Tag: Fabric

  • Joseph Jackson: The Man of Many Stitches

    Joseph Jackson: The Man of Many Stitches

    Christopher José // AMH 4110.0M01 – Colonial America, 1607-1763

    To find answers from the past, historians search endlessly through documents of all types, even store ledgers. These answers result in the researcher being able to glimpse into the past and learn from it. In the end, we better understand the culture and methods of those who came before us. This blog will explore one client of the Glassford & Henderson Colchester Store in 1760-1761, Joseph Jackson’s purchases and his method for buying, along with the mystery that surrounded this man’s profession.

    Jackson seemed to be quite an enigma when my initial research began. His purchases were what I presumed very similar to that of a tailor. I discovered his purchases often consisted of a mix of items such as pins, thread, and “duffils.”[1] These items drew me into exploring what this man truly intended to do with these objects.

    Joseph Jackson purchased materials necessary for making clothing during the cold month of December (folio 117D).

    Now, it was no surprise that needles and threads could be used by a tailor, but duffil, or duffle, was a foreign fabric type with which I was not previously familiar. I researched the word and discovered what it was. I found duffle’s origin derives from the name of a Belgian town that crafted the fabric. It is a heavy, wool fabric that was first manufactured during the seventeenth century.[2] With this in mind, it led me to think about the use of the material.

    A coat made of broadcloth, a heavy wool not unlike duffle. Joseph Jackson could have made a coat similar to this. From the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Acc. No. 1954-1041.

    Since Jackson bought the heavy fabric in December, it is possible he could have used the material to make a coat for himself or for another person to keep warm during the winter. The purchasing of duffle was not exclusive to one kind of trade and therefore did not provide conclusive proof of his profession. Moreover, these items could also have been purchased for another person, even a family member. The fact remained that if Jackson was not a tailor, then what (or who) were these purchases specifically for?

    I realized that it was imperative to continue my investigation of Jackson’s purchases to discover the truth behind his identity. As I continued my analysis of Jackson’s account, I attempted to compare documents with another customer that I stumbled across. This individual, like Jackson, acquired similar items. This person was John McIntosh who was more likely to be a tailor based on how he paid his accounts – in the creation and repairs of clothing for Alexander Henderson (the Colchester store manager) and those enslaved by the store.[3]

    John McIntosh also purchased materials for clothing, creating a link between his account and Jackson’s (folio 34D).

    Through McIntosh, I saw some similar purchases: needles and duffle. Knowing that McIntosh purchased his materials at the same store that Jackson did made me wonder if there were any connections. Given the similarity in purchases, perhaps Jackson was a tailor not yet employed, or perhaps he was an apprentice for a tailor and associated with McIntosh on some level. Yet, it was not enough evidence to surmise Jackson’s profession and it continued to be unknown to me. Whatever profession Jackson pursued was not clearly identified by his purchases alone and would take additional research to learn.

    John McIntosh paid his balance at the Colchester store in 1760-1761 by making various items of clothing. Clearly, he was some sort of tailor (folio 34C).
    Compare how Joseph Jackson paid his account with McIntosh (above). By paying with tobacco, and not with a service such as tailoring, it becomes evident that Jackson followed some other profession (folio 117C).

    By looking at Jackson’s payments to the Colchester store, it became clear he was not a tailor at all.[4] He may have been connected to Marmaduke Beckwith (a landholder in the western part of Fairfax County) as Jackson’s credits came from selling tobacco notes originally belonging to Beckwith. Was Jackson a tenant of or farm manager for Beckwith? Although I couldn’t confirm what Jackson’s profession may have been by looking at his purchases, by continuing to look at Jackson’s accounts in full, I learned I was wrong in my initial interpretation of him as a tailor based on his fabric purchases and that sometimes it is hard work being a historian!

     

    [1] Alexander Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 117 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] “Duffle coat,” Encyclopedia of Clothing and Fashion, accessed March 23, 2017, http://angelasancartier.net/duffle-coat.

    [3] Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, folio 34 Debit.

    [4] Ibid., folio 117 Credit.

  • Nice Threads

    Nice Threads

    Jordi Pelayo // AMH 4110.0M01 – Colonial America, 1607-1763

    Clothing is a status symbol. If you have the nicest pants on the block, chances are they were expensive, and you bought them to show off. The clothing people buy tells us about who they are and for what purpose the clothing is intended. Cotton is undoubtedly one of the most well-known fabrics for clothing, and throughout history it has been used in a variety of ways. Cotton was used in sails, towels, fishing nets, and bookbinding in addition to clothing.[1] Using the accounts from the John Glassford and Company store in Colchester, Virginia, from 1760-1761, as well as conducting my own research, I have been able to uncover some information about what the fabrics of the time said about the people who wore them.

    Henry Taylor purchased both muslin and printed cotton at the Colchester store in September of 1760 (folio 090D).
    The portrait of Elizabeth Buckner Smith, painted ca. 1745-49. The sheer material at her neck is muslin. From the Colonial Williamsburg Collections, Acc. No. 1951-577,A&C.

    In the eighteenth century, cotton came in many forms, each with its own distinct functions. Muslin was a form of cotton that was made in India. Although it could be manufactured into varying degrees of softness, it was well known for being fine.[2] The most popular use for muslin—a fabric similar to gauze—was as a dress material. The people who bought muslin came from a higher tier of society, and were either women or purchasing it for women. At the Colchester store, I found an example of this in the account of Henry Taylor when he bought some women’s gloves and muslin, possibly for his wife.[3] Portraits of wealthy women show them dressed in muslin attire.[4]

    Another specific kind of cotton was known as printed cotton. This fabric was often decorated with floral designs and was used for multiple purposes, such as home décor and quilts in addition to clothing. In the early eighteenth century, both England and France had placed bans on printed cotton for domestic production because it quickly became a competitor for imported silks, but by mid-century these bans had been lifted and printed cotton became more widespread on the continent. The American colonies, however, had always had a large market for this kind of cotton.[5] At the Colchester store, I found that mostly men bought printed cotton. William Turner bought two yards, Leonard Dozer six yards, and Henry Taylor one and a half yards.[6]

    A 1765-1775 woman’s printed cotton gown, featuring the popular floral patterns of the time. From the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Acc. No. 1954-67,1.

    However, a few women also purchased this fabric, such as Elizabeth Pierce and Elizabeth Fallen, who bought one and a half yards and seven yards, respectively.[7] Each customer at the Colchester store who bought this particular kind of cotton paid a range of prices, from as little as 1 shilling 1 pence for half a yard to as much as 1 pound 15 shillings for 14 yards, with variations in between even for similar amounts.[8] Using a sample of purchases of printed cotton and comparing them to the few instances of muslin being purchased, it is clear that printed cotton was slightly more affordable than muslin. For example, one and half a yards of the former sold for 7 shillings 1½ pence, whereas the same amount of muslin went for 10 shillings.[9]

    Each of these specific types of cotton was worth more than the parent fabric. The purchases of both muslin and printed cotton show that customers at the Colchester store were searching for visible ways to express their wealth, or even to give the impression they had more wealth than was the reality. Just like today, appearances mattered.

     

     

    [1] Julian Roche, The International Cotton Trade (Cambridge, England: Woodhead Publishing Ltd., 1994), 4-5.

    [2] Roche, International Cotton Trade.

    [3] Alexander Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 90 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [4] James Gillray, Advantages of Wearing Muslin Dresses!, February 15, 1802. British Cartoon Prints Collection, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C.

    [5] Melinda Watt, “Textile Production in Europe: Printed, 1600-1800,” in Heilbrunn Timeline of Art History (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 2000-), accessed May 18, 2018, http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/txt_p.htm.

    [6] Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761 folio 20, 49, 90 Debit.

    [7] Ibid., folio 42, 122 Debit.

    [8] Ibid., folio 8, 20, 22, 23, 24, 29, 38, 42, 48, 49, 52, 68, 79, 90, 122, 131, 141, 147, 150, 153 Debit.

    [9] Ibid., 11 Credit, 122 Debit.

  • Osnaburg: A Sign of Wealth?

    Osnaburg: A Sign of Wealth?

    Jason Bernstein // AMH 4110.0M01 – Colonial America, 1607-1763

    Whenever we look back on the colonial period of American history, we always look to the relationships amongst the Native Americans, the colonial economy, and the events leading up to the American Revolution. But there are several aspects that go under the radar, such as diet, climate, and family life. One aspect of family life is how the family dressed themselves. And that’s where recognizing one of the period’s  mainstay fabrics come in. Osnaburg, a common fabric during the 1600 and 1700s, found its way into the colonies through trade imports where it was utilized in many forms. I will focus on the creation of this fabric, its uses, and its representation of colonial wealth during the eighteenth century.

    Osnaburg originated in Germany before being exported to England and later, her colonies. Woven from flax and hemp, it naturally looked brown due to weavers not bleaching it during its fabrication.[1] Eventually, Scotland began weaving this cloth to compete with other markets, and saw much  exportation to the colonies.[2]

    Osnaburg, a rough-textured cloth, was also very durable. As such, it was used for food sacks, and other assorted bags to transfer objects. However, its primary use was in clothing, particularly for slaves on plantations.[3] As an example in 1705, the Virginian government consolidated the different laws regarding slaves and indentured servants. Among them, one law stated that slaves had to be clothed, with no  other clarifications or restrictions about the clothes, “That all masters and owners of servants, shall find and provide for their servants wholesome and competent diet, clothing, and lodging…”[4] This led many slave owners to provision their enslaved with clothing that was readily available, as well as both time and cost effective. In addition to its availability and affordability, osnaburg fabric for enslaved clothing was favored for its simple construction and hardiness.[5]

    James Edwards’s account showing repeated purchases of osnaburg at the Colchester store in 1760-1761 (folio 19D).

    The amounts of osnaburg fabric purchased depended on the wealth of the consumer, and that can give us an idea of its intended use. For example, let’s examine the ledger account for James Edwards, a customer of Glassford and Henderson’s store in Colchester, Virginia, from 1760-1761. Over eleven months, he purchased thirty-one yards of osnaburg, with the cost of each purchase averaging one shilling per yard; he also purchased fourteen yards of the best osnaburg available for a total of sixteen shillings and four pence.[6]

    Another modern representation of an osnaburg work shirt. Image from Jas Townsend and Son, Inc.

    A modern recreation of what an osnaburg shirt might have looked like. Image from Jas Townsend and Son, Inc.

    What could these amounts of osnaburg been used for? We can create an idea, by looking at the rest of his purchases. Metal and glass buttons, thread, nails, and pins point to clothing fabrication.[7] Five and a half yards of the fabric would make two pairs of men’s pants, while two and a half yards would make one woman’s petticoat. Osnaburg could also have been used to make work shirts. (Other fabrics, such as cotton, shirting, and linsey would have been used to make shirts as well, along with dresses and slips.)[8] The osnaburg could also have been used as a bag for nails (you wouldn’t want a flimsy bag holding them). We know that osnaburg was inexpensive and capable of withstanding harsh and prolonged working conditions.[9] From the amount Edwards bought over the span of one year and the amount of tobacco Edwards paid for goods (two hogsheads totaling over 2000 pounds of tobacco), it’s possible that he was a slave-owner.[10] The purchases he made and how much he bought reflect his wealth, which we can understand through the purchase of a simple fabric.

    As we look back on osnaburg—a pretty simple fabric that has survived into the modern age, although made with more modern methods—shows how much the past affects us today. The creation, use, and purchasing of this cloth have given us a small insight into the wealth, culture, and production methods of the 18th century.

     

    [1] Katherine Egner Gruber, “Slave Clothing and Adornment in Virginia,” Encyclopedia Virginia, last modified February 4, 2016, accessed April 12, 2017,
    http://www.EncyclopediaVirginia.org/Slave_Clothing_and_Adornment_in_Virginia.

    [2] Alastair Durie, “Imitation in Scottish Eighteenth-Century Textiles: The Drive to Establish the Manufacture of Osnaburg Linen,” Journal of Design History 6, no. 2 (January 1993): 71.

    [3] Gruber, “Slave Clothing.”

    [4] William Waller Hening, ed., The Statutes at Large; Being a Collection of All the Laws of Virginia from the First Session of the Legislature, in the Year 1619 (Philadelphia: R. & W. & G. Bartow, 1823), 3:448, accessed April 10, 2018, http://vagenweb.org/hening/vol03-25.htm.

    [5] Gruber, “Slave Clothing.”

    [6] Alexander Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 19 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [7] Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761 folio 19 Debit.

    [8] Michael Wayne, “Slavery,” in Death of an Overseer: Reopening a Murder Investigation from the Plantation South (New York: Oxford University Press, 2001), 81, eBook Collection EBSCOhost, accessed April 12, 2018.

    [9] Gruber, “Slave Clothing.”

    [10] Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761 folio 19 Debit.

  • They Were Wearing What? The unusual names and materials used to make clothes in colonial America

    They Were Wearing What? The unusual names and materials used to make clothes in colonial America

    Joseph Lolli // AMH 4110.0M01 – Colonial America, 1607-1763

    When looking at any documents from the past, you must understand that the words used in their time may mean something completely different than they mean today. Depending on how far back you go, you will also have to become patient with simple things like spelling because there may not be a standardized way of writing a word, and it can be spelled many different ways by the same person, even in the same sentence. While transcribing the Colchester, Virginia store ledger (1760-1761), many entries stumped me in terms of context, until I noticed a pattern in items purchased concerning fabric goods.

    Richard Henderson bought two types of shalloon at the Colchester store from 1760-1761 (folio 042D)

    Traditional, well-known fabrics like denim, jean, linen, muslin, satin, silk, and velvet were used. Items that caused confusion due to mixed definitions were alamode, bearskin, drill, holland, and shalloon.[1] Alamode is today used to refer to ice cream with pie, though its origin is the French saying a la mode meaning “in the fashion of.” To the craftsman of the eighteenth century, it was a lightweight silk fabric used for scarves and hoods.[2] Bearskin was not literally referred to as the skin of a bear, but instead it was a thick, woolen cloth often provided to slaves as outerwear.[3] Drill is not an electronic power tool used in construction; drill in the accounts was a strong, twilled cotton often used for summer clothing.[4] Ask most people what holland is and they will tell you it is a country. Ask the shopkeeper in Colchester, and you will be supplied with a linen fabric which got its name from where it was made.[5] Something like shalloon would sound foreign to the average American, though it was a very common, cheap, wool cloth used for lining clothing and pockets.[6]

    Mrs. Elizabeth Fallen purchased “striped holland” in January 1761 at the Colchester store (folio 042D).
    Black alamode woman’s hat, ca. 1770-1780—Colonial Williamsburg Foundation., Acc. No. 1993-335.

    If you take a good look through the Glassford and Henderson ledger from the mid-eighteenth century, you’ll find that the usual fabrics from today and the more unusually titled fabrics explained here were bought in similar volumes and similar frequency. When you find something shocking, strange, or at odds with your modern perspective during research of an era past, fear not. There is likely a very simple explanation when you look into the context and add a little more digging into your research.

     

     

     

    [1] Alexander Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 52, 59, 158 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] Dictionary.com, “Alamode,” accessed March 23, 2017, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/alamode.

    [3] Gaye Wilson, “Slave Clothing,” Thomas Jefferson’s Monticello, accessed March 23, 2017, https://www.monticello.org/site/plantation-and-slavery/slave-clothing.

    [4] Dictionary.com, “Drill,” accessed March 23, 2017, http://www.dictionary.com/browse/drill.

    [5] Linda Baumgarten, “Looking at Eighteenth-Century Clothing,” Colonial Williamsburg Online Resources, accessed March 23, 2017, http://www.history.org/history/clothing/intro/clothing.cfm.

    [6] Peter Earle, Making of the English Middle Class: Business, Society, and Family Life in London (London: Methuen, 1991), 288.

  • Down the Silk Route We Go

    Down the Silk Route We Go

    Sarah Green // AMH 4110.0M01 – Colonial America, 1607-1763

    For most, silks are a fabric associated with the finer things. Silk is a rich, luxury fabric by today’s standards but what about in eighteenth-century America? Silk was as favored back then as it is now.

    While examining ledger pages from the Glassford and Henderson Colchester store (1760-1761) in Fairfax County, Virginia, silk is mentioned more than once. People bought silk in many different forms.[1] Silk garters, for example, were used to hold up stockings and to prevent them from rolling down. As garters were essentially the eighteenth-century version of suspenders, both men and women used them.

    Alexander Henderson’s account showing several purchases of silk in various different forms (Folio 8 Debit).

    Cultivated for thousands of years, silk commonly came from China, Italy, and France. The English wanted to rival the French and Italians in the production of silk, but the damp and cold English climate was not agreeable with its production. In 1603, King James sent silkworm eggs and mulberry seeds to America.[2] However, silk was produced inconsistently until the middle of the 1700s and by then, the American colonies were far better at producing cash crop like tobacco.

    Woman’s dress of lustring (taffeta) silk that was originally crafted in the 1750s and remade in the 1770s, courtesy of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Acc. No. 1975-340,2.

    Trading, for the American colonies, was rather constricted and controlled by the English crown limiting access to open trading. When it came to trading with America, goods had to pass through England as part of the Navigation Act of 1651.[3] The act put more control on the British handlings of domestic goods, placing a restraint on colonial trading and decreasing demand for imported goods; the Act of 1651 also stated that goods were required to be carried in British vessels.[4] While homespun fabrics produced in the colonies were an alternative to buying imported fabrics and textiles, silk remained a popular purchased fabric in America even with the importation restrictions.

    Man’s coat possibly of lustring (silk taffeta), courtesy of the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation, Acc. No. 1970-155.

    Because silk is a lightweight and breathable fabric, it provides comfort to its wearers during the hot summer months in Virginia. Wealthy white women liked to keep cool as much as possible, so they chose to dress in a silken fabric called lustring.[5] Silk was worn in many forms, year round, and not just by women, but by men too. Fabrics made of silk for men’s clothing were often a mix of fibers such as with wool to create alapeen or hairbine which was made with worsted.

    While more accessible today than in the eighteenth century, silk was a statement of wealth back then, a way of feeling important as well as being functional. There were many forms to buy silk that added to fashion as well as function. Silk is a timeless fabric that has been sought after for not just for a hundred years, but thousands, and is still popular today.

     

     

    [1] Alexander Henderson, et. al. Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 8 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] David Landry, “History of Silk,” Mansfield Historical Society, accessed April 19, 2017, http://www.mansfieldct-history.org/history-of-silk-production/.

    [3] Carmen Miner Smith,”Navigation Acts (1651, 1660),” Encyclopedia of North Carolina, accessed April 18, 2017, http://www.ncpedia.org/navigation-acts-1651-1660.

    [4] Smith, “Navigation Acts.”

    [5] Linda Baumgarten, “Looking at Eighteenth-Century Clothing,” Colonial Williamsburg, accessed April 14, 2017,
    https://www.history.org/history/clothing/intro/clothing.cfm.

  • Linen, The Body Fiber

    Linen, The Body Fiber

    Matthew Gray // AMH 4112.001 – The Atlantic World, 1400-1900

    Linen shirt and Haversack. From the personal collection of Matthew Gray.

    Imagine you wake up one day in colonial America, with no idea why you are there or how you got there. What is the first thing you need to do? Get some clothes so that you fit in and not draw people’s unwanted attention. You would not want to be mistaken for some sort of witch or warlock in this time period. So, how would you do it? Walk down to the local general store and buy yourself a pair of pants, a shirt and some shoes? Good luck finding them already made. You’re most likely going to have to make your own clothing or find someone to make them for you. In order to make your clothing, you will need to buy material such as linen from a store like Glassford and Henderson’s Colchester store in Virginia.[1]

    Linen is a type of fabric woven from the plant fibers of flax. This plant is grown in wet climates and requires nutrient rich soil to grow.  The plant produces a two to three foot stalk that is allowed to rot and then thrashed in order to obtain the long thin fibers used to spin into thread to make the clothing.[2] This process is very time consuming and requires a lot of skilled and unskilled labor to produce.[3] Fine linen is tightly woven and feels comfortable on a person’s skin, which costs more money than coarser linen that would itch and irritate the wearer.[4]

    A factor in determining the price for linen was whether it was shipped to the colony or made in the colony.  The price for linen would also be affected if it was imported from a country other than Britain, because Britain maintained a strict monopoly on manufactured trade in the colonies.  In order for a foreign good to enter the system, it had to pay extra taxes directly to England on top of other fees in order to legally get the product into the American market.[5]

    Examples of “Linnen” purchased by Peter Carter in April 1761, recorded in the Colchester store of Glassford and Henderson (folio 62).

    The price for linen at the Colchester store varied depending on the length sold, as well as the type.  Linen was described as Princess, Russian, Irish, fine, red, white, as well as with no additional description.  Its price varied from one shilling and one pence for only ¼ yard (with no additional descriptor) to 8 ½ yards sold for thirty-five shillings and three pence for fine linen.[6]

    Example of “princess Linnen” recorded in James Doyle’s account on 26 October 1760 in the Colchester store of Glassford and Henderson (folio 48).

    Linen could be considered a mainstay item in colonial times given its high number of purchases recorded in the Glassford & Henderson ledger and as most clothing was made from it.[7] A lot of people made their own clothing using it, as well as many other fabric-based items such as sails, bed sheets, tents, covers, jackets, haversacks and many other items.  Linen would last for many years and wore well through a lot of hard usage.

     

    [1] Alexander Henderson, et. al.  Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 10-13 Debit/Credit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] National Park Services. Historic Jamestown: Flax Production in the Seventeenth Century. https://www.nps.gov/jame/learn/historyculture/flax-production-in-the-seventeenth-century.htm (accessed November 9, 2016).

    [3] Ibid.

    [4] Ibid.

    [5] Thomas Benjamin.  The Atlantic World:  Europeans, Africans, Indians, and their Shared History, 1400-1900.  Cambridge:  Cambridge University Press, 2009.

    [6] Henderson, et. al. Folio 61 Debit, Folio 10 Credit.

    [7] Richard Lyman Bushman “Markets and Composite Farms in Early America.” The William and Mary Quarterly, vol. 55, no. 3, 1998, pp. 351–374. www.jstor.org/stable/2674528; Henderson et.al.

  • Imitation Scottish Linen

    Imitation Scottish Linen

    James Wilson // AMH 4112.001 – The Atlantic World, 1400-1900

    After looking through the Ready Money account (1760-1761) of Glassford and Henderson’s Colchester store in Virginia, there were a few items that stuck out to me because I had no idea what they were. One of which was Osnaburg, having never heard of this, I decided to look more into it what it was because I saw it being purchased quite a few times in September, 1761.[1] What was the item? What was it used for?

    Osnaburg was purchased many times in September 1761 at the Colchester store of Glassford and Henderson (folio 13).

    These questions were much easier to find answers to than I thought they were going to be. Osnaburg was a form of linen that was particularly coarse that was originally made in Osnabrück, Germany, which is where the name is derived. Osnaburg was used for quite a few things from napkins, to upholstery, to clothing.[2] The fabric doesn’t seem to have been a luxury item because it was used to make clothing for everyone, including slaves. In a 1761 slave advertisement from the Virginia Gazette, a runaway slave named Joe had been captured and was being held in the public jail in Williamsburg, Virginia, his only clothing described as ‘a ragged Oznabrigs Shirt’.[3]

    An example of an 18th-century Osnaburg man’s work shirt. Image courtesy of Jas Townsend & Son, Inc.

    Something of interest that I found was the probability of where this linen came was made. Osnaburg was originally imported to England from Osnabrück, Germany. By the 1730s, Scotland, which was attempting to become a larger economic power and trader in her own right, started to craft their own version of Osnaburg fabric.[4] The Edinburgh Linen Copartnery even sent one of their executives to Germany to learn how to properly make authentic Osnaburg, which the people particularly wanted.[5] Given the wars in Germany from 1756-1763, which caused their exports to go down, Scotland became the better choice for many nations to buy their fabrics from.[6]

    This revitalization of the economy paid off, after all was said and done, with the work done by the many of the fabric companies, Scotland provided millions of yards of linen that was exported to England and other parts of Europe. This piece of linen that was bought in a small shop was actually a piece of economic revival for Scotland based off of copying a form of linen created by a town in Germany.

     

    Infographic on Osnaburg

    [1]Alexander Henderson, et. al.  Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia Folio 13 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 58 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] C. E. Davis. “Inventory of Col. Bridger’s Estate.” The William and Mary Quarterly 22, no. 2 (1942): 186-87. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1925299; Alastair Durie. “Imitation in Scottish Eighteenth-Century Textiles: The Drive to Establish the Manufacture of Osnaburg Linen.” Journal of Design History 6, no. 2 (1993): 71-76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1315959.

    [3] James Galt. “Runaway Announcement.” Virginia Gazette (Hunter), Williamsburg, January 16, 1761.  http://www2.vcdh.virginia.edu/gos/search/relatedAd.php?adFile=rg61.xml&adId=v1761010146, Accessed December 5, 2016.

    [4] Durie, Alastair. “Imitation in Scottish Eighteenth-Century Textiles: The Drive to Establish the Manufacture of Osnaburg Linen.” Journal of Design History 6, no. 2 (1993): 71-76. http://www.jstor.org/stable/1315959.

    [5] Ibid.

    [6] Ibid.

  • Shalloon Useful and Unknown

    Shalloon Useful and Unknown

    Christian C.deBaca // AMH 4112.001 – The Atlantic World, 1400-1900

    Shalloon, a fun name to come across when learning about life in colonial Virginia, but what is it?
    As found in the Glassford & Henderson 1760-1761 ledger at the Colchester, Virginia store on January 16, 1761, Humphrey Peake purchased 9 yards of Shalloon along with various other fabrics, buttons, and thread.[1] Based on the associated items and its unit price, one could assume that Shalloon was a type of cloth.

    Civilian coat reconstructed by Joel Bohy. Coat of Golsing Green Superfine body and Buff Superfine Shalloon lining. Image courtesy of Historical Textiles (Kochan and Philips Historical Textiles, England).

    What type of cloth was shalloon?  Did it have a specific function?  Who were the general consumers of it? Shalloon was a common fabric in the 18th century that was a thin twill, made of worsted wool, and primarily used for the lining of coats. When considering that it was used for the lining of coats, it comes as no surprise that it was not a common purchase, unless you were crafting your own clothing or needed to replace the lining of your existing coat. The author J. H. Clapham states that Shalloon was a fabric that was worn “by the lower classes of females” but it was also widely used in coats of all demographics including military uniforms.[2] Since Shalloon was not thought of highly, it was affordable, while still not the cheapest fabrics. At the same time, shalloon was known for its versatility and relative ease in dyeing, making it a fashionable choice of cloth for everyone. Not only was shalloon used for clothing, it was also sometimes used in blankets and things like curtains or for the drapery around beds.

    As found in the ready money account and personal accounts in the ledger, shalloon was sold as a raw material typically bought in small quantities along with other clothing related items.  In the Ready Money accounts, of the seven purchases of shalloon, the length of fabric purchased ranged from ½ yard to 5 ½ yards.  It is possible that by comparison, Humphry Peake may have been a tailor, given his purchase was for 9 yards of shalloon. The sale of shalloon seemed to peak during the winter months when production and need for coat linings would have been at its highest.

    Shalloon was a cloth common because it could be used relatively cheaply to line coats.  With that being said, shalloon was not as commonly purchased as other fabrics, such as linen.

    Shalloon was not a cloth that was often exclusively used to make clothing. It stayed relevant for the colonial period due to its multiple uses for home décor and its ability to be dyed easily for custom work.

    Shalloon purchased by Humphry Peake in January 1761 at the Colchester store of Glassford and Henderson (folio 97).

    Infographic on Shalloon

    [1] Alexander Henderson, et. al.  Ledger 1760-1761, Colchester, Virginia folio 97 Debit, from the John Glassford and Company Records, Manuscript Division, Library of Congress, Washington, D.C., Microfilm Reel 61 (owned by the Mount Vernon Ladies’ Association).

    [2] J.H. Clapham. “The Transference of the Worsted Industry from Norfolk to the West Riding.” The Economic Journal 20, no. 78 (1910): 199. doi:10.2307/2220916.