|
Post by stuart on Apr 26, 2008 12:00:16 GMT -5
I was discussing this with Doc back at the weekend...
One of the reasons I wrote my book was that I'd read Marshall's first one and was astonished at what a mess he'd made of interpreting the source material and how his colour plates bore little or no relation to the accompanying references; his second book was in my mind even more disappointing.
Although I've some affection for the Haythornthwaite book since it was the first one where I picked up the reference to James Grant that set me on my way, I've never been able to take the colour plates seriously and not just because of the comments above. Many years ago a publisher over here called Blandford (may be a different imprint in the USA) produced a series of pocket sized books on uniforms with some very good colour plates. One of them, on WW1 by John Mollo was illustrated almost photographically, by a guy called Malcolm McGregor. The individual figures really were superb, but all of the figures in the Haythornthwaite book were so faithfully copied from it that it was quite off-putting. This may be because the artist, Paul Hannon, usually does modern subjects but the US deserter for example is instantly recognisable as a German landwehr private; the presidiale trooper was originally a Portuguese artilleryman and the mounted guy in the bearskin was copied from a Belgian Guide. Don't get me wrong, the uniforms were appropriate (if not always correct) but the pose, features and expressions on every one of the figures can be found in that WW1 book.
Just by the by, while I'm on the subject. The Mexican cavalry trooper with the bearskin is wrongly identified as a mounted sapper; he is in fact nothing of the sort. In the original "Battle of Tampico" painting there is a whole company of these guys, obviously representing the regiment's elite company - French dragoon regiments had their elite companies in bearskins.
|
|
|
Post by steves on Apr 26, 2008 14:05:32 GMT -5
I was discussing this with Doc back at the weekend... One of the reasons I wrote my book was that I'd read Marshall's first one and was astonished at what a mess he'd made of interpreting the source material and how his colour plates bore little or no relation to the accompanying references; his second book was in my mind even more disappointing. Although I've some affection for the Haythornthwaite book since it was the first one where I picked up the reference to James Grant that set me on my way, I've never been able to take the colour plates seriously and not just because of the comments above. Many years ago a publisher over here called Blandford (may be a different imprint in the USA) produced a series of pocket sized books on uniforms with some very good colour plates. One of them, on WW1 by John Mollo was illustrated almost photographically, by a guy called Malcolm McGregor. The individual figures really were superb, but all of the figures in the Haythornthwaite book were so faithfully copied from it that it was quite off-putting. This may be because the artist, Paul Hannon, usually does modern subjects but the US deserter for example is instantly recognisable as a German landwehr private; the presidiale trooper was originally a Portuguese artilleryman and the mounted guy in the bearskin was copied from a Belgian Guide. Don't get me wrong, the uniforms were appropriate (if not always correct) but the pose, features and expressions on every one of the figures can be found in that WW1 book. Just by the by, while I'm on the subject. The Mexican cavalry trooper with the bearskin is wrongly identified as a mounted sapper; he is in fact nothing of the sort. In the original "Battle of Tampico" painting there is a whole company of these guys, obviously representing the regiment's elite company - French dragoon regiments had their elite companies in bearskins. Dashed off to look at the Blandford book(haven't looked at it for years)...You're right!..... Steve
|
|
|
Post by steves on Apr 26, 2008 14:11:47 GMT -5
IMO, Chartrand's book attempts to cover far too much subject matter in too few pages, and thus comes up short. Specifically,I still don't know what the rank insignia were....or the distinguishing marks of the flank companies...the original Osprey did set them out,but as it's not all that trustworthy otherwise.... Steve
|
|
|
Post by tmdreb on Apr 27, 2008 21:38:37 GMT -5
Chartrand's book does indeed not reach its goal, but in many ways, it's the best source available at the moment. There are many out there, but this is the only one I've seen that isn't just lifted from Hefter.
Hefter seems to be stuck on quoting regulations, but evidence seems to show these weren't always followed, to say the least. This especially holds true for the Mexican-American War. Additionally, his research was lost, and there aren't really many citations in his work that is only directed towards the years 1837-47.
|
|
|
Post by archivist on May 3, 2008 20:43:33 GMT -5
The DRT Library at the Alamo has some women's clothing from the nineteenth century that may interest someone studying clothing of this period.
|
|
|
Post by lorinfriesen on May 23, 2008 10:02:58 GMT -5
From Gary Foreman: Here is an example of Steve Abolt's work which shows the cut of the clothes. This our 30' x 90' image that will be wrapped on an oil tank near the entrance to San Jacinto. Steve made most of the clothing and Bill Hamilton did the photoshop work. Simply fabulous, this scene! Like being there! So this is a photographic work? Lorin
|
|
|
Post by Wade Dillon on Sept 18, 2008 10:59:23 GMT -5
Some amazing input, guys! I plan on working on an Alamo graphic novel and will try my best to accurately depict the clothing, seams, and the appropriate ways they were worn.
Are there any more photo references? As a fellow reenactor and artist, I want to get things right. Mark, thank you for the daguerreotype photo link.
Thank you all.
~Wade
|
|
|
Post by elobo on Sept 19, 2008 2:59:40 GMT -5
trk wrote:"Haythornwaite's book is dated and of limited usefulness as far as clothing & uniforms. The color plates look like the artist used various Alamo movies as his main reference material; the depiction of Jim Bowie with a beer gut is particularly funny." In fact the drawing of Jim Bowie was copied from a picture of John Wayne. You can see this picture of the Duke on the front cover of his biography by Maurice Zolotow "John Wayne, shooting star"
|
|
|
Post by TRK on Sept 19, 2008 10:49:07 GMT -5
Mark, thank you for the daguerreotype photo link. Just a caution: be careful using daguerreotypes as references for clothing styles of the mid-1830s. The daguerreotype process was revealed to the world in 1839, so unless you can find very early daguerreotype portraits (such as those Robert Cornelius took in Philadelphia), you're going to be seeing styles of clothing that are much different than those of 1835-36.
|
|
|
Post by Wade Dillon on Sept 19, 2008 12:07:14 GMT -5
Agreed, trk. Thank you.
The earliest dated daguerreotype I found on the website was 1841. Even then, I was hesitant.
I'll do some more studying up.
~Wade
|
|
|
Post by marklemon on Sept 19, 2008 14:58:17 GMT -5
Wade, The greatest changes in men's clothing between the 1830's and 40's is evident in the tailoring of men's coats (collars, cuff, etc) But as far as everyday men's shirts and ties, trousers, and to some extent, hairstyles, there was not much difference, so IMHO, if you want to reference 1840's daguerrotypes, for the 1830's in these areas, you are in the right ballpark. For example, the so-called "mechanic's cap" was in use throughout the 1830's and 40's, and utilizing details gleaned form 1840's daguerrotypes is fine. Also, neck wear, which was almost a universal article of clothing during these decades, even on the frontier, did not change much, and 1840's photos can be used. The same applies to workshirts, trousers, etc.... Mark
|
|
|
Post by Wade Dillon on Sept 22, 2008 12:41:50 GMT -5
Thank you Mark. I appreciate the help.
Did the hairstyles have names? Particularly, the wavy bangs. That seems to have been the most common style among men in those days.
~Wade
|
|
|
Post by billchemerka on Sept 22, 2008 15:11:58 GMT -5
Thank you Mark. I appreciate the help. Did the hairstyles have names? Particularly, the wavy bangs. That seems to have been the most common style among men in those days. ~Wade There is no "common style" of men's hair styles in the 1830s, with the exception of length. Start with Crockett's center-part style of the mid-1830s and then examine Rembrandt Peale's John C. Calhoun 1834 portrait that features of full head of hair. The painting of John Perrin in 1835 depicts a hair style like Richard Nixon's! Then there's the Brillo-like hair of Mr. Edwin Davis that is featured on the 1838 pastel on paper. Lots of different styles in extant paintings and sketches. And more can be determined by examing the many silhouettes (both the outlines cut by hand & machine and those painted in India ink) of the period.
|
|
|
Post by sloanrodgers on Sept 29, 2008 21:29:16 GMT -5
Did the hairstyles have names? Particularly, the wavy bangs. That seems to have been the most com There is no "common style" of men's hair styles in the 1830s, with the exception of length. Does this include facial hair as well? Mutton chops, gotees, etc. seem to be popular around this time, but I'm no hirsute expert.
|
|
|
Post by Wade Dillon on Dec 25, 2008 10:45:26 GMT -5
Hey gang, Merry Christmas to you all! Today, I got my first reenactment kit from Jas Townsend and wanted to get your opinions. The lapel on the waist coat (wool) is up in the first photo, my apologies. I tucked my fall front trousers (linen) into the boots, as Bill Chemerka suggested a while back. ~Wade
|
|