The Buccaneer Project

[Patrick Hand]

One of the things I've been trying to look up is what was worn when the Buccaneers came to the West Indies, I don't think they went to a Buccaneer clothing store and bought all new Buccaneer duds tailored for the job.... The pictures posted waaay back in the beginning of this thread are later period than 1669... They look good, but I'm not sure if they are correct.... But so far I haven't found anything.... (well other than paintings of the upper class or some ECW stuff)

[Patrick Hand]

I'm thinking of going to Searle's Raid this year...(if I can get enough money for an airplane ticket) The date is 1668, and for the Buccaneer Camp at PiP, we're going with the date 1669, so both are close enough......

To make this kinda short, I'm trying to figure out when Buccaneers would have started to wear their shirts not tucked into their breaches.... The pictures showing them with their shirts un-tucked are from a later period, but it's the only thing to work with right now....

Shirts un-tucked looks very Buccaneerish but I don't know if it is really period to do so........

[Animal]

I believe that they were very much in the period un-tucked. All the pictures and drawings of the time showed buccaneers and pirates in that style with only the captains tucked in.

Animal

[michaelsbagley]

To play a bit of the devil's advocate here...

Most of the images (going from memory here) in "The Buccaneers of America" seem to depict them with shirts tucked in... But to counter my own point, those images were done in the 1680s, and I believe they were done by European artists that probably never saw real buccaneers.

Personally I think the un-tucked shirts give more of the longhunter style buccaneers look, whereas the tucked in shirt gives more the "on campaign" look of the former soldier style buccaneers... But then that is based solely on the feeling it gives me and not any real fact.

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

Artistic licsense is always a factor to be considered in period artwork. For the most part, artists were not making drawings or paintings for the fun of it, but rather to make a living. In order for the art to sell, it would have to be aesthetically pleasing and most likely conform to social norms of the day to attract a sale. Just my conjecture, but this is based on info from my art history class as well.

Bo

[hurricane]

That's dead on, Bo. The painting of Woodes Rogers, for instance, omits his missing jaw that was shot out during battle. Most people of the time were poxed and scarred from disease. An artist is never going to sell art that was an actual representation of the subject he was looking at. Same reason we appreciate PhotoShopped images of pretty ladies in girly magazines today. We like to view a world more perfect than it really is.

-- Hurricane

[Patrick Hand]

That's the problem with "Artistic License" .... Someone describes something to the artist, and he draws it..possibly never having seen any of the people or the location....And changes everything to "fit" social standards..... "Soldiers Sacking Panama... well this is what Soldiers here wear, so that's how I'll paint it......If I painted them differently, no one would know they were Soldiers....."

So far the closest I've found is Expuemelin writing..."I had nothing to wear except an old shirt and a pair of drawers"... I'm speculating, but shirts were long enough that wearing it on the outside would cover his drawers (underwear). I'm not saying this is the "standard dress", but it's the closest I've found so far... (for this early of a time period ... mid 1600....) So I'm still searching....

I can find documentation for later period Buccaneers wearing their shirts on the outside, but if I go to Searle's Raid (1668) this year.. . and for the Buccaneer Encampment at PiP (1669), I want to be as correct as possible.

I started making a pair of Venetians (out of wool) and Drawers (out of linen)... I'll have to take some photos and post them for others who may want to see how to make them......

[Mary Diamond]

So far the closest I've found is Expuemelin writing..."I had nothing to wear except an old shirt and a pair of drawers"... I'm speculating, but shirts were long enough that wearing it on the outside would cover his drawers (underwear).

Which begs the dressing order question ~ would an shirt have been tucked into underpants?

[Patrick Hand]

Which begs the dressing order question ~ would an shirt have been tucked into underpants?

See... that's the tricky part.....

Period shirts are longer than modern shirts, so you (well males or women wearing men's clothing) end up with more shirt tail bunched up.... Once you get everything tucked in, it isn't uncomfortable, but that's with the shirt outside the drawers but tucked under slops....

Not wanting to get into a discussion on period toilet habits, but with the shirt tucked into the drawers, you have two garments getting "soiled" instead of only one..... (ick...)

The real "tricky part" is that I don't think I'll find much "documentation" on how Buccaneers wore their underwear......(just that they had it...)

[Mary Diamond]

A thought ~ I am not well versed on this, but, perhaps there might be images of men in various stages of undress, a la GAoP Hogarth (A Rakes Progress, A Harlots Progress) or tailoring?

[Patrick Hand]

That might help.......

But the problem with that is they more than likely won't be Buccaneers.....

If I find a picture of a half naked poor French peasant, would the Buccaneers dress the same? (but it would give a hint about the Social view of tucking in the shirt or not... so it might help...)

So I'm kinda stuck looking at what other people in period wore, and guessing.......

The biggest problem is the lack of period ( 1660's) descriptions of what the Buccaneers DID wear.... The only pictures I've seen of Buccaneers are all later period.... (with their shirts un-tucked.... ... I'd hate to be 30 years out of fashion........)

Right now, my guess is that un-tucked shirts identified someone as a Buccaneer, but the danger of that guess is it is based off of only three different drawings (the ones Foxe posted back on page 1 and the picture shown in most books)... so it was unusual enough to be noted in the drawings... I just don't know when the style started, or how common it was.

[Animal]

I believe that because of their "business", most buccaneers wouldn't be following social trands of the time. I suspect that their clothing needed to be functional for the task at hand, ie: hunting, butchering, carrying meat to camp, tending fires at the boucan or general fire pit and generally surviving. Always there was a risk of attack from the Spanish (and those pesky pirates hunters ) so they were always on their guard. I wonder if they did watches in their camps against raiders? I would almost think so.

Animal

[Patrick Hand]

I started making a pair of Venetians and Drawers. Other than the Drawers being a little smaller The pattern is the same, The Venetians will have some more details to them and the Drawers are slightly simpler... But I'll post more pictures of the progress......

This picture shows the shape of the Drawers, the Venetians are just a little larger....(I used this picture because the linen is lighter than the green wool for the Venetians and photographed better)

[Patrick Hand]

OH yeah..... and I'm hand sewing everything (because it's warmer in my bedroom than in the workroom where the sewing machine is......... )

[hurricane]

There's a big difference between the early buccaneers and those of 1669. Most of the lads you're speaking of would have been much more "civilized", the bulk of the English buccaneers living in Port Royal. I can't vouch for the Frenchies of the time who met up with them at Isle de Vaca. They certainly didn't walk around town blood stained... :)

Given the experience we've had and the landscape of the lands they were marching through, an untucked shirt would have been a real pain in the a** to deal with. The shirt tails would catch on all the brambles, stickers and thorns as they hacked their way through the jungle, not to mention branches. Again, big difference between hunting cattle or pigs on Tortuga and marching in battle to attack Spanish towns. By 1669 buccaneers only used their knives and boucan skills to eat while on the march. They no longer hunted with them as a regular source of income. Again, can't vouch for other countries, just the English.

I'll see if I can dig up some info for ya over the holidays. :)

-- Hurricane

[Sgt Johnson]

There's a big difference between the early buccaneers and those of 1669. Most of the lads you're speaking of would have been much more "civilized", the bulk of the English buccaneers living in Port Royal. I can't vouch for the Frenchies of the time who met up with them at Isle de Vaca. They certainly didn't walk around town blood stained... :)

Given the experience we've had and the landscape of the lands they were marching through, an untucked shirt would have been a real pain in the a** to deal with. The shirt tails would catch on all the brambles, stickers and thorns as they hacked their way through the jungle, not to mention branches. Again, big difference between hunting cattle or pigs on Tortuga and marching in battle to attack Spanish towns. By 1669 buccaneers only used their knives and boucan skills to eat while on the march. They no longer hunted with them as a regular source of income. Again, can't vouch for other countries, just the English.

I'll see if I can dig up some info for ya over the holidays. :)

-- Hurricane

Great point Hurricane. Keep in mind that at this period of the Buccaneers (1668) the majority of the men that sailed with the good Captain Robert Searle's were former soldiers from Europe and the English Civil War. At this point we are only 18 years removed from the end of the war. Many of the men with Searle's were there to make a good bit of coin in order to return to their homeland to "retire". The others just had nowhere else to go and nothing to return to so headed out to the Islands to be hired on a crew for the various Privateers working in the area.

Being former soldiersthey were some of the best crew to have when it came to land campagins. Remember Searle's didn't much care for sailing around,he likedto get to ground and take the fight to whomever was the "enemy" at the time. There are pictures (forgive me, I do not remember the names) that show battles with line and column in proper military fashion being fought on the Islands. Theses ex-soldiers fought best when under regimented command (Drum call, commands given , etc.)

As for the shirt tails being tucked or untucked, I have found no definitive evidence (other than the aforementioned pictires) that there was a right way or a wrong way. I know that most of us that have been doing Searle's raid for the past 10 year tuck the shirt in. I myself am Sgt of Searle's muskets and safety officer and protray a former Royalist soldier from the English Civil War. So Patrick, in a round about explaination to your inquiry, I would say thit it all depends on the character impression that you are trying to portray. Please feel free to comment or rebut.

Great thread you've got going here!

[hurricane]

I was looking at some of our historical clothing resources. The illustrations of period wear show that the gentlemen's shirts were indeed long, but were tucked in. The fashion of the time (and I'm talking the buccaneer period, not GAoF) was to wear the shirt tucked, but heavily bloused so it hung over and down the waist of the breeches. Every instance I could find showed it that way for the period. As I noted, everything was flounced then... the petticoat breeches were huge... the gentry ornamented them with looped ribbons along the bottom.

Also, jack boots (think musketeers) were in style during the age of Searle's, for those researching that era. Buccaneers often imitated the wealthy by painting the heels of their shoes red, as was the fashion. This is the period when the bow tie on the shoes gave way to the buckle.

There's lots more. Even though the common buccaneer would have dressed down and not in as resplendent attire, they would have followed the basic conventions of the time. And many buccaneers wanted to emulate those in town since they were as wealthy as the wealthiest merchants after a venture with Morgan or Myngs... it's still unknown whether this was a true desire or an effort to lampoon society.

-- Hurricane

Which begs the dressing order question ~ would an shirt have been tucked into underpants?

See... that's the tricky part.....

Period shirts are longer than modern shirts, so you (well males or women wearing men's clothing) end up with more shirt tail bunched up.... Once you get everything tucked in, it isn't uncomfortable, but that's with the shirt outside the drawers but tucked under slops....

Not wanting to get into a discussion on period toilet habits, but with the shirt tucked into the drawers, you have two garments getting "soiled" instead of only one..... (ick...)

The real "tricky part" is that I don't think I'll find much "documentation" on how Buccaneers wore their underwear......(just that they had it...)

[Animal]

A question? Given the brush, terrain and general wear and tear, what did buccaneers wear for footwear??? I's not like they can just go down to the nearest shoe store and buy a new pair of shoes?? Did they wear a moccasin made form the hides that they got from the various animals they killed??

Animal (not the type they killed )

[Animal]

I'm in the process of looking for material for some shirts. The question is: Linen or hemp??? Any other suggestions?

Animal

[Patrick Hand]

what did buccaneers wear for footwear?

With out good documentation, I can only guess.... I know that during the American Civil War, some Southern Soldiers tried to make their own shoes.... but they came out really really crude.... without a last to make them from, the project isn't going to turn out very usable... Also, the Confederate Infantry (the guys trying to make shoes...) knew about moccasins....(maybe some did make them, but just because I've never seen a picture of a pair doesn't mean they didn't).... but......that's not documentation that they did.....

Now to take this back to the Buccaneers.... would they have seen moccasins? and would any of them have known how to make shoes... sure they wore them, but with out looking any information on-line, could you make a serviceable pair of shoes right now ?....I could probably make a pair of shoes (I cheated, and have looked up how they were made ) but it would be a hustle, with a lot of trial and error until I got a pair that worked right...... I've made moccasins, and even being skilled at making stuff, they could have used some "refinement"... What's that line.... about moccasins just being a decent way of walking barefooted?

So my guess, is that the Buccaneers traded or bought their shoes instead of trying to make them.....

But I really don't know one way or the other..... just a "gut feeling" about it.......

'm in the process of looking for material for some shirts. The question is: Linen or hemp

Go with linen... hemp is a nice fabric, but it is heaver... (I'm wondering about bleached or un-bleached linen.... unbleached was cheaper, but would it have been shipped to the Caribbean?)

But once again... I can't document one way or the other on that also.......

Dang... I'm lotsa help tonight ain't I.........

[Animal]

Actually you have been. It has given me another thing to think about and research. Always thinking...damn gotta quit that, I just might get edgumakated

Animal

[hurricane]

---

Edited December 27, 2008 by hurricane

[Animal]

I will reread your posts and digest them for what I am looking for.

Edited December 27, 2008 by Animal

[Capt. Bo of the WTF co.]

French had an Ox-hide shoe that was very similar in pattern to the modern minnetonka moccasin pattern. These were in use in the country in both France and New France at the time, but I don't know about in the carib.

Bo

[Patrick Hand]

"Boots de savage" or something like that......... I'll have to look up more information on them, they had a formed sole (but that part would be easy enough) and a softer leather upper...... They might be early enough to be period.... don't know if they would have been worn in the Caribbean, but it would be a place to start looking.....