Antler buttons...

[satx78247]

PLEASE provide that "abundance of evidence to the contrary" from prime/neutral sources.

yours, satx

 

[satx78247]

Speaking for me alone (I cannot speak for anyone else!), I'm not upset at you or anyone else. = I've simply posted what my research from original documents, museums & other historical collections have to examine and my OPINIONS based on SEEING those documents/artifacts.
In the event that saying what my research (over 3 decades) has found, what the FACTS are & what my opinions are of those facts "upsets" anyone, I simply say, "We are all adults here & we do not have to agree with each other."

yours, satx

 

[Black Hand]

PLEASE provide that "abundance of evidence to the contrary" from prime/neutral sources.

yours, satx

All you need to do is look at the hundreds of articles of 18th & 19th century clothing (originals) that exist in collections world-wide.

I've see pewter, gold, silver, brass, cloth-covered (very common), thread, horn, bone, etc. but NOT ONE that looks like a slice of antler.

A few examples: http://www.pinterest.com/lauraellen80/18th-century-men-s-clothing/
http://www.vintagetextile.com/new_page_331.htm
http://www.scribd.com/doc/159526891/Male-Dress-Coats-Suits-Waistcoats
http://www.pinterest.com/18thcentkitty/men-s-18th-century-fashion/
http://www.scribd.com/doc/159514758/Male-Dress-Breeches-Overalls

 

[Claude Mathis]

My uneducated quesiton would be, would a person on the "frontier" have a saw fine enough to "slice" antler for buttons? It would be much easier to whittle buttons out of wood. IMO

Now, do I care if someone wants to use antler buttons on their gear? Absolutely not.

 

[satx78247]

Pardon me for pointing out that ALL of those sources are:
1. NOT prime sources,
2. Solely fashions of aristocrats and "well to do"/RICH people's attire,
("Ordinary folks" in Europe or here didn't wear "fashions"; they wore "clothes".)
3. NO pictures of Mountain Men, early settlers, shopkeepers, farmers, etc. or "poor folks"attire
and
4. No Germanic clothes or hunting attire that was typical of Central Europeans either in Europe or in the Colonies/USA.

Do you have anything like "an abundance of evidence to the contrary" of persons who would EVER have even considered wearing homespun, linsey-woolsey, brain-tanned leather, locally tanned hides & furs, longhunter outfits, "manual laborer's clothes" or even "middle class" person's attire anywhere?

yours, satx

 

[Black Hand]

Somehow, I knew that this was going to be your objection (they aren't "poor-people" clothes). Also, how is an original item of the period NOT a reasonable source?

Nonetheless, buttons that were available to the rich were also available (in many cases) to the poor. Horn, bone, thread, covered & pewter are the ones that come to mind. Either way, your objection is still drowned-out by the preponderance of buttons....(see Spence's list, trade-lists of the period and archeological digs of period settlements/forts).

 

[Stophel]

Just a comment: any "Germanic hunting attire" from the 18th century that you could find is going to be clothing worn by the wealthy, at the very least, and likely nobility.... hardly indicative of the common man!!!

Everyone else, assuming they could hunt at all, wore their ordinary clothes... and one of those cool hunting caps with ear flaps.. I must make myself one of those! :grin:

The 18th Century German hunting clothes I see so much in period images, even worn by the elite, are rather ordinary, and generally distinguished from the standard suit of clothes only by being green! Of course, I can't tell if the buttons are antler or not... :haha:

Even proving the mere existence of such a thing does not mean anyone actually used it. Benjamin Franklin invented a (technically) more efficient cast iron stove. It existed, but it was contrary to operate, expensive, and almost no one bought it.

 

[tenngun]

The truth is that when we look at old discriptions of poor peoples clothing we don't get enough info to recreate it. Much of the details are left out and we have to fill in the blanks. New immigrints would use what they brought and what they had always made. We could think about celtic pins...not somthing used here in america but new scots showing up didn't toss them in the river.
The 'poor' could have owned a lot of real property and still have little money to spend. Making3 cents a piece to high too buy and a ready substitute could have been used.
I have changed since the 90s to metal buttons, but we have to be careful to judge what was used and by whom it was used at any time.

 

[satx78247]

Well, that's "interesting". - A Franklin stove was supposed to be the greatest thing since "sliced bread". = I'd guess that the people who liked them REALLY liked them & those who didn't kept silent.

Being a member in good-standing of the Lands Jadgverband in Zwiebrucken, BRD doesn't require you to be "well to do", rich or a member of the nobility and probably never did.
(Though "dirt poor" hunters in Germanic states were likely called: Poachers. = CHUCKLE.)
You are also correct that the hunting attire was/is different only in material (generally heavy-weight wool) and loden green.
Fyi, I've never seen a set of new/old German hunting attire that did NOT have buttons & other "ornamentation" of antler and/or bones of European game animals.
(I have a circa 1900 vest with chamois/Gamse teeth as buttons & a pair of vintage green lederhosen with badger/Dachs bone buttons at the knee.)

IF you really want a traditional German hunting (billed) cap, let me know, as I know of a TX importer that has NICE things at a reasonable price.

yours, satx

 

[satx78247]

WELL SAID.

yours, satx

 

[Black Hand]

It would be much easier to whittle buttons out of wood.

Or make thread buttons, death-head buttons, buy (barter for) buttons, use ties or use the buttons from another article of (discarded) clothing. Also, one should remember that may of the buttons present on coats were purely decorative.

To think that anyone was so remote that they had NO access to material goods and that they made everything with their own 2 hands is a little far-fetched. They purchased/bartered for material goods.
http://www.fwhmuseum.com/archaeology_find_popup.asp?section=buttons
http://www.wmboothdraper.com/Buttons/buttons_main.htm

1964 Interpreting the Brunswick Town Ruins. Florida Anthropologist 17(2):56-62.
Last half 18th century, British colonial, Brunswick Town, NC. General discussion of archaeological and historiographic work conducted at site; emphasis on architectural features; mentions hundreds of buttons, fourteen scissors fragments, five thousand straight pins, scores of buckles, twenty-eight sleeve-links, and many thimbles. http://www.sha.org/research/bibliographies/bibliography_N_america_S-Z.cfm
http://nmscarcheologylab.wordpress.com/page/2/?like=1 (~1/3 of the way down)
http://nmscarcheologylab.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/buttons-hume1.jpg

 

[Claude Mathis]

To think that anyone was so remote that they had NO access to material goods and that they made everything with their own 2 hands is a little far-fetched.

As I posted above, they even hand buttons for sale at Rendezvous, which was about as remote as you could get. And, if someone was that remote, would they have a small, fine-toothed saw for cutting antler slices?

Did someone, somewhere have antler buttons? Probably. Go for it if it works for you. :thumbsup:

 

[Rifleman1776]

Even proving the mere existence of such a thing does not mean anyone actually used it. Benjamin Franklin invented a (technically) more efficient cast iron stove. It existed, but it was contrary to operate, expensive, and almost no one bought it.

This proving such and such existed, or didn't exist, back then is a never ending issue. The thread counters can suck the fun out of a ronny like the black plague. To be safe we should all show up naked.
BTW, I read the autobiography of Ben Franklin about a year ago. According to him, the stove sales were very successful. But....maybe not....he may not have sold out the original inventory as they are still being sold today. :shocked2: :wink: :v

 

[Black Hand]

This proving such and such existed, or didn't exist, back then is a never ending issue.

Using documented items really isn't all that restrictive and leads to a far better interpretation because one is using what was KNOWN to be available. Admittedly, there may be a few items where some interpretation might be needed, but we also know what materials & construction methods were used (by examining similar items) and can make informed decisions.

As a side note: Many/most Rendezvous aren't all that strict about their requirements for PC/HC, so there is really no "fun-sucking" going on. People pretty much do whatever they want, and it is the job of the organizers to enforce their rules. On the other hand, the camps of people who make an effort to be PC/HC are easily recognized.

Additionally, Naked is always PC/HC, but for the events I've attended, Naked is something that SHOULD NEVER be seen.

 

[Black Hand]

Pardon me for pointing out that ALL of those sources are:
1. NOT prime sources

To browse at your hearts content (Primary sources from 1700-1850): https://www.google.com/search?q=bu...lnt&tbs=cdr:1,cd_min:1700,cd_max:1850&tbm=bks

 

[crockett]

Stophel- sounds like you know about this issue, in your opinion, from what remains, what were the most common type buttons? I am thinking metal- but what metal? brass, tin? and did the buttons have button holes or a loop in back? Bone? Antler? Your input would be very helpful for me.

 

[Black Hand]

The items I've seen suggest:
Pewter buttons appear to be the most common metal buttons.

Thread-type buttons (whether thread alone or thread over some sort of form - wood/bone/horn) which appear to be used on clothing items subjected to washing (shirts), though linked buttons (cuff-links) were not uncommon for shirts.

Cloth-covered were very common (some sort of shanked button or button form covered with cloth) used for breeches, waistcoats & coats of all types.

Of buttons with holes, bone appears to be the most common material.

 

[zimmerstutzen]

Old Ben Franklin also invented a static electric motor which was used to turn a turkey on a spit in his kitchen, but which he otherwise regarded as an amusing toy. I figure the dog soldiers might pitch a fit If I were to provide such a rig to turn my spit at a rondy.

 

[satx78247]

I have to ask. - WHERE can I see an example of that invention? =====> sounds like something that would be FUN to make a copy of.
(I'm a fan of "Ole Ben".)

yours, satx

 

[Rifleman1776]

interpretation

And that is the fly in the soup. :shocked2:
Interpretation is not always fact.
Years ago I applied to join a well known Rev. Rifleman's unit. I was sent a list of items they stipulated I must have. I had almost everything. But when I got to the shirt things came to a halt. The shirt described that I was required to have was nowhere to be found in my library or research for a rifleman. I asked for documentation. The reply was that their sole judge for right and wrong on such items was one man, that shirt was what he said and their rules did not allow for appeal. His word was final. I knew (and still do) he was wrong and withdrew my application as I did not want to get involved with a 'cs' organization, or person, like that. (we) Reenactors vary widely in our tolerance for things pc but we usually do our best.