ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/hist_text/archive/v01.n1179

Internet Message Format | 2003-03-30 | 47KB

From: [e-mail] (hist_text-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: hist_text-digest V1 #1179
Reply-To: hist_text
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


hist_text-digest        Sunday, March 30 2003        Volume 01 : Number 1179



In this issue:

-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List:womens dress
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List:womens dress
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List:womens dress
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
-áááááá Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 15:34:38 -0600
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

Dear List,

It doesn't look like many messages are being posted. At least I'm not
getting them if there are so I'll post a question.

Does anyone else wish the 1840 limit (AMM used to state 1850) was extended
to at least 1860? Think of the history and technology that could then be
explored collectively.

I understand the original intent was to preserve "rendezvous" as it was in
its prime. Wouldn't it be nice, however, to expand the fur trade guidelines
represented at modern rendezvous to at least 1860. Bridger, Carson, robe
traders, and a host of other personalities that grew from the green trappers
of the rockies could be studied and represented.

It appears to me that many who attend rendezvous would be more at home in a
slightly later period portrayal (judging by the fashions and gear many
people adopt). I have not attended very many rendezvous but it seems that
not much would change except the information sought (and corrected in a lot
of cases).



Just a thought. I haven't thought it out very well and wonder if there are
reasons the NMLRA, and other organizations would not want to expand their
time period that encompasses study and preservation of knowledge. Maybe it
is just a rendezvous guideline and has nothing to do with the organizations.
It strikes me that western rendezvous are different from the east in this
particular way; the east celebrates American frontier of their particular
landscape for a period ranging from the early 1700's and sometimes earlier,
up to the 19th century. The west is restricted to about a fifty year period
of history associated with our particular landscape). The wider range of
interests welcome would invite new blood, bodies, ideas, gear, and
knowledge.

I can't help but feel the western rendezvous are stagnating to some small
degree and I try to think of ways to inspire new interest. I love the
landscape of the west and the people who were here were most interesting. In
fact I love it so much that I become nostalgic; missing even the heyday of
modern rendezvous in the 70's and 80's. I miss the excitement and passion
rendezvous used to convey as it grew and grew. Then modern rendezvous seemed
to stop growing even though population levels, roads, and developement
seemed to continue.

Jim



_________________________________________________________________
Add photos to your e-mail with MSN 8. Get 2 months FREE*.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/featuredemail


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:36:27 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List:womens dress

- --part1_196.1817f582.2bb8cb6b_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

   Jim.
       Actually, leather dresses were the norm for women of this time period
unless they were a trapper's or trader's wife. Wool was the cloth of choice
at the time, especially saved list cloth with the white edge, which was used
as part of the decoration. To have wool was a status symbol because it had to
be obtained from traders and was a spendy item in comparison to buckskin,
which was readily obtained from nature. Trappers were proud of their women
and seemed to take pride in how much they could spend on them, and how
lavishly they could be dressed.  Read Joe Meek's account of Mountain Lamb. He
tells just how much he spent on her horse, its trappings, and on her clothes.
He said her skirt was blue and her bodice was red, with red leggings and a
red scarf on her head. She was Shoshone, too. Denig said that wool dresses
were cut much like the buckskin ones when they first started making them.
There are, however no existing wool dresses from the fur trade. Kurz was
barely past the fur trade and he shows "Crow woman at Fort Berthold" of a
woman wearing a cloth dress with the open sleeves, buckskin fringe on the
bottom of the skirt and what looks like elk teeth on the bodice. One large
picture of this that I saw looked like her bodice was a different color that
the skirt of the dress, but I couldn't be sure. Ewers in his book on
Blackfeet shows a circa 1850 wool Blackfoot dress of blue stroud, with
buckskin gussets up the sides and with the arches cut out at the bottom, and
with plenty of fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves. This one had the
blue and white pound beads for decoration.
       All trappers wives did not have wool, though. Miller shows Walker's
wife on horseback following behind him and she has a buckskin dress on. In
Cody museum there is a two hide dress which is remarkable for its absence of
decoration, though it does have fringe on the sleeves and bottom. This is
Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on display in their collection, so we were
told. It also has some hair left along the turned down edge where the tail
is. We also can't forget the Miller paintings of the Shoshone women wearing
only a skirt and no top at all.
       Leggings go over the moccasins, come to just below the knee and were
tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. Some tribes had a fold down section
at the top that was fringed. They were either decorated or plain depending on
whether they were for work or for a fancy outfit. The best book for leggings
and dresses is Cathy Smith's article in The Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6.
Primitive Indian Dresses by Susan Fecteau is another good one but is out of
print. You may find it through Amazon. com as a used book. If you want to
read about saved list cloth, look at our web site.
<A HREF="http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm"> http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm</A>
Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade.
We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat smilier
to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade. If anyone is
interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you would like me to send
you pictures of any of the dresses I talked about, I can Email them to you.


                                                               Jill


- --part1_196.1817f582.2bb8cb6b_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2>   Jim.
<BR>       Actually, leather dresses were the=20=
norm for women of this time period unless they were a trapper's or trader's=20=
wife. Wool was the cloth of choice at the time, especially saved list cloth=20=
with the white edge, which was used as part of the decoration. To have wool=20=
was a status symbol because it had to be obtained from traders and was a spe=
ndy item in comparison to buckskin, which was readily obtained from nature.=20=
Trappers were proud of their women and seemed to take pride in how much they=
 could spend on them, and how lavishly they could be dressed.  Read Joe=
 Meek's account of Mountain Lamb. He tells just how much he spent on her hor=
se, its trappings, and on her clothes. He said her skirt was blue and her bo=
dice was red, with red leggings and a red scarf on her head. She was Shoshon=
e, too. Denig said that wool dresses were cut much like the buckskin ones wh=
en they first started making them. There are, however no existing wool dress=
es from the fur trade. Kurz was barely past the fur trade and he shows "Crow=
 woman at Fort Berthold" of a woman wearing a cloth dress with the open slee=
ves, buckskin fringe on the bottom of the skirt and what looks like elk teet=
h on the bodice. One large picture of this that I saw looked like her bodice=
 was a different color that the skirt of the dress, but I couldn't be sure.=20=
Ewers in his book on Blackfeet shows a circa 1850 wool Blackfoot dress of bl=
ue stroud, with buckskin gussets up the sides and with the arches cut out at=
 the bottom, and with plenty of fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves=
. This one had the blue and white pound beads for decoration.
<BR>       All trappers wives did not have woo=
l, though. Miller shows Walker's wife on horseback following behind him and=20=
she has a buckskin dress on. In Cody museum there is a two hide dress which=20=
is remarkable for its absence of decoration, though it does have fringe on t=
he sleeves and bottom. This is Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on display=20=
in their collection, so we were told. It also has some hair left along the t=
urned down edge where the tail is. We also can't forget the Miller paintings=
 of the Shoshone women wearing only a skirt and no top at all.
<BR>       Leggings go over the moccasins, com=
e to just below the knee and were tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. S=
ome tribes had a fold down section at the top that was fringed. They were ei=
ther decorated or plain depending on whether they were for work or for a fan=
cy outfit. The best book for leggings and dresses is Cathy Smith's article i=
n The Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6. Primitive Indian Dresses by Susan Fecteau=
 is another good one but is out of print. You may find it through Amazon. co=
m as a used book. If you want to read about saved list cloth, look at our we=
b site.
<BR><A HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm"> http://membe=
rs.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm</A>
<BR>Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade.
<BR>We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat sm=
ilier to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade. If anyone=
 is interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you would like me to s=
end you pictures of any of the dresses I talked about, I can Email them to y=
ou.             =
            &nbs=
p;            &n=
bsp;            =
            &nbs=
p;            &n=
bsp;
<BR>             =
;            &nb=
sp;            &=
nbsp;            =
;            Jil=
l             &n=
bsp;            =
            &nbs=
p;            &n=
bsp;            =
    </FONT></HTML>

- --part1_196.1817f582.2bb8cb6b_boundary--

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:38:04 -0500
From: "Tom Roberts" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

Why stop there?  Why not extend to the1900's, then all kinds of stuff would
be ok.

(sorry - just couldn't help it)

Tom

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 4:34 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840


>
>
> Dear List,

> Does anyone else wish the 1840 limit was extended  to at least 1860?


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:39:54 -0500
From: "Double Edge Forge" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

" Why not extend to the1900's, then all kinds of stuff would
> be ok. (sorry - just couldn't help it)"
'
 Tom
   Yes you could, you just dinnit wanna...<GG>
D



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 16:48:19 -0600
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

Do you think it is just a bad idea then?






>From: "Double Edge Forge" <[e-mail]>
>Reply-To: [e-mail]
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
>Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:39:54 -0500
>
>" Why not extend to the1900's, then all kinds of stuff would
> > be ok. (sorry - just couldn't help it)"
>'
>  Tom
>    Yes you could, you just dinnit wanna...<GG>
>D
>
>
>
>----------------------
>hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html


_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:08:32 -0600
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

Jill,

Thanks for the post. You have a nice web page. I'll be looking it over
better over the next few days and following up on your directions for more
information.

Have you made a willow backrest? I would like to know how the old ones were
strung together. I haven't seen an original up close.

Thanks again.
Jim





_________________________________________________________________
The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 18:09:58 -0600
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

Jill,

Looking through the backlog I found this post. Would this pattern apply to
the 1825-50 period? I wonder how far back the shell or elk teeth or
(dentalion?)cone like shells go. Is there a place saved list cloth can be
bought these days?




Jim




From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: New to List...Cloth dresses..Indian
Date: 13 May 2000 12:43:59 -0400


- --------------C4BDC584CA8769AC5F88E088
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

You know, we always talk about men's outfits, but very little on the
women's cloth (Indian) dresses.
Now here is something  that has bothered me for a long time.  The "T"
dress or cloth dress  can be 4 or 6 pieces of material.  Most of the
ones I have been able to study from museums to later photos, show one
piece of cloth that is long enough to go from front to back with a hole
cut for the head with a small slit in the back for a tie to close the
head opening.  The sleeves are added.  Some cloth was of a width you
might get the sleeves in the main body of the cloth with the body, but
not always.  These sleeves were meant to go almost to the wrists.
Two somewhat triangular insets to the main body of the dress going from
under the arm area to two to three or so inches beyond the main body of
the dress.  And there are variations of this pattern.  But who wants to
sew two big pieces of cloth together at the neck when a hole will do.
There can be some ribbon  or cloth for a little decoration on the bottom
of the dress and sleeves.  I see way too much ribbon on Indian dress at
events and pointed like sleeves that are somewhat medieval in design
that traders and some pattern companies are putting out.  These dresses
are meant to be very comfortable  and not to fit the figure except for a
belt.  And you wore them in layers.  Most women might have at least two
on at a time.  The under dress kept dirt from getting on your better
dress or to keep you warm, other than wearing a blanket or "shawl"
around your waist.

I do have patterns I can scan for anyone interested.  Hansan and I use
to have a go around because he had one of his dresses on backwards.  The
slit of the neck was in the front instead of the back.

But how many of you guys go around in ladies cloths?????    ;-)

Linda Holley




_________________________________________________________________
Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 18:30:06 -0600
From: "larry pendleton" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List:womens dress

The women on the Texas Frontier often ony had one cloth dress.  Their
everyday work dresses were of buckskin.

Pendleton


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 16:27:57 -0800
From: "roger lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

- ----- Original Message -----
From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
To: <[e-mail]>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840


> Do you think it is just a bad idea then?

Jim,

In the context of today's rendezvous yes. They are set in a fairly narrow
historical time frame and to go outside that time frame takes a lot away
from the efforts of those who are trying to recreate the atmosphere of those
evens, (as poorly as it is done in any case). It was bad enough a few years
back to see someone walk through camp looking like an extra for an Eastwood
"B" grade western with his brace of Colt Patterson's and etc. (let's not
argue about whether those guns being 1836 models fit the time frame and
venue, they don't).

I understand your desire to expand horizons and create new energy. Why not
put that enthusiasm to work and start a new form of encampment that covers
the period of American History your interested in? You could dress up like
"49'ers" or re-enact the Civil War, or have Cowboy Action Shoots! Take it a
step further and have Teddy's Rough Riders charge through camp along with
the Charge of the Light Brigade. Maybe some WWI guys and Maxim Machine Guns
along side the Gattling Guns. Well you get the idea.

YMOS
Capt. Lahti'


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:43:12 -0500
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List:womens dress

- --------------000309040806000505070203
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I would love to see this list.

Linda Holley

[e-mail] wrote:

>  Jim.
>       Actually, leather dresses were the norm for women of this time
> period unless they were a trapper's or trader's wife. Wool was the
> cloth of choice at the time, especially saved list cloth with the
> white edge, which was used as part of the decoration. To have wool was
> a status symbol because it had to be obtained from traders and was a
> spendy item in comparison to buckskin, which was readily obtained from
> nature. Trappers were proud of their women and seemed to take pride in
> how much they could spend on them, and how lavishly they could be
> dressed.  Read Joe Meek's account of Mountain Lamb. He tells just how
> much he spent on her horse, its trappings, and on her clothes. He said
> her skirt was blue and her bodice was red, with red leggings and a red
> scarf on her head. She was Shoshone, too. Denig said that wool dresses
> were cut much like the buckskin ones when they first started making
> them. There are, however no existing wool dresses from the fur trade.
> Kurz was barely past the fur trade and he shows "Crow woman at Fort
> Berthold" of a woman wearing a cloth dress with the open sleeves,
> buckskin fringe on the bottom of the skirt and what looks like elk
> teeth on the bodice. One large picture of this that I saw looked like
> her bodice was a different color that the skirt of the dress, but I
> couldn't be sure. Ewers in his book on Blackfeet shows a circa 1850
> wool Blackfoot dress of blue stroud, with buckskin gussets up the
> sides and with the arches cut out at the bottom, and with plenty of
> fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves. This one had the blue
> and white pound beads for decoration.
>       All trappers wives did not have wool, though. Miller shows
> Walker's wife on horseback following behind him and she has a buckskin
> dress on. In Cody museum there is a two hide dress which is remarkable
> for its absence of decoration, though it does have fringe on the
> sleeves and bottom. This is Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on
> display in their collection, so we were told. It also has some hair
> left along the turned down edge where the tail is. We also can't
> forget the Miller paintings of the Shoshone women wearing only a skirt
> and no top at all.
>       Leggings go over the moccasins, come to just below the knee and
> were tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. Some tribes had a fold
> down section at the top that was fringed. They were either decorated
> or plain depending on whether they were for work or for a fancy
> outfit. The best book for leggings and dresses is Cathy Smith's
> article in The Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6. Primitive Indian Dresses
> by Susan Fecteau is another good one but is out of print. You may find
> it through Amazon. com as a used book. If you want to read about saved
> list cloth, look at our web site.
> http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm
> Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade.
> We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat
> smilier to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade.
> If anyone is interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you
> would like me to send you pictures of any of the dresses I talked
> about, I can Email them to you.
>
>
>                                                               Jill
>



- --------------000309040806000505070203
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <title></title>
</head>
<body>
I would love to see this list.<br>
<br>
Linda Holley<br>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:[e-mail]">[e-mail]</a> wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="[e-mail]"><font
 face="arial,helvetica"><font size="2">   Jim. <br>
       Actually, leather dresses were the norm for women of this time period
unless they were a trapper's or trader's wife. Wool was the cloth of choice
at the time, especially saved list cloth with the white edge, which was used
as part of the decoration. To have wool was a status symbol because it had
to be obtained from traders and was a spendy item in comparison to buckskin,
which was readily obtained from nature. Trappers were proud of their women
and seemed to take pride in how much they could spend on them, and how lavishly
they could be dressed.  Read Joe Meek's account of Mountain Lamb. He tells
just how much he spent on her horse, its trappings, and on her clothes. He
said her skirt was blue and her bodice was red, with red leggings and a red
scarf on her head. She was Shoshone, too. Denig said that wool dresses were
cut much like the buckskin ones when they first started making them. There
are, however no existing wool dresses from the fur trade. Kurz was barely
past the fur trade and he shows "Crow woman at Fort Berthold" of a woman
wearing a cloth dress with the open sleeves, buckskin fringe on the bottom
of the skirt and what looks like elk teeth on the bodice. One large picture
of this that I saw looked like her bodice was a different color that the
skirt of the dress, but I couldn't be sure. Ewers in his book on Blackfeet
shows a circa 1850 wool Blackfoot dress of blue stroud, with buckskin gussets
up the sides and with the arches cut out at the bottom, and with plenty of
fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves. This one had the blue and white
pound beads for decoration. <br>
       All trappers wives did not have wool, though. Miller shows Walker's
wife on horseback following behind him and she has a buckskin dress on. In
Cody museum there is a two hide dress which is remarkable for its absence
of decoration, though it does have fringe on the sleeves and bottom. This
is Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on display in their collection, so we
were told. It also has some hair left along the turned down edge where the
tail is. We also can't forget the Miller paintings of the Shoshone women
wearing only a skirt and no top at all. <br>
       Leggings go over the moccasins, come to just below the knee and were
tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. Some tribes had a fold down section
at the top that was fringed. They were either decorated or plain depending
on whether they were for work or for a fancy outfit. The best book for leggings
and dresses is Cathy Smith's article in The Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6.
Primitive Indian Dresses by Susan Fecteau is another good one but is out
of print. You may find it through Amazon. com as a used book. If you want
to read about saved list cloth, look at our web site. <br>
  <a href="http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm"> http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm</a>
  <br>
Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade. <br>
We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat smilier
to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade. If anyone is
interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you would like me to send
you pictures of any of the dresses I talked about, I can Email them to you.

  <br>
                                                               Jill                                                                    </font></font></blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

- --------------000309040806000505070203--



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:44:36 -0500
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

You can see some on my web site.  There are two or three ways for
putting them together.

Linda holley

James MacKannai wrote:

> Jill,
>
> Thanks for the post. You have a nice web page. I'll be looking it over
> better over the next few days and following up on your directions for
> more information.
>
> Have you made a willow backrest? I would like to know how the old ones
> were strung together. I haven't seen an original up close.
>
> Thanks again.
> Jim
>
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html
>




- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:48:13 -0500
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

Yes  it would as it is the cloth pattern for wool or cotton.  Stay away
form the patterns sold by the traders.  Way too much ribbon and tailored
sleeves.

Linda hOlley
alias [e-mail] which is [e-mail]
http://www.tipis-tepees-teepees.com

James MacKannai wrote:

>
> Jill,
>
> Looking through the backlog I found this post. Would this pattern
> apply to the 1825-50 period? I wonder how far back the shell or elk
> teeth or (dentalion?)cone like shells go. Is there a place saved list
> cloth can be bought these days?
>
>
>
>
> Jim
>
>
>
>
> From: [e-mail]
> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: New to List...Cloth dresses..Indian
> Date: 13 May 2000 12:43:59 -0400
>
>
> --------------C4BDC584CA8769AC5F88E088
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
>
> You know, we always talk about men's outfits, but very little on the
> women's cloth (Indian) dresses.
> Now here is something  that has bothered me for a long time.  The "T"
> dress or cloth dress  can be 4 or 6 pieces of material.  Most of the
> ones I have been able to study from museums to later photos, show one
> piece of cloth that is long enough to go from front to back with a hole
> cut for the head with a small slit in the back for a tie to close the
> head opening.  The sleeves are added.  Some cloth was of a width you
> might get the sleeves in the main body of the cloth with the body, but
> not always.  These sleeves were meant to go almost to the wrists.
> Two somewhat triangular insets to the main body of the dress going from
> under the arm area to two to three or so inches beyond the main body of
> the dress.  And there are variations of this pattern.  But who wants to
> sew two big pieces of cloth together at the neck when a hole will do.
> There can be some ribbon  or cloth for a little decoration on the bottom
> of the dress and sleeves.  I see way too much ribbon on Indian dress at
> events and pointed like sleeves that are somewhat medieval in design
> that traders and some pattern companies are putting out.  These dresses
> are meant to be very comfortable  and not to fit the figure except for a
> belt.  And you wore them in layers.  Most women might have at least two
> on at a time.  The under dress kept dirt from getting on your better
> dress or to keep you warm, other than wearing a blanket or "shawl"
> around your waist.
>
> I do have patterns I can scan for anyone interested.  Hansan and I use
> to have a go around because he had one of his dresses on backwards.  The
> slit of the neck was in the front instead of the back.
>
> But how many of you guys go around in ladies cloths?????    ;-)
>
> Linda Holley
>
>
>
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> Tired of spam? Get advanced junk mail protection with MSN 8.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
>
> ----------------------
> hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html
>




- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 19:52:39 -0500
From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

- --------------090804040402030402080907
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

I know the point of trying to stay in one or so time period.  Right now
you can go to many an event and see Civil War, contemporary western and
Saloon girls? mixed into the event and no says anything. Still have not
figured out the Santa Fe look.  Love some of the girls going around in
breech clout and honour shirts.  Wonder where that came from?  So much
for the Dog Soldiers.

Linda Holley

roger lahti wrote:

>----- Original Message -----
>From: "James MacKannai" <[e-mail]>
>To: <[e-mail]>
>Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 2:48 PM
>Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840
>
>
>
>
>>Do you think it is just a bad idea then?
>>
>>
>
>Jim,
>
>In the context of today's rendezvous yes. They are set in a fairly narrow
>historical time frame and to go outside that time frame takes a lot away
>from the efforts of those who are trying to recreate the atmosphere of those
>evens, (as poorly as it is done in any case). It was bad enough a few years
>


- --------------090804040402030402080907
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
  <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
  <title></title>
</head>
<body>
I know the point of trying to stay in one or so time period.  Right now you
can go to many an event and see Civil War, contemporary western and Saloon
girls? mixed into the event and no says anything. Still have not figured
out the Santa Fe look.  Love some of the girls going around in breech clout
and honour shirts.  Wonder where that came from?  So much for the Dog Soldiers.<br>
<br>
Linda Holley<br>
<br>
roger lahti wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="mid000701c2f71c$61092750$72057744@x2d1a5">
  <pre wrap="">----- Original Message -----
From: "James MacKannai" <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:[e-mail]"><[e-mail]></a>
To: <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:[e-mail]"><[e-mail]></a>
Sent: Sunday, March 30, 2003 2:48 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840


  </pre>
  <blockquote type="cite">
    <pre wrap="">Do you think it is just a bad idea then?
    </pre>
  </blockquote>
  <pre wrap=""><!---->
Jim,

In the context of today's rendezvous yes. They are set in a fairly narrow
historical time frame and to go outside that time frame takes a lot away
from the efforts of those who are trying to recreate the atmosphere of those
evens, (as poorly as it is done in any case). It was bad enough a few years</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

- --------------090804040402030402080907--



- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 17:48:00 -0800
From: "roger lahti" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: post 1840

This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2F6E4.819B2500
Content-Type: text/plain;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<Love some of the girls going around in breech clout and honour shirts.>

I remember a young "lady" at the first rendezvous we went to back in, =
well I can't remember when but it was up on the Boulder River from Big =
Timber. She was dressed in leggings, breech clout and a fairly short =
shirt.=20

I been' comin' back every since!

YMOS
Capt. Lahti'


- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2F6E4.819B2500
Content-Type: text/html;
    charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD><TITLE></TITLE>
<META http-equiv=3DContent-Type =
content=3Dtext/html;charset=3DISO-8859-1>
<META content=3D"MSHTML 6.00.2800.1141" name=3DGENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=3D#ffffff>
<DIV><Love some of the girls going around in breech clout and honour=20
shirts.></DIV>
<DIV> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I remember a young "lady" at the first =
rendezvous=20
we went to back in, well I can't remember when but it was up on the =
Boulder=20
River from Big Timber. She was dressed in leggings, breech clout and a =
fairly=20
short shirt. </FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>I been' comin' back every =
since!</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2>YMOS<BR>Capt. Lahti'</FONT></DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV>
<DIV><FONT face=3DArial size=3D2></FONT> </DIV></BODY></HTML>

- ------=_NextPart_000_001E_01C2F6E4.819B2500--


- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

Date: Sun, 30 Mar 2003 21:07:17 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: women's dresses

- --part1_197.180b68c0.2bb8fcd5_boundary
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit





   Jim.
      Actually, leather dresses were the norm for women of this time period
unless they were a trapper's or trader's wife. Wool was the cloth of choice
at the time, especially saved list cloth with the white edge, which was used
as part of the decoration. To have wool was a status symbol because it had to
be obtained from traders and was a spendy item in comparison to buckskin,
which was readily obtained from nature. Trappers were proud of their women
and seemed to take pride in how much they could spend on them, and how
lavishly they could be dressed.  Read Joe Meek's account of Mountain Lamb. He
tells just how much he spent on her horse, its trappings, and on her clothes.
He said her skirt was blue and her bodice was red, with red leggings and a
red scarf on her head. She was Shoshone, too. Denig said that wool dresses
were cut much like the buckskin ones when they first started making them.
There are, however no existing wool dresses from the fur trade. Kurz was
barely past the fur trade and he shows "Crow woman at Fort Berthold" of a
woman wearing a cloth dress with the open sleeves, buckskin fringe on the
bottom of the skirt and what looks like elk teeth on the bodice. One large
picture of this that I saw looked like her bodice was a different color that
the skirt of the dress, but I couldn't be sure. Ewers in his book on
Blackfeet shows a circa 1850 wool Blackfoot dress of blue stroud, with
buckskin gussets up the sides and with the arches cut out at the bottom, and
with plenty of fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves. This one had the
blue and white pound beads for decoration.
      All trappers wives did not have wool, though. Miller shows Walker's
wife on horseback following behind him and she has a buckskin dress on. In
Cody museum there is a two hide dress which is remarkable for its absence of
decoration, though it does have fringe on the sleeves and bottom. This is
Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on display in their collection, so we were
told. It also has some hair left along the turned down edge where the tail
is. We also can't forget the Miller paintings of the Shoshone women wearing
only a skirt and no top at all.
      Leggings go over the moccasins, come to just below the knee and were
tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. Some tribes had a fold down section
at the top that was fringed. They were either decorated or plain depending on
whether they were for work or for a fancy outfit. The best book for leggings
and dresses is Cathy Smith's article in The Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6.
Primitive Indian Dresses by Susan Fecteau is another good one but is out of
print. You may find it through Amazon. com as a used book. If you want to
read about saved list cloth, look at our web site.
<A HREF="http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm">http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm</A>
Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade.
We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat smilier
to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade. If anyone is
interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you would like me to send
you pictures of any of the dresses I talked about, I can Email them to you.
                                                              Jill

- --part1_197.180b68c0.2bb8fcd5_boundary
Content-Type: text/html; charset="US-ASCII"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<HTML><FONT FACE=3Darial,helvetica><FONT  SIZE=3D2>   =20
<BR>   =20
<BR>
<BR>
<BR>   Jim.
<BR>      Actually, leather dresses were the norm f=
or women of this time period unless they were a trapper's or trader's wife.=20=
Wool was the cloth of choice at the time, especially saved list cloth with t=
he white edge, which was used as part of the decoration. To have wool was a=20=
status symbol because it had to be obtained from traders and was a spendy it=
em in comparison to buckskin, which was readily obtained from nature. Trappe=
rs were proud of their women and seemed to take pride in how much they could=
 spend on them, and how lavishly they could be dressed.  Read Joe Meek'=
s account of Mountain Lamb. He tells just how much he spent on her horse, it=
s trappings, and on her clothes. He said her skirt was blue and her bodice w=
as red, with red leggings and a red scarf on her head. She was Shoshone, too=
. Denig said that wool dresses were cut much like the buckskin ones when the=
y first started making them. There are, however no existing wool dresses fro=
m the fur trade. Kurz was barely past the fur trade and he shows "Crow woman=
 at Fort Berthold" of a woman wearing a cloth dress with the open sleeves, b=
uckskin fringe on the bottom of the skirt and what looks like elk teeth on t=
he bodice. One large picture of this that I saw looked like her bodice was a=
 different color that the skirt of the dress, but I couldn't be sure. Ewers=20=
in his book on Blackfeet shows a circa 1850 wool Blackfoot dress of blue str=
oud, with buckskin gussets up the sides and with the arches cut out at the b=
ottom, and with plenty of fringe at the bottom and on the open sleeves. This=
 one had the blue and white pound beads for decoration.
<BR>      All trappers wives did not have wool, tho=
ugh. Miller shows Walker's wife on horseback following behind him and she ha=
s a buckskin dress on. In Cody museum there is a two hide dress which is rem=
arkable for its absence of decoration, though it does have fringe on the sle=
eves and bottom. This is Shoshone, and is the oldest dress on display in the=
ir collection, so we were told. It also has some hair left along the turned=20=
down edge where the tail is. We also can't forget the Miller paintings of th=
e Shoshone women wearing only a skirt and no top at all.
<BR>      Leggings go over the moccasins, come to j=
ust below the knee and were tubes tied on with a string of buckskin. Some tr=
ibes had a fold down section at the top that was fringed. They were either d=
ecorated or plain depending on whether they were for work or for a fancy out=
fit. The best book for leggings and dresses is Cathy Smith's article in The=20=
Book of Buckskinning Vol. 6. Primitive Indian Dresses by Susan Fecteau is an=
other good one but is out of print. You may find it through Amazon. com as a=
 used book. If you want to read about saved list cloth, look at our web site=
.
<BR><A HREF=3D"http://members.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm">http://member=
s.tripod.com/gazingcyot/index.htm</A>
<BR>Read the article Wool in the Fur Trade.
<BR>We are also starting a group for women that has requirements somewhat sm=
ilier to AMM but adapted for women, called Women of the Fur Trade. If anyone=
 is interested, I will post the requirements. Also if you would like me to s=
end you pictures of any of the dresses I talked about, I can Email them to y=
ou.=20
<BR>             =
;            &nb=
sp;            &=
nbsp;            =
;           Jill </FO=
NT></HTML>

- --part1_197.180b68c0.2bb8fcd5_boundary--

- ----------------------
hist_text list info: http://www.xmission.com/~drudy/mtman/maillist.html

------------------------------

End of hist_text-digest V1 #1179
********************************

-
 To unsubscribe to hist_text-digest, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe hist_text-digest" in the body of the message.