From: "Yeldham, Caroline S"
Subject: RE: H-COST: Elizabethan Colors
Date: Mon, 8 Jun 1998 05:54:23 -1000
The following is an extract from some notes I'm putting together on wool dyes for
a late medieval group. It gives the dye source as well as the mordant, which makes
quite a difference. There were changes from late medieval/ Elizabethan, in blues
and reds. Blues increasingly use indigo, which gives a stronger blue than woad. Reds are
from kermes, another type of insect, which was more expensive than cochineal, but
apparently a similar red.
Not sure about Bristol Red, but Lincoln Green was a quality of cloth rather
than a specific colour (there was also Lincoln Grey, which was a lower quality); scarlets
were also a quality of cloth, underdyed with scarlet (kermes?) so could be other
colours.
Hope this helps
Caroline
Green weld/copper mordant
Yellow weld/alum mordant
carnation/pink cochineal
orange madder ) type of
reddy orange madder ) wool varied
pinky yellow weld
green fermented carrot tops/alum
soft brown comfrey leaves
watchet blue 1 dip indigo/washing soda
blue 2 dip indigo " (woad produces soft versions of same colours)
dark brown oak galls
black oak galls/iron mordant
browny pink madder on gray wool
sad madder/iron mordant
sea blue/green indigo/urine
dark blue indigo/urine
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Irene leNoir
Subject: Re: H-COST: looking for Jessica Clark
Date: Fri, 19 Jun 1998 03:50:30 -1000
For those who asked for specific citations, here they are. I will warn you, this
message is quite long. However, I have tried to present the information as coherently
as I can.
First, a little background. The article that is on my website was written as an accompanying
handout for a slide show I give from time to time at SCA events. In the course of
the slide show, I cover the aspects of the cotehardie in roughly the same order that they appear in the article, showing slides as examples. The slides themselves
are the result of a single trip to the library with a couple of rolls of film. I
basically just scanned through as many books as I could and took as many pictures
as I could in the time that I had. As a result, in some places I don't necessarily have
the best example that I might for a particular aspect. In addition, sometimes I
don't really have an example of a aspect, but I didn't want to not mention it at
all.
What follows is the text of my article on cotehardies, appended with numbers in parentheses.
These numbers refer to the slide number. Following the article, is a key to the
slide numbers, giving the information for the books that they were taken from. Some of these books are readily available, some may be harder to find. They are all
part of the University of Massachusetts at Amherst, W.E.B. DuBois Library's collection.
(The entire ninth floor is a non-circulating art collection. For those of you near
enough to visit it, I highly recommend it.) If you can't find a particular book elsewhere,
you
should be able to obtain it through inter-library loan, as the UMass library system
is part of the inter-library loan system.
**************************************************
Introduction
All too often books on historic costume give an extremely simplified view of historic
garments. Many will give a single definition or example of a garment, as if that
was the only variation ever seen. In reality, historic garments varied as widely
as modern ones do. To say that a cotehardie always looked like X is as incorrect as saying
that a modern women's blouse will always look like Y. What follows is a summary
of the different aspects of cut
and style that were seen in women's cotehardies, with suggestions for construction
and wearing of re-creative garments. With this information, any number of cotehardies
can be created that ,while not exact copies of any one historical example, are authentic and in the style of the period.
Basic Cut
The basic cut of the cotehardie is fitted in the upper torso (1,2,3), with a rounded
neckline (1,2,3), and, starting at the waist or hips, flared out into a full skirt
(1,2,3). It can be floor length all around (5), floor length in front with a train
in back (7), or longer than floor length all around (6). The easiest way to draft a
cotehardie pattern is to start with a modern 8-panel princess seamed dress and alter
it. Look for a pattern that has the princess seams go over the shoulder rather than
into the armpit, as the former
is more accurate and flattering, and takes less yardage. When looking for patterns,
keep in mind that changing a neckline or eliminating an overlap is a lot easier than
changing the general proportions of the garment.
Undergarments
Historically, the cotehardie would be worn with at least one underdress. Depending
on the cut of the main garment, the underdress might (8) or might not show (7).
For modern re-creation, because of climate and convenience considerations, the underdress is frequently omitted unless the main garment is cut to expose the underdress.
Closure
In order to have the cotehardie fit snugly around the upper torso, it is necessary
to incorporate some sort of closure into the garment. Two types of closures were
used, buttons and lacing. Lacing was placed in the center front (9), on the sides
(10), or possibly even up the back (11). The cord could be visible on the surface of the
garment (12), passing through eyelets, or it could be run up lacing rings on the
inside of the dress so that it does not show (13,14). Buttons were placed on the
center front of the dress. Sometimes
buttonholes were clearly visible (15), sometimes button loops may have been used instead.
Sleeves
Cotehardies had many different types of sleeves. Some were plain and tight fitting
(16). Some had buttons running up the back of the sleeve (17). Frequently, the
sleeves did not stop at the wrist, but continued on to cover the hands (18), sometimes
as far as the second knuckle. The most common type of sleeve had tippets: flaps of
fabric that extend from just above the elbow, and hang loose behind or beside the
arm. They could be either banded or integral. Banded tippets were cut from a separate
strip of fabric and joined to the sleeve by a band that encircled the arm just above the
elbow (22). Integral tippets were cut in one piece with the sleeve (21). In effect,
the
front or inside of the sleeve stopped just above the elbow, and the back or outside
continued on. With integral tippets, the sleeves of the underdress showed from the
elbow down. Tippets came in all shapes and sizes: narrow (22,24) or wide (21,23,25),
long (21,22,25) or short (23), square (21,23,25) or rounded (22) at the tip. Two other
styles of sleeves occurred on cotehardies, although they were very rare. The first
style was that of a long tube slit up the front of the arm, like a very wide tippet
(28). The other style was the funnel shaped sleeve (29); narrow at the upper arm and
flared out into a wide opening, often reaching to the ground.
Fichets
Fichets were a pair of vertical slits in the skirt of the dress, placed at about
hip height, on either side of the front of the dress. They were the precursor to
the modern pocket. The wearer could place her hands in them to warm them, or to
access a pouch worn under the dress (where it was safe from thieves). Sometimes the fichets
were nearly unnoticeable (31), sometimes they were emphasized with trim, embroidery,
or contrasting fabric (30).
Textiles
All variety of fabrics were used: solid colors (6), brocades (26), stripes (26,32),
even furs for linings (25). Usually, there was some sort of contrast between the
main fabric and the lining or underdress (8,10). Often, the richer fabric was used
for the lining or underdress (*). Examples of some combinations are: solid main fabric
with brocade underdress (24), solid main fabric with contrasting solid lining (13),
solid main fabric with fur lining (9), brocade main fabric with fur lining (25),
etc.
Embellishment
Cotehardies were embellished with trim (2,9), embroidery (29,34), contrasting fabric
(13,17,20), and beadwork (21,32,33). Embellishments were commonly placed around
the neckline (9,13,21,33,34), down a center front opening (9,13), around the wrists
(2), around fichets (5,22.30), and on the hem (17,20,29). Nearly every combination possible
of the above mentioned types and locations of embellishment were used. The most
extreme example of
embellishment that I have seen is a dress that was embroidered and possibly also beaded
across the entire upper torso (32).
Hairstyles and Headdresses
Hair was worn long and loose (29), or braided and arranged on top of the head or
by the sides of the face (5). Either way it was often held in place by a circlet
(2), sometimes with supports for braids suspended from the circlet (1). Sometimes
cylindrical cages for containing the braids were suspended from the crown or circlet. Most
headdresses worn with cotehardies were some variety of veil arrangement. They ranged
from something as plain as a simple veil draped over the head (12), to something
as elaborate as a wire
stiffened horned veil (3) or a ruffled veil (15,17). Caul (18), padded roll (25,28,35),
or hood style headdresses (7,38) were also occasionally worn.
Belts
Belts were worn either under (39) or over (12) the main dress. They could be simply
decorative, but frequently they served a more functional purpose, such as to hang
jewelry or a pouch from (14).
Jewelry
A variety of jewelry was worn: necklaces (10), pendants, brooches (2), rings (28),
rosaries, decorative baldrics (28), and a variety of circlets, coronets, and crowns
(1,2,4,6,14,16,22,24,33).
Wearing the Dress
When walking in a dress with a longer than floor length hem, pick your feet up off
of the floor only a tiny amount and use your toe to poke the folds of fabric out
of the way as you step. When you need to turn around, walk in a small circle, always
keeping your train behind you, or swing one leg out as you turn to push the dress out
of the way. If you simply turn in place, you will wind the hem of the skirt around
your ankles and trip yourself. When all else fails, pick your hem up and hold it
as you walk. If you need to have your skirt really out of the way, but you can't hold it
because you need your hands free, you can bustle it up in one of several ways. If
you are wearing a belt, you can either grab portions of the dress from below the
belt and tuck them into the belt (19), or you can just pull the dress up through the belt so
that the excess length bunches around your waist (14,37). If you are wearing
an underdress, you can bustle your skirt up around your hips. Pick the hem up and
let the dress turn itself inside out as you bring the hem up to your waist. Then
tuck the ends into your belt (37,38), or if you are not wearing a belt, wrap the
hem around your waist and tuck it into itself, like you would do when wearing a towel (39).
In Conclusion
Although a cotehardie can have a variety of appearances, the basic pattern is quite
simple. Once you have your basic pattern, any of the variations mentioned above
can be achieved through simple alterations. I encourage you to look at as many pictures
of historic examples that you can find. The more you look at, the more ideas you
will have for ways in which you can modify your basic pattern to create cotehardies
that are your design, but also historically accurate.
**************************************************
Key to Slide Numbers:
1 A History of Fashion - Black & Garland, page 124
2 20,000 Years of Fashion - Boucher, plate 412
3 The Golden Age - Thomas, plate 25
4 The Golden Age - Thomas, plate 11
5 Manuscript Painting at the Court of France - Avril, plate 24
6 Great French Paintings From the regional Museums of France, plate 4
7 Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry - Longnon, plate 2
8 A Concise History of Costume - Laver, page 73 plate 68
9 French Painting: From Fouquet to Poussin, page 78
10 The Golden Age - Thomas, plate 2
11 20,000 Years of Fashion - Boucher, plate 4
12 The Rohan Master, plate 36
13 Illuminated Manuscripts Exhibited in the Grenville Library, plate
IV
14 French Painting - Wright, page 15
15 A History of Fashion - Black, page 123
16 The Golden Age - Thomas, plate 18
17 Costume - Laver, page 30
18 Costume - Laver, page 34
19 Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry - Longnon, plate 6
20 Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry - Longnon, plate 8
21 *unknown - sorry 22 Manuscript Painting at the Court of France - Avril, plate 30
23 Gothic Painting - Dupont, page 158
24 Manuscript Painting at the Court of France - Avril, plate 25
25 Gothic Painting - Dupont, page 160
26 International Gothic Art in Italy, page 18
27 The Golden Age - Thomas, plate 1
28 Les Tres Riches Heures du Duc de Berry - Longnon, plate 4
29 The Rohan Master, plate 14
30 Manuscript Painting at the Court of France - Avril, plate 23
31 Gothic Painting - Dupont, page 118
32 International Gothic Art in Italy, page 19 33 *unknown - sorry
34 International Gothic Art in Italy, page 17
35 Gothic Painting - Dupont, page 159
36 *unknown - sorry
37 Great French Paintings From the regional Museums of France, plate 5
38 Mediaeval Book Illumination in Europe, page 113
39 French Painting: From Fouquet to Poussin, page 48
I've tried to keep the above information brief, to save space and my sanity. If anyone
has any trouble identifying a book, or would like further information on the slide,
let me know. For most of the books I have further information such as the author's
complete name(s), publisher information, and sometimes an ISBN. For some of the slides,
I also have notes on the name of the piece of art and the museum or collection it
can be found in. If anyone has any other questions, just let me know.
Jessica Clark, SCA: IrE8ne leNoir, [email protected]
http://home.ici.net/~beowulf/jessica
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: H-COST: Toot, toot! (New Costume boasting)
I have two methods of charging. One is by the hour, the other is by the
piece. (this second method, I just found out about, but it works in some types
of clothing) 1. You are a skilled trades person, you should be making no less than
$10.00 an hour.
2. If you have a pattern, count the pieces and charge $10.00-$15.00 per piece,
including the lining.
At first, this second method had me kind of questioning, but after adding it
all up, I found that this method brought my prices up to where they should
have been. Off the rack dresses are $10.00 per piece. Custom made are $15.00.
Jackie Wakeling, Past Reflections, [email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Schosser-Payne"
Subject: Re: bliaut & chemise (shift)
Date: Sat, 4 Jul 1998 18:31:00 -1000
Unto the good lady Aisling and any other gentle reading this missive doth Arianne
de Dragonnid send her greetings! Aisling asked me a few questions concerning the
bliaut and the chemise that went under it that I shall endeavour to answer.
>You don't happen to have a copy of it (talking about "The Bliaut: A Reconstruction
based on Primary Source Material" by Belinda Sibly, published in the Winter '93 issue
of _Tournaments Illuminated_), or could you tell
>me what the statues were? I'm not having much luck getting in touch with the T.I.
people.
If you would rather just look up the statues yourself, they are: the Royal Portal
of Chartres Cathedral, carved in the mid-1140"s, Saint-Loup-de-Naud and Le Mans for
the overall style and Bourges Cathedral, Etampes, and Toulouse for the side lacing.
The cover of the Melisande Psalter (c. 1140) would be a good place to look. She also
quotes _L'Escoufle_ (1204) via Joan Evans' book _Dress in Medieval France_ for a
period description of the gown and warns against using Herbert Norris or anyone using
his work to research the bliaut, as he apparently sees things that aren't really there.
Her bibliograpy is extremely long, so I won't email it unless you specifically want
it.
I've never seen anything that would lead me to believe that the chemise of the period
might be gathered at the neck. Instead make it along the lines of a basic long tunic
with extra long arms. For your keyhole closure, I would suggest a small pearl button and a loop of thread or cloth or two short bits of grosgrain ribbon (satin ribbon
isn't period, or if it is its extremely late). I've not seen any close-ups or descriptions,
but these would have the appropriate effect and are plausible.
>Shiny is not period? Not even satin?
Perhaps I should have said that the type of shine you see in the super-shiny bridal
satins isn't period. And even regular satins wouldn't be period for 12th century
garb. Silks of the time were more like the rough silk we see sometimes than the
shiny silks we think of nowadays when we think of silk. The piece I saw looked more like a
fine linen. That said, I have a piece of azure blue Silkessence (a brand of fake
silk) waiting to become a bliaut and a piece of white satin that will probably become
Coronation garb if I or anyone close to me becomes Consort before I find a more appropriate
use for it, bought before I knew better.
Your Servant,
Arianne
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 1 Jul 1998 09:29:58 -1000
From: Brenda and Larry Clough
Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: linen
This may be helpful. Essentially, you test snips of the fabric by burning
or by dipping it into various chemicals. The wool-into-bleach stunt is
particularly cute -- the wool dissolves completely, a fine party trick to
amuse the children. Do the burning in your kitchen sink or something, for
safety's sake.
Brenda
Wool-ash is irregular, black and it crumbles. Chorine bleach will dissolve it. Same
for silk.
Rayon-No ash. Sulfuric acid will dissolve rayon and cotton
Cotton. Irregular, glowing ember, gray/black, crumbles to a fine powder. Stong acids
will disolve it.
Acrylic Irregular black ash, hard crust, but the crust can be crushed.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Henk 't Jong"
Subject: Re: H-COST: Twisted Cloth Belt and other subjects
Date: Thu, 9 Jul 1998 06:09:14 -1000
Annora wrote:
"Does anyone know where I can find a photograph of the tomb statues in
Westminster Abbey of Richard II and his first wife, Anne of Bohemia? "
There is one in a splendid book called 'Westminster Abbey and the Plantagenets' by
Paul Binski (New Haven/London, 1995, ISBN 0-300-05980-9)
on page 201, but Richard is in front and Anne is partly behind hin and details of
her dress are very unclear. It is long, with a fitting upper part and full in the
skirt, buttoned midfront down to the hips, has a slender belt with ornate buckle
and a mantle over it (her hands are not visible). It looks as though her hair is uncovered wit
a narrow metal fillet in it, but I'm not sure here. Sorry I can't be of more help.
I also have no more pictures of this tomb, except from Richard II singly.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 10 Jul 1998 03:41:31 -1000
From: [email protected] (Deborah Pulliam)
Subject: H-COST: h-cost: effigies
<<"Does anyone know where I can find a photograph of the tomb statues in Westminster
Abbey of Richard II and his first wife, Anne of Bohemia? ">>
There is an excellent book available: The Funeral Effigies of Westminster Abbey ed.
by Anthony Harvey and Richard Mortimer 1994 Boydell Press, Woodbridge, England
ISBN 0-85115-368-2
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1998 15:20:44 -1000
From: "Erin K. Gault"
Subject: H-COST: Super Library
I just wanted to tell you all about the best library I just found. ...Art Institutes
International Portland. That's great and all but the neat thing is that the school
has a large apparel design program and the largest collection of historical costuming
books I have ever seen.
Erin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 22:27:16 -1000
Subject: Re: H-COST: brightly colored silk veils?
Joan Garner asks:
> Any real evidence of veils other than white? Were colored silks being
> brought back from the Crusades and considered terribly trendy?
Most veils are white. I have found some (such as in the Pampaloma Bible, 13th C Spain)
which are also yellow and pale blue.
It is easy to get lead astray about colored veils because sometimes you aren't looking
at a veil but rather a mantle pulled up over the head.
That said, I have found some colored veils:
a blue veil (bright blue, held on head with some sort of narrow fillet): Winchester
Bible, 12th C England. (Actually, there are several ladies throughout wearing veils
of primary colors, as well as the more usual white. I can tell they're colored but
not what, because of the b/w xeroxes.) bright red and bright green veils: Shaftsbury 1130-40
(the 3rd veil in the picture I had was either white or yellow. It was hard to tell
because of the color balance. However, they were definitely veils because they were
also wearing mantles. The lady wearing the green veil had a bright red mantle.)
Silver colored veil with an embroidered and beaded edge. May be 2 layers: Spain, 12th
Century (statue of St. Foy. She wears a very ornate crown over the veil)
There are others but in some of my xeroxes it is obvious that it is not white like
another lady standing near, but it's black and white so I don't know what color it
is. (Lambeth Bible, early 12th C for example)
As far as why they were wearing colored veils (crusades, fashion statement, etc),
I don't know.
Kat
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 04:41:12 -1000
Subject: Re: H-COST: Beaded veils?
-Poster: [email protected]
I don't know about beaded, but I do have information about a 13th century
German embroidered silk mesh hairnet that has a brocaded tabletwoven band sewn
to the bottom circumference of the veil.
Nancy
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 02:10:30 -1000
From: Melanie Wilson
Subject: H-COST: Coloured and beaded veils
>Talking before finishing the backed up mail again-- but don't forget to be
careful of Biblical illustrations. Sometimes non-standard dress (stripes,
for example) is short hand for "this person is a foreigner". A color may just be shadow,
especially grey or blue. Not that a colored veil is impossible, but
you have to take all your understanding of what your looking at into the
fray with you.
On coloured veils I have just spend a long time looking into this for the 13th C.
There are many illustrations from biblical sources and not forigners etc, if you
read the text as well, there are also several written refs particularly to saffron
veils.
Here are a few of the refs:-
Secondary is Baronial Household of the 13th Century-Wade Labarge for both
Primary is Robert Mannyng(handlyne Synn) for complaints about yellow
wimples and a Frenchy song of the 13th C for the pedlers wares (including saffron
wimples I think maybe Satirical songs and poems on costume FW
Fairholt), see also the German precher Berthold of Regensburg moaning about
the expense and vanity women spent on veils.(also for gold in veils)
Interestingly Labarge also mentions young men favoured embroidered coifs! and Bible
morelisee Codex 2554(first half 13th C) opp page36 grey coif type
wear, page 40 fillet, in blue opp page pink veil, page 44 brown fillet, page 45 pinkish
veil(not pure white anyhow) red fillet/crown., opp p 50 green fillet, 50 yellow veil
enough ?
Mel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "S.B. McDaniel"
Subject: Re: Cloak closures
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1998 10:30:05 -1000
This subject came up on H-Costume awhile back. This closure is called a
"morse", and the impression I have gotten from the scant research I have
done is that they were fastened either with brooches or tied to the
mantle on either side with cording. I have seen on picture in which the
morse seems to have been sewn to the mantle's edges, but cannot remember
its source. Anybody else?
S. McDaniel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Amanda Reeves"
Subject: Re: H-COST: Whitening unbleached cotton
Date: Tue, 28 Apr 1998 06:48:30 -1000
But, a long time ago my mother told me of a mixture of 1/4 cup of powdered dishwasher
detergent and 1/2 cup of bleach (does that sound like too much?) to your wash water
that will whiten magically. Disclaimer...............test it on something first :-),
but it does work.
A Reeves
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "popdan"
Subject: Re: H-COST: Bleach
Date: Wed, 29 Apr 1998 16:15:13 -1000
Greetings
One easy way to "bleach" unbleached muslin without damaging the material is
to launder the garment then , while the garment is still wet soak it with lemon juice
and and then work salt into the garment and then place it in the sun all day. Then
re-launder. It will not be a blinding white but it will gradually lighten the material without harming it. This will also remove mildew and iron rust stains if they are
fairly fresh. Hope this is of some help.
Yours in Service
Catrin Skynith
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1998 14:21:47 -1000
From: "S.B. McDaniel"
Subject: H-COST: Rolled Hems
My method of hand-sewing rolled hems came from studying paintings with a
magnifying glass. Example: Van der Weyden, "Portrait of a Lady". It seems to me
that the hems of many sheer veils seem to contain a thin cord or thick thread, so
I experimented.
First, I press a shallow fold into the edges of the fabric. I insert a strand of
while pearl cotton and whipstitch it into the fold. Trim away fabric inside fold
above the pearl cotton, take a tiny fold and whipstitch again.
The hem this method produces a crisp, beautiful hem that looks exactly like the paintings.
The pearl cotton in the hem seems also to give my veils more body and causes them
to frame the face beautifully. It works especially well with oval and round shapes.
S.B. McDaniel
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Diane Perry (Melangell)"
Subject: 12th century books
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 1998 18:23:48 -1000
Goddard, Eunice Rathbone. Women's Costume in French Texts of the Eleventh and Twelfth
Centuries. The Johns Hopkins Press: Baltimore, Maryland, 1927. Originally published
in Paris France by Les Presses Universitaires de France, Paris.
Wonderful text, wish I could read French. This looks like a Doctorial thesis or Masters
thesis on French costuming. Some is in English and some in French. I ILL'd it from
my library. I also have had Amazon.com looking for it for me for about 6-8 months with no luck. Very few pictures, mostly text.
Mitchell, Timothy J. Costume for a 12th Century Lady. Published in the Summer 1995
(#115) issue of TI. Also on his web page. Good discussion of one source of this
type of costuming.
Davenport, Millia. The Book of Costume. Vol I. Crown Publishers: New York, ????.
I have copies of pages 103-152.
I just love MIllia Davenport and wish that I could get a copy of this book. Unfoortunately,
Amazon.com lists it as in print but permanently out of stock (for about 15 years!!).
Any good library, especially university libraries have a copy of her books. She uses only primary sources to draw her conclusions. Some pictures I have only
seen in her book. Of interest is page 143 which shows a side laced dress, page 137
which show nice closeups of the bourges Catherdral and Chartes Cathedral.
To see another picture of side laced dresses, look at page 78 of Costume in England
A History of Dress to the End of the 18th Century by F. W. Fairholt. George Bell
and Sons: London, England, 1885. It is mostly line drawings, but shows the oft referred
to picture of the devil wearing womans clothing. It is to be a mockery of the exaggerated
clothing styles of the time. I have yet to find an original of this devil. Anyone
have one? I have about 30 or so more sources, of varing quality. I really recommend Millia Davenport. Do look at all costuming books and copy the revelant pages.
Once you start looking at the majority of works, clothing styles and prominant features
will make themselves felt.
I tend to stick to a narrow band of 12th century clothing, 1130ish, England (of course
France, Germany, and I think Spain were wearing about the same type of clothing).
This is the time when the cloths were very exaggerated, long sleeves, long trailing
skirts and veils.
Want more info, just let me know.
Diane Perry
Melangell
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 26 Aug 1998 02:59:40 -1000
From: aleed
Subject: Re: H-COST: Spanish mid-1500's women costume
> >My guess is that it is because there was a long train in the back of the
> >dress. And thus, that was the purpose of the pleat, to make the front stop
> >at the floor while the back trailed on the floor.
>
> If that was the reason, why not just cut it shorter in the front in the
> first place?
Looking at Janet Arnold's Patterns book, it looks like skirts were made level at the
bottom by changing the length at the top of the skirt fabric (i.e., higher in back).
The Infanta's skirt could have been leveled in that way, too. I never noticed the
pleat before, but can't for the life of me figure out what it might be for. Keeping
the skirt off the ground in the front seems the most reasonable guess, but tailors
certainly had to be skilled enough at that time to sew a level hemline.
yours puzzledly,
Drea
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 29 Jul 1998 04:55:32 -1000
From: Mary Denise Smith
Subject: Re: H-COST: Rolled Hems
This is how I hand roll a hem:
Machine stitch a row about 1/8 inch in from the edge (or further, then
trim to 1/8 inch), through a single thickness of the fabric.
Fold and "finger press" along the stitching line. The stitches make this
first fold very easy.
Use a single thread in as fine a needle as possible. Starting at the "top" of the
fabric, pick up a single thread on the body of the garment, then pick up a single
thread along the folded edge. Do not pull this tight yet. Going back and forth, pick
up single threads from the body of the garment and the folded edge about half a dozen times
or so.
Now, holding the fabric taut (I do this in my left hand), gently pull the sewing thread.
This causes the hem to roll evenly. Don't pull the last stitch quite tight.
Proceed for another half dozen stitches or so, til finished.
Sounds much harder in the description than it actually is. This is how my grandmother
taught me to do a rolled hem. She was born in 1890, and learned to sew as a child.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1998 15:41:01 -1000
Subject: Re: Re: H-COST: rolled hemming
The way I was taught as a child to roll a hem:
Turn under approx. 1/8" of fabric. Slide your filled needle up into the fold
to hide your knot. Bring your needle down to just past the raw edge of where
the fabric was folded. This should be about 1/8" from the fold now. Catch a
few threads with your needle. Take you needle up to the original folded edge,
about 1/4" away from your knot, and pick up a few threads there. Take your needle
down, at a slight diagonal, past the raw edge and pick up a few
threads. Go up to the fold again, and pick up a few threads, about 1/4" from
your last stitch there. You should now be creating a zig-zag pattern with your
thread, back and forth across the folded-over part of your hem. After you have
gone a couple of inches, pull the thread gently, and you will see this hem
"roll" over to create a 1/16" "rolled hem".
That's the way it is done traditionally.
Karla
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Mon, 31 Aug 1998 03:35:59 -1000
From: Chris Peters
Subject: shoes
Marc's is the best URL for shoe design. another is
http://www.uit.net/wmorris/costume/footwear/footwear_index.html .
It is more a renfaire style boot but the directions are clear, concise and
easily modifiable. Hope this helps
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 01:16:19 -1000
From: Su Carter
Subject: H-COST: Linen care
I found a good resource for linen care.
http://www.ulsterlinen.com/caring.htm
The various pages contain some excellent material including a very complete stain
removal chart.
One thing I might add is to avoid any contact with "brighteners and whiteners" when
washing white or near-white linen. They will leave very permanent extra white spots
that glow in sun or florescent light. If you usually use such detergents be careful
there is no residue in your machine before washing your lovely linens. You might try putting
a load of towels through an extra rinse cycle before washing the linen. This will
flush the machine as well as removing lots of leftover soap from your towels - you
might be surprised at how soft they are after the extra rinse!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: SCA-Garb - Bliaut (was "Patterns of Time" - URL)
Date: Tue, 1 Sep 1998 07:50:52 -1000
I do not have a copy of Davenport handy, although I have reviewed those
pictures before. I do have Blanche Payne's, which shares many of the same
pictures. Unfortunately, they don't share the same numbers.
The belts are *not* at the waist line. They fall just above the waist and
on the hips. Therefore, if there is a seam, it has to fall on the hip line. This
is less likely than a waist seam IMHO. If we could get a good look at the
side or back of the waist, the whole question might be answered, since these
kinds of belts ride up in the back. Any seam would be revealed.
None of the pictures in the Payne book show this area well, but the
women's figures on page 156 and 165 clearly show horizontal wrinkles smoothly
merging into vertical wrinkles around the breasts. Payne suggests shirring
along the side seams as one explanation for the waist wrinkles. She also points out
that the horizontal lines on fig 177 (the Queen of Sheba) resemble
smocking (I believe this is this mesh pattern referred to by Lady Allison), as
do the sleeves of fig. 166 (Queen from Chartres Cathedral). She also suggests
that the sculptors may have taken some artistic license, since the same
pattern appears on the hose of shepards in a nativity scene elsewhere. The
evenness of the wrinkles is definitely artistic license. (A similar argument
was once held about chainmail. All of a sudden, medieval scribes changed the way they
drew chainmail, altering it so much that experts wondered if it
represented a new form of armor --the so-called "ring mail". People believed
in the existence of ring mail for a long time, but no pieces were ever found,
and no contemporary sources ever mentioned it. Eventually it was decided that
the "new armor" was merely the artistic convention of the time.) However,
Payne is also firmly convinced of the 2 piece theory, but does not explain
this belief in any great detail.
Does anyone think the men's garments were made in 2 pieces? Several of the men's
outfits also have horizontal belly wrinkles, just less even. The pattern of the wrinkles
on the men's garb suggests to me that the sculptures werefollowing the artistic conventions of the day, rather than trying to
accurately portray garb (they strongly resemble illuminated patterns draw on
garb we know to be 1 piece).
In Women's Costume in French Texts of the 11th and 12th Centuries by
Eunice Rathbone Goddard; fig 7 reveals more of the waist, but my copy is dark and
I don't wish to rely on memory alone, but I seem to recall this figure as
one of the ones showing merging of wrinkles at the waist. No promises. Fig 5
shows a drawing of a woman in bliaut that looks like the top half is an ace
bandage wrapped around her bosom and arms. I suspect the artist took liberties.
The point about waist seams in cotehardies is irrelevant --bliauts are
200 years earlier. Waist seams were definitely in use by then; to create
heraldic quartered garb, and to attach skirts to sideless surcotes. In Davenport figs
595 & 628 clearly show seams. Anne of Bohemia's funerary
cotehardie shows a waist seam peeking out from under her belt. I guess she
didn't care if the seam showed or not.
Until some new evidence is presented to me, I will follow Occam's Razor.
But I would love to hear from any one who may have studied these statues in
person.
Judith
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Suzanne Berry"
Subject: Phone number - Re: WOW! silk prices!
Date: Fri, 4 Sep 1998 12:40:30 -1000
Sorry about the double posting, folks, my mailer messed up (I think). The phone number
for Rupert, Gibbon and Spider is 800 422-0455. They have no minimum order, but the
more you buy, the cheaper it gets - or at least, they have three levels; under $70,
over $70, and buy by the bolt. The $1.65 a yard I quoted first was for a bolt of
5mm 36" wide silk - the mm stands for weight, and it's *very* sheer. Things like
tatoos show through very clearly. Their fabrics are all white, natural, or they
do have some in black. This stuff dyes like a dream... and I've found that 10 yards of "raw"
silk (aka silk noil) shrinks to somewhat over nine yards on machine washing (hot,
for the
dyebath) and drying.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 28 Aug 1998 08:33:48 -1000
From: Cynthia Virtue
Subject: Re: H-COST: 16th c accessories
For making soft leather or other shoes, I teach a "try before you buy
lasts" version. It is very simple.
Put a sock on your foot that you can destroy. Make a cone out of paper to the shape
that you want the point of the toe to fit (either long, for poulaine style, or short
and fat for small points) and tape that with masking tape to the sock, over your
toes, to look right.
Then cover the rest of your foot with masking tape. Stand on a piece of
paper (to protect the floor) and outline your foot with a big marker. This will draw
the right seam line for your sole on the masking-taped foot.
You will also need to put in vertical seams running from the shoe opening
to the sole; usually right under your ankle bones. Check illustrations
for the shoe opening shape itself; or you can just make another line that
goes across the top of your arch and over your ankle.
Cut the masking-taped-sock off your foot at the seam lines. Use these
pieces to make a pattern (you will find that you need a small dart at the back of
the heel near the ground). Flip pattern over for the other foot.
If you are using leather, you probably want to make a trial pattern run
with fabric, or marine-grade vinyl.
Cynthia Virtue
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From:
I asked professional cordwainer Al Saguto to comment about shoe lasts,
and he wrote,
------------------------------------
"THE LAST SHALL BE FIRST"
I have been asked to provide some advice on the matter of shoe lasts for
making reproductions of Medieval and Renaissance shoes, and while I am happy to do
this, it should be pointed out that properly thought of, lastmaking has always been
a distinct and separate trade from shoemaking, and one requiring a high degree of
artistic ability as a sculptor as well as a fitter of the wiggliest and most difficult portion
of the human anatomy to clothe--not to mention a costly tool kit and set of skills
entirely different than those needed to make shoes. Few shoemakers have ever been
noteworthy lastmakers, and even fewer lastmakers have ever made shoes worth remembering,
so if the reader manages to achieve anything like a satisfactory result, they will
have good reason to brag.
I know the home-spun image is often the simple elderly shoemaker sitting
alone in a workshop, carving lasts by hand, then lovingly fabricating shoes made to
measure for some familiar villager, but since Antiquity, and certainly by the Medieval
period, in European urban centers one was just as likely to buy ready-made footwear
from a market stall or out of stock on the racks of a shoemaker, as have a pair made
to measure. Some classes of Medieval shoes were in fact so insubstantial and difficult/uneconomical
to re-sole because of their turnshoe construction--and otherwise so readily available ready-to-wear--that London apprentices were to be given a brand new
pair each month! With
this in mind, that an authentically-made pair might be needing replacing in only one
month (if you keep off the concrete), if the reader decides to move forward with
this project, time spent on lasts will be a good and necessary investment for making
future replacement shoes.
While it is indeed possible to make hard-soled footwear quite satisfactorily without
a last, and in fact some of the light-weight, heel-less turnshoes made in the 1780's-1800
were supposedly done this way over a simple stick as a novelty, the use of a conventional last is by far easier for the amateur and adept alike to face. Making or
acquiring a suitable last can be either daunting or expensive, but in the long run
it is well worth it in both maintaining the integrity of the shoemaking process,
and assuring a satisfactory fit and finish. To try and recreate historical footwear one will
be attempting, usually on the first and perhaps only try, to duplicate a complex
assembly of specialized materials and substances that are virtually extinct today;
and an object that was originally produced in quantity every day by a highly specialized
artisan more than familiar with the intricate process, possessing all the requisite
tools (including lasts), whose skill was the result of an arduous apprenticeship,
and whose survival depended on their
ability to consistently produce up to standards in what has always been
historically a huge and fearlessly competitive industry.
Now, after these frightening opening remarks, let me just say that in the face of
all this, not having lasts at all will make what should be a challenging project
somewhat more frustrating or even disastrous for the
beginner--as I assume most individuals just want to make an occasional
pair of shoes to go with a period costume and are not setting up a production shoe
shop.
Medieval and Renaissance footwear has one advantage, for when it comes
to heels there virtually were none in Western Europe before c.1580, and one of the
most troublesome details to get right on a last is to set the "pitch" or heel-height
correctly. The advent of the heel and its attendant design problems, in part, contributed to this shift away from left and right "crooked" lasts (the rule before c.1600),
to the "upright" straight (symmetrical) lasts that dominated c.1600-c.1800. The
other reson was to reduce the multiplicity of paired lasts, now needed an a variety
of heel-heights after c.1600. So, the advantage gained by choosing the period before heels
need to be accommodated, is somewhat lost by the historical demand for paired "crooked"
lasts before c.1600. But without heel-height to confuse matters, the task is modified, so take heart.
For most people the best practical way to go about obtaining suitable
historically-correct shoe lasts will be to learn to make these themselves. If the
skill and patience usually exhibited by the more methodical makers of reproduction
historical clothing is brought to bear, this project should not be outrageously irksome,
and in the end should provide quite a great deal of self-satisfaction.
For a one-time or occasional use, perfectly satisfactory lasts can be
made from two sections of soft pine 2 x 4 glued together to obtain a dimension approaching
4" x 4". The insole pattern of the shoe style you want (not your footprint) is drawn
on the bottom, and at a suitable distance from this the rough shape can be cut-out on a bandsaw. Since the foot has no sharp corners on it, but the last does, the
broader profile of the last tends to overhang the "feather", or the defined sharp
edge that is represented by the insole pattern. If you are confident, further stock
removal can be done on the bandsaw, but for a real sense of satisfaction and better control,
a fast-cutting "Sure-form" rasp is desirable here. In rounding the last to shape,
the girth measurements and their locations on the last are critical. It should be
noted that a last is <> a one-to-one model of the foot, nor is the insole pattern
(bottom shape) just a footprint with a toe extending off the end. This is why plaster
casts are useless to make shoes over. They are decidedly too short and tend to be too big in girth. The shoe made over them ends up looking like an ugly shapeless
foot-bag in wear, the soles walking quickly out of place and wrapping themselves
up around the side of the foot.
A shoe last should be thought of merely as the container-shape, as it
only defines a void or negative space--the interior compartment of the footwear.
The upper design, linings, stiffeners, bottoms, etc., each can and do alter the outward
appearance of the shoe by modifying the last's shape complicating matters, so one
should not be dismayed if a trial shoe does not look exactly like the last it was made
over. In numerous ways the last is different from the foot: it is longer at the
toe, and in girth it must be smaller.
(continued)----deleted; dealt with hiring a professional last maker.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: H-COST: Shoemaking, part 2
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998
From:
For a good practical description of the traditional lastmaking process,
I recommend: 'Last Making and Last Measurement'; (London,1889) by Albert
E. Tebbutt. This book, as well as a number of early textbooks on hand-shoemaking
can be obtained in photocopy reprint form from our guild library:
Carl Lichte, Librarian
The Honourable Cordwainers Company
4340 Fairfax Ave.
Dallas, TX 75205
(214) 521-3373
D. A. Saguto
Master Shoemaker
The Honourable Cordwainers Company
The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation
-----------------------------------------------
Al is not on the h-costume list, so if anyone has further questions
for him I'll be happy to forward them along.
-Carol Kocian
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: Phone number - Re: WOW! silk prices! (CORRECTION)
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 13:34:54 -1000
800 442-0455
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: Mary Denise Smith
Subject: Re: H-COST: How do you make wrapped buttons?
I think the responding posts have all referred to Dorset buttons, which
to my best recollection are made over a ring and have thread in-fill.
The bead-based buttons are made thusly:
Take a (plastic) bead with a hole large enough to allow the passage of a
needle and many layers of thread.
Choose cotton embroidery floss in preferred colors (there is no reason
not to use silk or metallic, but wool might abrade too quickly).
Using all strands, thread a tapestry needle.
Leaving a long tail (12" more or less) below the bead, begin passing the
needle through the bead hole, around the bead and through the hole
repeatedly, until the surface of the bead is smoothly and completely
covered with thread.
One may then change colors and add another layer of thread.
To finish, draw the threaded needle back through the hole so that the original tail
and the "new" tail are coming out of the same side of the bead. Braid these tails
together for a little over an inch, and thread the needle with all strands of the
tail.
Place a small dowel or fat tapestry needle or size 2 or 3 knitting needle (you get
the picture) across the bottom of the bead and draw the threaded needle back through
the hole (this should be hard to do) so that the braided part of the tail is over
the dowel, forming a loop for stitching the botton to the garment.
Tie the tail (which is now sticking out of the top of the bead) into an overhand knot
and tighten this firmly against the bead. Be sure that the
dowel stays in place during this part of the operation.
Trim the tail close to the overhand knot, creating a fluffy little tuft on the top
of the button. This whole operation takes less than 5 minutes, far less time than
it took to type it!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: "Susan Carroll-Clark"
Subject: H-COST: Fabric shopping in Toronto
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1998 17:39:23 -1000
Greetings!
If anyone is actually *interested* in coming to Toronto to fabric shop, I've put a
guide (targetted at SCA people, but it should be helpful for others as
well) to fabric shopping here up on my web page at
www.geocities.com/Athens/Acropolis/5145. The shop where Danielle and I get
the groovy shot taffeta is Scarborough Textiles.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: H-COST: Picot ribbon/hat trick
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 03:02:34 -1000
From: Gail DeCamp
I do something like this to hold Elizabethan cauls on; I sew a piece of grosgrain
ribbon around the inside edge (the lining side, not the fashion fabric side) of the
caul, except I stitch it down every centimeter or so, so that it forms a series
of "loops" that I stick bobby pins through.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 01:18:02 -1000
Re: keeping hennins on
>>The best (and, actually the most period) way to keep a hennin on the head is
>>to make an undercap, like a beanie, and pin all the hair underneath.
>
>Can you actually document this? I would love to know the sources - it
>would tye in very nicely to the evolution of something I'm researching.
I will have to dig my sources out, but yes, pictures of the undercap do exist,
with the forehead wire attached, in pictures of a ladies in "less than
complete" attire. I will send them to you as soon as I can.
Karla
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Subject: H-COST: More about shoes...
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 04:40:43 -1000
From:
> >>....Some classes of Medieval shoes were in fact so insubstantial and
> >>difficult/uneconomical to re-sole because of their turnshoe
> >>construction--and otherwise so readily available ready-to-wear--that
> >>London apprentices were to be given a brand new pair each month!...
Marc,
Had a quick rummage through my files, and the Medieval London apprentice
item didn't turn up immediately, but then it may have been in a published
work or correspondence. LMK if it's urgently needed and I'll do a deeper
excavation. As I recall it was part of a 13th/14th c. apprenticeship
indenture in London, and the kid was to get the usual food, clothing, and
12 new pairs of shoes per annum. I lieu I hope the following will be
useful.
> >turnsoles are relatively easy to resole,
The question here is relative to what? The Turnshoe method is a "direct" method
of sole attachment where the uppers are fastened directly to the [only] sole--the
outsole--via a single inseam. The Welted method [including "rand" variations] is
"indirect"--the outsole is attached to an intermediate strip of leather via one seam, and
the uppers are more or less permanently joined to the insole and this intermediate
strip of leather via a very solid separate inseam. This permits the worn outsole
being removed and replaced far more reliably, frequently, and safely than with a Turnshoe
or other "direct" method of bottom attachment since it doesn't broach the inseam,
but merely the secondary row of stitching around the edge of the intermediate strip
of leather. With the turnshoe, yes it's easy to remove the old sole, but once you have done
this you have dismantled the inseam, lost the container shape, size, and dimension
of the shoe, and the upper is just a loose floppy thing. While it is certainly <> to resole a turnshoe, was it practical? More frequently it appears that additional
repair-soles were just
"clumped" [added on top] to the old one, or partially grafted to it without fully
removing it.
> >archaeological material from Medieval England and Germany would seem to
> >support this, based on the number of old soles dug up.
Be cautious. Archaeological Medieval soles do not automatically belie a
repair unless the soles themselves show signs of repair evidenced by additional stitching/pegging,
patching, grafting etc. This is especially
true for Medieval footwear in which the uppers, often delicate to begin with, were
produced from a variety of skin-types (sheep, goat, etc.) and by a variety of methods
such as "tawing" (mineral salts--as opposed to tanning), oil dressing (oil oxygenation--as in chamois/buff), or tanned by combinations of these methods and afterward stained,
dyed, and curried by additional methods that in combination resulted in a less enduring
material (enduring in the archaeological sense).
Sole leather on the other hand is/was a specialized product, usually
produced from heavier bovine hides by straight-forward tanning with oak bark, and
without the troublesome and often corrosive pigmentation used on lighter skins.
Since sole leather was, 1) a thicker and more robust base-material to begin with,
and 2) tanned by a more consistent and reliable method than what was used for uppers, it is not
surprising that hundreds and even thousands of archaeological shoe soles survive
where the uppers do not. In short, lots of soles surviving with no associated uppers
just suggests that the particular archaeological environment is biased in favor of the
survivability of sole leather, not that the soles were necessarily discarded from
repaired shoes.
> I believe there is also a mention in the Paston letters regarding one of
>the children, a student continually sending home for more money to have his
>shoes resoled.
Not unlikely. I do not know the Paston letters. Do they date from
<> the introduction of the "turn-welt" transition constructions
[late 14th early 15th c.]? These modifications increased the reparability considerably.
I didn't mean to leave the impression that turnshoes were <> [nothing is
that black and white] resoled, only that this "direct" construction method is not
as conducive to resoling as the "indirect" methods like "turn-welt", welt/rand constructions.
There are Medieval turnshoe soles exhibiting all manner of half-soles, toe patches,
heel patches, and over-lay replacement soles cleverly stitched or pegged right on top. The only problem is the one of removing the uppers from the sole and therefore
losing the shape and size of the shoe all together. Furthermore, thelongevity of
the shoes--the "perceived-value" of how long they "should" last is entirely another
matter. Under the rigors of a military campaign even the stout double-soled shoes of
the 1860's Union Army were thought poor if they only lasted 15 days in the field--they
should have gone more like 30 days! How long were a "good" pair of Medieval turnshoes
expected to last? By today's standards it might be safe to say they were relatively
"disposable" because they certainly did not last 5, 10 or even the 20 years expected
of good hand-sewn welted boots or shoes mades today.
In regards to the availability of mass-produced footwear to be bought
ready-made, the best and only article I know on this subject is a paper 'The Mass
Production of Shoes' by June M. Swann. I think it may have been published in a costume
journal in Europe in 1996, but she also presented the paper here at Williamsburg
a few years ago, outlining evidence for this level of production from division of labor
in the shoemaking trade under Xenephone (sp.?) the Greek 370 BC, and the "brand name"
shoes of LUCIUS AEBUTIUS THALES, whose shoes have turned up at Vindolanda on Hadrian's
Wall (a beautiful woman's sandal), and in France and Syria as well--at the very extremes
of the Roman empire. And the need to supply a vast army posted on service in foreign
lands with shoes virtually <> mass-production in set sizes.
The most compelling Medieval examples Miss Swann cited were from Henry
III (b.1206, d.1272) and his annual provisioning of the poor with alms-shoes on the
three major Christian feast-days of Christmas, Easter and Whitsun. From 1229, Henry
III was buying shoes ready-made at up to 345 pairs at a time, from London, Winchester,
and 7 other towns. In 1262 he ordered "100 pairs by Thursday"; in London "150 pairs
the next day" obviously from stock on-hand, all totaling 16,000 pairs over 43 years.
In 1239 Henry bought shoes at 4.5d, 5d, and 6d a pair, which suggests three sizes
[the larger the size, the more they cost, was the norm for many centuries]. In 1272
the London Cordwainers enacted trade restrictions forbidding "strangers"(non-London
shoemakers) in the city from selling shoes wholesale, which obviously means ready-made
on speculation. Master shoemakers' workforces were subsequently curtailed downward in
size from more, to 8 journeymen (from French "journee"=day workers), 3 apprentices
and whatever family was on hand--these were not tiny, cozy, one-man operations making
shoes a pair at a time to measure, but multi-worker "factory" operations. In 1303 London
bought ready-made shoes from foreign residents who were importers. By 1378 London
is exporting ready-made footwear in small quantities to Flanders, and in the year
1426 the docks of Southampton are groaning under 2.75 TONS of imported "pattens" (overshoes)
from Genoa!
Given these facts, it seems pretty obvious that how we interpret the
archaeology of Medieval footwear must always be informed by what we know
of the manufacturing and economic context in which they were produced and sold.
D. A. SAGUTO
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Thu, 17 Sep 1998 06:05:26 -1000
From: "I. Marc Carlson"
Subject: H-COST: re; More on shoes
>Had a quick rummage through my files, and the Medieval London apprentice
>item didn't turn up immediately, but then it may have been in a published
>work or correspondence. LMK if it's urgently needed and I'll do a deeper
>excavation...
I'm sure it will turn up eventually, and no I'm not in that big a hurry. I'll take
another look at the indenture contracts I have access to myself and see what the
provisions are for shoes.
Having had to resole both turnshoes and welted shoes in the past, I have found that
even disassembling turnshoes, reattaching the sole, and re-turning them (and as you
point out this is NOT the most commonly found form of repair we find in the evidence)
to be less problematic than having to completely resole a welted shoe, since (again)
as you point out the shape is often difficult to retain (whether you touch the inner
sole or not). This may just be a judgement call, however, based on the fact that
I work mostly with turnshoes and try to avoid having anything to do with welted shoes :)
>Be cautious. Archaeological Medieval soles do not automatically belie a
>repair unless the soles themselves show signs of repair evidenced by
>additional stitching/pegging, patching, grafting etc...
I appreciate the concern, but what I am referring to are those soles that clearly
show sufficient wear to need to be replaced or repaired, as opposed to soles simply
found alone. I agree that there is a problem trying to interpret excavated materials
and one should be careful though.
The Paston letters date from the entire 15th century, and so might well be referring
to turn-welt repairs. I wasn't aware that there was evidence
though that turn-welts were the norm among upper class shoes.
>...The only problem is the one of removing the uppers from the sole and
>thereforelosing the shape and size of the shoe all together...
While this can be a problem, I find this much more true of modern welted shoes. Again,
it may be related to the fact that when I am resoling a shoe, I have the owner of
that shoe to work with on a new sole that will retain the upper's form.
>...In regards to the availability of mass-produced footwear to be bought
>ready-made, the best and only article I know on this subject is a paper
>'The Mass Production of Shoes' by June M. Swann...
I'm sorry, I have not retained a boppy of my original message to you, but I don't
recall suggesting that they didn't make mass produced shoes in the
Middle Ages.
I am very much enjoying this discussion with you. If you prefer to continue
it by private mail, I would be happy to do so with you.
Marc Carlson
[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected] (LYN M PARKINSON)
Subject: Re: silk -- Long, for no web access members
Date: Wed, 16 Sep 1998 11:37:05 -1000
For list members without web access LONG
http://www.jacquardproducts.com if you have access
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Fri, 18 Sep 1998 09:01:31 -1000
From: Danielle Nunn
Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hairstyles?
Greetings,
>But does anyone know how to do that late Elizabethan rolled hairdo?
Well, actually yes. I do it on my laurel all the time. Her hair is a chin
length bob so here are the instructions for shorter hair:
1. take fake braid of matching hair colour (or other supporting pad) and
fold it over a couple of times so it is stacked just behind the hairline.
Make sure it doesn't spill down the sides. Sometimes we wrap the braid
around the back of her head first and cross the ends over her head.
2. take the front of the hair which is going to rolled back and tease and
back-comb it a bit to give it some body. It helps if you're hair is
*dirty* (i.e. don't wash it that morning) otherwise it's too slippery.
3. next, pull the hair over the braids and start bobby-pinning. The good
thing about the braids is you can stick a bobby pin right into them. Once
it's bobby-pinned to death it's usally quite stable.
4. now decorate with billament or jeweled hair pins.
For long hair:
try starting a braid at the base of you skull and braid forward ending
before the hairline (I vaugely seem to remember some reference to this
actually being done).
OR
try a hair "rat" - the long sausage like pads that you can pin into - and
roll your hair onto it like a curler.
Don't forget there are PLENTY of references to women using pads and false
hair to aid in hairstyling.
Hope this helps.
Cheers,
Danielle/Gwendolin
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sat, 19 Sep 1998 20:50:51 -1000
From: Ronna Birkenhagen
Subject: Leather source
supposed to be cheaper than Tandy.
http://www.flash.net/~lfmidas2/
arianne
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Date: Mon, 21 Sep 1998 22:29:09 -1000
Subject: Re: H-COST: Tudor pleats
> Okay...try as I can, I can no longer ignore the existance of a small amount
> of pleating/gathering at the back of Tudor overskirts.
>
> Was cartridge pleating all there was for overskirts? And how do we know?
> Lady Jane's gown (the most obviously pleated one in the period) doesn't look
> like cartridge pleating to me. (but then again, when I think of cartridge
> pleating I think of ruffs and Flemish gowns)
There are several kinds of cartridge pleating (depending on how they are sewn down.)
Gowns in the Tudor skirts could be flat in front, knife pleated on the side and cartridge
pleated at the back. They could be flat pleated (knife at the side with a box at
the back). They could be organ pipe cartridge pleated all the way around (except for
a couple of inches at the front). Sometimes those pleats were graduated (tiny at
the front to great big at the back) or the same size pleats all around.
I teach a class on cartridge pleating and have slides of it from as early as 1257.
Kat
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 7 Jul 1998 02:29:45 -1000
From: Lady Starkiller
Subject: H-COST: RE: Velvet vs. Velveteen.
The answer is yes. I've just finished a rather long and exhaustive (for me anyway!)
study on the history of velvets. My persona is late 12th early 13th century French,
and there was some concern about textiles a whiel ago, so I did a lot of research
to prove these things. The velvets that are available, as far back as 3000BC in Egypt, are
silk. The next most popular velvets are wool and cotton velvets, cotton velvet is
what we know as velveteen, or fustian, its more period name (finding this was an
excercise in finidng a needle in a haystack....)Fustian has been around, since approximately
1225AD. It had a relation called Corde du Roi, (Corudroy) which is 100% cotton corduroy
worn by the servants and minor nobilities in European courts, presumably because
they couldn't afford the real stuff. Fustian is a pain in the behind to work with,
a pain to wear, but by golly it looks great! For more information, I've put up my
velvet paper on the web, and its at http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/5459/bliaut3.html.
Hope this helps!
Lydie
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Subject: still the bliaut
Date: Thu, 1 Oct 1998 18:51:17 -1000
<< From: Sheron Buchele/Curtis Rowland
Subject: trim on a bliaut
The question on the table being:
At 12:25 PM 9/25/98 -0700, Slaine wrote:
>So having suggested tablet woven trim for Celtic and
>Viking garb, does anyone know if it would be
>appropriate for a bliaut? You know, that sort of
>dress that laces up the sides.
Leonora's beliefs about the bliaut:
1. It is a variant of a tee tunic. Longer waist area (about 1-1/2 times
from under the bodice to the hip bone. It is not pieced and there is no
over bodice or girdle. Just wrinkles from the lacing and the long waist
area.
2. It was laced up the sides which can either touch or gap.
3. Patterned under tunics with tight somewhat overly long sleeves which
also wrinkled at the wrist were occationally worn which show in the gaps
and on the arm.
4. The sleeve is not pieced, not a circle, and not an angel wing. Well,
it may be pieced because of fabric width but the basic sleeve shape is a
curve that runs from the armpit to just past the elbow. It then drops
pendant to the floor when your arm is dropped or mid calf when your arms
are at your waist. The bottom of the sleeve is a flat scoop of 4" to 6".
The sleeve lining was often different material and decorative. Sleeves are
often knotted to keep them clear of the floor - also a great weapon. ;-)
This is clear as mud but I am doing the best that I can. Sleeves are
sometimes decorated at the bicep - where the piecing of the sleeve (if any)
should occur but never along the opening of the bell. (I think that if it
looks like there is trim along the opening of the bell it is actually the
decorative lining folded over and showing over the sleeve. That is
frequently what I do as the sleeves can be very cumbersome.)
5. The bliaut had many different neck treatments, but all basically were a
turned out facing. This was often a different color or embroidered. The
embroidery seems to be fairly simple and architectural - as opposed to
floral and viney.
6. The bliaut was almost always worn with a mantle. This looks to be a
half circle of cloth with a straight edge. Along this straight edge was
heavy embroidery or trim. The mantle was worn over the shoulders and
fastened with some sort of cord and button affair just below the collar
bones.
7. The correct belt is wrapped around once under the waist and around to
tie in front, low over the pubic area. It is often a knotted silk belt.
8. I believe that the bliaut skirt should be full circle or gored to make
one. It is a dress of exageration. It is a transitional construction
method which rejected the simple lines of the past and looked forward to
the more complex contructions of the future.
9. I believe that it takes about 8 to 10 yards of material to make a good
bliaut.
Again, please take this a discussion of faith. I do strongly disagree with
my learned collegues who wrote on the bliaut construction in the TI Winter
1993 Issue 109 but there is much good information in the article.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected] (LYN M PARKINSON)
Subject: Re: Houppelande patterns
My article on Houppelandes is in the clothing section of Stefan's
Florilegium,
http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/rialto/rialto.html
There are patterns in Hill and Bucknell and Hoelkboer. I've made the Hill and Bucknell.
DON'T USE THE SLEEVE PATTERN!!!
Regards,
Allison
[email protected], Barony Marche of the Debatable Lands, Pittsburgh, PA
Kingdom of Aethelmearc
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: [email protected]
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1998 22:00:50 -1000
> You know the famous Holbein of Jane Seymour? With the visible pins? Well,
> Morris suggested that the work on her cuffs was either couched cord or
> (da-da-da!) bugle beads.
Couched cord I'd believe. However, the more I see of that portrait, the less I think
that bugle beads are a possibility. It just doesn't hang as heavily as heavily beaded
things do. Although it has a stiffness to it, it hangs more like something embroidered or couched would hang.
As to the pins: I've found other portraits with pins. One is Holbein's portrait of
Mrs. Pemberton (who is wearing a little white hat over a coif, a dark dress and a
little linen drape over her shoulders. She has little pins down the side of her dress,
but what I found interesting is that the pins are going down the opposite side of the
dress from Jane Seymour's dress. It is possible that both sides were pinned and depending
on the angle the painter used, only one side or the other would be seen. (Sort of
like pinning in a
stomacher on an 18th C gown, only on top instead of beneath an edge.)
> I second the motion for a reference on the Mary Stuart portrait...I'd love
> to see it. :)
It's one of the Antonio Mor portraits of her. I think the one I got came from Lorne
Campbell's Renaissance Portrait book. In looking at the picture again, there is a
second smaller motif farther up the skirt which is also more prominent, but not lower.
It's difficult to see what technique was used: beads (small sead type, not bugles) vs
metal thread loops (like in some of the voided velvets, Eleanor of Toledo's portraits
for example.)
Kat
Kat(June Russell)
[email protected]
Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat!
back