Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Uniform alterations - bastion loops

Expand Messages
  • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
    wrote: (condensed from 2 separate e-mails): Gotta disagree with you, honey. First off, it s not right. Jim comments: Guess we can see where you re coming
    Message 1 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
    • 0 Attachment
      wrote: (condensed from 2 separate e-mails):








      "Gotta disagree with you, honey. First off, it's not right."

      Jim comments: Guess we can see where you're coming from on this particular
      issue. However, it seems evident that you are speaking from the viewpoint
      of someone who is familiar with square looping - although even here, I
      think you are wrong.

      "Second off, it can be worked around by adjusting the loop length and
      distance apart." [snip]

      Jim comments: for bastion looped regiments - 41st, 49th, Royal Artillery,
      etc. - and especially for 41st, which has the bastion looping with the base
      points touching the base points of the neighbouring loops - you are just
      plain wrong.

      The bastion loops are approximately 2" wide at their side points i.e.
      vertically, as they lay on the coat when worn - on all types of bastion
      looping. They are 2" wide at their bottom or base points as well on a 41st
      style loop (there are a number of other regiments which have this
      particular style of bastion loop, as well). Such a loop shape can only be
      "stretched" in one direction so far, before you lose its "fish" appearance
      and it becomes something unrecognizable as a bastion loop.
      The regulations say that loops are to be 3 1/2 inches "long" - i.e.
      horizontally - at the bottom of the tunic, increasing to 4 1/2" at the top.
      So if we follow regulations on the horizontal length, but increase the
      width of the loop excessively vertically (in the uniform for the giant we
      have been discussing, we would have had to stretch the width of all the
      loops to cover over 6" of extra length - in 9 loops, this works out to over
      half an inch per loop), then we produce something that looks very different
      from what everyone else in a 'regular' tunic has... And if we follow the
      "regulation" (which, by the way, is much vaguer for bastion-looped
      regiments than the other types, as noted below) on the number of loops to
      be used, and ignore the "regulation" on what the length of each loop is to
      be, so as to retain the overall shape of a bastion loop, then how are we
      any further ahead in terms of not screwing around with the regulations?

      There is also the plain and inescapable fact that you can stretch the shape
      of the loop any way you wish, but the lace itself remains 1/2" wide.
      Stretching a loop, even if done equally horizontally and vertically,
      therefore produces an "anemic"-looking loop. The center space is bigger
      than normal, the lace looks 'thin'. Once again, each and every loop would
      look very different from what everyone else in a 'regular' tunic has...


      Ms. Draper:"The proportion issue is something I'll cautiously agree with,
      and cautiously suggest that if it's proportion we're trying to maintain,
      adding 3 rows of lacing isn't going to maintain it. Lengthening the loops
      will maintain the look, without sacrificing the regulated number of rows.

      And it's important to remember that they were concerned with symmetry and
      line and appearance. Adding rows of lace isn't going to maintain that: it
      will alter it. I understood that the look isn't just per individual coat,
      it's also the coat's affect in the overall appearance of the line. If you
      add rows of lace, and then stand the guy between two people with fewer
      rows, it's going to look skewed, and if you're going for similarity and
      symmetry, it won't look right"

      Jim comments:
      actually, you are wrong. I've already discussed the effect of altering
      the shape of a bastion loop too much - a person in such a tunic sticks out
      far more in a group than if there is a few more loops down the front but
      where each loop looks right. I've actually seen (as I am making it) the
      41st tunic with 12 loops down the front, it is very difficult to tell that
      there are "too many" loops unless of course one makes a conscious effort to
      count them. When wearing the belts, it will be almost impossible.
      Especially when one takes a casual glance.

      It is also not irrelevant to point out that you can't alter the loops on
      the front of the tunic, and leave the loops on the cuffs "regulation"
      sized. If you start altering the cuffs on the loops to "match" the
      extended loops on the front, then you really are producing a botched
      abortion. The size of the exposed portion of the cuff on the sleeve would
      have to be extended past the regulation length to accomodate the 'extended"
      loops. Yet leaving the cuff loops regulation size underlines the "anemic"
      nature of the front loops - and this would be apparent when the individual
      is standing *on his own*, let alone in the ranks.... "Catch-22" time,
      methinks....

      And, I suspect you are wrong, even for "square-laced" regiments, *IF* the
      spacing between the loops gets really excessive.
      The overall effect would be that there weren't enough loops on the uniform.
      When an observer is regarding the lads standing in ranks, they are not
      counting the number of loops - but anemic looping or irregular spacing in
      the loops sticks out like a sore thumb.
      If one is "concerned with symmetry and line and appearance" then I'm afraid
      your comment that "Adding rows of lace isn't going to maintain that: it
      will alter it" is just wrong.
      Your suggestion, of fooling around with the shape and spacing of the loops,
      is the one that will alter the symmetry and appearance to the most
      noticeable extent.

      There is also the fact that the Regulations make allowances for the special
      difficulties associated with bastion looping. They note that although
      there are to be 10 loops down the front of coats, in bastion-laced
      regiments, room will be at a premium and it might be necessary to make do
      with only 9. In a regiment like the 33rd, where the bastion loops are to
      be place in pairs, they can only get 8 loops (in 4 paired sets) down the
      front of their uniform, because the extra space used up to form a gap
      between the paired sets nixes one loop.
      Small-sized uniforms (some musicians coats being the classic example) have
      fewer loops yet. Fort Malden has a 41st Musician's coat made by a *very*
      reputable fabricator (not me, I hasten to add) where it was impossible to
      have more than 6 bastion loops down its front (it's made for somebody who
      would probably be about 4' tall).

      So, the rule appears to have been: not enough room? take a loop or two
      off. Too much room? add a few on.

      I wish to add that I did not reply to Ms. Draper's initial postings on this
      issue, because I was somewhat put off by the fact that someone who
      obviously knows nothing of the special considerations involved in lacing
      bastion-looped regiments nevertheless could make such dogmatic statements,
      which seemed to be based on experience she may or may not have had with
      square-looped regiments.
      However, this is the way flame-wars get started, and as one of the
      moderators of this list, I didn't think I should be starting one. Since
      Ms. Draper continues to vigorously put forward her views, I felt I now had
      to respond.

      The 41st Regiment of Foot reenactment group strives for authenticity in its
      equipment. It was founded by Dave Webb when he was on the staff at Fort
      Malden and has always had a cadre of experienced reenactors in its
      membership. We research our regiment's particular practices using every
      available source that we know of. We have the benefit of Parks Canada
      research in to the 41st, and we have had members and friends visit various
      archives, including the PRO in London, on our behalf.
      When it comes to our equipment, and coats in particular, all visible seams
      are and always have been hand sewn (and sometimes, even the "invisible"
      seams as well), as is all the bastion-looped lace - not an easy task, I can
      assure anyone who is thinking of giving it a try.

      I would like to assure our fellow reenactors that when it comes to the
      41st, if you see something "odd", like one of our members, 7' tall, with 12
      bastion loops down the front of his tunic, it is as a result of the most
      searching and far-reaching inquiry that we could conduct as to the
      authenticity considerations of the piece of equipment. In this instance, I
      diligently followed up every source of information I knew of for a period
      of many months before putting needle to lace...

      Hey, when you've got 'hard-core' members like Andrew Bateman, and retired
      professors like Ray Hobbs in your membership - you can't screw around on
      authenticity!

      Jim
      1/41st
    • Sue Draper
      Jim: I am too insensed at the moment to respond, other than to ask one question: What s the measurement of this individual from shoulder to waist? ... From:
      Message 2 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
      • 0 Attachment
        Jim: I am too insensed at the moment to respond, other than to ask one question:

        What's the measurement of this individual from shoulder to waist?


        -----Original Message-----
        From: yawors1@... <yawors1@...>
        To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
        Date: February 1, 2001 11:59 AM
        Subject: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops




        wrote: (condensed from 2 separate e-mails):








        "Gotta disagree with you, honey. First off, it's not right."

        Jim comments: Guess we can see where you're coming from on this particular
        issue. However, it seems evident that you are speaking from the viewpoint
        of someone who is familiar with square looping - although even here, I
        think you are wrong.

        "Second off, it can be worked around by adjusting the loop length and
        distance apart." [snip]

        Jim comments: for bastion looped regiments - 41st, 49th, Royal Artillery,
        etc. - and especially for 41st, which has the bastion looping with the base
        points touching the base points of the neighbouring loops - you are just
        plain wrong.

        The bastion loops are approximately 2" wide at their side points i.e.
        vertically, as they lay on the coat when worn - on all types of bastion
        looping. They are 2" wide at their bottom or base points as well on a 41st
        style loop (there are a number of other regiments which have this
        particular style of bastion loop, as well). Such a loop shape can only be
        "stretched" in one direction so far, before you lose its "fish" appearance
        and it becomes something unrecognizable as a bastion loop.
        The regulations say that loops are to be 3 1/2 inches "long" - i.e.
        horizontally - at the bottom of the tunic, increasing to 4 1/2" at the top.
        So if we follow regulations on the horizontal length, but increase the
        width of the loop excessively vertically (in the uniform for the giant we
        have been discussing, we would have had to stretch the width of all the
        loops to cover over 6" of extra length - in 9 loops, this works out to over
        half an inch per loop), then we produce something that looks very different
        from what everyone else in a 'regular' tunic has... And if we follow the
        "regulation" (which, by the way, is much vaguer for bastion-looped
        regiments than the other types, as noted below) on the number of loops to
        be used, and ignore the "regulation" on what the length of each loop is to
        be, so as to retain the overall shape of a bastion loop, then how are we
        any further ahead in terms of not screwing around with the regulations?

        There is also the plain and inescapable fact that you can stretch the shape
        of the loop any way you wish, but the lace itself remains 1/2" wide.
        Stretching a loop, even if done equally horizontally and vertically,
        therefore produces an "anemic"-looking loop. The center space is bigger
        than normal, the lace looks 'thin'. Once again, each and every loop would
        look very different from what everyone else in a 'regular' tunic has...


        Ms. Draper:"The proportion issue is something I'll cautiously agree with,
        and cautiously suggest that if it's proportion we're trying to maintain,
        adding 3 rows of lacing isn't going to maintain it. Lengthening the loops
        will maintain the look, without sacrificing the regulated number of rows.

        And it's important to remember that they were concerned with symmetry and
        line and appearance. Adding rows of lace isn't going to maintain that: it
        will alter it. I understood that the look isn't just per individual coat,
        it's also the coat's affect in the overall appearance of the line. If you
        add rows of lace, and then stand the guy between two people with fewer
        rows, it's going to look skewed, and if you're going for similarity and
        symmetry, it won't look right"

        Jim comments:
        actually, you are wrong. I've already discussed the effect of altering
        the shape of a bastion loop too much - a person in such a tunic sticks out
        far more in a group than if there is a few more loops down the front but
        where each loop looks right. I've actually seen (as I am making it) the
        41st tunic with 12 loops down the front, it is very difficult to tell that
        there are "too many" loops unless of course one makes a conscious effort to
        count them. When wearing the belts, it will be almost impossible.
        Especially when one takes a casual glance.

        It is also not irrelevant to point out that you can't alter the loops on
        the front of the tunic, and leave the loops on the cuffs "regulation"
        sized. If you start altering the cuffs on the loops to "match" the
        extended loops on the front, then you really are producing a botched
        abortion. The size of the exposed portion of the cuff on the sleeve would
        have to be extended past the regulation length to accomodate the 'extended"
        loops. Yet leaving the cuff loops regulation size underlines the "anemic"
        nature of the front loops - and this would be apparent when the individual
        is standing *on his own*, let alone in the ranks.... "Catch-22" time,
        methinks....

        And, I suspect you are wrong, even for "square-laced" regiments, *IF* the
        spacing between the loops gets really excessive.
        The overall effect would be that there weren't enough loops on the uniform.
        When an observer is regarding the lads standing in ranks, they are not
        counting the number of loops - but anemic looping or irregular spacing in
        the loops sticks out like a sore thumb.
        If one is "concerned with symmetry and line and appearance" then I'm afraid
        your comment that "Adding rows of lace isn't going to maintain that: it
        will alter it" is just wrong.
        Your suggestion, of fooling around with the shape and spacing of the loops,
        is the one that will alter the symmetry and appearance to the most
        noticeable extent.

        There is also the fact that the Regulations make allowances for the special
        difficulties associated with bastion looping. They note that although
        there are to be 10 loops down the front of coats, in bastion-laced
        regiments, room will be at a premium and it might be necessary to make do
        with only 9. In a regiment like the 33rd, where the bastion loops are to
        be place in pairs, they can only get 8 loops (in 4 paired sets) down the
        front of their uniform, because the extra space used up to form a gap
        between the paired sets nixes one loop.
        Small-sized uniforms (some musicians coats being the classic example) have
        fewer loops yet. Fort Malden has a 41st Musician's coat made by a *very*
        reputable fabricator (not me, I hasten to add) where it was impossible to
        have more than 6 bastion loops down its front (it's made for somebody who
        would probably be about 4' tall).

        So, the rule appears to have been: not enough room? take a loop or two
        off. Too much room? add a few on.

        I wish to add that I did not reply to Ms. Draper's initial postings on this
        issue, because I was somewhat put off by the fact that someone who
        obviously knows nothing of the special considerations involved in lacing
        bastion-looped regiments nevertheless could make such dogmatic statements,
        which seemed to be based on experience she may or may not have had with
        square-looped regiments.
        However, this is the way flame-wars get started, and as one of the
        moderators of this list, I didn't think I should be starting one. Since
        Ms. Draper continues to vigorously put forward her views, I felt I now had
        to respond.

        The 41st Regiment of Foot reenactment group strives for authenticity in its
        equipment. It was founded by Dave Webb when he was on the staff at Fort
        Malden and has always had a cadre of experienced reenactors in its
        membership. We research our regiment's particular practices using every
        available source that we know of. We have the benefit of Parks Canada
        research in to the 41st, and we have had members and friends visit various
        archives, including the PRO in London, on our behalf.
        When it comes to our equipment, and coats in particular, all visible seams
        are and always have been hand sewn (and sometimes, even the "invisible"
        seams as well), as is all the bastion-looped lace - not an easy task, I can
        assure anyone who is thinking of giving it a try.

        I would like to assure our fellow reenactors that when it comes to the
        41st, if you see something "odd", like one of our members, 7' tall, with 12
        bastion loops down the front of his tunic, it is as a result of the most
        searching and far-reaching inquiry that we could conduct as to the
        authenticity considerations of the piece of equipment. In this instance, I
        diligently followed up every source of information I knew of for a period
        of many months before putting needle to lace...

        Hey, when you've got 'hard-core' members like Andrew Bateman, and retired
        professors like Ray Hobbs in your membership - you can't screw around on
        authenticity!

        Jim
        1/41st



        Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

        www.




        The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of square miles...



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
        Sue Draper wrote: Jim: I am too insensed at the moment to respond, other than to ask one question: What s the measurement of this individual from shoulder to
        Message 3 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
        • 0 Attachment
          Sue Draper wrote:

          "Jim: I am too insensed at the moment to respond, other than to ask one
          question:
          What's the measurement of this individual from shoulder to waist? "


          Jim responds:
          and the reason for this specific measurement request is...?

          We utilize a template to lay the front bastion loop lace positions out; his
          coat front is 6" bigger than our biggest template, necessitating the
          addition of three bastion loops. That's the long and the short of the
          issue, as regards a 41st bastion-laced regimental coat, for all the reasons
          I detailed in my last post on this issue.

          Although I imagine Ms. Draper knows lots more than I do about all sorts of
          1812 issues, when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as placed
          on a regimental coat of the 41st Regiment of Foot, she is choosing to play
          in my ball-park...

          regards,

          Jim
          1/41st
        • mike dollinger
          ... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
          Message 4 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
          • 0 Attachment
            >From: yawors1@...
            >Reply-To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
            >To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
            >Subject: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops
            >Date: Thu, 1 Feb 2001 16:19:01 -0500
            >
            >Mike Dollinger : writes dont add loops, keep them formed correctly but
            >space them in proportion to the gentleman giant that will wear the coat.how
            >many loops are in the warrant order? say ten,divided into 6 inches will
            >space out fine,put the lower and upper loop on and fill in the space
            >proportionatly. geeze so much about nothing. Has anyone seen Jock Mcgraw's
            >regtimental? he's the stoutest man in the forty twa, quite a celebrity. His
            >sergeant let his tailor make the necessary adjustments needed to make his
            >coat look good, not siily.........I've looked at a few original coats and
            >have found that the individual tailors had there own ideas about warrant
            >orders, particularly when sewing for officers. nuff said!
            >
            >
            >
            >Sue Draper wrote:
            >
            >"Jim: I am too insensed at the moment to respond, other than to ask one
            >question:
            >What's the measurement of this individual from shoulder to waist? "
            >
            >
            >Jim responds:
            >and the reason for this specific measurement request is...?
            >
            >We utilize a template to lay the front bastion loop lace positions out; his
            >coat front is 6" bigger than our biggest template, necessitating the
            >addition of three bastion loops. That's the long and the short of the
            >issue, as regards a 41st bastion-laced regimental coat, for all the reasons
            >I detailed in my last post on this issue.
            >
            >Although I imagine Ms. Draper knows lots more than I do about all sorts of
            >1812 issues, when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as placed
            >on a regimental coat of the 41st Regiment of Foot, she is choosing to play
            >in my ball-park...
            >
            >regards,
            >
            >Jim
            >1/41st
            >
            >
            >
            >

            _________________________________________________________________
            Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
          • spikeyj@crosslink.net
            Am I missing something, or isn t the fact that the guy in question is seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty obviously no matter what
            Message 5 of 24 , Feb 1, 2001
            • 0 Attachment
              Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
              seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
              obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
              tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
              the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
              loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
              effect anyway?

              Spike Y Jones
            • Bateman, Andrew
              ... You re not missing a thing - you see the situation more clearly than a lot of people. Wait until you see the coat, then judge... :-) Andrew Bateman,
              Message 6 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
              • 0 Attachment
                > -----Original Message-----
                > From: spikeyj@...
                >
                > Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                > seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                > obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                > tunic?

                You're not missing a thing - you see the situation more clearly than a lot
                of people. Wait until you see the coat, then judge... :-)

                Andrew Bateman, 1/41st
              • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                In a message dated 2/2/2001 4:06:27 AM Central Standard Time, spikeyj@crosslink.net writes:
                Message 7 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                • 0 Attachment
                  In a message dated 2/2/2001 4:06:27 AM Central Standard Time,
                  spikeyj@... writes:

                  << Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                  seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                  obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                  tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                  the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                  loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                  effect anyway? >>

                  Sort of but his coat should still look like the others.
                  For that very reason such men at the time usually ended up as drum Majors or
                  fluglemen (you can see them easier). Obviously with that height he would HAVE
                  to be a marker from the start! :-)

                  Cheers

                  Tim
                • Kevin Windsor
                  What is the PRO?
                  Message 8 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                  • 0 Attachment
                    What is the PRO?

                    > Jim comments:
                    > archives, including the PRO in London,
                  • Kevin Windsor
                    I think you are right. People are going to say holy @#$% he s a big one! I don t think people will notice he has a tunic on! Unless he takes it off. What I
                    Message 9 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I think you are right. People are going to say holy @#$% he's a big one! I don't think people will notice he has a tunic on! Unless he takes it off. What I think the
                      big concern with is accuracy, not for the sake of the public, but for pride in our kits. Not too many of us on this list would wear a tunic that we know is inaccurate.
                      In fact I am in the process of taking mine apart for some resizing and fixing. We want to look good, and although many times I say it is for the public, it is mostly to
                      please myself and my peers.
                      I am also very interested in this thread b/c we have a new member that is larger than all of us. My double breasted great coat didn't even do up on him so we will no
                      doubt run into these problems.

                      With regards to double spaced square lacing, would the distance between the pairs be increased or an extra row?
                      Jim, Sue, Mike?

                      spikeyj@... wrote:

                      > Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                      > seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                      > obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                      > tunic?
                    • John Williamson
                      Hi All, I don t post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the
                      Message 10 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Hi All,

                        I don't post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by
                        listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st,
                        and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                        oversight.

                        I saw the 41st in action at Ft. Malden a year or so ago, and after speaking
                        to a couple of members, I noticed that their cuffs were done incorrectly,
                        the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam, not the bottom,
                        as I had seen on several coats in the museum here in Ottawa, including
                        Brocks last coat, and a couple in my own private collection. I want to
                        state right now that I am not the most knowledgeable in that regard, but
                        like all I strive to become more so. I asked a couple of members at the
                        encampment and received the same reply, that the person who made the coats
                        had said that it was done because it was easier, something about it being
                        too hard to lace the cuffs. I mention this now not to cause a flame war,
                        but because with the 41st and its constant desire to be as accurate as
                        possible, perhaps Jim should look into who does the coats, in particular the
                        cuffs and correct what is otherwise an excellent impression.

                        Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an otherwise
                        good impresion.

                        John
                        _________________________________________________________________________
                        Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
                      • John Williamson
                        Hi All, I don t post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the
                        Message 11 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                        • 0 Attachment
                          Hi All,

                          I don't post often, lurking is my specialty, it is the best way to learn, by
                          listening. I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st,
                          and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                          oversight.

                          I saw the 41st in action at Ft. Malden a year or so ago, and after speaking
                          to a couple of members, I noticed that their cuffs were done incorrectly,
                          the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam, not the bottom,
                          as I had seen on several coats in the museum here in Ottawa, including
                          Brocks last coat, and a couple in my own private collection. I want to
                          state right now that I am not the most knowledgeable in that regard, but
                          like all I strive to become more so. I asked a couple of members at the
                          encampment and received the same reply, that the person who made the coats
                          had said that it was done because it was easier, something about it being
                          too hard to lace the cuffs. I mention this now not to cause a flame war,
                          but because with the 41st and its constant desire to be as accurate as
                          possible, perhaps Jim should look into who does the coats, in particular the
                          cuffs and correct what is otherwise an excellent impression.

                          Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an otherwise
                          good impresion.

                          John
                          _________________________________________________________________________
                          Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
                        • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
                          Public Record Office, in London, England, where the original army records are stored. Jim Kevin Windsor
                          Message 12 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Public Record Office, in London, England, where the original army records
                            are stored.

                            Jim




                            Kevin Windsor
                            <kevin.windsor@sym To:
                            patico.ca> WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                            cc:
                            02/02/01 12:21 PM Subject: Re: [WarOf1812]
                            Please respond to Uniform alterations - bastion
                            WarOf1812 loops






                            What is the PRO?

                            > Jim comments:
                            > archives, including the PRO in London,





                            The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                            square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS
                            of square miles...
                          • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                            In a message dated 2/2/2001 1:00:04 PM Central Standard Time, kevin.windsor@sympatico.ca writes:
                            Message 13 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                            • 0 Attachment
                              In a message dated 2/2/2001 1:00:04 PM Central Standard Time,
                              kevin.windsor@... writes:

                              << What is the PRO?

                              > Jim comments:
                              > archives, including the PRO in London,
                              >>

                              The Public Records Office
                            • yawors1@uwindsor.ca
                              [snip] I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st, and hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious oversight. I
                              Message 14 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                              • 0 Attachment
                                "[snip] I am writing because of one inaccuracy I noticed with the 41st, and
                                hope that some sort of explanation can be offered for this obvious
                                oversight."

                                "I saw the 41st in action [snip] I noticed that their cuffs were done
                                incorrectly, the seams being uppermost in line with the top sleeve seam,
                                not the bottom, [snip] "

                                "Thanks and I do not mean to offend, just point out an error on an
                                otherwise good impresion."

                                "John"

                                Jim writes:
                                No offence taken, it's a very fair question - and very observant of you!
                                As I am probably the fabricator of most of the coats John observed, I would
                                say first off that the difficulty with the bastion shape on a 41st coat is
                                that the points of the sides and base of each loop must come as close as
                                possible to touching each other.
                                This fact, coupled with the fact that the lace is hand-sewn on while the
                                cuff is still off the sleeve, leaves the fabricator with two options:
                                1) work the loops on in a position where the cuff seam will line up with
                                the 'bottom' arm seam (where it is on Brock's coat), which I will call the
                                "normal" position, and which will require some fiddling with the bastion
                                loop shape as described below;
                                2) work the loops on in the position John observed on some of the 41st
                                repro coats he saw - which means one "regular" "symmetrical" loop on one
                                side of the cuff piece (cuff seam still not sewn together) and three
                                "regular" loops on the other.

                                Option #1: The cuff piece has a slight angle to it in its mid point, this
                                is the point that should lie on the seam line of one side of the arm; the
                                other seam of the arm is where the cuff's own seam lies.
                                The slight angle in the mid-point of the cuff forces the two bastion loops
                                on either side of it in to a "collision" on their side points (the base
                                points of course present no problem). There is just the one loop on one
                                side of this mid-point line; the other side has three loops.
                                Altering the two loops that abut the mid-point line is complicated because
                                of the other two loops - you either put all the alteration in to the
                                'abutting' loops and leave the other two as symmetrical and regular, or you
                                try and spread the alteration out a bit over all 4. Neither option is
                                entirely visually satisfactory: one results in two "symmetrical" loops with
                                two distorted ones in obvious proximity; the other alters all 4 but to a
                                lesser extent...

                                option #2: you sew the symmetrical loops on, then sew the cuff seam
                                together. This is easier to do and the individual symmetrical loops look
                                better. You have the cuff seam to fiddle with in matching the abutting
                                loops - somehow, it just seems to work out.

                                However, either option is certainly 'do-able' from a practical point of
                                view. I have in fact done both, and while I personally prefer option #2 it
                                is of course *not* an "option" if it is historically incorrect.

                                Although I do not have them in front of me and therefore can't indicate
                                exact pages & illustrations (I'm at my office, they're at home) my memory
                                is that a careful study of the Steppler uniform articles showed cuffs with
                                the seam in either position i.e lying on the top or bottom seam of the
                                arms. On that basis, I've most often used "option #2"...

                                Hope this answers John's question...

                                Jim
                                1/41
                              • HQ93rd@aol.com
                                Message 15 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                • 0 Attachment
                                  << << Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                                  seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                                  obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                                  tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                                  the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                                  loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                                  effect anyway? >>
                                  >>

                                  I will have to dig it out, and I don't feel like it right now (nyaaaa) but I
                                  recall there being something on the 93rd whilst on station in South Africa
                                  being noted by one IG that some of the mens coats were cut too short in the
                                  front and could only take 8 or 9 loops and buttons instead of the required
                                  ten. That's what comes of being waaaaaaay down under I suppose....

                                  B
                                  93rd SHRoFLHU
                                  THE Thin Red Line
                                  www.93rdhighlanders.com
                                • fullerfamily@sprintmail.com
                                  ... Kevin and List, the PRO is on line. http://catalogue.pro.gov.uk/ListInt/default.asp You can search for records from our time period of interest, as well as
                                  Message 16 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                  • 0 Attachment
                                    --- In WarOf1812@y..., Kevin Windsor <kevin.windsor@s...> wrote:
                                    > What is the PRO?

                                    Kevin and List, the PRO is on line.

                                    http://catalogue.pro.gov.uk/ListInt/default.asp

                                    You can search for records from our time period of interest, as well
                                    as of many others, but beware, the military records weren't
                                    rationalised until much later (1850s?), so many things are quite hard
                                    to find, and may not be catalogued properly, necessitating a visit
                                    there to find it yourself, preferably with a laptop to transcribe
                                    what you read, as there is not much chance to photocopy original
                                    documents, due to fragility and concerns about fading.

                                    Still, it's quite a thrill to open a book nobody else has looked at
                                    in almost 200 years!

                                    Roger
                                    3/95th (Rifles)

                                    TODAY IN RIFLE BRIGADE HISTORY:
                                    2 February 1814.-4 Cos. 1st, 2nd and 3rd Bns. at assault and capture
                                    of MERXEM; 3 Riflemen killed, 4 officers and 6 Riflemen wounded.
                                  • mike dollinger
                                    ... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                                    Message 17 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                    • 0 Attachment
                                      >From: spikeyj@...
                                      >Reply-To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                      >To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                      >Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops
                                      >Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:28:44 -0500 (EST)
                                      >
                                      >Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                                      >seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                                      >obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                                      >tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                                      >the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                                      >loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                                      >effect anyway?
                                      >
                                      >Spike Y Jones
                                      >He'll need to find a red deer or something to lead around. :) what do you
                                      >say Mcdonald?
                                      >

                                      _________________________________________________________________
                                      Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                                    • mike dollinger
                                      ... _________________________________________________________________ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                                      Message 18 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                      • 0 Attachment
                                        >From: spikeyj@...
                                        >Reply-To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                        >To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com
                                        >Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops
                                        >Date: Fri, 2 Feb 2001 00:28:44 -0500 (EST)
                                        >
                                        >Am I missing something, or isn't the fact that the guy in question is
                                        >seven feet tall going to make him stick out in the line pretty
                                        >obviously no matter what number or size of loops he has on his
                                        >tunic? Even if his loops are the same size as everyone else's, won't
                                        >the fact that the bottom loop on his coatee is even with the middle
                                        >loops of the guys standing on either side of him going to run the
                                        >effect anyway?
                                        >
                                        >Spike Y Jones
                                        >He'll need to find a red deer or something to lead around. :) what do you
                                        >say Mcdonald? LOL Mike
                                        >

                                        _________________________________________________________________
                                        Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com
                                      • Sue Draper
                                        Mr. Yaworsky: Your email raises several issues, only two of which I choose to address. First, construction, accuracy and interpretation of tailoring: I have it
                                        Message 19 of 24 , Feb 2, 2001
                                        • 0 Attachment
                                          Mr. Yaworsky:

                                          Your email raises several issues, only two of which I choose to address.

                                          First, construction, accuracy and interpretation of tailoring: I have it on the authority of Peter Twist that the maximum number of loops allowed on a coatee was 10, with a minimum of 8. So, as Tim Pickles pointed out, I stand corrected that there was some slight variation in the uniforms. Peter notes that the minimum of 8 was a provision for smaller men, and 10 for larger. Apparently, variations in numbers of buttons and loops stopped altogether by the Rev war, excepting that which is noted above.

                                          According to Steppler, modern military lacing assigns only 3 shapes for lacing: square-ended, pointed and bastion. Early 19th century lacing recognizes at least 5 (possibly more) patterns: Bastion (2 types entitled flowerpot and Jew's Harp, Straight lacing had 2 variations: the common straightpoint and what he terms a rarer Coldstream loop. "There may also have been another variation to the pointed loop...the square ended loops were also referred to as double-headed loops" (Steppler, Military Illustrated, 1989/90 (22):39). Steppler also outlines irregularities/concessions made for bastion-looped regiments.

                                          Further, he notes that on the 1802 clothing regulations review, "the infantry were to use 10 loops on each side of the front of the coat...Highland regiments...8 loops". "Alone, the 3rd foot guards had nine loops, set in threes" (ibid).

                                          According to Pearse c.1803 as quoted by Steppler (ibid, p.44), Hamilton Smith's Chart of Colours 1812 (p.22) and Koke (NY Hist Quarterly, 1961(55) 1: p.172), the looping on the 41st coats is bastion, Steppler goes further to note it as flowerpot shape.

                                          I've done a quick draft of the coatee pattern, adjusted for your large man. I've used bastion loops in a flowerpot shape and which conform to the graduation in size from 3.5" to 4.5" in length, and are approximately 2 inches in width at the medial (lapel) edge. A coatee with a measurement of 30 inches from shoulder to waist takes 10 bastion-flowerpot loops of lace, with less than 1/4" between loops at the medial edge. At 27" from the shoulder, it takes 9, with the medial loops touching (ie no space between loops). Perhaps the problem lies with the template for the bastion loops not being wide enough at the lapel edge. When straight edge looping is what the tailor is familiar with, it's not unusual to try to get the two inside edges of the lacing to touch and flange outward only at the lateral edges, or to attempt to alter the looping via the internal edges.

                                          The regulations make allowance for 8 to 10 loops, but no more. Practical experimentation verifies that the maximum of 10 is possible on a coat of this size.

                                          The point is not whether it's possible to fit more loops on a coat. The point is whether or not it's correct and accurate. Clearly, it isn't. I refer to my original point: when we have so little to hold up as concrete examples, it doesn't make sense to alter the detailed representation we have. Surely there is enough conjecture and debate over details in our period as it is, without dabbling with primary sources.

                                          To your points regarding tailoring:
                                          *increase the width of the loop excessively vertically
                                          {sue}: No, I speak of marginally increasing the distance between the medial points of the loop, not the interior edges. Someone with experience with bastion looping will, as you point out, know better than to adjust the interior width.

                                          *Your suggestion, of fooling around with the shape and spacing of the loops
                                          {sue}: No, my suggestion was to minutely alter the spacing of the loops evenly across the face of the tunic. My suggestion did not include alteration of the bastion shape.

                                          Second, to your personal comments:
                                          *you are speaking from the viewpoint of someone who is familiar with square looping
                                          {sue}: No, I am speaking from the viewpoint of someone who's constructed many coats, for different regiments, based on research and practical experience.

                                          * because I was somewhat put off by the fact that someone who obviously knows nothing of the special considerations involved in lacing bastion-looped regiments nevertheless could make such dogmatic statements, which seemed to be based on experience she may or may not have had with square-looped regiments.

                                          {sue}: As you yourself have pointed out, this egroup is a forum for the exchange of ideas and information, and not for personal digs, slander or maligning. I take exception not only to the tone of your missives, but to the attacks contained therein. I have, contrary to your opinion, rather a lot of experience in the research and construction of British military and non-military clothing, as many on this list will attest. This includes construction using bastion loops. Should you be desirous of a portfolio, you may contact me offline.

                                          We are all on a learning curve, and make adjustments to our methods and presentation as we acquire knowledge and experience. Sometimes the transition from the not-known to the now-known is difficult. I appreciate the position from which you are arguing. However, personal attacks launched by near strangers who have little background upon which to base their assertions is unkind and unproductive and does indeed, enocurage a (to use your term) flame-war. None of this is necessary in an educational, discussion-based forum such as this e-group. Please do not credit me with less experience and fewer years than I've earned.

                                          *she is choosing to play in my ball-park...
                                          {sue}: Forgive me, Mr. Yaworsky. When I paid my admission to this game in 1982, I wasn't aware it was you who owned the playing field.

                                          The field is yours, sir. Do as you will.


                                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                        • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                          Ooooo Sue, You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802 regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by
                                          Message 20 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                          • 0 Attachment
                                            Ooooo Sue,

                                            You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802
                                            regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by Bill
                                            Carman. Bill is a stickler but some of his illustrations of officers coats
                                            are strange, he shows a Lt. Company officers jacket with 10 buttons in pairs
                                            but a Lt. Company officers COAT with 12! I confess I cannot find a reference
                                            for this in the text, 10 being the most mentioned (I have however found a
                                            reference to reducing the number as mentioned by Robert but not a reference
                                            for increasing the number). I suppose I will have to drop Bill a line and see
                                            if he can enlighten me.

                                            I am going to be all frustrated until I nail this one down now!

                                            Cheers

                                            Tim
                                          • Sue Draper
                                            Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I ve read says something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to say
                                            Message 21 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                            • 0 Attachment
                                              Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I've read says something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to say *with the exception of Officer's coats, which* blah, blah, blah.

                                              Does this shed any light?

                                              -sue
                                              -----Original Message-----
                                              From: BritcomHMP@... <BritcomHMP@...>
                                              To: WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com <WarOf1812@yahoogroups.com>
                                              Date: February 3, 2001 12:28 PM
                                              Subject: Re: [WarOf1812] Uniform alterations - bastion loops


                                              Ooooo Sue,

                                              You have got me all confused now. I dug out what I was thinking of (the 1802
                                              regulations) as re-printed in full in the JSAHR within an article by Bill
                                              Carman. Bill is a stickler but some of his illustrations of officers coats
                                              are strange, he shows a Lt. Company officers jacket with 10 buttons in pairs
                                              but a Lt. Company officers COAT with 12! I confess I cannot find a reference
                                              for this in the text, 10 being the most mentioned (I have however found a
                                              reference to reducing the number as mentioned by Robert but not a reference
                                              for increasing the number). I suppose I will have to drop Bill a line and see
                                              if he can enlighten me.

                                              I am going to be all frustrated until I nail this one down now!

                                              Cheers

                                              Tim

                                              Yahoo! Groups Sponsor

                                              www. .com




                                              The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of square miles...



                                              [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                            • BritcomHMP@aol.com
                                              In a message dated 2/3/2001 11:57:47 AM Central Standard Time, suedraper@sympatico.ca writes:
                                              Message 22 of 24 , Feb 3, 2001
                                              • 0 Attachment
                                                In a message dated 2/3/2001 11:57:47 AM Central Standard Time,
                                                suedraper@... writes:

                                                << Oh, ummmmm. I was talking only about OR coats. Everything I've read says
                                                something akin to this is how it was, blah, blah, blah, and then goes on to
                                                say *with the exception of Officer's coats, which* blah, blah, blah.

                                                Does this shed any light? >>

                                                Not necessarily. Basically regulations are written in such a way that you are
                                                supposed to refer back up the line for stuff so they don't have to keep
                                                repeating it. I mean one quite often comes across instructions for privates
                                                that will say for example 'as for sergeant but coat in red not scarlet' in
                                                other words if a regulation is laid down and not mentioned again, it is
                                                supposed to carry through for all ranks. So if there is a reference to tall
                                                officers having increased the numbers of buttons and this is NOT qualified
                                                later in the text, privates would logically follow the same regs.
                                                However, as I said before, the ONLY reason for doing this is to make the
                                                coats look the same.

                                                Cheers

                                                Tim
                                              • Craig Williams
                                                Tread carefully Jimmy, Ms. Draper is well versed in the construction of 1812 soldiers clothing. Craig when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as
                                                Message 23 of 24 , Feb 5, 2001
                                                • 0 Attachment
                                                  Tread carefully Jimmy, Ms. Draper is well versed in the construction of 1812
                                                  soldiers clothing.

                                                  Craig

                                                  when it comes to matters relating to bastion loops as placed
                                                  >on a regimental coat of the 41st Regiment of Foot, she is choosing to play
                                                  >in my ball-park...
                                                  >
                                                  >regards,
                                                  >
                                                  >Jim
                                                  >1/41st
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >
                                                  >The War of 1812: In Europe, thousands fought over the fate of hundreds of
                                                  square miles: in North America, hundreds determined the fate of THOUSANDS of
                                                  square miles...
                                                • Maxine Trottier
                                                  Someone was telling me about a piece in The Beaver recently. I quote: It appears as if gun registration is not a new issue in Canada. I was particularly
                                                  Message 24 of 24 , Feb 5, 2001
                                                  • 0 Attachment
                                                    Someone was telling me about a piece in ""The Beaver" recently. I quote: "It
                                                    appears as if gun registration is not a new issue in Canada. I was
                                                    particularly interested in the fact that in the mid-19th century gun
                                                    ownership was quite tightly controlled, however, with the Americans in
                                                    ferment to the south, the government did not want all of us disarmed. They
                                                    introduced something called <Certificates of Exemption>. In order to get
                                                    one, you had to apply to a local Justice of the Peace in person, complete
                                                    with references and sponsors. The certificate, once issued, exempted you
                                                    from, I gather, most of the regulations."

                                                    Comments? Is this still on the books?



                                                    Max



                                                    [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                                                  Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.