ftp.xmission.com/2014.06.ftp.xmission.com.tar/ftp.xmission.com/pub/lists/hist_text/archive/v01.n197

Internet Message Format | 1998-12-17 | 40KB

From: [e-mail] (hist_text-digest)
To: [e-mail]
Subject: hist_text-digest V1 #197
Reply-To: hist_text
Sender: [e-mail]
Errors-To: [e-mail]
Precedence: bulk


hist_text-digest      Thursday, December 17 1998      Volume 01 : Number 197




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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 14:57:01 -0700
From: "Matt Richards" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing

>Matt
>  The cutouts, or"pinkings and piercings", was predominately a
>southwestern addition to clothing styles.  Many examples of Mexican and
>Commanche leather goods have patterns cut through an outer cover with
>leather or cloth to back with.
>


You also find the cutouts or 'piercings' as you call them in northern
California Indian brain-tan, well north of Mexican influence  (see old
photos at the 'Trees of Mystery' museum, highway 101 south of Crescent City)
and in some Plains Indian pieces.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:09:29 -0700
From: "Matt Richards" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Kit Carson's Coat?

Well I called the place that had the Kit Carson coat I was referring too.
The woman who owned the pieces said that the buckskin pants (made from elk)
that were there, were made shortly before his death in 1868. But the jacket
was very old and dated in the early 1800's.........however, she then had me
call her son who was also involved in the collection who said he wasn't even
sure the coat was Kit Carson's.....and that I should talk to his mother....

So nothing definitive that's for sure, if I ever make it back down there,
I'll check into it some more. If anyone else wants to check it out.....the
gallery/museum is directly across the street from the entrance to the 'Kit
Carson Home and Museum', and just a little to the right, in Taos NM. The
phone number of this place (unfortunately I didn't get the name of it) is
505-758-9188. I talked to Paul, and his mother, the owners.

One question for you all (as I am trying to learn your approach to this), if
this coat can be reasonably placed as being used by Kit prior to 1840 in the
Rocky Mtns, would its replica be considered period for what you folks do? Or
is anything of Mexican or southwestern influence considered somehow off
limits, or not a part of the same scene? Honest question...

I realize it wouldn't make it appropriate for re-enacting here in northern
Montana, but I'm curious whether you'd consider it 'mtn man'.

Matt Richards
www.braintan.com

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

Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1998 22:26:46 -0800 (PST)
From: zaslow <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Farmer.

David,

A book I would strongly recommend you find is called, "Diary of an Early
American Boy, Noah Blake 1805" by Eric Sloane, ISBN 0-345-32100-6.  I think
it may be out of print, but try ordering from Barnes & Noble.  That's where
I got mine.  It is a diary of a 15 year old boy who lined on a frontier farm
in 1805.  Excellent reading.  Hope this helps.

Best Regards,

Jerry (Meriwether) Zaslow #1488



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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 15:14:24 +0100
From: Allen Chronister <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: misc topics

Maybe I should explain that I do all this chatter
at work 1 when I shouldbe doing something
productive.  Therefore, I do nothave at hand a lot
of books to pullout to cite specific page
references for everything I say.  However, I
usually try to be very careful to differentiate
between something that is just my conclusion from
something that  other documentation.  If I don't
"footnote" things I say, that is the reason.
That being said, there was a request for some
background on tanning.  Suggest you look at Welsh,
Peter.  "Tanning in the United States to 1850"
Smithsonian Institution Press (1964).  That is a
source for the large number of tanneries in US
(govt estimate of 8229 in 1840, p. 13);  and for a
reference to leather breeches.  Trench Coxe
(otherwise known as the Perveyor of Public
Suplies) wrote in 1812 of the importance of
leather and the "necessaries or plain
conveniences" made from it.  In that list he
included "leathern breeches."  (p. 3)  The
importance of leather breeches to the working man
in late 18th and early 19th centuries is discussed
in Gehret, Ellen, "Rural Pennsylvania Clothing."
Liberty Cap Books, York, PA (1976), pp. 126-27.
I do not know where, exactly, the leather to make
garments (principally gloves and breeches) came
from in this country in the early 19th centuries.
Being a leather  garment maker was a trade subject
to long apprentichship in this country (See
Gehret)  With over 8000 tanneries around, it looks
like someone would have figured out how to turn
out garment leather.  But, it is certainly
possible that most garment leather was imported.
During the 1820s and 30s and even later the AFC
shipped enormous quantities of "Shaved deer skins"
out of St Louis bound for either New Orleans or
New York.  See, e.g., American Fur Company, Ledger
 S, "Packing Book, AFC Western, 1830-33."  These
could have gone to American or European tanneries,
I don't know.  At the same time, the AFC dealt in
comparatively minute numbers of "dressed"  (ie
probably brain tanned) hides.  The numbers are
just very small.  There are occasional field
journal references to men buying dressed hides
from the Indians.  Osborne Russell's bunch, for
example, bought a quantity of excellent smoked
hides from a group of "Sheepeater" Shoshoni that
hemet in what is not Yellowstone Park.  (Sorry,
don't have page #).  I assume that most of these
types of hides went into moccasins because they
never talk about sitting around making their own
clothes.  Compare, for example, the L & C journals
when they did dress their own hides and make their
own clothes.  Whenever they stopped to do it (eg
at Ft Clatsop), it was a major party of the
journal entries.  The same thing is just missing
from "mtn man" journals.

As far as Kit Carson goes, we have a number of
detailed transactions by Carson when he was a
customer at Ft Hall in the 1830s.  What was he
buying?  beads, cloth, needles, cotton binding,
coffee, sugar, tobacco, flour, etc.  He also
bought clothes:  flannel shirts,  silk
handkerchiefs, shoes and "sattinet pants."  (Ft
Hall Day Book, entries for Feb 3, 1835;  June 26,
1836, for example).
One should be very careful about attributing such
things at Carson's coat or the ever-popular Tom
Tobin coat or the Marino Modena gun and pouch and
the Bridger Hawken to the 1820-30 period.  As
someone else pointed out, these surviving items
are usually the last ones these men owned in their
lives in the 1850-70 period, not things that they
used as beaver trappers in 1830.  This kind of
free association led in years past to lots of
Calif Gold Rush period Hawkens being attributed to
the 1830s.  See also Russell's "Firearms, Traps
and Tools of the Mtn Man" in which he illustrates
a lot of 1860 period guns as typical mtn man
material.

Some people seems to like to dismiss any
discussion of historical clothing that does not
suit their ideas as attacks by the "fashion
police."  Funny you don't hear that in discussions
about guns or traps.  Would someone that said a
coil spring wire trap was probably not typical of
an 1830 beaver trap be accused of being "trap
police"?
Anyhow, some of the idea that the "Mtn man"
dressed his own way comes probably from
assumptions that he mand his own clothing and
therefore did his own thing.  Problem is, except
for moccasins which they did routinely make
themselves, there is very little evidence that the
man in the field typically made any substantial
part ofhis own clothing.  The evidence is that it
was mostly purchased.  When you purchase, you get
what someone else is making and therefore more or
less the fashion of the time.  That is why tight
legged pantaloons are mentioned so often in 1830s
transactions,
that was the fashion of the times.
Also, there was "fashion police" in the old West.
George Simpson in 1824 upbraided one of the HBC
brigade leaders for being dressed in tattered,
patched, country clothes (Simpson, FurTrade and
Empire").  In 1850, Rudolph Kurz observed from Ft
Union that White men "dressing Indian" inspire "no
special respect among the tribes;  on the
contrary, he rather lowers himself in their
estimation."  Kurz also said a White man dressing
Indian was much more likely to be killed as an
enemy.  Hewett, ed. Journal of RF Kurz, Univ Neb.
Press 1970 p. 134.   Edwin Denig, who much
influenced Kurz' views, said the same thing of
Meldrum, the trader to the Crows:  "Unless a white
man were rich he became a sport of the savages
when he went about naked and work long hair
reaching to his shoulders, as was the practice
with some white men at Fort alexander on the
Yellowstone."  In Ft. Sarpy Journal,Contributions
to the Historical Society of Montana, Vol. X
(1940), note 153.  See also Hanson, The Traders
Dress, Museum of the Fur Trade Quarterly, Vo. 25
No. 1, 1990.
Whew!
Allen Chronister


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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:38:41 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Spencer)
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Some questions

Marion D. Watts wrote:

>I'm not sure that this will be of help to anyone concerning brooms, but
>being from the deep south and growing up in a rather "plain living" life
>style, I was acquainted with several ladies that made their own brooms, as
>their mothers before them had.  They were fashioned from sage grass.

That "sage grass" you mention is actually sedge, and the common orange-tan
type you see growing all over the southeast is called 'broom sedge'. I
presume that's because it was commonly used to make homemade brooms, as you
describe.

Bob

Bob Spencer <[e-mail]>
http://members.aye.net/~bspen/index.html
non illegitimi carborundum est

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:20:48 -0700
From: Longtrail <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Re: unsubscribe

unsubscribe

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:04:45 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing

one of the sketch books (sorry for no citation, but they are in storage right
now) shows a fringed southwestern style jacket with diamond shaped, red
blanket wool cut-outs going up the lapels and around the collar, as well as
around the cuffs. the top layer of the cuff and collar are also pinked. this
jacket also has an exterior top pocket. It (the jacket) is part of the
collection housed at the Museum of Anthropology in Albequerque. It is dated
circa 1823.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:36:04 -0700
From: "Matt Richards" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: misc topics

Allen
Thanks for the long reply. I'm at work too when doing this, but my
taskmaster is myself, and its nice to give one's self a break from scraping
hides, to learn and share a bit on the machine.

Here are some thoughts on your recent responses in our ongoing discussion of
period leather.

1. You're right in that I have always assumed that at least some of the mtn
men made their own clothes and accoutrements.....and that this lead me to
assume that they would improvise a bit to suit their own needs. Do others on
this list agree with this assertion that nearly all of their clothing (aside
from mocs) was purchased?

2. I very clearly did not hear any real evidence or sources for leather
garments of the period being made out of bark tan.....only inferences from
the fact that there were a lot of tanneries and garment makers. I would
still love to know of some...not to challenge what you are saying (though I
do doubt it somewhat) but for my own knowledge.

3. Have read several times the resource you mention. Not a primary source by
any means, but some interesting stuff. (Welsh, Peter.  "Tanning in the
United States to 1850").

4. The quotes regarding 'leather' breeches are highly open to
interpretation. While there was often some clear distinctions between
'buckskin' being what we call brain or smoke tan, and 'leather' meaning
bark-tan, this distinction doesn't seem to be any where near universal, or
even necessarily predominant.

5. As far as exporting brain tan or 'dressed' leather, my research agrees
with you. A lot of 'indian dressed' deerskins were shipped to England in the
mid 1700's (hundreds of thousands), there are very good records of this,
particularly from the southeast. As time went on, more and more of this
trade involved sending raw deerskins rather than dressed ones, that were
then presumably (can't back this up) oil-tanned in England. But definitely
tanned in England ... buckskin was a major fashion rave of the time in
Europe.
There are accounts of these buckskin breeches being typically
yellow....which has always made me think these were the ones they got from
the Indians....but they certainly could have been dyed yellow. There was
also (just a weird side note) a German brain tanning tradition still
practiced in Europe in the 1850's.

6. I think your comment comparing period guns and clothing is relevant in
some ways, but not completely. With the guns you are comparing pieces of
technology, and a knowledge of the technology. With clothing, at least the
context I've been writing and reading about on this list, the question is
more along the lines of the assumption that one could personalize one's own
clothing within the existing technology and knowledge of the day. I don't
know practically anything about muzzleloading guns, but I'll try to make an
analogy: Its more like some-one deciding to shorten the stock so that it fit
their body better, or devised a different way of attaching the strap than
was the 'norm' for such and such a reason.

I kind of compare it to food. When you cook food at a re-enactment, do you
only use recipes that you can document? Or do you think that it is somewhat
reasonable to take some of the fixings that were available and used at the
time and place, and cook them up without a documentable recipe? (with the
obvious exception of it not being appropriate to take period fixings and
deliberately make some favorite dish of a later time.....that not
acceptable).

As far as 'fashion police' go, I'm sure they existed. They've existed in
every time and place, including our own. But like the guys on the
yellowstone who grew their hair long and wore indian clothes, ...there have
always been people who didn't follow the rules of the fashion police. And
there is a huge leap from altering period style so that they fit the mtn man
of the time's needs, to wholesale adopting a different style. My argument is
that people would have altered stuff when it made practical utilitarian
sense (and occasionally just because).

Matt Richards
www.braintan.com

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:36:04 -0700
From: "WILLIAM P. GARRISON" <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: Unsubscribe

- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE29DB.5DB3E580
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit




- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE29DB.5DB3E580
Content-Type: application/ms-tnef
Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64
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- ------ =_NextPart_000_01BE29DB.5DB3E580--

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 16:41:44 -0700
From: "Matt Richards" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing

The two fellows who responded earlier about cutouts (aka piercings), HBC and
someone else, could you point me in the direction of a couple resources that
have good pictures of some of these southwestern and comanche buckskins. My
wife really likes them and is interested in specific shapes and if there
were any reinforcements or the like to keep the holes from stretching out
oddly.

Matt Richards
www.braintan.com

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:58:15 -0600
From: Glenn Darilek <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Kit Carson's Coat?

I will be in Taos for part of these holidays and will try to check it
out.

Iron Burner

Matt Richards wrote:
>
> Well I called the place that had the Kit Carson coat I was referring too.

> If anyone else wants to check it out.....the
> gallery/museum is directly across the street from the entrance to the 'Kit
> Carson Home and Museum', and just a little to the right, in Taos NM. The
> phone number of this place (unfortunately I didn't get the name of it) is
> 505-758-9188. I talked to Paul, and his mother, the owners.

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 19:02:49 -0400
From: [e-mail] (Bob Spencer)
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: period tanning / Alans comments

John, I have run across many references concerning leather, whether offered
for sale, taxed, whatever, in my browsing through the on-line archive of
the Pennyslvania Gazette from 1728 to 1800. I've included some exerpts whic
seem to bear on some of the points of the current discussion concerning
dressed vs tanned, oil treated leather, etc. They are early, much earlier
than the mountain man era, but shows that the terms and procedures existed
long before that time. I hope you find them interesting.

July 10, 1766 The Pennsylvania Gazette

"The 5th inst. July, was broke open, the skin shop of Frederick Shinkel,
and the following things stolen out of it, viz. 22 large pattern deer
skins, Indian dressed, marked about the neck F, 6 ditto smaller, marked W,
and 33 ditto oil
 dressed. Whoever secures the abovesaid skins, so that they may be had
again,..."

November 23, 1752 The Pennsylvania Gazette

"...white oak hogshead beading, oil flints, Indian dressed deer skins,
English ditto, cocoa, chocolate, bohea tea, coffee, and bottles. ..."

December 9, 1772 The Pennsylvania Gazette

"...the shotbag is made of old sheepskin, English dressed;"


>Calf skins were commonly greased with equal quantities of cod-liver oil and
>tallow, called dubbing, after bark tanning.

September 10, 1777 The Pennsylvania Gazette

"N.B. Ready money is given, by said Mentz, for any quantity of tanned and
allom dressed sheepkins."

>I overheard a discussion years ago that declared brain tan was actually the
>"dressing" of skins and not a true tanning.  I don't remember the particulars
>but, wonder if you've encountered this distinction in your research.

August 24, 1785 The Pennsylvania Gazette

(detailing the amount of import tax)
"...womens leather and stuff shoes, 1 s per pair; all dressed or tanned
leather, 3d per pound; cheese, 3d per pound;..."

April 23, 1777 The Pennsylvania Gazette

"That the said Committee of fifty be authorised to take possession of all
tanned and dressed leather, bar iron, &c...."

November 7, 1781 The Pennsylvania Gazette

PHILADELPHIA, November 7.
Extract of a letter from General WASHINGTON, dated Head Quarters, near
York, October 27, 1781. (This is from a list of soldiers and an inventory
of gear (returns) surrendered at Yorktown)

"60 dressed calf skins, 22 hides tanned leather."

I'm sure you noticed that they tended to use the terms "tanned" and
"dressed" as though they meant different things. Throughout my browsing, I
never saw the term "Indian tanned", it was always "Indian dressed". They
did always distinguish between "Indian dressed" and English dressed",
though. You noticed also, of course, the "oil dressed" deerskins and "allom
dressed" sheepskins.

Bob

Bob Spencer <[e-mail]>
http://members.aye.net/~bspen/index.html
non illegitimi carborundum est

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:06:49 +0100
From: Allen Chronister <[e-mail]>
Subject: MtMan-List: more babbling

1.  I am not arguing that the working man's
breeches in America were never made from brain tan
leather.  I just don't know what material they
were made from.  In some upper-crust settings
where they were used for riding breeches, they
were described as "doe skin."  That doesn'thelp
much.  I do suggest a theory that the same types
of tailors who were making leather knee breeches
in the 18th and early 19th centuries certainly
might have been the same types who manufactured
leather pantaloons and hunting shirts for sale in
St Louis and other places in the 1820-30 period.
They were likely commercially cut and constructed.
 This theory  is reinforced by the fact that many
of the trading posts in the West had tailors on
premise.  When detailed records are available
(such as Ft Hall), they made both cloth and
leather garments for sale.  In St Louis these
garments might have been made from whatever
leather the breeches had been made from;  in the
West they certainly could have been made from
"local" leather.
2.  I am not arguing that garments were made from
bark tan  leather.  I don't know whether they were
or not. I don't know the range of leather that is
possible with the bark tan method.  Does it all
come out like harness leather no matter what you
start with, or what?  What is a bark tanned deer
or sheep hide like?
3.  On the SWestern cut-out hide backed with cloth
stuff, at least as far as Indian material goes, I
think you'll find a lot more of it coming from the
Western Apaches than from the Comanches.  The
Apaches commonly decorated by doing geometric
cut-outs in soft hide or thin rawhide backed
usually with red wool cloth (at least in the
historic period).  Two items that this is commonly
seen on are double saddle bags and arrow quivers.
I don't think Comanche people did much of this
work.  I can supply some cites if needed.  While I
usually take Thomas Mails with a grain of salt,
his book on the Apache has numerous pictures of
the Apache material.
Mexican/Spanish involvement in this is something I
don't really know about as far as age,
applications, materials.
Allen Chronister

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:04:11 -0700
From: "Barry Conner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing

The coat your talking about was Tom Toblin's, but the date the museum put on
it is wrong, because according to his grandson, now in his mid 90's. Toblin
was wearing this coat when he killed the Espensoia brothers and that was
15-20 years later than the date shown. Plus revolvers were carried by
several army officers at the time, they refused to help in the fight and
Toblin shot several with his Hawken and wounded one.

Charles Hanson put the sketch in the Mountain Man Sketch Book, with a remark
that the coat's location was unknown. Ray Turner, Dick Whitmer and myself
(AMM brothers)were in Durango several years after the sketch book came out,
in a small museum at the west end of town. I saw the coat hanging on the
back wall behind the counter, called my friends over and told them, "there's
Toblin's coat". An old man showing some people an apple peeler, that he was
cranking, came over and wanted to know how I knew that the coat was
Toblin's.

I explained seeing it in a book and the stories I had read about Toblin, he
became very interested and ask if we would like to see the rifle and a
letter written about Toblin's deed. Turn's out he's Tom Toblin's grandson
then in his late 60's, the letter was written for Kit Carson by an officer
as Kit could not write, but had placed his mark on the letter. The rifle was
a gift from the army for his deed and the reward money was never collected
from the government.

Oh, Toblin and Carson were related, cousins or second cousins ?

But the coat looked real close to the drawing that Charlie had done, called
and told him about the coat, was in the winter, the next spring he called
and wanted to see it, so we met and drove down together to Durango from
Loveland, Colorado. He took lots of pictures of it and tried to talk the
grandson into letting the musuem have it, never got anywhere with a deal.

So Kit Carson having one with cut out coat's like his relation is not a
suprise.

Buck
_____________________________
- -----Original Message-----
From: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 4:25 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing


>one of the sketch books (sorry for no citation, but they are in storage
right
>now) shows a fringed southwestern style jacket with diamond shaped, red
>blanket wool cut-outs going up the lapels and around the collar, as well as
>around the cuffs. the top layer of the cuff and collar are also pinked.
this
>jacket also has an exterior top pocket. It (the jacket) is part of the
>collection housed at the Museum of Anthropology in Albequerque. It is dated
>circa 1823.
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 18:49:31 EST
From: [e-mail]
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: cutouts on clothing

Matt, I'll try and dig out the sketchbook that has the jacket i referred to
and will give you the info.  i had a jacket made using the drawings as
referrence; the illustration from the museum cites the date 1823. The lapel,
collar and cuff, in the area of the cut-outs are actually three layers of
material. The bottom is the base skin of the jacket, then a layer of thin red
blanket wool, then the top layer of skin has the cut-outs. The layers were
hide-glued and stitched, and this arrangement seems to prevent 'stretching' of
the openings where the wool shows through. Hope this helps,    Ralph.  (Barney
P. Fife)

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:22:31 -0700
From: "Barry Conner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Releif, gratitude, thanks

That's "Etiquette" Dennis, not "you ett somethim."

Buck
___________________
- -----Original Message-----
From: Dennis Miles <[e-mail]>
To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 2:45 PM
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Releif, gratitude, thanks


>So THAT'S why I haven't been tossed off the list yet.. Well I'll be didilly
>damned!!<G>
>
>Dennis
>
>   "Abair ach beagan is abair gu math e"
>          DOUBLE EDGE FORGE
>  Period Knives & Iron Accouterments
>    http://www.wesnet.com/deforge1
>-----Original Message-----
>From: Linda Holley <[e-mail]>
>To: [e-mail] <[e-mail]>
>Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 4:35 PM
>Subject: Re: MtMan-List: Releif, gratitude, thanks
>
>
>>Etiquette??? what etiquette?  I didn't know we had any.  Thought this
sight
>was
>>guided by freedoms of speech,  who had knowledge, big brass ones,  choices
>to
>>stick your foot in your mouth and who could run the fastest after throwing
>the
>>first punch.
>>
>>Linda Holley
>>
>>"Marion D. Watts" wrote:
>>
>>> My apologies to all for showing individual gratitude on the list.  I'm a
>>> new comer, thus not aware of proper etiquette.  Your understanding is
>>> appreciated.
>>> Your most humble and obedient servant,
>>> [e-mail]
>>> [e-mail]
>>> M. D. Watts
>>>
>
>
>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:48:35 -0700
From: "Barry Conner" <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: misc topics

- -----Original Message-----
From: Allen Chronister <[e-mail]>
To: chat <[e-mail]>
Date: Thursday, December 17, 1998 3:13 PM
Subject: MtMan-List: misc topics


Hello Camp,

As Allen has pointed out leather breeches were popular, I have a pair of
late leather breeches, drop front, comm.made and believed by Mrs.Z.Gates
(author of "Marino Medina Mountainman"), to have belonged to Medina and worn
by his step-son Louie at the turn of this century in town events in Loveland
Colorado.

>reference to leather breeches.  Trench Coxe (otherwise known as the
Perveyor of >Public Suplies) wrote in 1812 of the importance of leather and
the "necessaries or >plain conveniences" made from it.  In that list he
included "leathern breeches."  (p. 3)


Again these breeches were late in his life as were his other items mentioned
by Allen, just because they belonged to a mountainman doesn't make then
"period" to the fur trade, with Medina he came late or at the end of the
period.

>One should be very careful about attributing such things at Carson's coat
or the ever->popular Tom Tobin coat or the Marino Modena gun and pouch and
the Bridger >Hawken to the 1820-30 period

I have seen and handled Toblin's coat, but can't remember the leather
(commerical or home tanned), the breeches are of a commerical type tanning,
light gray to a off white in color, machine sewed on 2/3 's and some hand
stiching on waist band. This was another item that Hanson wanted for the
museum and time just flys, never got to do anything with them. Bill
Cunningham will run an article in the next issue of T&LR about these
breeches I believe. Interesting but would they have been used, Wes Housler
and I have talked about this, as well as Wes and Jeff mention the use of
breeches in their book, "Dress & Equipage of the Mountain Man".

As others have stated isn't this better than having everyone complaining,
research and ideas.

Buck

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 17:07:05 -0800
From: Roger Lahti <[e-mail]>
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: misc topics

Matt,

Matt Richards wrote:

> 1. You're right in that I have always assumed that at least some of the mtn
> men made their own clothes and accoutrements.....and that this lead me to
> assume that they would improvise a bit to suit their own needs. Do others on
> this list agree with this assertion that nearly all of their clothing (aside
> from mocs) was purchased?

Thanks for the opportunity to vote on something. I agree in principle with
Allen's assertion that most if not all their clothing was purchased and I would
add, or made for them by indian or white seamstress' on the scene. There were a
lot more divers peoples (other than our heroes) on the scene than most realize.
many of the engage's or hired help had families with them and many of these
people came from the original fur trade activities in the Old North West.
French, Half breeds, eastern indians, etc. Considering the evidence put forth on
the amount of dry goods and sewing supplies sent west, one can extrapolate a
thriving "cottage' industry going on for anyone able to sew garments in the
"white" fashion.

2. I very clearly did not hear any real evidence or sources for leather garments
of the period being made out of bark tan.....only inferences from the fact that
there were a lot of tanneries and garment makers. I would still love to know of
some...not to challenge what you are saying (though I do doubt it somewhat) but
for my own knowledge.

Can't add anything on this other than the volume of such organized business and
home oriented tanning activity that was going on.

> 3. Have read several times the resource you mention. Not a primary source by
> any means, but some interesting stuff. (Welsh, Peter.  "Tanning in the
> United States to 1850").
>
> 4. The quotes regarding 'leather' breeches are highly open to
> interpretation. While there was often some clear distinctions between
> 'buckskin' being what we call brain or smoke tan, and 'leather' meaning
> bark-tan, this distinction doesn't seem to be any where near universal, or
> even necessarily predominant.

If that is the case then we will just have to live with the knowledge that
Breeches made of leather are proper and can be made of indian dressed hides or
other period correct leathers until a primary source comes along that says one
or the other was the way it was done.

> 6. I think your comment comparing period guns and clothing is relevant in
> some ways, but not completely. With the guns you are comparing pieces of
> technology, and a knowledge of the technology. With clothing, at least the
> context I've been writing and reading about on this list, the question is
> more along the lines of the assumption that one could personalize one's own
> clothing within the existing technology and knowledge of the day. I don't
> know practically anything about muzzleloading guns, but I'll try to make an
> analogy: Its more like some-one deciding to shorten the stock so that it fit
> their body better, or devised a different way of attaching the strap than
> was the 'norm' for such and such a reason.

If we compare the guns of the time and how they were thought of and use that as
an analogy of how these people may have dealt with the subject of personal
clothing then we would see very little "personalizing" of clothing. I don't
recall seeing any period guns that were markedly altered other than some
decorative things like brass tacks (which is probably by indians) and trying to
add a rear sight to a smooth gun which was done quit a bit. There were many
field repairs with wire and raw hide and damaged muzzles were cut down to allow
continued use of the gun. there are some rare examples of trade guns being cut
down at both ends to facilitate use on horse back or for concealment but this
was not wide spread either. So how does that allow us to go Willie Nillie in
creating new and individual ways of dressing for the present day historical
reenactment? The bottom line is that if you can't place it in the time and
locality of the event you are reenacting it really isn't the proper thing to do.
That people do it don't make it right!

> I kind of compare it to food. When you cook food at a re-enactment, do you
> only use recipes that you can document? Or do you think that it is somewhat
> reasonable to take some of the fixings that were available and used at the
> time and place, and cook them up without a documentable recipe? (with the
> obvious exception of it not being appropriate to take period fixings and
> deliberately make some favorite dish of a later time.....that not
> acceptable).

There are many that try very hard to eat as the historical record says they ate.
There are also many modern reasons why this is not always done. I and I'm sure
many others try very hard, within the bounds of what is known, to walk the
straight and narrow but when I can't, I try to be honest about it and say this
is probably not right but for now it is the best I can do. I also try hard not
to do things that are easily visible and are not period correct because many new
folks will look at me walking down the trail in my "Pendlton Wool Chief Joseph
Blanket Capote" and think, "gee that's a beautiful coat and Old Uncle Rog, who's
been in this for 30 years, always does things right so that must be ok".

> As far as 'fashion police' go, I'm sure they existed. They've existed in
> every time and place, including our own. But like the guys on the
> yellowstone who grew their hair long and wore indian clothes, ...there have
> always been people who didn't follow the rules of the fashion police. And
> there is a huge leap from altering period style so that they fit the mtn man
> of the time's needs, to wholesale adopting a different style. My argument is
> that people would have altered stuff when it made practical utilitarian
> sense (and occasionally just because).

I just loved Allens observations on "fashion police" and the fact that you don't
hear about the "accouterment police" or the "gun police" or the "camp gear
police" just says that people think they should be able to wear what ever they
have spent their money on without critique. And my argument is that they didn't
alter stuff when it made practical utilitarian sense in our modern context. Are
your attitudes the same as your grandfathers or will they be shared by your
great grand children? Hardly. Well the attitudes of people in the 18th and 19th
Century were a lot different than those we harbor and live our modern lives by
now. If we want to pretend to be living in those bygone eras' we are obligated
to try to think like they did. What innovative ways would you portray some
persona from the 13th or 14th Century if you were a member of the Honorable
"Society for Creative Anachronism" 'It sure is impractical to were these cloths
so I think I will be innovative and change the style and fabric to a more
practical cut, etc. that I am aware of from the hundreds of years of history
that followed those early Centuries'. Silly isn't it?

This ain't the sixties and I ain't no free spirit "flower child" no more. I'm
trying to recreate the American life style of the 18th and 19th Century and
their "free spirit" is just romanticism on our part. I  remain....

YMOS
Capt. Lahti'

>

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

Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1998 10:07:50 -0700
From: [e-mail] (Angela Gottfred)
Subject: Re: MtMan-List: period tanning / Alans comments

"Matt Richards" <[e-mail]> wrote:
>>My understanding from primary source research is that hundreds of thousands
of hides were sent to England.....many of them already brain and smoke
tanned by Natives (such as the Creeks). As the 1700's went on, an increasing
amount of these exported deerskins were sent untanned. They were then tanned
in Europe, using an oil tanning process, and many of these were then shipped
back to the US for use in garments. <<
Matt, thanks for this. At first, I was going to write & tell you that, from
HBC &  North West Company journals for the 1774-1821 period, the only hides
that I recall being traded were for the use of the fur traders at their
posts. But then I had a quick flip through the journal of NWC wintering
partner Alexander Henry the Younger, and found the following information on
what the NWC traded in 1805. It was an eye-opener.

"Returns of Outfit of 1805, Receipted at Kamanistiquia [Fort William], 1806:
[out of 141,581 skins & furs received, there were:]
4,065 Deer Skins...
3,497 Dressed [brain-tanned] Orignal [moose] Skins...
173 Dressed Cariboux Skins...
906 Deer Skins, damaged, and Biche [elk] Skins, staged[?]...
38 Does [elk] and Cariboux, dressed...
218 Orignals, dressed" (Henry the Younger, Coues ed., vol 1, pp. 283-284).

(I've omitted the large numbers of beaver, marten, buffalo robes, etc. on
this long list. There is also a smaller number of untanned 'parchment'
skins.) This works out to 8,897 skins, which is only 6% of the total number
of furs traded, but it's still a heck of a lot of brain-tanned skins going
east from NWC headquarters on Lake Superior.

Your humble & obedient servant,
Angela Gottfred
[e-mail]

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

End of hist_text-digest V1 #197
*******************************

-
 To unsubscribe to hist_text-digest, send an email to
"[e-mail]"
 with "unsubscribe hist_text-digest" in the body of the message.
 For information on digests or retrieving files and old messages send
 "help" to the same address.  Do not use quotes in your message.