dasNdanger Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 OOO!! Nice hat!! :) Still, I wonder what ye had to show to get all of those non-period beads... ...and is that guy behind you getting ready to take a piddle?? das http://www.ajmeerwald.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarborMaster Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 I didnt have to show anything.,they *knew* by that gold toothed grin that I had that extra inch they were looking for . .., therefore the period correct 2006 Gasparilla beads came -Naturally- The man behind me was not going to pee Das., he was working his way behind that blonde to my right., Florida's Gasparilla was wild ! I guess anything goes ! Gasparilla 2006 I am not Lost .,I am Exploring. "If you give a man a fire, he will be warm for a night, if you set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasNdanger Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 I didnt have to show anything.,they *knew* by that gold toothed grin that I had that extra inch they were looking for . .., therefore the period correct 2006 Gasparilla beads came -Naturally-The man behind me was not going to pee Das., he was working his way behind that blonde to my right., Florida's Gasparilla was wild ! I guess anything goes ! Well, shiver me timbers!! I never met a man wif an extra inch o' brim that I didn't give me beads to...*tosses a strand of sparklies to HM!* das http://www.ajmeerwald.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasNdanger Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 Gasparilla 2006 That had to be one hell of a fart.... das http://www.ajmeerwald.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kass Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 Thanks Das, I'm dead now... Building an Empire... one prickety stitch at a time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaRed Posted February 27, 2006 Share Posted February 27, 2006 OMG Das I'm laughing so hard it hurts.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HarborMaster Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 I'll take'm !! and it was fun to say the least. Florida didnt seem quite as reserved as Washington., must be the cold weather ? This one lost her shirt somewhere. But got rewarded with plenty of period correct 2006 beads. I am not Lost .,I am Exploring. "If you give a man a fire, he will be warm for a night, if you set a man on fire, he will be warm for the rest of his life!" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Swifty Morgan Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 To Cool HM I Wish I was There Swifty Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dasNdanger Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Uh...what are we talking about here...boots...or booty.... das http://www.ajmeerwald.org/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hitman Posted February 28, 2006 Share Posted February 28, 2006 Just as a personal prefrence I wear work boots pretty much every day My brother Joey was actually married wearing a suit and his work boots and at funerals and such it's not uncommon to see many of the men in attendance wear their one good suit and work boots. Knowing this I belive that pirates pretty much wore shoes why for the same reason those above wear boots it what they own. Now playing devils advocate if we presume a pirate ship crewed out in a place heavy with fisherman(or for that matter another proffesion where we know boots were prevelent despite there expense) and that these fisherman were not for the most part involved with the handling of the rigging. (argument for this is overcrewing to get hands for boarding as opposed to sailing) then I could become convinced that we have a documented case of a vessel with a high number of boot clad pirates. We are still talking about what 10 maybe 20% of the crew on one vessel and they deffinatly would not be in bucket boots. However please petee continue to look for a way in witch I can justify wearing boots with my kit I hate shoes. THIS BE THE HITMAN WE GOIN QUIET Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Petee Posted February 28, 2006 Author Share Posted February 28, 2006 Will do Hitman. I'll keep fightin the good fight. Petee Defender of the Bucket Boot. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Sterling Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 das If this image is of one of the Versailles statues, it was done in the 1830s, according to some help from the Early 18th century wars list. Hector "I being shot through the left cheek, the bullet striking away great part of my upper jaw, and several teeth which dropt down the deck where I fell... I was forced to write what I would say to prevent the loss of blood, and because of the pain I suffered by speaking."~ Woodes Rogers Crewe of the Archangel http://jcsterlingcptarchang.wix.com/creweofthearchangel# http://creweofthearchangel.wordpress.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Capt. Sterling Posted March 1, 2006 Share Posted March 1, 2006 and this one The bottom picture, wish I could find my Hogarth book, it explains a lot of what the characters symbolized or represented, any way the fella with the stiff looking boots is wearing spurs and the case he is carrying looks very similar to a valiesse or port-mantau (forgive spelling both cases) which were cases carried behind the saddle when riding, like a suitcase. I doubt very much he is supposed to represent anything other than some type of horseman or cavalry folk. Hector "I being shot through the left cheek, the bullet striking away great part of my upper jaw, and several teeth which dropt down the deck where I fell... I was forced to write what I would say to prevent the loss of blood, and because of the pain I suffered by speaking."~ Woodes Rogers Crewe of the Archangel http://jcsterlingcptarchang.wix.com/creweofthearchangel# http://creweofthearchangel.wordpress.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaRed Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Yeah, Hogarth has plenty of jackbooted dudes in his work, but they have little to nothing to do with the sea. Hitman my friend, if you wanna wear boots, wear 'em! At the end of the day, that's all the justification you need if you just can't make shoes work for ya. We can't prove they were at all common for sailors, but they did exist during the GAOP. So if you were depicting a "fighting man" who had signed articles on a pirate, purely as muscle, and aren't portraying an ABS, then you might have a workable concept. However, it should be noted that post-buccaneer era pirates were a remarkably tight clique who prided themselves on their seamanship, and were loathe to let any landsmen at all in their mix. So it might be a more feasible persona for the late buccaneer era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenighs Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I'm just waiting on a parts order for my flux capacitor, then I'll just go back and settle this once and for all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoshuaRed Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Can I come? Pleeeease? :angry: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
greenighs Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Can I come? Pleeeease? :angry: Well, okay, but just you, cuz it's the Delorean model, two-seater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One And Only LT Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I started its own post, I didn't want to take away from the Morgan Pic topic.Boots, yeah. I love this debate. Now see people, we can have a friendly debate, without peoples slops getting in a bunch. GoF, I didn’t get your PM about the Batavia’s boots, but I received those pics from Charity here at the pub. True, if you look at the pics of the “Bucket Boots” who in there right mind would want to wear those stiff looking things on a ship, maybe some, I don’t know. If you look at the pics of the Batavia boots and another illustration of seamen wearing boots, they look totally different, looser, more baggy and more “ship friendly”. Is it possibly that there were several different styles of boots, both tall with folded tops, maybe. A discussion in its own. Now I’m not saying that every pirate or sailor wore boots, hell I’m not even saying that most of them wore boots, I am just saying that some did. Hey, don’t get me wrong I wear buckle shoes too. Shhh don’t tell my boot friends about that . I don’t think Hollywood came up with the idea that they wore boots, there are a lot of early 19th century images of seamen wearing boots, that’s in the 1800’s, a lot closer to the GAoP than we are :angry: , with so many depictions of them wearing boots it had to have come from some where. Ok, I just love debates, and love to play devil's avocate in the myst....so here is something that needs pondering. First of all todays society glorifies and romances Pyracy, and any one knows cow hide is not something great to have in or arround salt water. Second pirates took and wore whatever they got their hands on, and that all depended on the ship they were aboard. I'm sure there were "bad" pirates, as well as all the renound, and pirates did not live very long (no-one movie accounts for quick pro queo kills and desperate poor pirates-let alone how hard the life was.) So it is truely safe to say...Maybe the Captain and officers got boots of any sorts, and safe to say, all pirates wore what they stole, and could keep, depending on the other pirates. Mostly they wanted quick monies. Pirate crews, wore their cloths until they were nothing, and boots got in the way. Have you ever climbed rigging with boots? Pirates did not care what they looked like, they cared about making/stealing monetary goods to make a quick fortution. Now for saliors, thats a whole different issue. Do to the fact they were issued clothing and alotments. Just as today, they also had different alotments accross the board, for different countries, and this would explain the different kinds of boots, and gear. Also they would of had different attire for the event. Such as if Royality was inspecting, etc. and the lower ranks would have less gear. (A good movie for this is Horicio Hornblower. --forgive spelling--you get it.) Any way they did not have many boots at all in this video, mostly buckle shoes, and the higher ups, to say got to change their foot gear, but even in this video the boots were not bucket. More like english riding boots. So I agree with all of you really, but what is baffling is who got to wear the boots? Maybe the seaman officers got to wear boots, when they went ashore, or in the deep dense jungle forest.....or when they got on their horse. I will keep intune with this thread, I love the pics, never saw anything like the pics. only drawings. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
One And Only LT Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Will do Hitman. I'll keep fightin the good fight. Petee Defender of the Bucket Boot. :angry: This isn't part of the debate, but I'd like to add, none of us renies are true blue buccaneers when it comes to depiction. First of all none of us lasses would of had any cleavage!! Second we all want to look good, bucket boots are beautiful and are sweet for holding a flask of the rum! And pulled up they keep the legs warm. Besides I'm certainly not one to talk, I were moccians, and I'm not binding the twins. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Hand Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 I just figure that Petee wears his bucket boots because he has really ugly legs...... not nice shapely legs like the rest of us.... Hey.... this is the time period when it was men who showed off thier legs..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Petee Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 Shhh...PAtrick you wern't supposed to tell. Well folks, sailors wore boots or should I say wear cause they still do. I have proof of this in the 17th, 18th, 19th and the 20th centuries. Did they wear them all the time? Of course not. But they did wear them and they did have a purpose. I am not going to state purposes because that’s speculative. Above are images, one a pair of boots from the shipwreck Batavia, early 17th century. Two, a couple French seamen, 18th century and the rest are early to mid 19th century. Two images show sailors wearing shoes, but have boots with them as gear. Now all these boots are very similar that span three centuries. They are not the musketeer type of “Bucket Boot”, nor are they the stiff riding boot, but a tall, looser leather boot with the tops folded down. True there is only one pic of a GAoP seaman with these boots, but if this type of style of boot has been with sailors through three centuries, it is my hypothesis that they were worn more than once during the GAoP buy sailors and pirates. In conclusion sailors wore boots. I will still continue to keep up the search for the holy grail. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Patrick Hand Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Petee, where is the first picture from? I'm looking at the shoes right behing the boots tho...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kass Posted March 2, 2006 Share Posted March 2, 2006 Good hypothesis, Petee. I definitely see your trail of logic. I would love to see you find a pair of GAoP sailor's boots and wear them and when people ask you why your boots look so different, you could tell them about the difference! That would be awesome! And THANK YOU for calling it a hypothesis, not a theory. My respect for you grows and grows! Building an Empire... one prickety stitch at a time! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pirate Petee Posted March 2, 2006 Author Share Posted March 2, 2006 Thank you Kass, . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fox Posted March 3, 2006 Share Posted March 3, 2006 Petee, good luck with the Holy Grail - it probably doesn't exist, to prove bots were common in the GAoP you need to find multiple source showing boots on ships in the right period. The "Holy Grail" is not one source, it's a large number of sources. As I said several pages ago: if you want to prove that boots existed in the GAoP and that one or two pairs may have been worn by seamen and pirates then you can stop looking, I think we're all agreed that that's the case anyway. If you want to prove that they were common in the GAoP then good luck, but pictures of 19thC fishermen in boots mean absolutely squat. If we're going to keep this going can we please have some GAoP period evidence! I just posted this over on Plunder, but I'm going to say it here again anyway: NOBODY IS SAYING THAT ANYONE HAS TO BE AUTHENTIC IF THEY DON'T WANT TO BE, BUT FOR 99% OF THOSE THAT DO WANT TO BE AUTHENTIC BUCKET BOOTS ARE NOT APPROPRIATE. Problems with that anyone? Foxe"With this Fore-Staff he fansies he does Wonders, when, God knows, it amounts to no more but only to solve that simple Question, Where are we? Which every chi'd in London can tell you." - Ned Ward The Wooden World Dissected, 1707ETFox.co.uk Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now