From: Gretchen Miller Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:16:00 -0400 (EDT) Subject: H-Costume Digest, Volume 285, 4/21/95 The Historic Costume List Digest, Volume 285, April 21, 1995 Send items for the list to h-costume@andrew.cmu.edu (or reply to this message). Send subscription/deletion requests and inquiries to h-costume-request@andrew.cmu.edu Enjoy! ------------------------------ Topics: Ragtime dance in SF Bay area ISO: Info on chastity belts Thanks: was keeping hems clean Roman carved bone resource ISO: Victorian dance in NYC More on cotton Beauty and the Beast (the musical) Scottish vs Irish kilts Opinions of Rob Roy (the movie) Questions on 1830s frock coat drickman on hiatus What is homespun? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Thu, 13 Apr 95 22:12:54 PDT From: aterry@Teknowledge.COM (Allan Terry) Subject: Ragtime dance in San Franciso Bay Area There will be a ragtime dance at Ardenwood Historic Farm from 4:30 to 6:30 p.m. on June 18 (Father's Day). Dances will be taught the first hour and led the second two hours by Allan Terry and Frances Grimble. The Paul Price Society Orchestra will play all three hours. Admission is free. 1910s attire is optional but welcome. The Ardenwood address is 34600 Ardenwood Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94555; (510) 796-0199. ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 13 Apr 95 22:37:54 PDT From: aterry@Teknowledge.COM (Allan Terry) Subject: Correction My mistake: there will be teaching at 4:30 and TWO hours of dance from 5:30-7:30. There will be a ragtime dance at Ardenwood Historic Farm from 4:30 to 7:30 p.m. on June 18 (Father's Day). Dances will be taught the first hour and led the second two hours by Allan Terry and Frances Grimble. The Paul Price Society Orchestra will play all three hours. Admission is free. 1910s attire is optional but welcome. The Ardenwood address is 34600 Ardenwood Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94555; (510) 796-0199. ------------------------------ From: Finchesa@aol.com Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 09:43:40 -0400 Subject: Chastity Belts I know this is a silly question, but I can't find any good references for the history of "chastity belts". Can anyone tell me if these articles really existed, how they were made, of what materials, how they were used, and the time periods where they existed, and who would have worn these contraptions? Any references will be appreciated! ~fin ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 10:36:41 -0400 (EDT) From: Astrida E B Schaeffer Subject: Thanks for all the info! I'd like to thank everyone who sent me info on the 1870's hems problem. You inadvertently answered a question I'd had, but hadn't asked--namely, what in the world is brush braid. Janet Arnold describes one of the dresses I'm making as having brush braid at the hem, and I had no clue... but now I do. Thank you, all, and I'm glad I'll be able to use a correct period solution to my problem. Keep your fingers crossed for me, though. The dress needs to be done by April 29th, and I have yet to even cut my cloth. I'm in for an intense few weeks! Astrida ************************************************************** Astrida Schaeffer "All life on Earth is a fairy tale in which outlandish creatures pursue impossible lives" - Rutherford Platt ------------------------------ From: BPH3213@ACS.TAMU.EDU Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 10:42:30 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Roman bone carved objects resource I am forwarding the announcement from the ROMARCH (Roman Archaeology) list as I thought it might be of interest to some people here. I haven't seen the book, so can't answer any questions. (I don't even know for a fact it is in English, but the sections look as if they contain a lot of information people here could use). Bryan H. [Begin forwarded message]: ************************************************************* Maria T. BIRO, The Bone Objects of the Roman Collection =Catalogi Musei Nationalis Hungarici, Series Archaeologica II. Budapest, 1995 ISBN 963 7421 83 1 ISSN 1217-632X 230 pp, paperback, 29x20 cm illustrated text, map and 88 plates, (drawings and photographs) The book can be obtained by book-exchange at the Central Archaeological Library of the Hungarian National Museum Mail address: Budapest VIII., Muzeum krt. 14/16 P.O.B. 364 Hungary-1370 C O N T E N T S : Foreword Introduction 1. The possible classification of bone carvings as reflected by sources 2. The technical process of bone carving 3. Theoretical aspects of determining bone carving workshops I. Bone carvings decorating weapons and military equipment 1. Sword and dagger pommels 2. Hilt guards and basket hilts 3. Hilts 4. Scabbard slides 5. Scabbard chapes 6. Ferrules 7. Bow stiffeners and plates II. Carved bone ornaments of the provincial wear 1. Buttons 2. Buckles 3. Dress pins (fibulae) III. Jewellery 1. Bracelets 2. Rings 3. Beads 4. Necklace ornaments, pendants (crepundia) IV. Hair-styles. The use of bone hair-pins, and comb use of the Romans 1. Undecorated bone hair-pins 2. Globular pins 3. Decorative pins 4. Combs V. Bone objects connected with cosmetics and physical culture 1. Unguentum jars (narthecium) 2. Spatulae (focus) 3. Unguentum sticks 4. Casket mounts VI. Bone objects of everyday use and tools made of bone 1. Spoons 2. Knives 3. Knot looseners, mouthpieces of bits, arrow-heads, punchers or perforators 4. Tools of women's housework: sewing needles, spinning and weaving equipments VII. The spread of using written records - writing and counting implements made of bone 1. Writing tablets (pugillares, cera) 2. Styli 3. Counting discs (calculi) VIII. Carved furniture decoration 1. Pivots, hinges IX. Entertainment, play 1. Musical instruments (lyre, flutes) 2. Games (dice, board games) 3. Sports (stigilis) X. Sacral objects, religious relics XI. Bone objects of unknown function and unfinished workshops pieces Catalogue (859 entries) Provenance of the objects as listed in the catalogue Dating of types Bibliography Notes Plates (I-LXXXIII) ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 12:37:25 -0400 (EDT) From: Elizabeth McMahon Subject: Victorian activities in NYC area On Thu, 13 Apr 1995, Allan Terry wrote: > > There will be a ragtime dance at Ardenwood Historic Farm from 4:30 to 6:30 > p.m. on June 18 (Father's Day). Dances will be taught the first hour and This sounds really nifty, but I'm on the other coast. Any lurking types have activities of a 19th c. nature that they participate in in the NYC area? I'm particularly interested in trying my hand at some late Victorian era gowns and dances. -*-*- Beth in the office 212-741-4400 ------------------------------ From: Edward Wright Date: Fri, 14 Apr 95 11:51:53 TZ Subject: Re: sigh, cotton redux | Despite your desire to hurl nasty names, your arguments | do not speak to the points that David is making. David did not | SAY that the cloth from India was wool. HE AGREES WITH YOU | that it is made from the cotton fiber. What David said was "from the 14th century to the mid 18th century, whenever we encounter the word "cotton" as a _textile_, it probably means a _woolen_ textile." Specifically, with regard to the cloth imported from Calicut, he said "Not much new here. Note that the word 'cotton' modifies 'cloth.' In other words, the author is making the same sort of distinction we would expect for 'woolen cloth.'" He did not say, "Of, wow. I guess 'cotton' really did mean cotton." He said, "Not much new here." He still believes that, because this was prior to the mid-18th Century, the word cotton "probably means a woolen textile." He reemphasizes this in the last line by saying that "the author is making the same sort of distinction [the dinstinction between friezed or 'cottoned' and unfriezed] we would expect for 'woolen cloth.'" | He merely said that this | quotation doesn't use the word "cotton" as a noun. It is used | as an adjective, modifying cloth. No, he said that it was used as an adjective to make a distinction that "we expect" to be made for woolen cloth. (The distinction between "cottoned" and "uncottoned.") If David meant something else, he was being extremely unclear, and ought to clarify that. But if David was, indeed, acknowledging the use of the word "cotton" to mean a cotton cloth, prior to 1756, there is indeed "something new here." | Therefore, this quotation does not show that cotton, as a noun, | was used to describe a fabric in the 1600's. I assume from your name that English is probably your native language. Therefore, you must know that adjectives convert into nouns. This happens automatically: "I'd like to buy four yards of the cotton cloth." "Which cloth?" "The cotton." Thus, "automatic pistol" becomes "automatic," "microwave oven" becomes "microwave", and "cotton cloth" becomes "cotton." In the period we are discussing, people converted adjectives into nouns even more freely than we do today. Anyone who has read Shakespeare knows this: "all my pretties.... and every fair from fair declines." In fact, any adjective could be used as a noun because there was no distinction between adjectives and nouns in the English language at that time. Such distinctions did not arise until grammars were written. In the age we are talking about, there were no Englsih grammar books -- grammar was Latin, not English -- and people used words freely, without regard to whether they were adjectives or nouns. Everyone understood that when you said "the " you meant "the thing," just as they still do today. | Same goes for the second paragraph: "cotton linens" uses cotton | as an adjective. I shop a _lot_ of fabric stores, and have | never seen WORD WORD used to mean a blend of fabrics. I've | seen WORD/WORD (as in polyester/cotton), Then you haven't looked very closely. You will *usually* see it written as "cotton/linen", but it is also written "cotton-linen" or, simply, "cotton linen," especially if it is a hand-written, rather than printed, sign. Just as there was no formal grammar in the period we're discussing, there was no standardized spelling or puntuation, either. People spelled words the way the words sounded to them and used punctuation marks when they thought they needed them. No one who is familar with the English language of this period (as opposed to the English language you were taught in school) would attach any significance to the absence of a punctuation mark. ------------------------------ Date: 14 Apr 95 20:34:04 EDT From: Eddie Broneske <100527.1074@compuserve.com> Subject: Beauty and The Beast (The Musical) Did anyone catch the 1 hour special on the opening night of "Beauty and The Beast" the musical in Los Angeles on T.V. last night? The costumes for the Enchanted Objects were fabulous! My favorite: Lumiere. Really cool how they made his "hands" look light lit candles. I also liked the dresser with drawers that really opened. Any comments? Joan Broneske 100527.1074@Compuserve.com ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 14 Apr 1995 18:50:09 -0700 (PDT) From: Tracy Miller Subject: Re: Beauty and The Beast (The Musical) On 14 Apr 1995, Eddie Broneske wrote: > Did anyone catch the 1 hour special on the opening night of "Beauty and The > Beast" the musical in Los Angeles on T.V. last night? > Yeah, I saw that. It looked really cool, and I don't usally go for musicals too much! I'm going to try to see it if it comes to San Francisco. Info anyone? Tracy ------------------------------ Date: Mon, 17 Apr 95 7:45:49 EDT From: (David W. Rickman) Subject: Unfinished business Hello, It is Monday morning and I am back at work. I've had a chance to reread not just Mr. Wright's post, but all those that preceded it on this subject, both mine and others. By now, perhaps, Mr. Wright has reread all those posts as well and realizes where he went wrong. If not, Deb has already alerted him to his error. I was surprised to see that, after all my postings to this mailing list, Mr. Wright somehow came away with the belief that I was talking about the import of woolen cloth from India. His confusion would be laughable if it were not so frustrating. If the number of off-the-list messages, and Deb's on list remarks are any indication, many of you have been following this discussion a good deal more attentively. You know that the whole purpose of it has been to discuss a particular use of the word "cotton" in early records as a kind of coarse woolen cloth called "cotton" from its rough texture, which was raised by a process known as "cottoning." Bryan has supplied us with sources on this, dating to Henry VIII, and to Manchester, which, Mr. Wright, is in England. I won't answer the rest of Mr. Wright's errors, except to say that everything else he put in his posting was due to similar misreadings of these messages. Nor will I answer any of his personal remarks. I think Mr. Wright has embarassed himself sufficiently. Anything I could add would only be superfluous. David ------------------------------ Date: 15 Apr 95 17:34:55 EDT From: James A. Staples <74252.3202@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: a Kilt question .... Most of the answers I've seen deal with the ancient history of the garments' respective origins. The kilt is as modern as blue jeans. They were invented over a century ago, and are quite a bit different than they are today, but they're undeniably still blue jeans. In modern time, there is very little difference. One answer indicates that Scots kilts are tartan, and Irish kilts are solid. That only tends to be true. Many Scots wear solid kilts, some Ires wear patterned ones. And, have we all forgotten all of the other nationalities who commonly wear kilts? Welsh, Manx, Breton, and even Danes, Italians, Greeks, and Turks wear kilts. To be fair, though, most of these peoples now wear them primarily as folk costumes, for festive occasions. However, this at least tends to be true of the Irish as well. This is one modern difference, in fact. Nowadays, it is generally only the Scots who wear kilts as ordinary formal wear. There are certainly exceptions, though. I'm Welsh/Teutonic, and I wear a kilt as formal wear. I hate suit trousers, and don't even own a pair. These other historical answers are certainly very fascinating, though. I hope you are finding out everything you want to know. - Seamus Staples ------------------------------ Date: 15 Apr 95 17:36:07 EDT From: James A. Staples <74252.3202@compuserve.com> Subject: Re: a Kilt question ... True, the Irish didn't wear kilts as we know them until around 1600. The Scots (forever antangled in war with their ancient enemies, the Scots) were wearing them sooner. Like many other things (such as the bagpipes), the kilt was derived from Eastern Mediterranean styles, picked up by the Celts a REAL long time ago. To say that the Irish wore the stuff your post described is not to say that they didn't also wear other stuff, too. For many Celtic peoples, the kilt has long been the equivalent of jeans; just a common grunge-work garment. It wasn't really formalized, though, until about the 15th or 16th century. The important thing to me is: the kilt is not an ancient garment to which we return, it is a current garment, the wearing of which changes over time, just like trousers do in this culture. Even as recently as my life-time, the conventions for wearing a kilt suit have changed. For example, until recently, it was common to wear spats. Also, certain elements have been downplayed quite a bit (such as the plaide, a kind of cape worn over one shoulder). The nice thing is: saves on underwear (hubba, hubba). - McTony ------------------------------ From: Edward Wright Date: Mon, 17 Apr 95 11:47:04 TZ Subject: Finished business | You know that the whole purpose of it has been to discuss a | particular use of the word "cotton" in early records as a kind of coarse | woolen cloth called "cotton" from its rough texture, which was raised by a | process known as "cottoning." Bryan has supplied us with sources on this, | dating to Henry VIII, and to Manchester, which, Mr. Wright, is in England. Thank you, David. There is indeed, in your words, "something new here." This is the first time you have admitted that "cotton" as a woolen cloth was only "a particular use of the word 'cotton'". Previously, you have maintained "whenever we encounter the word "cotton" as a _textile_ [prior to 1757], it probably means a _woolen_ textile." You specifically asked for souces "if someone out there still thinks that 'cotton' could mean a _textile_ made from bombast (cotton wool) at any time from the 14th century to 1757." I never denied that some particular cloth made in Manchester during the reign of Henry VIII and called "cotton" might have been wool. I didn't need to. To disprove your sweeping generalization, all I had to do was show *one* example where the word "cotton" meant a textile made from bombast, anytime betwen 1300 and 1757. I did that, with examples of cotton cloth imported from India. Now, you were less than gracious in conceding this, hence my confusion -- I took your "nothing new here" to mean that you stuck to your original statements, rather than a denial that you ever believed any cloth called "cotton" could be wool, and only wool, prior to 1757. Well, if that hurt bird routine pleases you, so be it. I think I've made my point. ------------------------------ From: ccary@tiara.wpd.sgi.com (Christina Cary) Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 15:52:19 -0700 Subject: Costume: Rob Roy Hi Costume Makers, I saw "Rob Roy" this past weekend, and after joining this list, I paid special attention to the costuming. I know very little of the costumes of that time and place (Scotland, 1713), so all I can offer is the general opinion that they looked pretty good to me. The costumes for the bad guy, Englishman Archibald Cunningham, were wonderful. I'd wear them myself! Once he has some money, he starts dressing in deep lace cuffs, gilded brocade long jackets with gold buttons, elaborate vests, and curly wigs of various colors. No one else in the film dresses in such expensive garb. His pink outfit was especially gorgeous. Rob Roy and his men spend all their time in plaid kilts and raggedy, full shirts. (Liam Neeson looks fabulous in a skirt--um, I mean kilt--by the way.) I noticed that the men seemed to be wearing different plaids, I assume depending on their clan or family name. Jessica Lange had only a few changes of outfit, and being poor, her garments weren't very interesting. Fitted, lace-front vests of a sort, underblouses (were the necklines really that low?), and full long skirts. Plain fabrics. I'd be interested in comments from other list members who are more knowledgable about the clothing of that period and have seen Rob Roy. Please post! Christina ccary@tiara.wpd.sgi.com ------------------------------ From: LarryKin@aol.com Date: Mon, 17 Apr 1995 20:26:06 -0400 Subject: frock coat cir 1830 h-costume folks; I am making an 1830s frock coat from a draft: page 38... in H. I. Davis' "MEN'S GARMETS 1830- 1900 A guide to pattern cutting" I would like to know what kind of buttons to use. Did they use cloth covered buttons? Also what is the origin of the side edge with it's buttons and that large button at the top end of the side edge?Did the side edge evolve from some previous function? Or was it simply an ornament with no significance? thanks larry kincaid lkincaid@hooked.net ------------------------------ Date: Tue, 18 Apr 95 10:24:51 EDT From: (David W. Rickman) Subject: hiatus Hello, I'm not sure if this is of interest to anyone, but I switched over yesterday to digest format for this mailing list. Since I have been on this list almost daily for several weeks now, I thought I'd let you know why I won't be, at least for a time. I've enjoyed the discussions, and the people I've met, so please don't think I'm tiring of this list. It is just that I have several projects underway, including a book, and I need to cut back on outside activities. Besides, I think we'd all like to hear from someone other than me for awhile. Thanks again for the kind messages I've been getting recently, and please, if anyone wishes to contact me at any time off the list, I'd enjoy hearing from you. David drickman@state.de.us ------------------------------ From: cpecourt@mhv.net Date: Tue, 18 Apr 1995 10:58:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Homespun? Hello I have been meaning to ask this for some time. Homespun..what exactly is it? Whenever I read the word I think of a brown burlap-y type material but I do not think this is correct. Is it some type of wool? Question 2: Skirt material..I need some suggestions for skirt material to create a camp skirt. SOmething that I can wear with bodices and wear to set up camp at War etc. What would have been used? Wool? Even in the summer months? I would really like to make a skirt that looks more authentic than the ones that one can make cheaply with broadcloth. The only problem is cost. I cannot afford $5/yard for wool. Anyone know of how to get around this problem? Comment:: Rob Roy Saw it..loved it.. :-). ANyone know how to make those shirts that the Scottish men wore?? Jessica Lang's skirts were really neat..anyone want to fathom a guess on how they were pleated? Cartridge? Box?? Chantal ------------------------------ End of Volume 285 -----------------------