| Author |
Message |
Glennan Carnie
|
 Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 2:49 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| Bruno Cerkuenik wrote: | Hi,
Could anybody explain the difference between the grande-assiete and the later inset sleeve??
Thanks! |
Basically, it's a difference in how the sleeve is cut and fitted. Both require an armhole cut in the body of the garment such that the arm is fully out side the garment - that is, the whole ball and socket of the arm is in the sleeve not the garment. This is different to a modern suit cut, where the arm is partially inside the body of the garment. That's why, when you lift your arms in a suit it lifts the whole body of the jacket.
With the Grande Assiete, the sleeve starts as a simple rectangular tube. This is then fitted to the body of the garment. Additional panels are added (and parts of the sleeve removed) until the body and sleeve fit the form of the wearer completely, and allow full movement. To achieve this, the body of the garment must be cut away rather drastically (leaving a large, round hole - perhaps hence 'grand assiette' - big plate!) The sleeve head becomes very big - look at images of the Revival garment and you will see the large triangular panels at the pectorals.
The later, inset sleeve demands more pattern cutting skills. The head of the sleeve is shaped prior to being fitted, so doesn't need so much fitting to the body of the wearer, yet still retains a large degree of movement (although not as much as the grande assiete sleeve)
Hope this helps
|
|
  |
 |
Randall Moffett
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 3:35 am Post subject: |
|
|
Al,
Very sure. This is my point, her idea, which I hope someday soon gets published is that most people who have never actually seen it are wrong in their assumptions that it went over the torso armour. There are loads of other points she has on it as well. It has ties and such which would not work for over armour. Looking at the Black Prince jupon makes me think the same thing actually. Most say it was over armour because it is highly decorated
. Well he was the heir to the throne, his underwear was likely very nice as well. I think you may have missed my point though. I was saying that it had to have been worn under the torso armour. The only bit of possible armour under would be the arms. So as far as I can tell with 70plus% of it under the armour I'd still call it an under garment. I am not saying it had to have been under his armour armour. The 14th century is notorious for a wide variety of arm harness configurations.
I do have some pics of Walters effigy and think it is a good example of it as an under garment with arms under, if in fact he has plate arms on.
As far as sizes that is relative, fair enough. Let me clarify my point then. Unless the person it was for was very undersize or adolescent/child it would not fit over armour. If the person was an average sized male in the late medieval period it size wise would have had to have been under the majority of the armour (breastplate, COP etc.) he wore or it would not have been able to fit.
Glennan,
A very good description. I might have to cut that for later use.
RPM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Cerkuenik
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 4:42 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thanks for the explanation Glennan!
I could understand a litle bit but thatīs because my tailoring knowledge is very small! My girlfriend studies fashion design and iīm sure sheīll understand!
I tried to google it but I coulndīt find any website.
Can you suggest one for me?
Thanks again!
Bruno
|
|
 |
|
Glennan Carnie
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 5:09 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruno Cerkuenik wrote: | Thanks for the explanation Glennan!
I could understand a litle bit but thatīs because my tailoring knowledge is very small! My girlfriend studies fashion design and iīm sure sheīll understand!
I tried to google it but I coulndīt find any website.
Can you suggest one for me?
Thanks again!
Bruno |
Try this one:
http://www.cottesimple.com/blois_and_sleeves/...erview.htm
If not, try googling "Pourpoint Charles du Blois"
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Cerkuenik
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 5:31 am Post subject: |
|
|
Sorry Glennan,
I didnīt express myself correctly, I found some texts about the Grande Assiete, I didnīt find any about the inset sleeve.
Seeing this website, I saw that in the talhoffer manuscript, they use the grande assiete, so why you suggested to use the inset sleeve?
Thanks again!
|
|
|
|
|
Glennan Carnie
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 5:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Bruno Cerkuenik wrote: | Sorry Glennan,
I didnīt express myself correctly, I found some texts about the Grande Assiete, I didnīt find any about the inset sleeve.
Seeing this website, I saw that in the talhoffer manuscript, they use the grande assiete, so why you suggested to use the inset sleeve?
Thanks again! |
Ah, I understand now!
You do see the Grande Assiette sleeve in some Talhoffer illustrations; but you also see what appear to be inset sleeves and also inset detached (that is, held on with points) sleeves. I admit I haven't studied every Talhoffer plate. Obviously, a number of design co-existed.
My reason for preferring the inset sleeve is mainly due to the development of tailoring through the 14th - 15th century. The inset sleeve gives 95% of the movement of a grande assiette, at much less tailoring (fitting) effort. By the mid-15thC you see fewer and fewer examples of the grande assiette.
Probably the best source of information about the inset sleeve I know of is Sarah Thursfield's book "The Medieval Tailor's Assistant". At present, it is only available in English, although I understand a German version will be available soon, too.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Bruno Cerkuenik
|
| Posted: Fri 27 Feb, 2009 6:18 am Post subject: |
|
|
Thank you very much for the explanation.
Iīll definety buy Sarah Thursfield's book, my girlfriend and I will taylor a gambeson very soon and Iīll post here for your comments.
Sorry fo being so annoying! but isnīt there any image of a inset sleeve to compare with the grande-assiete?
thanks!
Bruno
|
|
|
|
|
|
Sean Hayes
Location: Eugene Oregon Joined: 01 Mar 2004
Posts: 6
|
| Posted: Tue 03 Mar, 2009 10:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| David Teague wrote: | I just don't fit the standard. I have a "odd" body shape. I like the Revival Clothing Company garment, but it just doesn't fit me.
I'm too fat for the medium, way too small for the large. |
I won't comment on David's proportions if he won't comment on mine, but I'm no longer the trim figure I cut 20 years ago.
I just got the Historical Enterprises arming doublet and am very pleased with the fit. I ordered the base garment in medium, and noted to Gwen that my waist measured 40 inches. She altered the base garment to fit a 40 inch waist. I'm not a tailor, so I can't really speak with authority, but she was able to modify the base garment for me and it's working great. If I lose those annoying few pounds, I'll need her to alter it again. One can hope, anyway.
I'm quite pleased with it. It feels close and snug, as an arming doublet should, and I've been "wearing it in" without harness or voiders attached for unarmoured training at longsword, wrestling and dagger-work, and I love it. (I have some voider tailoring to do before those go on; the voiders are a bit small and don't fully cover all that needs covering.) It's comfortable and moves beautifully - not a single bind to movement anywhere, and I have it laced tight to my body. It feels really good to move in it, and already I much prefer wearing it to not wearing it. And it looks good, too.  When my new cuisses arrive in a couple of days I'll be pointing them to this garment, along with the vambraces. Until I get the voiders tailored I'll be using my haubergeon (itself in need of some tailoring...).
I also have a Revival Gambeson in linen, medium and off-the-rack, which fits great and allows me to move really well. Like the HE doublet, there are no binds to movement anywhere. I have both for two slightly different harness configurations, and the Revival Clothing gambeson is a first-rate light cloth armor for "blossfechten" sparring, especially for protecting against dagger thrusts that aren't quite defended against.
In the case of both garments, if the off-the-rack or mildly modified fit is this good, then tailored must be incredible.
Sean
Sean Hayes
Maestro d'armi
Northweast Fencing Academy
http://www.fencingacademy.net
|
|
  |
|
Christian Henry Tobler
Location: Oxford, CT Joined: 25 Aug 2003
Posts: 704
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
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