luiseach@aol.com[30,0]CSuX:hair question.... Subject: Re: Re: H-COST: Hair question.... From: Luiseach@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 01:01:06 EDT -Poster: Luiseach@aol.com In a message dated 06/30/99 07:21:33 PM, Elysant wrote: <> That's a good description of the process. How well it works depends on the length and texture of your hair. My grandmother put my hair into rag curls once. My hair is naturally curly and when she took the rags out I had an Afro. Not a popular style for little blond girls in the late 50s. She ended up french braiding my hair because she couldn't get a comb through it. Lucinda gerekr@aol.com[64,1]CSuX:h-cost suggestion on janet... Subject: H-COST: Re: H-COST Suggestion on Janet... From: Gerekr@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 02:39:40 EDT -Poster: Gerekr@aol.com Apologies if I've already sent this to the list, 8-0!! >>Date: 06/13 3:46 PM >>... >>-Poster: Joan M Jurancich >> >>... This would be especially useful for the _Waffen-und Kostumkunde_ >>articles. I have not been able, so far, to find a library that >>has the magazine; for ILL through the California State Library, >>I need to give them the location information. If anyone *has* >>found a library with the magazine, could you please either post >>it to the list or send it to me privately ... >she has to tell them where? huh??? This statement about JOAN having to tell the LIBRARY where to look for the journal is just COMPLETELY weird! I have never heard of an inter-library loan operation that worked like that... and I've worked in libraries for over 20 years! anyway, I spent much too much time at work today, 8-), figuring out where this (Waffen und Kostumkunde) is located. The info I could find does NOT say what years each of these institutions holds, however... I've re-sorted the list into free suppliers, suppliers for $$, and non-suppliers. Note that Harvard has designated itself a "supplier for $$" - $20 minimum the last I heard. Even the non-suppliers may have this available for walk-ins to use. state library CA CAM - Los Angeles Co Museum of Art - supplier (no $!) CT UCW - University of Conn - supplier DC SMI - Smithsonian - supplier LA LRU - Tulane - supplier NC NOC - UNIV OF N CAROLINA, CHAPEL HILL - supplier AB UAB - UNIV OF ALBERTA CANADA SUPPLIER ON UWO - UNIV OF WESTERN ONTARIO CANADA SUPPLIER KY KUK - University of Kentucky, Lexington $, supplier MA HLS - Harvard - $, SUPPLIER NY BUF - SUNY AT BUFFALO - $, SUPPLIER NY NYP - NEW YORK PUB LIBR RES LIBR $, supplier PA PAU - UNIV OF PENNSYLVANIA , PHILADELPHIA - $, SUPPLIER CT yrb - WADSWORTH ATHENEUM, AUERBACH LIBR , Hartford - nonsupplier DC dlc - Library of Congress - NONSUPPLIER MA bmf - Museum of Fine Arts, Boston - NONSUPPLIER EU ava - V&A - nonsupplier edn - (Danish) - nonsupplier xu@ - (another Danish) - nonsupplier That's 18 known locations: 7 free suppliers, 5 suppliers requiring $$ ... Hope this helps, & Good luck! Patsy/Chimene john and/or barbara bailey [22,2]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: John and/or Barbara Bailey Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 06:06:14 -0500 -Poster: John and/or Barbara Bailey "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne" >The problem is that my hair, which I like VERY much, is butt-length, hip-length if I braid it, which I often do. >While this is great for period hairstyles, I'm having real trouble finding a mundane hairstyle I like Have you considered or tried the Gibson Girl-type top of the head chignon? You can leave the non-chignon-ed hair quite puffy and soft, and since the pile of hair is on top of your head, rather than on the back, gravity has a little more trouble taking over. You'll still need way more hairpins than I do (I only need about four to hold) but I've played volleyball with my hair (mid-back length and wavy) in this style, and it held 'til I pulled the pins out. Barbara mikkee peyerk [13,3]CSuX:elizabethan hats Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan Hats From: Mikkee Peyerk Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 20:06:20 -Poster: Mikkee Peyerk Many thanks to all who have answered my question. Hopefully I can find one I like and make it. Mikkee "The real secret to patience is to find something to do in the meantime." -Unknown mikkee peyerk [21,4]CSuX:hair question.... Subject: Re: H-COST: Hair question.... From: Mikkee Peyerk Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 20:13:50 -Poster: Mikkee Peyerk I was against her using any modern setting lotion, but >she sometimes used sugar water to help keep the curls in. (Just dampened >the hair slightly with it). > I have very fine hair, which was much longer when I was in gradeschool, but in order to keep curls in my hair, my mother used Knox gelatin. I'm not sure if she did something special to it or not, but it worked. Mikkee "The real secret to patience is to find something to do in the meantime." -Unknown pulliam@acadia.net (deborah pulliam)[15,5]CSuX:elizabethan caps Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan caps From: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 09:10:05 -0500 -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <> Minor correction: a toque actually is a brimless hat or cap (made popular in this century by Queen Mary). The caps you're describing are known as flat caps or Tudor caps. Deborah holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [80,6]CSuX:ot - yahoo/geocites webpages - you don t own your content! Subject: H-COST: OT - Yahoo/Geocites webpages - you don't own your content! From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 15:19:35 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" I got passed this on from another list. I thought anyone with web pages on these servers should know about this. Apologies to anyone else. Yahoo's Lawyers Take Over the Asylum How much will your free Geocities site actually cost you if they "legally" steal your content? By David "Spam Me and Die" Fiedler Sigh. They tried to slip one past us all. Before I go any further with this, I want you to know that I'm truly sad to be writing this particular column today. I'm not one of those people who run around saying "Oh, sure, I know Jerry Yang", but I have met him on a number of occasions and he's always struck me as a Nice Guy. Yesterday, Yahoo! took the first major steps in bringing millions of GeoCities users into its own network, after buying Geocities in January. Unfortunately, yesterday was also the day that Yahoo! quietly unveiled some new terms in its agreement with users of Yahoo! and Geocities properties...terms that effectively mean you're giving Yahoo! perpetual rights to any content you submit to them! Paragraph 8 is the one we're concerned about here: By submitting Content to any Yahoo property, you automatically grant, or warrant that the owner of such Content has expressly granted, Yahoo the royalty-free, perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive and fully sublicensable right and license to use, reproduce, modify, adapt, publish, translate, create derivative works from, distribute, perform and display such Content (in whole or part) world-wide and/or to incorporate it in other works in any form, media, or technology now known or later developed. This is one of the most horrific scenarios one could possibly imagine, but in a way I'm glad that such a high-profile company like Yahoo! was the first to try this little scam. Every time I've visited one of the sites that give you free Web space, I've read the Terms and Conditions carefully, because I was afraid that someone would try this eventually. This way, we can make enough of an outcry that perhaps we can shame Yahoo! into withdrawing the entire concept, as well as set a precedent that will effectively stop anyone else from doing the same thing. We all know that nobody would visit any site on the Web if it wasn't for the content there. In the past, sites like Geocities would be content to sell ads on their site -- which contain your content -- and the deal was that you'd get free Web space. Now apparently they want to sneak your content into their pockets as well. Well, we're not going to let them do that, are we? I am indebted to Mark Welch, who runs Web Site Banner Ads Digest among other things, for pointing this out to his subscribers, of which I am one. Mark is calling for a boycott of Yahoo! and Geocities until they mend their ways. Let's hope they see things the right way and fix this fast. Personally, I think Yahoo! is a great directory, and I use it all the time. But I'm going to give them a pass until they come to their senses. After all, if Yahoo! didn't have all our content to point to, where would they be in the first place? -- D. Fiedler Evening Update: It's Worse! I've been doing a bit of research, and it seems our friends at Yahoo/Geocities are not alone. Other sites that are doing this include @Home, Tripod, and Suite101. Because of the widespread nature of this problem, I've set up a personal outside site to act as a clearinghouse for information at http://dragonflames.com. Please go there for further updates on the boycott. Thanks! David Fiedler is Editor-in-Chief of WebDeveloper.com, and his opinions are definitely his own. Last modified: Tue Jun 29 21:35:26 EDT 1999 Taken from http://www.webdeveloper.com/refresh/refresh_062999.html cdepner26@webtv.net (harold hensley)[14,7]CSuX:elizabethan caps Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan caps From: CDepner26@webtv.net (Harold Hensley) Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 09:00:51 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: CDepner26@webtv.net (Harold Hensley) Deborah Are you referring to the Marie Stuart Cap? I have been researching this cap (the toque) for quiet some time now and all my sources referred to it as a toque. I'll be happy to share my sources with you if you like. I would also be interested in knowing your sources as I am eager to learn anything new having to do with the Elizabethan era. Thanks Melissa Depner margo anderson [17,8]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: Margo Anderson Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 08:54:40 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson > >Have you considered or tried the Gibson Girl-type top of the >head chignon? > >You can leave the non-chignon-ed hair quite puffy and soft, >and since the pile of hair is on top of your head, But how do you get it to stay on top of your head? I like this style, but whenever I try to wear it, the bun slides to the back, or worse, to one side. Margo grm files [8,9]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: RE: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: "GRM Files" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 13:27:59 -0400 -Poster: "GRM Files" To keep the Gibson-y thing at the top of my head, I just pull the front part of the hair further through the elastic than the rest of the hair, before "bunning." That gives a kind of anchor to the pouf. [19,10]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: Date: Thu, 1 Jul 99 14:08:49 -0000 -Poster: Hello Arianne and other longhairs, You need The Long Hair Site! . There is also an e-mail discussion list, which can be reached through the site. One source of styles is a series of videotapes by Jim Butchee who is a long hair stylist in Texas. There is a phone number on the tape - 1-800-803-7220. There are several places that cater to long hair, though they are few and far between. The Long Hair Site has links to sources. Good luck! -Carol Kocian kat & kent [22,11]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: Kat & Kent Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 11:08:06 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent Margo Anderson wrote: > > > >Have you considered or tried the Gibson Girl-type top of the > >head chignon? > > > >You can leave the non-chignon-ed hair quite puffy and soft, > >and since the pile of hair is on top of your head, > > But how do you get it to stay on top of your head? I like this style, > but whenever I try to wear it, the bun slides to the back, or worse, > to one side. > > Margo My hair only comes down mid-back and it's really baby fine but I find that two or three strategically placed long bobby pins do the trick. Kat marsha s. mclean [26,12]CSuX:elizabethan, again Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan, again From: "Marsha S. McLean" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 14:19:38 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: "Marsha S. McLean" - -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" I guess I should have been more specific. Would it be appropriate to have embriodered gaurds, like the Elanora of Toledo gown, on a linen merchant class gown? Andrea Indeed, the middle class are notable for their attempts to dress like the upper classes. This seems to me like the perfect way to do that. Can't afford a silk gown? Well, you CAN afford the heavily embriodered guards. If't were me, I'd make MY guards even more elaborate than any wealthy woman's. Now we know there is little evidence of everyday dress, much less middle class every day dress, so this is conjecture based on human nature. Look at women today; they can't have the Gucci suit, so they buy the scarf. One possible influencing factor; is this for a Puritan? If so, plain is bettter. Marsha penny ladnier [20,13]CSuX:ot: really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: REALLY LONG hair From: "Penny Ladnier" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 14:59:46 -0400 -Poster: "Penny Ladnier" You might want to try some of the hairstyles on this article I posted http://www.costumegallery.com/Frank_Leslie/April_1864/Ladies_Hairstyles.htm Directions are on the page. All of the hairstyles require long hair or hair pieces. One style states that you need a yard of hair. The styles are very pretty and can be adapted to current fashion. My seven year old daughter has knee-length hair. It is fine and curly. She loves these hairstyles. So I am going to try them out on her. There is a list for people with long hair. Carol Kocian is on it. Maybe she can post the directions for getting on the list. I'd like to get on that list too. Later...Penny http://www.costumegallery.com snowfire@mail.snet.net[28,14]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: snowfire@mail.snet.net Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 12:17:42 -0400 -Poster: snowfire@mail.snet.net -Poster: Elysant Per my mother - she used to do Edwardian and Gibson Girl styles for people. Use hair pins instead of bobby pins, or braid it and then wind it into the bun, or twist the hair round and roundm then coil the twist into a bun. Also you can use a large "pony-tail clip" which is a rigid circular clip which snaps shut around the base of the ponytail, and has "teeth" which interlace in the middle of the circle - enhances the grip to keep the ponytail in place. (She's in Britain - don't know what's available where you are sorry!) Also use combs. Using combs can increase the pouffiness of the hair around the bun, without loosening it for the same effect and will eliminate slippage. To insert the combs, you slide them up the hair wrong side out, then flip the comb over while in the hair, and push it down firmly into place. This seats it and allows the hair to pouf below and in front of the comb, as well as keeps the comb in place. You could place a few of them around the sides and back of the bun, to achieve the Gibson Girl (or "Chelsea Bun") effect. Elysant kat [19,15]CSuX:fabric sources Subject: H-COST: fabric sources From: kat Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 16:28:17 -0400 -Poster: kat I am looking for a source (wholesale or retail) for wool satin. Also: I was also told there is a company in England making a wool superfine, cochineal dyed, that is back ordered for nearly a year. I saw/handled some of the wool, and it looks too 'hot' for cochineal -- almost edging on the neon. I don't know if this is the real deal and the other cochineal fabrics I have seen are a poorer red, or if this is a commercial dye that supposedly looks like cochineal. the fabric is for a British officer's coat. Kat Hargus owner, Making Time www.makingtime.com connect@aol.com[18,16]CSuX:fabric sources Subject: Re: H-COST: fabric sources From: CONNECT@aol.com Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 17:51:15 EDT -Poster: CONNECT@aol.com In a message dated 7/1/99 4:49:15 PM, kat@janrix.com writes: << -Poster: kat I am looking for a source (wholesale or retail) for wool satin. >> Designer Fabric Outlet in Toronto, Ontario has wool satin for $25 CAN a yard, if memory serves. Yours, Pattie Rayl janice dallas [20,17]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: Janice Dallas Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 17:27:45 -0400 -Poster: Janice Dallas I also have very long hair which I often put up with the Mei Fa sticks or another brand that is sturdier. Before I started using sticks, I had a "Do" which balanced out the weight of my hair on my head so my neck wouldn't be strained. I'd braid my hair at the nape, heading up to the crown of my head, or a little forward. Then I'd fasten it with a large barrette,and divide it into two braids, fastening the ends with bands (optional) these two braids would be carried forward to each side and then back, above each ear, to have their tails end tucked under the nape/beginning of the whole braid. Fasten in place with pins and you're done. This worked for a friend with slippery blonde hair past her buttocks as well but we had to do more with her ends, sort of a back spiral arrangement. -- Janice Dallas JaniceDals@MediaOne.net "Just so, the girl has beauty, virtue, wit..." amanda reeves [13,18]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: "Amanda Reeves" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 18:51:57 -0500 -Poster: "Amanda Reeves" One thing caught my attention on Penny's hair site...: Cover it all with an invisible net. What a simple cure all! Amanda j,k,s&a baird [17,19]CSuX:fabric sources Subject: Re: H-COST: fabric sources From: "J,K,S&A Baird" Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 19:13:37 -0500 -Poster: "J,K,S&A Baird" At 04:28 PM 7/1/99 -0400, you wrote: > >-Poster: kat > >I am looking for a source (wholesale or retail) for wool satin. > > I have found wool satin at G Street Fabrics (1-800-333-9191), at Treadle Yard Goods in St. Paul, MN, and at other fine fabric stores. Wholesale--I don't know. The stuff I've seen is made in Italy. It is gorgeous! Kim penny ladnier [15,20]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: "Penny Ladnier" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 20:50:16 -0400 -Poster: "Penny Ladnier" I too have hip length very straight and fine hair. Everything falls out of my hair. When I did the Cyber Cinderella thing last year, the hair stylists "Up-do Queens" guaranteed me they could make my hair stay up. They used this hair spray called Vavoom by Matrix. On the canister it is not called hair spray but Freezing Spray. Believe me it did hold my hair in place even after I took all the pins out. The stylists told me I would have to wash my hair twice with baking soda to get the spray out. Later...Penny http://www.costumegallery.com snowfire@mail.snet.net[34,21]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: snowfire@mail.snet.net Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 21:00:47 -0400 -Poster: snowfire@mail.snet.net -Poster: Elysant See that's the problem I used to have too! Fine silky hair, everything falls out - no matter what! Ribbons, bobby pins, spirals, whatever! (Unless you glue it or starch it in place or something)! ;-) I'm glad Im not alone anyway! With my veils, I use those long pins with the big pearl tops to pin the ruddy thing to my head! sigh! I wonder what they did in the olden days! Elysant On Thu, 1 Jul 1999, "Penny Ladnier" wrote: > >-Poster: "Penny Ladnier" > >I too have hip length very straight and fine hair. Everything falls out of >my hair. When I did the Cyber Cinderella thing last year, the hair stylists >"Up-do Queens" guaranteed me they could make my hair stay up. They used >this hair spray called Vavoom by Matrix. On the canister it is not called >hair spray but Freezing Spray. Believe me it did hold my hair in place even >after I took all the pins out. The stylists told me I would have to wash my >hair twice with baking soda to get the spray out. > >Later...Penny >http://www.costumegallery.com > > > caroline dechert [27,22]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: Caroline Dechert Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 20:11:00 -Poster: Caroline Dechert >See that's the problem I used to have too! Fine silky hair, everything falls >out - no matter what! Ribbons, bobby pins, spirals, whatever! (Unless you >glue it or starch it in place or something)! ;-) I'm glad Im not alone >anyway! > >Elysant I, too, have very long, straight, things-fall-out-of-it hair. I've managed by using roller pins (like very long bobby pins), and by arranging my hair so that it is always either braided or twisted in a coil before putting it up. The pins won't slip from braided hair, and can't slip far through a twisted coil. Just be careful to keep the weight centered, or the neck strain and headaches can be frightful. Caroline ---Caroline Dechert enilorac@voicenet.com / Carodec@aol.com / caroline@agcsys.com "How fleeting are all human passions compared with the massive continuity of ducks." Dorothy Sayers, Gaudy_Night kevin + mara riley [15,23]CSuX:ot: mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: OT: mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: Kevin + Mara Riley Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 21:33:10 -0400 -Poster: Kevin + Mara Riley My favorite fast hairdo thing is to braid my hair in back, then wind it around a bandana or ribbon, then wind the ends of the ribbon a) under the resulting bundle, then b) up over the bundle and tie in a knot or bow. Quick, easy, and it stays out of the way. My hair reaches to my waistline in back, and it's not terribly thick, but it's not too thin either. I don't know how much difference an extra six or ten inches would make. Cheers, Mara Kevin + Mara Riley Home Page http://www.radix.net/~lindo mary denise smith [10,24]CSuX:looking for beth mcmahon Subject: H-COST: Looking for Beth McMahon From: Mary Denise Smith Date: Thu, 01 Jul 1999 19:32:49 -0600 -Poster: Mary Denise Smith Will Beth McMahon please email me privately? Thanks, Mary Denise Smith j. gregory [84,25]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: "J. Gregory" Date: Thu, 1 Jul 1999 22:32:41 -0400 -Poster: "J. Gregory" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BEC411.A18E53A0 Hello! Does anyone know where we could find information on the clothing of sea = captains, sailors or middle class men in Elizabethan England? Any = suggestions of books or websites would be most welcome. Or perhaps a = movie where the costuming was good? (Yes, I know these are very few, = and VERY far between!) We have found many portraits of Drake dressed to impress the queen, but = I'm certain he didn't wear all of that when he was busily ravaging = Spanish shipping lanes. So what did real people wear day-to-day? My = husband has found the lack of information quite frustrating. :) (He = HATES ruffs!) Thanks! J. Gregory =3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D "We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could produce the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the Internet, we know this is not true." -Robert Wilensky, University of = California =3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D ------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BEC411.A18E53A0
Hello!
 
Does anyone know where we could find = information=20 on the clothing of sea captains, sailors or middle class men in = Elizabethan=20 England?  Any suggestions of books or websites would be most = welcome. =20 Or perhaps a movie where the costuming was good?  (Yes, I know = these are=20 very few, and VERY far between!)
 
We have found many portraits of = Drake dressed to=20 impress the queen, but I'm certain he didn't wear all of that when he = was busily=20 ravaging Spanish shipping lanes.  So what did real people wear=20 day-to-day?  My husband has found the lack of information quite=20 frustrating.  :)  (He HATES ruffs!)
 
Thanks!
J.=20 Gregory
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-= =3D-=3D
"We've=20 heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards = could
 produce the=20 Complete Works of Shakespeare.  Now, thanks to = the
 Internet, we=20 know this is not=20 true."
         &nbs= p;            = ;            = =20 -Robert Wilensky, University of=20 California
=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D= -=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-=3D-= =3D-=3D-=3D
------=_NextPart_000_0024_01BEC411.A18E53A0-- david s. mallinak [18,26]CSuX:polish gowns Subject: Re: H-COST: Polish gowns From: "David S. Mallinak" Date: Wed, 30 Jun 1999 00:06:32 -0700 -Poster: "David S. Mallinak" Megan McHugh wrote: > -Poster: "Megan McHugh" > > Is there a place in the catalog where I can order it? I missed the exhibit, > but would very much like to order a copy of the catalog. Thanks for the > info you sent. This evening I saw in Olsson in Washington DC a copy of the Winged Horseman catalog in the "Sale / Ends" rack. DSM connect@aol.com[23,27]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: CONNECT@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 00:47:50 EDT -Poster: CONNECT@aol.com In a message dated 7/1/99 10:31:17 PM, brand@sun-spot.com writes: << Hello! Does anyone know where we could find information on the clothing of sea captains, sailors or middle class men in Elizabethan England? Any suggestions of books or websites would be most welcome. Or perhaps a movie where the costuming was good? (Yes, I know these are very few, and VERY far between!) >> Have you checked out the Merry Rose website? It's a tiny bit before Elizabethan, but it's Tudor, if that's ok. Additionally, Herbert Norris's book on Tudor Costume and Fashion has a sailor outfit drawn in it. Where he gets his source is a mystery tho. ;( Yours, Pattie Rayl gerekr@aol.com[34,28]CSuX:article about class and fabric Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Article about Class and Fabric From: Gerekr@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 01:50:35 EDT -Poster: Gerekr@aol.com On 6/30/99 5:02 AM h-costume@indra.com wrote: > There was a brief mention a couple of days ago about an article = >(perhaps book?) >discussing the relationship between fabric and design and social class, = >with regards >to interviews. It seemed to be in something called New Woman? Did = >anyone know to what this reference referred? Sounds fascinating... > > Thanks. Cindy Brown This is in John Molloy's "New Women's Dress for Success", copyright about 1997; check your local public library. Based on his 20 years consulting experience with women executives and the companies which employ them; mostly anecdotal evidence, but very interesting. I think what I mentioned in that post was that Molloy is very convinced that "upper class" colors and fabrics, and a couple of other indicators, send crystal-clear, if usually unconscious, signals to observers of all classes (i.e., blue-collars recognize upper class signals just as definitely as vice versa). An easy read, too -- entertainingly written, fairly short; includes specific exercises and strategies for up-class-ing yourself, if you're in a position to want or need to. Clear examples of (allegedly) how lower-class signals can short-circuit promotion opportunities, etc. Chimene kate m bunting [9,29]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: H-COST: re:Elizabethan sailors From: "KATE M BUNTING" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 09:15:56 +0100 -Poster: "KATE M BUNTING" Pattie means "Mary Rose". The URL is http://www.maryrose.org/ Kate Bunting Library, University of Derby pulliam@acadia.net (deborah pulliam)[19,30]CSuX:wool satin Subject: H-COST: wool satin From: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 08:07:53 -0500 -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <> I would check with Kathleen Smithat Textile Reproductions. She no longer advertises, but is still in business and selling wonderful fabrics. I saw some lovely 100 percent wool jeans when I was last there. ph 413 296 4437 (fax 413 296 0036.) <> The British "red coats" were always dyed with madder, so it should be a hot red, not a cochineal/purplish red. pulliam@acadia.net (deborah pulliam)[22,31]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 08:08:00 -0500 -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <> Very little, if anything, has been published on this, unfortunately. The large book called The Elizabethan Age (sorry, I've forgotten the publisher, but much of the information came from the Folger ) has quite a lot of graphic material in it that might be useful. About 20 years ago, someone published a short series on sailors' clothing in The Mariner's Mirror; check a good citation index. Actually, the frontispiece of the 20c Mariner's Mirror is an original engraving from the 16c one, and includes about six sailors (all but one is wearing a ruff, by the way.) Deborah kat & kent [8,32]CSuX:long hair & veils Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair & veils From: Kat & Kent Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 08:46:03 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent Re veils & fine hair...I use either a circlet to hold it in place or a barbette and pin the veil to the barbette. Kat kat & kent [22,33]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: Kat & Kent Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 08:48:23 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent Caroline Dechert wrote: > > I, too, have very long, straight, things-fall-out-of-it hair. I've > managed by using roller pins (like very long bobby pins), and by > arranging my hair so that it is always either braided or twisted > in a coil before putting it up. The pins won't slip from braided > hair, and can't slip far through a twisted coil. > > Just be careful to keep the weight centered, or the neck strain > and headaches can be frightful. Most of the time I wear a banana clip or ponytail but I agree that braiding or twisting the hair as you put it into a bun makes the bobby pins work *much* better...you can also get away with those lovely pins that look like chopsticks (my mom has been known to use a pencil when she's busy working! ). Kat kat [15,34]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: kat Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 09:16:13 -0400 -Poster: kat A friend of mine was recently talking with some members of the 42nd at a local re-enactment. He is seriously considering adopting a Scots persona. Several members of the 42nd recommended a hunting kilt as a way to get started. This is evidently an unpleated kilt -- i.e. fabric just wrapped around the lower body. Has anyone else ever heard of such a beast? If so, can you direct me to any reference or time period? Kat Hargus owner, Making Time www.makingtime.com j,k,s&a baird [12,35]CSuX:long hair Subject: H-COST: long hair From: "J,K,S&A Baird" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 09:01:17 -0500 -Poster: "J,K,S&A Baird" Maybe everyone already knows this, but until I tried it, I couldn't keep my hair up for more than a few minutes: when using bobby pins, cross each pin with another to make an X shape. One pin holds the other one in. Even my thick hair can be held by only 4 pins this way, whereas previously 20 didn't do the job. Kim holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [10,36]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: RE: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 16:04:09 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Tough not a "proper" costume source there is a film called "Seven Seas to Calais" which is about Drake. It shows the costumes worn by sailors when out at sea and in port. might be worth a look if you can get hold of a copy. Rachel sarah toney [40,37]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: Sarah Toney Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 07:24:11 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney I have HEARD of this, but I don't have any resources... the explaination I heard was that it took less time to make unpleated, and since they were "abused", why spend scads of time on a piece of clothing that is just going to be destroyed. Sarah --- kat wrote: > > -Poster: kat > > A friend of mine was recently talking with some > members of the 42nd at a > local re-enactment. He is seriously considering > adopting a Scots persona. > Several members of the 42nd recommended a hunting > kilt as a way to get > started. This is evidently an unpleated kilt -- i.e. > fabric just wrapped > around the lower body. Has anyone else ever heard of > such a beast? If so, > can you direct me to any reference or time period? > > Kat Hargus > owner, Making Time > www.makingtime.com > > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com aleed [32,38]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: aleed Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 10:48:08 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: aleed The Kentwell website has pictures of a common sailor & ships navigator, as well as other Elizabethan gentry & folk, at http://www2.shef.ac.uk/misc/personal/cs1jwh/kentwell/index.html#pictures They're good. Drea On Thu, 1 Jul 1999, J. Gregory wrote: > Hello! > > Does anyone know where we could find information on the clothing of sea captains, sailors or middle class men in Elizabethan England? Any suggestions of books or websites would be most welcome. Or perhaps a movie where the costuming was good? (Yes, I know these are very few, and VERY far between!) > > We have found many portraits of Drake dressed to impress the queen, but I'm certain he didn't wear all of that when he was busily ravaging Spanish shipping lanes. So what did real people wear day-to-day? My husband has found the lack of information quite frustrating. :) (He HATES ruffs!) > > Thanks! > J. Gregory > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > "We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could > produce the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the > Internet, we know this is not true." > -Robert Wilensky, University of California > =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [15,39]CSuX:kentwell Subject: H-COST: Kentwell From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 17:04:53 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" I was actually at Kentwell on Saturday, the year this time is 1520. I have to say that I was very disappointed, so much so that I have scrapped plans to participate next year (1578). The costumes are not as authentic as you would think, elastic was spotted along with bluetack holding signs up! It was evident that some people had really worked hard on their costumes but there were plenty more that let the whole thing down. Having had some of the descriptions from Kentwell on how to make these costumes they seem to be well researched but I would need to go through some more before I pronounced a judgement on them. For anyone planning to visit Kentwell the entry cost of £11.25 quite frankly wasn't justified. Rachel [12,40]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: Date: Fri, 2 Jul 99 11:24:35 -0000 -Poster: Someone pointed out that she could not find the info on subscribing to the Long Hair discussion list. Go to , to the section called "info", and scroll to the bottom of that page. I hope to see some of you on the list! We can talk about long hair and what type of clothes look best with it. :) -Carol Kocian r.l. shep [18,41]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "R.L. Shep" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 08:38:49 -0700 -Poster: "R.L. Shep" Please don't send messages as *attachments*... I refuse to open them That is what *cut and paste* was invented for. Thank you ~!~ R.L.Shep http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks ---------- >From: kat >To: "'Historic Costume list'" >Subject: H-COST: Hunting kilt? >Date: Fri, Jul 2, 1999, 6:16 AM > appin1@aol.com[12,42]CSuX:h-costume-digest v4 #399 Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: h-costume-digest V4 #399 From: Appin1@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 12:34:02 EDT -Poster: Appin1@aol.com One thing I noticed years ago in buying men's jeans (I almost never wore women's because they weren't long enough)was that Levi's jeans had the skinniest legs of all jeans. Lee Riders made jeans for people with real legs rather than chicken legs. Look carefully at people wearing Levi's & you'll see that most of them have skinny legs. And back then, I had great legs, not heavy, just long. Kathleen Norvell appin1@aol.com[15,43]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: Appin1@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 13:11:10 EDT -Poster: Appin1@aol.com Penny -- I can't tell you the date for tight lacing, but I can tell you about one of the ill effects. I ued to work in a medical library in Philadelphia & there was a medical museum in the same building (the Mutter Museum). The museum exhibited a female skeleton from the late 19th century, which had very constricted bottom ribs from tight lacing. The rest of the ribs had been thrust upward and slightly forward. The rib cage seemed to be more rounded than a normal ribcage. Hope this information helps. Kathleen Norvell margo anderson [22,44]CSuX:elizabethan, again Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan, again From: Margo Anderson Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 09:04:23 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson >One possible influencing factor; is this for a Puritan? If so, plain is >bettter. Not neccesarily. Take a look at portraits of wealthy merchant class men, many of whom were Puritans, and you'll see very rich fabrics, furs, fine linen, and lots of trim. They tended to the all black and nothing but texture look. The totally plain black suit with the large linen collor is from the next century, despite what you see at Ren Faires. they do it there for theatrical purposes. When I made my costume for Alice Montague, the Queen's Silkwoman, I used all black in linen, embroidered silk, organza, and silk-look trims, and it was very effective. Margo Anderson "One Tough Costumer" appin1@aol.com[21,45]CSuX:ivanhoe and rowena Subject: Re: H-COST: Ivanhoe and Rowena From: Appin1@aol.com Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 12:45:00 EDT -Poster: Appin1@aol.com Henk -- I have seen several versions of "Ivanhoe" and found that the costumes from the 1980(?) Anthony Andrews version were the best. They came from Bermans & Nathans, a big costume house in England (now Angels & Nathans, I believe) and as far as I could tell, came from Vol. II of the Herbert Norris books. Not the most reliable, but better than many others available bak then. I saw the latest version, albeit late at night and the costumes were dreadful (must have come from the same crew that outfitted the "Brother Cadfael" series). Not only that, but all the Saxons were blonde and looked alike! How much research rsearch would have made those costumes decent? Frankly, not much. I'm a semi-pro costumer & I could have done better. Kathleen Norvell "How many costumes do you think I can pack?" joel thompson [15,46]CSuX:hunting kilt Subject: H-COST: Re: Hunting kilt From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 14:25:01 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" Are you perhaps referring to a great kilt. I only know of 2 types of kilts, the modern kilt, where the pleats are sewn into place and it generally looks like a skirt (forgive me!), and the old great kilt, which is indeed pleated and wrapped around the body and belted, with the excess drawn up and pinned on the shoulder. This is very easy to do. Start with about 4-5 yards of heavy wool. Gauge this by the size of the man. Any muted color will do. It should be no less that 48" wide. Open it up, and spread it on the ground...go to one end, and begin making pleats the entire width of the fabric, about 4'' wide. Keep doing this across the length of the material. You can leave about 2-3 feet at the far end unpleated. Take a leather belt and pass it under the kilt, making sure that it buckles the way you want it to. Now lay down on the kilt, with the bottom edge about knee level and the pleated side on your left side. Wrap the pleated side of the kilt over you first, then the other side. That means left side first, then right side. Pull the belt up and buckle it. Stand up. You may need someone to help you with the rest of this. Arrange the top of the material so that the tops of the corners meet on the left shoulder. You will need a large brooch to secure the fabric, but if you don't have this, a leather thong will do. Arrange the folds of fabric to lay properly. It is common to use these natural "pouches" to hold a variety of things, and it does stay put. Have someone adjust the length, it should be right at knee level all around. I gave directions for fastening the kilt on the left side. It can also be done on the right. It depends on what the person is doing. A right handed sword fighter wants it to be fastened on the left, but I have seen a bagpiper with it done on the right. It interferred with his pipes when it was on the left side. It's worth mentioning here that the clan tartans as we know them did not come into existence until the late 17th century or so. Prior to that, different localities produced different plaids, but it definitely wasn't an identifier. So that means that you are free to choose whatever you like, including solids. Just remember to keep it muted and rather faded looking. If you research the modern tartans, almost all of them have 3 different versions, regular, dress, and hunting, and also sometimes ancient. Another feature of this kilt is that when it was time to sleep, all one had to do was unwrap it and it became a blanket. "Braveheart" has some excellent examples of this type of kilt. There are also some good publications available. Hope this is what you were looking for! Alianora VMAA jean waddie [37,47]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: Jean Waddie Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 20:01:20 +0100 -Poster: Jean Waddie I haven't been to try and find a website myself, but last year(I think) there was a group sailed a reconstruction of The Matthew from Bristol to Newfoundland. I think it was for the anniversary of -erm- the finding of Newfoundland?? Anyway, they did the whole thing in costume, with period food and equipment, apart from safety items like radio and navigation. There was a TV programme about it and it looked very good. You could try to find something on that. Jean >Hello! > >Does anyone know where we could find information on the clothing of sea >captains, sailors or middle class men in Elizabethan England? Any suggestions >of books or websites would be most welcome. Or perhaps a movie where the >costuming was good? (Yes, I know these are very few, and VERY far between!) > >We have found many portraits of Drake dressed to impress the queen, but I'm >certain he didn't wear all of that when he was busily ravaging Spanish shipping >lanes. So what did real people wear day-to-day? My husband has found the lack >of information quite frustrating. :) (He HATES ruffs!) > >Thanks! >J. Gregory >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >"We've heard that a million monkeys at a million keyboards could > produce the Complete Works of Shakespeare. Now, thanks to the > Internet, we know this is not true." > -Robert Wilensky, University of California >=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= -- Jean Waddie danielle nunn [23,48]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: Danielle Nunn Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 13:19:26 -0400 -Poster: Danielle Nunn Greetings, >I too have hip length very straight and fine hair. Everything falls out >of my hair...Believe me it did hold my hair in place even after I took >all the pins out. I don't have hair that long but, I do have that problem. I have "baby hair" it is so fine, strait, and slippery NOTHING stays in it. For my prom (many years ago) my hairdress used "ICE mist" by Joico. He used a ton of it but it worked. He sculpted the front of my hair into a really neat wave and put the back in a chignon. I stayed in place throughout the entire evening. The only downside was - he said not to put pressure on my hair or it could BREAK! It also took 10 washes to get all the junk out (yes I was counting). But it kept EVERYTHING in place. Cheers, Danielle cindy abel [15,49]CSuX:elizabethan, again Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan, again From: "Cindy Abel" Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 15:56:32 +0000 -Poster: "Cindy Abel" And even owning anything black now is high maintanance--I've a Susan Bristol black cotton jacket with Tudorish look machine embroidery and while it is washable it is a total dust, cat hair, etc magnet and has to be hand vacuumed and cleared of everything before ironing and wearing if I wash it with anything else. I'm sure those who wore all that black had servants who did nothing but care for all that black, to say nothing of the high costs of the dyes and the care it took in dyeing, least one destroy the cloth from a dye with too strong a mordant or other chemical. kathryn l. herb [14,50]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: "Kathryn L. Herb" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 17:54:34 EDT -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" Ill effects of tight lacing? Try eating something hot in a rush after lacing. Fortunately my brother knew to loosen the laces slooooowly after I hit the ground in a dead faint. Kay kayherb@juno.com Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. john and/or barbara bailey [23,51]CSuX:ot:mundane hair styles for really long hair Subject: Re: H-COST:OT:mundane hair styles for REALLY LONG hair From: John and/or Barbara Bailey Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 17:36:57 -0500 -Poster: John and/or Barbara Bailey At 08:54 7/1/99 -0700, Margo Anderson wrote: >But how do you get it to stay on top of your head? I like this style, but >whenever I try to wear it, the bun slides to the back, or worse, to one side. > >Margo Make a ponytail far to the front of your head; forward of the ear to ear line (do the bend at the waist and brush it all forward thing.) Mine is usually only about three inches back of my front center hairline. Use a ponytail rubberband-I've never managed to make the style stay without the rubberband as an anchor. I run the bobbie-pins, or at least a couple of them, through the hair that's gathered into the band between the band and the scalp. Make the coil flat and wide, not high. You don't want a handle, you want a cow-pattie shape. (Sorry, best analogy I can come up with 8-) ) Barbara lisa leong [11,52]CSuX:long hair Subject: Re: H-COST: LONG hair From: Lisa Leong Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 13:00:12 -1000 -Poster: Lisa Leong > For my prom (many years ago) my hairdress used "ICE mist" by Joico. I have to second the suggestion of ICE mist. The stuff is tough. However, it does give you the shellac-ed look. annora megan & david schmidt [31,53]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: Megan & David Schmidt Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 20:01:01 -0500 -Poster: Megan & David Schmidt That's great that your brother thought to undo the laces slowly. I am a nurse and NOVICE costumer. It really would never have occured to me that doing it slowly would be an issue. Of course, when I get ladies out of bed the first time after they have had a baby, we do that VERY SLOWLY. Makes sense! Megan Kathryn L. Herb wrote: > -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" > > Ill effects of tight lacing? Try eating something hot in a rush after > lacing. Fortunately my brother knew to loosen the laces slooooowly after > I hit the ground in a dead faint. > > Kay > kayherb@juno.com > > Get the Internet just the way you want it. > Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! > Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. gary stephens [30,54]CSuX:gold embroidery thread Subject: H-COST: gold embroidery thread From: Gary Stephens Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 21:45:30 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Gary Stephens Greetings Embroiderers! I have come into a limited, but excellent, stock of 24k gold purl in two sizes and jaceron in two sizes, embroidery threads. As any of you who have embroidered with gold will know, these threads are expensive and difficult to acquire, Kreinik being the only manufacturer. I can easily attest to the fact the threads I have in my possession are of equal, if not superior, quality to Kreinik bullion. I am offering some of these threads for sale. Normal retail on gold thread runs between $20-$30CDN/strand, which is approximately 30" long. For those who are interested I'm offering strands for $10.00 ea., plus PST and shipping, payable by cheque, money order or Visa to Five Rivers Chapmanry. Please be sure to send along full mailing address and expiry date, if applicable. Please reply off-list to the above e-mail address. Crass commercial message off. Lorina -------------------------------------- Five Rivers Chapmanry ~ purveyors of quality hand-crafted cooperage, period furniture & fine hand-sewn garments ~ e-mail: lgsteph@golden.net ~ http://web.idirect.com/~canuck/stephens/stephen.html kathryn l. herb [20,55]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: "Kathryn L. Herb" Date: Fri, 02 Jul 1999 22:09:48 EDT -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" Somewhere along the line I passed on the information about slow unlacing to him and my mom, since they often experienced my panic to get ready for an event when I was visiting. Never expected to need them to use it!! They knew that I'd do bodily harm if they cut all that lucet cord after I'd worked so hard on it! The sudden rearrangement of internal body parts could do some harm. Kay kayherb@juno.com Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. christopher ballis [7,56]CSuX:hunting kilt Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunting kilt From: "Christopher Ballis" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 15:17:30 +1000 -Poster: "Christopher Ballis" Ach! It woold be a dissssasssterrrrr if ye went -ahuntin' an' noothin' werrrrr kilt. joseph & christine [42,57]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joseph & Christine" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 06:54:54 -0400 -Poster: "Joseph & Christine" Kat, Joel and list, What you are describing sounds like a plaid (pronounced "played"). From the Osprey book "Highland Clansman 1689-1746" (not the best of references, but all I have at hand: "...the belted plaid, traditionally comprising six double ells of tartan material. At this point is should be pointed out that a Scots ell measured only 37 in. and that a double ell was twice the usual width, not twice the length." "Even so, six yards of material is quite a length, but Stewart of Garth quite explicitly states that it was folded in half to double the thickness before putting it on." Most modern Scot interpreters that I have seen do not fold their plaids in half before pleating them (I note that Joel does not do so), but having done so, I find it works much better, and is considerably warmer. I take a couple more exceptions to Joel's description (not that there is necessarily a right way or wrong way to put on a bunch of cloth ) - all the period paintings I've seen show the bottom of the plaid should come to about a hand span above the knee. And rather than trying to pass the belt under the plaid after it's folded, I find it much easier to lay the belt out first, and do the pleating over it. As to needing help adjusting it - wot's th' matter, laddie? Kin ye no dress yersel'? I'd be very interested to know of any documentation of clan tartans prior to the 19th C. Scots revival courtesy of Queen Victoria. Prior to that, I was under the impression that tartans had no association with a given clan, but rather to a given locale (close, but not quite), and that the "ancient" and "hunting" tartans are pure fabrication based on what somebody thought they "might" have looked like. But if this is not so, I would gladly learn better. Regards, Joseph Ruckman ninni pettersson [26,58]CSuX:fabric sources Subject: Re: H-COST: fabric sources From: Ninni Pettersson Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 13:27:01 +0100 -Poster: Ninni Pettersson At 21.28 +0100 99-07-01, kat wrote: >I was also told there is a company in England making a wool superfine, >cochineal dyed, that is back ordered for nearly a year. I saw/handled some >of the wool, and it looks too 'hot' for cochineal -- almost edging on the >neon. I don't know if this is the real deal and the other cochineal fabrics >I have seen are a poorer red, or if this is a commercial dye that >supposedly looks like cochineal. the fabric is for a British officer's >coat. I of course don't know anything about this specific fabric, but my aunt and I dyed some handspun wool with cochineal about 10 years ago (It was supposed to become a sweater. It never did and now spends a shameful existence in one of my cupboards :-) and some of that turned out *very* vivid indeed, and it still is! I don't remember what we used as mordant, alun (whatever that is called in English) probably. /Ninni (Terribly behind on things e-maily, not to mention that promised webpage with my Tudor Doll! The photos are done, but they're still waiting to be developed . . .) henk t jong [32,59]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan sailors From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 17:11:52 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi List, Jean wrote: > I haven't been to try and find a website myself, but last year(I think) > there was a group sailed a reconstruction of The Matthew from Bristol to > Newfoundland. I think it was for the anniversary of -erm- the finding > of Newfoundland?? Anyway, they did the whole thing in costume, with > period food and equipment, apart from safety items like radio and > navigation. There was a TV programme about it and it looked very good. > You could try to find something on that. This was in 1997. In 1497 father and son Cabot, John and Sebastian, sailed the Matthew to what's now Canada and founded Newfoundland. I saw the documentary and although the ship was a very beautiful copy, the costumes didn't stuck me as particularly authentic, especially when they wore yellow plastic 'oilskins' over them ;-) Anyway, they were a century earlier than was asked, Henk joel thompson [62,60]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 11:31:06 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" Hi Joe & listers: You've brought up some interesting points. "...the belted plaid, traditionally comprising six double ells of tartan material. At this point is should be pointed out that a Scots ell measured only 37 in. and that a double ell was twice the usual width, not twice the length." First, if a Scots ell is 37 in. long, is it also 37 in. wide? "Even so, six yards of material is quite a length, but Stewart of Garth quite explicitly states that it was folded in half to double the thickness before putting it on."Most modern Scot interpreters that I have seen do not fold their plaids in half before pleating them (I note that Joel does not do so), but having done so, I find it works much better, and is considerably warmer. Is this folded in half lengthwise? If not, how do you get it up on the shoulder? If so, how do you get it ALL up on the shoulder? That seems like a lot of fabric to fasten on the shoulder. Also, once this is pleated around the body, you will be *plenty* warm! We had 3 guys swordfighting in great kilts, and never had a case of the thing falling apart, slipping, or anything else. They all reported that this was the most comfortable garb that they had ever worn and are now devoted to it! Note: I recommended that they each purchase 4-5 yards for their kilts. This seems to be ampleplenty for the average size man. Joel, (my husband) is 6'3", and around 270lb. He needs a tad more. ....should come to about a hand span above the knee. Yes, you're right. Thanks for clarifying that. And rather than trying to pass the belt under the plaid after it's folded, I find it much easier to lay the belt out first, and do the pleating over it. As to needing help adjusting it - wot's th' matter, laddie? Kin ye no dress yersel'? Yes, of course. I was merely suggesting that the first couple of times that one does this, it's often necessary to have someone help you with it. Like anything else that we choose to wear, the first time we put it on, there is often a feeling of " Is this right?" After a couple of tries, one soon figures out the easiest way to do it, and instictively knows when it's not right and how to correct it. I'd be very interested to know of any documentation of clan tartans prior to the 19th C. Scots revival courtesy of Queen Victoria. Prior to that, I was under the impression that tartans had no association with a given clan, but rather to a given locale (close, but not quite), and that the "ancient" and "hunting" tartans are pure fabrication based on what somebody thought they "might" have looked like. But if this is not so, I would gladly learn better. Yes, that is what I had mentioned. There is a difference between "the cloth that is made by a particular town, so that is what everybody wears", and "we are a clan from this place, so we all wear this plaid". However, it is an easy step to see how one evolved into the other. But that was a political move, and came much later.Like you, I find myself sorely in need of a good reference book. Unfortunately, the ones that will answer this are still packed away( I recently moved) It may very well be that the clan tartan system was a product of Queen Victoria's reign. After all, much of our medieval "knowledge" came from that same time. It's taken a lot of research and rethinking of things to get past all that. However, I do know that during the Jacobite uprisings, the Scots lost the rights to play their pipes. I had believed that the tartans were also outlawed here. These (and other) actions were designed to completely repress and fragment the Scots. This is one of the reasons that the Scots do not love the English. I've never heard that the "hunting" and "ancient" versions of plaids were fabricated (excuse the pun!) Their colors are so muted, that I've always believed them to be the precursors to todays versions. In other words, what was once created using plant dyes, which are known to fade rapidly, are now being made with chemical dyes, which are brighter and more colorfast. Also, poor, rural post-Medieval Scotland would not have likely had access to the exotic dyestuffs available to the wealthier people. I think of the "ancient" or "hunting" versions as being more suitable to 1) everyday type wear, and 2) something more likely to be worn while hunting(duh!). I think of the bright colors as suitable for clan indentification in a battle, and also for "Sunday best". I would not want to wear my Clan Buchanan (again, forgive me!) every day. It's so bright! But I find the "ancient" and "hunting" versions of many plaids to be earthy and soothing. Just my humble opinion. But that doesn't mean that I'm not wrong. That's why I join these lists, to learn and get other people's perspectives. Most of my historical interest lies in Medieval and Viking, and it was only when we joined a Highland bagpipe band a couple of years ago that I started learning more about this subject. Kat, I hope this all makes sense, and helps you with your friend's new persona. Best, Alianora VMAA schuck@vci.net [14,61]CSuX:recommended reading-- medieval Subject: H-COST: Re: recommended reading-- medieval From: "schuck@vci.net" Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 11:08:11 -0500 -Poster: "schuck@vci.net" Hi all! I'm fairly new to historical costuming, and I was wondering if anybody could recommend good books for researching Medieval period clothing? I am primarily interested in the clothing of western and northern Europe and the British Isles. Also, are there any books or articles that address authentic construction techniques from that period? Thanks so much! Julie schuck@vci.net joseph & christine [87,62]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joseph & Christine" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 12:33:19 -0400 -Poster: "Joseph & Christine" >Hi Joe & listers: Hi Alianora - but it's Joseph, not "Joe." >First, if a Scots ell is 37 in. long, is it also 37 in. wide? Sorry - going back to the same source, "Ordinarily plaiding was woven on a 27 in. width, and two pieces had to be swen together to achieve the normal broadcloth width of 54 in." >Is this folded in half lengthwise? Yes - six yard length is folded to make it three. This means the pleating is a lot easier. >If not, how do you get it up on the shoulder? If so, how do you get it >ALL up on the shoulder? That seems like a lot of fabric to fasten on the shoulder. Think about it a second - whether you fold it or not, all the fabric goes over/fastens on the shoulder. There is another little trick that you left off and that I forgot to mention - once it's belted, you take the corners of the upper portion of the plaid, cross them over and tuck them in the belt behind you. In other words the corner on your left goes around behind you on the right, and vice versa. Then you have a rounded section behind that goes up to the shoulder, or you can pull part of it over the left shoulder from the back, and part of it around the front to the left shoulder, and tie or pin it. I use a shoe buckle to fasten it. I have some pictures on my computer at work which may help, but that'll have to wait until Tuesday. >Also, once this is pleated around the body, you will be *plenty* warm! True - but bear in mind, we're not in the Scottish Highlands - at least I'm not. It takes a lot more to be plenty warm there than it does here in highlands of Virgina! It's about 95 outside and I have no desire to don my plaid at the moment. >....should come to about a hand span above the knee. >Yes, you're right. Thanks for clarifying that. My pleasure. >As to needing help adjusting it - wot's th' >matter, laddie? Kin ye no dress yersel'? >Yes, of course. Sorry, just kidding, hence the (Double-Grin.) (good stuff snipped) >Their colors are so muted, that I've always believed them to be the precursors to >todays versions. In other words, what was once created using plant dyes, which are >known to fade rapidly, are now being made with chemical dyes, which are brighter >and more colorfast. That's exactly the story they tell - "This is how these would have looked if plant dyes had been used." Never mind the fact that the patterns under discussion may or may not ( and probably did not) have existed in the first place! There is a very famous painting which you have probably seen of the Battle of Culloden (Fine brave Scots charging from the left, the Forces of Darkness... I mean, the British soldiers... from the right ). The Scots portrayed in this painting were painted from prisoners after Culloden, and the artist as I understand it, went to great pains to get the patterns of the plaids right. Not a one of them matches a modern day tartan. Again, from the same book, quoting George Buchannan in 1581: "They delight in variegated garments, especially stripes, and their favourite colours are purple and blue. Their ancestors wore plaids of many colours, and numbers still retain this custom, but the majority now in their dress prefer a dark brown, imitating nearly the leaves of the heather, that when lying upon the heath in the day, they may not be discovered by the appearance of their clothes." Sixteenth Century camoflage! And having read that, I obtained from G-Street Fabrics a brown blue and green sort of plaid fabric, which I call my "hide in the heather" plaid. Again, the pix will have to wait until Tuesday, if anyone wants them. joel thompson [18,63]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 13:22:48 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" Hi again Joseph and listers! Thank you so much for this very interesting and enlightening dialog. Since we seem to have nothing further to add to the construction of the great kilt, may I suggest that we take this private? I would love to see your photos, and I have several that I can send along to you as well. Great fun! BTW- "The Forces of Darkness" .....ROFLOL!!! BTW2- Hey, I live in Virginia too! Small world. 8^) Best, Alia VMAA carol j. bell cannon [19,64]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 10:44:30 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" At 12:33 PM 7/3/99, "Joseph & Christine" wrote: >That's exactly the story they tell - "This is how these would have looked if >plant dyes had been used." Never mind the fact that the patterns under >discussion may or may not ( and probably did not) have existed in the first >place! Some of the finds in archaeological digs have been of muted green checked or plaid cloth. One I am recalling, though I do not recall from what book, nor which find at the moment [I catalog books for a living--it's hard to recall so many...sorry, everyone...my sincere apologies--short term memory is full up... .], was a soft, mossy green with a dark brown or black sett that looked like a plaid to me. I've seen another that was a deep camel or coffee with cream-type color that also had a darker pairing of very narrow and slightly wider 'plaid' pattern in it. -- Carol kat & kent [9,65]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: Kat & Kent Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 12:56:12 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent Just a side note on ancient vs modern plaids...the modern Clan Bruce tartan is muted while the ancient is...is...well, the only way to put it is florescent! Kat snowfire@mail.snet.net[30,66]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: snowfire@mail.snet.net Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 14:34:35 -0400 -Poster: snowfire@mail.snet.net -Poster: Elysant This post makes me think. 1. Weren't the ancient Celts known for their bright colours? If so why would the more ancient plaids be muted? If the Celts did wear bright colours, it seems to make sense that the more ancient plaid spoken of below would have been brightly coloured wouldn't it? 2. Is it because we're talking "hunting" plaids that they might have been muted - for camouflage or something? The colours described seem to suggest this... Elysant On Sat, 03 Jul 1999, Kat & Kent wrote: > >-Poster: Kat & Kent > >Just a side note on ancient vs modern plaids...the modern Clan Bruce >tartan is muted while the ancient is...is...well, the only way to put it >is florescent! > >Kat > > melanie wilson [19,67]CSuX:fantastic fabrics low prices !!!! Subject: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics low prices !!!! From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 15:30:33 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson I found these two suppliers they are UK based but B L Joshi does international postage and the other may I'm not sure..... B L Joshi http://www.b.l.joshi.com Brocades, silks, satins, embroidered fabrics THE most beautiful I've seen in a while at prices I can afford !!!!! Croft Mill Tel : 01282 869685 Fax: 01282 870038 Various stuff some good for costume etc others more mundane, a useful contact. Sorry no email or wen page as far as I know. Mel kat [17,68]CSuX:kilts Subject: H-COST: Kilts From: kat Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 15:43:27 -0400 -Poster: kat I am printing every bit of this thread as we speak. I am familiar with the idea of different plaids for hunting and dress. I guess I didn;t make myself very clear. I was looking for verification on a non-pleated kilt, worn for hunting, evidently much like a wrap skirt -- for lack of clearer wording. I have never heard of such a creature, but it was recommended by one of the members of the 42nd Highlanders (re-enactment group). This may be some 20th cent flight of fancy, or a mis-intrepretation of some evidence. Any one got access to McClintock? Kat Hargus owner, Making Time www.makingtime.com joel thompson [29,69]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 16:19:54 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" ---- Never mind the fact that the patterns under >discussion may or may not ( and probably did not) have existed in the first >place! Some of the finds in archaeological digs have been of muted green checked or plaid cloth. ....was a soft, mossy green with a dark brown or black sett that looked like a plaid to me. I've seen another that was a deep camel or coffee with cream-type color that also had a darker pairing of very narrow and slightly wider 'plaid' pattern in it. I agree. Several years ago there was a program on either A&E or Discover, or maybe it was PBS... (yes, the mind *is* the first to go!) about discoveries on the Silk Road. They had found a reddish and blackish piece of wool that for all the world looked like plaid! I believe that they had linked this find with the Viking traders. Which brings up another interesting thread.....I have some friends who are Grade A Vikingologists. They maintain that there is no surviving piece of wool (Viking era folks!) with 2 different colors woven into a pattern. Hmmm....to me, that sounds highly unlikely. We know that they were proficient weavers, making lovely twill, herringbone and tabby, so why not use different color threads to make it even more beautiful. Vikings, like Celts, liked bright colors. Maybe Chimene can shed some light on this one. 8^) So, getting back on the original subject, if you look at books which lists all of the plaids in all of the different colorways, you will see a rainbow of options. If the persona that you are trying to create has strong clan affiliations, you can probably get authentic tartan from Scotland. We just got several bolts of Mackenzie Hunting to make kilts and bagcovers for the band. Not the most striking of choices, but it's a sheriff's department band and we needed to be "understated". Be prepared to pay upwards of $50.00US per yard for it, and to wait months for the more obscure choices. The good news is, if it doesn't really matter, or if you just want to try it and see if you like it, the stuff that you can get at any fabric store will do. Just try to have an eye for "what looks right", and come as close as you can to what you've seen in the books. You can also purchase the whole thing from Chivalry Sports Renaissance Catalog. Doing it that way costs about double the price of buying your own fabric, but you get instructions. Alianora carol j. bell cannon [8,70]CSuX:kilts Subject: Re: H-COST: Kilts From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 13:22:57 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" At 03:43 PM 7/3/99, Kat Hargus wrote asking about kilts. You might try this website, Kat--and others interested... The url is: http://metalab.unc.edu/gaelic/john/greatkilt.html --Carol, aka: Gráinne ingen Domnaill Ildánaig, in the SCA, Inc. lois [19,71]CSuX:1858 peterson s magazine Subject: H-COST: 1858 Peterson's Magazine From: Lois Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 16:58:06 +0000 -Poster: Lois Just listed an 1858 Peterson's complete with 12 colored fashion plates on ebay: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=126241755 Also an 1877 Ladies' Guide to Needlework by Frost: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=126008008 Lois -- Lois Mueller Wooden Porch Books books@woodenporch.com lisa scovel [20,72]CSuX:for all you shoe lovers! Subject: H-COST: For all you Shoe lovers! From: "Lisa Scovel" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 14:29:25 -0700 -Poster: "Lisa Scovel" The site I've been producing about the history of shoes this century is now complete! http://www.centuryinshoes.com Take a look and let me know what you think... Thanks, Lisa ---- Lisa Scovel About.com Guide to Historical Reenactment http://reenactment.About.com melanie wilson [24,73]CSuX:hunting kilts Subject: H-COST: Hunting kilts From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 19:13:51 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >I'd be very interested to know of any documentation of clan tartans prior to the 19th C. Scots revival courtesy of Queen Victoria. Prior to that, I was under the impression that tartans had no association with a given clan, but rather to a given locale (close, but not quite), and that the "ancient" and "hunting" tartans are pure fabrication based on what somebody thought they "might" have looked like. But if this is not so, I would gladly learn better. The earliest I found was c 17th C, ref Hunting Maclean colours used as part of rental (or some payment) in the MaClean occupied area. Nothing I've seen suggest clan tartans for early use either, in fact contempory refs tend to describe the mix of colours ie socks one tartan, kilt another, etc etc Braveheart whilst great kilts & great for artistic licence, should have been wearing the saffron shirt, for the correct time line :0) Mel carol j. bell cannon [11,74]CSuX:hunting kilts Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilts From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 17:39:38 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" At 07:13 PM 7/3/99, Melanie Wilson wrote: >Braveheart whilst great kilts & great for artistic licence, should have >been wearing the saffron shirt, for the correct time line :0) Mel AND ought NOT to have been wearing the blue gunk [which was supposedly woad] on his face, imnsho. Carol [Gráinne ingen Domnaill Ildánaig, in the SCA, Inc.] lynnx@mc.net[22,75]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: lynnx@mc.net Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 20:56:02 -0700 -Poster: lynnx@mc.net (FWIW to whomever: The word "plaid" had nothing to do with pattern originally; it meant a large piece of cloth used as a shawl, blanket, clothes, etc.) Alianora, Do you have any *reliable, understandable* info about the women's arasaid (?sp) / skirt combo, especially the size and shape of fabric they used? I'd *swear* the way the pictures look, the women could have wrapped a sufficiently wide piece around the waist for the skirt (selvedge vertical) and then just draped the top like the guys did, with some style variations of their own. (Also I heard the women wrapped their skirt/"kilts" opposite the way the men did.) Any insights on this? Thanks, Sister Ed lynnx@mc.net[10,76]CSuX:croft mill info? Subject: H-COST: Croft Mill info? From: lynnx@mc.net Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 21:48:07 -0700 -Poster: lynnx@mc.net Wow!! Do you have Croft Mill's snailmail address? Thanks, Heather stephen & astrida schaeffer [42,77]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Stephen & Astrida Schaeffer Date: Sat, 03 Jul 1999 22:24:56 -0400 -Poster: Stephen & Astrida Schaeffer Okay, so I'm trying to make the best cotehardie I can. I've looked at the "pin it till it shapes you" school of thought which seems to be the prevalent construction theory. A friend is in the process of draping one for me, as it is clear one cannot do this to oneself. And I've come up with a very basic question: Why is everyone so sure there is no body-shaping foundation garment beneath the cotehardie? If you look at the relatively loose garments that come before, and the correspondingly low-level seamstress skills required to create those dresses, and compare them to the rather highly skilled techniques required for the "pin it till it shapes you" dress, how could so many women suddenly make that jump in skill? And what about the Bohemian Bath Attendants in illuminations, who are shown in spaghetti-strap shifts and nothing else, but who are already sporting the correct body shape? Is this just artistic license? (i.e., this is how bodies are supposed to look, so that's how I'll draw them?) Furthermore, if the snug and body-shaping fit of the dress is so dependent on the fabric, that would mean each dress made would have to be individually draped to allow for differences in the textile itself; no creation of patterns, or of getting the pattern for a new dress off of an old one. This does not strike me as terribly practical. Whereas if there were a shaping foundation garment of some kind, at least some of the pressure would be off the cotehardie itself and it would be an easier dress for seamstresses to create. Opinions? Thoughts? (To Robin Netherton, especially, if you don't mind--how did you reach your conculsions? I've gotten myself quite befuddled.) I just wanna do it right... Astrida joel thompson [29,78]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: Re: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Sat, 3 Jul 1999 23:51:07 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" -Hello again! I am sorry to admit that no, I don't have a reliable source for women's Scottish and/or Irish medieval clothing. There just doesn't seem to be as much documented about that as there is for the men. This is something that I always look for in my costume books, but it seldom gets a mention. If anyone knows of any good books or good websites, please let me know. Since you mentioned pictures, could you let me know where you found them? Thank you! Alianora VMAA Do you have any *reliable, understandable* info about the women's arasaid (?sp) / skirt combo, especially the size and shape of fabric they used? I'd *swear* the way the pictures look, the women could have wrapped a sufficiently wide piece around the waist for the skirt (selvedge vertical) and then just draped the top like the guys did, with some style variations of their own. (Also I heard the women wrapped their skirt/"kilts" opposite the way the men did.) Any insights on this? Thanks, Sister Ed joel thompson [10,79]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: Re: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 00:08:33 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" Ok, everybody, I just went to the Ravensgard Homepage, where there is a lot of stuff on well, a lot of stuff! I found medieval Scotland and Ireland, but some of the pages were "under construction" so they weren't much help. But, there is a ton of really good info here, both male and female. The addy for this is http://users.aol.com/gerekr/costume.html Alianora VMAA melanie wilson [20,80]CSuX:kilts Subject: H-COST: Kilts From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 04:32:31 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >. I guess I didn;t make myself very clear. I was looking for verification on a non-pleated kilt, worn for hunting, evidently much like a wrap skirt -- for lack of clearer wording Yes you were clear I think everyone got sidetracked :) I've not come across the type you suggest either in my books or by heresay. That dosen't mean it dosen't exist however :) The Highland museum sent me a lot of info re early Highland dress, up to the '45, but there is no mention of it there either. No +ive help I fear sorry :( Mel melanie wilson [38,81]CSuX:hunting kilt Subject: H-COST: Hunting kilt From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 04:32:36 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >Is this folded in half lengthwise? If not, how do you get it up on the = shoulder? If so, how do you get it ALL up on the shoulder? You fold it widthways, then pull the upper layer up to your shoulder >However, I do know that during the Jacobite uprisings, the Scots lost = the rights to play their pipes. I had believed that the tartans were = also outlawed here. Do you mean then after the '45 , or here as in the US or are you in Scotland ? >Their colors are so muted, that I've always believed them to be the = precursors to todays versions. In other words, what was once created = using plant dyes, which are known to fade rapidly, are now being made = with chemical dyes, which are brighter and more colorfast. You would need to look at the creation dates for each, but I think most were created rather that evolved. > Also, poor, = rural post-Medieval Scotland would not have likely had access to the = exotic dyestuffs available to the wealthier people. =20 Highlanders maybe, but not lowlanders who were pretty similiar to English or French depending on the time ! >I think of the "ancient" or "hunting" versions as being more suitable to = 1) everyday type wear, and 2) something more likely to be worn while = hunting(duh!). I think of the bright colors as suitable for clan = Some hunting are pretty bright ! Mel melanie wilson [16,82]CSuX:hunting tartan Subject: H-COST: Hunting Tartan From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 04:32:35 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson > Some of the finds in archaeological digs have been of muted green checked or plaid cloth. One I am recalling, though I do not recall from what book, nor which find at the moment [I catalog books for a living--it's hard to recall so many...sorry, everyone...my sincere apologies--short term memory is full up... .], was a soft, mossy green with a dark brown or black sett that looked like a plaid to me. I think the thing is YES tartans/plaid fabric was made way back, but NOT to the patterns known as McX today, ie Mr McX might have wore McZ, McY or whatever as the fancy took him. Mel susan carroll-clark [48,83]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Susan Carroll-Clark" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 11:33:07 -0400 -Poster: "Susan Carroll-Clark" Greetings! >Why is everyone so sure there is no body-shaping foundation garment >beneath the cotehardie? > >If you look at the relatively loose garments that come before, and the >correspondingly low-level seamstress skills required to create those >dresses, and compare them to the rather highly skilled techniques >required for the "pin it till it shapes you" dress, how could so many >women suddenly make that jump in skill? Well, first of all, most professional tailors were men (not that that makes much difference in the skill level, but it's a common misconception). I also get the idea that it was only the upper classes (and perhaps those middle-class folks who could afford the style and wanted to imitate their "betters :-) who really want in for the very tight styles. However, if you look at surviving gaments, one thing you conclude is that the "jump" isn't as dramatic as it looks. Tailors had been playing around with piecing garments to create a shape for at least 100 years before the cotehardie era. I do "pin 'til it shapes you," and actually, once you learn the skill, it's a fairly easy technique. I can fit a "cotehardie" in about 15 minutes. I should mention I have exactly zilch professional dressmaker training--I'm entirely self-taught. Trust me--it does get easier :-) >Whereas if there were a shaping foundation garment of some kind, at >least some of the pressure would be off the cotehardie itself and it >would be an easier dress for seamstresses to create. The problem here is that visual evidence is just one type that we look at to support our theories. One real problem with a "fitted foundation garment" (something other than a close-fitting kirtle, cut on similar lines as the outer garment) is that there's no evidence of it in literary or household accounts. Susan dc [10,84]CSuX:chinese clothing Subject: H-COST: Chinese clothing From: DC Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 11:27:56 +0100 -Poster: DC Does anyone know of good sources for Chinese clothing around 1300-1500? Internet searches with engines have not shown very much. Thanks henk t jong [32,85]CSuX:recommended reading-- medieval Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: recommended reading-- medieval From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 17:36:18 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi, > I'm fairly new to historical costuming, and I was wondering if anybody could > recommend good books for researching Medieval period clothing? Which part of the circa 500-1500 period? I am primarily > interested in the clothing of western and northern Europe and the British Isles. What class of people? Nobility and the rich: no problem. Common burghers: pretty difficult. The peasant and the pauper: very difficult generally. > Also, are there any books or articles that address authentic construction techniques > from that period? Thanks so much! > Not many, especially not from the part before ca 1350. Henk henk t jong [61,86]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 17:54:39 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi, Astrida wrote: > Why is everyone so sure there is no body-shaping foundation garment > beneath the cotehardie? > Nobody can be sure, because none have been found and none are depicted. But with tied laces and buttons and good sewing or patternmaking you can easily get a close fitting cotehardie. > If you look at the relatively loose garments that come before, and the > correspondingly low-level seamstress skills required to create those > dresses, and compare them to the rather highly skilled techniques > required for the "pin it till it shapes you" dress, how could so many > women suddenly make that jump in skill? > Between ca 1320 and 1390 there is a fairly slow change in fashion. The button and the discovery of cutting cloth differently made the difference. Don't make the mistake that techniques could reach far-out places fast in this period; communication for example between courts, was very frequent indeed. Courtiers were the first to wear the closefitting fashions and it seeped via rich merchant through to the common man and women, who were very skilled sewers indeed. > And what about the Bohemian Bath Attendants in illuminations, who are > shown in spaghetti-strap shifts and nothing else, but who are already > sporting the correct body shape? Is this just artistic license? (i.e., > this is how bodies are supposed to look, so that's how I'll draw them?) > This is probably because their shifts were wet and clung to their bodies. > Furthermore, if the snug and body-shaping fit of the dress is so > dependent on the fabric, that would mean each dress made would have to > be individually draped to allow for differences in the textile itself; > no creation of patterns, or of getting the pattern for a new dress off > of an old one. This does not strike me as terribly practical. Don't make the mistake that medieval seamsters/stresses were amateurs; they were highly skilled craftspeople and knew exactly what they could do with what kind of cloth and had the human shape in their fingertips. > > Whereas if there were a shaping foundation garment of some kind, at > least some of the pressure would be off the cotehardie itself and it > would be an easier dress for seamstresses to create. I for one don't believe in corsets or the like before the 16th c. But hey, that's my opinion...;-) Henk margo anderson [16,87]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: Margo Anderson Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 10:00:58 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson >There is a very famous painting which you have probably seen of the Battle >of Culloden (Fine brave Scots charging from the left, the Forces of >Darkness... I mean, the British soldiers... from the right ). The Scots >portrayed in this painting were painted from prisoners after Culloden, Umm...I believe I've read that possesion of even small scrap of tartan was a flogging offense, or worse, for the Scots prisoners. Margo snowfire@mail.snet.net[14,88]CSuX:hops and fabric dyeing Subject: H-COST: Re: Hops and Fabric Dyeing From: snowfire@mail.snet.net Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 13:36:57 -0400 -Poster: snowfire@mail.snet.net -Poster: Elysant I am trying to find information on the use of hops as a dye for fabrics. I have a book "The Year 1000: What Life Was Like at the Turn of the First In it the author claims that "Hops were grown in the year 1000, but they were used only in cloth-dying processes." Does anyone have any more on this? Elysant de Holtham hope h. dunlap [47,89]CSuX:wool satin Subject: H-COST: wool satin From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Fri, 2 Jul 1999 10:04:25 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" When I was in G -Street Fabrics in Rockville, MD over Memorial Day Weekend, they had several bolts of wool satin. I recall black and navy, but cannot confirm the full color range. Hope H. Dunlap -----Original Message----- From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On Behalf Of Deborah Pulliam -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <> I would check with Kathleen Smithat Textile Reproductions. She no longer advertises, but is still in business and selling wonderful fabrics. I saw some lovely 100 percent wool jeans when I was last there. ph 413 296 4437 (fax 413 296 0036.) <> The British "red coats" were always dyed with madder, so it should be a hot red, not a cochineal/purplish red. _____ majordomo@indra.com joseph & christine [16,90]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joseph & Christine" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 18:19:12 -0400 -Poster: "Joseph & Christine" >Umm...I believe I've read that possesion of even small scrap of tartan was a >flogging offense, or worse, for the Scots prisoners. Margo I was referring to prisoners taken at Culloden. The ban was not yet in effect. Joseph margaret bolger [20,91]CSuX:chinese clothing Subject: H-COST: Chinese clothing From: Margaret Bolger Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 18:43:20 -0400 -Poster: Margaret Bolger Message text written by INTERNET:h-costume@indra.com >Poster: DC Does anyone know of good sources for Chinese clothing around 1300-1500? Internet searches with engines have not shown very much.< You could try the following web site......http://www.cixi.demon.co.uk It is owned by Jocelyn Catterton, who deals in antique Chinese costume and textiles. She is very approachable and helpful and should be able to answer any queries you have. Margaret antique costume & textiles http://www.artizania.co.uk kat@grendal.rain.com[23,92]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: kat@grendal.rain.com Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 16:10:16 +0000 -Poster: kat@grendal.rain.com > Ill effects of tight lacing? Try eating something hot in a rush after > lacing. Fortunately my brother knew to loosen the laces slooooowly after > I hit the ground in a dead faint. According to the cardiologists I've spoken with, never do it fast unless the person is actually in cardiac arrest (no pulse at all) or you could put them into cardiac arrest from the sudden shift in blood flow to the heart. (Hopefully no one will ever have to see the effects of that.) Of course, if they are already in cardiac arrest, there's nothing lost in getting to them quickly, only in delay. Kat Kat(June Russell) kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! kathryn l. herb [27,93]CSuX:stays Subject: Re: H-COST: stays From: "Kathryn L. Herb" Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 20:06:40 EDT -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" >According to the cardiologists I've spoken with, never do it fast >unless the person is actually in cardiac arrest (no pulse at all) or >you could put them into cardiac arrest from the sudden shift in blood >flow to the heart. (Hopefully no one will ever have to see the >effects of that.) Kat, thanks for having the details at hand. I couldn't remember the exact effects. We should all make the people we appear in costume with aware of it. I'm thankful for my brother's good memory. (A new Medic Alert bracelet?? "Stay wearer -- undo slowly" ) Kay kayherb@juno.com Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. dave;editors(heritage matters) [20,94]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 01:17:21 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Wasnt it Sir Walter Scott who was given the job of redesigning the Highland dress by Queen Vikki . Both would turn in their grave at the current kilt phenomenon. Even John Paul Gautier has been left behind. No we can buy Kilts in any pattern whatsover even some reminiscent of the 1960 s; As long as it has a side opening and a pin its a kilt not ad ress I have recently seen some down to ankle length; Evidently they are the in thing for clubbing the night away;; extremely practical. no tartans in site. The Cornish "tartan" for kilts is shaded crisscrossing black and white., and for some reason beyond me , only ever worn with a rugby football shirt; there having been no equivalent of Sir Walter in Cornwall/ Dave LD MUNDY Editor Heritage Matters susan fatemi [27,95]CSuX:chinese clothing Subject: Re: H-COST: Chinese clothing From: Susan Fatemi Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 17:48:31 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi DC wrote: > > -Poster: DC > > Does anyone know of good sources for Chinese clothing around > 1300-1500? Internet searches with engines have not shown very > much. > Do you want to find actual garments from that period? Or just web pictures or books? If the latter, you could try the library: there are a number of books on Chinese clothing, bearing in mind that the period you mention includes the Mongol dynasty. Also the Osprey series has several well-illustrated little books on Chinese armies thru' the ages. Don't know how authentic they are. Susan Fatemi -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf carol j. bell cannon [9,96]CSuX:hunting tartan Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting Tartan From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 18:01:53 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" At 04:32 AM 7/4/99 -0400, you wrote: >I think the thing is YES tartans/plaid fabric was made way back, but NOT to >the patterns known as McX today, ie Mr McX might have wore McZ, McY or >whatever as the fancy took him. -- Mel Agreed...no arguement on that point. Carol dave;editors(heritage matters) [60,97]CSuX:fabric sources superfine cochineal Subject: Re: H-COST: fabric sources superfine cochineal From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 02:00:51 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > -Poster: Ninni Pettersson > > At 21.28 +0100 99-07-01, kat wrote: > > >I was also told there is a company in England making a wool superfine, > >cochineal dyed, that is back ordered for nearly a year. I saw/handled some > >of the wool, and it looks too 'hot' for cochineal -- almost edging on the > >neon. I don't know if this is the real deal and the other cochineal fabrics > >I have seen are a poorer red, or if this is a commercial dye that > >supposedly looks like cochineal. the fabric is for a British officer's > >coat. > I bought a job lot of this material for project five or six years ago. I still have a dozen or so yards underneath a work bench for replacement purposes; Yes they make both officer and other ranks dyed stanards. The dye used is exact and accurate. But the material behaves strangely. When it is first seen it seem almost flourescent in certain lights and too bright a colour in normal light ; However this is caused by the nature of the superfine weaving method; there are very small loose filament all over the material that causes this . When fully made up they have all shedded and the colour is true ; The roll I still have is the true colour on the outside but brightly coloured inside the roll where this "dewnap" ( i think ) is still present; Of course treatment with a hot iron removes any odd) bits This is mosty excellent material to work with . it cuts to panel shapes really weel and og course need no hemming so cna match the original. I used it to make authentic jackets replacing ex film company ones that not only had hems but were alseds lined with pillow ticking and had padded shoulders and the works having been made from ex army khaki great coats redyed>; In the new exact coats the fit is amazing being based on items in Blackburn museum. Without the ticking and other tailoring it is quite easy to freeze to death in them . very accurate. However if you ever work in it, (if you can get your hands on any) be very careful with the nap. You cant see it in the piece but it shouts at you if its wrong when made up; After one failure I covered it all with blue chalked arrows and little paper stickers showing the direction of the nap on each piece; Believe or not the two sides also behave differently. Get this right and its dream to work with. Its also very forgiving in the wear being oily enough to resist more water than the former greatcoat types with all of their extra thickness and of course even when fully drenched dries off quicker ; It is best to cut the pattern on the tight side with very little give; done this way and lived in they tend to adopt the contours of the wearer more accurately and always tend to look smart because of it.; Be warned however , they should never be seen in the same room as a modern steam iron else they are ruined . Most of the seaming is lapped but where there is normal seeming this should be weel saoped and psryed with water while being worn. If it will not flatten; Dave > hope h. dunlap [35,98]CSuX:cotehardies Subject: H-COST: Cotehardies From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 21:47:44 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" These sources may help: http://www.virtualelpaso.com/neverwinter/dress/dress.htm http://www.fpnet.co.nz/users/m/maggiem/works/mystuff/TUNICS. HTML http://pip1.pipcom.com/~tempus/cotehardie/cotehardie.html -----Original Message----- From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On Behalf Of Andrea Gideon -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" Anyone know where I can find a copy of a graph used to make the "cut away anything that doesn't look like a cotehardie" cotehardie? I made my pattern this way a few years ago and threw away my instructions. I now need to make one for a friend. Andrea _____ majordomo@indra.com schuck@vci.net [7,99]CSuX:recommended reading-- medieval Subject: H-COST: Re: recommended reading-- medieval From: "schuck@vci.net" Date: Sun, 04 Jul 1999 20:55:02 -0500 -Poster: "schuck@vci.net" Sorry folks, I should have been more specific. I am most interested right now in Flemish and English costume of the upper classes in about 1000-1250 AD. allison thurman [21,100]CSuX:century of shoes Subject: H-COST: re: century of shoes From: "Allison Thurman" Date: Sun, 4 Jul 1999 22:42:25 -0400 -Poster: "Allison Thurman" imho this is a VERY well done site! allison - -Poster: "Lisa Scovel" The site I've been producing about the history of shoes this century is now complete! http://www.centuryinshoes.com Take a look and let me know what you think... Thanks, Lisa melanie wilson [13,101]CSuX:hops Subject: H-COST: Hops From: Melanie Wilson Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 02:59:04 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >In it the author claims that "Hops were grown in the year 1000, but they were used only in cloth-dying processes." THey were grown I believe, but most refs I've seen are for medicinal use. They were not popular for brewing until much later. As for dyeing I don't recall seeing anything personally... Mel melanie wilson [16,102]CSuX:the matthew Subject: H-COST: The Matthew From: Melanie Wilson Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 02:59:05 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >I feel at a complete loss when reading this message. What in the world are you talking about and referring to? It was a reconstruction of a 15th C ship which made the crossing of the Atlantic, the documetery refered to clothing, breing and other items from the period the original ref was to whether the clothing was/was not correct. and then what the used which wasn't modern......Quite a lot IMHO, but it was interesting never the less. you may not have got in in the US (the Programme I mean ) Mel melanie wilson [7,103]CSuX:croft mills web page ! Subject: H-COST: Croft mills web page ! From: Melanie Wilson Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 02:59:00 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson page:http://www.scoot.co.uk/croftmill/ Mel teddy1 [34,104]CSuX:fantastic fabrics at low prices Subject: Re: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics at low prices From: teddy1 Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 11:58:30 +0000 (GMT) -Poster: teddy1 Hi Mel > - -Poster: Melanie Wilson > Croft Mill Tel : 01282 869685 Fax: 01282 870038 > > Various stuff some good for costume etc others more mundane, a useful > contact. Sorry no email or wen page as far as I know. I buy from Croft Mill quite regularly. In fact the shorts (short trousers, not under-shorts for the information of US H-Costumers) I'm wearing to work today in from fabric I got there. They're good for basic fabrics on occasion (though their stock tends towards the "poly-cotton-sheeting" end of the market) and sometimes have bargains of bankruptr stock from other places (100% wool crepe in a beautiful bright red was my latest purchase....I can feel a pair of footed hose coming on....) They also do things like rolls of cottan bias-binding at very reasonable prices. I only found them because someone showed me the catalogue - which is worth getting just to read. It's a very "chatty" publication, full of asides and the thoughts of the author as he wanders around the warehouse noting down the types of fabrics they have in.... sometimes it's quite surreal. As to the other supplier you listed, I'll just have to check them out, but they sound promising Teddy kate m bunting [12,105]CSuX:elizabethan sailors Subject: H-COST: Re: Elizabethan sailors From: "KATE M BUNTING" Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 12:54:01 +0100 -Poster: "KATE M BUNTING" The system added an unwanted "=20" to the URL I quoted for the Mary Rose website, which should read http://www.maryrose.org/ Hope it transmits OK this time. I too enjoyed the TV programmes on the "Matthew". My impression was that the crew had been issued with period costume to wear for show on departure/arrival and, presumably due to lack of storage space for clothes, often wore it at sea too, but that there was no requirement for them to go without modern waterproofs etc. Kate Bunting Library, University of Derby PS There seem to be a lot of library cataloguers on this list! I'm a cataloguer too. andy oppenheim [13,106]CSuX:shorts Subject: RE: H-COST:shorts From: "Andy Oppenheim" Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 07:55:49 -0400 -Poster: "Andy Oppenheim" Teddy, shorts mean the same thing here for most under 50. undershorts are more commonly called underwear ( a generic term for panties, bra and underpants(hopefully not on the same person =o). in the slang they are called drawers. Hope this helps andy agottfre@telusplanet.net (angela gottfred)[20,107]CSuX:the matthew ! Subject: Re: H-COST: The Matthew ! From: agottfre@telusplanet.net (Angela Gottfred) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 07:07:01 -0600 -Poster: agottfre@telusplanet.net (Angela Gottfred) The Matthew was the ship used by John Cabot to cross the Atlantic to Newfoundland in 1497, thus officially claiming the New World for England. The ship was recreated and the voyage reenacted for the tricentennial. Melanie Wilson wrote: >> Anyway, they did the whole thing in costume Actually, there was a VERY long documentary on the CBC (Canadian Broadcasting Corporation) which made it quite clear that the historic clothing was only worn for photo-ops, except for one or two die-hards among the crew. I was a little disappointed, but not surprised, to learn this. Your humble & obedient servant, Angela Gottfred agottfre@telusplanet.net trekona@erols.com[28,108]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: trekona@erols.com Date: Mon, 05 Jul 99 14:01:55 GMT -Poster: trekona@erols.com > -Poster: "Joel Thompson" > [snipped] > Which brings up another interesting thread.....I have some friends who are > Grade A Vikingologists. They maintain that there is no surviving piece of > wool (Viking era folks!) with 2 different colors woven into a pattern. > Hmmm....to me, that sounds highly unlikely. We know that they were > proficient weavers, making lovely twill, herringbone and tabby, so why not > use different color threads to make it even more beautiful. Vikings, like > Celts, liked bright colors. While I haven't seen much at all of Viking culture plaids (which is odd, but who knows about taste), there *is* a scrap of Viking Age plaid in the Oslo Ship Museum. This museum exhibits artifacts of Oseberg, Gokstad and Tune - including a small selection of textile scraps. If Nancy Spies is still on the list, she spied the piece of plaid and got a photo of it (I missed it on my trip - too 'stoned' over all the bigger artifacts to notice the dark textile room!). So there *is* a surviving piece of wool from the Viking Era woven into a plaid pattern. Unfortunately all I know of is this one. Anyone else?? -Judy Mitchell aprilx@ns.net (april athena genung)[17,109]CSuX:fantastic fabrics at low prices Subject: Re: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics at low prices From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 10:23:11 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) I just discovered a place called Phoenix Textiles. Their web address is www.phoenixtextiles.com I don't know how great they are for period fabrics right now, but their selection changes and grows constantly, and their mundane fabrics a gorgeous. Some of the fabric is icky polyester or lycra but I found some gorgeous eggplant colored corduroy and a batik printed rayon, I even saw some silk shantung as well. Most things are under $5/yd and they have a huge section for $1/yd! The fabric is very high quality too. They have great swatches that are pretty color accurate too. Check it out! April midorih@proaxis.com[16,110]CSuX:recipe for sugar water please? Subject: H-COST: Recipe for sugar water please? From: midorih@proaxis.com Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 19:15:48 -0700 -Poster: midorih@proaxis.com Elysant wrote: >...she sometimes used sugar water to help keep the curls in. Elysant, I've heard of sugar water used for rag curls. What is the recipe for sugar water please? I'd like to try it. Many thanks in advance. Midori snowfire@mail.snet.net[22,111]CSuX:recipe for sugar water please? Subject: Re: H-COST: Recipe for sugar water please? From: snowfire@mail.snet.net Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 22:18:00 -0400 -Poster: snowfire@mail.snet.net -Poster: Elysant >Elysant wrote: > >>...she sometimes used sugar water to help keep the curls in. > >Elysant, > >I've heard of sugar water used for rag curls. What is the recipe for sugar >water please? I'd like to try it. Many thanks in advance. >Midori I'll have to ask my mother when next I call home. I will post the details ok? Elysant charlene charette [35,112]CSuX:german book Subject: Re: H-COST: German book From: Charlene Charette Date: Mon, 05 Jul 1999 23:57:58 -0500 -Poster: Charlene Charette Andrea Clef wrote: > > >> Does anyone know of a book dealer from whom I might order this particular book (e.g. one which >> specializes in German books, or a German dealer)? My German is rusty, but for a good book, I'd be >> willing to give it a whirl. >> >> Susan Carroll-Clark >> This was apparently spawned from another thread that I wasn't reading as I haven't found the title being sought. However, I have found a US company that can order any German book in print for you. I've used them once and so far I've been happy with them. I'm currently awaiting an exchange copy as the book was bound incorrectly -- certainly not their fault and they've been good about ordering a replacement. It does take awhile; if you're in a hurry I'd suggest contacting the publisher direct. Intl Book Import Service, Inc. 161 Main Street, PO Box 8188 Lynchburg, TN 37352-8188 USA 800-277-4247 or 931-759-7400 Fax: 931-759-7555 --Charlene -- One may be my very good friend, and yet not of my opinion. -- Margaret Cavendish margo anderson [12,113]CSuX:costume connection pattern Subject: H-COST: Costume Connection pattern From: Margo Anderson Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 23:22:16 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson Has anyone used The Costume Connection's Elizabethan Man's pattern, the upperclass one? If so, what was your opinion as to historical accuracy, ease of sewing, and fit? thanks, Margo margo king [32,114]CSuX:old world enterprises pattern Subject: Re: H-COST: Old World Enterprises Pattern From: margo king Date: Tue, 6 Jul 99 08:31:17 -0000 -Poster: margo king Another comment please on another pattern from another Margo! I purchased the folowing pattern and need whatever help I can get re: problems with the pattern, etc. I also could use some help on appropriate fabric and colors to the 1850's. My intent is to wear it at either the opening night celebration for The Washington Antiques Show in Jan 2000 or at the Turn of the Century Ball (also sponsored by the show, which will be 'fancy dress') on Saturday, Jan 8th This is a modern pattern by Old World Enterprises, copyright 1989, for making a reproduction 1850s crinoline ballgown. Old World Enterprises, Unique Patterns of Historical Fashion, Pattern #851. Includes sizes 8 through 14 in same pattern envelope. An off-the-shoulder gown with a lace or fabric flounce running around its perimeter. The fitted bodice is fully boned and sweeps to a point at the center front waist, which is embellished with flowers on ribbon pillows. The gown has a center back opening that can either be laced or employ a hook and eye closure. The neckline is trimmed with flowers that are set onto ribbon cushions. Lace or fabric flounces fall from the sleeve cap. The large skirt is bell shaped, gathered at the waistline, and features two wide flounces that can be made exclusively of fabric or overlayered with lace. A lace mitt pattern is included, as is a hoop skirt pattern. Also -- is there any corset I can get that I can wear for costumes from 1850's -1899 or are they so different that I need to invest in several. Where is the best place to buy accurate corsets since I do not have the time or the skills to make them?! Many thanks!! Margo King andrea gideon [21,115]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Andrea Gideon" Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 08:57:02 -0400 -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" > > Astrida wrote: > > Why is everyone so sure there is no body-shaping foundation garment > > beneath the cotehardie? > > > Nobody can be sure, because none have been found and none are depicted. But > with tied laces and buttons and good sewing or patternmaking you can easily > get a close fitting cotehardie. > Also, if you wear a very tight one as an underdress under a looser one. you will acheive some shaping and some support. Andrea penny ladnier [32,116]CSuX:please test a webpage Subject: H-COST: Please Test a Webpage From: "Penny Ladnier" Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 11:20:14 -0600 (MDT) -Poster: "Penny Ladnier" I have developed a new section of my Vintage Publications website about 1864 children's clothing http://www.costumegallery.com/Frank_Leslie/April_1864/Children.htm. This is supposed to be at a level that grade school children can take a quiz about 1864 children's clothing (adults can take it too). Can some of you please take the quiz and let me know if it was simple enough. If you have a child, please let them take the quiz and see how well they navigate the webpage. Should I offer an explanation somewhere that children wore dresses until a certain age? Should I explain this ahead of time or when they finish the quiz? Please email me privately with responses. New additions for everyone: Frank Leslie's April 1864: Ladies Caps: http://www.costumegallery.com/Frank_Leslie/April_1864/Ladies_Caps.htm Ladies Bonnets: http://www.costumegallery.com/Frank_Leslie/April_1864/Ladies_Bonnets.htm Many Thanks!!! Later... Penny Ladnier The Costume Gallery http://www.costumegallery.com robin netherton [274,117]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 11:22:04 -0600 (MDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton I've been trying to post this for days, but it hasn't shown up, so I'm trying again. My sincere apologies if this come through multiple times. [It was delayed because it exceeded the maximum un-approved posting length, and I was away from my mail for the holiday weekend. ...eliz] ---------- Forwarded message ---------- I have been traveling and came back to (1) a pile of work and (2) a pile of H-COST messages I would like to reply to but haven't yet had the chance. But since this one popped up just now, and Astrida asked for my thoughts, here goes. On Sat, 3 Jul 1999, Stephen & Astrida Schaeffer wrote: > Why is everyone so sure there is no body-shaping foundation garment > beneath the cotehardie? The short answer, from my perspective, is that you don't need it to accomplish the task, and there's no evidence it existed, so there's no reason to assume it. The simplest solutions that require the fewest assumptions are generally the best. The rest of this message is the long answer. (By cotehardie, I'm guessing you mean the fitted dress worn by Western European noblewomen in the late 14th and early 15th century. I don't use the term quite so generally myself, but that seems to be what people mean nowadays.) > If you look at the relatively loose garments that come before, and the > correspondingly low-level seamstress skills required to create those > dresses, and compare them to the rather highly skilled techniques > required for the "pin it till it shapes you" dress, how could so many > women suddenly make that jump in skill? Actually, the jump wasn't that sudden. The relatively loose garments begin changing around 1320, first with attempts at fitting by bringing in the width of the torso. That method has a limit -- you can't fit beyond the point at which you can't get the garment on over your head and shoulders. Enter two major innovations, both simple and logical in form but wide-ranging in what they allowed people to do: The center front opening (meaning an opening from the neckline down past the waist that is closed after the garment is on you), and the set-in sleeve (which integrates some concepts of the square underarm gore, but with additional shaping and flexibility). The center opening let you tighten further around the torso, and the set-in sleeve let you eliminate the bulk around shoulders and underarms without sacrificing range of motion. After these two changes, you see a gradual series of developments in fitting. First the tightening is just done sideways, giving us the columnar figures and smashed "monobosom" of, say, the Machaut manuscripts of the 1350s (French) or the English brass of Joan de la Pole (c. 1380). Nothing here requires any great development in skill level, just the addition of a couple more techniques to the repertoire over the course of several decades. And at the same time we've got a lot of social and economic upheaval, due to the Black Death and other social and economic shifts, that eventually serve to get a lot of money (and fabric) in circulation and increase motivation for fashion change and complexity. Fashion tends toward to extremes, so fitting became tighter and tighter -- but that happened gradually, over decades. Then necklines began to inch wider and lower. If you take the columnar fitted dress of mid-century, with its relatively high jewel-neck, and cut that neckline progressively lower, you find that this releases pressure on the upper bosom, so the continuing pressure of the fabric on the lower bosom pushes the breasts higher. (Interestingly, the Wonderbra operates on the same principle.) Continue this trend, and eventually the whole figure shifts in form. By the turn of the century you reach the most extreme form of this fashion -- with the S-curved spine, high bust, tiny waist, generous belly. But that look didn't spring up overnight; you can track its development slowly and gradually. (I did this by making a series of dresses covering the range of these developments, and learning how small changes in neckline cut yielded progressively more extreme overall figure shaping.) By the end of the century, there is obviously quite a bit of additional *effort* required to achieve this look, but it's not really a question of skill; it's a question of time and money. Note that lower-class garments do not reach nearly so extreme a form -- they do become fitted, but not to the same extent. That meant they required less labor, and also it meant they'd have a longer life, as there was less cutting and pressure on the garment (which cause faster wear) and because they could be passed from one person to another with a minimum of alteration. Meanwhile, rich women did not have as much concern over the longevity of their garments, and if they did not want to take the time to create the extreme fit in their own households, they could hire dressmakers who would have the experience to produce the highly fitted garments. Others who were willing to invest the time to do it themselves could manage, still, at home -- because the actual techniques did not require any special equipment or proprietary knowledge. I have actually managed to make these dresses for myself, though it's no picnic -- still, few of these women lived alone; they lived in extended households, and each household would have had members who did the sewing for the whole household. > And what about the Bohemian Bath Attendants in illuminations, who are > shown in spaghetti-strap shifts and nothing else, but who are already > sporting the correct body shape? Is this just artistic license? (i.e., > this is how bodies are supposed to look, so that's how I'll draw them?) First, I do hate to generalize from Bohemian bath attendants to the English and French and Flemish courts. But even if you wish to, the explanation of artistic convention to justify these women's figures has plenty of precedent -- starting with the multitude of nudes who are painted as though they are wearing fitted garments that elevate their bust and bend their spine. One obvious example is Eve in the Eden scene from the Tres Riches Heures; there are many others. Alternatively, I've seen no illustrations suggesting a separate foundation garment or body shaper under a 14th-century fitted dress. And that's after examining many dozens of illustrations of women half-unlaced, or in the process of dressing, or nursing. Over and over, you see the fitted gown unlaced to show a plain unfitted chemise underneath, and nothing else. Nor is there any evidence I know of in written records that names or suggests such a garment. I can't of course say that nothing of the sort ever existed, but I feel pretty confident in saying it certainly was not in routine wear. > Furthermore, if the snug and body-shaping fit of the dress is so > dependent on the fabric, that would mean each dress made would have to > be individually draped to allow for differences in the textile itself; > no creation of patterns, or of getting the pattern for a new dress off > of an old one. This does not strike me as terribly practical. Actually, if you look at how clothing was made at this point, it's patterns that don't seem terribly practical. I see no evidence that patterns had been invented by this time at all. The earlier garments certainly did not need any; patterns are acutally counterintuitive if you're coming from a history of loose tunics that are geometrically cut based on dimensions that reflect the width of the fabric and the size of the person. For clothing made in the home, a pattern-less approach makes more sense because it requires no written record and no physical pattern. What's vital is the construction *method.* People would most likely have learned from watching how to measure fabric by holding it up to the body, cutting specific rough shapes (usually geometric in form), basting them into place, then fitting the rough garment on the body, sewing truer seams, and cutting away the excess. This is a simple and logical means of sewing, but it does not come naturally to people who are used to thinking in terms of patterns. A student of mine once phrased it this way -- "With patterns, you cut it out, sew it, then fit it. Before patterns, you fit it, then sew it, then cut it out." A generalization, but pretty close to the mark. It's important to remember that for patterns to work, you need to first have a stable body. The 14th-century fitted body is anything but stable; the dynamic of the silhouette derives from the mobility and manipulation of the bosom, the shoulders, the floating ribs, etc. The dress itself -- through its pressure along grain lines and stretch on bias lines -- works with the individual body to mold it into a shape whose exact angles and dimensions are unique to that body and that dress. Any attempt to make a pattern would be pretty useless, because there are too many factors involved that affect the angles, proportions, and sizes of the finished pieces. (You can, however, use an existing garment as a rough guide to a new one, as long as it comes close to fitting the individual -- you can't use it as an exact pattern, but it gives you a nice place to start, and then you complete the fitting on the person.) On the other hand, once you do have foundation garments, you have a stable body, from which you can take measurements -- and you can assume that those measurements will be the same when you return to that body, because the foundation garment dictates the proportions and structure. My research partner, who specializes in Elizabethan, often notes that an Elizabethan corset stands up by itself -- you can see the shape of the body even when no one is wearing it, and you can put it on a dress dummy and fit around it; but my fitted dresses fall in a shapeless heap when they're removed from the body -- they have no independent form of their own. I would guess that the development of foundation garments helped make possible the regular use of patterns, and also the expansion of tailoring as a profession. Certainly by the 1500s, tailors could routinely work independently of their clients, from measurements only. (Certainly certain garments could be done this way earlier, too, but not the 14th-century fitted gown we're discussing here.) And many new techniques were developed that were indeed more complex than the average housewife could learn easily -- so tailoring became a proprietary profession. But note that later garments typically do not use the fluidity and stretch of the fabric to mold a shape -- often the clothing is essentially upholstered around a set foundation, and stretch in the overlying garment would be a very bad thing indeed. So, there are significant changes in approach, technique, and economics between the fitted Gothic dress of 1400 (cut from long pieces falling from shoulder to floor, plus triangular gores) and the highly complex Elizabethan or French gowns of 1600 (cut with a multitude of small, oddly shaped pieces that are assembled to create a set silhouette). > Whereas if there were a shaping foundation garment of some kind, at > least some of the pressure would be off the cotehardie itself and it > would be an easier dress for seamstresses to create. Bingo. This is what happened in that in-between time. Look carefully at fashion changes over the 1400s and 1500s. More and more structure is built into the gowns, producing more stable silhouettes and firmer and flatter surfaces. Eventually someone (or many people) realized it made more sense to separate some of the layers of structural support from the gown itself to make inner garments that could be used under many gowns, relieving the pressure from the finer fabrics, simplifying outer-garment construction, and adding versatility. Once you have those foundation garments, there's room to develop such concepts as standard sizes, ready-to-wear, and a host of other ideas that we take for granted now -- but that didn't really exist in the 14th century. Perhaps it would help if you considered that 14th-century fitted dress to *be* the foundation garment. After all, it was typically covered by a second gown; that may have been a fitted overgown (what I would call a cotehardie, as distinct from a fitted dress worn directly over a shift), or it may have been a fuller garment like a houppelande. Either way, the dress on the inside would be doing all the hard work of molding and holding the figure. That dress would have been worn as an everyday basic garment, and subject to intensive daily wear and perspiration. The outer gown would have been more formal, and more likely to use expensive fabric, fur, and embellishment. A noblewoman might therefore be more likely to have her fitted dress made within the household, but hire a dressmaker to make the better outer gown. And if you have a decent-fitting undergown, you can indeed use it as a rough guide for the cutting of a fitted overgown; a houppelande can be fit with even less effort (once you get the neck and shoulders just right). > Opinions? Thoughts? (To Robin Netherton, especially, if you don't > mind--how did you reach your conculsions? I've gotten myself quite > befuddled.) How did I reach these conclusions? First, intuitively, starting more than 20 years ago, when I began draping fabric to create medieval costumes for fun. I realize now that it helped that I had very little modern sewing knoweldge. I went directly to the sources and worked from those. One of the things I teach my students now is to forget everything they know about modern methods, and start from the absolute bare basics. Essentially, what I did is start with the universal loose tunic of the early Middle Ages (geometric shapes, straight seams) and worked my way forward, adding new techniques only as absolutely necessary and as the evidence suggested. So, no set-in sleeves till the early 1300s. No princess seams till maybe 1440 (and rare even then). No significant use of the waistline seam till the mid-1400s (you get a few outliers before then, but the seam wasn't an integral element of the clothing construction for a long time). No darts. And certainly no boning, stay-stitching, dozens of other small things that today's seamstresses learn in their first sewing classes. Over the years, I've worked my way up through about 1480, figuring out where they added one more cut here, one more seam there, to generate each new style. At the same time, I went to college, learned how to do real research, traveled, photographed, burrowed into books, talked with other researchers in many areas, etc. And in this time, I haven't found anything to indicate that either patterns or foundation garments were used in the 14th century, so I'm maintaining the hypothesis that they were not. What convinces me, though, is that if I can take a hunk of natural-fiber woven fabric, sew it using a minimum number of techniques, no patterns, no foundation garments, no boning, etc. and produce a garment that, on the body, generates the same silhouette I see in the artwork -- and if I can do this over and over using the identical method, and if I can teach this to other people, and they can accomplish the same thing -- then logic would dictate that there is no need to assume the existence of more complicated methods or elements. If I can do this, there's no reason to think that the average medieval seamstress could not do as well or better. If someone does have evidence for pattern use or foundation garments in the 14th century, I do want to see it. It would throw a large part of my work out the window, but I'd still like to know. --Robin ariyana kylstram [36,118]CSuX:phoenix textiles does spam Subject: H-COST: Phoenix Textiles does SPAM From: Ariyana Kylstram Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 10:52:30 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Ariyana Kylstram > > From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) > Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 10:23:11 -0700 (PDT) > Subject: Re: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics at low prices > > - -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) > > I just discovered a place called Phoenix Textiles. Their web address is > www.phoenixtextiles.com > > I don't know how great they are for period fabrics right now, but their > selection changes and grows constantly, and their mundane fabrics a > gorgeous. Some of the fabric is icky polyester or lycra but I found some > gorgeous eggplant colored corduroy and a batik printed rayon, I even saw > some silk shantung as well. Most things are under $5/yd and they have a > huge section for $1/yd! The fabric is very high quality too. They have > great swatches that are pretty color accurate too. Check it out! > > April > No offense, April, but Phoenix Textiles has been spamming me and not removing me from their mailing list after *7* requests to remove me. They have been spamming a university account, which is for instructional purposes, and I find their actions reprehensible. They could be the best fabric seller in the world, and I wouldn't buy from them because of these business practices. Be careful... if they get your email address they might start spamming you too. .ari lyssandre mackenzie [74,119]CSuX:phoenix textiles does spam Subject: Re: H-COST: Phoenix Textiles does SPAM From: Lyssandre MacKenzie Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 11:39:44 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Lyssandre MacKenzie Try and find out who their ISP is and notify them. Also try sending mail to webmaster@ and postmaster@ the Phoenix Textiles domain name. Otherwise, check your mail system's preferences- you mail be able to filter out the SPAM. Good luck, Noelle --- Ariyana Kylstram wrote: > > -Poster: Ariyana Kylstram > > > > > From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) > > Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 10:23:11 -0700 (PDT) > > Subject: Re: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics at low > prices > > > > - -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) > > > > I just discovered a place called Phoenix Textiles. > Their web address is > > www.phoenixtextiles.com > > > > I don't know how great they are for period fabrics > right now, but their > > selection changes and grows constantly, and their > mundane fabrics a > > gorgeous. Some of the fabric is icky polyester or > lycra but I found some > > gorgeous eggplant colored corduroy and a batik > printed rayon, I even saw > > some silk shantung as well. Most things are under > $5/yd and they have a > > huge section for $1/yd! The fabric is very high > quality too. They have > > great swatches that are pretty color accurate too. > Check it out! > > > > April > > > > > > > No offense, April, but Phoenix Textiles has been > spamming me and not > removing me from their mailing list after *7* > requests to remove me. > They have been spamming a university account, which > is for instructional > purposes, and I find their actions reprehensible. > They could be the best > fabric seller in the world, and I wouldn't buy from > them because of these > business practices. > > Be careful... if they get your email address they > might start spamming > you too. > > .ari > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com aprilx@ns.net (april athena genung)[48,120]CSuX:phoenix textiles does spam Subject: Re: H-COST: Phoenix Textiles does SPAM From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 16:20:56 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) Oh dear, thanks for the tip! I get a couple of updates from them a month but nothing I personally consider spam. But not taking you off their list after that many requests is >>really<< bad!! Thanks for letting me know April > >-Poster: Ariyana Kylstram > >> >> From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) >> Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 10:23:11 -0700 (PDT) >> Subject: Re: H-COST: Fantastic fabrics at low prices >> >> - -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) >> >> I just discovered a place called Phoenix Textiles. Their web address is >> www.phoenixtextiles.com >> >> I don't know how great they are for period fabrics right now, but their >> selection changes and grows constantly, and their mundane fabrics a >> gorgeous. Some of the fabric is icky polyester or lycra but I found some >> gorgeous eggplant colored corduroy and a batik printed rayon, I even saw >> some silk shantung as well. Most things are under $5/yd and they have a >> huge section for $1/yd! The fabric is very high quality too. They have >> great swatches that are pretty color accurate too. Check it out! >> >> April >> > >No offense, April, but Phoenix Textiles has been spamming me and not >removing me from their mailing list after *7* requests to remove me. >They have been spamming a university account, which is for instructional >purposes, and I find their actions reprehensible. They could be the best >fabric seller in the world, and I wouldn't buy from them because of these >business practices. > >Be careful... if they get your email address they might start spamming >you too. > >.ari > > david stamper & eve harris [39,121]CSuX:leather jerkin Subject: H-COST: Leather Jerkin From: "David Stamper & Eve Harris" Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999 21:10:35 -0400 -Poster: "David Stamper & Eve Harris" I'm posting because I am deliriously happy about some research I conducted. I'm working on an A&S challenge in Ealdormere which centers around a from-the-ground-up recreation of the extant pinked and scored leather jerkin shown in Janet Arnold's Patterns of Fashion, circa 1560. I've been trying to find other examples of jerkins in this time period and had about 4 painting sources, none of which made me very happy. Then a month ago I came across the website for the Wreck of the Mary Rose (this fits in well with a recent thread). Apparently they had brought up some jerkins with the ship. I emailed them for some information, and today I am happy to relate that they sent me full size scale drawings of the jerkin most similar to mine out of the 13 they recovered, along with drawings of the other ones, pictures of the different kinds of buttons and toggles, notes on the work in progress, and locator maps of the ship. I call this primary research. Now I can begin my work. For those who care: the recreated jerkin will hopefully be supported by a whole suit of clothes: a fulled wool doublet and slops, linen blouse with blackwork and smallclothes, knitted silk stockings, and a couched trim felted morion hat. All handmade from period materials using period techniques as far as possible. I am very happy. So will be my husband, since he gets to wear all this after I present the goods at Twelfth Night. Unfortunately I can't spread around the pictures without permission from the Mary Rose Trust, but they were very nice to ME, a Nobody, and sent me the stuff for free. That's good news. Eve Harris do not fold, staple, spindle or mutilate glenda robinson [31,122]CSuX:mary rose trust and surgeon s cap Subject: Re: H-COST: Mary Rose trust and surgeon's cap From: "Glenda Robinson" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 14:06:19 +1000 -Poster: "Glenda Robinson" Eve wrote: >Unfortunately I can't spread around the pictures without permission >from the Mary Rose Trust, but they were very nice to ME, a Nobody, and >sent me the stuff for free. That's good news. > They were also very nice to us. My husband spied a domino "found on the boat" on a webpage, and captioned as a Tudor domino. He asked for more info, as we hadn't seen a domino before WAY later. Well, the webpage was wrong. It was a Napoleonic period domino that must have fallen from a ship and dropped onto the deck of the Mary Rose. They promised to fix it, too. Seems like these people really enjoy their work, and want to help all those others interested too. Also... On the Mary Rose, there was the Silk Velvet surgeon's cap found with the stitching disintegrated. This was part of the travelling exhibition that came to Australia a couple of years ago. There were linen and wool (and leather, too) items found nearby well preserved. I'd like to dig some more on this, as this may possibly be a use of cotton thread. Has anyone else done research on this one? Glenda. r.l. shep [15,123]CSuX:history: we re losing it Subject: H-COST: History: We're Losing It From: "R.L. Shep" Date: Tue, 06 Jul 1999 21:19:43 -0700 -Poster: "R.L. Shep" Some of you may recall that there was a prolonged discussion about how we should take all the old costume books and put them on disk to preserve them In the July 12 issue of Newsweek under Technology there is an article entitled *History: We're Losing It-- They told us digital would last forever. They lied. How do we save the past before it all disappears?* Although it does not specifically talk about costume books it is certainly worth reading and learning from. I basically comes down to *yesterday's miracle drug is today's poison*. There never is an easy answer to these problems. ~!~ R.L.Shep http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks melanie wilson [23,124]CSuX:penny s kids competition Subject: H-COST: Penny's kids competition From: Melanie Wilson Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 04:53:36 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson My daughter 5 gave these answers: 1 BOY 2 GIRL 3 BOY 4 GIRL 5 GIRL Not sure what the answers were as it took over 10 mins to load the picture & I had to get to work b4 the answers came up ! I can try it on others if you like, what age are you aiming at ? Bryony is above average intelligence(not bragging simple for your info !) & used to costume events having been brought up in serveral eras at once :) Hope this helps Mel dave;editors(heritage matters) [29,125]CSuX:history: we re losing it Subject: Re: H-COST: History: We're Losing It From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 12:31:23 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Slightly allied with this thread? Before going digital I spent years printing photos onto special archival paper and the storing the prints in special envelopes so they might last a hundred years. Digital printed out photos start to fade withing 6 months; i have recently found a supplier of archival ink but not for my printer. Any thoughts Dave > > -Poster: "R.L. Shep" > > Some of you may recall that there was a prolonged discussion about how we > should take all the old costume books and put them on disk to preserve them > In the July 12 issue of Newsweek under Technology there is an article > entitled *History: We're Losing It-- They told us digital would last > forever. They lied. How do we save the past before it all disappears?* > Although it does not specifically talk about costume books it is certainly > worth reading and learning from. > I basically comes down to *yesterday's miracle drug is today's poison*. > There never is an easy answer to these problems. > ~!~ R.L.Shep > http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks > schmitt100@aol.com[55,126]CSuX:finished outfit!!! Subject: H-COST: Finished Outfit!!! From: Schmitt100@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 08:24:53 EDT -Poster: Schmitt100@aol.com Wow, my Very First Historical Outfit, partially done for Faire on Saturday! And it looked GOOD! I did a upper-middle class Eliz. woman. I finally received my stays and hoopwire at noon on Friday, so as soon as it arrived, I went to work. The corset wasn't anywhere near as hard as I thought it would be (however I learned a tip - use tin snips to cut corset stays - they snip through easy as paper! Thanks hubby!). The farthingale came out as well. The bum roll of course was quite easy (although a question about washing - it isn't as fully stuffed since I washed it - how do you keep that from happening?). The overskirt is of a forest green (rayon poly blend, but lightweight enough for the 90F plus high humidity in Chicago in July!) and I actually cartridge stitched it into the waistband as well. That wasn't as hard as I thought either - actually I think it was easier to do that than try to pleat the sucker in! The bodice is a rather nice tapestry upholstery remnant. (Unfortunately, the center point didn't go where it was supposed to, exactly, but I was scolded by hubby that NO ONE would notice!) I didn't have enough time to finish an underskirt (I was pleating and hemming the overskirt Saturday morning to go to Faire that afternoon), so I pinned more of the tapestry to the farthingale - hey, it looked good! And I'll finish the underskirt this week, as well as sleeves and skirting and epaulets for the bodice. The whole outfit was topped off by a flat cap and snood and feather fan purcahsed at Faire. The best part, however, was that I entered the costume contest and won for middle class! Now I have to go back next weekend for semi-finals (aww, shucks!). Actually the best part was trying on the skirt after cartridge pleating over the farthingale and bumroll and squealing with delight that it actually looked RIGHT! (However, I couldn't squeal too loud, or jump up and down, cuz hubby was still asleep). Can you tell I'm just a wee bit excited! I always knew h-cost sounded like fun, but now that I've actually DONE an outfit, oh, boy! And once I get mine finished, I start on hubby's! By the way, another thing I didn't get to do is any trimming. What sorts of trim would I use? Plain ribbon? Lacy trim? I don't think I want anything shiny (i.e. metallic) as that would be a bit above my station. Any ideas? hints? tips? Thanks! ********************** Rebecca Schmitt So many books, so little time We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -Albert Einstein schmitt100@aol.com ********************** drgurley@aol.com[10,127]CSuX:finished outfit!!! Subject: Re: H-COST: Finished Outfit!!! From: DRGurley@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:54:07 EDT -Poster: DRGurley@aol.com Could someone describe cartridge pleating or cite a source for instruction? I'm going to be working on an Elizabethan skirt and it sounds like that may be the best way to handle the upholstery material I've chosen. Thanks! Dani G franchesca havas [29,128]CSuX:pleating again :) Subject: H-COST: pleating again :) From: "Franchesca Havas" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 09:24:53 -0500 -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" I have a question. It has come up that box pleats and cartridge pleats come from different areas of Europe and time periods. Which one was in use for Henry the VIII? Sincerely, F. Havas Dallas, Texas -----Original Message----- From: DRGurley@aol.com To: h-costume@indra.com Date: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 9:09 AM Subject: Re: H-COST: Finished Outfit!!! : :-Poster: DRGurley@aol.com : :Could someone describe cartridge pleating or cite a source for instruction? :I'm going to be working on an Elizabethan skirt and it sounds like that may :be the best way to handle the upholstery material I've chosen. : :Thanks! :Dani G : aleed [25,129]CSuX:finished outfit!!! Subject: Re: H-COST: Finished Outfit!!! From: aleed Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 11:05:46 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: aleed I have a cartridge-pleating tutorial online at http://www.dnaco.net/~aleed/corsets/cartpleat/ Enjoy, Drea Leed On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 DRGurley@aol.com wrote: > > -Poster: DRGurley@aol.com > > Could someone describe cartridge pleating or cite a source for instruction? > I'm going to be working on an Elizabethan skirt and it sounds like that may > be the best way to handle the upholstery material I've chosen. > > Thanks! > Dani G > henk t jong [20,130]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Mon, 5 Jul 1999 18:56:31 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi all, I wrote: > Don't make the mistake that techniques could reach far-out places fast in > this period; communication for example between courts, was very frequent > indeed. That should have been: 'couldn't reach'. That'll teach me to answer people in a hurry... Henk kat@grendal.rain.com[25,131]CSuX:pleating again :) Subject: Re: H-COST: pleating again :) From: kat@grendal.rain.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 10:55:20 +0000 -Poster: kat@grendal.rain.com > I have a question. It has come up that box pleats and cartridge pleats come > from different areas of Europe and time periods. Which one was in use for > Henry the VIII? Both were in use. In fact, there are portraits where it is fairly obvious that they can be used together in the same garment! I don't have immediate access to the specific portraits but if you look at the waists of the ones in Holbein's painting, the Visual History of Costume (16th Century), Boucher's book (20,000 years of Costume or whatever it is called in your country), Davenport's book (although it is harder to see in B&W) or any good book of 16th Century portraits, you may be able to find them yourself. Kat Kat(June Russell) kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! henk t jong [94,132]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 22:15:54 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi list, My compliments to Robin for her very lucid description of how medieval tailors worked. I completely agree and reached my conclusions roughly the same way, although I'm only just branching out into the 15th c now. There's an added fact too. You'll have to realise that we are used to making patterns on paper. Paper was rare and very expensive during almost the whole 14th c and only used for writing on. The same goes for parchment or vellum, which was even more expensive. Both were almost only available in relatively small formats; about A3 or A2 at the most if parchment was made from a foul or calf. Mostly they were from goat, lamb or sheep and the usable part just wasn't any bigger. Paper was made in double size A4 types maximum (well, not exactly, but near) or even single A4's. This was just too small to make patterns on, if they had wanted or needed to, that is. Patterns on cloth or measuring older garments were probably done, but, what the heck, these sewing artists knew what they were doing and, IMO, worked almost intuitively with a real tailor's eye. > (By cotehardie, I'm guessing you mean the fitted dress worn by Western > European noblewomen in the late 14th and early 15th century. I don't use > the term quite so generally myself, but that seems to be what people mean > nowadays.) > I agree here. IMO a cotte hardi (which is how it was mostly written at the time) is a very specific garment for the idle rich, who didn't have to bend over while working for a living. > Fashion tends toward to extremes, so fitting became tighter and tighter -- > but that happened gradually, over decades. Then necklines began to inch > wider and lower. If you take the columnar fitted dress of mid-century, > with its relatively high jewel-neck, and cut that neckline progressively > lower, you find that this releases pressure on the upper bosom, so the > continuing pressure of the fabric on the lower bosom pushes the breasts > higher. leave (part of) their shoulders bare. > Alternatively, I've seen no illustrations suggesting a separate foundation > garment or body shaper under a 14th-century fitted dress. And that's after > examining many dozens of illustrations of women half-unlaced, or in the > process of dressing, or nursing. Over and over, you see the fitted gown > unlaced to show a plain unfitted chemise underneath, and nothing else. Nor > is there any evidence I know of in written records that names or suggests > such a garment. I can't of course say that nothing of the sort ever > existed, but I feel pretty confident in saying it certainly was not in > routine wear. > Nor have I in 30 years of looking at medieval pictures seen such a foundation garment... ever. > I would guess that the development of foundation garments helped make > possible the regular use of patterns, and also the expansion of tailoring > as a profession. Certainly by the 1500s, tailors could routinely work > independently of their clients, from measurements only. A pretty interesting theory: I'll have to think this one over... > Perhaps it would help if you considered that 14th-century fitted dress to > *be* the foundation garment. After all, it was typically covered by a > second gown; that may have been a fitted overgown (what I would call a > cotehardie, as distinct from a fitted dress worn directly over a shift), My sentiments exactly! Cotte hardi, that is...:-) > or it may have been a fuller garment like a houppelande. Either way, the > dress on the inside would be doing all the hard work of molding and > holding the figure. That dress would have been worn as an everyday basic > garment, and subject to intensive daily wear and perspiration. The perspiration was mostly caught by the shift, but practice learns that you'll have to wash you (under)cotte regularly in summer. This could be a pointer in the direction that summer undercottes (or cottes) were of linen, which keeps better in the laundry than wool does. But so far I have found no real evidence for this. Have you already, Robin? Cheers, Henk schmitt100@aol.com[33,133]CSuX:cartridge pleating Subject: H-COST: Cartridge Pleating From: Schmitt100@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 16:56:56 EDT -Poster: Schmitt100@aol.com This is a great explanation with wonderful pictures. I was doing out of a book with no pictures, but found that the explanations just made it *sound* difficult - it really was a snap! (Of course, I cheated and only did one row of gathering stitches, as I was using a fairly lightweight fabric.) I also found that quilting thread worked great as the gathering stitch thread, as it's coated/waxed for ease of quilting thru many layers. By the way, Drea, your costuming pages are wonderful and I spend many (supposed to be working) hours drooling there! Thanks! ********************** Rebecca Schmitt So many books, so little time We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -Albert Einstein schmitt100@aol.com ********************** In a message dated 7/7/99 3:41:10 PM Central Daylight Time, owner-h-costume-digest@indra.com writes: > I have a cartridge-pleating tutorial online at > http://www.dnaco.net/~aleed/corsets/cartpleat/ > > Enjoy, > > Drea Leed lynnx@mc.net[23,134]CSuX:archival ink suggestion (shot in the dark) Subject: H-COST: Archival ink suggestion (shot in the dark) From: lynnx@mc.net Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 16:39:52 -0700 -Poster: lynnx@mc.net > Digital printed out photos start to fade withing 6 months; i have > recently found a supplier of archival ink but not for my printer. > Any thoughts > Dave > Ink refill kits? What kind of printer do you have? Also, where is this company? I want some! (some day... sound kinda expensive) If they make refill kits for your printer, you could try getting a kit (usually has a syringe), save empty cartridges, and try to get their ink in a container you can get it out of. Then use the kit refill your cartridges with their ink. (You might have to use up the ink in the refil kit first.) ****CAUTION****!!! Ink refill kits work fine for some people, others get everything from lousy output to ruined printers. If you are not a gadget-head or are running a gigabuck printer, BE CAREFUL, try it out on a cheaper printer, or just *don't* - Contact the highest-up person you can at the ink co. and ask them to make cartridges for your printer. franchesca havas [16,135]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum From: "Franchesca Havas" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 17:17:05 -0500 -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" So how did the term cotehardie come into being? We know of stories of why a garment is called the gates of hell, how about this one? Sincerely, F. Havas Dallas, Texas -----Original Message----- From: Robin Netherton To: Historic Costume List Date: Tuesday, July 06, 1999 12:31 PM Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants dave;editors(heritage matters) [37,136]CSuX:archival ink suggestion (shot in the dark) Subject: Re: H-COST: Archival ink suggestion (shot in the dark) From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 23:39:02 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: lynnx@mc.net > > Ink refill kits? What kind of printer do you have? Also, where is this > company? I want some! (some day... sound kinda expensive) The co. I mentioned were offering replacement cartridges only and then only for High end I; e expensive Canon printers. I will have to try ans ee if I have still got the message somewhere.> > If they make refill kits for your printer, you could try getting a kit > (usually has a syringe), save empty cartridges, and try to get their ink > in a container you can get it out of. Then use the kit refill your > cartridges with their ink. (You might have to use up the ink in the > refil kit first.) I use colour ink refills on my cheap Canon printers The biggest bottles Ican get and black refills on all printers.Its fine for graphics etc; However I do most of my photographic quality output on an HP Deskjet 1120; I dont use refills on this because the yellow always runs out first and the refill yellow is not fine enough it blocks and stops and starts. On ordinary paper as well as photo type paper. I might try the service that refills the catridges for you , but this will most probably be the same problem; they are all still waterbased inks and so will fade rapidly.. Although I have seen a Lex printer that includes a varnishing sytem I have not found anybody that as actually used one . In the predigital days when we used to use a Roneo machine it had a spray attachment that sprayed each sheet as it came out of the back Will someone please invent one for deskjet printers. Dave , kevin + mara riley [68,137]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: Re: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: Kevin + Mara Riley Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 15:18:42 -0400 -Poster: Kevin + Mara Riley That's correct -- the term 'plaid' is a lowland term referring to the fact that the garment is made of cloth that has been pleated (no, the pleats aren't sewn in, at least in the early period). You basically take your cloak cloth, pleat it, and wrap it around you. Since the plaid often doubled as one's blanket at night, it wouldn't have been practical to sew the pleats in permanently. Plaids also could be of plain (i.e., not tartan) cloth. The arisaidh is NOT a skirt. It's a piece of cloth worn in addition to chemise, skirt, and bodice, to act as a cloak/covering. There are several ways of wearing the arisaidh. One is simply to drape it over your head, with the center of the length of cloth at the top of your head, and then belt it around you; or pin the two front edges at your breast, and wear it like a shawl. Belting does help keep it out of the way if you're going to be very active, though. The other way is to pleat it like a man's kilt, but along the shorter width of the cloth, not its length. You then belt it around your waist, and pin the top two edges at your breast (or just one of the top corners, if you so choose). I have seen no documentation whatsoever as to whether women's arisaidhs were wrapped 'opposite' to men's plaids. I think that rumor derives from the Victorian convention of having men's and women's garments fasten differently. Also, kilts are men's garments. Properly speaking, women wear pleated skirts, usually longer than knee-length. The modern man's kilt basically derives (in the latter part of the 1700s, I believe) from the 'great kilt', but with the part of the fabric that is above the belt cut off. The sash is sometimes worn to simulate the effect of the top of the great plaid (sort of). Cheers, Mara At 08:56 PM 07/03/1999 -0700, you wrote: > >-Poster: lynnx@mc.net > >(FWIW to whomever: The word "plaid" had nothing to do with pattern >originally; it meant a large piece of cloth used as a shawl, blanket, >clothes, etc.) > >Alianora, > >Do you have any *reliable, understandable* info about the women's >arasaid (?sp) / skirt combo, especially the size and shape of fabric >they used? I'd *swear* the way the pictures look, the women could have >wrapped a sufficiently wide piece around the waist for the skirt >(selvedge vertical) and then just draped the top like the guys did, with >some style variations of their own. (Also I heard the women wrapped >their skirt/"kilts" opposite the way the men did.) > >Any insights on this? > >Thanks, >Sister Ed Kevin + Mara Riley Home Page http://www.radix.net/~lindo margo anderson [15,138]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum From: Margo Anderson Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 18:36:06 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson >-Poster: "Franchesca Havas" > >So how did the term cotehardie come into being? We know of stories of why a >garment is called the gates of hell, how about this one? With absolutely no substantiation, I'll say that I've been told that it's a "cote for the foolhardy". Could be true, I suppose. Margo stitchwitch [212,139]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf (fwd) Subject: H-COST: Fwd: More on V. of Willendorf (fwd) From: "StitchWitch" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 19:51:56 -0600 (MDT) -Poster: "StitchWitch" >From another list, I found it to be a very interesting article. > > > >STONE AGE FIGURINES DRESSED TO TELL > >Scripps Howard News Service > >Must credit Pittsburgh Post-Gazette > >Recommended for weekend use > >By BYRON SPICE > > > >Pittsburgh Post-Gazette > > > >Besides a woven hat and a pair of dainty bracelets, the voluptuous > >Venus of Willendorf doesn't wear so much as a smile. So perhaps it's > >not surprising that the exaggerated sexual features of this stone-cold > >babe ... a 4-inch-tall limestone figurine unearthed near Willendorf, > >Austria, in 1908 ... have mesmerized archaeologists and art historians > >much as the charms of Pamela Anderson Lee have distracted otherwise > >diligent Web surfers. > > > >But experts now are taking a second look at the scanty bits of apparel > >worn by Miss Willendorf and by some of the hundreds of other "Venus" > >figurines that have been preserved from Ice Age Europe. They say the > >necklaces, string skirts and other "Venus-wear" that do so little to > >hide the obvious are proving to be equally revealing about the > >hunter-gatherer societies that existed along the receding glaciers. > > > >These odd and mysterious figurines suggest that people living 26,000 > >years ago possessed well-developed weaving skills that were at least as > >valuable to the community as the strength and prowess of male hunters. > >Even the head dress worn by the Venus of Willendorf arguably reflects > >social traditions still seen today in the babushkas worn by women in > >Eastern Europe or even the bonnets favored by Amish women in America. > > > >These new insights, ironically, are derived from Venus-wear that has > >been in plain sight for decades. > > > >"The vast majority of folks have simply ignored the fact that these are > >woven fabrics," said James Adovasio, director of the Mercyhurst > >Archaeological Institute in Erie, Pa. It's an oversight he attributes > >to the mindset of archaeologists. Stone implements, not textiles, > >supposedly were state of the art during the Paleolithic period, the > >Stone Age. > > > >"When you have these stereotypes, you don't look beyond the > >stereotype," he explained. > > > >But those assumptions began to change a couple years ago, when > >Adovasio, his Mercyhurst colleague David Hyland and University of > >Illinois anthropologist Olga Soffer uncovered evidence that the > >Paleolithic people in what is now the Czech Republic were making twine, > >fashioning nets and even producing cloth. > > > >The textiles themselves hadn't survived more than 20 millenia, but the > >cordage and woven articles had left impressions in the mud floors of > >huts. Those preserved impressions enabled Adovasio and Hyland to > >indirectly study the long-gone textiles, even allowing them to analyze > >types of knots. > > > >"Simply having the ability to make string must have dramatically > >changed people's lives," said Elizabeth Barber, a linguist and > >archaeologist at Occidental College, near Los Angeles. String lets > >people haul things and catch things in nets. "I call it the string > >revolution. It must have been as powerful as the invention of writing > >and the wheel." > > > >Nets, in particular, suggest that hunter-gatherers need not have relied > >on hunting mammoths, deer and other big game. Women and even children > >likely would have been involved in hunting small game, constructing and > >hanging nets and then chasing varmints into the trap. > > > >But studying Ice Age textiles is like chasing phantoms, so Soffer, > >Adovasio and Hyland are pursuing other lines of evidence in hopes of > >further bolstering their claims. The Venus figurines are one such > >effort. > > > >In the case of the Venus of Willendorf, Adovasio said, they knew they > >were dealing with an icon. When he and Soffer went to examine the > >statuette at the Naturhistorisches Museum in Vienna, they found > >themselves escorted to an inner room with special lighting, where > >museum officials produced the figurine from a special leather case > >embossed in gold. > > > >"I told them I needed to hold it to examine it," Adovasio said. "It was > >like I was asking to touch the Holy Grail." When given permission, he > >focused on the Venus' head, which has no facial features, but an > >intricately carved covering. "They thought it was an elaborate > >hairstyle," but it was unlike any hairdo he had ever seen. He came away > >convinced that it was a woven cap, not woven hair, with concentric rows > >of plaited material. > > > >Only a minority of the Venus figurines have any apparel. Adovasio and > >his colleagues, however, have noted the presence of belts, bracelets, > >various headcoverings, string skirts and bandeaux, narrow strips of > >material worn on the torso. "Even the so-called naked ones often have > >necklaces and bandeaux, which are often written off as tattoos," he > >noted. "iBut tattoos with seams?" > > > >A notable aspect of Venus-wear is the detail in which it is depicted. > >The figurines generally aren't very realistic ... the pear-shaped, > >disproportioned Venus of Willendorf likely had as much resemblance to > >women of the Paleolithic as she does to contemporary women. The Venus > >heads usually have no faces. > > > >Yet the detail of the Venus-wear is tremendous. "You can tell which way > >the string was twisted," Adovasio said. "It's really kind of amazing." > > > >At the simplest level, he said, the depiction of fabric provides > >evidence that Paleolithic people were familiar with cloth, which would > >suggest that weaving had been developing for hundreds of thousands of > >years before the figurines were carved or molded. > > > >"This has been my argument for more than a quarter of a century," said > >Alexander Marshack, an image analyst for Harvard University's Peabody > >Museum of Archaeology and Ethnology. "The capacity was there. It is the > >human capacity. The basic skills are human and found all over the > >world. > > > >"Weaving was just a way of problem solving," he continued. "They had no > >metal, but they used everything available in their ecology. They were > >just like us. We have become more technically advanced, not smarter." > > > >His argument was based only on this rationale, rather than > >archaeological evidence, so many scientists dismissed it. Now that > >Soffer and Adovasio are finding textile artifacts, "I feel, perhaps, a > >little vindicated," he said. > > > >But when trying to determine what these figurines meant to Paleolithic > >people, "you have to be careful about what you deduce from the > >evidence," he cautioned. > > > >"It's hard to say what they mean," agreed Rosemary Joyce, an > >anthropologist at the University of California-Berkeley who studies > >South American figurines dating back 3,500 years. These sorts of > >figurines are found throughout the world and the ages and, like symbols > >today, they likely meant different things to different people. > > > >It's probably safe to assume that the statuettes were a means of > >communication used by preliterate people, she said. Just as a newspaper > >focuses on things that are new, interesting or significant while > >ignoring everyday details, the people who made these clay or stone > >figurines weren't so much interested in reflecting society as they were > >in representing moments of importance. > > > >So the fact that they expended so much energy on the details of apparel > >suggests there is something important about these items. Likewise, "the > >absence of skin (or fur) clothing thrusts the few woven objects into > >high relief," Joyce said. Perhaps the makers are commenting on the > >importance of textiles in their lives, or use the woven objects to > >identify people who are weavers, or the woven objects could simply be > >ceremonial clothing that denotes an individual's status. > > > >Soffer and colleagues noted that some figurines have string skirts. > >Occidental's Barber has traced the use of string skirts from the late > >Stone Age through the Bronze Age to present day; consistently, string > >skirts have been a sign of fertility. > > > >Even today, girls in Albania wear string skirts only after reaching > >puberty. > > > >Likewise, if the Venus of Willendorf is indeed wearing a head covering, > >it too might be related to a present-day practice. Barber said women in > >some cultures, seeing the hair as an analogue for pubic hair, routinely > >cover their heads after marriage. It's a tradition still seen in > >Eastern Europe and one that has been taken a step further by the Amish, > >who cover the hair of girls and women alike. > > > >"You have to take all this with a grain of salt,"Barber added. "But the > >material all hangs together." > > > >Symbolism aside, the evidence of Ice Age textiles continues to grow. > >Soffer, now on sabbatical, has been traveling across Russia, Germany > >and France, gathering photos and casts of woven clothing for Adovasio > >and Hyland to analyze. > > > >She reports seeing what appear to be bone and ivory weaving tools, such > >as battens, and some impressions of what may be basketry. "This is all > >work very much in progress," she said in an e-mail message. > > > >This summer, Adovasio has joined her in France, where they hope to > >examine the only known examples of Ice Age fabrics ... stamp-size bits > >that, when excavated in the 1920s, were assumed to be more recent > >textiles that had somehow gotten mixed into an Ice Age site. > > > >The Venus figurines not only reinforce the significance of these > >textile artifacts, but provide the "ideological overtones" of the > >Paleolithic peoples, Adovasio said. "They're expressing what society > >believes was important." > > > >(Distributed by Scripps Howard News Service.) > > > > > > > --------- End forwarded message ---------- > Kate ---- StitchWitch Man is certainly stark mad: he cannot make a flea, yet he makes gods by the dozens. - Montaigne, Essays - 1588 Get your free, private email at http://mail.excite.com/ penny ladnier [11,140]CSuX:austin power s designer interview Subject: H-COST: Austin Power's Designer Interview From: "Penny Ladnier" Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 22:58:29 -0400 -Poster: "Penny Ladnier" Costume designer from Austin Powers: http://www.cnn.com/STYLE/9907/06/appel.transcript/ Later... Penny Ladnier The Costume Gallery http://www.costumegallery.com barbmvd@aol.com[59,141]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: Re: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: BarbMVD@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 23:26:18 EDT -Poster: BarbMVD@aol.com The plaid (pronounced "plade", is and always has been a garment. If I may butt in, your discussion of the arisaid seems to cover a far greater time period than would be appropriate, and brings the arisaid into the Victorian era, far overextending its actual wear. It is in fact one of the earlier garments but it was still worn at the end of the 17c. And yes, it would seem to be the female version of the belted plaid. An early description : "The ancient dress . . . is a white Plade, having a few small stripes of black, blew and red, it reached from the Neck to the Heels, and was tied before on the Breast with a Buckle of Silver or Brass, according to the Quality of the person." "The Plad being pleated all around, was tied with a Belt below the Breast; the Belt was of Leather, and several pieces of Silver intermixed with the leather like a Chain. The Lower end of the Belt has a piece of Plate, about 8 inches long, and three in breadth, curiously engraven, the end of which was adorned with fine Stones or pieces of Corral." There are two illustrations of the Arisad/aristad on pages 170 and 205 of McIan's Costumes of the Clans first published in 1845 and reprinted in 1980 by Alfred A. Knopf as "The Clans of the Scottish Highlands. Among the descriptions of the 1740's, the letters of Edward Burt provide great insight - ". . made of silk or fine worsted, chequered with various lively colours, two breadths wide and three yards in length, it is brought over the head, and may hide or discover the face according to the wearers fancy or accason, it reaches to the waist behind, one corner low as the ancle on one side, and the other part in folds hangs down from the opposite arm." Now about the belted plaid worn by the men, the originals were long pieces of cloth, 12 to 15 feet, which wrapped around the wearer being pleated as he wrapped and fastened at the waist by a belt or a cord. It was wrapped so as to leave a long length on the end which was brought over the shoulder and tucked in or fastened. The modern kilt of feileadh beag (little plaid) consisted of a separation of the early garment into a pleated portion and a length to be fastened at the shoulder. This new style was popularized about 1720 and the sewn in place pleating was from that time. And since the plaid is the garment, it is equally important to remember the definition of tartan. In the old sense it referred to a kind of cloth, a thin hard material made from wool spun very fine and woven at as many as 70 threads to the inch, its texture was more like linen. This old hard tartan was extremely durable and waterproof. In the 18th century (my time period) uniform clan tartans did not exist, and in Martin's writings 1703 - "Every isle differs from each other in their Fancy in making Plads, as to the Stripes in Breadth and Colours. This Humour is as different through the main Land of the Highlands, in so far that they who have seen those places, are able at the first View of a man's Plad, to guess the Place of his Residence . . . " >From the viewpoint of the reenactor up to and through the 18th century, those who wear the Plaid must remember to treat this fabric as functional garb, not the decorative nonsense of the Victorian period. Barbara Delorey m311@aol.com[18,142]CSuX:ot--seattle, wa area Subject: H-COST: OT--Seattle, WA area From: M311@aol.com Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 23:35:24 EDT -Poster: M311@aol.com I have noticed that people on this list are from the Seattle area. I am looking for someone from the Seattle/Everett/Lynnwood area. My brother just moved there and is a single father. He has 2 girls. The one is chubby and he is trying to find clothes for her. Does anyone know of a place that carries clothes for girls that has half sizes? She can wear some 14/16 but she is only 8 years old. Trying to find the little girl styles has proven hard. He has tried Walmart, Kmart and Target with not much luck. She isn't real tall either. I am to far away to sew for her and my mom said she hasn't sewn in years. I would like private responses since this is off topic. I just didn't know of a store to tell him and thought maybe you all would know. Thanks, Kelly m311@aol.com sue shatto [26,143]CSuX:price reduction for miniature millinery Subject: H-COST: Price reduction for Miniature Millinery From: Sue Shatto Date: Wed, 07 Jul 1999 20:53:13 -0400 -Poster: Sue Shatto Historic Millinery in Miniatures Price Sheet Miniature Style Price    Alexandra - 1893 $99.00 now $60    Autumn Capote - 1880 $99.00 now $60    Czarina - 1904 $79.00 now $50    Duchess Of Leinster - 1780 $99.00 now $60    Fanchon - 1850 $79.00 now $50    Glengarry - 1817 $79.00 now $50    Green Bibi - 1830 $99.00 now $60    Josephine - 1795 $79.00 now$50    Leghorn - 1912 $79.00 now $60    Lunardi - 1784 $99.00 now $60    Pamela - 1815 $99.00 now $60    Pink Bibi - 1821 $99.00 now $60    Spring Capote - 1882 $99.00 now $60    Young Victoria - 1837 $79.00 now $50    Set Of Boxes $50.00 now $30 All miniature shoes are now $20 julie adams [15,144]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Julie Adams Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:26:54 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Julie Adams I think these are the support garments in question. I've seen some with spagetti straps, but clearly these don't have any. And anyone who'se ever made a victorian corset cut like this, and tried it on before the bones are in, will tell you that without something stiff, the top will roll right over. I don't see how these garments would work without some stiffening. http://www.idyllmtn.com/savaskan/bathhouse_babes.html Julie Adams margo anderson [17,145]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf (fwd) Subject: Re: H-COST: Fwd: More on V. of Willendorf (fwd) From: Margo Anderson Date: Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:42:33 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson I just HAVE to take issue with this statement: >> >A notable aspect of Venus-wear is the detail in which it is depicted. >> >The figurines generally aren't very realistic ... the pear-shaped, >> >disproportioned Venus of Willendorf likely had as much resemblance to >> >women of the Paleolithic as she does to contemporary women. Not very realistic? IMHO, the Venus is a very realistic depiction of a very fat woman. Obviously, most people today don't see a lot of fat women naked..but that IS what we look like! Margo stitchwitch [38,146]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf (fwd) Subject: Re: H-COST: Fwd: More on V. of Willendorf (fwd) From: "StitchWitch" Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 08:12:18 PDT -Poster: "StitchWitch" > I just HAVE to take issue with this statement: > > >> >A notable aspect of Venus-wear is the detail in which it is depicted. > >> >The figurines generally aren't very realistic ... the pear-shaped, > >> >disproportioned Venus of Willendorf likely had as much resemblance to > >> >women of the Paleolithic as she does to contemporary women. > > Not very realistic? IMHO, the Venus is a very realistic depiction of a very > fat woman. Obviously, most people today don't see a lot of fat women > naked..but that IS what we look like! > > Margo I wondered about that one myself. Not all of us are model thin! Who would really want to be, with all the trouble it takes to get and stay that way for most of us? (I realize that some folks are thin, and can do nothing about it, which has its own problems.) Besides, those of us who are Goddess sized get to wear lots more pretty fabric! Kate ---- StitchWitch Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim. - Santayana, Life of Reason, 1905 Get your free, private email at http://mail.excite.com/ hope h. dunlap [87,147]CSuX:big clothes for little girl Subject: H-COST: Big clothes for Little Girl From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:08:05 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" I sympathize with your brother's problem. I have a friend with a downs syndrome girl about the same age, even heavier than you describe and normal height. She gets by with carefully selected thrift store items and a neighborhood seamstress who alters every last thing, ie the sleeves and legs are always miles too long, and need shortening. When you pay $2 for a garment, you can afford to pay the seamstress $8 to take up the legs or sleeves. This works for tops and bottoms, but tends to be prohibitive for waisted garments. Every Spring and Fall there is the massive effort to provide new clothes that fit for this quickly growing girl. But she always looks just super, incredibly well coordinated and turned out. It is pretty easy to sew for a girl who hasn't yet begun to develop. My far-away female relatives sewed for me all the time. My mother selected and purchased the pattern in the correct size, noted my variations in dimensions. She sent my relatives the pattern and changes required, and clothes would come back. She often sent the actual fabric too. This company will provide perfectly customized patterns for her, but it is somewhat costly for a growing Web-based service I've seen, $39 for the initial sign-up, $10-20 for each pattern, then there is more cost to update as she grows. The range of patterns for different life-style situations is comprehensive. Alternatively, your brother could plug her measurements into this on-line pattern sloper drafting site periodically and e-mail the results to you to draft up: http://www.panix.com/~aqn/tailoring/drafting/index.html. It includes bodice, sleeve, skirt, pants, and vest patterns. On-line sources for "standard" plus-size patterns are shown at the bottom of the second list of FAQ below. I am intrigued by the quality, skill, and low price of this internet custom dressmaker in Hawaii. Her site is well worth visiting and considering. She is a skilled pattern drafter and sewer, and her prices are extremely reasonable: http://home.att.net/~merylh/dressmak/patterns.htm. J. C. Penney has a plus size and a super plus size catalog for boys and girls. Their contact is listed in the FAQ below. Several mall stores are really "plus size" stores in disguise, fashions so pretty you may not realize they are plus sizes: April Cornell, Elisabeth, Amanda Fielding, August Max, The Avenue, Lane Bryant. Your brother might call the local malls and ask if they are there. Alterations will still be required however, due to the girl's short stature, so this is the pricey way to go. The Web has some super resources for "plus size" girls: http://www.blessingsindresses.com/plus/2.htm is limited, but good. Here is a list of resources for plus size people that is simply extraordinary: http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/fat-acceptance-faq/clot hing/us1.html for stores A-K, http://www.cs.uu.nl/wais/html/na-dir/fat-acceptance-faq/clot hing/us2.html for stores L-Z. These lists are maintained quarterly, cover women, men, boys, and girls, and must be seen to be believed. They have western wear, 501 Levis to size 50, school uniforms, swimsuits and sports apparel, confirmation and party dresses, dance wear and leggings, and riding apparel. If you don't have Web access, write back, and I will copy the entire current listing of hundreds of Web, mail-order, and other stores nationwide. The list is extremely well annotated, and includes a number of well known stores like Eddie Bauer and Lands' End, which you wouldn't normally think of as plus size sources. Specifies precisely what you can expect to find there and the size range and how to access them at the store, i.e. in-store, catalog, special order. Good luck, Hope H. Dunlap amanda reeves [53,148]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf and a shakespeare question Subject: H-COST: More on V. of Willendorf and a Shakespeare question From: "Amanda Reeves" Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 11:04:51 -0500 -Poster: "Amanda Reeves" I have to come in on this one. > > >> >A notable aspect of Venus-wear is the detail in which it is depicted. > > >> >The figurines generally aren't very realistic ... the pear-shaped, > > >> >disproportioned Venus of Willendorf likely had as much resemblance to > > >> >women of the Paleolithic as she does to contemporary women. I always tell my sons that these "contemporary women" they see on TV and movies are computer images.........they aren't real. (a little joke from a mom with 4 sons) > > Not very realistic? IMHO, the Venus is a very realistic depiction of a > > very fat woman. Obviously, most people today don't see a lot of fat women > > naked..but that IS what we look like! I wouldn't say VERY fat, but certainly not buff! I personally like the softness of her curves. Can you imagine the ladies back then doing sit-ups? ------------------------------------------------------------------------- > I wondered about that one myself. Not all of us are model thin! Who would > really want to be, with all the trouble it takes to get and stay that way > for most of us? (I realize that some folks are thin, and can do nothing > about it, which has its own problems.) I'm a belly dancer, a vegetarian, don't drink alcohol, work out (light weight) at the gym every-other-day during the summer, take a yoga class once a week AND I'M STILL NOT THIN! I certainly can't imagine myself dancing without my full rounded curves! > Besides, those of us who are Goddess sized get to wear lots more pretty > fabric! Even though I'm petite (5'3" size 9/10) I shop in the Plus size departments for this very reason! Nothing feels better than large, loose, soft cloth! (thus the appeal of ME dancing.....veils, scarves, skirts) Now, for a costuming question. Three of my sons are in Shakespeare Under the Stars. http://www.emilyann.org/sutstars.html My 18 year old is playing Edgar in "King Lear". At one point they are going to put him in a loin cloth (where he is posing as a madman). Would Shakespeare have done this? We personally don't care if he's in it or not, but they try to be completely authentic. Amanda lynn downward [34,149]CSuX:price reduction for miniature millinery Subject: Re: H-COST: Price reduction for Miniature Millinery From: Lynn Downward Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 10:22:11 -0800 -Poster: Lynn Downward >-Poster: Sue Shatto > >Historic Millinery in Miniatures >Price Sheet > > > Miniature Style Price > Alexandra - 1893 $99.00 now $60 > Autumn Capote - 1880 $99.00 now $60 > Czarina - 1904 $79.00 now $50 > Duchess Of Leinster - 1780 $99.00 now $60 > Fanchon - 1850 $79.00 now $50 > Glengarry - 1817 $79.00 now $50 > Green Bibi - 1830 $99.00 now $60 > Josephine - 1795 $79.00 now$50 > Leghorn - 1912 $79.00 now $60 > Lunardi - 1784 $99.00 now $60 > Pamela - 1815 $99.00 now $60 > Pink Bibi - 1821 $99.00 now $60 > Spring Capote - 1882 $99.00 now $60 > Young Victoria - 1837 $79.00 now $50 > Set Of Boxes $50.00 now $30 > > All miniature shoes are now $20 Sue, please reprint your website for those of us dumb enough not to have bookmarked it. (Im, certainly guilty of that.) LynnD stitchwitch [28,150]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf Subject: Re: H-COST: More on V. of Willendorf From: "StitchWitch" Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 10:29:44 PDT -Poster: "StitchWitch" > I wouldn't say VERY fat, but certainly not buff! I personally like the > softness of her curves. Can you imagine the ladies back then doing sit-ups? Perhaps the occasional mad dash away from a saber-tooth, but not sit-ups. I had read a theory that debated the first usage of clothing. It proponded that, rather than covering up one's naughty bits, clothing instead accented them. Thus, one might picture one's ancesters strolling about the early African plains, painted and plaited with procreation in mind. An interesting thought, that . . . Kate ---- StitchWitch Fanaticism consists in redoubling your effort when you have forgotten your aim. - Santayana, Life of Reason, 1905 Get your free, private email at http://mail.excite.com/ robesof@aol.com[18,151]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf Subject: Re: H-COST: More on V. of Willendorf From: RobesOf@aol.com Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 13:44:24 EDT -Poster: RobesOf@aol.com << I had read a theory that debated the first usage of clothing. It proponded that, rather than covering up one's naughty bits, clothing instead accented them. Thus, one might picture one's ancesters strolling about the early African plains, painted and plaited with procreation in mind. An interesting thought, that . . . >> I think thats been done to a degree throughout time (even now). One example I read about is the cod piece having elaborate decorations, I'm assuming to attract the eye to one's masculinity. Although the "naughty bits" are covered, they were designed to attract...with procreation in mind, maybe. Do you think? Erica henk t jong [22,152]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 17:20:22 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi List, Franchesca wrote: > So how did the term cotehardie come into being? We know of stories of why a > garment is called the gates of hell, how about this one? The word 'hardi' means 'bold' or 'brave', and in this instance could have been meant for a person who did not mind that other people say his or her bodyshape in this narrow outfit or 'cotte'. Today it would be named a 'risky garment'. Henk lavolta press [80,153]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: Lavolta Press Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 17:31:45 -0700 -Poster: Lavolta Press My husband and I took this week off to look for tile and fixtures for remodeling the bathroom, with only moderate success so far. However, we discovered the most amazing fabric store. It's the size of a reasonably-sized independent fabric store, and almost all the stock is pure silk fabrics. All the fabrics are natural--no synthetics and no blends. There are a few linens and cottons, but the bulk of the store is pure silks. They have lots of silk taffetas, plain and changeable (shot). They have striped taffetas--all widths of stripes and lots of color combinations--tablecloth check taffeta, and some plaid taffeta (surprisingly little plaid though). (I bought two silk striped fabrics, with subtle color gradations of very narrow stripes, that are perfect for mid-19th-century dresses.) They have pique taffeta (tiny woven patterns), taffeta pintucked in diamond shapes, and taffeta shirred up in "stripes" like the skirts of dresses in some 18th-century portraits. They have silk taffetas printed in big toile de Jouy (sp?) designs. They have machine-embroidered taffetas. They have silk brocades, including paisley patterns, patterns suitable for Renaissance costumes, one 18th-century style pink-floral-stripes-on-white pattern (not a large selection of this type), and some "napeolonic bees" sorts of patterns--not bees precisely, but early 19th-century-style patterns about the right sizes scattered over the fabric. They have silk organzas, plain, changeable, striped, spotted, and with various other woven patterns. They have silk plus metal "tissue" fabric. They have pure silk satins in a good historic dress weight (not the thin modern lingerie weight). They have silk velvet--heavy weight, short pile, probably intended for upholstery but might work for clothes. The few linens displayed (I forget if there were cottons, and I don't think there were wools) were OK, but nothing to get excited about in terms of quality, rarity, price, or the size of the selection. It's really a place to buy silk. The store is oriented toward decorating, which means the average fabric width is about 54", with some 60" and some 45" widths. For most fabrics lots of yardage was on the rolls. Although there are some upholstery weight silks, and books on making curtains are displayed, most of the silks are the proper weight for historic clothing rather than modern upholstery weight. (They do not, however, carry the very thin, slippery silks popular for modern blouses.) They have every color you can imagine--not in every pattern, of course, but most patterns are available in several colors. The patterns are high-quality and tasteful by my standards, none are outstandingly modern, and most are very suitable for historic styles of one period or another. Prices range from $22-$25/yard for dupionis, through $39/yard for plain and changeable taffetas, through about $60/yard for satins and brocades, to $120/yard for the velvet (significantly more expensive than most of their fabrics, though it was about 60" wide). On the whole I'd say the prices are signficantly better than Britex (since this store sells wider fabrics) and the silk selection is bigger. They are perfectly happy to sell retail as well as wholesale, on the spot (rather than back ordering), and if there is any lower limit to the yardage you can buy they didn't tell me about it. The store is: The Silk Trading Co. 1616A 16th Street San Francisco, CA 94103 (415) 282-5574 They also have a store in Los Angeles, but did not give me the address. They say they will swatch and sell by mail. Fran Grimble --------------------------------------------- Visit our web pages! Books on historic costume and vintage clothes http://www.best.com/~lavolta/index.htm Historic and vintage dance http://www.best.com/~lavolta/dance/index.htm dietmar [26,154]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum Subject: H-COST: Re: Cotehardie Conundrum From: Dietmar Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 13:23:45 +0000 -Poster: Dietmar Greetings, Henk wrote: > The word 'hardi' means 'bold' or 'brave', and in this instance > could have been meant for a person who did not mind that other > people say his or her bodyshape in this narrow outfit or 'cotte'. > Today it would be named a 'risky garment'. The previously mentioned word 'foolhardy' means someone that is foolishly brave and adventurous, so you can see the relatonship. They also came into use at about the same time. Regards, Dietmar "Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." hope h. dunlap [20,155]CSuX:unique patterns Subject: H-COST: Unique Patterns From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 13:06:08 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" The cost to update your measurements for Unique Patterns is only $5.00. Given the extraordinary accuracy of the patterns, this might make it a viable option for your plus size girl. I'd guess she would need a pattern update once per year. To get a catalog update is $15, but there's no requirement to get it. The $39 initial fee includes helping to get your measurements and to get the 200-pattern catalogue, and the new pattern updates are on the Website. It's a lifetime membership, and your little girl will be ready to sew herself in 3-4 years, so she can use it the rest of her life. Hope H. Dunlap sue shatto [32,156]CSuX:price reduction for miniature millinery Subject: Re: H-COST: Price reduction for Miniature Millinery From: Sue Shatto Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 13:39:45 -0400 -Poster: Sue Shatto I am so sorry. Here is the address http://www.VictorianMillinery.com >> Miniature Style Price >> Alexandra - 1893 $99.00 now $60 >> Autumn Capote - 1880 $99.00 now $60 >> Czarina - 1904 $79.00 now $50 >> Duchess Of Leinster - 1780 $99.00 now $60 >> Fanchon - 1850 $79.00 now $50 >> Glengarry - 1817 $79.00 now $50 >> Green Bibi - 1830 $99.00 now $60 >> Josephine - 1795 $79.00 now$50 >> Leghorn - 1912 $79.00 now $60 >> Lunardi - 1784 $99.00 now $60 >> Pamela - 1815 $99.00 now $60 >> Pink Bibi - 1821 $99.00 now $60 >> Spring Capote - 1882 $99.00 now $60 >> Young Victoria - 1837 $79.00 now $50 >> Set Of Boxes $50.00 now $30 >> >> All miniature shoes are now $20 > > >Sue, please reprint your website for those of us dumb enough not to have >bookmarked it. (Im, certainly guilty of that.) > >LynnD > > dietmar [26,157]CSuX:more on v. of willendorf Subject: H-COST: Re: More on V. of Willendorf From: Dietmar Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 13:28:02 +0000 -Poster: Dietmar Greetings, Erica wrote: > I think thats been done to a degree throughout time (even now). > One example I read about is the cod piece having elaborate > decorations, I'm assuming to attract the eye to one's masculinity. > Although the "naughty bits" are covered, they were designed to > attract...with procreation in mind, maybe. Do you think? I was lead to believe that they were often used to hold poultices to combat the venereal diseases of the day. It wouldn't surprise me, but I don't know the voracity of the story. Regards, Dietmar "Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." susan fatemi [38,158]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: Susan Fatemi Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 18:20:56 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi Lavolta Press wrote: > ..... > The store is: > > The Silk Trading Co. > 1616A 16th Street > San Francisco, CA 94103 > (415) 282-5574 > > They also have a store in Los Angeles, but did not give me the address. > They say they will swatch and sell by mail. > > Fran Grimble > Thanks for posting the info., Fran. Have you tried Silk Road on Broadway in Oakland? 45" dupioni is about $12 (?) Last time I was in there, they had Italian foulard silks for about $6/yd. Susan Fatemi > --------------------------------------------- > Visit our web pages! > Books on historic costume and vintage clothes > http://www.best.com/~lavolta/index.htm > Historic and vintage dance > http://www.best.com/~lavolta/dance/index.htm > -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf carol mitchell [18,159]CSuX:bristol faire/chicagoland costumer s guild Subject: H-COST: Bristol Faire/Chicagoland Costumer's Guild From: Carol Mitchell Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 18:37:31 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Carol Mitchell Is there anyone on this list who asked to be on our mailing list and has not recieved a message this month? If so, please let me know. I've moved twice, and I know people have been lost in the process. We are doing a group trip to Bristol Renaissance Faire this month, and would like to invite all interested parties to come along or meet us there. My e-mail address is CarolineRi@yahoo.com. Carol Mitchell President Chicagoland Costumer's Guild === Carol Mitchell President Chicagoland Costumer's Guild Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com lavolta press [55,160]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: Lavolta Press Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 18:45:02 -0700 -Poster: Lavolta Press > > Thanks for posting the info., Fran. Have you tried Silk Road > on Broadway in Oakland? 45" dupioni is about $12 (?) Last > time I was in there, they had Italian foulard silks for > about $6/yd. Yes, I've been to Silk Road in Oakland and it's a good store. Their prices are better, but they don't have nearly the selection the Silk Trading Company does. What amazed me about this store is, if you were to set up a good-sized store devoted almost entirely to high-quality silks in weights, patterns, and colors suitable for pre-20th-century costuming, this store would be it. They seem to expect people to buy for curtains; maybe people who want pure silk curtains are furnishing in antique styles? I'm not a decorator so I don't know. But I saw lots of fabrics there I have never seen before and would never have expected to see all in one place. This is not just your usual selection of taffetas and dupionis (though they have some of those too, and in wider widths than usual). It's not the kind of store where you walk around going, "Oh, they have pure silks but a lot of them look so modern, " or "Yes, they have some pure silk satins but they're all bridal whites and pastels," or "They have some good stuff but you really have to be selective because many of the fabrics are tasteless." _Everything_ except a few heavy upholstery weights is perfect for one costume or another. Fran > > > Susan Fatemi > > > --------------------------------------------- > > Visit our web pages! > > Books on historic costume and vintage clothes > > http://www.best.com/~lavolta/index.htm > > Historic and vintage dance > > http://www.best.com/~lavolta/dance/index.htm > > > > -- > Oh Noh! Kimonos! > susanf@netwiz.net > http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf -- --------------------------------------------- Visit our web pages! Books on historic costume and vintage clothes http://www.best.com/~lavolta/index.htm Historic and vintage dance http://www.best.com/~lavolta/dance/index.htm lavolta press [17,161]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery again Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery again From: Lavolta Press Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 19:14:05 -0700 -Poster: Lavolta Press BTW, I said I didn't see any wool but my husband is claiming he saw a couple bolts of wool satin. Fran --------------------------------------------- Visit our web pages! Books on historic costume and vintage clothes http://www.best.com/~lavolta/index.htm Historic and vintage dance http://www.best.com/~lavolta/dance/index.htm the purple elephant [29,162]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: The Purple Elephant Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:40:52 +0930 (CST) -Poster: The Purple Elephant On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Susan Fatemi wrote: > > The Silk Trading Co. > > 1616A 16th Street > > San Francisco, CA 94103 > > (415) 282-5574 > > > > They also have a store in Los Angeles, but did not give me the address. > > They say they will swatch and sell by mail. > > > > Fran Grimble > > > Thanks for posting the info., Fran. Have you tried Silk Road > on Broadway in Oakland? 45" dupioni is about $12 (?) Last > time I was in there, they had Italian foulard silks for > about $6/yd. > Stop it! You're making me jealous!!!! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claire F. Clarke "What is this world if, full of care, Physicist, writer, We have no time to stand and stare?" and non environmentally Robert Louis Stevenson friendly substance. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ susan fatemi [33,163]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: H-COST: wings of a dove From: Susan Fatemi Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 19:24:18 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi I know this was discussed awhile back, but I just finally saw the movie. Didn't like the story too much (Agatha Christie did it better!) but the scenes in Venice and the costumes by Sandy Powell were incredible! And there were at least two dresses that just had to be Fortuny (though perhaps a trifle anachronistic for the period) I've never been very interested in this period (1910) until now! Were the clothes authentic to this period?? They seemed very avant-garde and "artsy". Did people wear these gorgeous things or was it just "artistic license"? I always think of "Upstairs Downstairs" in this period and the extremely uptight Lady Marjorie. I wish there were a big book of close-up photos, accompanied by swatches. sigh. Susan Fatemi (by comparison, I saw Phantom Menace and Ever After this weekend, before "Dove". Not worth mentioning in the same breath. Queen Amidala's costumes were just wasted -- they were on screen about 5 seconds each and all the intricate work was completely wasted. I did like the black felt hats of the froggy people.) -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf arianne de dragonnid mka grace payne [39,164]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne" Date: Thu, 08 Jul 99 22:42:59 -Poster: "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne" On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:26:54 -0700 (PDT), Julie Adams wrote: >I think these are the support garments in question. I've seen some with >spagetti straps, but clearly these don't have any. And anyone who'se ever >made a victorian corset cut like this, and tried it on before the bones are >in, will tell you that without something stiff, the top will roll right >over. I don't see how these garments would work without some stiffening. > >http://www.idyllmtn.com/savaskan/bathhouse_babes.html > >Julie Adams ``````````````````````````````````````` Everyone, I've been to this site and have to agree with Julie. Unless there's a good deal of artistic license involved, more than just dropping the spagetti straps, I would have to bet that she's found the foundation garments. They look like TIGHTLY fitted chemises, but nearly horizontal at the armpits, with the breasts practically up on a shelf and no straps in sight. Someone on this (?) list said that the chemises were clinging because they were wet, but even with straps they'd have to be fairly tight to fit ANYTHING like this. And if the absence of the straps ISN'T artistic license (something we will probably never know), then the bodice of the chemises HAS to be stiffened somehow. Yours in the Dream, Arianne de Dragonnid Shire of Castlemere, Kingdom of Trimaris %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% "The founder of my noble line was wont to see Dragons. His Lady rode out from the forest in a gown of samite and was as young on the day he died as on their wedding day." %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% albertcat@aol.com[20,165]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:42:36 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/8/99 10:29:06 PM, you wrote: <> Fortuny was doing his "Delphos" gowns in the period of the film....and up until the 1930s I think, with little changes. The type of people the main characters are would have indeed been avant garde and worn these things. It's what Rose should've looked like in "Titanic" but alas didn't. It is , after all "Le Belle Epoch. albertcat@aol.com[14,166]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:45:10 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/8/99 10:29:06 PM, you wrote: <> Straight outta Japanese history..... "Phantom Menace" is the most unimaginative muck up I've ever seen! I'd seen it all before somewhere else. susan fatemi [31,167]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove From: Susan Fatemi Date: Thu, 08 Jul 1999 21:21:24 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi AlbertCat@aol.com wrote: > > -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com > > In a message dated 7/8/99 10:29:06 PM, you wrote: > > < felt hats of the froggy people.)>> > > Straight outta Japanese history..... Actually, I think, more central asian. They found a tall black felt headress on the "Ice maiden" (Siberia) and one of the Froggy headresses was like Kalmyk or one of the other Mongol sub-groups. But yes, *like* the Japanese and ancient Chinese black hats. > "Phantom Menace" is the most unimaginative muck up I've ever seen! I'd seen > it all before somewhere else. Too bad. All that money -- he could have done something wonderful. -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf aprilx@ns.net (april athena genung)[17,168]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) Date: Thu, 8 Jul 1999 23:01:47 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: AprilX@ns.net (April Athena Genung) Another place that's very good for silks in the Bay Area is Thai Silk in Los Altos. Most of their things are pretty basic but they do have some beautiful hand painted silks. They also have the most amazing devore velvet I've ever seen. It's rayon but with a silk backing. I don't know how period they are but they do have a wide selection, and very reasonably priced. They also do mail order and will send swatches. Also Fran, if you're redecorating you might want to go to Norman Bernie in San Mateo. Or maybe it's Cliff Bernie. One is the owner and one is the store name, I can never remember which is which! They are a lot of fun too. April robin netherton [139,169]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 02:19:37 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton > On Wed, 7 Jul 1999 21:26:54 -0700 (PDT), Julie Adams wrote: > > >I think these are the support garments in question. I've seen some with > >spagetti straps, but clearly these don't have any. And anyone who'se ever > >made a victorian corset cut like this, and tried it on before the bones are > >in, will tell you that without something stiff, the top will roll right > >over. I don't see how these garments would work without some stiffening. > > > >http://www.idyllmtn.com/savaskan/bathhouse_babes.html On Thu, 8 Jul 1999, Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne wrote: > I've been to this site and have to agree with Julie. Unless there's a > good deal of artistic license involved, more than just dropping the > spagetti straps, I would have to bet that she's found the foundation > garments. They look like TIGHTLY fitted chemises, but nearly horizontal > at the armpits, with the breasts practically up on a shelf and no straps > in sight. Someone on this (?) list said that the chemises were clinging > because they were wet, but even with straps they'd have to be fairly > tight to fit ANYTHING like this. And if the absence of the straps ISN'T > artistic license (something we will probably never know), then the > bodice of the chemises HAS to be stiffened somehow. This finally rang a bell for me, and I dug out my copy of Olga Sronkova's "Gothic Woman's Fashion" (Artia: Prague, 1954, printed in Czechoslovakia, no ISBN). The text of this book is rather suspect and suffers further in translation, but the illustrations are great. And she does have what I'm guessing is the picture in question -- I don't have graphic access to the Web, but I'm assuming the picture people have been citing shows two women in strapless dresses with long hair and netted caps, bathing a man whose hands are over his face and who has something, um, large and pear-shaped in a strategic position. (The suggestive nature of that item is probably not a coincidence, as will become clear in a moment.) More than this, Sronkova gives us no less than SIXTEEN more illustrations of bathhouse attendants. They are all from the same manuscript as the one just described -- the Bible of Wenceslas IV. Sronkova tells us this is an unfinished illuminated Bible in German, belonging to the group of manuscripts known as the Wenceslas manuscripts. It was made for Wenceslas IV between 1390-1400, and it "shows an intimate knowledge of the particular tastes of the king." It is in Vienna in the State Library, Codex 2759-2764. Seeing these images as a group, in this context, I'm struck by a few points. initials or borders. I don't know if Sronkova shows us all the bathkeepers in the Bible, but from what she does give us, it appears that the actual scenes of bathing are in initials (she shows two of these). In the other initials shown, they are standing the way you see saints or the astrological Virgo standing, on display, holding their buckets like attributes, with scrub brushes (? they look like leaves gathered in bunches, or like fans) in their hands, with birds waving banners over their heads. The border scenes are more fanciful, with the bathhouse figures intertwined among grapevines, or riding on strange birds, or some such. In other words, the bathhouse ladies are a recurring decorative theme throughout the Bible, presented as drolleries. In other Bibles, you might find half-man-half-beast figures, or animals with hats and musical instruments, or demons or grotesques filling these positions. Sronkova does not show any other drolleries from this manuscript, save for one fully gowned woman she blithely calls a "bathkeeper in holiday dress." (I take issue with that, as she does not even have a bucket.) But I'd guess there are others besides bathhouse women. Sronkova makes a passing king's likes and dislikes." The man being bathed by the bathkeepers -- in the image discussed above as well as in the other showing a bath scene -- is supposed to be the king. (The thing sitting upended in his lap at such a suggestive angle is one of those scrub-brush thingies the bathkeepers are shown carrying in the other images.) Another marginal shows the king and a bathkeeper in stocks! (Yes, the punishment devices with holes to restrain the arms and legs.) Sronkova also quotes another researcher's theory that the woman in the bathkeeper's garment is the king's wife Sophie, but I don't know what the rationale for that is. It's maddening that Sronkova does not show whole pages -- just images in isolation. I would very much like to see whether there are other human drolleries, and of what type, and whether the presentation of the drolleries counterpoints the action or posture of figures in the main illustrations on the same page. Without seeing the whole Bible, I can't draw a lot of conclusions. But given what I do know of the context, and the fact that all these images appear as a decorative theme in a single Bible -- and there's no evidence that bathkeepers of this sort appear in any other sources -- I would be particularly hesitant to view them as an accurate representation of *anything*. Now, context aside, let's look at the dresses. They seem to be chemises (shifts) -- short, sleeveless, filmy, sometimes transparent. In the one image under discussion, the dresses do look strapless, though there's a pale area on the right-hand lady's left shoulder that may have been a strap once. In the other sixteen illustrations (some of which have two women in them), there are clear shoulder straps. Mostly there are two straps on a dress; a few dresses seem to have a single strap, but these are ones in which the woman is shown at a part-sideways angle, so it may have been a factor of the positioning. Some dresses have black straps and some have white. Some have interesting neck trims. Many have fanciful floating sashes at the waist or hips, much like one might see on angels or similar figures in other Gothic marginal illuminations. Sronkova also includes many of the primary (Biblical) illustrations from this book. And as I leafed through these, I found fully-dressed women in many of the same postures and angles as I saw on the bathhouse ladies. For instance, the figure of the left-hand lady in the strapless image is very close in form to that of Delilah shearing Samson's hair. Delilah is wearing a fitted dress with one of those extremely wide necklines that reveals the shoulders. If you take that same figure and eliminate the sleeves from the garment, but preserve the other lines, including the neckline, you have the figure of the bathhouse maiden. You can find similar parallels between other bathkeepers and other primary images. Sronkova shows two more-literal pictures of chemises from major illustrations from this book, both of the birth of Samson. Both show a woman in bed (possibly childbed). In both, the woman is covered up to just below the bust, but you can see a straight-across neckline and black shoulder straps. My guess, then, would be that for the bathkeeper drolleries, the illustrator was showing standard "beautiful women's figures," but changing their dress to echo flimsy chemises, often with decorations or sashes to add a fantasy element. That's just a guess, based on too little information. I'm sure somewhere there's a book about the Wenceslas Bible that analyzes these drolleries in context, and that would shed more light on their role in the pictures. But what I feel pretty secure about right now is that I wouldn't view these as realistic images of women working in bathhouses, or realistic undergarments of any sort. --Robin melanie wilson [7,170]CSuX:unique patterns Subject: H-COST: Unique Patterns From: Melanie Wilson Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 03:39:24 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson Where is their web site ? Mel andrea gideon [11,171]CSuX:slightly ot queen margot Subject: H-COST: slightly OT Queen Margot From: "Andrea Gideon" Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 08:09:15 -0400 -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" I caught Queen Margot last night while fliping channels during a late night baby feeding. I set the VCR to tape the rest, however when I watched it this morning I realized it was longer than my tape. Could someone tell me how it ends? I got to the part after Henri returns to Navarre and he sends her lover back to get Margot. ANdrea aleed [43,172]CSuX:pleating again :) Subject: Re: H-COST: pleating again :) From: aleed Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:31:19 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: aleed >From the pictures I've seen, most english Tudor dresses used box pleats. Drea On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Franchesca Havas wrote: > > -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" > > I have a question. It has come up that box pleats and cartridge pleats come > from different areas of Europe and time periods. Which one was in use for > Henry the VIII? > > Sincerely, > F. Havas > Dallas, Texas > motto: Numquam scribae ridente fide > > -----Original Message----- > From: DRGurley@aol.com > To: h-costume@indra.com > Date: Wednesday, July 07, 1999 9:09 AM > Subject: Re: H-COST: Finished Outfit!!! > > > : > :-Poster: DRGurley@aol.com > : > :Could someone describe cartridge pleating or cite a source for instruction? > :I'm going to be working on an Elizabethan skirt and it sounds like that may > :be the best way to handle the upholstery material I've chosen. > : > :Thanks! > :Dani G > : > > holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [30,173]CSuX:slightly ot queen margot Subject: RE: H-COST: slightly OT Queen Margot From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 16:49:43 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Are you referring to the French film "La Reine Margot" if so then I have this on video and consequently can tell you what happened. Right when Margot's lover "La Mole" returns for her with his friend they are waiting in the street whilst the page has gone to the palace to fetch Margot and her maid. However the Duc d'Guis arrived and with his men at arms fights the two would be rescuers. La Mole is in fact shot in both knees and they are dragged off. Margot then arrives and finds that their attempts have been in vain. By this time the rather unfortunate Charles who read too much of the book for Henri is dying. He shows is mother the book and points out that he read too much she of course is distaught having effectively polished off one of her offspring. Charles is now sweating blood. Margot goes to him to beg for the life of her lover. Charles askes what the time is, naturally it is too late. On the scaffold La Mole is almost blind and asks his friend if Margot is there, he lies and says that she is. The news is broken to the court that Charles is dead and that Henri (his brother) is now king, while this proceeds Margot makes her escape to the excutioner that patched up La Mole after his fight. There she find the body and severed head of her lover. She asked the executioner to embalm the head and to bury the body with her jewels. A coach is waiting outside into which she gets in with La Moles head, tastefully covered, her maid stays behind. She is then shown driving off to meet her husband. The end Hope that does. RAchel hope h. dunlap [54,174]CSuX:unique patterns Subject: RE: H-COST: Unique Patterns From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:07:20 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" This company will provide perfectly customized patterns: http://www.uniquepatterns.com/index_two.html. The detailed measurements taken are far better than any other Web-based service I've seen, $39 for the initial sign-up, submitting measurements per their videotape instructions, and catalogue of current 200 patterns, $10-20 for each fully customized pattern. When her measurements change, there is a $5 charge to update the database. New patterns appear on the WebPages, or alternatively you can get a new catalogue, optional, from time to time for $15. The range of patterns for different life-style situations is comprehensive. Hope H. Dunlap > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of Hope H. Dunlap > Sent: Thursday, July 08, 1999 1:06 PM > To: M311@aol.com; h-costume@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: Unique Patterns > > > > -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" > > The cost to update your measurements for Unique Patterns is > only $5.00. Given the extraordinary accuracy of the > patterns, this might make it a viable option for your plus > size girl. I'd guess she would need a pattern update once > per year. To get a catalog update is $15, but there's no > requirement to get it. The $39 initial fee includes helping > to get your measurements and to get the 200-pattern > catalogue, and the new pattern updates are on the Website. > It's a lifetime membership, and your little girl will be > ready to sew herself in 3-4 years, so she can use it the > rest of her life. > > Hope H. Dunlap > > > > _____ majordomo@indra.com > franchesca havas [38,175]CSuX:slightly ot queen margot Subject: Re: H-COST: slightly OT Queen Margot From: "Franchesca Havas" Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:52:08 -0500 -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" Was up last night too and caught it. Lover and lover's buddy die, beheading. They were accused of poisoning the King since his name was in the book his father wrote that Catherine had poisoned for Navarra. King dies as the duo is beheaded. Margo has her lover's head embalmed and takes it with her to Navarra. The end credits say that she grants Navarra a divorce but remains friends with him for the rest of his life. She outlives all her brothers and her husband. They give a bio of the next two kings of France with the youngest of the brothers being the most beloved of them all. A very sad movie, very bloody, beautiful colors and I wish I could wear those costumes!!!!! Sincerely, F. Havas Dallas, Texas -----Original Message----- From: Andrea Gideon To: H-Costume Date: Friday, July 09, 1999 7:04 AM Subject: H-COST: slightly OT Queen Margot : :-Poster: "Andrea Gideon" : :I caught Queen Margot last night while fliping channels during a late night :baby feeding. I set the VCR to tape the rest, however when I watched it :this morning I realized it was longer than my tape. Could someone tell me :how it ends? I got to the part after Henri returns to Navarre and he sends :her lover back to get Margot. :ANdrea : : gaelscot@aol.com[23,176]CSuX:cotehardie fitting Subject: H-COST: Re: cotehardie fitting From: Gaelscot@aol.com Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 11:23:16 EDT -Poster: Gaelscot@aol.com I dont think there's all that much info to go on. The people who believe that there is no fitted foundation garment seem to be able to make cotehardies just fine without them. I have been experimenting, assuming that I will make a wardrobe of cotehardies in the future (which seems to get farther off all the time) and it seems to me that the best plan would be to make an extremely fitted underkirtle or two, to take the stress off the main garments. I go back and forth between a full kirtle with sleeves, and something akin to the Bohemian stuff mentioned, with no sleeves (which would then need an underkirtle on top of THAT -- pretty stuffy). But I think that if someone wants to experiment with an undergarment, then she should! Try it out and let the rest of us know how it works -- we might be convinced. Gail Finke margo anderson [24,177]CSuX:amazing fabric store discovery Subject: Re: H-COST: Amazing fabric store discovery From: Margo Anderson Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 10:34:29 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson >Also Fran, if you're redecorating you might want to go to Norman Bernie in >San Mateo. Or maybe it's Cliff Bernie. One is the owner and one is the >store name, I can never remember which is which! It's Norman Bernie. As I recall, they're only open on weekdays. They're a jobber, buying up odd lots of fabric, mostly home dec. I've seen everything from natural scrim to great brocades, day-glo plaid Herculon airplane seat cover fabric, to heavy upoulstery leather there. I've gotten good prices on short peices, too small to cover a chair, say, but big enough to make a pair of sleeves or a forepart. Nothing in the place is priced, you have to ask about everything, and I suspect that prices are open to negotiation. Don't expect to get a price break for buying 20 yards of something; most of their fabric is on huge rolls. If you want 300 yards of fuschia cotton, though, you can probably get a deal. Margo Anderson (who misses shopping in the Bay Area) henk t jong [82,178]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 20:52:17 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi all. Robin wrote: > This finally rang a bell for me, and I dug out my copy of Olga Sronkova's > "Gothic Woman's Fashion" (Artia: Prague, 1954, printed in Czechoslovakia, > no ISBN). The text of this book is rather suspect and suffers further in > translation, but the illustrations are great. > > More than this, Sronkova gives us no less than SIXTEEN more illustrations > of bathhouse attendants. They are all from the same manuscript as the one > just described -- the Bible of Wenceslas IV. Sronkova tells us this is an > unfinished illuminated Bible in German, belonging to the group of > manuscripts known as the Wenceslas manuscripts. It was made for Wenceslas > IV between 1390-1400, and it "shows an intimate knowledge of the > particular tastes of the king." It is in Vienna in the State Library, > Codex 2759-2764. > Ludmila Kybalova, Olga Herbenova and Milena Lamarova have some of these bathhouse ladies in theirs 'Das grosse Bilderlexikon der Mode, vom Altertum zur Gegenwart', also printed and published in Praha, in 1966 (of which I own a second edition from 1975). 3 of the shifts are visible here; two have sashes around the waist, the other is loose but fairly fitting. One is see-through. > and there's no evidence > that bathkeepers of this sort appear in any other sources Oh yes, there is! In the same book mentioned by me before, there is a page from a book called the 'Jenaer Kodex (1490-1500) in which 4 ladies in shifts exactly like the Prague bathhouse wenches (white, loose, heavily pleated, nearly see-through, a narrow decorated border along the upper end and straps of the same material, a narrow dark, one of the same material as the straps, tight belt around their waist) administer to two naked monks. This is supposed to be another Bohemian source, but I know nothing else about it. I'll have a look, though. So you see that a century later than Wenzels Bible there were still scantily dressed bathhouseladies around. I also seem to remember similar girls from ca 1500 bath scenes from Southern Germany (Augsburg, Nurnberg?). I'll try and find out more about this. > > My guess, then, would be that for the bathkeeper drolleries, the > illustrator was showing standard "beautiful women's figures," but changing > their dress to echo flimsy chemises, often with decorations or sashes to > add a fantasy element. I'm not so sure. It seems to me that practices of this sort were rather common in the German area (in summer?). They still are. Medieval people weren't shy about nakedness, they sometimes found it funny, but mostly didn't bother too much about showing their bodies. That is: if they belonged to the upper classes they were supposed not to show their bodies in public (young rich and influential people opposed this and invented the tight bliaut in the 12th and the cotte hardi in the 14th c). The clergy was, as usual, opposed to any nakedness, but only had influence over the older, more staid and 'square' part of society. So what else is new? > That's just a guess, based on too little information. I'm sure somewhere > there's a book about the Wenceslas Bible that analyzes these drolleries in > context, and that would shed more light on their role in the pictures. But > what I feel pretty secure about right now is that I wouldn't view these as > realistic images of women working in bathhouses, or realistic > undergarments of any sort. I think I disagree here, but I think this practice was rather regional. It might well have never been seen in the rest of Europe, but I've seen some very racy medieval bath house scenes with people, bathers and keepers, wearing no clothes at all. Henk dietmar [21,179]CSuX:cotehardie fitting Subject: H-COST: Re: cotehardie fitting From: Dietmar Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 13:20:35 +0000 -Poster: Dietmar Greetings, Gail wrote: > But I think that if someone wants to experiment with an > undergarment, then she should! What if that someone is a 'he'? ;-) Regards, Dietmar "Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." robin netherton [62,180]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 17:13:10 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Henk 't Jong wrote: I wrote: > > My guess, then, would be that for the bathkeeper drolleries, the > > illustrator was showing standard "beautiful women's figures," but > changing > > their dress to echo flimsy chemises, often with decorations or sashes to > > add a fantasy element. Henk wrote: > I'm not so sure. It seems to me that practices of this sort were rather > common in the German area (in summer?). They still are. Medieval people > weren't shy about nakedness, they sometimes found it funny, but mostly > didn't bother too much about showing their bodies. That is: if they > belonged to the upper classes they were supposed not to show their bodies > in public (young rich and influential people opposed this and invented the > tight bliaut in the 12th and the cotte hardi in the 14th c). The clergy > was, as usual, opposed to any nakedness, but only had influence over the > older, more staid and 'square' part of society. So what else is new? > ... > ... I think this practice was rather regional. It > might well have never been seen in the rest of Europe, but I've seen some > very racy medieval bath house scenes with people, bathers and keepers, > wearing no clothes at all. I'm sorry, I wasn't clear. I have absolutely no doubt about the existence of scantily-clad bathhouse ladies, very likely wearing some chemise-like garment, or even nothing at all. I agree wholeheartedly with you on that. There's plenty of evidence of the popularity of bathhouses! What I seriously doubt is that the shape of a woman's body in such a garment looked exactly like the figure of a fully dressed woman (uplifted breasts, etc.), which would be a logical conclusion only if you accept the depictions in the Wenceslas Bible as accurate depictions of bathkeepers. The fact that these images were marginal illustrations, with all the conventions usually associated with drolleries (and sexual overtones), makes me wary of these drawings as a literal source for how real bathhouse women looked in their flimsy clothes. Since the initial discussion was whether a particular image of a strapless bathhouse dress shown in this manuscript was actually a boned undergarment providing support to the figure -- and a source to prove that foundations garments were worn in the 14th century -- it's worth looking closely at the idea of whether this drawing is a reliable image of a bathkeeper's figure. I'd be inclined to assume it's simply a "sexy female form with bathkeeper imagery," no more realistic than another drollery that might be a "sexy female form with bird's wings." I'm especially wary of taking an image like this as evidence of a foundation garment given the lack of other evidence that such a garment existed at all. On the other hand, I'd be most happy to use the depictions of the buckets as realistic! --Robin kat & kent [10,181]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Kat & Kent Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 16:23:14 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent Okay, my two cents....young, virginal (eg never pregnant) women can look like the women in the pictures regardless of foundation garments. Having gone to Girl Scout camps from the time I was 9 until I was 17, I can vouch for this. Kat r.l. shep [38,182]CSuX:cotehardie fitting Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: cotehardie fitting From: "R.L. Shep" Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 14:43:38 -0700 -Poster: "R.L. Shep" Hear! Hear! ~!~ R.L.Shep http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks ---------- >From: Dietmar >To: h-costume@indra.com >Subject: H-COST: Re: cotehardie fitting >Date: Fri, Jul 9, 1999, 6:20 AM > > >-Poster: Dietmar > >Greetings, > >Gail wrote: > >> But I think that if someone wants to experiment with an >> undergarment, then she should! > >What if that someone is a 'he'? ;-) > >Regards, > >Dietmar > > >"Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; > over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." > > robin netherton [161,183]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 18:30:43 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton Catching up after a busy week... On Wed, 7 Jul 1999, Henk 't Jong wrote: > There's an added fact too. You'll have to realise that we are used to > making patterns on paper. Paper was rare and very expensive during almost > the whole 14th c and only used for writing on. The same goes for parchment > or vellum, which was even more expensive. Both were almost only available > in relatively small formats... > too small to make patterns on, if they had wanted or needed to, that is. > > Patterns on cloth or measuring older garments were probably done, but, what > the heck, these sewing artists knew what they were doing and, IMO, worked > almost intuitively with a real tailor's eye. Yes, yes, yes. Of interest: There are several images of tailor's shops in the extant manuscripts of the Tacuinum Sanitatus (late 1300s, Northern Italy, with fashions not too dissimilar from France). Bolts of fabric, garments in various stages of construction, needles, and shears are in evidence. No sign of a pattern, even where people are cutting out recognizable garment shapes (with visible armholes or neckholes) from unrolled fabric. No measuring tapes either, for that matter. But in an illumination from about a century later (Boccaccio's "Livre des cleres et Nobles Femmes, Bib. Nat. MS. Fr. 599 -- it's in the Medieval Woman Book of Days and probably one of the calendars somewhere), a woman tailor (possibly allegorical -- women were probably not tailors at this time) is shown cutting out a piece of white SOMETHING. It might be paper, but I'd guess it's cloth. Caption writers call this a pattern. Perhaps it is -- this would be about the time patterns or the ancestors of patterns might emerge. Maybe each customer would have an individual cloth pattern developed to his/her own shape, to be used for future garments? Maybe the tailor used a piece of linen to trace the shape of the pieces of an existing garment, and then to transfer that shape to new fabric to make another garment? That would be an easy way to use an existing garment as a guide for a new one. Maybe this is for the equivalent of a muslin mockup for fitting? Who knows? There's no fabric roll, just the shape lying on the table (with visible armhole and neckhole; my guess it's for a man's garment), and she seems to be trimming something off the bottom. But why would you cut a pattern that's already in an identifiable shape? Food for thought, but I wouldn't rely too closely on the illuminator's knowledge of tailor's techniques. I'd have to see a lot more examples of tailors at work, and compare them to see what features appear in many places. (Future research project, obviously.) I wrote: > > Fashion tends toward to extremes, so fitting became tighter and tighter > -- > > but that happened gradually, over decades. Then necklines began to inch > > wider and lower. If you take the columnar fitted dress of mid-century, > > with its relatively high jewel-neck, and cut that neckline progressively > > lower, you find that this releases pressure on the upper bosom, so the > > continuing pressure of the fabric on the lower bosom pushes the breasts > > higher. Henk wrote: > Actually: the courtly ladies in the Romance d'Alexandre (ms Bodley 264), > dated ca 1338, already have very low-necked dresses, which sometimes even > leave (part of) their shoulders bare. (For anyone who wants to see that, there's a good image from that manuscript on the jacket and as the frontispiece of _Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince._) These necklines are definitely very *wide,* but they're not deep enough in front to uncover the top half of the bosom. The necklines actually are drawn as slightly higher in the middle than on the sides! Definitely not the deep scoop you get later, when you see the S-curved spine and the pushed-up bosom. The breasts are held up, but more as a wide, gentle funnel shape, not as separate globes sticking out from a high ribcage, with the upper part of the breasts exposed. > > I would guess that the development of foundation garments helped make > > possible the regular use of patterns, and also the expansion of tailoring > > as a profession. Certainly by the 1500s, tailors could routinely work > > independently of their clients, from measurements only. > > A pretty interesting theory: I'll have to think this one over... I'm still working on it myself. So many things seem to fall into place together, and each step is necessary in order for us to reach, say, the situation in the late 1500s where it's considered routine for people in the English countryside to send their measurements to London tailors with clothing orders. No way I could make a fitted 14th century dress from measurements, because measurements can't account for angles, degree of "bulge" of bosom or a flexed muscle, density and mobility of body tissue, etc. Not a problem if all those things were forced into a standard shape and held there reliably and you could then measure the key points of that shape. Which would mean you could create a pattern that would be useful. With foundation garments, also, the degree of stretch and distortion in a piece of fabric wasn't an issue, as it is with the 14th-century fitted styles. Once you eliminate stretch from the process, patterns become a more logical innovation, because the shapes of the pieces will be less variable from one garment to another. Of course there's a lot more involved in the development of tailoring as a profession, but I think the ability to separate the actual process of garment-making from the client -- that is, the client no longer needs to be present for multiple fittings -- would be one of those vital pieces. I know you can't get standard sizes (a later development) without being able to rely on standard shapes for women, which are achieved through foundation garments. I suspect I'm not the only woman around who wears different bras for different styles or brands of clothes, because I know that Leslie Fay or Kasper or Chaus is cut in a certain way, and I have to make my shape match their slopers. I wrote: > > or it may have been a fuller garment like a houppelande. Either way, the > > dress on the inside would be doing all the hard work of molding and > > holding the figure. That dress would have been worn as an everyday basic > > garment, and subject to intensive daily wear and perspiration. Henk wrote: > The perspiration was mostly caught by the shift, but practice learns that > you'll have to wash you (under)cotte regularly in summer. This could be a > pointer in the direction that summer undercottes (or cottes) were of linen, > which keeps better in the laundry than wool does. But so far I have found > no real evidence for this. Have you already, Robin? :-) I'm guessing Henk is remembering a question I sent him some months ago. (If you answered me, Henk, I never got it, and I'd still love your opinion.) I've been wondering whether there's any solid evidence for linen being worn as the primary (visible) fabric of a gown or other body garment -- we know it was used for undergarments (chemises) and linings of body garments, but I haven't found as much evidence for it being used as the main fabric, despite common assumptions to the contrary. So I'm on the prowl. Given the ready availability of wool and the small wardrobes of most people in the 14th century, I doubt many people would go to the expense of making a linen dress just for those rare hot summer days. I'm not even so sure linen would make that much of a difference in European temperatures -- I experimented with wearing identical dresses in cotton, linen, and wool in 90-degree heat last summer (far worse than is usually seen in Europe), and the wool was actually the most comfortable! Line it with linen and you get the best of all worlds. As to the issue of laundry survival, even in summer I find that lightweight woolen fitted dresses don't need washing that often, though the linen chemises do. So I don't think the issue of suffering in the laundry would necessarily be enough to cause a shift to linen for the summer. But I wouldn't use fancy fabric (e.g. silk brocade) on a fitted underdress, because it would suffer constant wear, physical stress, and some perspiration. Fancy fabrics are OK for the overgarments, which were not subject to the same stresses and sweat, and were probably not washed at all, just brushed. I've found some indications that linen was worn routinely for summer garments in sunny Italy, and I wonder if the paler palette of Italian clothing seen in paintings reflects an increased use of linen, which does not hold deep colors like wool does. This is another topic for another year -- but I'll happily collect references to linen use in Northern and Western Europe if anyone runs across anything. --Robin julie adams [21,184]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Julie Adams Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 19:35:02 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Julie Adams >But >what I feel pretty secure about right now is that I wouldn't view these as >realistic images of women working in bathhouses, or realistic >undergarments of any sort. > >--Robin Which would be fine, except that the flimsy chemise bathhouse costume is quite well-documented in the late 15th/early 16th c. Germany, and is the same identical garment as shown in other Wenceslas bible pictures. And the bucket and brush remain in use as well. I've also seen that spaggetti strapped garment as doll clothes and children's shifts. I guess I don't feel confident that I can brush off that strapless gown as unreal. Julie Adams robin netherton [79,185]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 23:27:24 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton I wrote: > >But > >what I feel pretty secure about right now is that I wouldn't view these as > >realistic images of women working in bathhouses, or realistic > >undergarments of any sort. Julie responded: > Which would be fine, except that the flimsy chemise bathhouse costume is > quite well-documented in the late 15th/early 16th c. Germany, and is the > same identical garment as shown in other Wenceslas bible pictures. And the > bucket and brush remain in use as well. I've also seen that spaggetti > strapped garment as doll clothes and children's shifts. I guess I don't > feel confident that I can brush off that strapless gown as unreal. Boy, I was clear as mud there. That's what I get for writing long posts after midnight. It would have helped if I had said "foundation garments" rather than "undergarments." The issue originally under discussion was whether the strapless costume was a structured foundation undergarment. Some people had noted the uplifted figures of the women and suggested this provided evidence that the garment shown had internal support, like a corset -- and that it was therefore *not* a flimsy chemise. This is what I was responding to (from your earlier post, Julie): > I think these are the support garments in question. I've seen some with > spagetti straps, but clearly these don't have any. And anyone who'se ever > made a victorian corset cut like this, and tried it on before the bones are > in, will tell you that without something stiff, the top will roll right > over. I don't see how these garments would work without some stiffening. I was trying to say that given the context of the manuscript, I didn't see the uplifted figures of the women as a realistic portrayal of how women's figures looked in real bathhouse costume,* and that while the strapless dresses might seem in this one image like boned support undergarments, I didn't feel comfortable accepting these images as evidence of such garments, because of the nature and purpose of the representation and the lack of other evidence of foundation garments from this period. I *do* most certainly agree that the images are meant to represent the well-documented "flimsy chemise bathhouse costume" -- which is why I pointed out the other more realistic portrayals of such a garment in the major illustrations (the two childbed scenes). Absolutely no argument that bathkeepers wore filmy spaghetti-strapped chemisey things; I didn't think there was any disagreement about that, and I didn't mean to imply that I was questioning that. I was questioning the interpretation of these dresses as boned foundation undergarments. I would happily use the bucket and scrub brush (or whatever that thing is) as realistic. I'm less secure about some other elements, such as the floating sashes that appear on some of the Wenceslas Bible bathkeepers in marginals that use other elements of iconographic presentation. These are the same sort of knotted sashes routinely used in certain saints' images, and other parts of these marginals echo other features of saints' images. The sash may have the same sort of symbolic function in the picture as, say, the bird-borne banners overhead -- as a joke to present the bathkeepers as though they were saints. (And in case I wasn't clear again, I'm not saying this means they never wore sashes. I'm saying that real sashes probably didn't have the improbable proportions or aerodynamic capabilities shown in these pictures. So the floating sashes may be a idealized/exaggerated version of a more ordinary sash that was actually worn with the more ordinary unsupported flimsy gown.) --Robin * Unless they're teenagers with perky breasts, as someone noted earlier. Good point. My research partner once did a lecture on some of the Bottacelli Venus costumes, and noted that they could only work on perky-bosomed teens. Maybe some bathkeepers *did* look that way, but it wouldn't be because they were wearing boned bodices! julie adams [53,186]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Julie Adams Date: Fri, 9 Jul 1999 21:21:54 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Julie Adams > . I was questioning the interpretation of these >dresses as boned foundation undergarments. Whether they were worn underneath another garment is certainly questionable, but having done a fair amount of corsetry, I can attest that no matter how perky those young ladies bosoms are, a strapless garment like that will not stay up without some kind of stiffening. One bend-over and the top will roll right over without some kind of boning. >I would happily use the bucket and scrub brush (or whatever that thing is) >as realistic. I'm less secure about some other elements, such as the >floating sashes that appear on some of the Wenceslas Bible bathkeepers in >marginals that use other elements of iconographic presentation. These are >the same sort of knotted sashes routinely used in certain saints' images, The knotted sashes are quite often seen up through the 16th c in Germany/Bohemia on all classes of people. In my thinking, I've seen the scrub brushes, the sashes, the gowns, the spagetti strapped garments on both bathhouse babes and as undergarments, the buckets, etc. (Costuming of the Holy Roman Empire is my focus). Given that the other costume and prop elements are fairly true to form, I feel I have no basis for discounting the strapless gowns. And given that their spagetti-strapped counterparts are worn as undergarments, I think that it would be hard for me to say for sure that the strapless garments would not be worn that way as well (for Bohemian/German costumes). Basically there is no clear proof, but enough evidence and collaborative information that the hypothesis could go either way in my mind. I also made quite a few cotehardies in the German style when I was young and high busted and I still did not have quite the same lift as the women in these and other similar depictions. It turns out that the higher your bust is naturally, the less lift you get from the garment pushing around your torso. And because the neckline is flat across the shoulders, there is little to achieve that lift. If the center of your bust is higher than your armpit, the flat neckline does not uplift. I can only say from experience (of days LONG past) that even naturally perky looks nothing like those women. I also believe that women then had much more musculature than your average woman today (but then they probably walked and lifted and worked harder physically than most of us do today). I know that when I'm working out a lot my bust goes up several inches compared to when I'm out of shape. When I was young and high busted and made those cotehardies, I was doing SCA armored fighting and swimming regularly, so I was roughly the same physical shape as I see in many of the nudes. *sigh* Not anymore :-) Julie Adams kat & kent [18,187]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Kat & Kent Date: Fri, 09 Jul 1999 23:51:55 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent First...when I was younger and didn't need so much support I wore strapless, tight outfits with no problem and no rolling. It's certainly easy to do if there is a casing and a ribbon (perhaps tied in back or not shown in the drawing?). Second, I wear cotehardies with no boning or corset. I've made them out of flannel, corduroy and cotton fabrics. All from the same pattern. No problem with support and I'm currently a 38 DD. It may have something to do with the fact that I always fully line my cotehardies (down to the hips). I don't know...but I do know that it's possible to make a fully supportive cotehardie for a large busted woman without using supportive undergarments nor boning regardless of whether the cotehardie is side-laced, back-laced or front-laced. Kat robin netherton [145,188]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/bohemian bath attendants Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Bohemian Bath Attendants From: Robin Netherton Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 01:49:56 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton On Fri, 9 Jul 1999, Julie Adams wrote: > > . I was questioning the interpretation of these > >dresses as boned foundation undergarments. > > Whether they were worn underneath another garment is certainly > questionable, but having done a fair amount of corsetry, I can attest that > no matter how perky those young ladies bosoms are, a strapless garment like > that will not stay up without some kind of stiffening. One bend-over and > the top will roll right over without some kind of boning. > ... > Given that the other costume and prop > elements are fairly true to form, I feel I have no basis for discounting > the strapless gowns. And given that their spagetti-strapped counterparts > are worn as undergarments, I think that it would be hard for me to say for > sure that the strapless garments would not be worn that way as well (for > Bohemian/German costumes). So, our best guesses differ. That may be just a question of what areas we're strongest in and what we find easier to explain based on our own experience. Differing viewpoints make for healthy exploration and discussion. If I have to choose an inconsistency, I personally find it easier to assume that this single picture shows an idealized uplifted female figure rather than assuming that boning existed in this garment when there's no evidence for such use elsewhere in the period. But I don't normally work with boning, while I do feel familiar with 14th-century painting conventions and iconography, so this is the explanation that works for me most readily. I don't have a strong feeling about "perkiness" as an explanation for these women's uplift; someone else suggested that idea, and I am willing to entertain it as a possibility, as I've heard that concept presented persuasively in another context. For my part, though, perky doesn't enter into it: I simply don't think these women would have looked that uplifted in life. I think they are drawn here this way because it was the convention to use that silhouette for attractive females, regardless of how or whether they are dressed. Given how many nudes of this time are shown as though they are molded by clothing, I know there's precedent for drawing attractive woman in a certain way. In this period, it's rarer to see a woman who is being presented as attractive shown with a natural (un-molded) figure, regardless of what she's wearing or not wearing. (You are more likely to see a natural figure in things like medical illustrations and other cases in which the woman is not being shown as an object of desire.) Did a strapless style exist? I haven't expressed an opinion on that because I don't have a strong feeling about it. Again, if I have to choose an inconsistency, I would sooner guess that the artist was using a set model figure and simply eliminating the sleeves (see my earlier discussion comparing this image to the fully dressed women in the same manuscript). Or that he just forgot to show the straps. His addition of straps in side-view drawings is inconsistent in other images. More important, of the 17 bathkeeper images I have on hand, only this one lacks both straps. Did a strapless style exist? Maybe; I don't have enough information to guess. Was it common or routine? Based on this, probably not. > Basically there is no clear proof, but enough > evidence and collaborative information that the hypothesis could go either > way in my mind. I may be more conservative than other people when it comes to evidence. I'm always nervous about relying a single image or a single manuscript. I do grant you that the presence of realistic details elsewhere in this image is important, but it's still internal evidence. The evidence and corroborative information I'd want to find in this case would be additional images of strapless dresses. If there are others in this manuscript, that would be good. If there are others in other manuscripts from this time and place, that would be much better. If those others showed women in a selected range of occupations or settings (e.g. not just bathkeepers) that would be great -- and would make for a really strong research article. I haven't gone looking for strapless gowns (heck, never thought about them till a day or two ago) so I have no idea if that evidence exists. But that's what I'd look for. The single image is, for me, only the starting place for the search. Or did you mean there is evidence and corroborative information for a boned bodice at this time? If so, please share! I have yet to see any. > >I would happily use the bucket and scrub brush (or whatever that thing is) > >as realistic. I'm less secure about some other elements, such as the > >floating sashes that appear on some of the Wenceslas Bible bathkeepers in > >marginals that use other elements of iconographic presentation. These are > >the same sort of knotted sashes routinely used in certain saints' images, > > The knotted sashes are quite often seen up through the 16th c in > Germany/Bohemia on all classes of people.... Of course. My point was about the presentation of those sashes, not their existence. Which is why I wrote this as well: > (...I'm not saying this means they never wore sashes. I'm saying that > real sashes probably didn't have the improbable proportions or > aerodynamic capabilities shown in these pictures. So the floating sashes > may be a idealized/exaggerated version of a more ordinary sash that was > actually worn with the more ordinary unsupported flimsy gown.) The knot is a common one (I've always tied my bathrobe that way, long before I started costuming!). But the sash and that particular knot do have iconographical significance in certain contexts, which is worth recognizing when there are other iconographical devices being used in an illustration. > I also made quite a few cotehardies in the German style when I was young > and high busted and I still did not have quite the same lift as the women > in these and other similar depictions. It turns out that the higher your > bust is naturally, the less lift you get from the garment pushing around > your torso. And because the neckline is flat across the shoulders, there > is little to achieve that lift. If the center of your bust is higher than > your armpit, the flat neckline does not uplift. I can only say from > experience (of days LONG past) that even naturally perky looks nothing like > those women. >From that description, our methods are probably not the same (I do a lot with the angle of fabric over the shoulders), and I don't know what you mean by German style specifically, so I certainly won't question your conclusions there. But our experience differs. My first fitted dresses were made on an A cup (me) and gave me cleavage I'd never had before. Over the course of the years I grew to a G cup (I'm not overweight, I just have strange hormones and two kids), and I've worked on a lot of other people, so I've played with the full range. But I'm still running into new puzzles and new figure types, so I don't know what my method would have done with your figure, and I don't know whether I've ever worked on someone particularly high-busted as you describe. Something to watch for... I do agree that the degree of prominence of the bust shown in these illustrations suggests a substantial enough bosom that it needs some support to sit that high, but I also find I can get that profile from the dress, without foundation garments. So that comes back to my thought that the bathhouse ladies are drawn conventionally, with the figures they would have if they were fully dressed. And it is well after midnight, so I have probably written something muddy again. I will withdraw from this conversation before I get more confusing (my deadlines have suffered while I have played on the list these past few days). --Robin missmela@aol.com[11,189]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove From: MissMela@aol.com Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 03:08:24 EDT -Poster: MissMela@aol.com Fortuny was making "Fortuny Gowns" as early as 1906, so the dresses in Wings of the Dove were not anachronistic but very "current." The rest of the clothes were dead on for the artsy, avant-garde crowd, the crowd that actually bought and wore Paul Poiret dresses. Many of the gowns were actual vintage clothing (their use in film, an entire different topic)! There are several costume books that show this type of clothing, but usually they are limited to one example per book. Mela annbwass@aol.com[14,190]CSuX:chinese ball buttons Subject: Re: H-COST: Chinese ball buttons From: AnnBWass@aol.com Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 06:08:40 EDT -Poster: AnnBWass@aol.com This is to the person that I promised to send the Chinese ball button directions to: I had been saving the message with your address so I could send you the directions and must have deleted it in a moment of forgetfulness. If you are still in need of the directions, please respond to me again privately, and I promise to get them to you promptly. Ann Wass annbwass@aol.com jmhr@alltel.net [11,191]CSuX:weaving book Subject: H-COST: weaving book From: "jmhr@alltel.net" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 08:19:19 -0400 -Poster: "jmhr@alltel.net" I was browsing eBay and came across this title - a good book for anyone interested in the history of weaving/dying: Rare C1817 Maufacturers Assistant-Wool&Cotn http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=127693201 Melissa hope h. dunlap [56,192]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: RE: H-COST: wings of a dove From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 12:19:51 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" There is a good photo of a 1920 fortuny gown and jacket shown here: http://members.aol.com/ShanJens/index3.html Note how the hem of the gown spreads out on the floor around her feet like the foot of a champagne glass. See http://www.camrax.com/pages/search.htm and type in "fortuny" and click on the images request to get the biggest and best images of Fortuny gowns in one place. Search for "poiret" and "gallenga" here too. At http://www.costumes.org/pages/1910links.htm there are some additional links for Fortuny, particularly towards the bottom. Key words are Fortuny, Raymond Duncan (Isadora's brother, who made clothes in a similar manner) Dephos, Knossos. Hope H. Dunlap > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of MissMela@aol.com > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 1999 3:08 AM > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove > > > > -Poster: MissMela@aol.com > > Fortuny was making "Fortuny Gowns" as early as 1906, so the > dresses in Wings > of the Dove were not anachronistic but very "current." The > rest of the > clothes were dead on for the artsy, avant-garde crowd, the crowd that > actually bought and wore Paul Poiret dresses. Many of the > gowns were actual > vintage clothing (their use in film, an entire different > topic)! There are > several costume books that show this type of clothing, but > usually they are > limited to one example per book. Mela > _____ majordomo@indra.com > kevin + mara riley [28,193]CSuX:womens period "plaid" info? Subject: Re: H-COST: Womens' period "plaid" info? From: Kevin + Mara Riley Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:50:20 -0400 -Poster: Kevin + Mara Riley At 11:26 PM 07/07/1999 -0400, you wrote: > >-Poster: BarbMVD@aol.com > >The plaid (pronounced "plade", is and always has been a garment. > >If I may butt in, your discussion of the arisaid seems to cover a far greater >time period than would be appropriate, and brings the arisaid into the >Victorian era, far overextending its actual wear. Yes, maybe if the original poster had indicated the time period desired... I took it for granted that we're talking the mid-1700s, which is the period I'm currently involved in. The Victorian era with its romaticized nonsense certainly messed up the whole scene! The MacIan illustrations are the only ones I've found; some of his stuff is a bit far-fetched, but at least these two portrayals seem in keeping with what has been described elsewhere. http://www47.pair.com/lindo/Scotland.htm Kevin + Mara Riley Home Page http://www.radix.net/~lindo allison thurman [22,194]CSuX:kilt patterns? Subject: H-COST: kilt patterns? From: "Allison Thurman" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:49:43 -0400 -Poster: "Allison Thurman" ive been reading the recent thread on kilts and plaids with interest. my husband has been talking about my making him a kilt for a while, and im finally looking into it, but i have some questions. ive located a kilt pattern at folkwear patterns site, but ive heard that their patterns can be inconsistent, especially considering sizing. as hes a big guy the pattern must be large enough! is this true of folkwear patterns, and if so what are some other kilt pattern sources? also the pleating concerns me as ive never made a pleated garment before. would a pleating board (as sold at clothilde) be helpful, or will the pattern include directions for pleating? are the pleats sewn in or merely pressed and attached to a waistband? thanks in advance! allison sarah toney [54,195]CSuX:kilt patterns? Subject: Re: H-COST: kilt patterns? From: Sarah Toney Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 16:17:08 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney I have found that pleats are relatively easy if you are patient... don't rush, or they won't be consistent... but when you take the time, they come out wonderfully... I generally pin the pleats and then press them to make sure they look right before I do any sewing (especially when using an expensive fabric.) Sarah --- Allison Thurman wrote: > > -Poster: "Allison Thurman" > > ive been reading the recent thread on kilts and > plaids with interest. my > husband has been talking about my making him a kilt > for a while, and im > finally looking into it, but i have some questions. > > ive located a kilt pattern at folkwear patterns > site, but ive heard that > their patterns can be inconsistent, especially > considering sizing. as hes a > big guy the pattern must be large enough! is this > true of folkwear patterns, > and if so what are some other kilt pattern sources? > > also the pleating concerns me as ive never made a > pleated garment before. > would a pleating board (as sold at clothilde) be > helpful, or will the > pattern include directions for pleating? are the > pleats sewn in or merely > pressed and attached to a waistband? > > thanks in advance! > allison > > > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com allison thurman [55,196]CSuX:kilt patterns? Subject: H-COST: kilt patterns? From: Allison Thurman Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 19:16:00 -0400 -Poster: "Kyna Grannd" ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: "Allison Thurman" > > ive been reading the recent thread on kilts and plaids with interest. my > husband has been talking about my making him a kilt for a while, and im > finally looking into it, but i have some questions. > > ive located a kilt pattern at folkwear patterns site, but ive heard that > their patterns can be inconsistent, especially considering sizing. as hes a > big guy the pattern must be large enough! is this true of folkwear patterns, > and if so what are some other kilt pattern sources? First thing you should realize is that the Folkwear "pattern" isn't a pattern but rather instructions on how to measure, pleat and fit your plaid...so it will work with most any size. Another source here on the Internet that I'd found helpful was at: http://waveweb.innet.be/janb/kilt_making.html > > also the pleating concerns me as ive never made a pleated garment before. > would a pleating board (as sold at clothilde) be helpful, or will the > pattern include directions for pleating? are the pleats sewn in or merely > pressed and attached to a waistband? > Both Folkwear and this website give instructions on pleating. Since how you pleat involves the set of the plaid (distance between threads of color in the plaid design) I don't know that a pleating board will help. It's really not hard...sort of monotonous though :) The pleats will/should be sewing in and kilts are the one time where you hem the garment FIRST then pleat sew etc. You really want to make sure you buy real kilt making plaid...it will be WORSTED WOOL. This is a wool that holds pleating much better. If you paid less than $35/yard it isn't worsted wool. The bargain wool blends just don't look as nice. It won't be because of your sewing/pleating ability...but others won't know that. Honestly, the drape of the kilt was very disappointing with inferior wool. Hope this helps! ~Kyna Grannd Garb amanda reeves [90,197]CSuX:kilt patterns? and size Subject: Re: H-COST: kilt patterns? and size From: "Amanda Reeves" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:37:44 -0500 -Poster: "Amanda Reeves" I was told at the last Ren Faire we went to that my husband's size kilt was 13 yards as opposed to the 9 yard tradition. How do you gauge? Thanks, Amanda (Texas) ---------- > From: Kyna Grannd > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: Re: H-COST: kilt patterns? > Date: Saturday, July 10, 1999 6:16 PM > > > -Poster: "Kyna Grannd" > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Allison Thurman > To: > Sent: Saturday, July 10, 1999 6:49 PM > Subject: H-COST: kilt patterns? > > > > > > -Poster: "Allison Thurman" > > > > ive been reading the recent thread on kilts and plaids with interest. my > > husband has been talking about my making him a kilt for a while, and im > > finally looking into it, but i have some questions. > > > > ive located a kilt pattern at folkwear patterns site, but ive heard that > > their patterns can be inconsistent, especially considering sizing. as hes > a > > big guy the pattern must be large enough! is this true of folkwear > patterns, > > and if so what are some other kilt pattern sources? > > First thing you should realize is that the Folkwear "pattern" isn't a > pattern but rather instructions on how to measure, pleat and fit your > plaid...so it will work with most any size. > > Another source here on the Internet that I'd found helpful was at: > > http://waveweb.innet.be/janb/kilt_making.html > > > > > also the pleating concerns me as ive never made a pleated garment before. > > would a pleating board (as sold at clothilde) be helpful, or will the > > pattern include directions for pleating? are the pleats sewn in or merely > > pressed and attached to a waistband? > > > > Both Folkwear and this website give instructions on pleating. Since how you > pleat involves the set of the plaid (distance between threads of color in > the plaid design) I don't know that a pleating board will help. It's really > not hard...sort of monotonous though :) > > The pleats will/should be sewing in and kilts are the one time where you hem > the garment FIRST then pleat sew etc. You really want to make sure you buy > real kilt making plaid...it will be WORSTED WOOL. This is a wool that holds > pleating much better. If you paid less than $35/yard it isn't worsted wool. > The bargain wool blends just don't look as nice. It won't be because of your > sewing/pleating ability...but others won't know that. Honestly, the drape of > the kilt was very disappointing with inferior wool. > > Hope this helps! > > ~Kyna > Grannd Garb > > kyna grannd [25,198]CSuX:kilt patterns? and size Subject: Re: H-COST: kilt patterns? and size From: "Kyna Grannd" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 19:47:07 -0400 -Poster: "Kyna Grannd" > > -Poster: "Amanda Reeves" > > I was told at the last Ren Faire we went to that my husband's size kilt was > 13 yards as opposed to the 9 yard tradition. > > How do you gauge? > My rule of thumb is for a little kilt use 8 yards of 27" wide material (4 yards of 54", you can hide the seam in the pleats very easily), for up to a 46" hip measurement. I add between 6 and 8 inches for every inch of hip measurement beyond 46". Hope this helps some more :) ~Kyna susan fatemi [22,199]CSuX:wings of a dove Subject: Re: H-COST: wings of a dove From: Susan Fatemi Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 18:59:41 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi MissMela@aol.com wrote: > > -Poster: MissMela@aol.com > > Fortuny was making "Fortuny Gowns" as early as 1906, so the dresses in Wings > of the Dove were not anachronistic but very "current." The rest of the Right. But it seems I saw (and can't remember where, now) some of his pre-1920 dresses and they looked more "dated". The dresses in the film looked more like they might have come from a period later than 1910. susan -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf annorak@aol.com[22,200]CSuX:parasol/umbrella covering help Subject: H-COST: Parasol/Umbrella covering help From: AnnoraK@aol.com Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 23:13:28 EDT -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com I bought an early 20th C. parasol/umbrella the other day. It's one of the rather long-handled ones, about 4 feet from the tip to the handle-end. The frame is in great shape, all the hinges working, no bends or breaks. Unfortunately, its fabric has basically self-destructed -- there's not a complete panel left. :-( I want to recover it, and intend to just use it as an accessory piece from time to time, not as a working umbrella, tho the option to use it as a parasol would be nice. My questions are: What kind of fabric do I use for the new cover? The original appears to have been a green-and-pink silk brocade, which I am definitely NOT interested in duplicating. And since the old cover is fragile at best and does not have a whole section to use as a pattern, is there anything I need to be careful with when taking measurements for a new one? Thanx! Jen broneske [26,201]CSuX:parasol/umbrella covering help Subject: Re: H-COST: Parasol/Umbrella covering help From: "Broneske" Date: Sat, 10 Jul 1999 22:18:29 -0700 -Poster: "Broneske" A few years ago, I re-covered an old parasol frame, and it came out rather well. What I did was I threaded a piece of string through the holes at the end of the ribs and "opened" the parasol, adjusting the thread so that it was the shape I wanted. I then carefully took some paper and laid it over the bowed, invisible "triangle" that was created and traced it. What I came out with was a triangle with slightly bowed out sides. I then added a seam allowance, cut it out of fabric (I just used a white muslin and trimmed it with some pretty pink ribbons and lace - simple, easy and reflects the sun's rays) and sewed it together. I then placed it over the frame, checked to make sure that the seams lined up with the ribs and then sewed the points down at the holes in the ends of the ribs. Any small errors I covered with trim. If anyone is interested, I will put a picture of the finished parasol up on the web and will post the URL. I have another frame that I have been meaning to cover with a black silk, but (sigh*) haven't had the time or inclination to do it yet. ;) Joan Broneske sue shatto [26,202]CSuX:wild wild west Subject: H-COST: Wild Wild West From: Sue Shatto Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:49:28 -0400 -Poster: Sue Shatto I have been waiting almost 2 years for this movie because I sold them many costumes for it. I had a feeling, I was going to be disappointed when the leading lady said on the Today show that one of the reasons she took the part was because she was going to be dressed in period attire. She said she came out that first day in this lovely long dress and the director said "we need to see more boobs, shorten that dress!" She said she ran around in undergarments the whole time. Meanwhile, we all had been studying the pictures of the outfits and were having a contest to see who could pick oput an outfit first. What a disappointment! Cordially, Sue Shatto Sue@VictorianMillinery.com http://www.VictorianMillinery.com genevieve de courtanvaux [47,203]CSuX:wild wild west Subject: Re: H-COST: Wild Wild West From: "Genevieve de Courtanvaux" Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 11:16:41 -0500 -Poster: "Genevieve de Courtanvaux" Now, I wasn't dissapointed at all.....I rather enjoyed the costumes. They were not supposed to be 100% accurate they are supposed to be fun (which is what I thought they were). I know you worked hard on them to make them as period as you could and I can understand your dissapointment in seeing what they did to your hard work. But, the tv show and the movie were never supposed to be period they both were loosly based in period. In other words they were fantasy. So my two cents is that I enjoyed the outfits especially the women's clothing. Carol Ross -----Original Message----- From: Sue Shatto To: h-costume@indra.com Date: Sunday, July 11, 1999 10:51 AM Subject: H-COST: Wild Wild West > >-Poster: Sue Shatto > > I have been waiting almost 2 years for this movie because I sold them many >costumes for it. I had a feeling, I was going to be disappointed when the >leading lady said on the Today show that one of the reasons she took the >part was because she was going to be dressed in period attire. She said >she came out that first day in this lovely long dress and the director said >"we need to see more boobs, shorten that dress!" She said she ran around >in undergarments the whole time. >Meanwhile, we all had been studying the pictures of the outfits and were >having a contest to see who could pick oput an outfit first. What a >disappointment! > > > > > >Cordially, > >Sue Shatto > >Sue@VictorianMillinery.com >http://www.VictorianMillinery.com > > sarah toney [17,204]CSuX:wild wild west Subject: Re: H-COST: Wild Wild West From: Sarah Toney Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 09:53:10 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney The movie was supposed to be "Victorian Gadget-tech". This "era" never really existed, so they can't really be "wrong"... (unless, of course, Jules Vernes' stories were true and I'm missing something. ;-) It is too bad that you are unhappy with the way your costumes were used... I think everything looks awesome! Sarah Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com sue shatto [66,205]CSuX:wild wild west Subject: Re: H-COST: Wild Wild West From: Sue Shatto Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 16:59:37 -0400 -Poster: Sue Shatto Carol, I might not have communicated the scenerio just exactly as I shuold have. These were not reproductions I had made, they were originals. I'm glad you enjoyed the movie, though. At 11:16 AM 7/11/99 -0500, you wrote: > >-Poster: "Genevieve de Courtanvaux" > >Now, I wasn't dissapointed at all.....I rather enjoyed the costumes. They >were not supposed to be 100% accurate they are supposed to be fun (which is >what I thought they were). I know you worked hard on them to make them as >period as you could and I can understand your dissapointment in seeing what >they did to your hard work. But, the tv show and the movie were never >supposed to be period they both were loosly based in period. In other words >they were fantasy. So my two cents is that I enjoyed the outfits especially >the women's clothing. >Carol Ross >-----Original Message----- >From: Sue Shatto >To: h-costume@indra.com >Date: Sunday, July 11, 1999 10:51 AM >Subject: H-COST: Wild Wild West > > >> >>-Poster: Sue Shatto >> >> I have been waiting almost 2 years for this movie because I sold them many >>costumes for it. I had a feeling, I was going to be disappointed when the >>leading lady said on the Today show that one of the reasons she took the >>part was because she was going to be dressed in period attire. She said >>she came out that first day in this lovely long dress and the director said >>"we need to see more boobs, shorten that dress!" She said she ran around >>in undergarments the whole time. >>Meanwhile, we all had been studying the pictures of the outfits and were >>having a contest to see who could pick oput an outfit first. What a >>disappointment! >> >> >> >> >> >>Cordially, >> >>Sue Shatto >> >>Sue@VictorianMillinery.com >>http://www.VictorianMillinery.com >> >> > > > Cordially, Sue Shatto Sue@VictorianMillinery.com http://www.VictorianMillinery.com marsha s. mclean [19,206]CSuX:h-costume, slightly ot, dolls for costuming Subject: H-COST: h-costume, slightly ot, dolls for costuming From: "Marsha S. McLean" Date: Sun, 11 Jul 1999 21:14:48 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: "Marsha S. McLean" I am looking for a source of heads for dolls, wood or porcelain. I want an animal head, not fussy what animal, tho there are some i wouldn't want. Does anyone know of a place tat sells these? I would settle for a human head the size of a lemon (same size for animal) with no hair, or Elizabethan-able hair. Thanks!! This is for a LLOOOONNNGGG dreamt of project. Marsha Let us be elegant or DIE [551,207]CSuX:h-costume, slightly ot, dolls for costuming Subject: RE: H-COST: h-costume, slightly ot, dolls for costuming From: Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 07:58:40 -0600 (MDT) -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" IF you use the master search engine http://www.metacrawler.com, and type in your key words, "porcelain doll parts" and "dollmaking supplies" and "doll making" you'll find quite a few on-line sources. I understand that little animal sculptures of this kind are made for sale today-- the whole animal, not just the head, anyway--and that the wood used is poplar, and carved with a dremel tool. There is a female artist in the Germantown section of Philadelphia who makes wooden fantasy animals for sale, but I don't know her name or address. Hope H. Dunlap > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of Marsha S. McLean > Sent: Sunday, July 11, 1999 9:15 PM > To: h-costume-digest@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: h-costume, slightly ot, dolls for costuming > > > > -Poster: "Marsha S. McLean" > > I am looking for a source of heads for dolls, wood or > porcelain. I want an > animal head, not fussy what animal, tho there are some i > wouldn't want. > Does anyone know of a place tat sells these? I would settle > for a human > head the size of a lemon (same size for animal) with no hair, or > Elizabethan-able hair. > > Thanks!! This is for a LLOOOONNNGGG dreamt of project. > > Marsha > > Let us be elegant or DIE > > > > > _____ majordomo@indra.com > -Poster: This just in from Williamsburg: We have more details now about the "18th-Century Clothing: Revealing Fashions" conference and the Textile Art Studies program that follows it in January 2000. (This makes a long message.) Later this month [July] we will mail program brochures. Please encourage anyone who is interested to contact us. Program details and the registration form will be on the Colonial Williamsburg web site soon at www.history.org under "What's New" in the Williamsburg Institute's 2000 Calendar. Thank you for helping "spread the word" about these exciting programs. -Pat Hearn Williamsburg Institute and the Colonial Williamsburg Foundation present 18th-Century Clothing: Revealing Fashions January 9-11, 2000 Clothes tell us a lot about our 18th-century counterparts. They tell us what people considered beautiful, which fabrics were used and how technology affected cutting and sewing garments. Clothing also shows us that ideal body shape was as important then as it is now. Women, men and children enhanced the shape of their bodies with stays, hoops and tailoring details to achieve the ideal silhouette. Fabric was expensive, garments were scarce and clothing was carefully made and remade. Join Colonial Williamsburg staff and visiting experts to look closely at 18th-century clothing. This two-day symposium allows study of a new exhibition, Revealing Fashions (December 4, 1999 - September 4, 2000), which displays clothing in ways not usually seen in museums: inside out, open to show linings and construction or stretched flat to indicate the cutting plan. Speakers will share new research and fresh insights about techniques of cut and construction, clothing in period portraits, masterpieces of costume from British collections, children's garments and body shape and deportment. Participants will discover how elegant 18th-century clothing was hand-sewn and embellished with colorful brocading, printing, applied trims, needlework and quilting. Opportunities for special behind-the-scenes tours will be available. Program Highlights Study time in the Revealing Fashions exhibition and self-guided tours of Historic Area trade shops related to fashion and costume for early arrivals Sunday, January 9 Optional one-hour introductory tours of Colonial Williamsburg's Costume Design Center Sunday afternoon Special study opportunities for conference registrants in the Revealing Fashions exhibition and the DeWitt Wallace Gallery textile study area A presentation of clothing in the 18th-century style with commentary by Janea Whitacre, manager of Fashion Trades at Colonial Williamsburg, and reception welcoming registrants Sunday evening Monday, January 10 *Connoisseurship: The Art and Mystery of Clothing; with Linda Baumgarten, curator of textiles and costumes, Colonial Williamsburg *A short gown, an apron and a hat: English Dress in the 18th Century; with Clare Rose, independent researcher, Winchester, England *Clothing Then and Now: 18th-Century Styles on Modern Bodies; with Richard Hill, manager, Costume Design Center, Colonial Williamsburg *Dressed for the Wall: Costume in Colonial Portraits; with Claudia Brush Kidwell, curator of Costume Collection, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. Tuesday, January 11 *Costumes Close-Up: An Inside Look?; with Linda Baumgarten *Clues in the Cloth: Conservation of Historic Costume; with Loreen Finkelstein, conservator of textiles, Colonial Williamsburg *Slips and Sprigs: Clothing Children during the 18th Century; with Clare Rose *Short Gowns, Bedgowns and Jackets, 1750 - 1800: A Survey of Current Knowledge; with Claudia Kidwell and Sally Queen, Alexandria, Virginia Opportunity to meet speakers, ask questions and obtain autographs for speakers' books and Costume Close-Up, the new publication accompanying the exhibition. *The pleasure of your company is requested for dessert; An after-dinner dessert reception, featuring costumes created and modeled by conference registrants. Please submit costume descriptions in advance. Please do not model antique clothing. Registration Information Conference registration must be made in advance and must be accompanied by payment of the $225 registration fee and full payment of all optional program fees. The conference registration fee includes the opening reception, coffee breaks, a dessert reception, special study time in the Revealing Fashions exhibition and opportunities to examine textile study storage drawers in the DeWitt Wallace Gallery, conference presentations proposed in this program and a Patriot's Pass. The Patriot's Pass is good for one year and provides admission to all Colonial Williamsburg museums and exhibition buildings. For a conference brochure, registration materials and additional information, contact: Registrar, 18th-Century Clothing Williamsburg Institute Colonial Williamsburg Foundation Post Office Box 1776 Williamsburg, Virginia 23187-1776 Telephone (757) 220-7182, fax (757) 565-8630 or e-mail tengle@cwf.org Conference size is limited and registrations will be processed in the order received. You may register by mail or fax. We cannot accept registrations by telephone. Information will also be available at www.history.org under "What's New" in the Williamsburg Institute's 2000 Calendar. Lodging and Dining at Colonial Williamsburg The following special conference rates are available for "18th-Century Clothing" registrants. To make your room and dining reservations, please call (800) 261-9530, Monday through Friday, 9 a.m. until 5 p.m. Hotel rates for single or double occupancy, per night (rates do not include applicable taxes): Woodlands Guest Rooms $50 Woodlands Suites $60 Williamsburg Lodge - Main, East or South Wing $85 Williamsburg Lodge - Tazewell or West Wing $105 TEXTILE ART STUDIES AT COLONIAL WILLIAMSBURG January 12-15, 2000 The Williamsburg Institute presents the second Textile Art Studies at Colonial Williamsburg. This year a variety of needlework classes are complemented by costume workshops examining the intricacies of 18th-century clothing and accessories. Visiting experts join Colonial Williamsburg staff to offer exciting opportunities to acquire new skills and knowledge. For additional information about the related Williamsburg Institute conference, "18th-Century Clothing: Revealing Fashions," January 9-11, 2000 and the new exhibition "Revealing Fashions at the DeWitt Wallace Gallery" (December 4, 1999-September 4, 2000), contact the Williamsburg Institute Registrar (see information below). Behind the Scenes at Colonial Williamsburg's Textile Collection Wednesday, January 12, 2000 Tour A - 9-10:30 a.m. Tour B - 10:30 a.m.-Noon Linda Baumgarten and Kim Ivey, Colonial Williamsburg $15 Special opportunities to see examples of Colonial Williamsburg's textiles collections in the curators' flat storage facility. Viewing the entire collection would be impossible; however, the tour reveals the rich documentation and resources available for the study of 17th- and 18th-century quilts, coverlets and other extraordinary textiles. Groups are limited to 25 participants. Decorative Fringe I: Introducing the Finishing Touch for 18th-Century Apparel Wednesday, January 12, 2000 9 a.m.-Noon Rick Hill, Colonial Williamsburg $50 Rick Hill, manager of Colonial Williamsburg's Costume Design Center, leads this beginner's hands-on workshop that introduces a variety of decorative fringes used to enhance apparel during the colonial period. Using materials provided, participants learn how to make two types of fringe to complete in class or at home. Refreshments for a break are included. Class size is limited to 30 students. [Note: This repeats last year's popular class. See Decorative Fringe II below.] Ann Holewll Sampler Session I - Wednesday, January 12, 2000 Session II - Thursday, January 13, 2000 10 a.m.- 4 p.m. Joanne Harvey $125 Ann Holewll's 1699 sampler is an example of a late 17th-century polychrome sampler using multiple banded designs, including a verse and various randomly placed motifs. This important English sampler is one of a group of embroideries worked under the guidance of Juda or Judeth Hayle. Known examples in this group were worked between 1691 and 1710. A common design element is an embellished square containing the maker's initials. Many of these samplers also include the initials "IH" identifying the teacher. The verse on Ann Holewll's sampler reads, "Look well to what yov take in hand for larning is better then hovse or land when land is gone and money is spent then larning is most excelent.?" Colonial Williamsburg acquired this sampler in 1998 with funds contributed by Friends of the Textile Collection. This piece is worked with floss on a linen ground and uses a variety of stitches, such as cross, double running, satin and other accents. Refreshments for morning and afternoon breaks are provided. Lunch is on your own. Class size is limited to 35 students. Joanne Harvey is a well-known teacher and student of historical needlework. She has developed meticulous reproductions of several samplers in the Colonial Williamsburg collection, including those stitched by Mercy Hopkins (1800) and Elizabeth Cotton (1698). The Ann Holewll sampler is her most recent project in conjunction with Colonial Williamsburg. Joanne owns The Examplarery, Dearborn, Michigan. Constructing an 18th-Century Infant's Gown Wednesday, January 12, 2000 1:30-4:30 p.m. Clare Rose, Winchester, England $55 Participants learn how to construct a "slip" gown worn by infants and young children from about 1750 until 1790. It was ingeniously constructed from two large pieces of fabric that was pleated to shape and sleeves were added. Fashioned in printed linen, fine lawn or silk satin, such gowns were widely sold and must have been in the repertoire of every seamstress. Clare Rose provides for each student a master pattern she has drafted from surviving examples in British museum collections. Participants use the pattern to cut and assemble a tissue paper mockup and learn how to shape the bodice with tucks and pleats. Class discussion includes using variant constructions for different weights of fabric and the positioning of applied or quilted decoration. Bring scissors, a 12-inch ruler, needle and basting thread, sticky (Scotch) tape, a 12-inch piece of muslin for practice stitches (optional), and paper for taking notes. Refreshments for a break are provided. Class size is limited to 30 students. Clare Rose is an authority on children's clothing in the 18th century and author of _Children's Clothes since 1750_. Former curator of textiles at York Castle Museum, she is now an independent researcher and writer with a special interest in the history of children's clothes and 18th-century quilting in Britain. She is an experienced dressmaker and quilter who has taught many workshops in quilting techniques, including classes at Quilt Expo Europa. Feet of Ingenuity: Calceaology, An Old Science Session I - Wednesday, January 12, 2000 Session II - Friday, January 14, 2000 2-4:30 p.m. Al Saguto, Colonial Williamsburg $50 Master boot and shoemaker D. A. Saguto leads a workshop that blends a practical background explaining the architecture and anatomy of 18th-century shoes using archaeological examples and slides, and an overview of construction, styles, terminology and techniques being rediscovered from 18th-century textbooks about the trade. This is a special opportunity for those curious about fashionable shoes and for those interested in authenticity in reproducing colonial era footwear. Refreshments for a break are provided. Class size is limited to 20 students. Sarah Leonard's Wedding Pocket Wednesday, January 12, 2000 6-9:30 p.m. Joanne Harvey $75 Sarah Leonard of Warwick, Massachusetts, married David Mayo on December 15, 1786. Documentation accompanying this needlework indicates that Sarah spun and wove the foundation for her wedding pocket. She also spun and dyed the wool she used to do her embroidery. This wonderful pocket reflects the domestic form of crewel embroidery so prominent in the embellishment of garments and accessories during the 18th century. The beauty of this pocket is the simplicity of its meandering floral design. Its monochromatic blue color scheme is indicative of crewel embroideries in the Massachusetts area. The pocket measures 13 inches by 17 inches. This reproduction is worked on a linen ground using Appleton Crewel Wool. Stem stitch, New England laid stitch and running stitch are used. Class does not include dinner. Class size is limited to 35 students. Suit Coats behind the Seams: Studying Pattern and Materials Session I - Thursday, January 13, 2000 Session II - Friday, January 14, 2000 9:30 a.m.-Noon Florine Carr $55 This hands-on class introduces students to museum research techniques. Using two antique coats from Colonial Williamsburg-s collections, Florine Carr explains how men-s 18th-century suit coats were shaped and constructed. Students discover how museum staff study and catalogue antique clothing, how to analyze construction techniques and fabric thread counts and how to use basic microscopic analysis of materials. Each participant receives a magnifier-thread counter, white gloves for use in handling antique textiles and information to take home. No previous experience is required. Class size is limited to 20 students. Florine Carr is co-author with Linda Baumgarten and John Watson of _Costume Close-up_, a new book of clothing patterns from Colonial Williamsburg's collections. She is a textile specialist docent at the Bayou Bend Collection, Houston, Texas. Caring for Costume and Accessories Thursday, January 13, 2000 9:30 a.m.-4 p.m. Loreen Finkelstein, Colonial Williamsburg $100 Textile conservator Loreen Finkelstein discusses textile conservation treatments performed for the "Revealing Fashions" exhibition. The class includes a tour of the textile conservation laboratory emphasizing special conservation equipment and procedures. Participants explore causes of deterioration and methods and materials for use in proper storage and display. They learn about stitching techniques used for conservation of costumes. Textile conservation technician Olivia Eller explains and demonstrates procedures used in the dye laboratory to produce fabrics suitable for use in treatment. Each participant receives a packet of useful information with a reading list, supply list, synthetic dye recipes and stitch guide. Participants may bring historic costumes for discussion. Refreshments for breaks are provided. Lunch is on your own. Class size is limited to 20 students. Tasselmaking Workshop: Introducing Passementerie Thursday, January 13, 2000 9 a.m.-4 p.m. Upholstery Conservation Staff, Colonial Williamsburg $100 Upholstery conservator Leroy Graves and staff of the conservation laboratory lead participants in the step-by-step process of making a five-inch trimmed tassel. The tassel is fashioned after those made for the elegant circa 1770 drapery bed on display in the recently refurbished Peyton Randolph House chamber. Each participant can take home a tassel of his/her own making and an appreciation for the fine art of passementerie. Refreshments for a morning and afternoon break are provided. Lunch is on your own. Class size is limited to 15 students. Making a Gown in the 18th-Century Manner Thursday, January 13, 2000 Janea Whitacre and Doris Warren, Colonial Williamsburg 9 a.m.-4:30 p.m. $100 This workshop explores several methods of gown making as practiced by the mantua maker in the 18th century. Participants see the cuttings and fittings for a single gown, then stitch their way through the project. Bring a thimble and the desire to sew! The completed gown is the newest style from London, according to The Lady's Magazine of May 1775. The gown made by the class will be displayed at the Margaret Hunter Millinery Shop throughout the year 2000. Refreshments for morning and afternoon breaks are provided. Lunch is on your own. Class size is limited to 18 students. 18th-Century Pinball Thursday, January 13, 2000 6-9:30 p.m. Joanne Harvey $60 For centuries the common needle and pin have been regarded as precious commodities because of their scarcity. A slide presentation explores the wonderful array of needlework tools. Among these tools, a needlework box or waist-hung chatelaine usually included a pincushion. Participants fashion an 18th-century-style pinball using queen stitches. The pinball is worked in silk on 35-count cream linen and includes a ribbon to enhance the piece. Participants may order a handmade sterling silver pinball ring at an additional cost. Class does not include dinner. Class size is limited to 35 students. [Note: This repeats last year's popular class.] Coloring Needlework Yarns with 18th-Century Dyes Friday, January 14, 2000 9 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Max Hamrick, Colonial Williamsburg $100 This class explores the myths and realities of how and why cloth was colored in 18th-century Virginia. Participants have opportunities to prepare dyes for use, set up the dye kettles and color yarns suitable for 18th-century needlework projects using the prepared dyes. Max Hamrick, Colonial Williamsburg's weaving specialist and dyer, conducts this class in the Historic Area. Refreshments for a morning and afternoon break are provided. Lunch is on your own. Class size is limited to 15 students. Sew On and Sew Forth Friday, January 14, 2000 9 a.m.-Noon Brenda Rosseau, Colonial Williamsburg $50 Explore the variety of stitches practiced in the 18th-century guided by an expert from Colonial Williamsburg's Costume Design Center. Participants assemble a reference book of construction samples, including multiple seam types, finishing techniques, buttonholes and covered buttons. Refreshments for a break are provided. Class size is limited to 30 students. [Note: This repeats last year's popular class.] Decorative Fringe II: More Finishing Touches for 18th-Century Apparel 1:30-4:30 p.m. Rick Hill, Colonial Williamsburg $50 In response to many requests, Rick Hill leads an intermediate hands-on workshop focusing on the variety of trims used to ornament clothing. Using materials provided, participants learn to make two different types of fringe based on antique samples. Prerequisite: Decorative Fringe I (see above) and basic crochet skills. Refreshments for an afternoon break are provided. Class size is limited to 30 students. Keeping It Covered: Hats for Fashionable Women and Men Saturday, January 15, 2000 9 a.m.-Noon Frances M. Burroughs and Susan B. Hard, Colonial Williamsburg $50 Explore the design, construction and manufacture of fashionable hats of the second half of the 18th century - felt hats for men and silk hats for women. A slide presentation introduces a demonstration of blocking and decorating hats. Participants receive a list of sources and instructions for reproducing at home their own stylish 18th-century headwear. Refreshments are provided for a break. Class size is limited to 30 students. Introduction to Wigmaking: Weaving Hair on a Tress Loom Session I - 9-Noon, Saturday, January 15, 2000 Session II - 2-5 p.m., Saturday, January 15, 2000 Betty Kelly and Regina Blizzard, Colonial Williamburg $50 A wig was a basic part of men's fashion in the 18th century and making a wig was a long and involved process. The most time-consuming aspect was wefting the hair or weaving it so that lengths could be stitched onto the caul. This class teaches the basic hand skills and techniques needed to weave on a tress loom the hairs principally used in 18th-century For All Classes Participants should bring personal embroidery aids, such as scissors, thimbles and battery-powered lights and magnifiers if desired. All levels of expertise are welcomed. REGISTRATION INFORMATION For a program brochure, registration materials and additional information, contact: Registrar, Textile Art Studies Williamsburg Institute Colonial Williamsburg Foundation P O Box 1776 Williamsburg VA 23187-1776 Telephone (757) 220-7182, fax (757) 565-8630 or e-mail tengle@cwf.org. Information will also be available at www.history.org under "What's New" in the Williamsburg Institute's 2000 Calendar. LODGING AND DINING AT COLONIAL WILLIAMSBURG The following special conference rates are available for Textile Art Studies registrants. To make your room and dining reservations, please call (800) 261-9530, Monday through Friday, 9:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. Hotel rates for single or double occupancy, per night: (rates do not include applicable taxes) Woodlands Guest Rooms $50 Woodlands Suites $60 Williamsburg Lodge - Main, East or South Wing $85 Williamsburg Lodge - Tazewell or West Wing $105 jessica wilbur [23,208]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:15:15 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" Hello, I just received my copy of Jane Ashelford's _Visual History of Costume: 16th Century_. As I was looking through it yesterday, I noticed Holbein's sketch of Anne Boleyn, which is thought to have been done while she was pregnant. It's the one where she's wearing a linen cap which has a strap or tie under her chin. Well, the caption next to it said "An unknown lady" with the date (which I've now forgotten) and attributed to Holbein. I'm confused as to why she would note it this way, since Holbein wrote on the sketch, "Anna Bollein Queen". The description in the caption matches the sketch, so it's not like the picture got switched during layout of the book. And elsewhere in the book, Ashelford makes reference to "the unknown lady in plate 24". I can't imagine why this would be. Holbein labelled many of his sketches with the subjects' names, and he could hardly have been mistaken about the identity of a sketch of the queen. So can anyone think of a reason as to why this sketch would be labelled as "an unknown lady"? Thanks, --Jessica robin netherton [51,209]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: Robin Netherton Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 16:55:42 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Jessica Wilbur wrote: > ... I noticed Holbein's sketch of Anne Boleyn, which is thought to have > been done while she was pregnant. It's the one where she's wearing a > linen cap which has a strap or tie under her chin. Well, the caption > next to it said "An unknown lady" with the date (which I've now > forgotten) and attributed to Holbein. I'm confused as to why she would > note it this way, since Holbein wrote on the sketch, "Anna Bollein > Queen". The description in the caption matches the sketch, so it's not > like the picture got switched during layout of the book. And elsewhere > in the book, Ashelford makes reference to "the unknown lady in plate > 24". I can't imagine why this would be. Holbein labelled many of his > sketches with the subjects' names, and he could hardly have been > mistaken about the identity of a sketch of the queen. > > So can anyone think of a reason as to why this sketch would be labelled > as "an unknown lady"? >From _Holbein and the Court of Henry VIII_, a nice little exhibit catalog published by the Queen's Gallery, Buckingham Palace, 1978: "It is most unlikely that the instcription identifies the sitter correctly. Probably the most authentic portrait of Anne Boleyn is that in the National Portrait Gallery, which is unconnected with this drawing. The drawing by Holbein now in the British Museum is no longer thought to represent her, and the inscription on that drawing is certainly not contemporary." In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added later, and wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other inscriptions were also added after Holbein's death. That would make sense, though. The drawings themselves were collected from Holbein's effects after he died suddenly from the plague in 1543. They were apparently made into a book for King Edward VI and later given away or sold; the first definitive mention of the book is in a personal inventory of 1590. The Queen's Gallery catalog lists a wondrously complex chain of ownership as the book passed through many people's hands, through gift and purchase, returning to the royal family and leaving it again once or twice more before coming back to the Crown for good by 1675. On the basis of some heraldic drawings on the back of the page (the book continues), there have been two possible identifications suggested for this lady: Margaret, Lady Lee, the sister of Sir Thomas Wyatt (unlikely when compared to another known picture); or Wyatt's wife, Elizabeth, the sister of Lord Cobham. --Robin hope greenberg [19,210]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: Hope Greenberg Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:21:02 -0500 -Poster: Hope Greenberg Robin Netherton wrote: > In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added later, and > wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other inscriptions were > also added after Holbein's death. Yes, the most famous/obvious being the drawing labelled "Mistress Jak" who was Edward VI's nurse. It is more probably (based on the drawing style and clothing and similarity of appearance) a study sketch for one of the figures in the Thomas More family portrait. There is another mis-labelled one that has since been identified as another study sketch for one of More's daughters--the name escapes me now. Overall the general rule of thumb now is don't trust any Holbein label! - Hope jessica wilbur [30,211]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:55:04 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" > > -Poster: Hope Greenberg > > Robin Netherton wrote: > > > In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added later, and > > wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other inscriptions were > > also added after Holbein's death. > > Yes, the most famous/obvious being the drawing labelled "Mistress Jak" > who was Edward VI's nurse. It is more probably (based on the drawing > style and clothing and similarity of appearance) a study sketch for one > of the figures in the Thomas More family portrait. There is another > mis-labelled one that has since been identified as another study sketch > for one of More's daughters--the name escapes me now. Overall the > general rule of thumb now is don't trust any Holbein label! > > - Hope Thanks!! I'm glad I asked! =) --Jessica appin1@aol.com[25,212]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: Appin1@aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 18:35:18 EDT -Poster: Appin1@aol.com Some of the oldest surviving tartans (pre-1745) come from the Hebrides & are very bright -- orange/green. So the dyes were colorfast & were bright. Members of clans were recognized byt the plant or badge they wore in their bonnets, not by the color or sett of the tartan. The painting of the battle of Culloden, done aboutr 20 years after the fact, but using real participants as models, shows Highlanders wearing several different tartans. Each garment -- hose, pladi, waistcoat and coat -- is of a different tartan. But members of a clan wear the same spring of heather or oak leaf in their bonnets. While not an expert on Highland clothing, I AM the coordinator of an 18th century Highland living history group and we have done extensive research into clothing and folkways of the Highlands. An excellent resource is H. F. McClintock, "Old Irish & Hihgland Dress" last published in 1950 and still the seminal work on the subject. Grab a copy if you can find one. Kathleen Norvell Coordinator, Appin Regiment, Jacobite Rebellion, 1745-46 appin1@aol.com[25,213]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: Appin1@aol.com Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 18:24:03 EDT -Poster: Appin1@aol.com Joseph -- YOu are quite right about clan, "ancient" & "hunting" tartans. The "Sobieski Stuarts" made up quite a lot of what we now consider today as gospel regarding tartans & kilts. They published a book on the subject in the mid-19th century & the damage is still being felt. I have photos that prove you can take a bunch of Highlanders dressed in the loudest tartans inaginable (like "loud Mcleod" & Buchanan) out into the woods and "hide the Highlander." They cannot be seen in the trees & underbrush, even in the winter because the pattern of the tartan acts like camoflauge. I have never heaard of doubling the fabric by folding it over when you throw the plaid, however. The great kilt ("breaccan mor")traditionally consisted of two widths of fabric (generally 30" or so wide each, to make it around 60" wide) by at least 6 yds. long. The lower half of that 60" wide material covered the "nether regions" (similar to the modern kilt, but unpleated), while the top half of it was pulled over the shoulder or head for protection from the weather. There are many contemporary illustrations of Highlanders seen from the rearthat show them with the top half of the great kilt puleed up like that. Kathleen Norvell dietmar [37,214]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: H-COST: Re: Question on Ashelford From: Dietmar Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 15:25:41 +0000 -Poster: Dietmar Greetings all, Robin Netherton wrote: >> In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added >> later, and wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other >> inscriptions were also added after Holbein's death. Hope added: > There is another mis-labelled one that has > since been identified as another study sketch for one of More's > daughters--the name escapes me now. Overall the general rule of > thumb now is don't trust any Holbein label! That sounds a bit harsh, but not far from true. There is an inherent problem with identifying the art from that period. This is especially true of German woodcuts. By their very nature, there were a number of prints made before the blocks were destroyed or sometimes sold to bookprinters. Often the blocks and prints were not signed or numbered in any way. Monograms were often added years later, usually in hopes of adding to the value. Sometimes lower quality prints were made centuries later and disreputable dealers would sell them as older original prints. Hundreds of prints were attributed to Albrecht Durer even though he had nothing to do with them. Regards, Dietmar "Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." merouda the true of bornover [40,215]CSuX:cotehardie fitting Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: cotehardie fitting From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 09:47:25 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover WRT fitting cotehardies. I have found that when you don't use straight seams over the bosom, you get a very supportive fit. My cotehardie's front seam is quite curvy, straight from the hips up to right under the breasts. Then it flares out and then back in. Kind of like a question mark. When the gown is laced up however, the line appears straight, my breasts are quite supported. Quite. This kind of fit takes some work but worth it. It has been suggested to me that the bath house shifts have been fitted in a similar way, with the huge curve at the side seams on the front pieces of the garment. I need no fitted foundation but I do wear a linen shift underneath in the style of the garment in Kohler. Cut on the bias. Superb fit. > I dont think there's all that much info to go on. The people who believe that > there is no fitted foundation garment seem to be able to make cotehardies > just fine without them. I have been experimenting, assuming that I will make > a wardrobe of cotehardies in the future (which seems to get farther off all > the time) and it seems to me that the best plan would be to make an extremely > fitted underkirtle or two, to take the stress off the main garments. I go > back and forth between a full kirtle with sleeves, and something akin to the > Bohemian stuff mentioned, with no sleeves (which would then need an > underkirtle on top of THAT -- pretty stuffy). > > But I think that if someone wants to experiment with an undergarment, then > she should! Try it out and let the rest of us know how it works -- we might > be convinced. > > Gail Finke > -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir margretta de vries [20,216]CSuX:german translations Subject: H-COST: german translations From: Margretta de Vries Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 13:52:36 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margretta de Vries On a personal note, if people have short texts, I am fluent in both German and English, and could translate most texts well, if anyone is interested. I've had experience doing both directions, German to English and English to German. contact me, if interested! margretta === Margretta de Vries Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com merouda the true of bornover [22,217]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 14:19:42 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added later, and > wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other inscriptions were > also added after Holbein's death. Thanks for info. :) There is a portrait of Bess of Hardwick, Countess of Shrewsbury that has "Marie Reigna" painted into the background. This was also common practice, to paint the current reign but in this case, the Holbein sketch would have read Henry not Anne. So, thanks again for the clarification! Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir jessica wilbur [69,218]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 17:28:53 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" Thanks! I had just received a similar reply, privately. I didn't know that the names on the sketches were later additions. That certainly does clear up a lot of things. =) Though I am a little surprised to see the date on the catalog you mention. I've seen more recent publications that still label that picture as Anne Boleyn. You would think that twenty years after they figured out it wasn't her, that it would be common knowledge (I'm not contradicting what you've said, just pondering the way misconceptions can persist!) Do you know if the catalog you mention is still in print? Thanks for your help! --Jessica > > -Poster: Robin Netherton > > > On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Jessica Wilbur wrote: > > > ... I noticed Holbein's sketch of Anne Boleyn, which is thought to have > > been done while she was pregnant. It's the one where she's wearing a > > linen cap which has a strap or tie under her chin. Well, the caption > > next to it said "An unknown lady" with the date (which I've now > > forgotten) and attributed to Holbein. I'm confused as to why she would > > note it this way, since Holbein wrote on the sketch, "Anna Bollein > > Queen". The description in the caption matches the sketch, so it's not > > like the picture got switched during layout of the book. And elsewhere > > in the book, Ashelford makes reference to "the unknown lady in plate > > 24". I can't imagine why this would be. Holbein labelled many of his > > sketches with the subjects' names, and he could hardly have been > > mistaken about the identity of a sketch of the queen. > > > > So can anyone think of a reason as to why this sketch would be labelled > > as "an unknown lady"? > > >From _Holbein and the Court of Henry VIII_, a nice little exhibit catalog > published by the Queen's Gallery, Buckingham Palace, 1978: "It is most > unlikely that the instcription identifies the sitter correctly. Probably > the most authentic portrait of Anne Boleyn is that in the National > Portrait Gallery, which is unconnected with this drawing. The drawing by > Holbein now in the British Museum is no longer thought to represent her, > and the inscription on that drawing is certainly not contemporary." > > In other words, there's evidence that the inscription was added later, and > wrongly. I do not know whether that means that other inscriptions were > also added after Holbein's death. That would make sense, though. The > drawings themselves were collected from Holbein's effects after he died > suddenly from the plague in 1543. They were apparently made into a book > for King Edward VI and later given away or sold; the first definitive > mention of the book is in a personal inventory of 1590. The Queen's > Gallery catalog lists a wondrously complex chain of ownership as the book > passed through many people's hands, through gift and purchase, returning > to the royal family and leaving it again once or twice more before coming > back to the Crown for good by 1675. > > On the basis of some heraldic drawings on the back of the page (the book > continues), there have been two possible identifications suggested for > this lady: Margaret, Lady Lee, the sister of Sir Thomas Wyatt (unlikely > when compared to another known picture); or Wyatt's wife, Elizabeth, the > sister of Lord Cobham. > > --Robin > > robin netherton [34,219]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: Robin Netherton Date: Mon, 12 Jul 1999 20:47:01 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton On Mon, 12 Jul 1999, Jessica Wilbur wrote: > Thanks! I had just received a similar reply, privately. I didn't know > that the names on the sketches were later additions. That certainly does > clear up a lot of things. =) Though I am a little surprised to see the > date on the catalog you mention. I've seen more recent publications that > still label that picture as Anne Boleyn. You would think that twenty > years after they figured out it wasn't her, that it would be common > knowledge (I'm not contradicting what you've said, just pondering the > way misconceptions can persist!) Once something is in the literature, it tends to get re-cited and repeated for a VERY long time. People would have no reason to question its validity unless they happen to have seen the more recent research. > Do you know if the catalog you mention is still in print? Good question. I got it at the Queen's Gallery in, hmmm, 1985 or so. Title is "Holbein and the court of Henry VIII. There's no author or ISBN. Publisher is "The Queen's Gallery, Buckingham Palace," dated 1978-79. Printer is Lund Humphries (London & Bradford). I think you'd have your best luck by checking with a good used art book store in England (Zwemmer's, Ian Shipley, Blackwell), or with the Queen's Gallery directly. It's a lovely little book -- 144 pages, trade paperback size, a few color pix and lots of b/w. --Robin danielle nunn [24,220]CSuX:question on ashelford Subject: Re: H-COST: Question on Ashelford From: Danielle Nunn Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 00:06:59 -0400 -Poster: Danielle Nunn Greetings, >I just received my copy of Jane Ashelford's _Visual History of Costume: >16th Century_. As I was looking through it yesterday, I >noticed Holbein's sketch of Anne Boleyn, which is thought to have been >done while she was pregnant. It's the one where she's wearing a linen >cap which has a strap or tie under her chin. Well, the caption next to >it said "An unknown lady" with the date (which I've now forgotten) and >attributed to Holbein... Unfortunately, this is just an example of one of Ashelford's more obvious errors in my opinion. She has good pictures but, her text needs to be taken with a rather large grain of salt at times. Enjoy the book. Cheers, Danielle (who is gloating over the copy of Alcega she received for her birthday yesterday!) annorak@aol.com[19,221]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: AnnoraK@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 00:38:58 EDT -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com In keeping with a recent thread . . . In conjunction with my first foray into corsetry, I am shopping for the aforementioned grommet setter. I know that Greenberg & Hammer is the best place for grommets, but I can't seem to get a catalog out of them, tho I've asked twice in the past six months. So, I'm going elsewhere for these. My problem is the setter. The only size 00 setter that I can find (either online or in a catalog) is AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how often I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like spending that much on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the Thread, etc.) sell setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC Metro area where I can pick one up? Thanx! Jen [42,222]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 01:02:06 -0400 -Poster: "Kyna Grannd" Fastener Supply Company is who I go to for grommets, eyelets and setters. I had the same problem with Greenberg & Hammer....6 requests via email AND phone in the past 6 months and still nothing...no catalog...no email response...they DID however answer the phone :\ www.fastener-supply.com or call San Francisco at 415-392-6968 or Los Angeles at 213-749-2271 ~Kyna ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com > > In keeping with a recent thread . . . > > In conjunction with my first foray into corsetry, I am shopping for the > aforementioned grommet setter. I know that Greenberg & Hammer is the best > place for grommets, but I can't seem to get a catalog out of them, tho I've > asked twice in the past six months. So, I'm going elsewhere for these. My > problem is the setter. The only size 00 setter that I can find (either > online or in a catalog) is AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how often > I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like spending that much > on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the Thread, etc.) sell > setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC Metro area where I > can pick one up? > > Thanx! > Jen > joseph & christine [28,223]CSuX:hunting kilt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Hunting kilt? From: "Joseph & Christine" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 04:30:08 -0400 -Poster: "Joseph & Christine" Hi Kathleen, >I have never heard of doubling the fabric by folding it over when you >throw the plaid, however. This was the first I'd heard of it, and the only place I've heard of it. I have no idea who David Stewart of Garth was, save that he wrote "Sketches of the Highlanders of Scotland," published in Edinburgh in 1822. (snip) There are many contemporary illustrations of Highlanders >seen from the rear that show them with the top half of the great kilt >pulled up like that. I think I may have not been clear - it's folded lengthwise, so you have about 60" by three yards instead of six. That gives you the covering you describe, and makes the thing a whole lot easier to "throw." I wore it that way at the Potomac Celtic festival, and it really works well. Regards, Joseph pulliam@acadia.net (deborah pulliam)[21,224]CSuX:correcting info Subject: H-COST: correcting info From: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 09:56:21 -0500 -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <> Another good example of this is the often-quoted (erroneous) information that Eleanora of Toledo was buried in the same gown she wears in the portrait by Bronzino. The tomb was open briefly in 1858, someone saw *something* that reminded him of the portrait, and made that statement. It was disproved when the conservation work in the 1980s, but it's still being quoted (unfortunately, it was published in many places.) Deborah hope h. dunlap [63,225]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: RE: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 08:45:31 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" What period corset are you trying to make? Grommets would be incorrect well into the 19th Century. You might consider skipping the grommets entirely. Use a small awl or nail to work open a hole of the right size between threads of the fabric. Do not cut any threads. Then buttonhole stitch the edges of the new round opening. This is strong and lasts quite well. Trick is to work open the hole, not cut it. I've used grommets and unless you do this anyway before you set the grommet, the fabric will eventually pull out of the teeth. Hope this might help. Hope H. Dunlap > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of AnnoraK@aol.com > Sent: Tuesday, July 13, 1999 12:39 AM > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? > > > > -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com > > In keeping with a recent thread . . . > > In conjunction with my first foray into corsetry, I am > shopping for the > aforementioned grommet setter. I know that Greenberg & > Hammer is the best > place for grommets, but I can't seem to get a catalog out of > them, tho I've > asked twice in the past six months. So, I'm going elsewhere > for these. My > problem is the setter. The only size 00 setter that I can > find (either > online or in a catalog) is AlterYears' $40 one. Since I > don't know how often > I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like > spending that much > on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the > Thread, etc.) sell > setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC > Metro area where I > can pick one up? > > Thanx! > Jen > _____ majordomo@indra.com > jennie chancey [27,226]CSuX:anyone watch "the hunley" on tnt? Subject: H-COST: Anyone watch "The Hunley" on TNT? From: Jennie Chancey Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:04:19 -0400 -Poster: Jennie Chancey This was Ted Turner's film about the Civil War submarine that sank the _Housatonic_ in Charleston Harbor. I thought most of the men's costumes were decent (though Gen. Beauregard's looked a bit too crisp and shiny for 1864), but the majority of the women's costumes were awful. I don't think I saw one woman with a corset underneath her dress. Some of the gowns were nicely done, but there were too many women in the "white blouse and skirt" combo that, from photos and fashion plates, we know were not widely worn until after the War. The "ladies of the evening" shown in the barroom scenes were also off quite a bit--I saw two with late 1870s and early 1880s necklines. And the hairstyle of Lt. Dixon's dead fiancee' was such a 1990s take on the 1860s--pouffy on top and with the hair smoothed over the ears rather than the flat top and side poufs to make the face look wider. Anybody else? Jennie -- Sense and Sensibility http://www.sensibility.com winsome clothing with an old-fashioned appeal mzscahlett@aol.com[26,227]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: MzScahlett@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 13:42:30 EDT -Poster: MzScahlett@aol.com In a message dated 7/12/1999 21:40:54 Pacific Daylight Time, AnnoraK@aol.com writes: << AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how often I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like spending that much on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the Thread, etc.) sell setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC Metro area where I can pick one up? >> The one I got cost me about $40 but it is "adjustable" (it has different heads that slip on so it works with various size grommets. I don't think you'll do much better for anything worth using. angela +++++ Angela F. Lazear Costumes & Custom Clothing Theatrical Costume Design "The truth of it is, I have no shirt." W. Shakespeare albertcat@aol.com[16,228]CSuX:anyone watch "the hunley" on tnt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Anyone watch "The Hunley" on TNT? From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:36:27 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/13/99 12:12:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, jchancey@rica.net writes: << This was Ted Turner's film about the Civil War submarine that sank the _Housatonic_ in Charleston Harbor. I thought most of the men's costumes were decent (though Gen. Beauregard's looked a bit too crisp and shiny for 1864), but the majority of the women's costumes were awful. >> Turner films are notoriously low on costume budget. Most things were probably rented....and women's things may have come from local costumers in Charleston. I'm guessing though 'cause I didn't see or work on the project but I know people who worked on the film about the iron clads....that's what I base my gossip on here. sarah toney [53,229]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: Sarah Toney Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 11:06:35 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney I hate to say this, since these are really pretty bad, but if you are really concerned about money and aren't going to use it much, Jo-Ann Fabrics sells a cheap-o hand held one for $10 or so... but they really are JUNK... Sarah --- MzScahlett@aol.com wrote: > > -Poster: MzScahlett@aol.com > > In a message dated 7/12/1999 21:40:54 Pacific > Daylight Time, AnnoraK@aol.com > writes: > > << AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how > often > I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't > feel like spending that > much > on one. Do any of the other grommet sources > (Richard the Thread, etc.) > sell > setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in > the DC Metro area where I > can pick one up? > >> > The one I got cost me about $40 but it is > "adjustable" (it has different > heads that slip on so it works with various size > grommets. I don't think > you'll do much better for anything worth using. > > angela > +++++ > Angela F. Lazear > Costumes & Custom Clothing > Theatrical Costume Design > "The truth of it is, I have no shirt." > W. Shakespeare > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com dave;editors(heritage matters) [17,230]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:51:51 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Having just processed the first sets of pics from The re-enactment at Tewkesbury at the weekend, I am starting to upload them to www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbury Ii should have most of the better ones up by the weekend. By then I should also have processed the second set which is of cloesups of the battle itself. Dave LD MUNDY Editor Heritage Matters simone89@aol.com[25,231]CSuX:anyone watch "the hunley" on tnt? Subject: Re: H-COST: Anyone watch "The Hunley" on TNT? From: Simone89@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 15:18:31 EDT -Poster: Simone89@aol.com << This was Ted Turner's film about the Civil War submarine that sank the > _Housatonic_ in Charleston Harbor. I thought most of the men's costumes > were decent (though Gen. Beauregard's looked a bit too crisp and shiny >for 1864), but the majority of the women's costumes were awful. >> >Turner films are notoriously low on costume budget. Most things were probably >rented....and women's things may have come from local costumers in >Charleston. I'm guessing though 'cause I didn't see or work on the project >but I know people who worked on the film about the iron clads....that's what >I base my gossip on here. Funny y'all should say how awful the women's costumes were. Alot of Civil War reenactors worked on that film. I was very amused when one of the ladies I work with brought in her 'gowns' to show me what she wore for it. It was brown and white cotton- very plain chemise and shirt, no bodice. For an SCAdian who does Elizabethan...... well I'm no expert on the Civil War era (even if I am from Charleston) but I was shocked at what she considered 'good' clothing. Simone89@aol.com sarah toney [35,232]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Sarah Toney Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 12:26:02 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney I have a question... I put this addy into my browser and it couldn't find it... will I not be able to access it from the US? (I'm not up on how these things work... I dunno). Sarah > Having just processed the first sets of pics from > The re-enactment at > Tewkesbury at the weekend, I am starting to upload > them to > > www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbury > > Ii should have most of the better ones up by the > weekend. By then I should > also have processed the second set which is of > cloesups of the battle > itself. > Dave > LD MUNDY > Editor Heritage Matters > > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com jessica wilbur [32,233]CSuX:correcting info Subject: Re: H-COST: correcting info From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:56:44 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" > > -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) > > < for a VERY long time. People would have no reason to question its validity > unless they happen to have seen the more recent research.>> > > Another good example of this is the often-quoted (erroneous) information > that Eleanora of Toledo was buried in the same gown she wears in the > portrait by Bronzino. > > The tomb was open briefly in 1858, someone saw *something* that reminded > him of the portrait, and made that statement. It was disproved when the > conservation work in the 1980s, but it's still being quoted (unfortunately, > it was published in many places.) > Such as Ashelford, for example. ;-) Seriously, that misinformation is in the caption next to the picture of Elenora of Toledo. I've also noticed a picture is included in this book which is often labelled as Catherine Howard, but is now thought to be Elizabeth Seymour, Jane's sister. So I think whoever mentioned that Ashelford's text is not totally accurate was right on the money. =( Who can you trust these days? --Jessica parsla liepa [47,234]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Parsla Liepa Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 15:38:27 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Parsla Liepa Nor could I. (That this is a UK site doesn't matter.) I could, however, get to the main Heritage Matters site, http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . Parsla Having just processed the first sets of pics from <> The re-enactment at <> Tewkesbury at the weekend, I am starting to upload <> them to <> <> www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbury <> <> Ii should have most of the better ones up by the <> weekend. By then I should <> also have processed the second set which is of <> cloesups of the battle <> itself. <> Dave <> LD MUNDY <> Editor Heritage Matters <> <> <> <> majordomo@indra.com <> < [17,235]CSuX:grommets and tewkesbury Subject: H-COST: Grommets and Tewkesbury From: Leslie Helms Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 13:20:19 -0700 -Poster: Leslie Helms If you must use grommets, use a very stout interfacing under them to give more meat for the metal to bite into. You might try canvas/sailmakers' shops to see if you can have them professionally inserted, IF you can find someone who can do a small enough size. Better yet, don't use 'em at all. Try a strip of sturdy canvas as interfacing and use the awl method. You can put just a few stitches around each one and reinforce with Fray Check or such. I couldn't get the Tewkesbury URL to work either. It seems to be an address problem just in the last two words of the address; the soft/net/UK server was responding. Leslie sarah toney [49,236]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Sarah Toney Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 21:24:13 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Sorry you were a bit quick of the mark. I am now just starting the first of the uploads I am doing it slowly and with large pics so that people can download them or look at the details so its a slow process. Dave LD MUNDY Editor Heritage Matters ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: Sarah Toney > > I have a question... I put this addy into my browser > and it couldn't find it... will I not be able to > access it from the US? (I'm not up on how these things > work... I dunno). > > Sarah > > > > Having just processed the first sets of pics from > > The re-enactment at > > Tewkesbury at the weekend, I am starting to upload > > them to > > > > www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbury > > > > Ii should have most of the better ones up by the > > weekend. By then I should > > also have processed the second set which is of > > cloesups of the battle > > itself. > > Dave > > LD MUNDY > > Editor Heritage Matters > > > > > > > > majordomo@indra.com > > > > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com > > parsla liepa [64,237]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Parsla Liepa Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 21:24:41 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Sorry you were a bit quick of the mark. I am now just starting the first of the uploads I am doing it slowly and with large pics so that people can download them or look at the details so its a slow process. Dave LD MUNDY Editor Heritage Matters ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: Parsla Liepa > > > Nor could I. (That this is a UK site doesn't matter.) I could, however, > get to the main Heritage Matters site, http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . > > Parsla > > > < > <> Having just processed the first sets of pics from > <> The re-enactment at > <> Tewkesbury at the weekend, I am starting to upload > <> them to > <> > <> www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbury > <> > <> Ii should have most of the better ones up by the > <> weekend. By then I should > <> also have processed the second set which is of > <> cloesups of the battle > <> itself. > <> Dave > <> LD MUNDY > <> Editor Heritage Matters > <> > <> > <> > <> majordomo@indra.com > <> > < > < > < > > > Parsla > > Vita brevis est, saxulum edeste. > **************************************************************************** * > > john page [18,238]CSuX:ladies trousers, 12thc Subject: H-COST: Re: Ladies' trousers, 12thC From: "John Page" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:08:12 -0400 -Poster: "John Page" Hi, List! A friend just got back from France and she claims to have seen a bas relief in a Toulouse church showing two women with trousers under their dresses. She said the women were wearing somewhat loose, mid-calf dresses with round necklines and elbow length sleeves; under this they were wearing ankle length trousers with seams up the fronts of the legs. Has anyone seen this? Thanks, Kristin Page dave;editors(heritage matters) [17,239]CSuX:tewkesbury update Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury update From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 21:53:37 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Sorry for the slight delay; After convincing the server that it should let me in I had to bribe a colleague to give me some of his space. If you are not getting to the site with the previous URl try the shoter version > <> www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbu.htm > <> The opening page is up . I hope to have gallery one up by midnight. If you discover any problems please let me know; Every time I go to Tewkesbury the sun shines and I get badly sunburnt. So bear with me thru my suffering. thanks Dave merouda the true of bornover [18,240]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 13:26:30 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > Nor could I. (That this is a UK site doesn't matter.) I could, however, > get to the main Heritage Matters site, http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . While I got to the Heritage Matters site, I couldn't find the photos. Can you give more information than this? There are too many links to choose from. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir merouda the true of bornover [20,241]CSuX:ladies trousers, 12thc Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Ladies' trousers, 12thC From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 14:18:37 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover I haven't seen it but having the name of the church would help track it down. Did she take pictures? If not, who's got the rope. *G* > A friend just got back from France and she claims to have seen a bas relief > in a Toulouse church showing two women with trousers under their dresses. > She said the women were wearing somewhat loose, mid-calf dresses with round > necklines and elbow length sleeves; under this they were wearing ankle > length trousers with seams up the fronts of the legs. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir parsla liepa [19,242]CSuX:ladies trousers, 12thc Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Ladies' trousers, 12thC From: Parsla Liepa Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 17:17:10 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Parsla Liepa > I'm certainly not going to get into defending Jane Ashelford's book, as I don't always agree with her conclusions. It's a good collection of period graphics, though. However, I would like to point out that scholarship and research are part of a continuous process. In the case of the portrait of Elizabeth Seymour, once thought to be Catherine Howard, look at the publication date of Ashelford's book. I believe it was published in the mid 1980s, and probably never updated when it was republished -- that's not Ashelford's fault. I don't think *any* of the books in that series went into second editions, until they were collected (and edited down) into the large format, by Aileen Ribeiro. 15 years is a long time ago, particularly in clothing history. She can't be held accountable for discoveries made after her book was published. It's up to the reader to read carefully and critically, and read widely. Deborah merouda the true of bornover [20,244]CSuX:visual history books Subject: H-COST: Visual History books From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 15:18:37 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > don't think *any* of the books in that series went into second editions, > until they were collected (and edited down) into the large format, by > Aileen Ribeiro. Oh, please do tell more! I haven't heard of this, but have found the books to be most helpful with all of the pictorial documentation. Thanks, Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir jessica wilbur [51,245]CSuX:correcting info again Subject: Re: H-COST: correcting info again From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:21:06 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" > > -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) > > < Elenora of Toledo. I've also noticed a picture is included in this book > which is often labelled as Catherine Howard, but is now thought to be > Elizabeth Seymour, Jane's sister. So I think whoever mentioned that > Ashelford's text is not totally accurate was right > on the money.>> > > I'm certainly not going to get into defending Jane Ashelford's book, as I > don't always agree with her conclusions. It's a good collection of period > graphics, though. > True, though I could wish that more of them were in color. Ah, well, c'est la vie... > However, I would like to point out that scholarship and research are part > of a continuous process. In the case of the portrait of Elizabeth Seymour, > once thought to be Catherine Howard, look at the publication date of > Ashelford's book. I believe it was published in the mid 1980s, and probably > never updated when it was republished -- that's not Ashelford's fault. I > don't think *any* of the books in that series went into second editions, > until they were collected (and edited down) into the large format, by > Aileen Ribeiro. > True. I want to say that the edition I have is dated 1992, but I may be thinking of something else, so don't quote me on it. I'll check when I get home. And it's very possible that it wasn't updated, or at least not the parts we're discussing. That was something I had not considered. > 15 years is a long time ago, particularly in clothing history. She can't be > held accountable for discoveries made after her book was published. > A very good point. I just thought it odd that she would be aware of the mislabelling of Holbein's sketch, yet still be under misconceptions about other portraits. But I will admit that I don't know that much about the timing of new discoveries and new ways of thinking concerning identity of portrait subjects, so my comments certainly may not be accurate either. > It's up to the reader to read carefully and critically, and read widely. > Also a good point. Thanks! --Jessica arcadiacb@aol.com[85,246]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: ArcadiaCB@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:14:40 EDT -Poster: ArcadiaCB@aol.com Have to throw in my $.02 on this. Previous comments are my sentiments exactly. It was very interesting to watch this production. I have a friend who works as an assistant costumer/ wardrobe assistant (or whatever the title is) on movies, including a lot of TNT movies. She was asked to work on this one and refused to work in the costuming when she found out that Michael Boyd was the head costumer--he doesn't know anything about the period, won't learn and won't listen to anyone and just isn't a nice person for other reasons. Her particular period of expertise is the mid 19th c--when she has time to do living history events with us (mostly prior to her involvement with movies), her things were wonderful, she also has an extensive collection of originals. She knows the period. But in the movie world, she's a peon. The main costumers--who may not know the period--are the last word. Sometimes she can get things changed,(like the gratuitous sex scene in "Lincoln" where he *unbuttons* her chemise and takes it off) but usually has to defer to the head costumer, who does it their way with their ideas of the period The "stars" generally have their own designers, who seem to never know the period and only start to "research" it a few weeks before production. I've worked on several films with my friend since a lot get filmed in this area (most recent "Day Lincoln was Shot" (TNT)and "Love Letter" (Hallmark Hall of Fame). Another of my friends has worked as a casting coordinator for "good civilians" --people who know the period, have the correct clothing & accessories, women are all corseted--as opposed to the "regular reenactors" (men generally can't get too bad since they are in uniform, but a lot of women are only in the hobby to follow the guys and do no research and look awful) and "street extras" who wear what the production company provides (often very ill-fitting, poorly made and totally incorrect) and you can tell the different groups on screen by the clothing and manner. I also have other male friends who are often involved in extra casting who know men's clothing, but not women's and have hired some awful looking women (they just *assume* the women also do research in what they wear) and they have promised a certain number of bodies. When my friend (the costume asst) is working, she will try to cover up incorrect clothing, change bonnets/hats, etc., ones more correct and age suitable, try to get the worst ones stuck way in the back (but the farbs always want to be in front). My friends have loaned our own extra bits to try to rectify some of the mistakes--we always travel with lots since since the production people never know exactly what they want the scene to be and we may feel the need to change to something more appropriate. Unfortunately, the one person you can never change is "the star" who has their own designer with their own ideas of the period (no matter how incorrect). Our joke for the field hospital scene in "Love Letter" was that Jennifer Jason Leigh was frantically searching for a good costumer and hairdresser (or she should have been!). I don't know the budget details, except that lots of money is spent on some of the totally inappropriate things the stars wear. While attending the props sale for "Lincoln", I looked at the clothing they were selling just for a laugh--these were all made for the production, then later sold. They did have corsets--made from the Past Patterns pattern--although only minimally boned and that was plastic boning. The "bonnets" (I hesitate to call them that) were these very strange bits of eyelet (yes) and other trims, none with the correct shape--and of course the 1830s felt hat blanks that had been trimmed (southern women never had a new bonnet in 20 years and never thought about cutting down the old shape). Of the newly made women's dresses, there were only one or two that were halfway decent -- very plain and being sold for hundreds of dollars. For "Love Letter" some of the costumes (but obviously not the stars) came from Angels in London. As for the hairstylists, these are usually hired from the locals, so again, usually have no knowledge of the period. The head hairstylist on "Love Letter" insisted that everyone's hair be plastered and greased down so as to better show off the ringlets on the star. Anyway, the gest of this whole thing is that it was very interesting to watch "Hunley" to see just how bad the women's clothing was since my friend did not work in costuming (she worked in another area) where she could try to correct/hide some of the things. And they were just as awful as expected--the great uncorseted, incorrectly beheaded. Actually I think I did see the correct shape of one bonnet hiding behind a gentleman's head. But mostly, it was awful. So why do we keep doing this? It's long days for little pay, very early and/or very late hours. I kept relating to the extras in the rainy parade scene in "Hunley" (been there, done that). We gripe and moan and complain about all the inaccuracies. But for just coming around every few years, it's a way to spend hours and days with friends and have some memories--and then later try to see if you can see yourself on film (I know I'm in that scene somewhere). Occasionally we can get historical inaccuracies changed--but in the end--"it's Hollywood, not History" And the hope that one day a film will be done correctly--both historically and clothing wise. Sorry for rambling--it's just one of my pet peeves, from all perspectives, seeing it on TV or film, working as an extra, and knowing what my friend who works as an "insider" has to put up with since she has the knowledge but not the clout to do it correctly. Charlene chantal pecourt [22,247]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: Chantal Pecourt Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:21:34 -0400 -Poster: Chantal Pecourt Hello I am beginning my involvement with Rev War and am in need of patterns. I once had a catalog of clothes and patterns, it was small, about the size of a slim paper back book. It focused mainly on Scottish clothes and fabrics but the lady did custom period corsetry for a reasonable price. I can't fidn my catalog and was wondering if anyone knew of this place or another that would be able to create the correct undergarments. I am confident in my ability to sew the outer-clothing but a corset seems difficult, esp with no patters. On that note, if anyone knows of patterns for the proper corset that would be great too. The ones I am looking at have the tie shoulder straps and are not sleeveless. Thanks so much!! Chantal margo anderson [33,248]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: Margo Anderson Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:07:08 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson ArcadiaCB@aol.com wrote: > >Have to throw in my $.02 on this. Previous comments are my sentiments >exactly. It was very interesting to watch this production. I have a friend >who works as an assistant costumer/ wardrobe assistant (or whatever the >title is) on movies, including a lot of TNT movies. She was asked to work on >this one and refused to work in the costuming when she found out that________ was the head costumer--he doesn't know anything about the period, won't >learn and won't listen to anyone and just isn't a nice person for other >reasons. I'd just like to say that I feel it's poor form to say this sort of thing, especially when it's hearsay, and to name names, which is why I deleted the name in question. Does your friend know that you're posting her stories? Film is a small world, and your description of her skills and knowledge could make her easily identifiable. There are many many more members of this list than you might think, and some of them are employed in the industry. It's quite possible that another costumer in a position to hire her will decide not to, having seen this on the list. >,(like the gratuitous sex scene in "Lincoln" where he >*unbuttons* her chemise and takes it off) And why is this incorrect? I haven't seen the film in question, but a number of mid 19th century chemises have front buttoned plackets. Margo Anderson r.l. shep [143,249]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: "R.L. Shep" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 18:24:20 -0700 -Poster: "R.L. Shep" I am afraid that I consider much of this posting *totally inappropiate*...... ~!~ R.L.Shep http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks ---------- >From: ArcadiaCB@aol.com >To: h-costume@indra.com >Subject: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) >Date: Tue, Jul 13, 1999, 5:14 PM > > >-Poster: ArcadiaCB@aol.com > >Have to throw in my $.02 on this. Previous comments are my sentiments >exactly. It was very interesting to watch this production. I have a friend >who works as an assistant costumer/ wardrobe assistant (or whatever the >title is) on movies, including a lot of TNT movies. She was asked to work on >this one and refused to work in the costuming when she found out that Michael >Boyd was the head costumer--he doesn't know anything about the period, won't >learn and won't listen to anyone and just isn't a nice person for other >reasons. Her particular period of expertise is the mid 19th c--when she has >time to do living history events with us (mostly prior to her involvement >with movies), her things were wonderful, she also has an extensive collection >of originals. She knows the period. But in the movie world, she's a peon. The >main costumers--who may not know the period--are the last word. Sometimes she >can get things changed,(like the gratuitous sex scene in "Lincoln" where he >*unbuttons* her chemise and takes it off) but usually has to defer to the >head costumer, who does it their way with their ideas of the period The >"stars" generally have their own designers, who seem to never know the period >and only start to "research" it a few weeks before production. I've worked on >several films with my friend since a lot get filmed in this area (most recent >"Day Lincoln was Shot" (TNT)and "Love Letter" (Hallmark Hall of Fame). >Another of my friends has worked as a casting coordinator for "good >civilians" --people who know the period, have the correct clothing & >accessories, women are all corseted--as opposed to the "regular reenactors" >(men generally can't get too bad since they are in uniform, but a lot of >women are only in the hobby to follow the guys and do no research and look >awful) and "street extras" who wear what the production company provides >(often very ill-fitting, poorly made and totally incorrect) and you can tell >the different groups on screen by the clothing and manner. I also have other >male friends who are often involved in extra casting who know men's clothing, >but not women's and have hired some awful looking women (they just *assume* >the women also do research in what they wear) and they have promised a >certain number of bodies. When my friend (the costume asst) is working, she >will try to cover up incorrect clothing, change bonnets/hats, etc., ones more >correct and age suitable, try to get the worst ones stuck way in the back >(but the farbs always want to be in front). My friends have loaned our own >extra bits to try to rectify some of the mistakes--we always travel with lots >since since the production people never know exactly what they want the scene >to be and we may feel the need to change to something more appropriate. >Unfortunately, the one person you can never change is "the star" who has >their own designer with their own ideas of the period (no matter how >incorrect). Our joke for the field hospital scene in "Love Letter" was that >Jennifer Jason Leigh was frantically searching for a good costumer and >hairdresser (or she should have been!). > I don't know the budget details, except that lots of money is spent on >some of the totally inappropriate things the stars wear. While attending the >props sale for "Lincoln", I looked at the clothing they were selling just for >a laugh--these were all made for the production, then later sold. They did >have corsets--made from the Past Patterns pattern--although only minimally >boned and that was plastic boning. The "bonnets" (I hesitate to call them >that) were these very strange bits of eyelet (yes) and other trims, none with >the correct shape--and of course the 1830s felt hat blanks that had been >trimmed (southern women never had a new bonnet in 20 years and never thought >about cutting down the old shape). Of the newly made women's dresses, there >were only one or two that were halfway decent -- very plain and being sold >for hundreds of dollars. For "Love Letter" some of the costumes (but >obviously not the stars) came from Angels in London. > As for the hairstylists, these are usually hired from the locals, so again, >usually have no knowledge of the period. The head hairstylist on "Love >Letter" insisted that everyone's hair be plastered and greased down so as to >better show off the ringlets on the star. > Anyway, the gest of this whole thing is that it was very interesting to >watch "Hunley" to see just how bad the women's clothing was since my friend >did not work in costuming (she worked in another area) where she could try to >correct/hide some of the things. And they were just as awful as expected--the >great uncorseted, incorrectly beheaded. Actually I think I did see the >correct shape of one bonnet hiding behind a gentleman's head. But mostly, it >was awful. > So why do we keep doing this? It's long days for little pay, very >early and/or very late hours. I kept relating to the extras in the rainy >parade scene in "Hunley" (been there, done that). We gripe and moan and >complain about all the inaccuracies. But for just coming around every few >years, it's a way to spend hours and days with friends and have some >memories--and then later try to see if you can see yourself on film (I know >I'm in that scene somewhere). Occasionally we can get historical inaccuracies >changed--but in the end--"it's Hollywood, not History" And the hope that one >day a film will be done correctly--both historically and clothing wise. > Sorry for rambling--it's just one of my pet peeves, from all >perspectives, seeing it on TV or film, working as an extra, and knowing what >my friend who works as an "insider" has to put up with since she has the >knowledge but not the clout to do it correctly. > Charlene > > r.l. shep [35,250]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: R.L. Shep Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 20:42:32 -0500 -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" I must agree. We are not here to tear down a movie for their lack of whatever. We are here to actually discuss history of dress and how to reconstruct it for ourselves or something like that I think..... Sincerely, F. Havas Dallas, Texas ----- Original Message ----- : : -Poster: "R.L. Shep" : : I am afraid that I consider much of this posting *totally : inappropiate*...... : ~!~ R.L.Shep : http://www.mcn.org/e/fsbks : : ---------- : >From: ArcadiaCB@aol.com : >To: h-costume@indra.com : >Subject: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) : >Date: Tue, Jul 13, 1999, 5:14 PM : > : : > : >-Poster: ArcadiaCB@aol.com : > : >Have to throw in my $.02 on this. Previous comments are my sentiments : >exactly. It was very interesting to watch this production. I have a arcadiacb@aol.com[7,251]CSuX:apology Subject: H-COST: Apology From: ArcadiaCB@aol.com Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 22:30:04 EDT -Poster: ArcadiaCB@aol.com My apology to all. The prior comments just struck a note on a subject of particular interest to me I should have written the note to air my $.02 then deleted it. Sorry to have offended anyone. Now I'll just slink off. margo anderson [14,252]CSuX:apology Subject: Re: H-COST: Apology From: Margo Anderson Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:38:31 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson At 10:30 PM 7/13/99 EDT, you wrote: > >-Poster: ArcadiaCB@aol.com > >My apology to all. And mine, too. I realized after posting that I should have replied privately. Margo erin gault [33,253]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: Erin Gault Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 19:39:31 -0700 -Poster: Erin Gault I bought a grommet setter of that size at a hardware store. Not all stores stock that small of a size though, so you may have to look around. I think I paid about $15.00. It is fairly heavy duty and is not a gun-type that you find at fabric stores. Another place you might check is a store that makes items for boats using canvas. I have actually had them grommet a corset for me when I didn't have time. I'm sure they can at least order the supplies to do it yourself. Erin AnnoraK@aol.com wrote: > -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com > > In keeping with a recent thread . . . > > In conjunction with my first foray into corsetry, I am shopping for the > aforementioned grommet setter. I know that Greenberg & Hammer is the best > place for grommets, but I can't seem to get a catalog out of them, tho I've > asked twice in the past six months. So, I'm going elsewhere for these. My > problem is the setter. The only size 00 setter that I can find (either > online or in a catalog) is AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how often > I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like spending that much > on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the Thread, etc.) sell > setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC Metro area where I > can pick one up? > > Thanx! > Jen robesof@aol.com[25,254]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: RobesOf@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 00:04:16 EDT -Poster: RobesOf@aol.com << I bought a grommet setter of that size at a hardware store. Not all stores stock that small of a size though, so you may have to look around. I think I paid about $15.00. It is fairly heavy duty and is not a gun-type that you find at fabric stores. Another place you might check is a store that makes items for boats using canvas. I have actually had them grommet a corset for me when I didn't have time. I'm sure they can at least order the supplies to do it yourself. Good idea, Erin! I forgot about canvas suppliers carrying grommets. You might try Beacon Fabrics (a supplier of boating canvas, etc.) I'm not sure how small their sizes go, but they are in the $15 - $20 range for a kit. They have a web site Beacon Fabric and Notions - Catalog Sales - Your Sewing Resource! You can send an email to receive their catalog. Good luck! Erica carol j. bell cannon [6,255]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Tue, 13 Jul 1999 21:43:27 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" My little anvil/grommet setter came from Tandy Leather. It was less than $20. Carol teddy1 [31,256]CSuX:h-costume-digest v4 #430 Subject: H-COST: Re: h-costume-digest V4 #430 From: teddy1 Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 09:56:02 +0000 (GMT) -Poster: teddy1 Hi Dave, > - -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > <> www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbu.htm > > <> > The opening page is up . I hope to have gallery one up by midnight. > If you discover any problems please let me know; I hastened to check this out as I hoped to spot myself in one of the pictures. No luck.... to my surprize, however, in the first picture in Gallery one has my other half dead centre. I'd recognizae that mitre and chasuble anywhere! > Every time I go to Tewkesbury the sun shines and I get badly > sunburnt. So bear with me thru my suffering. thanks Dave Surely you didn't get sunburn *last* year - it was the Tewkesbury "Rainy-Season" that weekend! The pictures look great - even if I do have to print them out (B&W) to see them clearly as our tech people reset all our graphics to "16 colour" every time we have an upgrade, and then don't get 'round to resetting them until just before the next upgrade.... Teddy (Trustworthy Evil-Bunny of Destiny, part-time Knave and Creature of air and darkness, apparently!) kate m bunting [9,257]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: "KATE M BUNTING" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 11:34:57 +0100 -Poster: "KATE M BUNTING" Any UK list members watching this series? (It's about the daughters of the Duke of Richmond from the 1740s onwards.) I'm no expert on 18th cent. fashions but the general "look" seems excellent to me - but did styles really change so little between the 1740s and 1760s? All the ladies have worn gowns with saque (sp?) backs and wide-brimmed hats throughout, with little sense of developing fashions so far. Kate Bunting Library, University of Derby holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [13,258]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: RE: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 12:50:27 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" I'm not sure about the "home fashions" but court fashion changed very little. So far I'm really enjoying the series. There was an interesting article in the telegraph last weekend about Louisa's house. It is still as she left it, a succession of males with no time to redecorate meant that the interiors were left untouched but sadly uncared for. At the time of filming it was being renovated otherwise they would have used it for the filming. I think it is now owned but the Irish Government. Rachel melanie wilson [12,259]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: Melanie Wilson Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 07:11:29 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson Good series I wondered too about the uniformity of the dresses ? Not my period though ! What did you think of the cloak (not sure which sister but she too Sarah (/) and the baby back to bruv Mel holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [33,260]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: RE: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 13:16:35 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Wasn't it Louisa, the one with the husband that does what he's told. Haven't got a clue whether it was period or not but I would love to make one it looked fantastic. I'm going to have to go back over the video and make a sketch of it. Rachel Roche Products Limited 40 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City Hertfordshire AL7 3AY > -----Original Message----- > From: Melanie Wilson [SMTP:MelanieWilson@compuserve.com] > Sent: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 12:11 PM > To: INTERNET:h-costume-digest@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 > > > -Poster: Melanie Wilson > > Good series I wondered too about the uniformity of the dresses ? > > Not my period though ! > > What did you think of the cloak (not sure which sister but she too Sarah > (/) and the baby back to bruv > > Mel kathryn l. herb [19,261]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: Re: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: "Kathryn L. Herb" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 07:40:18 EDT -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" Chantal, I like Janice Ryan's stays pattern myself. If you want to have someone else do yours, contact Deb Jarrett Peterson at 610-287-6939. She does very good work by mail with your measurements, in a variety of styles, and the at best prices I've seen yet. She loves to talk 18c clothing, so don't hesitate to ask her questions or for advice if you contact her. (Usual disclaimer -- just know her work, her research and her knowledge!) Kay Herb kayherb@juno.com Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. melanie wilson [58,262]CSuX:costume books on ebay Subject: H-COST: Costume books on eBay From: Melanie Wilson Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 08:41:32 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson Costume in Pictures by Phillis Cunnington 150 illustrations of contempory artists from the Middle ages to the 20th C. Ex-lib PB in Good condition http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131478470 English Costume of the 17th Century by Iris Brooke Shows the evolution of costume during this century, Includes many of Iris Brookes excellent drawings, both line and coloured, and a consise easy to understand description of each item. Iris Brooke as ever covers not only garments, but Hair styles and headwear. Ex lib HB in VG condition http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131478325 English Costume of the Early Middle Ages by Iris Brooke Shows the evolution of costume during the 10th to 13th centuries, Includes many of Iris Brookes excellent drawings, both line and coloured, and a consise easy to understand description of each item. Iris Brooke as ever covers not only garments, but Hair styles and headwear. Ex lib HB in VG condition, probable repair to spine. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131478152 English Costume of the Later Middle Ages by Iris Brooke Shows the evolution of costume during the 14th and 15th centuries, Includes many of Iris Brookes excellent drawings, both line and coloured, and a consise easy to understand description of each item. Iris Brooke as ever covers not only garments, but Hair styles and headwear. Ex lib HB in VG condition, with slightly damaged dust wrapper. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131477937 Dress & Undress by Iris Brooke Shows the evolution of costume 1660-1800, Includes many of Iris Brookes excellent drawings, both line and coloured, and a consise easy to understand description of each item. Iris Brooke as ever covers not only garments, but Hair styles and headwear. She goes on to explain the terms dress and undress in their period contexts Ex lib HB in VG condition. http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131477747 Mel albertcat@aol.com[26,263]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:08:19 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/13/99 8:17:35 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ArcadiaCB@aol.com writes: << Sorry for rambling--it's just one of my pet peeves, from all perspectives, seeing it on TV or film, working as an extra, and knowing what my friend who works as an "insider" has to put up with since she has the knowledge but not the clout to do it correctly. >> Don't apologize, my Dear; I've never read a better description of what goes on in cheap, fast, made-for TV, period movies. I hate working on them but I get $20 an hour & those hours add up big time. Just to make those of you in shock feel a little better........ On the big films I've worked on like "Interview with the Vampire" & "Last of the Mohicans", we made 60% of the extras and correctly [corsets, cut]. My favorite job was "Mohicans" where I got to develop a woman's jacket from original sources, and then make 15 of them with variations [cuffs or ruffles or nothing on the sleeve....button, or hook & eye or lace down CF...etc.] from incredible fabrics. Of course they had budget budget budget & time time time....but it can be done right & be a total joy to work on some films. albertcat@aol.com[17,264]CSuX:hunley on tnt (long) Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Hunley on TNT (Long) From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:15:04 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/13/99 9:52:26 PM Eastern Daylight Time, ches@io.com writes: << I must agree. We are not here to tear down a movie for their lack of whatever. We are here to actually discuss history of dress and how to reconstruct it for ourselves or something like that I think..... >> I don't think any of her statements will hurt anybody. Lighten up...her description is exactly what I've been through a number of times. It sounds cynical but is very accurate. It's really no worse than posting about how awful things look....now we know why. kat@grendal.rain.com[22,265]CSuX:ladies trousers, 12thc Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Ladies' trousers, 12thC From: kat@grendal.rain.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:11:38 +0000 -Poster: kat@grendal.rain.com > A friend just got back from France and she claims to have seen a bas relief > in a Toulouse church showing two women with trousers under their dresses. > She said the women were wearing somewhat loose, mid-calf dresses with round > necklines and elbow length sleeves; under this they were wearing ankle > length trousers with seams up the fronts of the legs. Haven't seen anything like this. How does she know they were women? What was the context (which in church reliefs are especially important because sometimes they were done to show some wierd iconography like "women of elsewhere" or "women who think they are men and should be burned.")? Kat Kat(June Russell) kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! chantal pecourt [34,266]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: Re: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: Chantal Pecourt Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:57:22 -0400 -Poster: Chantal Pecourt Hello Thanks for the info. Where can one get Janice Ryan's patterns? Does Deb Jarrett have email? Thank you! Chantal At 07:40 AM 7/14/99 -0400, you wrote: > >-Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" > >Chantal, > >I like Janice Ryan's stays pattern myself. If you want to have someone >else do yours, contact Deb Jarrett Peterson at 610-287-6939. She does >very good work by mail with your measurements, in a variety of styles, >and the at best prices I've seen yet. She loves to talk 18c clothing, so >don't hesitate to ask her questions or for advice if you contact her. >(Usual disclaimer -- just know her work, her research and her knowledge!) > >Kay Herb >kayherb@juno.com > >Get the Internet just the way you want it. >Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! >Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. kat@grendal.rain.com[20,267]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: RE: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: kat@grendal.rain.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 10:26:22 +0000 -Poster: kat@grendal.rain.com > Wasn't it Louisa, the one with the husband that does what he's told. > Haven't got a clue whether it was period or not but I would love to make one > it looked fantastic. I'm going to have to go back over the video and make a > sketch of it. There is a book about the series which shows many costume details, sketches and the like. (Unfortunately, I can't seem to find it this morning. I picked it up in England at a bookstore in one of the train stations.) Kat Kat(June Russell) kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! schmitt100@aol.com[19,268]CSuX:eliz. footwear? Subject: H-COST: Eliz. footwear? From: Schmitt100@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 18:27:28 EDT -Poster: Schmitt100@aol.com I am in the process of working on my hubby's outfit for Eliz. England. We are mid - to - upper middle class. The footwear vendors at our local Renn Faire tend towards the moccasin-type shoe/boot. This does not feel right to me. What would be appropriate footwear for him? Where would I be able to purchase? ********************** Rebecca Schmitt So many books, so little time We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking as we used when we created them. -Albert Einstein schmitt100@aol.com ********************** the purple elephant [22,269]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: Re: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: The Purple Elephant Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:14:16 +0930 (CST) -Poster: The Purple Elephant On Wed, 14 Jul 1999, KATE M BUNTING wrote: > > -Poster: "KATE M BUNTING" > > Any UK list members watching this series? (It's about the daughters of the Duke of Richmond from the 1740s onwards.) I'm no expert on 18th cent. fashions but the general "look" seems excellent to me - but did styles really change so little between the 1740s and 1760s? All the ladies have worn gowns with saque (sp?) backs and wide-brimmed hats throughout, with little sense of developing fashions so far. > I haven't seen the series, but I ran across a book about it the other day and was flipping through. This isn't really my period, but I did notice that some of the skirts on the gowns were 'chevron-pleated' and I do recall Hunnisett saying that was a theatrical technique..... ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Claire F. Clarke "What is this world if, full of care, Physicist, writer, We have no time to stand and stare?" and non environmentally Robert Louis Stevenson friendly substance. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ melanie wilson [9,270]CSuX:veiling Subject: H-COST: Veiling From: Melanie Wilson Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 18:38:39 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson Anyone know of a supplier, preferably in the UK but mail order US would do Thanks Mel merouda the true of bornover [16,271]CSuX:veiling Subject: Re: H-COST: Veiling From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 15:47:37 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > Anyone know of a supplier, preferably in the UK but mail order US would do I've never heard of a supplier for veiling. What do you mean by veiling? Can you get your hands on fine linen or silk. That would work. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir andrea gideon [24,272]CSuX:elizabethan footwear Subject: H-COST: Elizabethan Footwear From: "Andrea Gideon" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:08:29 -0400 -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" This is a multi-part message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BECE2C.42072540 My husband and I both got ours from Syke's Sutlering. They are hand made by Sarah Jasper and very authentic looking. http://users.aol.com/sykesutler/intro.html Andrea ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BECE2C.42072540 [DEFAULT] BASEURL=http://users.aol.com/sykesutler/intro.html [InternetShortcut] URL=http://users.aol.com/sykesutler/intro.html Modified=E085FE554DCEBE0192 ------=_NextPart_000_0005_01BECE2C.42072540-- kathryn l. herb [58,273]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: Re: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: "Kathryn L. Herb" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 19:04:47 EDT -Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" Well, nothin' like giving information without including half of it! Tidy's Storehouse (tidys@brandywine.com) carries J. P. Ryan as do other sutlers whose names I can't bring to mind at this second. Deb's e-mail is debpeterson@juno.com. Kay Herb kayherb@juno.com On Wed, 14 Jul 1999 14:57:22 -0400 Chantal Pecourt writes: > >-Poster: Chantal Pecourt > >Hello > Thanks for the info. Where can one get Janice Ryan's patterns? >Does Deb >Jarrett have email? > >Thank you! > > >Chantal > >At 07:40 AM 7/14/99 -0400, you wrote: >> >>-Poster: "Kathryn L. Herb" >> >>Chantal, >> >>I like Janice Ryan's stays pattern myself. If you want to have >someone >>else do yours, contact Deb Jarrett Peterson at 610-287-6939. She >does >>very good work by mail with your measurements, in a variety of >styles, >>and the at best prices I've seen yet. She loves to talk 18c >clothing, so >>don't hesitate to ask her questions or for advice if you contact her. > >>(Usual disclaimer -- just know her work, her research and her >knowledge!) >> >>Kay Herb >>kayherb@juno.com >> >>Get the Internet just the way you want it. >>Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! >>Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. > > Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. dzmzlzy@aol.com[15,274]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: Re: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: DzMzLzy@aol.com Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 21:32:54 EDT -Poster: DzMzLzy@aol.com In a message dated 7/14/99 12:00:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, chanty@idsi.net writes: << Thanks for the info. Where can one get Janice Ryan's patterns? Does Deb Jarrett have email? >> Use any good search engine for sewing patterns and you can find them on the web. I don't know the URL, but the company name is J.P.Ryan Liz Gerds joel thompson [21,275]CSuX:ladies trousers, 12thc Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Ladies' trousers, 12thC From: "Joel Thompson" Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 23:08:21 -0400 -Poster: "Joel Thompson" claims to have seen a bas relief in a Toulouse church showing two women with trousers under their dresses. She said the women were wearing somewhat loose, mid-calf dresses with round necklines and elbow length sleeves; under this they were wearing ankle length trousers with seams up the fronts of the legs. This sounds a lot like an illustration that I found several months ago. It's in "Historic Costume in Pictures" by Braun and Schneider, plate 13, the 11th century. It shows a Norman woman looking remarkably like the description Kristin gives, except the woman in the illustration is definitely wearing hosen. I had heretofore credited the picture to Victorian imagination, but perhaps there is some merit after all. Still, I would like to have more evidence that medieval women ever showed their legs, whether wearing hosen, trousers, or whatever. Waiting for more..... Linda Rice marc carlson [27,276]CSuX:elizabethan footwear Subject: Re: H-COST: Elizabethan Footwear From: Marc Carlson Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 23:28:08 -0500 -Poster: Marc Carlson > From: Schmitt100@aol.com > Date: Wed, 14 Jul 1999 18:27:28 EDT > Subject: H-COST: Eliz. footwear? > > - -Poster: Schmitt100@aol.com > > I am in the process of working on my hubby's outfit for Eliz. England. We are > mid - to - upper middle class. The footwear vendors at our local Renn Faire > tend towards the moccasin-type shoe/boot. This does not feel right to me. > What would be appropriate footwear for him? Where would I be able to > purchase? Um, no, a moccasin-type anything is not correct for any sort of Elizabethan shoe. If you go to the website that Andrea suggested and take a look at the men's shoe they have there, and picture that with no heel, you can see one of the two major popular styles. The other is a more of a slipper looking thing. I don't know of anyone who makes them for sale, but I suspect that there must be someone. If you are interested in making them yourself, let me know and I'll give you what help I can. (BTW, for the record, the designs for Tudor shoes at "http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/carlson/SHOEHOME.HTM" are mostly flawed. The _Mary Rose_ shoe is ok, and the "Lady's Elizabethan shoe" is barely ok (the sole is the wrong shape). I am informed by those who know that the toggle latched shoe is "pure crap". Unfortunately, I don't have anything to replace them with at the moment. I am planning on going to London in the Fall to get a better idea of what these should look like.) Marc Carlson marc-carlson@utulsa.edu holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [9,277]CSuX:boning suppliers Subject: H-COST: Boning suppliers From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:51:42 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" I am looking for a supplier of boning. I am due to start work on an Elizabethan bodice and farthingale and require boning for both. I would prefer this supplier to be in the UK or if elsewhere to accept credit cards. Thanks Rachel teddy1 [40,278]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: teddy1 Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:43:49 +0000 (GMT) -Poster: teddy1 Hello listmembers, I'm doing a "collective knowledge" question here... At the Tewkesbury battle-reenactment last weekend, i was drawn to a traders' stall that had a garment on display that was made from a beautiful purple silk brocade. The garment in question was the top half of a "sideless-surcote" When the stallholder explained that this was all she could make out of the remnant she had used I asked what she was going to use for the skirts and she told me that there *were* no skirts to go with it. She said she had made several of these garments to be worn over fitted gowns and that there were both skirted and unskirted versions of this garment. This doesn't sound right to me. I don't recall ever seeing a picture/diagram/painting/illo that showed an unskirted version of these surcotes... or have I seen them and just assumed the skirts that showed below them were the surcote rather than the skirts of the gown beneath? Anyone out there care to comment. The trader didn't have any of her sources with ehr and was unable to give me details without them, and I only ever see her at this annual event, so am unlikely to get any further by that route. Puzzled Teddy (Trustworthy Evil-Bunny of Destiny, part-time Knave and Creature of air and darkness, apparently!) rio@austin.rr.com (strangegirl)[57,279]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: rio@austin.rr.com (StrangeGirl) Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:27:51 GMT -Poster: rio@austin.rr.com (StrangeGirl) On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:43:49 +0000 (GMT), teddy1 wrote: >The garment in question was the top half of a "sideless-surcote" >When the stallholder explained that this was all she could make >out of the remnant she had used I asked what she was going to >use for the skirts and she told me that there *were* no skirts to go >with it. She said she had made several of these garments to be >worn over fitted gowns and that there were both skirted and >unskirted versions of this garment. Wow. I've *never*ever* heard this one before. Seriously! Erm. It sounds as though she's taking the fossilized court versions of the sideless surcote over-literally. This type are shown with the skirts pleated/gathered into the supporting band around the hips. I trust this was the type she had for sale? (pause here, while I rush to my bookshelf and dig for references) This seems to be the final form of the sideless surcote just before it went out of fashion for everything besides ceremonial court wear. Having made this type once or twice, I can see where she got confused, especially if she was using only redrawings and dodgy 19th and 20th c. theatrical costume texts for reference. Racinet, for one infamous example. (which I have, but is -deservedly- in storage for the time being) In all my research, I have *never* seen anything that could be *reliably* construed as a sidless-surcote-bodice-thing-without-skirts. Ever. Maybe some poor redrawings from victorian costume books, which may have the girdle showing where it never does in primary source art, or have the skirts shown as the same colour as the undergown. (Racinet, again, comes to mind. Blame the colourists, if you must. I do.) Did she perhaps mention where she found this gem of knowledge? If it is indeed true (which I find *extremely* doubtful as I am currently researching this period in depth and have seen nothing like this in the artwork I have been studying) I would love to know what sort of documentation she has based it on. New sources are always welcome. OTOH, it could be another reenactor-myth. "so-and-so said this was done, so it was done"... I have had to steer around enough of those in my time. :P Or it could possibly be a cheap theatre trick (a little budget extender learnt in school, perhaps?) to double the scenes got from one costume gown? I can see this used by a small repertory theatre group or a low-budget school Shakespeare production. Margery, wondering about this now *quizzical* ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~There is no spoon~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ {*to reply take "spambegone" from my reply-to address*} kevin & mara riley [30,280]CSuX:grommet setters??? Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet Setters??? From: Kevin & Mara Riley Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:22:52 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Kevin & Mara Riley What period is your corset? Grommets aren't period for the 1700s, so you might not need them. > AnnoraK@aol.com wrote: > > > -Poster: AnnoraK@aol.com > > > > In keeping with a recent thread . . . > > > > In conjunction with my first foray into corsetry, I am shopping for the > > aforementioned grommet setter. I know that Greenberg & Hammer is the best > > place for grommets, but I can't seem to get a catalog out of them, tho I've > > asked twice in the past six months. So, I'm going elsewhere for these. My > > problem is the setter. The only size 00 setter that I can find (either > > online or in a catalog) is AlterYears' $40 one. Since I don't know how often > > I'm going to be using this beast, I really don't feel like spending that much > > on one. Do any of the other grommet sources (Richard the Thread, etc.) sell > > setters to go with them? Or is there anywhere in the DC Metro area where I > > can pick one up? > > > > Thanx! > > Jen > > kevin & mara riley [19,281]CSuX:18th century clothes Subject: Re: H-COST: 18th century clothes From: Kevin & Mara Riley Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:40:40 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Kevin & Mara Riley James Townsends carries J. P. Ryan's patterns: http://www.jastown.com/ Cheers, Mara > >-Poster: Chantal Pecourt > > > >Hello > > Thanks for the info. Where can one get Janice Ryan's patterns? > >Does Deb > >Jarrett have email? > > > >Thank you! amanda reeves [24,282]CSuX:veiling Subject: Re: H-COST: Veiling From: "Amanda Reeves" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:55:23 -0500 -Poster: "Amanda Reeves" I'm a belly dancer and there are a lot of suppliers for veils. Is this what you are looking for? If so, I'm happy to send you some web sites. Amanda ---------- > From: Melanie Wilson > To: LIST historic costume > Subject: H-COST: Veiling > Date: Wednesday, July 14, 1999 5:38 PM > > > -Poster: Melanie Wilson > > Anyone know of a supplier, preferably in the UK but mail order US would do > > Thanks > > Mel donna kenton [34,283]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Donna Kenton Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 09:57:26 -0400 -Poster: Donna Kenton At 11:27 AM 7/15/99 GMT, you wrote: > >-Poster: rio@austin.rr.com (StrangeGirl) > >On Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:43:49 +0000 (GMT), teddy1 >wrote: > >>The garment in question was the top half of a "sideless-surcote" >>When the stallholder explained that this was all she could make >>out of the remnant she had used I asked what she was going to >>use for the skirts and she told me that there *were* no skirts to go >>with it. She said she had made several of these garments to be >>worn over fitted gowns and that there were both skirted and >>unskirted versions of this garment. > >Wow. I've *never*ever* heard this one before. Seriously! > >Erm. It sounds as though she's taking the fossilized court versions >of the sideless surcote over-literally. This type are shown with the >skirts pleated/gathered into the supporting band around the hips. I >trust this was the type she had for sale? It's also possible that she was using an idea taken from a modern pattern. I've seen costuming patterns -- albeit BAD ones! -- where the "fitted bodice" was merely a vest worn over a chemise. I can see how someone might stretch that idea to another style to create the illusion. Donna Kenton Visit my web page at http://www.dabbler.com! klwasden@aol.com[9,284]CSuX:medieval clothing patterns Subject: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns From: KLWasden@aol.com Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:12:13 EDT -Poster: KLWasden@aol.com Does anyone have any information regarding online or printed catalogs for medieval clothing and/or patterns? Thanks, Kevin cynthia j ley [23,285]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: cynthia j ley Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:40:49 EDT -Poster: cynthia j ley That doesn't sound right to me either--although I am just a novice costumer. :-) The ladies' version as far as I know always has a skirt, although it isn't usually a separate piece. A ladies surcoat is a sort of shoulder to floor affair. Men wore fighting surcoats, and even these had a shorter skirt on them. I think I'm more puzzled than you are. Arlys Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. merouda the true of bornover [23,286]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 08:48:30 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover Well, I "do" 14th century and from all my research (granted, there's always more research to do) I have never seen such a thing. The only thing it reminds me of are some of those costuming books that show some kind of vesty thing worn with bliauts. And I seriously doubt the accuracy of those too. Cynthia > The garment in question was the top half of a "sideless-surcote" > When the stallholder explained that this was all she could make > out of the remnant she had used I asked what she was going to > use for the skirts and she told me that there *were* no skirts to go > with it. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir hope h. dunlap [39,287]CSuX:medieval clothing patterns Subject: RE: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 12:56:28 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" Medieval patterns are on-line at http:www.alteryears.com, http://www.fortunecity.com/bally/treelee/147/patterns.htm, and http://www.richardthethread.com. > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of KLWasden@aol.com > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 11:12 AM > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns > > > > -Poster: KLWasden@aol.com > > Does anyone have any information regarding online or printed > catalogs for > medieval clothing and/or patterns? > > Thanks, > Kevin > _____ majordomo@indra.com > merouda the true of bornover [28,288]CSuX:medieval clothing patterns Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:22:35 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover These are my SCA merchants bookmarks http://www.historicenterprises.com./black_swan/ http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Lair/5459/bliaut.html http://www.medievalwares.com/ http://www.datasys.net/polish/merchantsrow.html http://www.heavymetalinc.com/ http://www.historicenterprises.com/swanlion/ http://www.extremezone.com/~medieval/products.htm http://www.acadiacom.net/bendaw/ http://www.concentric.net/~Stircraz/linkpage.html http://www.pillagedvillage.com/pillagedvillage/pvonline.cgi/TrimMain http://www.pbm.com/~lindahl/merchants/ > Does anyone have any information regarding online or printed catalogs for > medieval clothing and/or patterns? -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir nina marcks v w [33,289]CSuX:medieval clothing patterns Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns From: Nina Marcks v W Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 19:44:43 +0200 -Poster: Nina Marcks v W Harper House has mediaval patterns among a lot of other patterns for all historical costumes. They can be found on www.longago.com I have just learned that Harper House now has a completly new owner and I have got very quick answers via e-mail on all my questions. Nina in Sweden At 11:12 1999-07-15 EDT, you wrote: > >-Poster: KLWasden@aol.com > >Does anyone have any information regarding online or printed catalogs for >medieval clothing and/or patterns? > >Thanks, >Kevin > > #################################### Nina Marcks v W Sweden e-mail:nina.marcks@swipnet.se margo anderson [28,290]CSuX:t-tunics, etc Subject: H-COST: H-cost: T-tunics, etc From: Margo Anderson Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 10:46:14 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson After some years away, I'm getting back into the SCA. Having displayed insufficient reluctance, I am now the Mistress of Arts for our shire, and I've been asked to do a "basic costuming" workshop. I'm all too familar with the standard "Mr. T-tunic is our friend" approach, using modern materials, trim, and sewing methods to produce a quick and easy medievaloid garment. I'd like to at least touch on how these things would have been constructed in period. How would the keyhole neck have been finished? The rest of a tunic seems to have been carefully cut to conserve fabric and use the full width as much as possible. Somehow, the idea of then cutting out a shaped facing doesn't seem likely. Would they have bound the edge? If so, with self fabric or a woven trim, possible a decorative one? Or would it have just been rolled and hemmed, which is difficult to do smoothly? I know to caution them to use wool and linen, and I can show examples of trims and embroideries that are good or bad. Anything else I should tell them? Margo Anderson marie schulte [13,291]CSuX:t-tunics Subject: H-COST: Re: T-tunics From: Marie Schulte Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 12:51:28 -0500 (CDT) -Poster: Marie Schulte Why not look through _Cut of my cote_, published through the Royal Ontario Museum, I think. It gives several diagrams of different shirts, tunics, and coats (I think). Many that fall in the SCA period were made of simple squares and triangles.....at least from what I recall. Moreover, my copy is in storage. Maybe someone else with this invaluable pamphlet could comment. -marie kat & kent [13,292]CSuX:t-tunics, etc Subject: Re: H-COST: H-cost: T-tunics, etc From: Kat & Kent Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 13:11:28 -0500 -Poster: Kat & Kent I've made tons of t-tunics and not a one had a keyhole neckline. I've cut 'v's, circular, and square. Finished them by using a small hem. Sometimes I would add trim about a 1/4" from the edge and sometimes I trimmed them by using colored or metallic thread and a fancy stitch when I was hemming. Mistress Nerak makes keyhole t-tunics and uses a facing (usually of a complementary color and then turns it to the front and does a fancy stitch at the neckline and the edge of the facing. Kat albertcat@aol.com[24,293]CSuX:t-tunics, etc Subject: Re: H-COST: H-cost: T-tunics, etc From: AlbertCat@aol.com Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 14:35:10 EDT -Poster: AlbertCat@aol.com In a message dated 7/15/99 2:18:02 PM Eastern Daylight Time, kdyer@home.com writes: << I've made tons of t-tunics and not a one had a keyhole neckline. I've cut 'v's, circular, and square. Finished them by using a small hem. Sometimes I would add trim about a 1/4" from the edge and sometimes I trimmed them by using colored or metallic thread and a fancy stitch when I was hemming. Mistress Nerak makes keyhole t-tunics and uses a facing (usually of a complementary color and then turns it to the front and does a fancy stitch at the neckline and the edge of the facing. >> This is not my period but I think it's safe to assume that just about any method we might think of today, that is not machine oriented, would have been thought of back then. A shaped facing does not seem out of place; especially if it made up &/or pieced together from scraps. A contrasting facing seems OK if the fabric is left over from something else...scraps again. Rolled hems & straight facings will obviously work as mentioned above. Hand bindings & decorative embroidered overcastings all seem appropriate. merouda the true of bornover [27,294]CSuX:t-tunics, etc Subject: Re: H-COST: H-cost: T-tunics, etc From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 11:48:41 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > I'd like to at least touch on how these things would > have been constructed in period. Several of the bog tunics from Marc Carlsons website http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/5923/ show pattern shapes. There is a photo in Joan Evans' "Dress in Medieval France" that shows an extant "chainse". This is a basic t-tunic. The neck is a basic circle. The "keyhole" cut, really just a slit, is to the left of center. It appears that the cut of the neckhole has been finished with a bias tape like method. Then an embellishment of either embroidery, trim, or fabric in a square with the neckhole cut out is sewn down. The sleeve ends are heaviliy embroidered, even pearls are used, maybe about 2-3" wide. So is the hem, the trim at hem is about 5" wide. Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir jennifer gibson [15,295]CSuX:garment colors in the civil war era Subject: H-COST: Garment Colors in the Civil War Era From: "Jennifer Gibson" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 13:53:13 -0500 -Poster: "Jennifer Gibson" Hello, I am new to the list as well as the world of living history. I am in the process of beginning what will no doubt be a huge amount of research on the Civil War to adequately develop a persona. Would anyone happen to know where I could find information on the colors used in clothing of the Civil War era? I will greatly appreciate any leads. Thanks so much, Jenny jessica wilbur [34,296]CSuX:correcting info again Subject: Re: H-COST: correcting info again From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:04:43 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" Hello again, Just a quick note as a point of information: the paperback copy of Ashelford that I have was published in 1993. The original edition was published in 1983, or thereabouts. --Jessica > > However, I would like to point out that scholarship and research are part > of a continuous process. In the case of the portrait of Elizabeth Seymour, > once thought to be Catherine Howard, look at the publication date of > Ashelford's book. I believe it was published in the mid 1980s, and probably > never updated when it was republished -- that's not Ashelford's fault. I > don't think *any* of the books in that series went into second editions, > until they were collected (and edited down) into the large format, by > Aileen Ribeiro. > > 15 years is a long time ago, particularly in clothing history. She can't be > held accountable for discoveries made after her book was published. > > It's up to the reader to read carefully and critically, and read widely. > > > > Deborah > > > melanie wilson [19,297]CSuX:boning uk Subject: H-COST: Boning UK From: Melanie Wilson Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:46:10 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >I am looking for a supplier of boning. I am due to start work on an Elizabethan bodice and farthingale and require boning for both. I would prefer this supplier to be in the UK or if elsewhere to accept credit cards. Now here I can help ! What type, steel, spiral, nylon (ugh !) I use spiral for Victorian corsets, very comfortable & steel for my bustles. Both from the UK. Mel melanie wilson [12,298]CSuX:veiling Subject: H-COST: Veiling From: Melanie Wilson Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:46:09 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >I'm a belly dancer and there are a lot of suppliers for veils. Is this what you are looking for? If so, I'm happy to send you some web sites. Me too but I'm afraid not, it is for wearing over ones face with a hat, net like but not with hugh holes like modern veiling. Mel melanie wilson [18,299]CSuX:veiling Subject: H-COST: Veiling From: Melanie Wilson Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:46:11 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >I've never heard of a supplier for veiling. What do you mean by veiling? it is like a fine soft net >Can you get your hands on fine linen or silk. That would work. Yes but it isn't what I want ! :) I have some on my side saddle topper, but it is old,.... 1930s or so & I can't find anything similar now Mel lynn downward [30,300]CSuX:veiling Subject: Re: H-COST: Veiling From: Lynn Downward Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 15:48:51 -0800 -Poster: Lynn Downward >-Poster: Melanie Wilson > >>I've never heard of a supplier for veiling. What do you mean by veiling? > > >it is like a fine soft net > >>Can >you get your hands on fine linen or silk. That would work. > >Yes but it isn't what I want ! :) > >I have some on my side saddle topper, but it is old,.... 1930s or so & I >can't find anything similar now > >Mel Mel, Have you looked at millinery supplies houses? Or wedding stores? Those are very obvious, but you could try. I know of supply houses in New York and Los Angeles that do shipping, but I don't have the names handy and I'll be away for the weekend starting in about 1 1/2 hours. AH, the name of the place in L.A. is Embellishments and I think they have a website. Good luck in you rhunt! LynnD [45,301]CSuX:t-tunics Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: T-tunics From: Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 13:14:52 -1000 -Poster: > Why not look through _Cut of my cote_, published through the Royal > Ontario Museum, I think. It gives several diagrams of different shirts, > tunics, and coats (I think). After a quick skim, here are the ones that are pre 17C: -Egyptian, Coptic, 4th century: The whole garment was woven to shape; sleeves and neck hole were woven into the fabric. -Egyptian, Coptic, 5th-6th century: Also woven to shape with neck hole woven in. Text says that there are a number of other Egyptian shirts dating from the 4th to 12th cent. that were woven to shape. -Egyptian, Islamic, 10th-12th cent.: Neckline and short slit along the shoulder seam bound with a narrow band of silk. Doesn't say if it was cut on the bias but I would imagine it was cut on the straight of the grain. -French (probably, said to have belonged to St. Louis), 13th cent.: Slightly rounded triangular [does that make sense?] neck hole that was bound with a narrow strip of fabric; strips cross to make an X at the center front of the V-neck. I remember seeing a pattern for this somewhere--maybe in Tilke? >From _Daily Life in Chaucer's England_. This book has an extensive bibliography but no specific references for the following. "In many surviving unlined garments, neck and wrist openings are faced with a narrow linen or silk strip to cut down on chafing. Often the edges of wool garments were left unfinished, since the heavily felted wool resisted fraying. Raw edges of cuffs and collars were sometimes finished by tablet-weaving a fine braid directly onto the cloth, probably using a weft thread on a needle. Many rough openings that were not faced or finished with tablet-woven edging were turned back and trimmed with a narrow silk or linen ribbon folded over the edge." The MoL Textiles and Clothing book also documents narrow strip facings. It specifically says that on all their surviving finds the silk is a tabby weave and cut on the straight; no bias strips known to be used. Also mentions hemmed single turnings, tablet woven edges and felting of wool as cutting down on fraying of raw edges. HTH, lisa/annora marsha s. mclean [15,302]CSuX:grommet setters Subject: H-COST: Grommet setters From: "Marsha S. McLean" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 20:55:48 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: "Marsha S. McLean" Some years ago I gave up on grommets and started using machined buttonholes. They are much more authentic that grommets, and I've NEVER had one rip out. These are the ultimate in cheap and strong, plus they always match your fabric. marsha Let us be elegant or DIE heather [9,303]CSuX:medieval pattern source Subject: H-COST: medieval pattern source From: Heather Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 21:25:57 -0700 -Poster: Heather I've heard Good Things about these guys: http://www.greenduck.com/index.shtml Sister Ed carol j. bell cannon [12,304]CSuX:medieval clothing patterns Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval clothing patterns From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 19:04:56 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Anachronism and at Northern Renaissance Fair [Novato, CA] for years. I recommend them. Jane and Steve Urbach are their names in modern day life. Good fortune. Carol At 11:12 AM 7/15/99 -0400, you wrote: -Poster: KLWasden@aol.com Does anyone have any information regarding online or printed catalogs for medieval clothing and/or patterns? Thanks, Kevin russell hedges [28,305]CSuX:newbie - and the spanish american war Subject: H-COST: Newbie - and the Spanish American War From: Russell Hedges Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 19:01:14 -0700 -Poster: Russell Hedges Hello. I am new here, and have been lurking for a while. This list is pretty high powered! I have been around costumers for many years, but haven't done much myself. And most of what I have done has been Science Fiction. I have recently been introduced to ballroom dancing, and vintage dancing. So now I want to costume for the Victorian age. I am male, so the beautiful gowns are out. But, would anyone here know where I could find information on American Miltary uniforms of the 1890's? I was thinking of doing a Rough Rider, like Teddy Roosevelt. Bully. If you are wondering why I chose now to delurk, last Sunday was the Victorian Grand Ball in Pasadena. The weekend before that, Night in Vienna here in San Diego. I was dressed well enough, but the halls were filled with fantastic ball gowns, and a few men wearing fantastic clothes too. I want to be one of those men. I hope I didn't ramble too much. Searching the Web has revealed sources for finished clothing. I want patterns. I know I need help. Thank you. Russell Hedges San Diego susan fatemi [22,306]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: Susan Fatemi Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 19:11:09 -0700 -Poster: Susan Fatemi Parsla Liepa wrote: > .. > Nor could I. (That this is a UK site doesn't matter.) I could, however, > get to the main Heritage Matters site, http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . > > Parsla > Thanks for typing the http:// in the address. I get so much mail, I don't even go to the sites I can't just click on. Susan F. -- Oh Noh! Kimonos! susanf@netwiz.net http://www.netwiz.net/~susanf hope h. dunlap [56,307]CSuX:medieval patterns and t-tunics Subject: H-COST: Medieval Patterns and T-Tunics From: "Hope H. Dunlap" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 22:56:22 -0400 -Poster: "Hope H. Dunlap" More medieval patterns on the Web: >From the homepage at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/5923/, at the left hand menu, click on making stuff. Some Clothing of the Middle Ages section is the best you'll find on the Web, everything diagrammed and very well documented for you, at http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/5923/cloth/bockhom e.html. Thank you to I. Marc Carlson. More really terrific tunic documentation at http://www.leatherworks.com/viktunics.htm specifies the keyhole neckline as a ninth and tenth century Swedish thing, for example. Discusses seams techniques, fabrics and weaves, cut, and origins of actual garments, good bibliography. These two sites take it a step further , showing how to cut the pieces efficiently out of a single length of fabric: The 10-gore dress pattern: http://www.virtualelpaso.com/neverwinter/dress/dress.htm T-tunic, the period way: http://www.fpnet.co.nz/users/m/maggiem/works/mystuff/TUNICS. HTML And this for great background information on making things in period, use the scrollable table of contents on the left of the page: http://moas.atlantia.sca.org/topics.htm#text For the tablet-woven trim, neck facing, cuffs, and belts, the clearest directions I've seen are at: http://www.mtsu.edu/~kgregg/dmir/new/bonnie/twpatterns.html Even if you don't make your own, you can get a feel for the style of tablet woven decoration. Design inspiration for cotehardies as well as some alternate cutting diagrams, but not documented: http://www.pipcom.com/~tempus/cotehardie/cotehardie.html Have fun! [33,308]CSuX:grommet setters Subject: Re: H-COST: Grommet setters From: Date: Thu, 15 Jul 99 23:22:54 -0000 -Poster: Marsha wrote, >Some years ago I gave up on grommets and started using machined buttonholes. >They are much more authentic that grommets, and I've NEVER had one rip out. >These are the ultimate in cheap and strong, plus they always match your >fabric. It depends on what you're doing. Grommets are fine for 19thC corsets. I hope when you say machined buttonholes you mean when you set the machine on the eyelet size. I've seen people use regular buttonholes for eyelets, and I think it looks just like machine done buttonholes! It's no better than grommets for the non-grommet time periods. Hand stitched eyelets are not difficult and do not take long. The trick is to use a bodkin or awl to make the hole - snip as few threads as necessary for the size hole you want. Stretching the hole packs the threads of the fabric together, making the hole stronger. In 18thC stays, the eyelet holes are stitched only as much as necessary to hold it open. In some cases, as few as four stitches! For most cases more like twelve stitches. They are whipstitches, not hand buttonhole stitches. So I find that punching a hole and making a couple of stitches goes much faster than making a machine buttonhole and snipping it open. Also, in extant garments the thread on the eyelet is usually cream linen, not a color thread that matches the fabric. -Carol arianne de dragonnid mka grace payne [45,309]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne" Date: Thu, 15 Jul 99 23:48:44 -Poster: "Arianne de Dragonnid mka Grace Payne" Good Gentles, Teddy wrote: (snip) >The garment in question was the top half of a "sideless-surcote" >When the stallholder explained that this was all she could make >out of the remnant she had used I asked what she was going to >use for the skirts and she told me that there *were* no skirts to go >with it. She said she had made several of these garments to be >worn over fitted gowns and that there were both skirted and >unskirted versions of this garment. > >This doesn't sound right to me. I don't recall ever seeing a >picture/diagram/painting/illo that showed an unskirted version of >these surcotes... or have I seen them and just assumed the skirts >that showed below them were the surcote rather than the skirts of >the gown beneath? > >Anyone out there care to comment. (snip) I have also never encountered this in a book. I HAVE encountered it once on somebody. To be honest, I would never wear such a garment after seeing the way it looked on her. It was cut out right, but it needed the weight of the skirt to stay where it belonged. I highly doubt there was ever such a garment. The lady appeared to be new to the Society, so I politely tried to talk with her about her garb. I am known to be quite (I've been told TOO) polite, but she didn't take my attempt at conversation very well. She had made it the way it was supposed to be, and she didn't care what anyone else thought. I had to give up. If she really was a newcomer, then the job she did on her surcote top was quite impressive, making me sincerely hope that soon someone helps her realize that it really should have a skirt. Yours in the Dream, Arianne de Dragonnid Shire of Castlemere, Kingdom of Trimaris %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% "The founder of my noble line was wont to see Dragons. His Lady rode out from the forest in a gown of samite and was as young on the day he died as on their wedding day." %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% robin netherton [52,310]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Robin Netherton Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 00:48:14 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Robin Netherton On Thu, 15 Jul 1999, teddy1 wrote: > This doesn't sound right to me. I don't recall ever seeing a > picture/diagram/painting/illo that showed an unskirted version of > these surcotes... or have I seen them and just assumed the skirts > that showed below them were the surcote rather than the skirts of > the gown beneath? You're right, it was a misinterpretation. But she may indeed have gotten it from a book. I've seen at least two or three Victorian or early 20th-century costume books that have repeated this same misinterpretation. My favorite is the one that went on at length about the chic little fur-trimmed "jackets" that women wore over their fitted dresses. Apparently the author looked at images of women in sideless surcotes (meaning a long open-sided gown with fur edging and a fur placket, decorated with a row of front buttons, worn over a fitted dress that showed at the sides and sleeves) -- but he assumed that the skirt represented the underdress, whereas the outer layer was a jacket with long tight sleeves, wide bands of fur trim in elegant curves, and a front button closure He then proceeded to draw about 20 sketches of various styles of this jacket -- which were of course the shapes of the fur trims and fur plackets from the misinterpreted images. The author said one version was actually sleeveless, just the skeletal shape of the fur trim only. (I want to say this was one of Henry Shaw's books, but I may be wrong. I have the Xeroxes at home, and I'm on the road, so if anyone wants the cite, write me and I'll look it up next week.) I think I don't need to tell anyone on this list that this jacket did not exist! I have used that book, and several others, in a lecture on Victorian misinterpretations of medieval sources. I got many of these books off open-stack library shelves. There are a lot of old books sitting out there in public libraries, and people who are just starting out in costume research have no way of knowing that the older books are not reliable -- particularly if that's all their local library has. I wouldn't be surprised if this particular misconception was repeated in more than one costume book that followed. Authors in the first half of this century are notorious for picking up their information from earlier costume books, not from direct examination of the sources themselves. That was understandable in the day when pictures of manuscripts were hard to come by, and color pictures very rare. Today, we have no such excuse -- we can see good reproductions of massive quantitites of medieval art in books and on the Web. --Robin dietmar [68,311]CSuX:t-tunics, etc Subject: H-COST: Re: T-tunics, etc From: Dietmar Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999 16:23:00 +0000 -Poster: Dietmar Greetings all, Margo wrote: > After some years away, I'm getting back into the SCA. Having > displayed insufficient reluctance, I am now the Mistress of Arts > for our shire, and I've been asked to do a "basic costuming" > workshop. Commiserations...I just stepped up as our baronial herald. > I'm all too familar with the standard "Mr. T-tunic is our friend" > approach, using modern materials, trim, and sewing methods to > produce a quick and easy medievaloid garment. I'd like to at > least touch on how these things would have been constructed in > period. By all means, show them as many medieval patterns as possible. > How would the keyhole neck have been finished? The rest of a > tunic seems to have been carefully cut to conserve fabric and > use the full width as much as possible. Somehow, the idea of > then cutting out a shaped facing doesn't seem likely. Would > they have bound the edge? If so, with self fabric or a woven > trim, possible a decorative one? Or would it have just been > rolled and hemmed, which is difficult to do smoothly? Probably all of the above. I believe there is also evidence that Vikings cut silk into strips for use as decorative trim and edge binding. > I know to caution them to use wool and linen, and I can show > examples of trims and embroideries that are good or bad. > Anything else I should tell them? Well, at 6'1", I have no problem making a floor length tunic with 4 yards of 45" wide fabric using a medieval cutting pattern. It's nice to point out that medieval patterns are very economical and that there are plenty of them. Oh yeah. Accessorize, accessorize, accessorize!! The right accessories complete the outfit. Marie wrote: > Why not look through _Cut of my cote_, published through the Royal > Ontario Museum, I think. It gives several diagrams of different > shirts, tunics, and coats (I think). Many that fall in the SCA > period were made of simple squares and triangles...at least from > what I recall. I only remember one period pattern in 'Cut my Cote' and that was the St. Louis tunic. (I might have bought it if I saw more.) There were two others that they lumped together. One was middle eastern from the 18th century. The other was an early 19th century Canadian child's fur jacket that they speculate could be similar in pattern to medieval clothing. These are only my recollections, but I haven't seen the book in years. Regards, Dietmar "Victory or Defeat rests in God's hands; over Honor, we ourselves are Lord and Master." holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [38,312]CSuX:boning uk Subject: RE: H-COST: Boning UK From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:06:40 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Whatever is appropriate for Elizabethan, I rather imagine steel. I have no idea what spiral is. Rachel Roche Products Limited 40 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City Hertfordshire AL7 3AY > -----Original Message----- > From: Melanie Wilson [SMTP:MelanieWilson@compuserve.com] > Sent: Thursday, July 15, 1999 9:46 PM > To: INTERNET:h-costume-digest@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: Boning UK > > > -Poster: Melanie Wilson > > >I am looking for a supplier of boning. I am due to start work on an > Elizabethan bodice and farthingale and require boning for both. I would > prefer this supplier to be in the UK or if elsewhere to accept credit > cards. > > Now here I can help ! > > What type, steel, spiral, nylon (ugh !) > > I use spiral for Victorian corsets, very comfortable & steel for my > bustles. > > Both from the UK. > > Mel teddy1 [54,313]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: teddy1 Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 10:31:59 +0000 (GMT) -Poster: teddy1 > - -Poster: rio@austin.rr.com (StrangeGirl) > Wow. I've *never*ever* heard this one before. Seriously! Me either, that's why I thought I'd ask. > Erm. It sounds as though she's taking the fossilized court versions > of the sideless surcote over-literally. This type are shown with the > skirts pleated/gathered into the supporting band around the hips. I > trust this was the type she had for sale? Narrow centre-front strip (neckline to hips), slightly wider back strip and the bottom edge of the "armhole" connecting the two at hip level. I'm in the middle of making a sideless in gold brocade for a friend's wedding in a few weeks... slightly earlier with wider front and back panels... but I caut it through from shoulder to hem and was planning to add fur "guards" around the neck and armholes in a similar shape as would be covered by this trader's purple velvet "garment" I've never made one before, however, and thought there might have been something I'd missed > Maybe some poor redrawings from victorian costume books, which may > have the girdle showing where it never does in primary source art, > or have the skirts shown as the same colour as the undergown. > (Racinet, again, comes to mind. Blame the colourists, if you must. > I do.) *This* is what I thought most likely whan I asked her about her sources... > Did she perhaps mention where she found this gem of knowledge? If it > is indeed true (which I find *extremely* doubtful as I am currently > researching this period in depth and have seen nothing like this in > the artwork I have been studying) I would love to know what sort of > documentation she has based it on. New sources are always welcome. I asked but got very little by way of reply other than that she hadn't got them with her at the event but had seen it in "several" places... and she flitted off into another subject area and showed me pictures of some very nice early Victorian stuff she'd made for a museum. Being as we are both "conversational-butterflies," I was quite happy to flit from subject to subject and it didn't occur to me that I hadn't pressed for more details until after i had left the event.... Teddy melanie wilson [15,314]CSuX:boning uk Subject: H-COST: Boning UK From: Melanie Wilson Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 06:49:53 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >Whatever is appropriate for Elizabethan, I rather imagine steel. I have no idea what spiral is. Spiral is steel but a kind of flat spring with ends on, it allows movement in more directions. Steel Boning is £24 a 20 m roll 12mm wide, or £1.50 per metre plus postage at cost to a max of £4.25 in the UK Mel teddy1 [25,315]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: teddy1 Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:55:08 +0000 (GMT) -Poster: teddy1 > Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question > > - -Poster: teddy1 > I'm in the middle of making a sideless in gold brocade for a friend's > wedding in a few weeks... slightly earlier with wider front and back > panels... but I caut it through from shoulder to hem and was planning > to add fur "guards" around the neck and armholes in a similar shape > as would be covered by this trader's purple velvet "garment" Ooops! My typing is bad at the best of times, now my fingers are putting in different words than I was menaing to use.... What I meant to put in the paragraph above was.... I *cut* it through from shoulder to hem and was planning to add fur "guards" around the neck and armholes in a similar shape as would be covered by this trader's purple *silk brocade* "garment" Teddy (Rushing through checking his e-mail between jobs...) holliday, rachel {disc~welwyn} [34,316]CSuX:boning uk Subject: RE: H-COST: Boning UK From: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:57:40 +0200 -Poster: "Holliday, Rachel {DISC~Welwyn}" Mel Where do you get this from? Rachel Roche Products Limited 40 Broadwater Road Welwyn Garden City Hertfordshire AL7 3AY > -----Original Message----- > From: Melanie Wilson [SMTP:MelanieWilson@compuserve.com] > Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 11:50 AM > To: INTERNET:h-costume-digest@indra.com > Subject: H-COST: Boning UK > > > -Poster: Melanie Wilson > > >Whatever is appropriate for Elizabethan, I rather imagine steel. I have > no > idea what spiral is. > > Spiral is steel but a kind of flat spring with ends on, it allows movement > in more directions. > > Steel Boning is £24 a 20 m roll 12mm wide, or £1.50 per metre plus > postage at cost to a max of £4.25 in the UK > > Mel dave;editors(heritage matters) [41,317]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:11:53 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Just in case; here it is again; properly, as there is no link from the main site http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbu.htm Gallery four is now up Some more films of the the battle proper are awaiting my attention at the moment and should be available over the weekend; I should be able to keep them there for a month. This was a bit of an experiment; but judging by the hits on the site since its announcement; there has been considerable interest. The feedback has also been welcome, so at least a few of those hits found something of interest. There are a couple of other events that we are planning to cover, so its possible to do it again. Suggestions and invitations for future coverage are most welcome. ++ In answer to many FAQ; Heritage Matters is a free on subscription magazine aimed at professionals in the Tourism/Heritage industry in the UK;. Production is limited and we do not want to push our subscription list up to no effect. , which means outside UK; Contents of each issue are listed on our website and we can mail a copy of any individual article on request. We dont charge for printouts of pictures but do request an SAE; I am sorry if this seems like advertising; but rather than make money I am just trying to keep our costs down Dave LD MUNDY Editor Heritage Matters , http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . > > Thanks for typing the http:// in the address. > I get so much mail, I don't even go to the sites I > can't just click on. > > Susan F. dave;editors(heritage matters) [24,318]CSuX:newbie - and the spanish american war Subject: Re: H-COST: Newbie - and the Spanish American War From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:38:16 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" ----- Original Message ----- > > -Poster: Russell Hedges > > I am male, so the beautiful gowns are out. Are you sure about this. One of the Societies I belong to , admittedly set up as an antidote to so many women wearing miltary uniforms at events, only meets once a year; on which occassion, we all get a chance to put on the frocks. It can hurt buts its fun. ( Heavy corsetting does not bode well with lots of ale) The Chevalier Beaumont D'Eu was an important guest at many Napoleonic period balls. Why not set a precedent. Dave ( before anybody asks ; no ; its the one event from which my camera is banned) stephen bergdahl [14,319]CSuX:trim on ebay Subject: H-COST: Trim on Ebay From: Stephen Bergdahl Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 18:23:32 -0700 -Poster: Stephen Bergdahl Dear Listed I have just but up for bid a very nice Red & Black Medieval trim. Perfict for Ren Fair or SCA. Check it out at: http://cgi.ebay.com/aw-cgi/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&item=131427828 Happy Days! cathy harding [62,320]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: RE: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: "Cathy Harding" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 06:44:48 -0700 -Poster: "Cathy Harding" Are there any no-battle scenes? Like campsites, camp kitchens, clothing closeups? Maeve > -----Original Message----- > From: owner-h-costume@indra.com [mailto:owner-h-costume@indra.com]On > Behalf Of dave;editors(Heritage Matters) > Sent: Friday, July 16, 1999 4:12 AM > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury > > > > -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > Just in case; here it is again; properly, as there is no link > from the main > site > http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/tewkesbu.htm > Gallery four is now up > Some more films of the the battle proper are awaiting my attention at the > moment and should be available over the weekend; > I should be able to keep them there for a month. > This was a bit of an experiment; but judging by the hits on the > site since > its announcement; there has been considerable interest. The feedback has > also been welcome, so at least a few of those hits found something of > interest. > There are a couple of other events that we are planning to cover, so its > possible to do it again. > Suggestions and invitations for future coverage are most welcome. > ++ > In answer to many FAQ; Heritage Matters is a free on subscription magazine > aimed at professionals in the Tourism/Heritage industry in the UK;. > Production is limited and we do not want to push our subscription > list up to > no effect. , which means outside UK; > Contents of each issue are listed on our website and we can mail a copy of > any individual article on request. > We dont charge for printouts of pictures but do request an SAE; > I am sorry if this seems like advertising; but rather than make money I am > just trying to keep our costs down > Dave > LD MUNDY > Editor Heritage Matters > , http://www.soft.net.uk/wysewords/ . > > > > Thanks for typing the http:// in the address. > > I get so much mail, I don't even go to the sites I > > can't just click on. > > > > Susan F. > > > > gaelscot@aol.com[22,321]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Gaelscot@aol.com Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:47:01 EDT -Poster: Gaelscot@aol.com just my slow wit) I've never been able to figure out what this means. Does it mean that the strip would be INSIDE the garment, covering the raw edges to keep them from fraying and/or rubbing the skin? I do this on necklines with bias tape, or with extra strips of whatever fabric I have sitting around, which works very well. Or does it mean that the raw edges are on the OUTSIDE of the garment, covered with a protective and decorative strip of fabric? I've done that too. Both methods work and look nice, but I have no idea whether either was actually done at any time in the middle ages. As for the keyhole neck -- well, I've always done it as a contrasting facing that's topstitched to the front of the garment. But I was taught that as a newbie, and I always assumed that it was an attractive but modern solution. It's been many years since I've done one. Gail Finke charlene charette [30,322]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Charlene Charette Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 14:16:41 -0500 -Poster: Charlene Charette DzMzLzy@aol.com wrote: > In a message dated 7/16/99 11:17:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, keltia@serv.net > writes: > > > The _Museum of London Textiles and Clothing_ book published by the Museum > of London but now out of print. > > I'm not sure if this book is actually out-of-print. The difficulty in > getting this book (and other from the MOL) is that they have changed US > distributors several times over the last few years, and each time they do the > "old" distributor lists the books as no-longer-available. > > Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? > Thanks The Stationery Office (http://www.tsonline.co.uk/) shows it in print (£32). I didn't check all the books in the series. --Charlene -- One may be my very good friend, and yet not of my opinion. -- Margaret Cavendish dan fenwick [16,323]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: "Dan Fenwick" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:17:26 -0700 -Poster: "Dan Fenwick" > I'm not sure if this book is actually out-of-print. The difficulty in > getting this book (and other from the MOL) is that they have changed US > distributors several times over the last few years, and each time they do the > "old" distributor lists the books as no-longer-available. > > Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? > Thanks I had no luck trying to get them direct from HMSO. dzmzlzy@aol.com[19,324]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: DzMzLzy@aol.com Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 14:29:08 EDT -Poster: DzMzLzy@aol.com In a message dated 7/16/99 11:17:49 AM Pacific Daylight Time, keltia@serv.net writes: > The _Museum of London Textiles and Clothing_ book published by the Museum of London but now out of print. I'm not sure if this book is actually out-of-print. The difficulty in getting this book (and other from the MOL) is that they have changed US distributors several times over the last few years, and each time they do the "old" distributor lists the books as no-longer-available. Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? Thanks Liz Gerds jessica wilbur [22,325]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: "Jessica Wilbur" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 14:52:18 -0400 -Poster: "Jessica Wilbur" Hello, > > -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > > > What is the MOL book, please? > There are five > books in the series, Textiles and Clothing, Dress Accessories, Shoes > and Pattens, Household Goods, and Horse something or other. These > books are a God send to the medieval re-enactor. Just a minor note: there are now six books in the series. I saw the newest one last night. It is on pilgrim badges and other cast-metal items. Very cool! And yes, these books are a godsend-- they are often the only chance we have to see pictures of extant items. The only thing better is seeing the actual item itself! --Jessica merouda the true of bornover [27,326]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:15:56 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > What is the MOL book, please? I am operating on the assumption that it is the _Museum of London Textiles and Clothing_ book published by the Museum of London but now out of print. The book deals with archealogical finds along the Thames River in London. Much land was reclaimed during the years 1150 and 1450 by doing landfill dumps. Each dump can be dated by how close to the river it is and by records of when that particular land reclamation was done. Many items where tossed into these landfills such as shoes, clothing, household goods, dress accessories, and horse accoutrements. The Museum of London cataloged these items and then found experts in these fields to analyze the goods. There are five books in the series, Textiles and Clothing, Dress Accessories, Shoes and Pattens, Household Goods, and Horse something or other. These books are a God send to the medieval re-enactor. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir merouda the true of bornover [37,327]CSuX:garb snarks.. off topic Subject: H-COST: Re: Garb Snarks.. Off Topic From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:10:09 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > I wasn't assuming that it doesn't happen, I wanted to know where it DOES > happen. But see, what I meant was, it happens *everywhere*. Just in such minute numbers compared to the total population that most of us *don't* know someone it happened to. There is no place that it happens while all other places have no incidents at all. To say "I know someone that had that happen to them and they live in the West" would eventually start "The folks in the West are authenticity police" rumors. You've heard those kinds of rumors, we all have, whether we're in the SCA or not. > Everyone talks about how they've heard of someone saying this, that > and the other, but know one has ever really been the vicitm or witnessed it > firsthand. The poster then replied that she actually didn't play with the > SCA, she just heard that thiat was how people in the SCA are. Which is another reason why I don't think we should get into "It happens in AnTir but not in Meridies" type of conversation. That statement would be as false as the statement that "that is how most of us are in the SCA". Giving one particular area a reputation for this type of discourtesy is at best misleading. It is human nature for someone to play the one-up-manship game in every location on earth in every group, in every faction, in every century. It isn't something that happens solely in the SCA, as the first poster pointed out, and it isn't something that happens solely in one region of the SCA. People are people everywhere you go. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir gia gavino-gattshall [55,328]CSuX:badmouthing other costumers Subject: Re: H-COST: Badmouthing other costumers From: "Gia Gavino-Gattshall" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:25:22 -0700 -Poster: "Gia Gavino-Gattshall" HI listers! I had to laugh at costume "snarking"! While I am a costuming fanatic, I know that there are those who aren't. So be it; I try not to snark, albeit sometimes I'm not successful.... It's more fun to go out of my way to compliment a lovely bit of work, for I know *I* appreciate compliments! There are times when I can't find anything nice to say, so I don't. When in private, discussing the flaws of another person's costuming is instructive and helps me to analyze what *I* could do better (oh, is *that* how that really looks...I do that, too...oops! Lets try something different..) I am one of those *weird* folks that truly enjoys sewing garments by hand. I've sewn several t tunics a chemise and one italian ren gown by hand...just because I wanted to. And because linen *feels* so good to handle! Anyhow, have fun stitching! Gia/Giacinta >>and then proceeded to *physically* go over my friends bodice and what >>was wrong with it, "The fit is all wrong" "the fabric..." etc etc etc, >>pulling at fabric here and turning her there. She was absolutely >>right in her critique and my friend knew it because she already knew >>everything she had done wrong with the dress which made it even worse >>because the critique implied that my friend was stupid as well. > >WHY do people think this kind of thing will make them look better? In my >younger, nastier days, my favorite hobby was lambasting other people's >costumes (while wearing my own lurex-trimmed Elizabethans with the grommets >up the back, mind you) but at least I did it behind their backs. (come to >think of it, that didn't make things any better.) > >My worst example of this happened to me when my sister was working at a >vintage clothing store in San Francisco. A customer started telling her >what a hot Ren Faire costumer she was. Naturally, my sister said, "Oh, do >you know my sister, Margo?" The woman said "Oh yes, I know her.." .and >proceded to trash me and my costuming. So extensively, as a matter of fact, >that the store owner, who was present, backed out on a large project for >which he was planning to commision me. Her little exercise in self esteem >cost me $5000. Ah, karma. > >Incidentally, the person in question is on this list. I don't know if she >ever thought about possible consequences, but maybe next time she will. > >That's when I gave up my habit of costume snarking. These days, I keep my >mouth shut unless someone specifically says "What did I do wrong on this >costume, and how can I fix it?" > >Margo Anderson > merouda the true of bornover [29,329]CSuX:garb snarks wassideless surcotes question Subject: Re: Garb Snarks wasRe: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 10:04:21 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > Where do you play with the SCA? I've lived in 3 different Kingdoms and have > been active for about 10 years and have never had anyone make that sort of > comment to me, nor have I witnssed anyone making those sort of comments to > someone. Please don't assume that because you haven't experienced this in your neck of the woods that it doesn't happen there and that because you know of one instance that it happened somewhere else that it *does* happen *there*. :) It isn't something specific to one geographical area. What it does say is that most folks would never consider being so rude as to comment on another's poor taste/skill/knowledge in costuming. Which is probably why you were fortunate not to witness it where you live. :) Most of us haven't witnessed that kind of behavior in our areas, but one truly bad story becomes legend and pretty soon newcomers are being warned about folks who have to play the Know It All. Just my $.02 worth, Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir merouda the true of bornover [63,330]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:58:34 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > The other thing about this is, unfortunately, there > are some people who are rude about it... [telling newcomers that > their clothing isn't authentic] And some folks consider, that no matter how kind the person is in their delivery of the information, giving unsolicited opinions/advice/info about what is wrong with someones clothing to be rude, period. I'll never forget the evening that I was standing with my fellow Lady in Waiting after a large SCA Baronial event. A woman whose costuming is okay at best came up and said in an even tone (no snottiness or superiority) that she really wanted to sew for the Baroness, that she could really help her have a nicer wardrobe (never even cluing in that that is what *I* was doing in the name of improvement ;-> or that she was implying that the Baroness didn't already have a nice wardrobe) and then proceeded to *physically* go over my friends bodice and what was wrong with it, "The fit is all wrong" "the fabric..." etc etc etc, pulling at fabric here and turning her there. She was absolutely right in her critique and my friend knew it because she already knew everything she had done wrong with the dress which made it even worse because the critique implied that my friend was stupid as well. What she succeeded in doing is making herself look like a jerk and she insured that she will *NEVER* sew a single official stitch during *this* investiture. > I was told > that my costuming was all wrong because I "did it > wrong" and didn't I know that "true SCA members sew > everything by hand." I have a reputation in my Barony for sewing everything by hand, it's kind of joke, "Oh, that's Merouda for ya". One friend nearly choked on her mead when she found out my hood was polarfleece. *LOL* I love that one. I seriously doubt that very many SCA members sew every stitch of every garment by hand, if any of us do. I am sorry that you had this experience. Even though the SCA is supposed to be based on Chivalry, Courtesy, etc, sometimes you just can't take the rude out folks. The good news is that 99% of the players would never think of such a thing. > Now, while I know this isn't > true of all, these are the things people tend to hear > more loudly. Sad but true. However, I think that if someone came up and said "My lady, that is Lovely fabric, I wish I could find such nice things" even though the fabric is *perfect* for Italian Renn and they made a Viking underdress and over tunic out of it, you would remember such a gracious compliment. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir andrea gideon [22,331]CSuX:garb snarks wassideless surcotes question Subject: Garb Snarks wasRe: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: "Andrea Gideon" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:41:18 -0400 -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" > -Poster: Sarah Toney > > The other thing about this is, unfortunately, there > are some people who are rude about it... I was told > that my costuming was all wrong because I "did it > wrong" and didn't I know that "true SCA members sew > everything by hand." Now, while I know this isn't > true of all, these are the things people tend to hear > more loudly. > > Sarah Where do you play with the SCA? I've lived in 3 different Kingdoms and have been active for about 10 years and have never had anyone make that sort of comment to me, nor have I witnssed anyone making those sort of comments to someone. Andrea cynthia j ley [36,332]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: cynthia j ley Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:35:49 EDT -Poster: cynthia j ley On Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:18:35 -0400 (EDT) Sarah Toney writes: > >-Poster: Sarah Toney > >The other thing about this is, unfortunately, there >are some people who are rude about it... I was told >that my costuming was all wrong because I "did it >wrong" and didn't I know that "true SCA members sew >everything by hand." In the immortal words of Rowan Atkinson, "Utter Crap." Now, while I know this isn't true of all, these are the things people tend to hear >more loudly. It's not true of many. I know numerous SCA costumers who use their machines for the work that can be machined--some things have to be done by hand, and those are. Who has the time to be a purist? i sew by hand, but then, I'ld hardly call myself a costumer, and I don't own a machine. ;) Arlys Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. sarah toney [49,333]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Sarah Toney Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:18:35 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney The other thing about this is, unfortunately, there are some people who are rude about it... I was told that my costuming was all wrong because I "did it wrong" and didn't I know that "true SCA members sew everything by hand." Now, while I know this isn't true of all, these are the things people tend to hear more loudly. Sarah --- Merouda the True of Bornover wrote: > > -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > > > > appeared to be new to the Society, so I politely > tried to talk with her about her garb. I am known > to be quite > > (I've been told TOO) polite, but she didn't take > my attempt at conversation very well. > > Is it possible that she had been warned that there > were people who would come up to a person and > proceed to tell > them that their clothing isn't right? I know that > I, as a newbie, was warned about this very thing. > Sometimes > it's best to wait until they ask you. :) > > -- > Cynthia Long > Merouda the True of Bornover > Barony of Madrone > Kingdom of An Tir > > > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com merouda the true of bornover [39,334]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 09:06:03 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > BTW: I have read a couple of those sources (MOL book, etc.) that mention > finishing some medieval seams with strips of silk or linen. But (perhaps it's > just my slow wit) I've never been able to figure out what this means. There are a couple pictures in the Museum of London Textiles and Clothing (MOL) book that show quite clearly how the silk facings were applied. In one case, a neckline, the slim strip of silk was stitched on top of the turned back edge with two parallel rows of running stitch. On the inside of the garment. In a second case, a sleeve buttonhole edge, the silk was also on the inside of the garment. The silk was caught with the needle at the same time as the garment fabric when the tablet woven edging (not the same as trim at all) was applied. It was further secured when the button holes were sewn. No other attachment was used. > As for the keyhole neck -- well, I've always done it as a contrasting facing > that's topstitched to the front of the garment. But I was taught that as a > newbie, and I always assumed that it was an attractive but modern solution. > It's been many years since I've done one. The truth is, we don't really know. There just isn't that much extant evidence available. Illuminations can show us that there was trim or some type of embellishment around a neckhole but it can't show us if it was embroidery, card woven trim, fabric, etc. And it can't show us whether or not the garment fabric was turned outside and covered by the trim or not. Several of the bog findings don't appear to my eyes to have any trim around the neck at all. And the MOL book has very little. There is one tiny scrap of silk tablet woven trim but it doesn't tell us how it was attached and to what it was attached. Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir dave;editors(heritage matters) [29,335]CSuX:tewkesbury Subject: Re: H-COST: Tewkesbury From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:16:21 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > -Poster: "Cathy Harding" > > Are there any no-battle scenes? Like campsites, camp kitchens, clothing > closeups? > > Maeve I am sorry no apart from the odd one or two that are already posted . This is not a good event for this, even more so as I arrived late and the camping areas were completely deserted as everybody was then assembling for the battle; Afterwards I had to leave quickly to get a US guest to the Abbey. Funnily enough my actual brief for this event was " lots of action pics none of those sitting around the cooking pot poses that we usually have" In the selection posted I have chosen the better ones for showing of the costume. amongst other criteria...so many different people to please. We have a selection of campsite/med market pics from last year's Robin Hood Festival. I could post a few when I get the chance. We have a big event coming up at Keddlestone hall for our bank holiday weekend, I am working on a stall for the whole three days. It is easier to get pics when in costume so I am hopeful. Dave merouda the true of bornover [18,336]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 08:34:29 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > appeared to be new to the Society, so I politely tried to talk with her about her garb. I am known to be quite > (I've been told TOO) polite, but she didn't take my attempt at conversation very well. Is it possible that she had been warned that there were people who would come up to a person and proceed to tell them that their clothing isn't right? I know that I, as a newbie, was warned about this very thing. Sometimes it's best to wait until they ask you. :) -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir dave;editors(heritage matters) [41,337]CSuX:sideless surcotes question Subject: Re: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 18:55:29 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > Is it possible that she had been warned that there were people who would come up to a person and proceed to tell > them that their clothing isn't right? I know that I, as a newbie, was warned about this very thing. Sometimes > it's best to wait until they ask you. :) What has happened to the Uk anchronism police this year? Well and last year. They have been very quiet. Is it because everything is now correct. We used to run a competition for the person who got the most tellings off in a year. There was a prize and then we discovered that some people were deliberately introducing anachronisms and parading up and down in full view of known members of the AP in order to get points so we stopped it , the prize that is. Maybe this why there have been less reports; I doubt if they have given up enjoying themselves by spoiling other peoples fun. Perhaps the clarion call of "excuse me , but WHO exactly are you supposed to be" is now a thing of the past. Destined to the re-enactment with the attitudes that one very large and famous re-enactment society had for disabled people; suggesting they stayed at home and made little models. I have seen people in tears after attacks by the AP , having spent hours and hours putting together a costume. I have also seen the other side of the coin. At an event three years ago which I will not identify I was able to stop a female colleague from taking a swing at two members of the AP; However I was not able to continue my peacemaking duties as another encounter ensued and a member of the AP spent the rest of the event wearing a not very period dressing over a split lip. Not that I would recommend such actions; However there are other ways of dealing with them, true to most periods; the treatment for women who say too much is called "Scold's Bridle" I believe they are called something worse in the US. Right Garb snarks just spotted in it a later posting; great ! Dave schuck@vci.net [6,338]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: "schuck@vci.net" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 12:47:04 -0500 -Poster: "schuck@vci.net" What is the MOL book, please? margo anderson [37,339]CSuX:badmouthing other costumers Subject: H-COST: Badmouthing other costumers From: Margo Anderson Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 10:46:24 -0700 (PDT) -Poster: Margo Anderson ) >and then proceeded to *physically* go over my friends bodice and what >was wrong with it, "The fit is all wrong" "the fabric..." etc etc etc, >pulling at fabric here and turning her there. She was absolutely >right in her critique and my friend knew it because she already knew >everything she had done wrong with the dress which made it even worse >because the critique implied that my friend was stupid as well. WHY do people think this kind of thing will make them look better? In my younger, nastier days, my favorite hobby was lambasting other people's costumes (while wearing my own lurex-trimmed Elizabethans with the grommets up the back, mind you) but at least I did it behind their backs. (come to think of it, that didn't make things any better.) My worst example of this happened to me when my sister was working at a vintage clothing store in San Francisco. A customer started telling her what a hot Ren Faire costumer she was. Naturally, my sister said, "Oh, do you know my sister, Margo?" The woman said "Oh yes, I know her.." .and proceded to trash me and my costuming. So extensively, as a matter of fact, that the store owner, who was present, backed out on a large project for which he was planning to commision me. Her little exercise in self esteem cost me $5000. Ah, karma. Incidentally, the person in question is on this list. I don't know if she ever thought about possible consequences, but maybe next time she will. That's when I gave up my habit of costume snarking. These days, I keep my mouth shut unless someone specifically says "What did I do wrong on this costume, and how can I fix it?" Margo Anderson melanie wilson [10,340]CSuX:boneing uk Subject: H-COST: Boneing UK From: Melanie Wilson Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:37:36 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson >Where do you get this from? I buy it trade with a load of othe items, as far as I know they only do trade, but if you want some I could get some if you wanted Mel andrea gideon [18,341]CSuX:garb snarks wassideless surcotes question Subject: Re: Garb Snarks wasRe: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: "Andrea Gideon" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:46:13 -0400 -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" > Please don't assume that because you haven't experienced this in your neck of > the woods that it doesn't happen there and that because you know of one instance > that it happened somewhere else that it *does* happen *there*. I wasn't assuming that it doesn't happen, I wanted to know where it DOES happen. Everyone talks about how they've heard of someone saying this, that and the other, but know one has ever really been the vicitm or witnessed it firsthand. The poster then replied that she actually didn't play with the SCA, she just heard that thiat was how people in the SCA are. Andrea sarah toney [53,342]CSuX:garb snarks wassideless surcotes question Subject: Re: Garb Snarks wasRe: H-COST: Sideless surcotes question From: Sarah Toney Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:16:24 -0400 (EDT) -Poster: Sarah Toney Actually, I have never played with the SCA... I took this comment to be common of many of the players and chose not to go... I have since re-thought my stance on it and would love to play... but alas I have other things to do... mostly being a Noble in NERO instead. ;-) Incidentally, the person who said this to me had come to a NERO event where *I* do the costuming. Sarah --- Andrea Gideon wrote: > > -Poster: "Andrea Gideon" > > > > -Poster: Sarah Toney > > > > The other thing about this is, unfortunately, > there > > are some people who are rude about it... I was > told > > that my costuming was all wrong because I "did it > > wrong" and didn't I know that "true SCA members > sew > > everything by hand." Now, while I know this isn't > > true of all, these are the things people tend to > hear > > more loudly. > > > > Sarah > Where do you play with the SCA? I've lived in 3 > different Kingdoms and have > been active for about 10 years and have never had > anyone make that sort of > comment to me, nor have I witnssed anyone making > those sort of comments to > someone. > Andrea > > > > majordomo@indra.com > Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com merouda the true of bornover [21,343]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:12:40 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > Just a minor note: there are now six books in the series. I saw the newest one last night. It > is on pilgrim badges and other cast-metal items. Very cool! And yes, these books are a > godsend-- they are often the only chance we have to see pictures of extant items. The only > thing better is seeing the actual item itself! Yes! Thank you. I saw that a couple months ago. Fantastic. What really spiked my attention was that some of the badges are downright obscene. All kinds of little pewter badges with phallic symbols and people in "unusual" (*laugh*) positions. Amazing. I'd never have imagined that the medieval mind would have such fun with sexual humor. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir merouda the true of bornover [19,344]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 13:14:57 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > The Stationery Office (http://www.tsonline.co.uk/) shows it in print (£32). I > didn't check all the books in the series. Excellent source! Thanks. But remember, when these are sold out that's that. The Museum Publications Department told me that they are not printing any more editions at this time. You can hope that the popularity of the books will prompt them to print another edition. -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir merouda the true of bornover [22,345]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: Merouda the True of Bornover Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 11:46:16 -0700 -Poster: Merouda the True of Bornover > > The _Museum of London Textiles and Clothing_ book published by the Museum > of London but now out of print. > Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? I recently purchased my copy of MOL Shoes & Pattens directly from the Museum. They told me that these books were no longer in print, but they just happened to still have a few copies of the Shoes & Pattens (thank god!!). If their usual distributors don't have them now, they won't have them later. FWIW, Cynthia -- Cynthia Long Merouda the True of Bornover Barony of Madrone Kingdom of An Tir dave;editors(heritage matters) [18,346]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 22:54:42 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > I recently purchased my copy of MOL Shoes & Pattens directly from the Museum. > They told me that these books were no longer in print, but they just happened to > still have a few copies of the Shoes & Pattens (thank god!!). If their usual > distributors don't have them now, they won't have them later. > If anyone is currently looking for this ; try The Museum of Footwear in Northampton (uk) I have a recollection of seeing several copies and can only think that it was there. Dave kat@grendal.rain.com[39,347]CSuX:garb snarks.. off topic Subject: Re: H-COST: Re: Garb Snarks.. Off Topic From: kat@grendal.rain.com Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 16:53:35 +0000 -Poster: kat@grendal.rain.com >>. The poster then replied that she actually didn't play with the > > SCA, she just heard that thiat was how people in the SCA are. > > Which is another reason why I don't think we should get into "It happens in > AnTir but not in Meridies" type of conversation. That statement would be as > false as the statement that "that is how most of us are in the SCA". Giving one > particular area a reputation for this type of discourtesy is at best > misleading. It is human nature for someone to play the one-up-manship game in > every location on earth in every group, in every faction, in every century. It > isn't something that happens solely in the SCA, as the first poster pointed out, > and it isn't something that happens solely in one region of the SCA. People are > people everywhere you go. Lordy, a hearty amen to that! I've been involved in many forums (SCA, Costume Con, SciFi, here, etc) and one of the things I've found is that *every* group has some of it. Sometimes it will be rampant, sometimes subtle. It's still there. (And it's not just in recreational groups. It happens in work places as well. And it's not just women doing it. Some of the most major discourtesies I've had done to me of this sort have been from men.) If you don't like the people around you, try hanging with a different group within the main group. Just like there are discourteous people everywhere, you can also find people of similar interests who are kind, courteous, etc. Avoiding a group for one or two bad experiences will just keep your from finding those people you want to be around. Kat Kat(June Russell) kat@grendal.rain.com Heu! Tintinnuntius meus Sonat! cat devereaux [47,348]CSuX:alteryears eliz. corset patern sizing Subject: H-COST: AlterYears Eliz. Corset Patern Sizing From: Cat Devereaux Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 21:20:13 -0400 -Poster: Cat Devereaux A couple of weeks back there was a discussion on pattern sizing, specifically corsets. Here's a forward from AlterYears. -Cat- ********************************** To those of you discussing the sizing on Alter Years Patterns: Janet Anderson passed parts of the discussion on to me as I am the pattern’s designer. Every person is built slightly differently and when I was first creating the size chart for these patterns I discovered that every pattern company I found had a different set of measurements listed as their standard. I took each of those in to consideration along with the American Standard Retail sizing charts out of a book called The Manufacturers Handbook which is widely used as a training manual for the garment industry. I then attempted to come up with a viable size chart for the Alter Years pattern line. I am afraid that the Standard American Body is a fallacy. Since historical patterns are usually much more fitted than modern clothing there is almost always some sort of alteration necessary to these patterns in order for them to fit the modern body the way they should. To take the initial question specifically: The top of the corset when completed should sit just above the center line of your breast. The bottom point of the corset should sit approximately two inches below the belly button or at a place most comfortable to the individual wearer. The side seam length measurement method in the pattern usually assures that fit along with sitting the top edge at the side far enough down out of the armhole as to not strangle the wearer. Many people are very sensitive under the arm and cut that even lower to accommodate. All of these very fitted patterns need to be customized to each individual taste, body shape and comfort. If you are more comfortable with your corset higher under your arms and you have a high bust by all means make it only as short as you feel you should. You can always cut the underarm down lower after you have put together the two main corset pieces. I hope this information is useful to you and it helps you to properly fit the corset to your own preferences. Many thanks to those of you who had such nice things to say about the pattern line. Sincerely, Robin Pavlosky Alter Years Pattern Designer diane perry (melangell) [31,349]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: "Diane Perry (Melangell)" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:50:59 +0000 -Poster: "Diane Perry (Melangell)" > > > > I'm not sure if this book is actually out-of-print. The difficulty in > > getting this book (and other from the MOL) is that they have changed US > > distributors several times over the last few years, and each time they do > the > > "old" distributor lists the books as no-longer-available. > > > > Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? > > Thanks > > I had no luck trying to get them direct from HMSO. > > I happen to be friends with the owners of Green Duck books, and asked them about a month ago about getting the Dress Accessories book my MOL. This is what they told me. HMSO (Her Majesties Stationary Office) has been dissolved. It is now The Stationary Office. Some of the books previously printed by HMSO will not be carried by the new Stationary Office. The MOL books will not be reprinted. When the available copies are sold out, that is it. Just try to obtain a copy of the new hardback (will not be out in paperback) book on Household Items. It is too bad since these books are wonderful and I only have 3 of them. Diane Perry carol j. bell cannon [31,350]CSuX:garb snarks Subject: H-COST: Fwd: Garb 'snarks' From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 19:41:58 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" >I wrote to Andrea to tell her my personal, firsthand story. I am NOT a costuming person, as any number of folk could tell you. I sew to have clothes to wear. However, NO ONE deserves this kind of treatment from ANYONE, and especially NOT in a Society where Chivalry and Courtoisie are supposed to be an integral part of what we do. imnsho only, of course. Andrea, I apologize that you will see this twice, but I wanted people to know it does indeed happen. I will make sure I am never at fault for being the costuming critic of this ilk. Carol, aka: Gráinne ingen Domnaill Ildánaig, Cynagua, West > >>Dear Lady, How fortunate you are! I went to a class on Documentation at one Collegium. I was wearing a simple yellow overgown. Someone who shall remain nameless, but was dressed in hideously garish [and therefore very likely a 'period' combo] colors in full Elizabethans, who was sitting amongst folk who were obviously her good and longtime friends, from across the table looked down her nose at me, and drawled, "Only Jews wore yellow in period." As I was a foreign language major and knew that was not true for ALL of Europe, I nearly opened mouth...but thought better of it. Who needs permanent enemies? I came within a heartbeat of responding: "You have a problem with my people, milady?"... and going on to tell her that while the sumptary laws in her small area of the world might have been thus, it was thus and so in this city in Germany, and thus and such in that area of the British Isles...and... . Those persons unfortunately do exist. However, one thing that often diffuses/confuses them is to start asking them questions... . They become so involved in helping educate the poor, ignorant creature that they forget to be snide. >> Gráinne ingen Domnaill Ildánaig dave;editors(heritage matters) [35,351]CSuX:medieval seam finishing Subject: Re: H-COST: medieval seam finishing From: dave;editors(Heritage Matters) Date: Fri, 16 Jul 1999 21:41:29 -0500 -Poster: "Franchesca Havas" I went to the First site you all mentions see them for sale there and just ordered the entire series. 300.00!!! But I am convinced that she who dies with the most books WINS! Buahhhhhahahahah Sincerely, F. Havas Dallas, Texas ----- Original Message ----- : : -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" : : : > I recently purchased my copy of MOL Shoes & Pattens directly from the : Museum. : > They told me that these books were no longer in print, but they just : happened to : > still have a few copies of the Shoes & Pattens (thank god!!). If their : usual : > distributors don't have them now, they won't have them later. : > : If anyone is currently looking for this ; try The Museum of Footwear in : Northampton (uk) I have a recollection of seeing several copies and can only : think that it was there. : Dave : : robesof@aol.com[22,352]CSuX:off the costuming subject/ on the etiquette subject Subject: H-COST: Off the costuming subject/ On the etiquette subject From: RobesOf@aol.com Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 01:06:50 EDT -Poster: RobesOf@aol.com My off the subject $.02: It seems many (or even all) of us have had someone criticize our hard work, looks, personality or whatever at some time or another in life. It is not pleasant, but its not going away either. My humble suggestion to those who would like to learn how to deal with others they "feel" are rude, is to read some etiquette books. Yes, although I often think it is everyone else in the world and not me who needs it, I am wrong. A good etiquette book will give all the training you will ever need on how to gracefully handle awkward positions that others may have unintentionally put you in. I prefer Miss Manners as she has a wild sense of humor as well as good advice. Try one of her new books "Miss Manners Guide for the Turn of the Millennium". You will learn to look good, make others look good and laugh it off later. Hope this helps some of you. Now let's get back to talking about the good stuff...costumes :-D Erica dave;editors(heritage matters) [18,353]CSuX:garb snarks Subject: Re: H-COST: Fwd: Garb 'snarks' From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 14:11:56 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Subject: H-COST: Fwd: Garb 'snarks' -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" .. and going on to tell her that while the sumptary laws in her small area of the world might have been thus, it was thus and so in this city in Germany, and thus and such in that area of the British Isles...and... Carol, Would you care to tell us something on this subject; It sounds fascinating and I must admit ignorance. pulliam@acadia.net (deborah pulliam)[16,354]CSuX:museum of london book Subject: H-COST: museum of london book From: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:58:35 -0500 -Poster: pulliam@acadia.net (Deborah Pulliam) <<> Could someone in the UK confirm if this book is truly out-of-print? > Thanks I had no luck trying to get them direct from HMSO.>> They still had plenty of copies at the Museum of London bookshop this spring (May). Deborah carol j. bell cannon [23,355]CSuX:garb snarks Subject: Re: H-COST: Fwd: Garb 'snarks' From: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 07:35:47 -0700 -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" At 02:11 PM 7/17/99 +0100, you wrote: > >-Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" >Carol, Would you care to tell us something on this subject; It sounds >fascinating and I must admit ignorance. I would if I remembered that much about it. It was over 30 years ago that I studied it. Sumptary laws have to do with who can wear what. The German laws I was reading about involved differences between Geneva and Stuttgart, if I recall rightly. One example is the English laws that forbade persons of less than a certain station to wear more than so many ells of fabric in a shirt--whereupon the Irish began making theirs with as much fabric as they could fit into the sleeves, and resulting in the leines popular at Renaissance Fairs nowadays. Or the forbidding of the wearing of the kilt. Others had to do with forcing Jews, prostitutes and other "undesirables" to wear a certain color, so that they would be easily identifiable. Still others made certain bird feathers the province of those with certain titles. Those latter, I know NOTHING of...only have heard that they existed. I'm certain Susan Carroll-Clark and some of the others here are more capable of answering your question than I. Carol jean waddie [31,356]CSuX:veiling Subject: Re: H-COST: Veiling From: Jean Waddie Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 16:12:39 +0100 -Poster: Jean Waddie In message <199907151646_MC2-7D2F-C5FD@compuserve.com>, Melanie Wilson writes > >-Poster: Melanie Wilson > >>I'm a belly dancer and there are a lot of suppliers for veils. Is this >what >you are looking for? If so, I'm happy to send you some web sites. > >Me too but I'm afraid not, it is for wearing over ones face with a hat, net >like but not with hugh holes like modern veiling. > >Mel If you don't want modern nylon-net bridal veiling, would silk veiling do? It's very soft and limp - almost cobwebby. I'm going to recommend a place, but of course I have neither a London phone book nor A-Z here - try McCulloch and Wallace, I think it's Duke Street, London. It's down one of the streets just opposite John Lewis on Oxford Street. they do supplies for schools and art colleges, and they should be able to show you samples of all sorts of things if you describe what you want. I should think they would do mail order, if you find their phone number. Sorry to be so unhelpful about addresses etc! Jean -- Jean Waddie jean waddie [39,357]CSuX:"aristocrats" on bbc1 Subject: Re: H-COST: "Aristocrats" on BBC1 From: Jean Waddie Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 15:53:13 +0100 -Poster: Jean Waddie In message , KATE M BUNTING writes > >-Poster: "KATE M BUNTING" > >Any UK list members watching this series? (It's about the daughters of the Duke >of Richmond from the 1740s onwards.) I'm no expert on 18th cent. fashions but >the general "look" seems excellent to me - but did styles really change so >little between the 1740s and 1760s? All the ladies have worn gowns with saque >(sp?) backs and wide-brimmed hats throughout, with little sense of developing >fashions so far. > >Kate Bunting >Library, University of Derby > Yes, I agree - gorgeous looks, but they are very bad at showing the passage of time. It's not only the clothes, though - in the first episode or two, Caroline's son was born and grew to about five years old, while the youngest sister (I'm not sure if it was Sarah or Cecilia at that point) didn't grow at all, nor even change her dress! I also have to say, it's not the greatest adaptation. If you're interested in the 18th century, read the book, because it gives a really wonderful insight into the lives of the very top in society - both the differences from now and the astonishing similarities. I was disappointed about the costumes, because one of the things I liked most about the recent Vanity Fair was the changing fashions - suddenly I understood how the Jane Austen look developed into the Bronte look, as scene by scene her waistline got lower and tighter and her sleeves got bigger. That was great. Jean -- Jean Waddie mary-gayle jany [26,358]CSuX:sumptuary regulations Subject: H-COST: sumptuary regulations From: "Mary-Gayle Jany" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 10:23:43 -0500 -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" Shucks...I can't find the original request for information. However, in '97 I wrote a rather extensive paper on the sumptuary laws governing the color requirements required for prostitutes and Jews, so perhaps I can help with this question. The laws in all European countries required various articles of clothing and colors be worn by prostitutes to 'mark' them from the general population. The same applied to Jewish. I found 34 references between 1158 AD and 1560, which includes London, Venice, Avignon, Arles, Penenas, Castelnaudary, Gloucester, Exeter, Westminster, Beaucaire, Toulouse, Paris, Hull, Dijon, Lyons, Amiens, parts of Germany (specifically Nuremberg, Frauenwirt, And Strasbough), and Florence. I have no doubt that there are numerous other examples. In a nutshell: Prostitutes were forbidden in many locals BY LAW from turning away clients. The two exceptions allowed by law were of lepers and Jewish men, not a pretty comment. In Germany, prostitutes were required by law to wear a yellow band of cloth in 1493. In numerous locals, red became the color of choice to identify prostitutes. France seems particularly set on requiring red. Meg dave;editors(heritage matters) [23,359]CSuX:sumptuary regulations Subject: Re: H-COST: sumptuary regulations From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 16:52:02 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Meg, Thank You. Is your own paper available anywhere? Or is there any sources that you would suggest? I am particularly interested in the English cities 1400 on. Dave > -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" > > Shucks...I can't find the original request for information. However, > in '97 I wrote a rather extensive paper on the sumptuary laws governing the > color requirements required for prostitutes and Jews, so perhaps I can help > with this question. > ETC> > Meg dave;editors(heritage matters) [17,360]CSuX:garb snarks Subject: Re: H-COST: Fwd: Garb 'snarks' From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 16:58:15 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Thanks anyway.I would appreciate any leads or suggested reading that anyone on the list may care to suggest. Dave > > -Poster: "Carol J. Bell Cannon" > > I would if I remembered that much about it. It was over > 30 years ago that I studied it. Sumptary laws have to do with who can wear etv dan fenwick [15,361]CSuX:museum of london book Subject: Re: H-COST: museum of london book From: "Dan Fenwick" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 09:47:41 -0700 -Poster: "Dan Fenwick" > They still had plenty of copies at the Museum of London bookshop this > spring (May). > > > Deborah Thank you. I just called and ordered a copy that they say they'll ship out tomorrow. They are also going to send me a publications catalogue. mary-gayle jany [54,362]CSuX:sumptuary regulations Subject: Re: H-COST: sumptuary regulations From: "Mary-Gayle Jany" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 12:59:57 -0500 -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" Dave: If you're near a university library, you'll have good luck. Do a cross reference search including prostitution, sumptuary laws, and Jewish. I note that your address is in the United Kingdom. You have (?) access to a start far beyond my humble means. Try the following titles: Allison, K. J., ed. The City of Kingdom upon Hull: A History of the County of York: East Riding. vol. 1. London: Oxford UP, 1969. Goldberg, P. J. P. Women, Work, and Life Cycle in a Medieval Economy: Women in York and Yorkshire c. 1300-1520. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. Karras, Ruth Mazo. Common Women: Prostitution and Sexuality in Medieval England. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1996. There's also a reprint of Stow's Annales of England available, but I don't remember whether it covers the years in which you are interested. Do you read German well? Meg ---------- > From: dave;editors(Heritage Matters) > To: h-costume@indra.com > Subject: Re: H-COST: sumptuary regulations > Date: Saturday, July 17, 1999 10:52 AM > > > -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > > Meg, Thank You. > Is your own paper available anywhere? Or is there any sources that you would > suggest? > I am particularly interested in the English cities 1400 on. > Dave > > -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" > > > > Shucks...I can't find the original request for information. However, > > in '97 I wrote a rather extensive paper on the sumptuary laws governing > the > > color requirements required for prostitutes and Jews, so perhaps I can > help > > with this question. > > > ETC> > > Meg > > henk t jong [78,363]CSuX:cotehardie conundrum/blanket Subject: Re: H-COST: Cotehardie Conundrum/Blanket From: "Henk 't Jong" Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 20:30:27 +0200 -Poster: "Henk 't Jong" Henk & Pauline 't Jong tScapreel Medieval Advisors Dordrecht, Netherlands Hi all, Robin wrote: > :-) I'm guessing Henk is remembering a question I sent him some months > ago. (If you answered me, Henk, I never got it, and I'd still love your > opinion.) You haven't because I'm still searching and haven't found anything defininite yet. I've been wondering whether there's any solid evidence for linen > being worn as the primary (visible) fabric of a gown or other body garment > -- we know it was used for undergarments (chemises) and linings of body > garments, but I haven't found as much evidence for it being used as the > main fabric, despite common assumptions to the contrary. So I'm on the > prowl. > You say: as much. Does that mean you have found some? > Given the ready availability of wool and the small wardrobes of most > people in the 14th century, I doubt many people would go to the expense of > making a linen dress just for those rare hot summer days. I know about prices of cloth in the late 13th to 15th c, but I can tell you that linen was a hell of a lot cheaper than wool in our region (Holland, Flanders, Northern France). That is: except for the fine kerchief linen of Doornik, Reims or Paris, of course, but that wasn't used for underwear or linings. linings in the early 14th c. In my opinion it can't have been a thick roughed woollen cloth to make blankets from, this was called fustian at the time. But what else could it have been? Any suggestions? I'm not even so > sure linen would make that much of a difference in European temperatures > -- I experimented with wearing identical dresses in cotton, linen, and > wool in 90-degree heat last summer (far worse than is usually seen in > Europe), and the wool was actually the most comfortable! Line it with > linen and you get the best of all worlds. A lined woollen cotte is very hot in even our summers; I tried it. It works better in winter. A linen cotte works OK. > I've found some indications that linen was worn routinely for summer > garments in sunny Italy, So why not in Northern Europe where linen was cheap and plentiful? and I wonder if the paler palette of Italian > clothing seen in paintings reflects an increased use of linen, which does > not hold deep colors like wool does. Most well known Italian paintings of the middle ages (Giotto, Cimabue, Martini) are done on walls in fresco technique; this has paler colours than miniatures because they are fused with chalks. Italian miniatures are every bit as colourful as Northern European ones as are altar paintings in tempera. This is another topic for another > year -- but I'll happily collect references to linen use in Northern and > Western Europe if anyone runs across anything. Looking forward to your results. I'll keep you and the list posted if and when I find something, Henk russell hedges [33,364]CSuX:newbie - and the spanish american war Subject: Re: H-COST: Newbie - and the Spanish American War From: Russell Hedges Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 12:47:44 -0700 -Poster: Russell Hedges "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" wrote: > > -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > ----- Original Message ----- > > > > -Poster: Russell Hedges > > > > I am male, so the beautiful gowns are out. > > Are you sure about this. > One of the Societies I belong to , admittedly set up as an antidote to so > many women wearing miltary uniforms at events, only meets once a year; on > which occassion, we all get a chance to put on the frocks. Well. . . . The same frock that looks stunning on a woman would only look silly on a man. I have seen some women who looked really good in uniform, but few men who could do justice to any gown. I appreciate the humor of the idea, but I think if I want laughs, I'll come to a ball as Harpo Marx, my favorite Marxist. Honk honk. Russell Hedges melanie wilson [11,365]CSuX:veiling Subject: H-COST: Veiling From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 16:55:14 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson Thanks Jean Try http://www.bt.com/phonenetuk/ On line UK directory enquires Mel melanie wilson [24,366]CSuX:mcculloch & wallis ltd whsle fabrics, hbdshry, Subject: H-COST: MCCULLOCH & WALLIS LTD WHSLE FABRICS, HBDSHRY, From: Melanie Wilson Date: Sat, 17 Jul 1999 16:55:13 -0400 -Poster: Melanie Wilson MCCULLOCH & WALLIS LTD WHSLE FABRICS, HBDSHRY, 25 Dering St, W1. (0171) 629 0311 3 MCCULLOCH & WALLIS LTD WHSLE FABRICS, HBDSHRY, 25 Dering St, W1. (0171) 409 0725 4 MCCULLOCH & WALLIS LTD WHSLE FABRICS, HBDSHRY FAX. (0171) 491 2481 5 MCCULLOCH & WALLIS LTD WHSLE FABRICS, HBDSHRY FAX. (0171) 491 9578 Mel dave;editors(heritage matters) [71,367]CSuX:sumptuary regulations Subject: Re: H-COST: sumptuary regulations From: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 02:17:08 +0100 -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" Thank You ; Thus armed I shall venture forth (except for the Karras which I have somewhere and realise that this may have been niggling at the back of my mind when my interest was reborn) The York source will be of great interest German is a no no for me. Thanks again and to every body else that has repsponded dave > > -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" > > Dave: > If you're near a university library, you'll have good luck. Do a > cross reference search including prostitution, sumptuary laws, and Jewish. > I note that your address is in the United Kingdom. You have (?) > access to a start far beyond my humble means. > Try the following titles: > > Allison, K. J., ed. The City of Kingdom upon Hull: A History of the > County of York: East Riding. vol. 1. London: Oxford UP, 1969. > Goldberg, P. J. P. Women, Work, and Life Cycle in a Medieval Economy: > Women in York and Yorkshire c. 1300-1520. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1992. > Karras, Ruth Mazo. Common Women: Prostitution and Sexuality in > Medieval England. Oxford: Oxford UP, 1996. > > There's also a reprint of Stow's Annales of England available, but I > don't remember whether it covers the years in which you are interested. > > Do you read German well? > Meg > > ---------- > > From: dave;editors(Heritage Matters) > > To: h-costume@indra.com > > Subject: Re: H-COST: sumptuary regulations > > Date: Saturday, July 17, 1999 10:52 AM > > > > > > -Poster: "dave;editors(Heritage Matters)" > > > > > > Meg, Thank You. > > Is your own paper available anywhere? Or is there any sources that you > would > > suggest? > > I am particularly interested in the English cities 1400 on. > > Dave > > > -Poster: "Mary-Gayle Jany" > > > > > > Shucks...I can't find the original request for information. > However, > > > in '97 I wrote a rather extensive paper on the sumptuary laws governing > > the > > > color requirements required for prostitutes and Jews, so perhaps I can > > help > > > with this question. > > > > > ETC> > > > Meg > > > > > cynthia j ley [24,368]CSuX:badmouthing other costumers Subject: Re: H-COST: Badmouthing other costumers From: cynthia j ley Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 10:47:55 EDT -Poster: cynthia j ley You know, one thing we compliment most of us can manage, even though the fit might be wrong, the fabric's wrong for the style or period, is, "That color looks great on you." Offering assistance with costuming, done in a friendly and tactful manner, is seldom turned down. Kindness first. And those you talk to get turned on by the idea of making their own garb, rather than turned off. Arlys Get the Internet just the way you want it. Free software, free e-mail, and free Internet access for a month! Try Juno Web: http://dl.www.juno.com/dynoget/tagj. leif drews [93,369]CSuX:18th. c. anatomy Subject: H-COST: 18th. c. anatomy From: leif drews Date: Sun, 18 Jul 1999 18:50:28 +0200 -Poster: leif drews --------------6AC4121248610B155C962D4C Hello all I know that most of you mostly are involved in the medieval period, but i hope that someone could help me a little again. It is about 18th century stays again. I have made a correct enlargement of a pair of halfboned stays from Norah Waughs book, they are at page 40 in the book, the period is 177oies. When i put my paper pattern to my dresstand, the sides of the bustline is much two high. I dont mean the lowest bustline, it is all right, but the side towards the shoulderstraps. When the boning is done, there will be a wrong angle here, it wont turn inwards towards the body here. My dresstand is a size 38 a small size, but maybe i cant put the corset to this, when the bust isnt flexible like a real person. Should i make a new dress