Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 13:11:31 -1000
From: aleed
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
Here's what I know. Keep in mind that my forte's the costuming more than
period dyeing and fabric texture, so anything you see that looks wrong,
please pipe up and correct.
OK, here we go...
Authenticity Police Radar: ON
> The skirts: I am thinking of having them one in light grey and the other
> in green and one or both made of linen. My question here is, are grey and
> green REALLY period peasant clothing colours? What would they have used to
> get the grey (charcoal maybe?) and how? What about green? Would peasants
> have used verdigris or alder leaves? Or would they have perhaps mixed woad
> and weld to get green? Remember, this is an Elizabethan English peasant
> we're talking about. Subsistence level farming probably circa 1560-ish.
Grey and green are quite period colors, actually...depending on the green.
What was known as "goose-turd green" was definitely accessible to the peasantry, and
was (to the best of my knowledge) a sort of greeny-yellowy
color. Grey was refferred to as Rat's Color in 1518, and is referred to in the book
"Costume in England: A History of Dress" as being worn by poor people.
At this point in time indigo was accessible, along with woad, to make blue dye; weld
was also widely used for a yellow, and even the poorest peasant, with access to woad
and weld, could make a wide range of green colors.
There's many dyes of the period that would produce grey or greyish brown. Heck, half
the plants in my back yard would produce a grey, brownish, or tan color when boiled.
There's a great paper put up on the web by Penny Ladnier documenting colors used
during the 16th century at: http://www.dnaco.net/~aleed/corsets/lizcolor.html
> Another question that has come to my mind in doing my research is what
> cloth materials are really period peasant? When I was looking into doing
> this, I was hoping to find a period excuse to wear clothing with a
> different cut than usual faire wear. I always thought it funny that all
> the lower class people at the faires look like they shopped at the same
> store--chemise, skirt, bodice. Unfortunately, it looks like that IS what
> they all wore, and pretty much all the same cut too.
Actually, that's not entirely true. I've been researching lower class
elizabethan garb lately, and despite the scarcity of info out there, have
learned a bit about the "typical" lower class dress of the 1570s.
The chemise would more likely have been a t-tunic type of smock then a chemise, as
it takes much less fabric and a peasant woman would be more
likely to conserve fabric than gather it to a neckband. I made a mid-calf
length, flared smock with arms to the wrist out of 2 and 2/3 yards of 45
inch fabric.
There's an article on the history and development and construction of this
kind of smock at http://www.dnaco.net/~aleed/corsets/smock-info.html
Over this smock would be worn a kirtle, a close-fitting, sleeveless
dress. It either laces up the side or back or doesn't lace up at all,
being pulled over the head instead.
I have no firm evidence for the exact construction
of this kirtle, but have based it on pictures of lower-class dress from
the time, many of which can be seen at
http://world.std.com/~cti/gallery.htm . This page also has a link to
instructions on making this kirtle.
Over the kirtle, a bodice is worn. It laces up the front, but usually
there's a 6 to10 inch opening. I can't tell if the bodice is boned or
not; some pictures look like it, some don't.
Close-fitting sleeves are drawn over the sleeves of the smock and attached
to the straps of the bodice, either by pins or some other method, in one
or two places. The sleeves don't necessarily have to match the color of
the bodice or the kirtle.
Over everything a partlet is worn. It can be v-necked or high necked, and
reaches down to the middle of the chest, covering the open, square-necked
area. Partlets are ubiquitous in the portraits I've seen so far. It's
sort of a rectangle of fabric, slit down the front with a hold for the
head, that attaches underneath the arms.
The way I hope to
> distinguish my outfit from everyone else's is with the authenticity of the
> materials and colours used. In my research, I came across an intriguing
> picture and description from a book by Margot Lister called "Costumes of
> Everyday Life" I think. It was of a 16th century peasant woman with a
> rake. The description of her outfit said something about her wearing a
> skirt of "green hempen stuff."
By hempen, she could have meant "rough-woven". To the best of my
knowledge, hemp wasn't used for fabric in England at this time.
> I also need a description of how to make a period peasant skirt and a
> "biggins" cap, and suggestions of where to find the CHEAPEST and best
> unbleached linen, wool, etc. cloth and all the other supplies I'll need to
> do this.
Peasant skirts are dead simple. You take a long piece of fabric, sew it into a cylinder
(with a little space open at the top,) and pleat it/gather it onto a waistband or
a bodice. Often more than one skirt was worn. In the above costume description,
there could be at least one petticoat worn underneath the kirtle, or alternately, a
skirt attached to the outer bodice that was open in front to show the underskirt.
An open-fronted skirt attached to a bodice is even easier to make: just pleat or
gather the top edge of a long rectangle of fabric to the bodice, and hem the other edges.
(Note: I always like to hand hem skirts and other edges. Top-stitched
hems can mar an otherwise wonderfully period-looking outfit).
Linen is, alas, expensive. You can sometimes find it on sale at Jo-Anns--at least,
the "linen look" cotton/linen fabric they have there. I've used the linen-look fabric
for period clothes, and the stuff with the larger weave looks very period. Try wool
for the bodice and/or the overskirt. You can line it in linen so it won't be too hot.
Outer garments were often made of wool, especially for the peasantry.
I don't have any instructions for making a biggens cap, but I do have some
info, photos,patterns and instructions for making a circa 1600s coif at
http://www.dnaco.net/~aleed/corsets/headwear/coif.html
Authenticity Police Radar: OFF
Whew. I hope this helps you out. And have lots of fun!
Drea di' Pellegrini
------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: [email protected]
Date: Tue, 17 Mar 1998 13:18:41 -1000
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
Elizabethan is my area of particular interest and although I do a noblewoman at the
Bristol RenFaire, I started out doing peasant. I recommend that if you are interested
in doing a novel style of peasant that you do your own research. The standard chemise/skirt/bodice actually isn't that typical of the Elizabethan lower classes. May I recommend
the painting known as 'Wedding at Bermondsey'. It shows lots of happy dancing peasants,
none of whom are wearing the 'peasant uniform'. Also check primary source costume books such as "A Visual History of Costume-16th Century" by Jane Ashelford. Plates
#61,77,82 all show sketches of peasants in the City of London.
In terms of color, peasants wore lots of greys, browns, golden yellow, and navy blues.
The green they had would have been relatively dull, like an olive or sage green.
The dull oranges were popular as well, what we would call a rust. The shift (chemise
is way too late period and 'frenchy') would have been linen and not neccessarily unbleached.
One can bleach linen pretty effectively using just water and sunlight, so a creamy
white shade is perfectly legitimate. Stay away from colored linens. Linen is very
hard to dye with natural dyes, so most linen was left in it's normal light grey/creamy
white state. Your outer layer should be wool. It dyes beautifully and was the most
common fabric in Elizabethan England. Before you yelp about heat and such, remember,
wool is a natural fiber-it will breathe! It's not nearly as hot as you think (says a
woman who wears 15-20 pounds of velvet and brocade all summer long!). Don't forget
apron and a cap of some sort, no respectable woman
went out of her home without them.
If you have any other questions which I could be of some service answering, please
fell free to ask.
Karen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: [email protected]
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
>I haven't had much luck with finding books in my local libraries on the
>subject.
I know, isn't it a bear? I have spent years (and bucks) getting good research books,
but they are worth the effort. Another one I recommend, if you can find it, is "Rural
Costume-It's origin and development in Western Europe and the British Isles" by Alma
Oakes and Margot Hamilton Hill Batsford Ltd. Library of Congress Card Number 76-126880.
You will probably have to get it thru Inter Library Loan.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------From: "Yeldham, Caroline S"
Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan query
Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 01:10:35 -1000
Another good source of pictures for Elizabethan lower orders (the period
term - I'm afraid I don't like the term peasant in this context) is Breugel.
Yes, I know he was Flemish, but there were strong links between the two
countries, and nobody in England was painting the lower orders in such
detail and variety. There are even doubts over the Bermondsy Wedding Party -
it may have been painted by a foreigner!
A poor woman in the 1560s would probably be employed, even if only as a day labourer
in peak agricultural periods. Late marriage was common (25 for
women, 27 for men averages) and low birth rate, so even children would be
less of a handicap than might be thought. Therefore the clothes are
practical working clothes (for the English climate).
By the 1560s, for a working woman
1. Bleached linen smock (or shift - the more polite term), gathered at
neck to neckband and at wrists to cuffs (with frills if you have any
pretentions) - goes down to knee or mid-calf. Gussets under the arm and at the junction
of the shoulder seams to the neck band prevent the seams
tearing out with wear.. On the question of using large quantities of linen
- and as a large but short woman, I reckon mine of this type take about 3
metres of linen - linen wasn't that expensive, and it lasts very well,
getting softer with wear and age.
2. A separate waistlength woollen kirtle, pleated to a waistband (flat
at front, increasing depth of pleats to centre back). Ankle length or just
above
3. Boned woollen bodice probably with a square neckline (Janet Arnold's Pattern of
Fashion has lots of info on these). Often wings on sleeveheads
covering lacing points of removable sleeves
4. Coif, bleached linen again, on head (gather most of a circle large
enough to cover your hair comfortably onto a band which goes from behind
your ear, over the ear, round your head and back to the other side. On the
front of this band add a shaped piece which goes forward from each ear over
the forehead - the shape varies and the front edge can be wired - which was
disapproved of!
5. Extra petticoats, basically the same as the kirtle, often contrasting colours and
the skirt was kirtled up to show them
6. Woollen Gown worn over - Lucas de Herriman (sp?) drawings show the
shape. Essential for middleclass and up - probable for working woman on
formal occasions (ie if not wearing apron!)
7. Apron - knee or calf-length, wide enough to cover most of skirt,
gathered to band used to tie on (an alternative useful style is where only
the centre section is sewn to the band and the two top corners hang loose - you can
use a heavier weight linen in this style than the gathered which is
sometimes useful).
8. Woollen Hose (transition - probably woven for poorest, richer people
switching to knitted)
9. Shoes - leather, welted, probably with clump sole as working woman
10. Partlett - black or white linen
11. Hat - probably straw with wide brim
I've handled a hemp fabric, very similar to a linen suitable for a smock,
and it has a lovely feel but it is currently difficult to get hold of (in
the UK at least). I understand it was sometimes used for smocks and shirts. There
is some evidence that woollen shirts were worn by sailors on the Mary
Rose, linen for outer garments was unusual and probably on the posh side,
not least because pale linens show every mark!
The woollen cloth would be given to you once or twice a year as part of your
wages as an employed person. Except for the very poorest people and
children, the bodice, kirtle, gown and shoes (and possibly hose) would be
made by professionals for that individual, and should therefore fit well.
(no elastic, no drawstrings)
I exclude the very poor (ie beggars) because they probably coped with
charitable gifts, and children coped with hand-me-downs. The linen goods
would probably be made in the home, richer houses employing seamstresses for
this work.
hope that helps .
Caroline
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:38:14 -1000
From: aleed
Subject: H-COST: Re: Elizabethan peasant clothing
> Second, I can't document waistbands in England before approx. 1615.
> Although, there is plenty of evidence of seprate skirts which were also
> referred to as "kirtles" (see Alcega). I believe they would have attached
> by points or just sewn onto a bodice. There seems to be little evidence of
> bodices (rather than doublets or jerkins) worn by themselves.
I thought so too. But after looking at some early tudor dresses, namely the More
Family sketch, and some later 16th c. pictures portraying peasanty and lower class
women, I noticed that the uppermost layer of the skirt is the same color as the garment
showing under the front lacing of the bodice. I've tried lots of ways to do such a thing,
and have concluded (tentatively) that the bodice is worn over the kirtle/underdress.
This is lower class, we're talking about here, and a specific style; when it comes to middle/upper class, I agree with the statement above.
> >Over this smock would be worn a kirtle, a close-fitting, sleeveless
> >dress. It either laces up the side or back or doesn't lace up at all,
> >being pulled over the head instead.
>
> Cool! I would love to know where to find the over the head kirtle!
> Please, tell me where to find the sources! :)
The over-the-head's just a possibility; all I know is that they don't close up the
front or the front side, as many of the bodices which lace across the front show
a large amount of underdress. So they either lace up at the side or the back or go
over the head. Le Poulet Gauche stated that the kirtle was loose, and cinched by the bodice,
and in a couple of pictures on their site the wrinkles of the fabric underneath the
lacing of the bodice support this hypothesis. If the poulet person is on here, please
expound on what you wrote on the page-- I'd love to hear more. Until now I've concentrated
on the dress of the upper classes.
Personally, I've developed a pattern for this under-kirtle type things
which is close-fitting and laces together under the arm. I've agonized
over whether to have the skirt continue down from the bodice a la Janet
Arnold's kirtle in patterns of fashion, but have decided to go with a skirt pleated
to the waist to add more fullness. I may add a skirt to
the over-bodice too. Who knows. I'm making it now, and I'll tell you how
it turns out. Anyone else who's made a similar outfit, please speak up!
Thanks,
Drea
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:24:22 -1000
From: Danielle Nunn
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
Greetings all,
O.k. I'm in authenticity police mode.
Firstly, from my research a t-tunic style smock (or shift, chemise is not
the correct word for Elizabethan) appears to be correct. Aronld shows a
number of them in QE's wardrobe and in her smocks and shirts article. I'm
5'10" and can do a mid-calf length smock in 3 yards.
Second, I can't document waistbands in England before approx. 1615.
Although, there is plenty of evidence of seprate skirts which were also
referred to as "kirtles" (see Alcega). I believe they would have attached
by points or just sewn onto a bodice. There seems to be little evidence of bodices
(rather than doublets or jerkins) worn by themselves.
According to a 16th century conversation manual published by the Early
English Text Society, the correct order of clothing is:
smock
pair of bodies (corset) and farthingale
shirt
kirtle
partlet (if worn instead of shirt)
gown and or loose gown (ropa)
This is of course including hose, garters, and shoes etc.
In my research kirtles can have detachable sleeves and can be laced or
fastened up the front, laced up the diagonal back seems (see Elanora of Toledo in
Aronld's Patterns of Fashion) or up the back. Although the
latter two require aid in dressing. Kirtles (the ones with bodices
attached) without any other layers appear to be perfectly acceptable public
wear, however a "gown" would have been worn on more formal occasions.
>Over this smock would be worn a kirtle, a close-fitting, sleeveless
>dress. It either laces up the side or back or doesn't lace up at all,
>being pulled over the head instead.
Cool! I would love to know where to find the over the head kirtle!
Please, tell me where to find the sources! :)
For head covering coifs are great, but don't forget wide brimed straw hats
worn over the coif if you're "working" outdoors.
An often forgotten period fabric which would be worn by the lower classes
is "linsey-wolsey" (sp?) it is a combination of linen and wool (mine is
50/50) and I can find it here in Toronto for $5 - $10 a yard. It tends to
be a bit on the coarse side. The stuff is great, I find it cooler than
pure wool and very comfortable.
If you don't think a corset is appropriate for your "persona," I can document bodices
stiffened with "buckram" (I usually substitute haire canvas) back to the beginning
of the sixteenth century. The "buckram" gives you a fair amount of stiffening and
support in a period manner without the use of an actual paire of bodies.
If you would like, I could give you instructions on how to make a bodice of
your own. Honestly, they aren't hard.
Also, I can document back stitch but you might find a simple running stitch with the
occasional backstich works just as well and takes a good deal less
time (I can document it as well). That's how I've made all my hand sewn
clothing. If you want to e-mail me I'd be happy to go over period
finishing techinques with you.
Linen thread is great. However, you can also use threads taken from the
fabric you are using if the fibers are long enough.
As for colours, you'd probably be amazed as to what colours were period.
Check Drea's web page, she's got lots of good info.
I realize this was somewhat disjointed but, I hope it helped. Please feel
free to e-mail me if you have any questions.
Cheers,
Danielle / Gwendoline
[email protected]
------------------------------------------------------------------------------Date: Wed, 18 Mar 1998 09:29:07 -1000
From: Asia Poppers
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
Check out this site for some medieval hand stitches:
http://blah.bsuvc.bsu.edu/nfps_stitches
------------------------------------------------------------------------------ From: Appin1
Date: Tue, 24 Mar 1998 19:46:13 -1000
Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan peasant clothing
The artist's name is Lucas de Heere. He did a lot of 16th century color
illustrations showing common people in various countries. His drawings of
Irish clothing is invaluable.
Kathleen
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Wed, 25 Mar 1998 05:16:23 -1000
From: Donna Kenton
Subject: Re: H-COST: attifet
>If you cut the front section in a crescent, wire the outer edge of the
>crescent, and form that into the "sweetheart" shape, the sew the inside of the crescent
to the flat band (which in turn is fastened to the gathered "cap" you should have
no trouble. I've made several of these, and it works for me, sheer or solid.
Okay, you lost me. The pattern I have is two identical pieces (one right
and one left), a distorted half-moon shape with an elongated point at the
front, and a dart at the back.
Bad ACSII art:
Cut on the bias
Back of head, dart to size
----
/ \
/ \
/ |
| | Center seam, to ge gathered
| |
| |
\ |
\ |
\ /
\ |
\/
Center front
I've been told to wire the edge, sew and slightly gather the bias cut center seam,
and dart the back. There's no flat band in my pattern, but
I'm more than happy to use one, if it will make the thing work and fit better.
Donna
back