What I need help on is gown length. There seem to be 3 common lengths, one that ends mid to upper thigh, knee length, and then a kick-ass version that falls to the ankle.
My problem is I can't seem to find any info on whether the different lengths signify a particular status or nationality of the wearer? For some reason I think of the full length ones being more Polish, where they more common there? Are the shorter versions common through out Europe?

Also, I need some advice on fabric selection, I've seen modern reconstructions of these robes made of both broadloom/tapestry (basically to my mind, really nice upholstery fabric), as well as wool, Are both correct?

People use modern upholstery fabrics because real silk velvets and brocades are hideously expensive. What we tend to go for are close "approximations" in fabric and pattern.

--------------------

Addressing gown length, 'mid 15th century' is a little vague - fashion changes pretty abruptly regarding gown length for the jousting set right at mid century - almost knee length being popular in the 1430's and 1440's into the 50's, but going to top of thigh for the shorter gowns in the 1460's, right through the 1470's & 1480's - you can pretty much pick out the middle class people from the gentlemen in 1460's & 1470's art, at least in the LOw Coutnries, by the mid thigh to knee length gowns of the middle classes.

The long gown is always in fashion, throughout the century. It means different things, being commonly worn in the winter (the cover the ankle length gowns seem to be an upper-class thing, but long gowns are worn by the upper middle classes as well).

Longer robes were worn to mark station, in some cases, at least in art - also, Doctors, Doctors of Philosophy, jurists, and other very important people seemed to wear long robes to mark their station (clergymen as well). Robes of chivalric orders were ankle length.

Older men tended to wear longer robes than younger men - in art depicting the ages of man, the image of the old man almost invariably wears a long robe - keeping the chill out of their limbs.

I am sure more knowledgable people will chime in.

--------------------

The choice of fabric is simply a quality decision. I personally see no sense in portraying a person of such wealth that he owns a full suit of armour, and taking part in tournaments, and then using completly modern and unhistorical cloth.

People tend to spend thousands and thousands on shining metal, but when it comes to use correct brocade made from silk and gold thread on silk core, woven in a historical pattern (not a lookalike) they seem to find compromises attractive.

So the question is, what do you want to achieve, what is your hobby? Living history, do you want to create a reconstruction, or something else?

--------------------

Diu Minnezīt
Reconstruction of textiles, armour and daily life
1250,1350,1475
Nuremberg and Paris
http://www.diu-minnezit.de

IG Meisterhauw
Reconstruction of late medieval and early renaissance fencing techniques
http://www.meisterhauw.de

People compromise because few in this hobby have the resources to replace clothes the way a medieval aristocrat would. You can spend a bloody fortune on a garment in time and materials, and have a horse snot all over you, or dump you in a pile of poo 30 seconds after you put it on and ruin it.

Some feel it is a better compromise to have new, unstained, uncompromised clothes of incorrect fabric on a regular basis than one super 'authentic' outfit (whatever than means) covered in horse hair, snot, sweat and blood.

-Everyone- compromises somewhere.

But when aiming to museum quality it's quite simple: only choose a role you are able to achieve. If someone is unable to portray the count of so-and-so: simply don't do it.

And I personally simply will not wear my best clothes when it's clear they all get stained. Then I'll go for correct materials etc. which can be cleaned.
Yes, the show effect may be less, but then again the question: what am I trying to achieve, show or historical correctness.

Simpley name it correctly...

--------------------

Diu Minnezīt
Reconstruction of textiles, armour and daily life
1250,1350,1475
Nuremberg and Paris
http://www.diu-minnezit.de

IG Meisterhauw
Reconstruction of late medieval and early renaissance fencing techniques
http://www.meisterhauw.de

I would consider historical high end fabric, trouble is finding it or finding someone who can weave it that doesn't cost 1200/yrd. Does anyone know a weaver who can do a limited run on a historical pattern with or without gold threads?

Trolling ebay for 19th c remnants of silk velvet is pointless.

So if anyone has an idea of how to achieve the pentultimate of fabric reproduction, I'm listening.

--------------------

--------------------

Diu Minnezīt
Reconstruction of textiles, armour and daily life
1250,1350,1475
Nuremberg and Paris
http://www.diu-minnezit.de

IG Meisterhauw
Reconstruction of late medieval and early renaissance fencing techniques
http://www.meisterhauw.de

I'm so glad I gave up this whole 'living history'/who is more authentic' game, it just makes me crazy.

Thanks for the sterling reminder of why I've sworn off wearing costumes, *whatever* they are made of.

Jbeorner thanks also for your input. 'tho maybe I should have been clearer and not used the word "correct" in my post. My husband's not "portraying" anyone, he's going over to Europe, as himself, to compete in some jousting tournaments. And I will freely admit our focus is more on his "shining metal", it keeps him from breaking bones, and even it comes a distant second to our horses.
As Gwen pointed out, trying to keep cloths pristine around horses is a losing battle, there's a reason us horse people have a whole wardrobe called "barn cloths".

Is your hubby's armour mid-15th? French, Italian, German? Might help with the length indecision.

The cut of the clothes is different from geographical location to geographical location.

Jenn

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by jboerner:
Then same old discussion, Gwen.
It's you own decision what quality you choose.

But when aiming to museum quality it's quite simple: only choose a role you are able to achieve. If someone is unable to portray the count of so-and-so: simply don't do it.

And I personally simply will not wear my best clothes when it's clear they all get stained. Then I'll go for correct materials etc. which can be cleaned.
Yes, the show effect may be less, but then again the question: what am I trying to achieve, show or historical correctness.

Simpley name it correctly...

---

As one of the people out there who make compromises on materials to present an 'overall' impression, I do what is appropriate for the game I'm playing. It's wrong to apply one's own personal standards to those who are playing a different game. It does nothing but make people feel bad and you look foolish and uninformed.

It's a fact that different games have different 'standards' and that even within those standards there are different personal goals and 'standards' that people apply to their own kit. For my part, I'm really tired of some people's attitude that if others don't apply their standard, even if it's not necessarily appropriate for the particular game, that somehow what the others are doing is somehow 'less valuable' or worthless. That's a very narrow-minded view, one which I've long since grown tired of. I've had that view in the past and am well over it. Frankly I'm sick of it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by jboerner:
Then same old discussion, Gwen.
It's you own decision what quality you choose.

But when aiming to museum quality it's quite simple: only choose a role you are able to achieve. If someone is unable to portray the count of so-and-so: simply don't do it.

And I personally simply will not wear my best clothes when it's clear they all get stained. Then I'll go for correct materials etc. which can be cleaned.
Yes, the show effect may be less, but then again the question: what am I trying to achieve, show or historical correctness.

Simpley name it correctly...

---

Hi Jboerner,

I thought I should address this question, as it brings up the validity of interpretation to the public, which is an important consideration.

Successful interpretation must first and foremost have clearly defined what one is interpreting to the public.

There are several potential types of interpretation commonly undertaken, not all are mutually exclusive, but the thrust of the interpretation can often be different.

1. most commonly undertaken by most reenactment groups - small slices of material culture. In this case, the 'purity' of the objects being interpreted can be very important - if one is showing Medieval objects saying "this is what medieval objects looked like", then the objects being visually as nearly identical as possible is ultimately important.

2. activities undertaken. If one is doing a demonstration of Medieval carpentry, which is most important? Must the carpenter be dressed in exact thread count, hand-stitched replications of medieval clothing? Or is the most important aspect of the interpretation the carpenter using authentic tools and method to create an authentic object? If the carpenter is a superb master-craftsman, using entirely authentic tools and techniques, and makes a masterwork object, is the interpretation of technique suddenly invalid if the carpenter happens to be wearing denim overalls and a flannel shirt, and safety glasses? What if the costume worn is a close approximation of the proper clothes, but machine sewn? Is the interpretation invalid?

3. Interpretation of social customs or activities (jousting would fall into this). When presenting Medieval society, the ideal of course would be to be exactly dressed properly. However, one of the most striking aspects of Medieval society is the division of social classes - at almost no other historical time is the social division of society so visually readily appaent as during the middle ages. Is it valid to present a very exacting, uniform set of craftsmen or soldiers, all of the identical class, with little or none of the differences in society presented? I believe this can lead to a very unbalanced interpretation.

Some things are obvious sore-thumbs, like "knights" without horses, or an almost total lack of a serious view of Medieval religion portrayed, or groups of "lords", without a peasant in sight, Lords without servants, etc.

On the other hand, people only having the ubiquitous middle-class interpretation (almost invariably that of a soldier), gives a very unbalanced view of Medieval life.

I think that the presentation made by the better jousting groups, like at the Royal Armouries, Van der Haar, and the HJA joust in California - outside of their being a sport people are participating in for fun - are also, at that level of presentation, an equally valid historical interpretation of a social activity, placing it in a context the public can see and appreciate as presenting history, in this case, a sport of noblemen.

I believe in this case, the overall presentation - which takes place not at handling distance, but from arms length or longer - it is much more important to give the overall effect - if the cut of their gowns, and the material gives the proper impression, it is much more important than the exact material be copied, because at the distance the presentation is made at, the difference is subtle and not immediately noticeable by the viewer. I think it is more important that the jousters have attendants, mounted and on foot, in the proper cut of attire, and the proper pageantry is undertaken. This interpretation is, in my opinion, as equally valid as a hands-on presentation of authentic material objects - because the important part of the interpretation is the activity, and the form of the activity, and not the exact materials the objects are made of.

I have given a lot of thought to interpretation, from a semi-professional point of view, having engaged in the activity in a formal museum setting for the past 10 years, with a regular review by professionals and academics. This is my opinion, for what it is worth.

--------------------

"People tend to spend thousands and thousands on shining metal, but when it comes to use correct brocade made from silk and gold thread on silk core, woven in a historical pattern (not a lookalike) they seem to find compromises attractive."

Where can I find this stuff? I have looked all over and it seems to elude me at every turn much like 100% silk velvet.

It was early in the morning and the bold didn't register.

Thanks,

At the current conversion rate of Swedish Krona (using the Handelsgillet website) one of their brocades is 1680 krona per meter. That translates to $260.00 US per meter. Given that a meter is longer than a yard, you would still be looking at over $2500 for a single piece of clothing.

One that is going to get dirty, get slobbered on by your horse, etc. I don't think I'd spend that kind of money, no matter what kind of interpretation I'm doing. I cringe when I put on my $400 showcoat and $150 show breeches because I know what they are going to end up looking like, especially at a rainy, sloppy show.

Just the inexpert peanut gallery sounding off...but I think Firestyker, Chef and Gwen have this one right.

--------------------

--------------------

quote:

---

Originally posted by Angelique:
[B]

(SNIP) you would still be looking at over $2500 for a single piece of clothing.

One that is going to get dirty, get slobbered on by your horse, etc. I don't think I'd spend that kind of money, no matter what kind of interpretation I'm doing. I cringe when I put on my $400 showcoat and $150 show breeches because I know what they are going to end up looking like, especially at a rainy, sloppy show.
]

---

Sooks

There is over $2000 in this uniform I am wearing.

There is well over $2500 in this troopers uniform. This gets slobbered on, rained on, out in the blazing sun, sweated in. I rode in pouring rain and mud in this uniform. Got covered in mud, blackpowder, horse sweat and slobber etc.

My officers rig for this period costs well over $2500 just for the Dolman. You do not want to know what the Pellise costs

--------------------

Cheers

It doesn't matter that you have paid that much. If you can afford to spend that much in kit and have horse sweat and mud all over it, i want your job!

However, and this is the kicker, not all of us are lucky enough to have that kind of money to throw around. Some people just do this for fun you know!

--------------------

Thomas, I think it is more to the point that a Napoleonic officers uniform would be subject to the sorts of standard abuse to be found around horses. It is perfectly historical for it to be rained on, mudded, and slobbered over on occasion. Your batman would brush it out for you, but it would see a level of wear still.

Somebody portraying somebody of a station to joust in the Late Middle Ages, however, would have a larger array of servants, and a larger wardrobe, and would not be seen mudded, or slobbered over in the preparatory phases of a tournament.

Basically, somebody jousting in a Late Medieval context is portraying a multi-multi-millionaire, and needs to meet that impression visually for a historic joust. The level of individual detail required to pull the impression off is of a different level than of a first person, hands on interpretation, although the more detailed the impression, the better - but something that gives a correct impression of a historic brocade for such a job is as valid an interpretation in that scenario as one costing more (mind you, the faux fabric gowns are by NO means cheap).

Somebody portraying a Napoleonic officer is also usually portraying a wealthy man - most certainly the equivalent of a modern millionaire in a Napoleonic Cavalry regiment. As crushingly expensive as a properly made officers uniform is, it is not as expensive as a Late Medieval gown of rich fabric would be, made to the same level of accuracy.

I have enough different short riding gowns so I can give the illusion of wearing a "new" gown every day at an event, and I have a black wool gown for the rain. When I have a real brocade gown, that is what I will wear for one on one interpretation.

[ 12-29-2007: Message edited by: chef de chambre ]

--------------------

Barb, if you need any info or if I can be of further assistance, please feel free to email me privately gwen[@]historicenterprises.com. I'll be making clothes for both Jeff and Luke for Fred's jousts, so if it helps I can tell you what some of the other people at his events will be wearing.

Again, it comes down to your interpretation and what you are hoping to achieve with it

[ 12-29-2007: Message edited by: Angelique ]

--------------------

It's actually a question for Rod. The kit looks fabulous, but I really wasn't aware that flash nosebands were available in the Napoleonic period or is the tack in the impression still in development?

--------------------