Fur yes or no???

Making, Pictures, Queries, Resources

Moderator: Moderators

houseoffreyja
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:01 am
Location: N. Derbyshire
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby houseoffreyja » Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:28 pm

We've done a lot of research and we've found that most cloaks didn't have hoods, apart from ecclesiastical ones.
The reason I asked is that in all of the paintings etc, cloaks don't have hoods, but re-enactors mostly seem to wear cloaks with hoods. We make cloaks and try to make them as authentic as possible, but it's very confusing as to what is correct.
However, fur lined or fur trimmed cloaks (without hoods) were worn during the viking and medieval period.
Anymore thoughts on hoods would be greatly appreciated.
Elaine



User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Colin Middleton » Fri Nov 20, 2009 1:35 pm

I doubt anyone will stop you and say that it's wrong. If your group authenticity officer isn't going to shoot it down, it's enteriely your choice.


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Fri Nov 20, 2009 8:25 pm

houseoffreyja wrote:We've done a lot of research and we've found that most cloaks didn't have hoods, apart from ecclesiastical ones.
The reason I asked is that in all of the paintings etc, cloaks don't have hoods, but re-enactors mostly seem to wear cloaks with hoods. We make cloaks and try to make them as authentic as possible, but it's very confusing as to what is correct.
However, fur lined or fur trimmed cloaks (without hoods) were worn during the viking and medieval period.
Anymore thoughts on hoods would be greatly appreciated.
Elaine



hard to say on this or any costume really, when i asked about clothing at one of our museums they said that a lot of art work depicting medieval times had been done in the victorian times, they changed colours and styles to suit their visions ... food for thought. We have gone on the fact that if you find 3 proofs of somethoing seeming to be correct then go for it as you say most reenactors wear cloaks with a hood and a lot of our research seems to find an equal mixture ... i will wear the cloak and pray :D



User avatar
Xioumi
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 am
Location: 7th circle of Hell

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Xioumi » Fri Nov 20, 2009 10:44 pm

It's fairly easy to tell the difference between medieval art and sculpture and the pictures and restorations done by the victorians. For example books by Mary J Houston and Herbert Norris rely heavily on these victorian interpretations and if being used for research purposes should be taken with a big fat grain of salt. Museums and galleries should also be able to tell the difference and include this information with the piece on display. I remember coming across a beautiful tomb 14thC tomb effigy in Exeter cathedral that had several anomalies on both the Lady and the Knight. Looking a little bit closer I found that it had bee heavily restored in the late 19thC.
As far as I am aware cloaks and hoods were usually separate pieces, with some exceptions as someone has already commented on further up. They were commonly lined in fur rather than edged although I appreciate that a fully fur-lined cloak might be a little too warm these days. They would most likely have been made from wool rather than a fabric like velvet as they are primarily an 'weather' garment and wool is naturally water repellent as well as being able to still keep you warm when wet.
Just out of curiosity what sources did you use for your hooded cloak? Sometimes we can get so stuck in the mindset that this is the way they definately did something and completely miss the bleeding obvious staring you in the face. I'd like to see them and the context.



User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:26 pm

Xioumi wrote:It's fairly easy to tell the difference between medieval art and sculpture and the pictures and restorations done by the victorians. For example books by Mary J Houston and Herbert Norris rely heavily on these victorian interpretations and if being used for research purposes should be taken with a big fat grain of salt. Museums and galleries should also be able to tell the difference and include this information with the piece on display. I remember coming across a beautiful tomb 14thC tomb effigy in Exeter cathedral that had several anomalies on both the Lady and the Knight. Looking a little bit closer I found that it had bee heavily restored in the late 19thC.
As far as I am aware cloaks and hoods were usually separate pieces, with some exceptions as someone has already commented on further up. They were commonly lined in fur rather than edged although I appreciate that a fully fur-lined cloak might be a little too warm these days. They would most likely have been made from wool rather than a fabric like velvet as they are primarily an 'weather' garment and wool is naturally water repellent as well as being able to still keep you warm when wet.
Just out of curiosity what sources did you use for your hooded cloak? Sometimes we can get so stuck in the mindset that this is the way they definately did something and completely miss the bleeding obvious staring you in the face. I'd like to see them and the context.


might take me some time to find the refrences i used if i can find them again!!!! its all very conflicting and confusing all i can remember of the top of my head was that wool is the main fabric used because of its natural abilities but that other fabrics were used to show of the wealth ... we are nobility ... the Mortimers ... pretty high up on the list and thats the theme we go with ...to show off our wealth ... hence the velvet and fur ...if the cloaks way out of line in keeping then i cant use it which is a great shame the last thing i want is to be commented on /for wearing the wrong gear!



User avatar
Xioumi
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 am
Location: 7th circle of Hell

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Xioumi » Sat Nov 21, 2009 12:01 am

Sorry if you thought I was criticizing you in any way - I really wasn't. I'm genuinely interested in those sources but am more than totally familiar with the 'I know I've seen it somewhere in a book' thinkg and never manage to remember which one ever again! Yes the nobility and the rich liked to show off their wealth but a fine wool could be just as expensive as a velvet, if not more so. Wardrobe inventories and soforth seem to indicate that they were generally made from wool. I really don't think you would be the only re-enactor wearing a velvet cloak though. And I certainly can't say it was never done.



User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Sat Nov 21, 2009 8:52 am

Xioumi wrote:Sorry if you thought I was criticizing you in any way - I really wasn't. I'm genuinely interested in those sources but am more than totally familiar with the 'I know I've seen it somewhere in a book' thinkg and never manage to remember which one ever again! Yes the nobility and the rich liked to show off their wealth but a fine wool could be just as expensive as a velvet, if not more so. Wardrobe inventories and soforth seem to indicate that they were generally made from wool. I really don't think you would be the only re-enactor wearing a velvet cloak though. And I certainly can't say it was never done.



Your comments were not taken as critisism (wish they had spell check) at all, we all are entitled to express what knowledge we have, thats the idea of these forums so no worries there mate at all :D
I genuinely will have to research online again as my computer went down two weeks ago and i lost all saved files so i am busy refinding. ... not an excuse ...honest :)

i don't think the wife willwear it now, sure she spent 3 weeks making it mostly all sewn by hand and her first attempt at making clothing, if she doesnt feel others think its right for the period then she wont wear it :(
we will wait and see.



User avatar
Xioumi
Posts: 48
Joined: Sun Apr 09, 2006 8:22 am
Location: 7th circle of Hell

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Xioumi » Sat Nov 21, 2009 9:35 am

But it's very pretty! And as Colin said I doubt anyone will come up to you and say that it's wrong. It is entirely possible that ceremonial cloaks may have been mase from other fabrics than wool. There aren't really many extant examples to compare and it is often difficult to determine a type of fabric from a picture, that's why things like wardrobe inventories are such wonderful references. Your wife should wear it and look lovely doing so. These points are just worth bearing in mind when it's time to make the next cloak.



houseoffreyja
Posts: 235
Joined: Thu Apr 30, 2009 10:01 am
Location: N. Derbyshire
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby houseoffreyja » Sat Nov 21, 2009 11:14 am

I also think the cloak is lovely and there is written evidence of velvet being used.
The reason I asked about the hood is because I make cloaks to sell. I try and make them as authentic as possible. I made cloaks with hoods and some re-enactors told me they were not authentic. So I've made them without hoods and then see lots of re-enactors walking around with hooded cloaks. So you can see why I'm confused.
Elaine



User avatar
lucy the tudor
Post Knight
Posts: 1984
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:57 am
Location: Lancashire
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby lucy the tudor » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:10 am

Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:[

i don't think the wife willwear it now, sure she spent 3 weeks making it mostly all sewn by hand and her first attempt at making clothing, if she doesnt feel others think its right for the period then she wont wear it :(
we will wait and see.


If it's mostly sewn by hand, and your authenticity officer is happy for her to wear it, it would be criminal to waste that much effort and fabric. As has been said, wear, enjoy, look great in it, and when it finally wears out, make the next one in wool without a hood.
If your Mrs hand sews kit, she is a welcome and useful addition to the community, and should be told ( regularly) just how great she looks in the cloak.


lucythetudor@gmail.com

a filthy, arse-grabbing strumpet, masquerading as a demure two-door lady.

User avatar
Tuppence
Post Knight
Posts: 1397
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: chaos-world, west yorks
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Tuppence » Mon Nov 23, 2009 10:23 am

cloaks with hoods were around, they just aren't as heavily documented as those without (or you cannot see in the piscutres, because they're at the back.

and they weren't as common as those without, but they're by no means wrong. More questionable as a female garment, but still not wrong.

I'd challenge the idea that most re-enactors wear cloaks with hoods - I don't recall seeing many medieval re-enactors at all wearing hooded cloaks.


"What a lovely hat! But may I make one teensy suggestion? If it blows off, don't chase it."
Miss Piggy
RIP Edward the avatar cat.

User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Mon Nov 23, 2009 9:00 pm

Tuppence wrote:cloaks with hoods were around, they just aren't as heavily documented as those without (or you cannot see in the piscutres, because they're at the back.

and they weren't as common as those without, but they're by no means wrong. More questionable as a female garment, but still not wrong.

I'd challenge the idea that most re-enactors wear cloaks with hoods - I don't recall seeing many medieval re-enactors at all wearing hooded cloaks.



Me thinks that maybe we remove the hood .... thus solving one 'problem' and I have to ask .... why do (apart from the obvious) traders selling authentic clothing styles sell hooded cloaks ... we bought a wool (hooded) cloak on starting out and have seen plenty of hoods on cloaks ...maybe it depends where you camp up!!!!



Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Tue Nov 24, 2009 1:48 am

Just my two pence worth: I vaguely remember seeing a few medieval illustrations of men wearing separate hoods that ended in a really wide dagged shoulder cape, giving the impression of a hooded cloak. Date and source I have got none but I found this far more believable than a hooded full-circle cloak. From personal experience I can say that hooded cloaks are not as practical as they might appear. I still make them a lot and mostly for the discerning LARPer but personally I prefer a simple lined cloak that is cut very short at the front (so you don't step on it), buttoned on the shoulder (so you got your sword arm free) and if the weather is very bad I'll don a snug, fur-lined hood with a nice wide shoulder-cape and a very long tail.

This works very well if you are out and about as you can take off layers when you are either too warm or too cold. Large sweeping hooded cloaks are not nearly as versatile which leads me to believe that then as now they were worn mostly by people wishing to look dramatic and romantic, If they were worn at all.

So if you feel a hooded cloak is the thing for you, it should come with all the trimmings: at least the full-circle cloak (which we know existed without a hood) was almost universally a garment worn by the nobility. It should be made of fine wool which falls and flows well, ideally lined in a contrasting fabric, with expensive ornamentation, precious fasteners and so forth and so on.

Mind, I have also made another cloak for a benedictine monk character which is probably jut a fantasy interpretation yet seemed to look the part: 2 a half-circle cloaks, shaped at the shoulders, sewn together and turned inside-out to create an extra-thick and very heavy winter cloak. Then the whole thing was gently shrunk and felted up in some warm water and re-waterproofed with a very lightly greased (lanolin) sponge. Now it's absolutely water-tight. A few minutes under the shower leave this cloak completely dry on the inside, even if you smell a little of unwashed sheep. I'm rather proud of that one!

I'd absolutely LOVE to try and re-create a viking 'shaggy' cloak some time to find out how well it really worked! But that's a project for another winter...


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Tue Nov 24, 2009 2:01 am

Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:[...]and I have to ask .... why do (apart from the obvious) traders selling authentic clothing styles sell hooded cloaks ... [...]


I think I should own up to it: because that is what sells. When you say 'cloak' most people think of something from the Lord of the Rings-film. Mind, in 'The Hobbit' the dwarves had cloaks with separate hoods...always found that very inspirational!

Interestingly enough, though, I've only ever sold a handful of hooded cloaks to re-enactors and certainly not one to someone engaged in living history. But I have over the years sold no end of hooded cloaks to role players, people who use them as ceremonial costume for religious purposes and some chappies who use them for hiking - apparently they can be used as a light raincoat if you wear them over your backpack and serve as an extra blanket at night (don't take my word for it). So to tell the truth: I have been selling cloaks to anyone BUT re-enactors.

There are more useful garments, too, even if they are slightly less elegant, such as the Garnache (popular with soldiers and travellers), which is a bit like a primitive jacket or close-fitting cloak with baggy sleeves which DID have a hood. This may very well be what some folks interpret as a hooded semi-circle cloak?


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:10 pm

quote="Trading-Dragon"]
Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:[...]and I have to ask .... why do (apart from the obvious) traders selling authentic clothing styles sell hooded cloaks ... [...]


I think I should own up to it: because that is what sells. When you say 'cloak' most people think of something from the Lord of the Rings-film. Mind, in 'The Hobbit' the dwarves had cloaks with separate hoods...always found that very inspirational!

Interestingly enough, though, I've only ever sold a handful of hooded cloaks to re-enactors and certainly not one to someone engaged in living history. But I have over the years sold no end of hooded cloaks to role players, people who use them as ceremonial costume for religious purposes and some chappies who use them for hiking - apparently they can be used as a light raincoat if you wear them over your backpack and serve as an extra blanket at night (don't take my word for it). So to tell the truth: I have been selling cloaks to anyone BUT re-enactors.

There are more useful garments, too, even if they are slightly less elegant, such as the Garnache (popular with soldiers and travellers), which is a bit like a primitive jacket or close-fitting cloak with baggy sleeves which DID have a hood. This may very well be what some folks interpret as a hooded semi-circle cloak?[/quote]


Thanks for the above ... interesting ... when purchasing our first cloak we asked for help and advise and got sold as living history/re-enactors a wool all in one all singing all dancing hooded cloak ... not going to name and shame!.
Well its been decided ......... shes wearing the cloak and woe betide anyone who says its not authentic ...... there is documentation of hooded cloaks and of various materials mainly wool and velvet!!!!! for our time period cloaks were trimmed rather than lined and literally all they were doing was saying ... im posh ... i have money ...this is what i can wear .... :D
thats the missus all over ...rofl .... :angel:



Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Fri Nov 27, 2009 8:22 pm

Well, of course! :D After saying all that I still have a hooded cloak which I made for myself and I wear it whenever I can find an excuse for it. 8-) They're just got style!


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

User avatar
Sir Edmund Mortimer
Posts: 136
Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:36 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Sir Edmund Mortimer » Fri Nov 27, 2009 11:36 pm

Thanks for the above ... interesting ... when purchasing our first cloak we asked for help and advise and got sold as living history/re-enactors a wool all in one all singing all dancing hooded cloak ... not going to name and shame!.
Well its been decided ......... shes wearing the cloak and woe betide anyone who says its not authentic ...... there is documentation of hooded cloaks and of various materials mainly wool and velvet!!!!! for our time period cloaks were trimmed rather than lined and literally all they were doing was saying ... im posh ... i have money ...this is what i can wear ....
thats the missus all over ...rofl ....

omg im in for it ....... she read my comments :sweat:



User avatar
lucy the tudor
Post Knight
Posts: 1984
Joined: Sat Jul 14, 2007 11:57 am
Location: Lancashire
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby lucy the tudor » Sat Nov 28, 2009 12:42 am

What, she read that you are proud of the hard work she did, and that she likes to look lovely for you?
I think that was the gist of it 8-)


lucythetudor@gmail.com

a filthy, arse-grabbing strumpet, masquerading as a demure two-door lady.

User avatar
narvek
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:55 am
Location: Prague, Czech Rep.
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby narvek » Sat Nov 28, 2009 7:18 am

Just to give an idea of what garnache is to sir Edmund,
Early 14C garnache my friend made: http://vendolove.rajce.idnes.cz/Helfenb ... 09_008.jpg


Eurototty reporting in for duty!

User avatar
Tuppence
Post Knight
Posts: 1397
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: chaos-world, west yorks
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Tuppence » Sat Nov 28, 2009 10:59 am

why do (apart from the obvious) traders selling authentic clothing styles sell hooded cloaks ...


simple - people want to buy them, probably because they percieve them to be more practical / warmer than unhooded ones (although I don't sell them unless specifically asked for them, and even then I will point out that they probably aren't entirely correct, and that anybody wearing one in the wrong context in any of the groups I'm involved with would ban it :D ).





Narvek - that's a nice garnache - I'd call it a herigaut (although I have a theory that the terms were used interchangably, or varied with location).

another style (ignore background - not prepped it for website yet)
Attachments
lanarkgarnache1.jpg


"What a lovely hat! But may I make one teensy suggestion? If it blows off, don't chase it."

Miss Piggy

RIP Edward the avatar cat.

User avatar
Tuppence
Post Knight
Posts: 1397
Joined: Wed Aug 17, 2005 6:20 pm
Location: chaos-world, west yorks
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Tuppence » Sat Nov 28, 2009 11:01 am

although all of this said, there are some dress historians who've put forward the idea that unhooded cloaks were for women, while hooded ones were worn only by men.


"What a lovely hat! But may I make one teensy suggestion? If it blows off, don't chase it."

Miss Piggy

RIP Edward the avatar cat.

User avatar
narvek
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:55 am
Location: Prague, Czech Rep.
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby narvek » Sat Nov 28, 2009 1:42 pm

Tuppence wrote:[
Narvek - that's a nice garnache - I'd call it a herigaut (although I have a theory that the terms were used interchangably, or varied with location).


or Gardecorps as well..

oh, I am now loking into a price of fox fur. To line and edge my dreammed of cloak I need 60 red fox and 15 arctic ones :devil:


Eurototty reporting in for duty!

Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:00 pm

narvek wrote:
Tuppence wrote:[
Narvek - that's a nice garnache - I'd call it a herigaut (although I have a theory that the terms were used interchangably, or varied with location).


or Gardecorps as well..

oh, I am now loking into a price of fox fur. To line and edge my dreammed of cloak I need 60 red fox and 15 arctic ones :devil:


Looking magnificent, Narvek!

I think a gardecorps does not have proper sleeves, kind of like a heraldic tabard. In Germany and the Netherlands it's called 'Wetterfleck' - a 'weather patch' or throw that you put on when it's cold and rainy. Kind of like a poncho with a hood, tacked together at the sides. Very practical kind of garment that!


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

User avatar
narvek
Posts: 456
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 11:55 am
Location: Prague, Czech Rep.
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby narvek » Sat Nov 28, 2009 9:20 pm

Might be, I do agree with Tuppence that it is very hard to pinnpoint which term is used for what garment during which period and where.

Yeap, it really is lovely, unfortunately it is not mine :( That bloody boy made them himself, handsewn, hand embroided. Not sure if it can be seen, but the hood and cuffs are lined in fur, the rest of garment is lined in linen.


Eurototty reporting in for duty!

User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Colin Middleton » Mon Nov 30, 2009 2:17 pm

Trading-Dragon wrote:I think a gardecorps does not have proper sleeves, kind of like a heraldic tabard. In Germany and the Netherlands it's called 'Wetterfleck' - a 'weather patch' or throw that you put on when it's cold and rainy. Kind of like a poncho with a hood, tacked together at the sides. Very practical kind of garment that!


I was under the impression that a gardecops had full sleeves, but the armpits were open so that you could put your arms out there, as pictured in the Mac Bible.

I wonder if any of these ideas is wrong? :crazy:


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Mon Nov 30, 2009 11:05 pm

Colin Middleton wrote:
Trading-Dragon wrote:I think a gardecorps does not have proper sleeves, kind of like a heraldic tabard. In Germany and the Netherlands it's called 'Wetterfleck' - a 'weather patch' or throw that you put on when it's cold and rainy. Kind of like a poncho with a hood, tacked together at the sides. Very practical kind of garment that!


I was under the impression that a gardecops had full sleeves, but the armpits were open so that you could put your arms out there, as pictured in the Mac Bible.

I wonder if any of these ideas is wrong? :crazy:


Quite possibly things get lost in translation. Some people also call a big hooded Overtunic with short sleeves a gardecorps. Perhaps there is more than one variety and the names overlap. But originally I was referring to this garment here (in brown): http://www.medievaltymes.com/courtyard/ ... tm15vd.gif

Mind, it's very hard to interpret. The way it's gathered around the neck suggests some kind of short cape but the right side looks almost like a lined sleeve...could be either?


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

User avatar
Colin Middleton
Absolute Wizard
Posts: 2037
Joined: Thu Aug 11, 2005 12:31 pm
Location: Sheffield
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Colin Middleton » Wed Dec 02, 2009 2:02 pm

I'm looking at one from the same manuscript.


Colin

"May 'Blood, blood, blood' be your motto!"

Image

Trading-Dragon
Posts: 99
Joined: Fri Apr 04, 2008 3:26 pm

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Trading-Dragon » Wed Dec 02, 2009 8:47 pm

I just had another look again myself. There definitely is more than one style I'd say. And it would make sense, too....fashion is a fickle mistress, after all. :wink:


Books are like imprisoned souls until someone takes them down from a shelf and frees them...

User avatar
House of De Clifford
Posts: 390
Joined: Thu Jul 28, 2005 7:35 pm
Location: Generally on a motorway in the van!!!!
Contact:

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby House of De Clifford » Tue Dec 29, 2009 9:12 pm

narvek wrote:
oh, I am now loking into a price of fox fur. To line and edge my dreammed of cloak I need 60 red fox and 15 arctic ones :devil:

We can do you a good price on fox pelts of the highest quality !!! :twisted:
Dave.


House of De Clifford
Suppliers of ethical fur and hides to Re- enactment, Film, Tv and Theatre.
http://www.houseofdeclifford.co.uk

User avatar
Alice the Huswyf
Post Knight
Posts: 1308
Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2005 7:13 am
Location: Please do not distract the exhibit

Re: Fur yes or no???

Postby Alice the Huswyf » Wed Dec 30, 2009 2:58 pm

This is a lovely garment, but wrong for the period you are doing. (Not a waste though, C18th , regency or victorian would take it, if it was sold.)

You can take the hood off. The head shape is wrong, being early C19th from what I can see. Frustratingly, the V & A and Bath Costume Museum collections don't cover C15th let alone earlier periods as very little from that early survives intact outside church vestments and status embroideries'. People used, then re-cut garments and then re-cycled the fabric they contained as personal wardrobes were so limited. And this applied even for the very rich - see the inventory of Lady Mortimer's possessions (clothing, personal effects and bedding) when the Mortimer wealth was confiscated in entirety by the king. Cloth is a valuable resource, rather than the staple we take it for. The further you go back, the more valuable a resource.

If you have some of the velvet left you have two options, make a period appropriate hood (with primitive shoulder plate) to wear with the cloak OR if you have long remnants of the fabric, try letting them into the centre back in wedges to correct the shape, instead and use it as a mantle. This option would be of more use, although it is more work. Mantles (the hoodless cloaks which were used at this time) allowed for noble-woman's head-dressing, which was normally banded and pinned on so did not need disturbing. Cloaks or mantles of this period are also cut as half to three-quarter circles, from widths of cloth assembled edge to edge. A woman of Joan Mortimer's status would either have been indoors, transported in a closed conveyance in foul weather or would have used (more practically and warmer) heavy veiling with warm head-cloths.

Yes, Norris and others did re-illustrate according to the aesthetic of his time, as did the Victorians - but you will eventually pick up what to look for and what to ignore. We all do, even though we all felt as you sensibly do to start with. Dorothy Hartley and Nancy Bradfield re-draw according to the body not to the fashion of their own time (Hartley also includes photographs of the reproduced garments in wear) so I would trust them. I regard them as technical illustrators of clothing, if you like.

Have you looked at Medieval Costume and Fashion by Herbert Norris Dover publications ISBN 0 - 486 - 40486 - 2? An older book, but a good starting point if you are doing higher status as it also covers ornament and cloth types.

'Historical Costumes of England 1066 - 1968' Nancy Bradfield Eric Dobby Publishing ISBN 1 - 85882 - 039 - 1 Small section, but very good - you will see how the fashion between the high and low is so similar.

'Dress in the Middle Ages', Francoise Pipponnier and Perrine Mane Yale University Press ISBN 0 - 300 - 08691 - Deals with the back-story and social relevances of cloth and clothing. NB the fashions are french / continental unless labelled otherwise and DO NOT apply in the UK unless you were Scots.

I am sure you have already been pointed at 'The Medieval Tailor's Assisant - Making common garments 1200 - 1500' Sarah Thursfield, Ruth Bean publishing ISBN0 - 903585 - 32 - 4 Which is a very good how to book. Lower status clothing, but the construction methods all still ally - it is the type of cloth and the colours used that differ (See Pipponier and Mane)

MORE IMPORTANTLY: nobody's kit is perfect when they first start. Half of the pleasure is continuing to learn and to adjust things so that it improves. You are starting with the right attitude and intentions (and skillset if this was hand-stitched) and it is in your groups' best interests to advise you and help you. Not knowing your group or their requirements, we can lead you astray even with the very best intentions, so keep checking with them. But it is better to aim at too high a standard of research than too low. You are right in that! I always advise our new members (different period) to get good BASIC kit to start with. Then in your second season you will be adding to a good basis, rather than re-doing stuff.


Is it 'coz I is middewl clarse, aih?


Return to “Costumes”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests