Page 1 of 1

jacket

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 11:00 am
by sewmaid
Hi all
My friend has lent me this 17th century jacket (pictured below) but we are not sure if it is classed as a doublet or not. Can someone tell me the name of the style please.

Re: jacket

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 12:04 pm
by Eric the well read
sewmaid wrote: Can someone tell me the name of the style please.
IMHO, Fancy dress? :wink:

Regards
Eric

Posted: Tue Mar 24, 2009 10:31 pm
by Ariarnia
With the collar it looks almost stereotypically puritan, but it's not black.

Not my period, but looks smart.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 6:09 am
by Merlon.
casssock - no
coat - no (being generous it could be an overly long soldier's coat)
doublet - no
justacorp - no

Though it sounds harsh its a shapeless sack, sorry to have to say that.

The falling band (collar) and cuffs are Hollywood or Victorian portrait style.

The concept that Puritans wore black starts in Victorian times and is reinforced by American TV adverts in the 1950's

jacket

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:25 am
by sewmaid
Thanks for your comments, this was lent to me by my friend who works at my local museum and she wants me to make some costumes for the museum. I must admit it is very poorly made.
Any idea's which jacket I should go for as she wants cavalier style outfits.
This costume she lent me came with a plain style cavalier hat.

thanks
sewmaid

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 8:51 am
by Merlon.
Depends what is meant by Cavalier. The types of clothing worn by Parliamentarians and Royalists were indistinguishable at any given social level.
I assume high status clothing is meant. If you do an image search on Google on "english civil war portraits" and ignore 99% of the pictures of reenactors you will get some idea of the types of garments worn by high status individuals.
For very basic patterns Norah Waugh "Cut of Mens Clothing" will give you clues Also the Janet Arnold Books may be useful.
One good set of clothing will take a good period of time a number of sets is a major project and v expensive.
Once you have had a look at some portraits and made some choices, may be able to help further

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:17 am
by sally
It would be well worth sitting down with a team from the museum and discussing precisely what they want their costumes to do. Its important that museums try as hard as they possibly can to present the most accurate image of any given time period, or it makes a mockery of the whole purpose of museums, to preserve and present information and objects. They need to decide how far down the route of accuracy they wish to go regarding fabric, buttons lace and also construction techniques, after all, if they decide they want you to hand sew everything you will be looking at a very different pricing scale than if they don't mind you machining non visible seams.

Before you go to this meeting, find out what year they want the costumes to protray and go armed with copies of portaits, extant garments, and patterns using both early tailoring manuals and the better modern costume books. This allows you to help the museum team choose the right shades, cuts etc for what they need. It will also help them understand just how much time is going to be involved in this project and how much it is going to cost them and why its important they pay for research time as well as making time.

Gently remind them if necessary about the importance of accurate shoes and accessories, the best suit in the world will still look like fancy dress if the wearer has highstreet shoes on

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:15 am
by Eric the well read
Everything that Sally said plus-
sally wrote:It would be well worth sitting down with a team from the museum and discussing precisely what they want their costumes to do.
Something that's going to sit in a 'showcase', ' on mannequin', 'interpreter wear' and 'try-on' are all very different kettles of fish and bring different requirements to the table - this has to be taken into account at the design stage.

Regards
Eric

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:15 pm
by kittylittle
Well this is a period I do and make kit for and I honestly cannot say what this garment is. Find out where it came from, I suspect a Theatrical Costume prop box from some years ago. Cavalier style wanted, hmm well the clothing didn't differ much really. The feathery hats and yards of lace and gold trim are very miuch a Victorian image. Latterly taken up by Hollywood.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:45 pm
by John Waller
kittylittle wrote: The feathery hats and yards of lace and gold trim are very miuch a Victorian image. Latterly taken up by Hollywood.
Bit of a sweeping statement that. Look at the court paintings of Van Dyke -gold, satin, lace, feathers etc abound. It depends on what the museum means by 'cavalier' - Royalist officer, country gent or courtier etc. All could be called cavaliers but would have differences in clothing styles depending on status and usage. There were certainly those in the period who used appearance to identify with a cause or party - hence the name 'roundhead' and the ostentatious displays of finery by some of the cavalier 'swordsmen'. In the main people of the same class probably dressed pretty much the same but there were extremes.

I agree that the coat above looks very am-dram.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 4:56 pm
by Shadowcat
There are paintings of Dutch citizens in similar coats, I think by Rembrandt, and a painting of Hester Tradescant in the Ashmolean shows a similar shaped coat on her son, but much more elaborately trimmed.

I apparently am unable to post a picture - boo!

S.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 5:19 pm
by John Waller
Shadowcat wrote:There are paintings of Dutch citizens in similar coats, I think by Rembrandt, and a painting of Hester Tradescant in the Ashmolean shows a similar shaped coat on her son, but much more elaborately trimmed.

I apparently am unable to post a picture - boo!

S.
I think I know the picture. In which case I retract my comment above.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:33 pm
by John Waller
Shadowcat wrote:There are paintings of Dutch citizens in similar coats, I think by Rembrandt, and a painting of Hester Tradescant in the Ashmolean shows a similar shaped coat on her son, but much more elaborately trimmed.

I apparently am unable to post a picture - boo!

S.
Here be a link http://www.compulink.co.uk/~museumgh/images/htrad.gif

Similar in colour but shorter.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 9:57 pm
by Shadowcat
John Waller wrote:
Shadowcat wrote: a painting of Hester Tradescant in the Ashmolean shows a similar shaped coat on her son, but much more elaborately trimmed.


S.
Here be a link http://www.compulink.co.uk/~museumgh/images/htrad.gif

Similar in colour but shorter.
In fact the one in the Ashmoleon painting is grey, and looks like a casaque, rather. Trying again with the photo! Hmm, too big, and my Photoshop is playing up. I'll try later.

Posted: Wed Mar 25, 2009 11:39 pm
by seamsmistress
Looking at the picture of the loaned garment, there appears to be a seam at the waist. If so, it falls into the category of doublet - but this one looks wrong because the waist seam should be pointed down into a V. How sharply depends on date and status. The garment is also lacking some essential internal structure, which is why it looks like a coat. Individual tassets [skirts] would then be added to the waist line and these too would have structure.

Not all doublets had waist seams though, as the image Suzie has put up shows. That one is cut with the skirts in, in the 2 front and 2 back panels. The side skirts/tassets are made and added separately. The front and back skirts overlap the side skirts by 1 inch.

Norah Waugh cut of men clothes will give you a clearer idea of pattern shapes, as has been mentioned previously.

jacket

Posted: Sat Mar 28, 2009 5:12 pm
by sewmaid
Thanks everyone for your good advice and help, I shall certainly take on what you have all said.
I shall start looking into this next week ie. meetings, pictures, styles etc: But for me I would like the costume's to look right.


Thanks guys :)

Regards
sewmaid