Earl Lanning's Rifleman's frock

[bluenoser]

TOF,

If I contributed to the derailing of this thread in any way, or if I contributed to degradation of the quality of the discussion, you have my sincere apology.

I thought I was staying on topic.  My response to Dan was triggered much less by any perceived personal affront than by what I perceive to be a lack of respect for the opinions, goals and aspirations of others combined with a propensity to belittle those with differing views.  I am afraid I can be a little intolerant and I certainly can be outspoken.  I apologize to all for not keeping my opinion to myself.

Laurie

[Ken G]

I thought it was a informative thread.   

[bdixon]

My wife made me a very similar frock for last years hunt and it has a lot of fringe, fray, type of trim.  I didnt really have much trouble with hitch-hikers but the wife spent a lot of time pulling the fringe by hand, and she let me know that "of course."  Any way it did work for me and I like the style.  Pros and cons to this type of frock.

Humbly submitted

Brett.

[smshea]

I thought it was a informative thread.   

Me Too!

[Brian]

I thought it was a informative thread.   

Me Too!

I as well.  I thought some very good points were made by everybody who participated.

[BrownBear]

I often wonder if some of the things we question have not been read over by someone in some document who either did not realize what he was reading or was so intent on something else it went unnoticed.
One of the reason I see discussions of this sort as important and informative is that maybe it will make more people aware and perhaps they will stumble onto to some obscure reference that would at least be a clue.

That's a real mouthful, and I cite the following to prove your point:

I'm currently reading James L. Nelson's terrific book "George Washington's Secret Navy."  At one point he quotes one of Washington's letters to congress in 1775 about outfitting some ships, and in the middle of ship stuff Washington also requests hunters frocks to outfit Arnold's troops headed for Quebec.  Sorry, no details on style, but it does specify a particular type of fabric.  

Here's the point.  I was so interested in the ships that without this discussion I'd have read right over that little bit of "nonsense" about frocks that Nelson chose to leave in the quote.  But now I can't shake the stupid thing from my mind!!!!!

Edit-  It bugged me so much I went back and looked for the reference.  It's on page 103, and the reference is to "tow-cloth hunting shirts."

See what I mean?   

[smylee grouch]

TOF-while your thread might have been side tracked somewhat, you could be happy that you started a very interesting discusion, that in itself was worth the side trip IMHO. Thanks for your post and time.   Gary

[Pete G.]

I like Dan's answer. I don't always agree with what he says, but I am glad that he takes the time to compose a comprehensive post.

[Randy Hedden]

This thread may have some interesting information for some, but ultimately causes problems down the road.  The problem comes several months, or even years, later when a member remembers some of the info and wants to read it again.  The information in long threads with a majority of off topic replies are very  difficult, if not impossible, to retrieve from the archives.  If you do find some info through an archive search it will be out of context with other replies.

For nonbelievers just try to find some of the "interesting information" found in this thread.  There is a reason that many message boards frown on off topic replies. 

I really like this board and have been a member since it first started, but in the last couple of years it seems like a thread is started and a very few replies seek to talk about the original subject before the off topic replies start and wind their way through several topics and go on for pages.  Sometimes the off topic replies start before the original question is actually answered.

When one of these long multi-page threads starts, I find myself reading them until someone submits one of those long babbling replies that covers several off topic subjects.  After that, there seems to be nothing submitted that is pertinent to the original post and trying to keep track of all the various subjects in the babbler's thread is more than I care to do.  We seem to have gained a few babblers, TOF calls them "preening peacocks",  who think that the more they write the more creditable their reply.  Almost like they are trying to baffle us with BS.     

It is a simple thing to correct.  Don't allow off topic replies and request that the member who posts an off topic reply start a new thread on his particular off topic.  It would make for a clearer board and simplify archive searches.

Randy Hedden   



 

[Acer Saccharum]

I think this is a worthwhile discussion. Discussion means you get different points of view, and some of the posts are off topic, yes, but somehow related to the main.

If you guys could please keep it civil, that would be a big help. I know it's hard to resist slinging insults when you are mad or feelings are hurt. I feel that way sometimes, too.

Thanks, Tom

[Chuck Burrows]

It is a simple thing to correct.  Don't allow off topic replies and request that the member who posts an off topic reply start a new thread on his particular off topic.

Or you could just start you're own forum and run it the way you like...........we do things differently here and as long as it is not that far off and remains interesting to enough folks (as most have noted) to make it worthwhile than things will stay as is or until the owner orders me to do different....

[Randy Hedden]

It is a simple thing to correct.  Don't allow off topic replies and request that the member who posts an off topic reply start a new thread on his particular off topic.

Or you could just start you're own forum and run it the way you like...........we do things differently here and as long as it is not that far off and remains interesting to enough folks (as most have noted) to make it worthwhile than things will stay as is or until the owner orders me to do different....

Chuck,

I have been a member of this board from day one, many more years than you have been around here.     I am not an administrator or moderator, but I believe I should be able to offer suggestions to  the administrators without being told to go some place else.

Randy Hedden

[Dphariss]

Part of the problem is the printed word. It makes things sound more abrupt than they would in person with body language and inflection.
Over on the Frontier Folk a similar discussion got started and these often get heated and insulting perhaps.
It did come out that there was a 1768 reference to "hunting shirt" in a run away ad which indicates that the hunting shirt needed no further explanation so it was apparently a common item in 1768.
Meaning it dates to earlier IF it was considered a specific garment which it apparently was.
No mention of fringe but apparently by 1776 they were made both ways (?)

Dan

[rich pierce]

It is a simple thing to correct.  Don't allow off topic replies and request that the member who posts an off topic reply start a new thread on his particular off topic.

Or you could just start you're own forum and run it the way you like...........we do things differently here and as long as it is not that far off and remains interesting to enough folks (as most have noted) to make it worthwhile than things will stay as is or until the owner orders me to do different....

Chuck,

I have been a member of this board from day one, many more years than you have been around here.     I am not an administrator or moderator, but I believe I should be able to offer suggestions to  the administrators without being told to go some place else.

Randy Hedden

Like we say at work, "IT WAS JUST A SUGGESTION!"  LOL

Some weeks moderators get called out for being too active and not active enough, for being heavy handed Gestapo types and for acting like they've surrendered.  Not always easy to be moderate.

"There's nothing to see here, folks, move along."

All seriousness aside, I think the general rule is that as long as folks are interested, a topic is generating discussion, and has not gone out of bounds to where posts are well outside the "longrifle campfire talk" or have degenerated into playground fights, we tend to let them go.

[Chuck Burrows]

Yes Randy you do have that right as does anyone and it does not matter whether they've been here since the beginning or not - all members have the same "rights", but as long as I am the moderator here such suggestions should be done via a PM and not publicly posted, which is what I should have done as well with my reply so I apologize to all - I plead a long, bad day in town does things to one's patience...
Still all in all topics change, morph, etc. sometimes for the worse sometimes for the better, but so far the majority reading this one (including myself) have found it interesting and enlightening so it will remain as is.........

as to the original question

I wonder how much shirts with all that fringe were actually worn back in the day and if they weren't more of a dress item.

Based on a plethora of primary doumentation, said fringe was apparently widely used on such shirts..........
here's just a couple of examples,

"You expressed apprehension that the rifle dress of General Morgan may be mistaken hereafter for a waggoners frock, which he, perhaps, wore when on the expedition with General Braddock, there is no more resemblance between the two dresses, then between a cloak and a coat; the waggoners frock was intended, as the present cartman’s to cover and protect their clothes, and is merely a long coarse shirt reaching below the knee; the dress of the Virginia riflemen who came to Cambridge in 1775, was an elegant loose dress reaching to the middle thigh, ornamented with a great many fringes in various parts meeting the pantaloons of the same material and color, fringed and ornamented in corresponding style."

John Trumbull, Personal letter, 1780

Their whole dress is also very singular, and not very materially different from that of the Indians; being a hunting shirt somewhat resembling a waggoner’s frock, ornamented with a great many fringes.....
According to the number and variety of the fringes on his hunting shirt, and the decorations on his powder horn, belt, and rifle, he estimates his finery, and absolutely conceives himself of equal consequence, more civilized, polite, and more elegantly dressed than the most brilliant peer at St. James’s

A Tour of the United States of America by John Ferdinand Dalziel Smyth. Smyth toured Virginia and the Carolinas in the years immediately before the Revolution - his book was published in 1784

[Clark Badgett]

Good stuff Chuck. Now who makes a good pattern for one of these or are they just a bunch of rectangles sewn together to make a shirt with fringe added. Am getting very interested in making one.

[bluenoser]

To my understanding, the closed front wagoner’s shirt or smock was basically an enlarged and version of the common 18th century shirt extending to about the knees.  It is composed of rectangles.  The hunting frock is also composed of rectangles with the exception of the cape or capes.  Construction of the two is quite similar.

Patterns for both the shirt and hunting frock can be found in Beth Gilgun’s Tidings from the 18th Century, starting on pages 84 and 102 respectively.  A shirt pattern can also be found in Ellen Gehrt’s Rural Pennsylvania Clothing (Shumway) beginning on page 99.  Online patterns for the shirt can be found at
http://www.marquise.de/en/1700/howto/maenner/18hemd.shtml and
http://www.nwta.com/patterns/pdfs/261MensShirt.pdf and other sites.
Just cut it a little oversize and leave the hem raw or pull threads for fringe.  I am afraid I can’t help with regard to adding fringe in other places.  Patterns for the open front hunting frock are probably also available online, but I don’t have any bookmarked.

Laurie

[rich pierce]

Over on another forum there is an endless discussion of hunting shirts, when they emerged, what variations are permissible and still remain historically correct, etc.  I second Beth Gilgun's book as a good source for patterns and ideas.  I expect every kit for a 1770-1810 frontiersman/militiaman should have a fringed "hunting shirt"- along with a couple other outer garments.

[dannybb55]

I have a question about these shirts, Since all of our textile mills went off shore in the past 9 years, where do we get the linen or whatever?

[Pete G.]

I have a question about these shirts, Since all of our textile mills went off shore in the past 9 years, where do we get the linen or whatever?

Crazy Crow Trading Company catalogs some choices (along with complete frocks, kits and patterns).

[bluenoser]

I have a question about these shirts, Since all of our textile mills went off shore in the past 9 years, where do we get the linen or whatever?

Crazy Crow Trading Company catalogs some choices (along with complete frocks, kits and patterns).

I am afraid off shore products are just a fact of life these days.

Some of the fabrics offered by Crazy Crow are synthetic or partially synthetic and others appear to be unidentified.  I personally would be inclined to look elsewhere.  We have purchased from Jas. Townsend  http://www.jas-townsend.com/index.php in the past, and find their knowledge, service and the quality of their products to be very good.  However, at $20.00 per yard, I find the linen to be pricy.

There are a number of online fabric stores where one can purchase 100% linen for about $7.00 to $9.00 per yard.  Just do a search for online fabric sales.  We lost our hard drive a few months ago and, with it, the link to the online store we have been ordering from.  This is a link to an outlet that appears to have the fabric you/we might be looking for at good prices.  http://www.fabrics-store.com/  We have not ordered from these folks.

If you are unsure about fabric weight, look at fabrics at a local store to get a feel for weights.  You might also want to consider how tightly the fabric is woven.  The dreaded threads-per-inch.  The tighter woven fabrics are more wind resistant.  I would try to stay with 100% natural fabrics.  Linen and wool are always ok.  I have found linsey woolsey (linen warp and wool weft threads) online, but lost the link with the HD.  Depending on your time frame, cotton can lead to some interesting discussions.

Laurie

[James Rogers]

http://www.wmboothdraper.com/

[dannybb55]

Laurie, Cotton is grown just down the road, a few rows are still standing from last year. For a later blacksmith Federal period impression, I would go with that as it was the basis of our economy. We shipped the bails to the UK and they sent finished cloth to Morehead City, NC. For my earlier 17th to 18th century thing, Hemp seems the way to go. It was grown locally for the naval stores industry and by the Tuscaroras. Any help there? Danny

[dannybb55]

http://www.wmboothdraper.com/

           Thanks mind reader

[Mike R]

Over on another forum there is an endless discussion of hunting shirts, when they emerged, what variations are permissible and still remain historically correct, etc.  I second Beth Gilgun's book as a good source for patterns and ideas.  I expect every kit for a 1770-1810 frontiersman/militiaman should have a fringed "hunting shirt"- along with a couple other outer garments.

Yes, and I would extend that age range on both sides by a few years. Besides runaway ads there are other references [such as traders logs] that refer to hunting shirts/frocks in the 1760s as though they were commonplace by then, at least among hunters. The hunting shirt lasted into the late 19th cent, although styles varied. Surely the caped fringed type was used through the War 1812, Creek Wars, and into the Mex War period [1840s]. I have seen hunting shirts from the 1870s.