate over whether this Captain Johnson was actually Defoe - which, if that is the case, makes me suspicious of what sort of 'poetic license' he may have taken, maybe even to increase interest in his other works.

Can someone please help me here - Was Johnson REALLY Defoe - and if so, how do we know the book isn't a mixed work of fact and fiction, and if he wasn't - then who was Captain Johnson??? I would really like to read A General History..., but am very cautious because I'm concerned it may have been tainted by a writer's imagination.

das

[JoshuaRed]

Well it's HIGHLY worth reading just on its own merit as an entertaining work. It's never been officially proven if it is Defoe or not, just depends on who you ask. I've come to thinking that it just might be. With that said, it still has some accurate source material, notably from trial transcripts and broadsides of the day. Another thing to note is that regardless of how real it is, it IS still from smack dab in our chosen period of study.

You also should get a copy of "The King of Pirates" by Defoe, based on Henry Avery's exploits. It's very short and can be found at Borders.

For "firsthand account" stuff, check out Basil Ringrose, Exquemilin, and Dampier. They all "lived the life".

[dasNdanger]

You also should get a copy of "The King of Pirates" by Defoe, based on Henry Avery's exploits. It's very short and can be found at Borders.

LOL! Had to chuckle over this, it's as if you read my mind!! Anytime someone starts recommending books to me, I'm thinking, 'Sheesh - if it's longer than Of Mice and Men, I AIN'T reading it!!' I have the attention span of a flea...

Thanks for the recommendations - I'll check them out!

das

[JoshuaRed]

I had another thought regarding the quest for accuracy as a "pirate". We have one MAJOR strike against us, which is that none of us, no matter how accurate, will ever get to actually reenact a pirate boarding/prize taking, AT sea, with TWO period correct ships. Nope.

It's the bane of our quest, eh?

So in a sense, all the proper stitchery and correct clothing in the world will only serve to make us accurate early 18th century citizens, or sailors in between jobs. Which is fine, I mean we're all bound by this limitation, but it just means we always need that premise of "well this is our camp where we're hanging around while our ship is careened." Or, "well this is our impromptu market where we're selling our stolen goods to locals".

Generally speaking, the overall purpose of reenacting is so the public can come witness as close to historical events as possible. Rev war, Civil War, Jamestown, Sturbridge, etc, can do this with impressive accuracy to the original event, often reenacting battles or daily life in great detail on the soil where it actually happened. We can't do that. We can only sit on our barrel and tell little Johnny about the ship we just seized last week off Virginia.

Even French & Indian War groups or fur traders can faithfully do what the originals ACTUALLY did. We can't.

It's kind of sad in a way. Even IF a hardcore pirate reenactment group could get access to some ships in the West Indies, and set up a battle, it could only be witnessed by the public on land half a mile away.

So as I continue to delve further into this world of reenacting (reaching for accuracy, not fantasy), I'm considering adding a subtitle to the phrase "Pirate Reenactor" :

"Early 18th Century Seaman What's just returned home from two years at sea and all I have to show for it are the clothes on me back"

[dasNdanger]

I just pinched Mr. Das' booty - does that count as an act of piracy??!

Yeah, I guess there isn't a lot one can reenact, eh? Wenching and drinking in front o' da kiddies might raise an eyebrow or three, right??

But what if, instead of gathering groups together for land-based activities, you gathered your group together and rented a schooner for a sail?? Even if you can't actually engage in 'battle', it would at least give the crew an opportunity to set the sails, walk the deck, and keep a sharp eye out for victims that might cross your path. The Meerwald http://www.ajmeerwald.org takes out charter groups - old and young alike - but that's in NJ and not sure where most folks are located. But it's possible to arrange for a charter, and since they don't have a dress code for passengers, I see no reason why you couldn't come dressed in full cosume (though swords and working firearms MIGHT be a problem unless they are peace-tied - that's a detail I wouldn't know about). I know the Meerwald is pretty open to things like this - they have special sails (birding, oyster, lighthouse) all the time - why not a piratical one! But if you're not near NJ, look into other schooners near you, and that might take out charters for special groups. Pirates often preferred schooners because of their shallow draft and easy handling, so it would be CLOSE to the real thing. But their may be other vessels, like the Kalmar Nyckel that may welcome such a crew aboard. http://www.kalnyc.org (Of course, I have no idea if you are already associated with an actual ship or not - if you are, ignore my ramblings...)

Hey - at least it would give you a 'feel' for the sea...and let's face it, many a pirate spent his time starving and bored, searching the horizon for prey. So even if you all went for a sail and didn't actually get to do any pirating, at least you could appreciate that average day a pirate spent aboard ship...singing shanties and enjoying yer grog with yer mates...

:)

das

[hurricane]

Uhhhhh... captain.... who is beating down the other side?

This IS the forum for discourse like this... there are other forums for back slapping lets all get together for pirate “one-ness” Kum-by-ya stuff…

It seems your too busy laughing to actually read the threads…. So thanks for reposting a lot of what has already been said.

We have already stated that there are too sides and that there are horses for courses, chocolate and vanilla yadda yadda yadda.

I know that I am not going to dissuade folks from doing what they are going to do, we were just continuing the discussion as to the motivations.

Part of what makes the hobby fun for some of us is the research of that snapshot in time.  We like the history of it as much as we do putting on the clothing and going to the event. Some, in this post, are saying that its not just a snap shot, but a mountain of information from all kinds of sources that fit together like a jigsaw puzzle to give you a better idea of the picture.  You just have to look and be willing to accept what you find.

I for one am just Gobsmacked that someone interested enough to “craft a persona” and travel hundreds of miles to participate at an event spends more time researching their kit via POTC than reading Captain Johnson. 

Aren't we a little full of ourselves, Mr. Fortune.

While I don't have my own library card I am well versed in the historical nature of piracy and the period in general. I have spent the last 20 years separating fact from Hollywood fiction and teaching the public what we know as the truth, so don't bore me with your higher than thou rants. In fact, I'll be leading a summer expedition as historian for a shipload full of afficianados who will walk in the footsteps of the Golden Age in Jamaica and the Bahamas.

As a pirate, I like both sides. In most public contact, I do the Hollywood schtick because the public enjoys the improvisation and being part of the action. They just don't get the historical thing as far as interaction and pretending modern things don't exist. It just comes across as stupid. So, at PiP and like events, I go for hystorical accuracy.

I can kit with the best of them. I have all the period crap I could possible want. Thankfully, my business has afforded me the opportunity to purchase all my gear since The Pyrates is a subsidiary of it. And I wear the authentic stuff in public. I just don't do period when performing. The majority of the general public, in a public contact situation, could care less about education. They want to be entertained, engaged and have their kiddies pose for a photo.

And if you were privvy to our group's forum, you'd find that we discuss these activities (history, weapons, etc.) in far greater detail than is ever covered here.

Oh, yes, I do laugh at the threads. As someone who's been on the forum since the beginning, I've seen my share of blowhards and know-it-alls. Perhaps you need to purchase a sense of humor for your pirate kit. Of course, would that be period humor or modern humor. Hhm. Perhaps we need a thread on that. I'm sure there's documentation.

Hurricane