Re: MtMan-List: underwear

[Bishnow <bishnows@swbell.net>]

Barry Conner wrote:
> 
> I have read articles when the Buckskin Report (John Baird - fur trade) was
> still available, along with articles by Charles E.Hanson, Jr.(Museum of the
> Fur Trade - fur trade), Vernon L. Bigsby (Valley Forge Museum - pre Rev.
> War) and one from Colorado Historical Society (1849'ers and into the Civil
> War), will have to look for exact information and get back to you. But all
> of the articles mentioned were about period male under garments.
> 
> As I remember their were no one piece "union" suits as seen at outing today,
> the pre Rev War garments were like night shirts split front and back to slid
> down the breeches, the fur trade depending on early or late were: night
> shirt style - early being split or solid (solid being shirt tail pulled
> between legs to the front and front being tucked to the rear) seems to be a
> good load in the seat of one's pants? The late garments were straight leg
> bloomer style with a long tailed shirt - no collar.
> 
> Hanson felt that they, (the under garment) may have lasted the first winter
> and were used for repair of other garments afterwards. He felt that this was
> an item found not that serviceable in the field, as you would need to almost
> get undressed if nature called, not like the "union" suit found a decade or
> two later with its back and front access.
> 
> I'm sure others will have additional information from their research and I
> will look for those articles, have a 4 drawer file cabinet with information
> collected for 40 years.
> 
> Buck
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: TrapRJoe@aol.com <TrapRJoe@aol.com>
> To: hist_text@lists.xmission.com <hist_text@lists.xmission.com>
> Date: Monday, November 02, 1998 7:46 AM
> Subject: Re: MtMan-List: underwear
> 
> >Interested in your coments on underwear.  There are detailed discriptions
> of
> >male underwear even in the Bible, so no dout the males had underwear.  But
> >there are many  ladies at our rendezvous.  In reality they wouldn't have
> been
> >there at all in 1830, but they are here now.  What about our, their
> underwear.
> >
> >
   Terrel DeWald a brother from Amarillo once told me that the 
mountain man wore calico as underwear. He said he got the info
from an original journal he read somewhere. Anyway he said he
also read an account of a feller getting arrested in a town for 
being on the streets in a calico shirt, arrested for indecent
exposure?

Snakeshot