Page 1 of 3

Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:10 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
Reenactment period 1350 - 1420 medieval nobility ... would ladies and lords have worn cloaks/coats or any garment edged with fur?
and if so do we need to use real fur or fake?

Thanks in anticipation :)

Sir Edmund Mortimer

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:25 pm
by Vermin
Don't know if you should wear it - but if you do this is the place to go http://www.houseofdeclifford.co.uk/

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:46 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
Vermin wrote:Don't know if you should wear it - but if you do this is the place to go http://www.houseofdeclifford.co.uk/


Thanks for that link, we have some real fur coats from great aunts etc and thought we could use those, but need to know if we can or if we should. we dont agree with culling for the sake of using the pelts, but then commonsense says these coats were made back in the 40's / 50's ethics (although still wrong to us) were different and the deed has been done :?

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 8:59 pm
by British
Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:
Vermin wrote:Don't know if you should wear it - but if you do this is the place to go http://www.houseofdeclifford.co.uk/


Thanks for that link, we have some real fur coats from great aunts etc and thought we could use those, but need to know if we can or if we should. we dont agree with culling for the sake of using the pelts, but then commonsense says these coats were made back in the 40's / 50's ethics (although still wrong to us) were different and the deed has been done :?
But then you could always argue that these half century old coats are no longer made. They are the real deal. And with that, maybe they should remain in tact. You never know, there is perhaps a market for such items. And if you end up quids in, you might be able to afford some re-enactment cloths that suit your needs perfectly... Just a thought. I'll hide in my hole again.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sat Oct 10, 2009 9:04 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
British wrote:
Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:
Vermin wrote:Don't know if you should wear it - but if you do this is the place to go http://www.houseofdeclifford.co.uk/


Thanks for that link, we have some real fur coats from great aunts etc and thought we could use those, but need to know if we can or if we should. we dont agree with culling for the sake of using the pelts, but then commonsense says these coats were made back in the 40's / 50's ethics (although still wrong to us) were different and the deed has been done :?
But then you could always argue that these half century old coats are no longer made. They are the real deal. And with that, maybe they should remain in tact. You never know, there is perhaps a market for such items. And if you end up quids in, you might be able to afford some re-enactment cloths that suit your needs perfectly... Just a thought. I'll hide in my hole again.



Dont you go hiding :D valid comment and something we are looking in to; just need to determine the animal the fur came from :wink:
i will keep hunting for clothing piccies from said re-enactment era we have wool and velvet cloaks just wanted to refresh them.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:16 am
by frances
I noticed this summer that old fur coats of good quality are back in the vintage clothes shops. The best mink are hundreds of pounds. Couldn't give them away a few years ago.

My view is that if you want to add real fur. But also have a few good, interesting things to say when anyone comments about cruelty to animals

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:53 am
by Tuppence
Historical accuracy speaking, yes - everybody should be using more fur, at all levels and of all types.


In terms of modern use of fur (i.e. using it today, not using it on modern clothes) - that's a personal choice.

I do use fur on work things I make, if the customer wants it. I have used new fur, and I have used old fur (from stoles, etc).

There are arguments for and against both options (ignoring the viewpoint of not using it at all).

With new fur you have the hitch that something has died to allow you to use it's skin (no point in trying to be delicate about something that at its heart is fairly brutal). BUT, if you're careful about where it comes from, it is possible to get furs that are produced ethically, and that are not linked back to China et al (where conditions are often far more horrific than I'm going to describe here). You could get skins that are by products from the food industry (like with sheepskins) or from state culls that happen anyway (like some deer skins). And arguably in those instances it's better to use the fur, because that way you are not wasting a part of an animal that can be used. To waste it simply because it's currently unfashionable, or distasteful to many people would simply be wrong.
I eat meat, and wear leather, so to refuse to use furs from similar circumstances would be pointless and silly and wasteful.

With old fur coats and stoles, etc, you have the hitch that they are of an intrinsic value in themselves, even if they're not hugely pricey right now due to the unfashionability of fur (a quick check on ebay shows them going for anything from a couple of quid to £100+, though it'll depend on the age, condition, label if any, and type of fur). But they are vintage garments, and if in good condition, they are, as I said, of value.
That said, if you use old fur, (assuming it is usable and hasn't deteriorated), you are sidestepping the issue of a newly killed animal.

I'd doubt that many people these days without experience of handling real furs (which not that many people do have now) can actually spot the difference between a *good* fake fur and a real fur, without seeing the back, so it really is a personal choice.


As I said, I use it for customers, but I am very careful about sources. If I couldn't know it's coming from 'safe' soures, I wouldn't use it at all. And I use House of de Clifford too.




And again, that said, I don't use fur for my own kit, other than occasionally sheepskin.
Though as much to do with my hatred of working with the stuff as anything else - have to have two baths afterwards to get rid of all the bits of hair - worse than sand!

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 12:55 am
by Tuppence
Oh, but a *lot* of people say that fur should not be used under any circumstances, and is wrong (often while they wear their leather shoes and carry their leather bags, and buy their chicken sandwiches, etc, etc).

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 9:25 am
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
Thanks for all views, we are going to try and find out what fur the coats are made of ..... any ideas here would be greatfully received as unable to find any furriers here in wales. then decide either to sell or use. we have just finished making a red velvet cloak for a ladies outfit and thinking of edging it in fur to make it really stand out. so some thinking to be done me thinks!

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 11:44 am
by Grymm
Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:Reenactment period 1350 - 1420 medieval nobility ... would ladies and lords have worn cloaks/coats or any garment edged with fur?


Not just edged but often lined throughout in fur.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/search.aspx?query1=furred&rf=pubid:571

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:04 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
Not just edged but often lined throughout in fur.
http://www.british-history.ac.uk/search.aspx?query1=furred&rf=pubid:571[/quote]


Lined with fur is going to be to hot me thinks. will do the edges first and see how we get on, an interesting link you sent ...thank you

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 4:42 pm
by gregory23b
You also have to consider the practicalities of using real or fake fur, for real you need to not do any form of manual work, no oil or dirt on it, it must be groomed, for fake fur o not come into contact with flames etc. Plus look at the types of fur for the various ranks, check out sumptuary laws, for example, lamb's fur or budge or bogie was a lower end fur, rabbit was a restricted animal not that prevalent outside of warrens etc.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Sun Oct 11, 2009 6:04 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
gregory23b wrote:You also have to consider the practicalities of using real or fake fur, for real you need to not do any form of manual work, no oil or dirt on it, it must be groomed, for fake fur o not come into contact with flames etc. Plus look at the types of fur for the various ranks, check out sumptuary laws, for example, lamb's fur or budge or bogie was a lower end fur, rabbit was a restricted animal not that prevalent outside of warrens etc.


Had not herad of sumptuary laws... an interesting read. we are covered by these laws as all are high noble men and wives The Mortimers where very rich and at one point second in line to the throne so we should be ok wearing fur, looks like we will be wearing mink!

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 11:09 am
by Lena
Tuppence wrote:I'd doubt that many people these days without experience of handling real furs (which not that many people do have now) can actually spot the difference between a *good* fake fur and a real fur, without seeing the back, so it really is a personal choice.


Do you have a source for good fake fur? The fake furs I've seen in shops, and occasionally ordered samples from online retailers, have always been obviously fake to me.

/Lena

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 1:59 pm
by Tuppence
not off hand - I tend to buy it when I see it, but will have a think.


do bear in mind that to an extent sumptuary laws were a bit of a red herring. they wouldn't have needed to be re-issued ad infinitum if everybody had obeyed them.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 4:45 pm
by Fox
Tuppence wrote:do bear in mind that to an extent sumptuary laws were a bit of a red herring. they wouldn't have needed to be re-issued ad infinitum if everybody had obeyed them.

Certainly plenty of people seem to complain that they are not kept, particularly, it would seem, by merchants wives. :)

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Oct 12, 2009 5:10 pm
by gregory23b
"do bear in mind that to an extent sumptuary laws were a bit of a red herring. they wouldn't have needed to be re-issued ad infinitum if everybody had obeyed them."

Indeed, it is a case of the 'nouveau' riches having the cash to actually buy the stuff, but not necessarily the social background and ergo 'permission' to wear it

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 12:46 pm
by Drachelis
Denholm Velvets do some very nice faux fur - bit pricey though
have to say much like other synthetic fabrics when working with it you can definitely tell the differencer.
Cherry
Shadowlight Designs

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Tue Oct 13, 2009 3:20 pm
by John Waller
Lena wrote:
Tuppence wrote:I'd doubt that many people these days without experience of handling real furs (which not that many people do have now) can actually spot the difference between a *good* fake fur and a real fur, without seeing the back, so it really is a personal choice.


Do you have a source for good fake fur? The fake furs I've seen in shops, and occasionally ordered samples from online retailers, have always been obviously fake to me.

/Lena


The fake fur that Peta tried to persuade the MOD to use for guard's bearskins is made by a belgian company called Tyber. It's not a bad substitute but I'm not sure about it's flamability. They make many other fake furs but I have only seen the bear.

Their UK agent is

Name : STANDARD INTERNATIONAL
Address : UNIT D8 / THE LOUGHTON SEEDBED CENTRE LANGSTON ROAD / LOUGHTON
GB - IG10 3TQ ESSEX

Phone : 0044 208 787 7035
Fax : 0044 208 508 3932
E-Mail : sales@si-uk.com

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Tue Oct 20, 2009 10:40 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
Phew .... I have finished the cloak, it is edged in fur (possibly mink) all the way round and weighs a lot!!! i have had to do lots of hand sewing as a) to thick to go under machine and b) its showing... so more authentic. i have never made anything before so pleased with the result.

thanks for all your advise :D

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 5:11 pm
by RottenCad
Sir Edmund Mortimer wrote:Phew .... I have finished the cloak, it is edged in fur (possibly mink) all the way round and weighs a lot!!! i have had to do lots of hand sewing as a) to thick to go under machine and b) its showing... so more authentic. i have never made anything before so pleased with the result.

thanks for all your advise :D



Piccies ???

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:07 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
The cloak I have made ready for next seasons events ...bound to be a heatwave by then.
found out thanks to De Clifford the fur is musquash and authentic for our time period ... one thing right then :D

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 6:51 pm
by The Iron Dwarf
on another forum I use one person there had a sig that I think suitable for this thread.

it goes something like...
why do people get harrased for wearing fur but not leather.

because it is easier to harras and old lady than a gang of bikers
.


personally I have nothing against using the fur of an animal that died for other reasons like food production and as most here wear leather shoes or a leather belt or use a bag / wallet I think those people who do want to complain should first make sure they are not using leather themselves

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 8:27 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
The Iron Dwarf wrote:on another forum I use one person there had a sig that I think suitable for this thread.

it goes something like...
why do people get harrased for wearing fur but not leather.

because it is easier to harras and old lady than a gang of bikers
.


personally I have nothing against using the fur of an animal that died for other reasons like food production and as most here wear leather shoes or a leather belt or use a bag / wallet I think those people who do want to complain should first make sure they are not using leather themselves



I quite agree .... not infering the good lady is old are we????? :?

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 9:46 pm
by frances
Mmm, red velvet.

Here is a hint - to keep it from flapping open in a strong wind: sew two vertical pieces of strong tape on the inside of the front flap, on both sides. You can then put one hand through the two loops and hold the opening closed. Don't know if they did this in your time, but they certainly did in the 19th century.

If this is your first garment, then you have done well.

and yes, both fur and velvet are heavy. So now you know, when the telly shows people with their cloaks flapping in the wind, that the materials are all wrong. Another thing that really grates on me.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Mon Nov 09, 2009 10:19 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
frances wrote:Mmm, red velvet.

Here is a hint - to keep it from flapping open in a strong wind: sew two vertical pieces of strong tape on the inside of the front flap, on both sides. You can then put one hand through the two loops and hold the opening closed. Don't know if they did this in your time, but they certainly did in the 19th century.

If this is your first garment, then you have done well.

and yes, both fur and velvet are heavy. So now you know, when the telly shows people with their cloaks flapping in the wind, that the materials are all wrong. Another thing that really grates on me.


I really don't know if they did that in our time slot but a good idea anyway...... writes memo to tell her indoors :?

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:19 pm
by houseoffreyja
Just a quick question.
Are hoods on cloaks correct for that period?
We make cloaks and try to make them as authentic as possible, but it's something people don't seem to be able to agree upon. So,medieval cloaks.... hood or no hood?
Elaine

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 1:36 pm
by Colin Middleton
I think that the general oppinion is no.

I beleive that I've seen one picture with a hooded cloak, but IIRC they're not common if you can fine any at all.

I'd generally say best to avoid them and have the hood separate.

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 3:20 pm
by steve stanley
On Fur.....If you don't want to/can't get real....Don't use it at all.....IMHO
Steve

Re: Fur yes or no???

Posted: Thu Nov 19, 2009 8:50 pm
by Sir Edmund Mortimer
houseoffreyja wrote:Just a quick question.
Are hoods on cloaks correct for that period?
We make cloaks and try to make them as authentic as possible, but it's something people don't seem to be able to agree upon. So,medieval cloaks.... hood or no hood?
Elaine


we research as much as humanly possible for our costumes and we found many cloaks with hoods even in the V&A historical clothing, no one really knows for sure what anyone wore in medieval times as so little has survived .... so what do we do?????????
now im wondering should the cloak be worn or not ????? as i say we have done our best to research any one out there who makes cloaks ...is this cloak ok or not?