From: Gretchen Miller <grm+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Date: Tue,  8 Aug 1995 19:53:59 -0400 (EDT)
Subject: H-Costume Digest, Volume 358, 8/8/95

The Historic Costume List Digest, Volume 358, August 8, 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:
Bumrolls and "french farthingales"
Primary sources--good, bad, and indifferent
On codpieces
ISO: h-costume web page
Class on dying at Pennsic
What to tell the beginner
1789 Poor clothing info
Knitted mail
Book Stop and Barnes and Nobles

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Wed, 2 Aug 95 04:07:30 -0400
From: kl94ag@badger.ac.BrockU.CA (Kathleen Leggat)
Subject: Re: What do you wish you knew?

>|         My research shows that the curved bodice was only during the Tudor
>| period, and not in every case.  I haven't found any evidence of curved
>| Elizabethan bodices.
>
>At the risk of being nitpicky, Elizabeth I would have been very 
>surprised to learn that she was not a Tudor.

        Don't most costumers divide the 16th century into Tudor (the
reign of Henry VIII), early Elizabethan and high Elizabethan?  As far as
I know, Henry VII isn't included in the costume division of "Tudor", yet
he obviously was one too! <g>

>|         As for what I would like to see in a 16th century costuming book:
>| backs of gowns, colours and fabrics, and proper under-dressing.  For
>| example, every source I have found has suggested that a bumroll was worn
>| instead of a Spanish farthingale (for middle class), for support under a
>| French farthingale, and alone in the early 17th century--never in
>| combination with a Spanish farthingale, although I have seen it worn that
>| way.
>
>I don't quite understand this.  Cotgrave's "Dictionary of the French 
>and English Tongues" (1611) described the "French Vardingale" as "the 
>kind of roll used by such women as wear no Vardingale".  Minsheu's 
>"Guide into Tongues" (1617) called it "a role to weare under womens 
>gownes."  These sources seems to confirm that, as you say, a bum roll 
>was worn without other support by the early 17th Century.  However, if 
>the French farthingale is a bum role, I'm not sure what to make of the 
>statement that "a bum roll was worn... for support under a French 
>farthingale."  This suggests that the French farthingale was something 
>else entirely.  I am curious as to what your sources actually say about this.
>
        This is interesting!  All the sources I have read, specify the
Spanish farthingale as the cone-shaped hoops, and the French farthingale
as the cartwheel hoops.  They refer to the stuffed bolster as a bumroll.
 Could you look up Vardingale for me, and see if they mean the cone or
the
cartwheel?  (And where *do* you find access to such wonderful primary
sources!)  Now...far as I know, the different shapes actually originated
in the countries they are named for.  It may be that the French
farthingale is a modern term because that's where it
originated...perhaps contemporaries didn't differentiate between them
with different names???  Any ideas?

>
>|         That's another thing...primary source materials.  I figure the only
>| good source is a primary source (okay, call me a snob!).
>
>You're a snob. :-)

        :-P

>
>Seriously, there are good primary sources and bad primary sources, just 
>as there are good secondary sources and bad secondary sources.  Both 
>primary and secondary sources have their own susceptibilities to bias 
>and error. It is important to understand the limitations of each.

        I'm aware of the limitations of secondary or tertiary sources,
but what are the limitations of primary sources?  Other than bad
spelling, bad handwriting and bad artwork?  I figured primary source
artwork was safe, since more emphasis was placed on accurate detailing
of costume than on
accurate portrayal of the face.  (Surely Jane Seymour wasn't *really*
that ugly!)  If you are dealing with a work by a popular artist of the
times, such as a Holbein or a Hilliard miniature...what are the
limitations?

        Hoping that no one is bored yet with the 16th century thread...

        Kathleen (Catriona)

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 95 03:32:49 CDT
From: bednarek@tidalwave.med.ge.com (Dennis Bednarek Mfg 4-6971 ~BHOSVWZ#097)
Subject: Re:  a codpiece and bra's

:> From: kl94ag@badger.ac.BrockU.CA (Kathleen Leggat)
:> >
:> >What the hey is a codpiece?
:> 
:>         Well...you know how young women stuff their bras to look more
:> genetically endowed...

Perhaps in modern times.  But to me during the age of the COD piece it
seems to me that the corsets and bodices made them look more flat
chested than a stuffed bra would make them look.

:> 
:>         A codpiece is a fabric pouch that contains the male genetalia. With
:> hose constructed of two seperate legs, you can see the need for this!  They
:> were (usually?  always?) constructed of a fabric that contrasted with the
:> fabric of the hose.  As with any fashion...at times this became a grotesque,
:> padded thing that jutted out in an inhuman fashion.  Take a good look at
:> Henry VIII's "skirts"...often you'll see one poking out much further than
:> nature would dictate.  (See...men had their silly vanities, too!)
:> 

When I last visited London Castle I overheard the Beefeater claiming
that some of cod paices also made it hard for some individuals to pass
through doorways.  Now that is vanity at it's heighest.  And here I
thaught those produsions on the armour were for support of the breast
plates before that trip.

dennis

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 95 03:39:22 CDT
From: bednarek@tidalwave.med.ge.com (Dennis Bednarek Mfg 4-6971 ~BHOSVWZ#097)
Subject: dictionary perhaps.

Repearedly people ask what thios is what that is on this list.  Even
some more than average knowledge individuals come up with these
questions here.  So here are a couple questions and suggestions.

Does H-Costum have a WEB page yet?  And if so could it be linked to a
dictionary of common sewing and historicial terms?  And if there is web
page also how do we access it?

dennis

------------------------------
From: Mrs C S Yeldham <csy20688@ggr.co.uk>
Subject: 16th Century thread
Date: 02 Aug 95 10:43:00 BST

Bored with the 16th century - what a terrible thought :)

The limitations on primary sources are similar to limitations on
secondary ones - bias in the writer (painter - what _did_ Anne of Cleves
look like?), after all, they had their
political/religious/family/cultural axes to grind as well; limitations
on their knowledge, resources; necessity to earn a living/fit in with
the social demands of their peers/family - anyway you get the idea.... 
In the phrase I've used before 'Read the Historian, Not the History'.

Turning to codpieces ...  They start as codflaps and are such in the
15th century, growing through the early 16th century, reaching their
peak (I choose my words carefully) by the end of Henry VIII, and then
shrink to a more reasonable size.  During the 1540's some of them are
described as being as large as a babies head!

On a technical point, I don't make mine so as to actually hold the male
genetalia, that sits behind the codpiece just as it did with a codflap -
all the boasting is done with padding!

Interesting discussion on farthingales.  Interesting point on using a
bumroll to hold the cartwheel farthingale (French? - did the French wear
them, I don't remember a picture ...) in position, but the two versions
I've seen made didn't need support, they held a good shape without it.

Caroline

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 07:26:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Judy Gerjuoy <jaelle@access.digex.net>
Subject: Re: What do you wish you knew?

[much snipping] 
>         I'm aware of the limitations of secondary or tertiary sources, but
> what are the limitations of primary sources?  Other than bad spelling, bad
> handwriting and bad artwork?  I figured primary source artwork was safe,
> since more emphasis was placed on accurate detailing of costume than on
> accurate portrayal of the face.  (Surely Jane Seymour wasn't *really* that
> ugly!)  If you are dealing with a work by a popular artist of the times,
> such as a Holbein or a Hilliard miniature...what are the limitations?

There are a number of problems with working with pictures. First, the
artist sometimes paints people in fanciful or alligorical clothes, not
clothes that people actually wore,

More importantly, painters frequently paint how the people want to be
seen, reflecting that period's ideals of beauty versus how they (and the
clothes) really looked.  There is a good book that discusses this called
SEING THROUGH CLOTHES, my copy is lent out, so I don't have the author's
name handy,

The example that comes immediately to mind from her book is a discussion
of Maja and the Nude Maja, where she points out that human bodies just
don't work that way - unsupported breasts would not be in that position.

Now, having said that, I agree that one should use primary sources, but
you should be careful.

jaelle

------------------------------
From: JREYNOLDS@VAX2.LUTON.AC.UK
Date: Wed, 2 AUG 95 13:48:21 BST
Subject: Accuracy of primary sources

Another thought to add to the thread on the accuracy of paintings as
primary sources:

 How accurate are today's magazines and fashion photo's - how
representative are they of the way women look and dress.  Especially
given the current trend of 'touching up' photos with airbrushing and
computer manipulation.

 Personally, I think that they are representative of only a very small
section of the population.  Given that - how accurate are paintings from
the past likely to be?

Just my 2p worth!

Jo

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 09:00:39 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Hope A. Greenberg" <hag@moose.uvm.edu>
Subject: Re: dictionary perhaps.

> Does H-Costum have a WEB page yet?  And if so could it be linked to a
> dictionary of common sewing and historicial terms?  And if there is web
> page also how do we access it?

Funny you should ask! I offered to start one up some months ago and
several folks chimed in with similar offers. Seeing that there were more
than enough to get it going I quietly bowed out. However, since I
haven't seen  a URL posted yet maybe everyone else reacted the same way
"Oh someone else is going to do it. Great!"

If anyone is, and you want some resources to link to, I've got another
crop of images from Godey's Lady's Book just about ready to go online.

-----------------
Hope Greenberg           Hope.Greenberg@uvm.edu
Academic Computing       http://moose.uvm.edu/~hag   
Univ. of Vermont         Come visit The Hall's latest addition:
Burlington, VT 05405       Godey's Lady's Book

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 09:03:38 -0400 (EDT)
From: Astrida E B Schaeffer <aes@christa.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: What do you wish you knew?

Regarding the safety of primary sources, especially pertaining to
paintings, I understand that there were pigments available to painters
which were not available to fabric dyers. Also (and unfortunately I
don't remember the specific details) a museum curator speaking to a
friend of mine told her that paintings were sometimes "updated" to
account for clothing changes through time, and that sometimes extraneous
details were added (in the particular case under discussion, a woman's
figure, originally the painter's patroness, had had symbols added to it
later to make her represent St. Katherine. The alterations included a
crown, which was not part of actual wear at the time! But unless the
observer is up on the symbols of the various saints, it would be easy to
assume that her 
altered get-up is representational of the fashions of the day.) The
curator went on to say that medeival and renaissance paintings are
simply chock-full of symbolism which, for the most part, escapes us
today. In other words, painters were often conveying more than an
account of someone's appearance and in fact could alter that appearance
to make way for the other message.

I wish I could remember the specific portrait the curator was referring
to. If it shakes loose from the cobwebs, I'll let you know, if you're
interested.

Astrida

***************************************************************************
Astrida Schaeffer  "All life on Earth is a fairy tale in which
    outlandish creatures pursue impossible lives"
      - Rutherford Platt

------------------------------
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 09:47:54 -0400 (EDT)
Date-warning: Date header was inserted by SNYCORVA.CORTLAND.EDU
From: bfitzgerald@SNYCORVA.CORTLAND.EDU (BT)
Subject: codpieces

After all this discussion on tights, hose, etc, and the use and purpose
of codpieces, I have a question - 

It has been indicated that codpieces were used because the hose were
made in 2 seaerate pieces and the cp. held the whole thing together, and
provided a place for the "family jewels."  How were the hose held
together/was modesty protected in the back?  I know it's a silly
question, but if they went to
all the trouble of a codpiece instead of just sewing them together in front...

eternally curious - 
bernadette

------------------------------
Subject: Re: What do you wish you knew? - Color
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 10:03:45 -0400
From: Elizabeth Lear <eliz@world.std.com>

Kathleen Leggat:
>Regarding the safety of primary sources, especially pertaining to 
>paintings, I understand that there were pigments available to painters 
>which were not available to fabric dyers. 

For those in the SCA, I was looking through the Pennsic class list
yesterday and I noticed Dame Elayne Courtnay (a subscriber here, and
member of the Order of the Laurel for dyeing) will be teaching a class
that covers exactly this:

Color for the Recreationist, or What Color Should I Wear Wednesday 8/16, 2pm

Selecting a period color for recreating clothing, from a dyer and
illuminator/painter's perspective.  Focuses on the difference between
dye and paint pigments available to the period artist.  You will see
color examples from different times and places, then learn how to
interpret the color availability to different times and places.  While
the class may sound technical it will be presented so that the novice
will not get lost and the experienced will walk away with new insights.

(I'd also like to add that Dame Elayne [Denise Cross] is the East
Kingdom Mistress of Arts and Sciences)

       ...eliz

------------------------------
From: KATHLEEN@ANSTEC.COM
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 10:58:19 EST
Subject: Re: Accuracy of primary sources

Accuracy of paintings depends on the painter and the subject. Portraits
of the past, as today, are usually meant to flatter the subject or
present the subject in a certain light. Genre paintings, on the other
hand, usually show life and people as they are. I use these for
researching artifacts and accessories -- what kind of pitchers and
drinking vessels did common people use? What kind of baskets were
common. That sort of thing, besides the dress of the people. 

Portraits are useful for determining certain common elements of a
particular time period. What is the line of the bodice? How stiff is it?
How heavy or filmy is the fabric? What do the headdresses look like?
What colors are represented? What kind of accessories are common? Did
the men wear shoes or boots? Were they clean-shaven or bearded? Looking
at a bunch of portraits from the same time period will give you that
commonality. Certainly, there is such variation in Italian Renaissance
portraiture, for instance,  that common elements might be hard to find.
But if you look at enough of them you begin to see common hairstyles
(usually loose, or elaborately braided); love of blonde hair; loose,
flowing clothing with lots of chemise or shirt showing, etc. It helps
you get the look right.

Beware of allegorical or religious paintings. They are usually more
fanciful in interpretation of dress and hair. Also, Byzantine and
Russian iconography is very stylized and sometimes difficult to
interpret, since it is both religious and subject to certain rigorous
artistic strictures.

Something that has helped me immensely in researching and making
historical clothing was the fact that I took art history courses in both
high school and college, then continued to study it on my own. I keep
photo albums of postcards of portraits and period artwork showing
clothing detail. I've been collecting these postcards for almost 25
years. Every time I go to a museum, I gather as many useful postcards as
I can and mount them in chronological order in the photo album (I'm
overflowing 2 large albums now). It's amazing how many times I've pulled
out those albums for research purposes.

Kathleen
kathleen@anstec.com

Kathleen
kathleen@anstec

------------------------------
From: "Hicks, Melissa" <MAH@cbr.smtpgate.amsa.gov.au>
Subject: Re: H-Costume Digest, Volume 355, 7/31/95
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 95 11:05:00 EST

>I am in the midst of writing a text for beginning late period

<  - snip - >
< To give you an idea of how basic the instructions needed to be: One chap
< came along to a sewing session & didn't know where to start, we gave him
< a needle & thread with instructions to put the thread through the eye of
< the needle. The needle was rather oversized as we thought that would
< make it easier for him. Half an hour later he returned in triumph asking
< what to do next, "make a knot in the thread" we told him. Naturally he
< knotted the thread around the eye of the needle! (well it makes sense if
< you've just spent half an hour threading it, you don't want the thread
< to come out again).

I am afraid my other half used to do exactly that.  I was never a wizz
at a sewing machine, but even I thought how to handsew was elementary. 
I could'nt figure out how he kept breaking the eyes from my needles
until I sat down and really watched him one day.  - True story -

Also, when I showed him how to thread a needle and knot the end so that
it made a loop, thus one action of the needle used two threads, he
thought this to be a fantastic revelation that would save him hours.

I'm afraid, when it comes to the way my dearest does ANYTHING I do not
assume he does it the same way I do.

Melissa.

<He persisted & shortly was as good with a needle & thread as those 
<of us who had been sewing for years, but the lack of the most basic
<instructions had been keeping him from learning for ages.

<For those who didn't need an elemntary sewing lesson I tried to make the
<section more interesting by illustrating sewing stitches used in the 10th
<century along with a note of where they had been found.

Jennifer

------------------------------
From: BPH3213@ACS.TAMU.EDU
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 10:58:24 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: 1789 Clothing for the Poor info

Hi
 The response to yesterday's post about clothing for the poor has been
pretty heavy, so I'll post this for everyone rather than send it
individually. 

The whole title is:
_Instructions for cutting out apparel for the poor: principally
inteneded for the assistance of the patroneses of Sunday schools, and
other charitable institutions, but useful in all families: containing
patterns, directions, and calculations whereby the most inexperienced
may readily buy the materials, cut out and value the cloathing of every
size without the least difficulty and with the greatest
exactness...[yes, it STILL goes on but I type too slow].

Sold by J Walter, London 1789.  about 85 pages, 14 plates (patterns for
caps and such).  24 cm.  Published for the use mainly of a school in
Herstford, county, England.  

It is available on microfilm through the Goldsmiths'-Kress Library of
Economic literature (microfilm series of EMMENCE value). It's No. 13970.
The following libraries do ILL, and have it on microfilm: TAMU (Texas
A&M, where I'm at) Auburn, U of Delaware, U of Chicago, U of Maryland. 
Originals a P_hotocopy versions are at:   Colonial Williamsburg
Foundation library, and Purdue.

Origianls are held at: U of Chicago, Smithsonian, McMaster Univ.         

Because the copy at TAMU is microfilm, it would be pricey for me to make
a photocopy for anyone. I'll check into a film duplicate though, it's
more economical, and you get several more books (but they aren't
arranged by topic so one may be on 18th century prison floorplans and
the next on clothes, etc). All are printed in or near to the 18th
century though!

Hope this helps.  
 Bryan
 P.S. There is also a book out there for the 1830's-40's similar to this
called "The Workman's Guide..." but as I'm researching 1774-1778 i
haven't looked at it. 

bph3213@acs.tamu.edu
Baloo@tamu.edu

------------------------------
From: "Mike O'Toole" <motoole@ucomnet.unibase.com>
Date:          Wed, 2 Aug 1995 10:52:07 +0000
Subject:       Re: Chain Mail Knitting

> > Date:          Wed, 02 Aug 1995 13:43:07 +0000
> > From:          "GILLIAN RICHARDS (02) 716 3712"
<Gillian.Richards@tafensw.edu.au>
> > Subject:       Chain Mail Knitting
> > To:            h-costume@andrew.cmu.edu
> > Priority:      normal

> I read an article about commuters on the Blue Mountains train (journey
to Sydney 
> approx. 1 1/2 hours then) and one guy spent three weeks of these trips
making 
> wire loops for Chain Mail for his Roleplaying character.

At the moment I am about half way finished my second mail hauberk.  

With different sized rings I have made all kinds of jewellry, ear rings,
keychain fobs etc.  

I don't actually think that the knitted type of mail was ever used in
Europe.  All of the pieces I have seen are of individual rings linked
together.

The knitted type of mail was used in Asia.

Mike O'Toole

------------------------------
From: "Joe Cook" <JOE@imr.usa.com>
Subject: Re: codpieces
Date: Wed, 02 Aug 1995 13:28:29

Greetings!
> 
> It has been indicated that codpieces were used because the hose were made in
> 2 seaerate pieces and the cp. held the whole thing together, and provided a
> place for the "family jewels."  

Well, yes and no.  It really depends upon the country and time period. 
In Italy, for instance, the hoze (or calze) were two seperate stockings
until some point in the middle of the 15th century.  Eventually, they
began to run higher and join.  The codpiece was originally used to help
join the two pieces together in front and keep in place the genetalia. 
The chemise or camicia fluffed out and hung over the front and the back.
 What many do not realize, however, is that the Italian male DID indeed
wear a type of undergarment known as the mutande or the braccia
underneath it all. Basically, the mutande is like a bikini brief.

> How were the hose held together

They really weren't in the beginning.  Rather, they were tied to the
doublet or farsetto.  Both the calze and farsetto had eyelettes through
which individual ties were passed.  Eventually, by the 1490's they did
join and the codpiece performed the same function as a modern day
zipper-fly.  It covered, but provided accessability.

> was modesty protected in the back?

Again, for the earlier model, the mutande and camicia covered the back. 
Apparently, in period, the men were not modest about this form of dress.
 In fact, it seemed rather standard that the mutande WOULD be visible. 
Originally, the calzi were made of bias-cut wool.  This gave them some
stretch, but not much.  Thus, to bend, sit, or do other things that
involved bending the knee, it wasn't uncommon to have to untie the calze
and let it hang down below the knee.  For instance, to sit down to
dinner, an Italian lord would almost as a matter of necessity have to
partially undress.  From this, we can assume, that their manner of dress
was not a modest concern. 
I hope this helped!

Joe Cook 

------------------------------

From: Edward Wright <edwright@microsoft.com>
Date: Wed,  2 Aug 95 10:14:15 TZ
Subject: Re: 12C Italian Male

|  It recommends Men's Garments by R.L. Davis same publisher, The Cut of Men's
| Clothes by Norah Waugh, London:Faber and Faber..  I know that this is a
| difficult book to get and if you are not a prof you cannot order it directly.
|  Barnes and Noble will order them for you at the cover cost. It will take 6
| weeks to get.  Book Stop hates this publisher and refuses to order from them,
| they goes as far as telling you that the book from this publisher are out of
| print.

Write down the name of the clerk who told you this and ask to speak to
his manager.  Book Stop *is* Barnes and Noble, so he clearly doesn't
know what he's talking about.

------------------------------
From: Psobaka@aol.com
Date: Wed, 2 Aug 1995 14:49:07 -0400
Subject: Re: codpieces

Bernadette,

To keep the hose up they were tied (yes tied ) with ribbons or some such
called points, to the mans doublet or jack.  The points also kept the
back from gapping.  In some areas later in period the back was sewn shut
(Italy comes to mind, in the Renissanse) Hope that clears up a little of
the fog <g>

Mieka

------------------------------ End of Volume 358 -----------------------