From: Gretchen Miller Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 18:50:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: H-Costume Digest, Volume 287, 4/21/95 The Historic Costume List Digest, Volume 287, 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: Questions and answer: about 1500s skirts and other things On fustian and linsey-wooley Question and answer: breast-binding Linen question and answers History of herringbone weave Thanks: spinning wheel answers Opinions of J Peterman Co ISO: Info on 18th C women's wigs Cotton history and questions ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: cpecourt@mhv.net Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 12:50:43 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Skirt Question Hello I was wondering if anyone knew hoe lower and middle class women pleated their skirts in the 1500's. Did both cartridge pleat their skirts or did they box type pleat it into a waistband? Also, was it common for the overskirt to be open in front, showing the underskirt in lower class women? On another note, can a bodice have different material in the front than the back? I have enough fabric to do the two front pieces for a bodice and was wondering if that was ever done? Thirdly, If anyone watched Rob Roy and noticed how Mary's bodices were made in regards to the shoulders * Yes, I did look!* I noticed that the shoulder seams came to her shoulderblades instead of meeting at the top of the shoulder. Was this done? Anyone know where I can get apattern for that?? Thanks! Chantal ps. Oh I nearly forgot.. Can anyone tell me how helpful the books "beyond the Pale" and "Cut my cote" are for making costumes? ------------------------------ From: Edward Wright Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 11:35:12 TZ Subject: Re: #1(2) H-Costume Digest, V... | >Linthicum calls fustian "a velure of cotton, or flax mixed with wool, | >so silky looking that it substituted for velvet." Linthicum documents | >the use of fustian for vestments, socks, waistcoats, aprons, doublets, | | I am some what confused by this quote, as no fustian that I have seen would | pass for velvet. It has already been mentioned that in the 16 and 17 | centuries "fustian" may be made of linen and cotton or linen and wool. In | the later periods these fabrics would be known as Fustian or Linsey | Woolsey/Jean cloth, or so I understand it. I have seen both original and | reproductions of these fabrics, and cannot understand how they could be | described as looking like velvet. The confusion may come from your assumption that fustian and linsey-woolsey are the same thing. This does not appear to have been the case. On page 81, Linthicum describes linsey-woolsey as "a loosely woven, plain cloth of linen and wool, an excellent example of which survives in the bed curtains of Anne Hathaway's chamber at Shottery." Perhaps because of its loose weave, linsey-woolsey was sometimes used as a metaphor for confused speech or throught. Compare this to the description of fustian above. J. Florio, in World of Wordes (1598), wrote of "a kind of trip velvet that they make women's saddles with called fustian of Naples." The masque Gesta Grayorum, presented for Queen Elizabeth at Gray's Inn in 1594, spoke against knights who "wear fustian for necessity [but] pretend to to wear the same for new fashion." Philip Gawdy wrote in 1597 of an unnapped fustian, which "will wear as softe and as well as velvet, or satin." In the reign of Edward IV, a sumptuary law forbade the wearing of fustian by any person with an income less than 40 shillings per year, so it must have had a (pardon the pun) rich appearance. ------------------------------ Date: 20 Apr 95 16:46:03 EDT From: Dee Wilson <100545.3105@compuserve.com> Subject: Breast binding My topic of research is the history of social norms as applied to domestic health and medicine for the period 1750 - 1960. I offer two points for discussion : 1. During my period of study it is the 1920s that made the flat chested look fashionable. There seems to be some disagreement amongst costume references about how common serious breast binding was during this period. Certainly very fashionable women did present a VERY flat front to the world. Doctors in the 1930s wrote about women having inverted nipples and difficulty with breast feeding due to compression 10 years earlier. However, it is very easy to collect material about the unusual. What evidence is there that the average middle class woman was binding in the 1920s for reasons of FASHION? Were there any long term harmful effects ? 2. There is also some evidence - I have some in my own records - of young adolescent girls being bound for reasons of ( I quote) The last comment is from a woman I interviewed who was forced to wear a crepe bandage at the age of 11 for a school Christmas play in the UK in 1950. The other references are 1918 and 1940s. Was this an element of prudery, or was it wanting ot keep girls young, or evidence of a rule bound society ( you may have breasts at 13, not at 11). What are the likely physiological and psychological effects? ( apart from the discomfort !) 3. Are there any other periods 1770 - 1960 where binding was an accepted norm ? I have citations for this and similar references. I welcome the informed comments from members of this fascinating news group Dee ------------------------------ From: BPH3213@ACS.TAMU.EDU Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 16:05:44 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Linen (uh-oh!) While going through a book on commerce and trade (written 1755+- and published in 1761) I found this entry: LINNEN or Linen. A name given to a sort of texture of interwoven threads, made of flax, hemp, or cotton: of which there are many sorts, particularly cambrics and muslins; the former being manufactured in several parts of Europe, especially Flanders and Germany; the latter in the East Indies. Because the author (Richard Rolt) calls linen a "texture" and mentions flax, hemp, and cotton, how safe is it to assume when I read "linnen" in a document of the period, it refers to a flax composed material rather than a type of weave? I know that "linen" became a generic term, but I didn't think it was in general use by the 1750's. Anyone have any insight on this? Bryan bph3213@acs.tamu.edu ------------------------------ From: KTRuby@aol.com Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 17:24:38 -0400 Subject: Herringbone Weave Can anyone tell me how far back herringbone weave textiles go? I have found some beautiful nubby raw silk herrinbone fabric I would like to use for a midieval tunic of some kind, but I wonder what time frame and what region this would be appropriate for. Any suggestions? Kathleen in California ------------------------------ From: Pam Rowe (Mrs. J. Pollard) Subject: no subject (file transmission) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 17:58:07 -0500 (CDT) Unto all the spinners who wrote to me, I'd like to thank everyone who responded to my inquiry about spinning wheels. I've learned alot as a result. The job is preventing me from replying as quickly as I'd like, but if I owe you a reply, please be patient and I will get back to you. I have obtained some of the publications which were suggested to me, and others are on the way via snail mail. I've subscribed to the weaving/spinning/dyeing list, and I'm learning from that, although I'm behind on reading the digests. I've ordered a drop spindle and some fleece from a source I found in the ads of a _Threads_ issue. I've made some local contacts who will help me, but I will probably still need help from this quarter in the future. As to the spinning wheel that began all this, I made a counter offer on the wheel, the offer was accepted, and soon I shall possess an Ashford Traditional. I'll let you all know how the learning of the craft goes! Thank you again for all your generous assistance. Pam --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ --<-{@ Pam Rowe (Rowanna in the SCA) | I speak for no one but myself!! prowe@us1.msrcnavo.navy.mil | Located in soggy south Mississippi!! ------------------------------ From: ccary@tiara.wpd.sgi.com (Christina Cary) Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 16:11:09 -0700 Subject: COSTUME: cottonlinenfriezewoolenstopit Hey Peeps, Enough of the cotton-woolen-frieze-fustian-linen stuff, PUH-LEEEZ. At least bicker offline. I don't even know what a frieze or fustian is (and I don't want to know!). Nevertheless I had a possible explanation as to why the words are used in ways that are sometimes confusing to us, now: People used them incorrectly. It happens now, you know. I don't know how many fabric shops I've been in where I asked for "real linen, made from linen fibers, from the flax plant," and the clerk has eagerly led me to a display of polyester-rayon fabrics. She didn't know the difference. If I ask for silk, I'll be pointed toward a display of "polyester silkies" with not a single real silk fiber on the bolt. I've also been bridal-gown shopping with many friends and I wish I had a penny for every clerk who swore the dress was silk when I KNEW it was polyester or acetate. People use terms incorrectly now, and I think they may well have back then, too. I've also noticed that my English friends say "wool" when they mean "knitting yarn." For example, "I bought some red cotton wool," which means, in American English, "I bought some red cotton yarn." I don't know what they say when they buy yarn made from sheepswool. Maybe I'll ask. Maybe I won't. Christina ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 21:12:16 -0700 (PDT) From: Heather Rose Jones Subject: Re: Experience w/J. Peterman? On Thu, 20 Apr 1995 KTRuby@aol.com wrote: > Has anyone purchased items from The J. Peterman Company (Lexington Kentucky)? > > I have received a couple catalogs, which includes some incredible items, many > of which can be used for costuming, or to be worn daily if you like > historical classic or ethnic classic clothing. They have copies of dresses & > hats from 30's to the 60's, men's jackets & coats from 30's & 40's and > before, incredible long, wide gored skirts, natural fabrics, even a belt with > a pewter Texas star buckle from 1865. There are shoes, jewelry, luggage, and > interesting items from all over the world. > The illustrations in the catalog are watercolor, and I have not purchased > anything yet myself. Has anyone had experience with this company, and if so, > was the quality worth the seemingly high prices? How was the service? I haven't purchased anything from them myself, although I enjoy reading the catalogs immensely. My take on them is that 90% of what they're selling is romance: they take fairly ordinary items of clothing and accessories, make up intriguing stories about them, and crank the price up by a level of magnitude or two. One of my tenants orders from them occasionally and I haven't heard her complain about the customer service (which, knowing her, I would have if there had been problems!). I've seen the stuff she gets -- well-made but not (in my opinion) worth the exaggerated prices. I'd say, get inspirations from their catalog and see if you can buy or make the items elsewhere. Heather Rose Jones ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Apr 1995 21:33:58 -0700 (PDT) From: Heather Rose Jones Subject: Re: Herringbone Weave On Thu, 20 Apr 1995 KTRuby@aol.com wrote: > Can anyone tell me how far back herringbone weave textiles go? I have found > some beautiful nubby raw silk herrinbone fabric I would like to use for a > midieval tunic of some kind, but I wonder what time frame and what region > this would be appropriate for. The twill weaves in general are found in some of the oldest European fabric finds (from the use of "medieval" I assume you're interested in Europe). There are Danish examples of herringbone and birds-eye type twills from at least as early as the Migration period (ca. AD 300-500) (see Hald "Ancient Danish Textiles..." for example). What I would seriously question is not the weave but the fiber. Silk was a luxury import in medieval Europe and the evidence suggests that what was prized (and therefore bought) was fine "silky-smooth" effects, not "nubby raw silk", which is popular today because _we_ prize things that mimic rough, hand-made textiles. Heather Rose Jones ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 22:33:54 PST From: Kat@grendal.rain.com (June Russell) Subject: 18th century wigs Does anyone know of any reasonably priced sources for 18th century female wigs? I'm interested in doing a 1750-60 recreation (not facsimile, so that may not be the right word) but want to have the proper accessories for it. All the things I have seen seem to need wigs (although I have long enough hair I could do some of it with my own). Thankyou. Kat Kateryne of Hindscroft ( June Russell ) pacifier.rain.com!grendal!kat kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 22:22:51 PST From: Kat@grendal.rain.com (June Russell) Subject: Re: Breast binding Dee wrote: :My topic of research is the history of social norms as applied to domestic :health and medicine for the period 1750 - 1960. :I offer two points for discussion : :1. During my period of study it is the 1920s that made the flat chested look :fashionable. There seems to be some disagreement amongst costume references :about how common serious breast binding was during this period. Certainly very :fashionable women did present a VERY flat front to the world. Doctors in the :1930s wrote about women having inverted nipples and difficulty with breast :feeding due to compression 10 years earlier. However, it is very easy to :collect material about the unusual. While I can't help with the 18th century stuff (but would personally like to hear anything I can about it) I can tell you that for some women in the 20's it was *very* serious business. My own mother (who took some of the share belonging to both her daughters) was a teen in the 20s and wouldn't leave the house without tight breastbinding. :What evidence is there that the average middle class woman was binding in the :1920s for reasons of FASHION? Were there any long term harmful effects ? Mom was definitely middle class, lower middle class farm girl, in fact. She seems to have take no visible harm and probably has done better in the Cooper's droop department than most of the people of the postcorset era. : There is also some evidence - I have some in my own records - of young :adolescent girls being bound for reasons of ( I quote) : : : :The last comment is from a woman I interviewed who was forced to wear a crepe :bandage at the age of 11 for a school Christmas play in the UK in 1950. The :other references are 1918 and 1940s. This sure sound like the same thing Mom talked about from her teenage years. It was also what she kept telling me was why I had to wear a bra. (Which my little 23 year old niece keeps telling her 40 plus year old aunt. Neither of them can tell when I am and when I am't. Fortunately, Cooper has yet to catch up with me.) Kat (who usually is a definite prude. Has something to do with the upbringing) Kateryne of Hindscroft ( June Russell ) pacifier.rain.com!grendal!kat kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! ------------------------------ Date: Fri, 21 Apr 1995 02:45:30 -0400 From: Beverly Roden Subject: Re: Herringbone Weave One of the Earliest examples of Herringbone is from (i think - the book's not here!) 600 AD. It was a scrap of waste fabric used to stopper a bottle. Herringbone is a variety of Twill Weave, and twill is QUITE early, so you are safe using it for medieval costuming. Whatcha wanna make? - Beverly Roden ac508@dayton.wright.edu (Alexis MacAlister - sca) ------------------------------ From: jennyb@pdd.3com.com Date: Fri, 21 Apr 95 08:11:40 BST Subject: Re: Herringbone Weave Herrigngbone weave was around in Northern Europe in the Iron Age on wools See Lise Bender Jorgensen's book Prehistoric textiles in Scandinavia & Northern Europe. I don't know whether it was used on silk aswell though, silk was often imported ready-woven so it's patterns followed different traditions. Jennifer ------------------------------ From: Mrs C S Yeldham Date: 21 Apr 95 10:39:00 BST Subject: 1500's women's wear Chantal has asked quite a difficult question. The 1500's is a period of fairly rapid change in women's clothes, so you have to be quite precise about what period you are talking about, as well as the class, where they live (country/London) etc. But here goes on a general answer: In the early 1500's every woman (except I suppose the poorest) wore a kirtle and a gown - both of these cover from shoulder to ground. The idea of having the gown front open to show the kirtle (or a decorative forepart) seems to come in with farthingales for the rich in the 1530's/40's. The skirt of the kirtle and the gown are flat at the front and pleated (growing in depth through the years) to the centre back - so not really box-pleated. In the second half of the century the kirtle becomes a skirt - and may be only the decorative forepart worn over farthingale and bumroll for the rich. The middleclass/lower class did wear bumrolls, but it would appear not farthingales. In the middle part of the century the middle-class would seem to wear a kirtle under a split front gown - and the gown can get much heavier and more formal with a high collar - more like the English Gown (which is another question entirely) - again the kirtle skirt is pleated to centre back in a waistband (the gown falls in box pleats from the shoulder). As middle/lower class I would only cartridge pleat a skirt right at the end of the century, with a substantial bumroll, to give a flat top to the skirt coming into the waist. You don't really want the volume of skirt needed for cartridge pleating earlier in the century, and without a bumroll to help keep it under control! I have never seen a bodice with different material on front and back. I haven't seen Rob Roy, I don't think it's been released over here - but Hunnisett shows thin shoulder pieces coming over the shoulders to join the top of the front of the gown (1520s and 30s), so the shoulder seam is practically in the armpit. I hope this helps! CAroline ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 20 Apr 95 15:28:06 PDT From: susanf@EERC.Berkeley.Edu (Susan Fatemi) Subject: Re: H-Costume Digest, Volume 284, 4/20/95 Re: the cotton chronicles I've been trying to catch up on 2 wks worth of digests, so I may have missed something. Also the discussion is getting a tad acrimonious. But at the risk of fanning flames I would like to offer a snippet of information and also a question for any textile hiistorians. A book on Indian Costumes indicates that cotton (fabric and plant) originated in India at least as far back as the Harrapan civilization (pre-Aryan). Jumping forward a couple of millenia, cotton fabric was exported to Rome in the 1st c. A.D. The English word cotton, like the French and Spanish words derive from the a Arabic "qatan" (as previously pointed out). I don't have any dates, but I would imagine that cotton, like paper, went to Europe via the Arab/Islamic world. (I haven't done any serious research on this. Has anyone else??) In modern Persian, the word for cotton is pronounced like the French. The word for linen,however, (and the implication being a coarser weave) is "katohn", like the Arabic. Now this is modern usage, and does not necessarily reflect Medieval usage. Also, someone stated that Egyptian cotton was used by the Ancient Egyptians. I don't think this is true. My understanding is that linen was pretty much the only worthwhile fibre available to the Ancient ones. Wool was available, and used (I believe) as ornamental trim (because it takes dyes so much better than linen) and also in theiir wigs. Cotton (the plant) was introduced into Egypt in Islamic times. If anyone has more precise information, please share, but nicely. Questions: 1. When did cotton become commonly used in China? 2. I know that non-woolen fabric were woven in the New World pre-Conquest. What fibers were used? If cotton was used (as I thought I read somewhere) where did it come from?? Susan Fatemi susanf@eerc.berkeley.edu ------------------------------ End of Volume 287 -----------------------