From: owner-h-costume-digest (H-Costume Digest) To: h-costume-digest@lunch.engr.sgi.com Subject: H-Costume Digest V4 #107 Reply-To: h-costume Sender: owner-h-costume-digest@lunch.engr.sgi.com Errors-To: owner-h-costume-digest@lunch.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk H-Costume Digest Thursday, May 2 1996 Volume 4, Number 107 Compilation copyright (C) 1996 Diane Barlow Close and Gretchen Miller Use in whole prohibited. Individual articles are the property of the author. Seek permission from that author before reprinting or quoting elsewhere. Important Addresses: Send submissions to: h-costume@lunch.engr.sgi.com (or reply to this message). Adds/drops/archives: majordomo@lunch.engr.sgi.com Real, live person: h-costume-request@andrew.cmu.edu Topics: Re: 1840's Bodices Re: Odd Historic Fads Re: Softening linen chopines and silliness RE: 1840's Bodices Re: chopines and silliness Re: 1840's Bodices Re: boots & partlets Re: chopines and silliness Kilts--Wrapping a Belted Plaid Re: chopines and silliness Medieval Irish Women's Costume 1840's Bodices Maternity Museum Display EI Corset Re: Waistlines Proper Posture (was waistlines) ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 13:58:55 -0700 (PDT) From: Shea Munroe Subject: Re: 1840's Bodices On Wed, 1 May 1996, Dale Loberger wrote: > I have run across someone who adamantly insists that in the 1840=12s, > women rarely wore front-closing bodices. As a matter of fact, she > forbids people to wear them on her site, which is a rural farm in 1845. > I want to disagree but have no concrete evidence right now that she is > wrong. For one thing, I wonder what they did if they were nursing? I > know that in the =9150=92s and =9130=92s there were plenty of front closi= ng > gowns, and I have seen several pictures of =9140=92s gowns that could clo= se > in the front but am just not sure. All of my =9140=92s patterns do close= in > the back, but as I said, the dilemma is what if you are nursing and > can=92t wear gowns that close in the back right now? Would it have been > so unusual that anyone who wore a front-closing gown would automatically > have been assumed to be a nursing mom? What do you folks know about > this? This woman believes that if it closes in the front, it must be > either a =9150=92s or a Civil War era gown, and I just find this hard to > believe. > > Susannah Eanes, Mantua Maker and Fine Tailoring Susannah: I have an 1830s dress pattern (based on an original) that is front closing. THAT is probably an exception. But, I have also seen dresses that have been dated to the 40s (Oregon Trail travelers) that were front-closing. A thought on rural area dressing - fashions were slower to reach the ladies unless they had some contact with seaports or a visitor brought them a magazine, fashion doll, or even a dress of the latest fashion or =2E.... Ball gowns continued to be laced up the back into the 60s. For some evidence check out a book that has been around for a long time - Calico Chronicles. It documents clothing wore by women emigrating to Texas. There are front-closing bodices shown. I know of a private collection of 1870-80 medical textbooks. I will check out your nursing question. And finally, are you familiar with Juanita Leish's "Who Wore What"? It is focused on the Civil War, but does feature some "before and after" the war photos. It has been extremely helpful to me in training new docents because it is the results of a photo study of period clothing. Shea Munroe, Fort Steilacoom Museum ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 May 96 16:52 From: joe@imr.usa.com (Joe Cook) Subject: Re: Odd Historic Fads > > anyone else know of clothing that was worn in history which was not what we > > would think of as "romantic" and maybe even seems a bit silly? >> Julie Adams > How about those huge chopine stilt-shoes worn by Venetian nobility? They > look like a hellish outgrowth of 70s platform shoes. True, but they were quite practical. Remember that we are talking about Venice which was, in the very least, WET. Chopines not only helped to keep your feet dry, but kept the ladies' dresses out of the muck. You are quite right, though. They DO like look like 70's shoes! Joe ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 19:02:51 -0400 From: humantch@tiac.net (Meredith Hoffman) Subject: Re: Softening linen At 8:54 PM 4/29/96, Judy Gerjuoy wrote: >I need help in speeding the softening process of linen. > >Does anyone know of anyway to speed up the softening process? We've got >some folks in clothes that just don't have enough drape yet & we don't >want to wait 5 years ... Stomp on it! Seriously. (Just use clean shoes.) Flail it. Pound it with smooth rocks on the sidewalk. Then boil it a lot. Or put it through the HOT cycle fifteen times. Then pound/stomp/flail some more. My magazines are all still packed up in boxes from moving, or I'd look up the reference for you, so all I can do is tell you that some time in the last ten years, in either Handwoven or Spinoff magazine, there was a great article on softening newly-woven linen that recommended exactly this kind of procedure. Specifically, the last suggestion (smooth rocks on the sidewalk). As I recall, the author also said that it was a great way to work off tension/anger/.... . In case I'm not remembering exactly, since this is such an extreme procedure, I suggest you try to track down the article and make sure of the details. Cheers, - --mh Meredith Hoffman/HumaniTech Ph: 508-746-4662 and 415-323-1559 53 Russell Street FAX: 508-746-4115 Plymouth MA 02360 email: humantch@tiac.net http://www.tiac.net/users/humantch ------------------------------ Date: 01 May 96 09:29:12 GMT From: dodom@fogelson.csf.edu (Odom Cheryl TEMPORARY) Subject: chopines and silliness I thought chopines were worn by Venetian whores, not by nobility. My favorite silliness is the chaperone of the Gothic period when someone had the great idea of wearing the face opening over their head thereby creating a very silly-looking fashion. Is any specific person credited with this act or did it happen one night at some wild party (kind of like the lampshade joke used today) ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 96 22:43:11 UT From: "Susan Carter" Subject: RE: 1840's Bodices Just a thought - wouldn't front or back closing relate also to whether or not the woman had someone, as in maid, to do up the back closure? Once again we encounter the question of economic level of the surviving garments and those able to follow the latest illustrated fashions as opposed to the general population. Su sucarter@msn.com ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 20:00:53 -0500 (CDT) From: The Espresso Pegasus! Subject: Re: chopines and silliness I find that the Plucking of all visible hair was a bit silly... (Though I guess it was supposed to make the brain look bigger, and therefore more intelligent) That and the Mile-Long Fingernails, of the Eastern Cultures, to donate the lack of necessity to do manual labour... Thae Fact that a super long fingernail would sell for 500$ is even more silly. And that The Poulaine (pointy medival shoe) was belived to grant luck to the wearer.... so long that they had to tie them to their calves. Anything for a winning Lottory Ticket. Ciao! Sarahj ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 18:13:27 -0700 From: jamie@home.net (Jamie Nikkel) Subject: Re: 1840's Bodices Susan Carter wrote: > > Just a thought - wouldn't front or back closing relate also to whether or not > the woman had someone, as in maid, to do up the back closure? Once again we > encounter the question of economic level of the surviving garments and those > able to follow the latest illustrated fashions as opposed to the general > population. > > Su > sucarter@msn.com Why would a woman have to have a maid to do up the back of her dress? If she couldn't do it herself, wouldn't her mother, sister, daughter, husband, or whoever else was around help her? If she was in service herself or a factory worker, she'd be rooming with other women who could help. Would it have been improper to ask your father or brother if there was no one else? In this case, I don't even think it would be necessary. I can do up my own back buttons on my replica dresses from around that period. Back lacings (on dresses and corsets) are harder but I've seen other women reenactors do up their own. Jamie Nikkel ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 01 May 1996 21:32:41 -0400 From: zorro@netdepot.com (David Marcus & Peggy Lamberson) Subject: Re: boots & partlets In email on Mon, 29 Apr 1996 12:12:10 GMT, David Brewer wrote: | In message Jon Bagguley writes: | > | > Styles of boots varied but a basic fairly plain boot that is either laced up | > the inside of the leg or fairly loose soft leather boot which is tighten by | > straps and buckles at several points is the norm for a riding boot. | | Wouldn't a boot side-laced up the inside be a little harsh on | the horses flanks? Ditto all manner of straps and buckles. | | I don't know because I don't ride. Anybody? | | -- | David Brewer | I know nothing about medieval boots, but I do ride horses. Unless the horse is _very_ round in the girth (most horses are more oval with their sides fairly straight and closer to being perpendicular to the ground) the lower part of the leg hangs fairly free. You want to keep your upper leg in contact in order to maintain balance, but the the lower leg generally only comes in contact with the horse when you are using it to give the horse signals about where and how to move. This would be true if the leg is slightly forward, fairly straight down (Western and dressage), or bent but underneath the body (as in English/hunt style). I would actually worry more about buckles et al getting caught up in the stirrup leathers. This could be a serious problem for someone trying to manuever in the saddle during combat. Peggy Lamberson ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 May 1996 02:29:21 GMT From: db-cos@westmore.demon.co.uk (David Brewer) Subject: Re: chopines and silliness In message <199605012329.QAA02601@sgi.sgi.com> dodom@fogelson.csf.edu (Odom Cheryl TEMPORARY) writes: > I thought chopines were worn by Venetian whores, not by nobility. ...same thing surely. (I mean, the courtesans wore the same as the upper classes, right?) > My favorite silliness is the chaperone of the Gothic period when > someone had the great idea of wearing the face opening over their > head thereby creating a very silly-looking fashion. Is any specific > person credited with this act or did it happen one night at some wild > party (kind of like the lampshade joke used today) ...and from there it went on to become ossified into ceremonial dress. I wouldn't be surprised if they still wore it around the Oxbridge colleges... - -- David Brewer ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 23:28:07 -0400 From: QLemery@aol.com Subject: Kilts--Wrapping a Belted Plaid Regarding "great kilts" originally known as "belted plaids". These were actually a wrapped length of tartan 6-8 yards long. The shirts were worn amost to the knees providing some protection from drafts and embarassments. You start the plaid at the front of the right leg, wrapping it around the body to the left. You hand-pleat extra material at the hips to allow for ease of movement. Once you are back to the front right leg, you bring the remaining material up over the left shoulder, leaving the right arm free for fighting (i.e., swords). The tartan was securred at the left shoulder by ties that were sewn into the shirt or for more formal occassions by a broach. Broaches were larger, bold jewelry--but nothing too fancy. Scots are very practical. The remaining tartan was left draped over the shoulder or brought around under the right arm and secured again at the waist. This stylve of wrapping allowed the tartan to be pulled up over head and shoulders in the cold/rain. Hope this helps! ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 23:31:43 -0400 (EDT) From: aleed Subject: Re: chopines and silliness I wish I had the book with me...but I once read a priceless condemnation of fourteenth century fashion by a contemporary, who rages about necklines being so low you can see armpits, and sleeves being so long that people are always tipping glasses over when they reach across the table. Drea ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 00:05:55 -0400 From: Sylphiana@aol.com Subject: Medieval Irish Women's Costume Does anyone out there know anything about what a Medieval Irish Woman would wear? There doesn't seem to be much information out there about this area of costume. During this time, most women throughout Europe wore a long tunic-type gown, but I don't know the specifics about Irish costume such as the fabrics used, colors, sleeve shape, and neckline. Did they use plaid or solid colors? Wool? Linen? Was the neckline the typical kind with the slit in the front? Sorry for this battery of questions, but I'm really at a loss for information here. :| Jennifer ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 00:30:51 -0400 From: BarbMVD@aol.com Subject: 1840's Bodices >. . in the 1840's, women rarely wore front-closing bodices. . . she forbids people to > wear them on her site . . rural farm in 1845 The operative word here is "rarely", thus it would not be appropriate to dress every woman in a front opening garment, however where everyday wear on a rural farm is generally practical, it should have it's place among costumed interpreters. The timeless workwear from the 17th to the 20th centuries consisted of bodice/sacque/jacket and petticoats (skirts), in varying style. On pg 44 of Joan Severa's book "Dressed for the Photographer" she states "Because of the suggestion of a front closure . . .it is probable that this dress was made and worn during the period when Mrs. Sophia Damon Smith was nursing her first child in 1845". From a 1991 exhibition catalog "Yester-Morn To Yester-Eve - In and Out of Fashion in the 19th Century" written by Nancy Rexford, she refers to a working sacque & petticoat, described as a loose, front-fastening bodice which flairs out over the skirt without any fitting at all. The one she describes is " . . made of printed brown cotton, entirely unlined, and fastened with hooks and eyes at the front. The fabric was cheap, washable, and cool in warm weather . . .The sleeves are loose enough to move in and roll up, but not so full to hang in the soup. If the long full skirt got in the way, it could be tucked up into its own waistband (revealing a shorter under-petticoat, colored, so as not to show the dirt)." In the Royal Ontario Museum is a brown figured silk dress about 1839 with the front of the bodice adapted for use by a nursing mother, and in the late 1840's a plaid taffeta with two bodices, one of them in the form of a jacket buttons down the front. In other words, when interpreting a historic site, please adopt the mind-set of the period and site you are re-creating, clothing could be and was adapted, always within a certain framework, to do the job. Barbara M. Delorey Circle of the Rose ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 May 1996 22:26:38 -0700 From: iteach@slip.net (Elizabeth Pruyn) Subject: Maternity Museum Display Hi all, About a year and a half ago I saw an article in a costume magazine (I think it was the Lady's Gallery in their Muesum section.) on a exhibit of Edwardian maternity fashions in the Dallas/Fort Worth area. Does anyone have a copy of that issue and can they post me the name of the Museum or better yet, did anyone catch the exhibit? Was there a catalog? Thanks alot. Yours, Elizabeth Elizabeth Pruyn iteach@slip.net Oakland, CA "If I had been around when Rubens was painting, I would have been revered as a fabulous model. Kate Moss? Well, she would have been the paint brush..." - Dawn French ------------------------------ Date: 02 May 96 09:16:00 GMT From: Mrs C S Yeldham Subject: EI Corset I said I would post the published details of Elizabeth I's corset. The following book covers all the effigies at Westminster Abbey, from Edward III to Chatham (19th century politician) mostly via Kings and Queens, so people interested in other periods might well be interested. The Charles II, William and Mary/Queen Anne ones look good (original clothes), tho thats not my period. The section on the corset was written before the modern conservators took a look at it, but does include a photograph from the last conservation of the effigy in the 1950s. I have not seen anything else written on the corset, but I believe Janet Arnold is planning an article. The Funeral Effigies of Westminster Abbey Ed Anthony Harvey and Richard Mortimer The Boydell Press 0-85115-368-2 1994 The Boydel Press is an imprint of Boydell & Brewer Inc PO Box 41026 Rochester New York 14604-4126 USA Caroline ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 08:31:56 -0400 From: Booboopies@aol.com Subject: Re: Waistlines Hi, Robert, It's been a long, long time! Long story, too. Good to see you on the Costume list. Regarding your comment: >I think that sometimes form and function combine. There may have been >times, perhaps, that a certain posture was called for and the women >would wear a smaller or tighter corset, etc. If you think that they >were as all functionally mind, well I have to disagree (and I believe >some men will also) after wearing an 18th century mens coat and >attempting to keep the proper posture of the day. It takes almost as >much work as being a soldier in the Honor Guard did. > There was most definitely a specific posture aspired to in the 18th century. Young girls, particularly among the better sort, were put into stays at a very early age, sometimes as early as 4 years old (G Washington's step daughter Patsy was given stays at that age), in order to conform the figure to the desired inverted conical shape. The shoulder straps were designed to bring the shoulder blades back until they nearly touched in the middle. The same was actually true of little boys of the upper classes. Gentlemen's and ladies' clothing of the period have very high armholes that are placed much further back than modern armholes. Wearing such garments with any ease at all could only be accomplished through years of training in how to stand and with the aid of fully-boned stays. 19th Century corsets would not achieve the same figure. 17th and 18th century stays, however, were designed for this express purpose. Working class stays were less exaggerated but were still achieved the appropriate silhouette. Even so, many day dresses have the elevated and "retroverted" armscye and tightened sleeves as formal gowns. Karen ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 2 May 1996 06:19:09 -0700 From: gwjchris@ix.netcom.com (Bill and Glenna Christen) Subject: Proper Posture (was waistlines) You wrote: >after wearing an 18th century mens coat and attempting to keep the >proper posture of the day. It takes almost as much work as being a >soldier in the Honor Guard did. Ah, but did you have your corset with the shoulder straps on and the shoes with the proper height of heels? (Gentlemen of, at least the later, 18th Century often wore corsets.) The corset and heels would have helped the posture somewhat, but it still took a fair amount of 'body awareness' if not real concentration to maintain a gentleman's (or a lady's) posture. It probably became became more or less second nature after a time. How you carried yourself was yet another indication of your social class at that time. Respectfully, Glenna Jo Christen gwjchris@ix.netcom.com ------------------------------ End of H-Costume Digest V4 #107 ******************************* A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to subscribe to that instead, send the command lines: unsubscribe h-costume-digest subscribe h-costume end in the body of a message to majordomo@lunch.engr.sgi.com. Thanks and enjoy the list!