Re: MtMan-List: 1825 Cavalry Boots

[John Kramer <kramer@kramerize.com>]

The question was: are 1825 Cavalry Boots correct for rendezvous?

As no one else seems willing  to take on this question, and it was asked a
long time back,  I’ll set out my position on boots at rendezvous.  

They can be exactly right.  They can be inappropriate.

James Hanson & Kathryn Wilson in "The Mountain Man’s Sketch Book," volume
1.  Page 5 "Thoughts on Clothing," wrote; "The trappers outfitted in St.
Louis, and probably wore cloth clothes when going out.  Clothes, boots &
shoes were all available at rendezvous & some trading posts.  Replacement
apparel was made by friendly Indians copying white garments, or in Taos.
Many surviving examples of trapper clothing are New Mexican."  This has
been sufficient authority for most folks for some time now.  These are not
careless people and they’ve done their research. 

Dean has posted to the web site a transcription of a never before published
trade list consigned to Meriweather Lewis in May, 1809.  

Patrick Quilter is the gentleman who deciphered the photocopies of
microfilm copies of a hand written journal and it is work well done.  He
has my hearty congratulations and thanks, I know the strained eyeballs &
hard work involved.

I mention this because on page 5 of this invoice of goods it lists "5 pr
Boots  $10  $50."  It also lists a whole lot of other plain and fancy goods.  

The most common boot of the period was a lightweight boot of two piece
upper construction on a straight last, a low heel held with square iron
nails, shaped much like a "Wellington" 3 or 4 piece boot of today.  

The price of $10 gold the pair seems -- to me -- high (for the common style
of boot) when related to the other prices listed.  The invoice shows what
appear to be wholesale prices when related to our other excursions into the
value of money and goods in the period, i.e. blankets @$5.00 each.

This may mean these boots were of a heavier construction, a jack boot
perhaps, or a tall riding boot, maybe something much like a cavalry boot, I
think they were something different than the more typical light boot common
back east.  This is reinforced by the listing of 44 pair of woman’s shoes
at $2 and 6 pair of men’s at $2.50.  A pair of the common boots would have
been priced closer to $5.00 the pair by my calculations.

It is certain that at least a few someone’s would have been wearing boots
at rendezvous:  Company Captaines who had just returned from St. Louis, the
traders and packers who brought the goods to rendezvous;  Greenhorns,
Pilgrims and Tenderfeet making their first trip west.

It is unlikely that most trappers would have worn boots.  Boots were
expensive and too great a luxury for people who were already paying
mountain prices for bare necessities.  Boots could not be easily replaced
in the mountains and foot wear does take a beating.  Moccasins were then,
as now, cheap and practical.  $10.00 gold is about $200.00 today,  close to
what a pair of riding boots cost today.  

If you can justify (to yourself) through your outfit and persona the
wearing of boots then do so.  If you ain’t Stewart, Captain Ashley or
Bonneville, a mule skinner or a trader then you must be ex-military, a
farmer, pilgrim -- or a very successful free trapper enjoying all the
luxuries life has to offer: boots, stockings, bumfodder and more.  Boots
would only be wrong if everyone started wearing them at rendezvous.

1825 Cavalry Boots would probably suggest the inclusion of a few other
items of military garb and equipage to round out the costume.  A well
thought out costume including some mountain and settlement garb, would help
portray the variety of people who attended rendezvous; hivernauts and
pilgrims; and the companies: leaders, hunters, packers, clerks and traders.
 Not to mention the occasional outsiders off on a great adventure.

How long yuh been in these shinin’ mountains?  Pilgrim.

John…

Use it up, wear it out, make do, or do without.
john kramer@kramerize.com