Buckskin Fringes?

[vthompson]

I have seen quite a few paintings of mountain men and the ones with buckskin shirts had fringe all along both sleeves.
I have also seen museum exhibits that show the same thing. Now I have heard that the fringes were on the shirts to wick away water and moisture. Is there any truth to that? If not, can someone set me straight? Thank you for your time.

[Trois Castors]

the fringes were on the shirts to wick away water and moisture.

I believe this to be true......

Regards,

[Uncle Russ]

Same here Vernon...I have always heard they were strictly for "wicking".
However, I have also heard that in a pinch they were downright handy for short ties.

Still yet, much like you, if they were really there for another reason I would like to hear it.

Uncle Russ...

[Two Steps]

I kindda think that style had something to do with it.  Depending on where the shirt (and pants too) came from, the styles could/would change.  I, like the rest of ya, have read about the reasons for fringe;  Wicking away water...early camo by breaking up the human shape...used for whangs to repair their kit.  While each of these reasons may have some truth...IMO..."Style" had more to do with it than most anything.  
Just my thoughts.
Al

[Fletcher]

I all my reading, style and personal fancy are most likely the key, but the other facts are true.

When a few like Buffalo Bill and George Custer got into bucksins, the look went wild and no doubt ran the images that followed up the flagpole.

A very long and dressy fringe actually detracts from the coat/shirt by adding a lot of weight and dangly fluff.  Some also like fringe on the pants.

The Rondy folk here in the NW run a wide gammit of buckskin wear, some with fringe, some without.  Only a few seem to really do their history homework.  But as long as they have fun and act respectable I surely do accept that.

The most beautiful are the buckskin dresses made by the Rondy ladies.  As far as I am concerned, if they are not historically correct - they outta be, cause it sure adds color and beauty to a Rondy.

[pathfinder]

I'm with ya Fletcher,I was just talkin' of this very subject not long ago with an OLD friend and we were commenting on the style change in our time as Skinners. We remember back in the '70's and '80's how colorfull we all were in our skins and beads,as opposed to now everything is brown and biege. We are talkin' of resurecting our fancy dud's and goin' back to the 1830's-40's and lookin' GOOOOOOOOOD!

[rollingb]

It's probably just my opinion, but I think fringe on buckskins were a little more than simply "style".
Moisture "dissipates" through leather a little differently than cloth material, in that it seems to dry more from the edges than cloth does (because cloth is more "porous" due to it's "weave").

However, (I think) fringe on cloth garments (such as "capotes") is a different matter completely,... I think some folks add fringe to cloth garments simply because of the "style" established by buckskin clothing.  

[Gordon H.Kemp]

While there is little doubt that fringe acts as a wick to pull water/moisture from the solid material, and did give a supply of lace for repairs to gear etc. I think as Twosteps said,t the main reason was style. Now I understand that in the virgin forest there was no doubt much  less under brush , still, all those dangling strings would be bound to catch and tangle on limbs and brush. Also jf you were doing the low crawl the fringe would have to be a problem.  A couple of the possible bags I use has fringe just on the bottom (to wick away the water) actually its there because I like the look, and it somtimes gets in the way. We men seem to think we have to justify everthing and can't have an item just because we think it looks good. This is just my take on the subject. Those here that like a lot of fringe look neat , keep at it.

[Mitch]

fringe will help HOLD the water, not wick it away..it was a "style" thing as was said...but, if "real history" ain't your thang, feel free to fringe freely

[cb]

fringe will help HOLD the water, not wick it away..it was a "style" thing as was said...but, if "real history" ain't your thang, feel free to fringe freely

Mitch - I've gotta agree about the fringe soaking up and holding water (based on 40+ years of wearing it) - the idea of wicking sounds good but it only wicks it up not away.......
Whangs were made from it (documented), but it wasn't purpose added for that reason - carrying a chunk of spare hide is a better way.
Style seems to be a major reason - especially when one considers that long fringe was most popular amongst the Plains/Transmontane horse Indians of the dry west - riding a horse with that fringe flowing just plum looks good! (early clothing of the same tribes shows little evidence for fringe)

Now as for real history I'll disagree - for the western fur trade of at least the 1830's and later fringe, especially in the 6-7 inch length on coats and pants is well documented for "whites" as well as NDNz - as always it depends on who, when, and where..........

For documentation on fringe being worn start with:
A. J. Millers - prints and notes
BOB 7 has an excellent article on the trapper's clothing of the period - it includes info on the use of fringe
With cross referencing as to dates - the Mtn Man Sketchbooks 1 & 2 by the MOFT
Rex Allen Normans book Sketchbook 1837 and Sean Webster's "In the Image of A. J. Miller are other good resources....
that's just the tip of the proverbial berg........

[Mitch]

Chuck-I agree with you-and my statement about "real history" was a bit over the edge<grin>.....Fringe is cool, but I feel the long fringed "outfits", both NDN and Euro, were "mostly" for dressing up, fandango, "Sundaygotomeeting" if you will.....of course there will always be anomolies, but as you stated "40yrs of wearing it" has a lot of weight...