| Author |
Message |
|
James H.
|
 Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 1:41 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
OOPS, i QUOTED MYSELF. oh well.
If hunting big game such as deer and boar was reserved for the more wealthy or royalty was leather worn by middle to low class people.
|
|
  |
 |
Glennan Carnie
|
| Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 2:56 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James H. wrote: | OOPS, i QUOTED MYSELF. oh well.
If hunting big game such as deer and boar was reserved for the more wealthy or royalty was leather worn by middle to low class people. |
Leather seems to be reserved for shoes, belts and purses/pouches for everyday wear; and also for specialist work-related items, like aprons, armour, etc.
There doesn't seem to be very much evidence for leather clothing as portrayed by Hollywood. So no leather hose, for example. (Sorry.  )
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Glennan Carnie wrote: |
As to cotehardie and doublets: Personally I suspect the cote/tunic/kirtle persisted late into the century for the less fashionable - that is, the working man. Again, how many of us today dress in the latest designer fashions? The cotehardie is seen a lot in art of the 14thC but that art tends to show the young, noble and fashionable for the most part. Warmth and practicality are the key considerations for the working man. |
You have a point there. For instance, the Swedish Bocksten bog-man (dated to ca 1360-1370), who most likely was of lower status, was dressed in a simple, long cote/tunic that would have been out of fashion at the time. His hosen were also rather simply, loosely cut and not tight fitted as they're frequently depicted in period art. The same goes for the clothing found together with the buried Greenlanders excavated at the Herjolfsnes cemetary. The cotes/kyrtles/tunics (dated to the 14th and early 15th centuries) were comparatively crudely constructed out of rectangles and gussets of cloth, and although some of them showed fashionalbe features such as fittes sleeves, collars and buttons, they were far from the tight fitted garments associated with the non-working classes at the time
|
|
|
|
|
Jared Smith
|
| Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 6:55 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James H. wrote: | | I guess Middle class society did not come about till the late 1500s. |
Actually some of the subject specialists authors (Francis Gies, Norman Cantor, and others) pretty well characterize the 12th century until the beginning of the 100 years war (and the micro ice age and Black Death plague that combined with it) as a boom period for middle classes. Somewhat paraphrasing, the middle class economy roughly doubled , rapidly replacing feudalism and agrarian economy very quickly (roughly 1 century in each major region such as France, England, etc.) Many titled knights from the feudal system with status and monetary means sought to place sons (non eldest who would not inherit lands) in middle class professions (clergy, clerk, lawyer/legal secretary, artisan, etc.) During this significant period, professions such as skilled builders got paid wages that were competitive with just about any non royal office.
It is really not that different today. (When you see a major construction boom, the really efficient and organized builders can make an income similar to a well paid engineer or an average lawyer or doctor. I have worked with at least three individuals who switched from above mentioned skilled licensed professions to capitalize on freedom to self manage and profit in a local construction boom that lasted most of the past decade. Despite the mortgage lending bust, they are still happy and profiting nicely in the custom remodeling part of the business.)
I don't know how most of the workmen would have been dressed. However, the military, clerical and administrative type functions interacted with the courts, and seem to have been expected to fit in fully with all other aspects of courtly etiquette. I would guess that their style of clothing would have partially accommodated fashion within reasonable limits of function and expense.
Absence of evidence is not necessarily evidence of absence!
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 7:09 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Glennan Carnie wrote: | Fantastically succinct description Jonathan.
I would add:
I suspect the doublet began life in the mid 14thC as a military garment, which was adopted into everyday life (via the nobility - the fighting classes, after all). A fighting man, especially a well paid one, might own a doublet in the mid 14thC, but a typical peasant probably wouldn't; if for no other reason than cost.
Through the mid 14thC the predominant head covering was the hood for men. Also, contrary to what many reenactors may tell you, hats were not always worn. In fact in the majority of images from that period men go bareheaded. Of course, if you're going to do that as a reenactor you should make sure you have 'period' hair - that is, not a modern haircut (took me a year to grow mine, with some mighty bad hair days in between! )
Belts seem to be thinner, too. A typical male belt would be 1/2" to 5/8" wide, judging by the extent belt ends and buckles found. Red seemed to be a very common (in both senses of the word!) colour, since it can be achieved uding horse excrement (which was obviously pretty common, too!)
As for colours: (in order of commonality)
Madder shades (orange, rust, red),
Woad Blue (sky blue through to dark indigo blue, if you were very very rich; but certainly NEVER electric or royal blue) Yellow. Weld yellows tend to fade very quickly
Green doesn't seem to be too common, possibility because it requires two dyes (blue + yellow) and would therefore be expensive. |
Thanks for the kind words. Seeing you here has reminded me that it's been a while since I've been to the English Warbow site. I agree with all you said here, especially the part about the hats and reenactors.
James, felt was available and used in the construction of hats (such as your Robin Hood hat). As far as the crotch showing between your hosen; as the hem line rose, the higher the hem on the top of the hosen went. The Church typically had fits concerning what you are concerned about too, but the truly fashionable/wealthy nobility tended to ignore the complaints. Eventually fashion filtered downward with the improvement of the lower classes after the effects of the Black Death on the economy of Europe in the late 1300s.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
Last edited by Jonathan Blair on Wed 13 Aug, 2008 6:00 am; edited 1 time in total
|
|
|
|
|
Glennan Carnie
|
| Posted: Tue 12 Aug, 2008 11:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikael Ranelius wrote: | | Glennan Carnie wrote: |
As to cotehardie and doublets: Personally I suspect the cote/tunic/kirtle persisted late into the century for the less fashionable - that is, the working man. Again, how many of us today dress in the latest designer fashions? The cotehardie is seen a lot in art of the 14thC but that art tends to show the young, noble and fashionable for the most part. Warmth and practicality are the key considerations for the working man. |
You have a point there. For instance, the Swedish Bocksten bog-man (dated to ca 1360-1370), who most likely was of lower status, was dressed in a simple, long cote/tunic that would have been out of fashion at the time. His hosen were also rather simply, loosely cut and not tight fitted as they're frequently depicted in period art. The same goes for the clothing found together with the buried Greenlanders excavated at the Herjolfsnes cemetary. The cotes/kyrtles/tunics (dated to the 14th and early 15th centuries) were comparatively crudely constructed out of rectangles and gussets of cloth, and although some of them showed fashionalbe features such as fittes sleeves, collars and buttons, they were far from the tight fitted garments associated with the non-working classes at the time |
Some of the dating, based on radio carbon dating on the Herjolfnes finds jars with me a little. Some of the dates are given "some time 1250 - 1550" - that's a long time in fashion!
Other interesting things are the lack of dyes found on the wools. Most of the garments are of undyed wools. This could suggest: 1) The communities were relatively poor; 2) dyestuffs were not readily available. This seems to be in contrast to England in the same period, where dyestuffs were relatively more common, if still expensive (imported).
I also love the fact you see evidence of 'fashion', in the sense of conspicuous extravagence. Then, as today, people wanted to appear more wealthy than they perhaps were. Buttons are a notable extravagence, but then you have tight sleeves and false seams to suggest multi-panel (and therefore wasteful; therefore expensive) garments.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 2:47 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Glennan Carnie wrote: |
Some of the dating, based on radio carbon dating on the Herjolfnes finds jars with me a little. Some of the dates are given "some time 1250 - 1550" - that's a long time in fashion! |
Indeed, the dating suggested is very odd considering that the settlement (and thus cemetary) was abondoned in the early 15th century...
| Quote: | | Other interesting things are the lack of dyes found on the wools. Most of the garments are of undyed wools. This could suggest: 1) The communities were relatively poor; 2) dyestuffs were not readily available. This seems to be in contrast to England in the same period, where dyestuffs were relatively more common, if still expensive (imported). |
I think your suggestions are valid. The dressed bodies excavated at Herjolfsnes were found in the section of the cemetary reserved for the very poor (who could not afford expensive wooden coffins and were subsequently laid to rest with their clothing as shrouding). In overall, the Norse community in Greenland was comparatively poor - and if not completely isolated they were still far from the rest of western Europe and trading ships would probably appear rarely. I suspect that dyed fabrics were rare among rural people in general, at least in Scandinavia where the economy was relatively primitive and based on self-supported farming households. England, by contrast, had AFAIK at an early date an almost semi-industrial wool and cloth-production
| Quote: | | I also love the fact you see evidence of 'fashion', in the sense of conspicuous extravagence. Then, as today, people wanted to appear more wealthy than they perhaps were. Buttons are a notable extravagence, but then you have tight sleeves and false seams to suggest multi-panel (and therefore wasteful; therefore expensive) garments. |
One peculiar thing is also the fashionable liripiped hood, that appearantly was common among the Norse Greenlanders as well as among Scandinavian peasants. The Bocksten bog man for instance sported a 35 in/ 90 cm long liripipe that was made up from pieces of scrap fabric to imitate the current fashion of hoods and chaperons with extravagantly long liripipes
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Flynt
|
|
 |
|
Bruno Giordan
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 7:41 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Jonathan Blair wrote: | Generally, clothing in the High Middle Ages (late 13th through late 14th Centuries) for men would have been multiple layers. The layer closest to your skin typically was a linen shirt, coif (small hood), and braies (boxer style undershorts) made of plain white linen. This layer was for keeping the body's oils from the more expensive woolen garments on top and kept you barely decent for working in the fields. Finer linens would have been a bit pricier, and so would have been worn by the upper classes, whereas coarser linens were cheaper. Linen is not typically very colorfast, so white was the norm for the underwear.
On top of this was your second layer, consisting of a colorful tunic or doublet and hosen. The tunic was the typical T shape with gussets in the front, rear, and each side. Doublets were more form fitting, making a pigeon breasted shape that echoed the armor of the time. Earlier hosen were socklike, in unjoined pairs, pointed (tied with a cord) in the front to the braies or a belt. Late 14th early 15th C hosen were pointed front and rear to the doublet, had a extension that formed a seat, but were still two seperate pieces. Hosen didn't join until the mid 15th C. The second layers were of wool or fustien. Colors often clashed to the modern man's tastes and were as bright as you could afford.
Then you had your third layer. This was a brightly colored wool cotehardie or gown. Each opened in the front and closed with buttons of cloth (typical), wood, bone, or metal (if you could afford them). You also would wear a hood, chaperone, or hat of some type on the head and turn shoes and pattens on the feet. Shoes were rarely worn higher than the ankle (boots higher than the ankle did exist but were typically worn horseback to protect the legs like modern chaps). A good narrow belt (1-inch wide) with metal strap end cinched the waist and this was studded with belt mounts in pewter for the poorer or copper alloys for the richer. The length was not overly long with perhaps a four inch tail including strap end after the knot at the buckle. Longer, and wider belts were worn by women, although dedicated sword belts could be 2-inches wide. A purse, a small knife (used for eating, amongst other things), and perhaps a dagger or sword and buckler finished the ensemble, unless you really were cold, then you would wear a cloak or mantle on top.
Things to avoid are cotton or modern fabrics. Cotton is a relatively weak fabric compared to linen or wool as well as being prohibitively expensive in period, except in its raw form. Modern fabrics don't breathe at all well, making you hot on hot days. See www.historicenterprises.com for some examples.
Anyone else is welcome to chime in, make additions or corrections. |
Fustian.
Is it the fabric modernly known as fustagno in Italy, a sort of velvet like fabric that keeps rather warm in winter, is soft to touch but doesn't reach the stiffness of velvet?
Fustagno has been used extensively here in Italy and on teh alpine range during the first part of the XX century for mountain and early ski pants, as well as in earlier times it was widespread for hunting and farming use, most often in its ribbed fabric form, but it was also widely available in a plain non ribbed form.
Is this the same as medieval fustain? Colors were rather spent, mostly brownish or sand like
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
James H.
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 8:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
OK, no cotton if possible, tone down the leather (darn, no leather hose and vests  ) and don't forget my braies or I'll be singing free Willy all day long. Got it.
I found a SCA site on how to actually make the Chausses and Braies but it would probably be hard for someone lacking in the seamstress skills department such as me (unless my wife helped me though I doubt she would. she is not as into this as me.) But here is the site if any one else would like to give it a go.
http://www.randyasplund.com/browse/medieval/chauss2.html
Also, how would a felt hat hold up to rain? If it started to again like last year. I found some sites with simple how to make a Robin Hood hat ( which I've learned his called a huntsman hat or Italian Huntsman Hat) and this at lest looks easy enough for me to do. But I just have a few questions before I try. What color would the felt naturally be and what would they have used for thread? Also if anyone would know what kinds of stitchings they would have used on something like this hat during this time frame? It tells how to make them but not exactly how to properly stitch them. I have quail feathers and a few hawk feathers I could dress it with also.
Thanks, learning alot here.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 8:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
|
Fustian is a linen and cotton blend, the name is supposedly derrived from Al-Fustat (present day Cairo) in Egypt where cotton fabric was made and exported during the Middle Ages. I have bought some fustian for my aketon/pourpoint-project - it's a sturdy, tabby-woven fabric similar to canvas or sail-cloth.
|
|
|
|
|
Glennan Carnie
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 8:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | Fustian.
Is it the fabric modernly known as fustagno in Italy, a sort of velvet like fabric that keeps rather warm in winter, is soft to touch but doesn't reach the stiffness of velvet?
Fustagno has been used extensively here in Italy and on teh alpine range during the first part of the XX century for mountain and early ski pants, as well as in earlier times it was widespread for hunting and farming use, most often in its ribbed fabric form, but it was also widely available in a plain non ribbed form.
Is this the same as medieval fustain? Colors were rather spent, mostly brownish or sand like |
It sounds like a modern brushed cotton; and some have suggested that brushed cotton is very similar to medieval fustian.
Fustian seems to be one of those 'multi-purpose' descriptions. It appears to have been a 'composite' cloth with a linen warp and a weft of a different material. There is some evidence for linen-cotton (the common definition of fustian), linen-wool and linen-silk.
| Quote: | | I have bought some fustian for my aketon/pourpoint-project - it's a sturdy, tabby-woven fabric similar to canvas or sail-cloth. |
Fustian seems to be very difficult to get in the UK. You can get linen-cotton, but the mix is in the thread, not the weave. The fustian I have seen is very soft, as soft as pure cotton, but with the sturdiness of linen.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 8:48 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James H. wrote: |
Also, how would a felt hat hold up to rain? If it started to again like last year. I found some sites with simple how to make a Robin Hood hat ( which I've learned his called a huntsman hat or Italian Huntsman Hat) and this at lest looks easy enough for me to do. But I just have a few questions before I try. What color would the felt naturally be and what would they have used for thread? Also if anyone would know what kinds of stitchings they would have used on something like this hat during this time frame? It tells how to make them but not exactly how to properly stitch them. I have quail feathers and a few hawk feathers I could dress it with also.
Thanks, learning alot here. |
Felt hats are not stitched, but shaped on a wooden block while wet and then left to dry. Ususally they're then treated with stiffener to retain shape. You can use any colour you like, but I think blue (woad) and red (madder) was the most common, as for clothing. I've also seen brown, grey and yellow hats at Reenactment events
|
|
|
|
|
|
James H.
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 9:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
[/quote]
Felt hats are not stitched, but shaped on a wooden block while wet and then left to dry. Ususally they're then treated with stiffener to retain shape. You can use any colour you like, but I think blue (woad) and red (madder) was the most common, as for clothing. I've also seen brown, grey and yellow hats at Reenactment events[/quote]
That was a little more tricky then the how to make a robin hood hat artical I was going to follow. Is there a site that explains this process a little more in detail? Also is woad and madder the name of the types of the colors blue and red or the process from which the colors were made.
Thanks.
|
|
|
|
|
Chase S-R
Location: New Mexico Joined: 31 Jan 2008
Posts: 166
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Those "Robin Hood-style" hats are not only historically accurate, but were in fact extremely popular during the 14th century if we are to judge by period art. There are some images featuring them here, and a very fine and elaborate modern reconstruction here |
Right you are, I have seen many of these in period art. One fact I have heard but have no idea if it is true is that theese hats were worn "backwards" when it rained as the water washed back off the body, hearing this I wore a wool one backwards the next time it rained and it kept the water off me supprisingly well, it may not be historicaly confirmed but it works, so i would think some people may have done this.
I hate that most all the Ren faires and reenactments happen in the summer months because historical medieval clothing is very warm. And I end up baking to death in plate armour, or maille and a linnen and wool gambeson. ugh.
the civil war reenactments are also bad because all the rifle smoke makes you hotter.
someone said they thought linnen was mad from cotton and just to clarify, linnen is made by adding flax to wool. Flax comes from a plant and is called flaxseed i believe.
Raw silk is another fabric but only for the very wealthy so don't use it for middle class or poor. I see people using it all the time because it "looks cheap" don't be fooled, it was expensive.
Charles Stewart Rodriguez
|
|
 |
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 11:54 am Post subject: |
|
|
| James H. wrote: |
That was a little more tricky then the how to make a robin hood hat artical I was going to follow. Is there a site that explains this process a little more in detail? Also is woad and madder the name of the types of the colors blue and red or the process from which the colors were made.
Thanks. |
Woad and madder are both plants used for dyeing. Today fabric actually dyed with woad, madder etc are extremely rare, but there are synthetic dyes that closely imitate the colour achieved by plant-dyes.
My suggestion is that you buy a hat from historic enterprices, it's only US $10, which is an extremely low price as felt hats use to be very expensive (for instance, my hand-made felt hat cost me an equivilent of US $ 250)
Medieval design also have felt hats:
http://www.medievaldesign.com/cappellieng.html
|
|
|
|
|
James Barker
Location: Ashburn VA Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 365
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 12:16 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Mikael Ranelius wrote: | | Fustian is a linen and cotton blend, the name is supposedly derrived from Al-Fustat (present day Cairo) in Egypt where cotton fabric was made and exported during the Middle Ages. I have bought some fustian for my aketon/pourpoint-project - it's a sturdy, tabby-woven fabric similar to canvas or sail-cloth. |
Fustian in the middle ages was not a blend but a material with linen running the long way (warp) and cotton the short way (weft). If you buy a table cloth from Historic Enterprises they are a true fustian.
On warm layers I have not seen the most common medieval technology mentioned; a fur lining. Fur is super common; but if you fur line realize that the poor used certain furs and the rich used better furs.
I wore a gown lined in fur over a doublet and hose in 20 degree weather with getting cold at MTA in 07. We had sleet durning the day 
The way I see it the fitted kirtle comes about somewhere between 1340-1350, before then the garments are tunics with tighter fits and the lower class use tunics for quite a while after. Also don’t forget looser fitting gowns that get popular in the mid 14th century; Herjolfsnes has a few but look at the patterns closely because some are big in the waist and some taper in at the waist and out at the hips giving a tighter fit in the body. Marc Carlson’s site has good info:
http://www.personal.utulsa.edu/~marc-carlson/cloth/tunic2.html
James Barker
Historic Life http://www.historiclife.com/index.html
Archer in La Belle Compagnie http://www.labelle.org/
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mikael Ranelius
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 1:11 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| James Barker wrote: |
Fustian in the middle ages was not a blend but a material with linen running the long way (warp) and cotton the short way (weft). If you buy a table cloth from Historic Enterprises they are a true fustian.
|
Yes that was what I meant, English is not my native language so I have to admit that I'm not really sure about the correct meaning/use of the term "blend"
|
|
|
|
|
James Barker
Location: Ashburn VA Joined: 20 Apr 2005
Posts: 365
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 1:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
A blend here would mean you are spinning the two fibers together before the weaving process; which is what you get if you buy modern fustian in the States.
James Barker
Historic Life http://www.historiclife.com/index.html
Archer in La Belle Compagnie http://www.labelle.org/
|
|
|
|
|
Jonathan Blair
|
| Posted: Wed 13 Aug, 2008 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Chase S-R wrote: | | someone said they thought linnen was mad from cotton and just to clarify, linnen is made by adding flax to wool. Flax comes from a plant and is called flaxseed i believe. |
Actually, linen is neither cotton nor wool. Linen is made from flax alone. It is not made from the seed, but from the stalks of the flax plant, Linum usitatissimum, which are processed and spun into threads. Fustian is a cross weave of linen (warp) and cotton (weft), whereas linsey-woolsey is a cross weave of linen (warp) and wool (weft), which may be the source of your confusion.
"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." - The Lord Jesus Christ, from The Gospel According to Saint Matthew, chapter x, verse 34, Authorized Version of 1611
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
All contents © Copyright 2003-2024 myArmoury.com — All rights reserved
Discussion forums powered by phpBB © The phpBB Group
Switch to the Basic Low-bandwidth Version of the forum
|
This is a standard topic