Info Favorites Register Log in
myArmoury.com Discussion Forums

Forum index Memberlist Usergroups Spotlight Topics Search
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Charles de Blois Pourpoint, a sewing projectDIY Project Reply to topic
This is a standard topic Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next 
Author Message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

S. Andrew B. wrote:
Thank you Ian, this is super helpful. Am I right in assuming that you padded the gores before attaching them to the sleeve, then did the quilting stitches after they were attached? That seems the best way to make all the quilting stitching line up. I'm wanting to do the quilting stitches vertically on mine, but the way the shoulder flairs out into a circle is making my brain hurt a bit trying to figure out how I'd do that without it looking like a Spider-man costume. A normal pattern with a normal sleeve would be no problem, but I definitely like the unencumbered range of motion this pattern provides.

P.S. your finishing stitches look really good.


So i built my hand-finished one very differently from the way I built the first one. I built the first one just like the directions say to. Since having done that garment I've done a lot of sewing so I'm much more comfortable with fitting and technique now and made several modifications, both in fit and the way I put it together.

On the new one what I did was cut out all my pieces from the shell, liner, and batting first. Then I built the entire garment shell on a sewing machine. Then I laid the batting inside the shell, one section at a time (layers depended on where it was on the garment, 4 layers of batting being the highest I chose to use in any section). Then I placed the lining over the padding on that section. Then I whipped the unfinished edges of the shell down to secure the lining in place, sandwiching the padding in between and rolling the raw edge under. This was done for ever section of the garment one at a time. If you cut the batting very closely to the shape of the section it's going in it shouldn't shift much before you have a chance to quilt it, but if you're worried you can baste it in place or throw down some temporary padding stitches to keep the batting from shifting inside the garment while you do everything else. Then once all the seams were finished I quilted the whole garment at once. If I were to do it again, I would probably quilt the sleeves before attaching them because that was kind of a pain. Then I hemmed the cuffs and bottom hem, and finished the neckline. After all that was done I did the front closure lacing holes and arming point lacing holes with a heavy waxed linen thread.

______________________________________________________________

A normal armhole will be much easier to wrangle than a multi-gored grand-assiette sleeve but the mobility is worth it in my opinion, and if you plan to suspend a leg harness from the garment, I would amend that to say it is a necessity. If you don't plan to hang leg armor from your garment you may not need to worry about a grand-assiette style sleeves. If you think that is a possibility though, consider that with a conventional armhole you will have a very hard time lifting your arms above your shoulder without either trying to lift your entire arm harness at the same time (and consequently right into your groin), or even worse you just won't be able to lift them above your shoulders at all. If you plan to use an alternate method of suspending leg armor then you could get away with less mobile armholes.

This is how the original c1364 sleeve was pieced together, but Tasha's pattern is a little bit simplified. You can see where the deep inset circular armhole comes from:


My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
S. Andrew B.




Location: Sacramento, CA
Joined: 07 Jul 2015

Posts: 28

PostPosted: Wed 08 Jul, 2015 3:40 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Again, very helpful stuff. The cuffs, bottom hem, and neckline, you hemmed those all by hand right?
Also, I can't see from any of your pictures, but I noticed on the image of the original pattern that the lower sleeves are split with closures. Did you do this for yours as well, or did you close the sleeves all the way to the cuff?

see you space cowboy...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Wed 08 Jul, 2015 4:30 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

S. Andrew B. wrote:
Again, very helpful stuff. The cuffs, bottom hem, and neckline, you hemmed those all by hand right?
Also, I can't see from any of your pictures, but I noticed on the image of the original pattern that the lower sleeves are split with closures. Did you do this for yours as well, or did you close the sleeves all the way to the cuff?


Yes, all finished by hand. I didn't use any type of closure for my sleeves, they just pull on. If you want to do a closure and build this for use as an arming garment, I would recommend laces instead of buttons. Both are historical, but buttons, even compressible self-fabric buttons, can interfere with tight-fitting armor. For the front closure, you definitely want laces if you plan to suspend armor from the garment. Laces will allow you to get the very tight fit and girdling effect through the hips and waist that are necessary to achieve the proper suspension of the armor's weight from the waist and prevent weight transfer to the shoulders.

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
S. Andrew B.




Location: Sacramento, CA
Joined: 07 Jul 2015

Posts: 28

PostPosted: Thu 09 Jul, 2015 12:29 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Now I remember what else I wanted to ask! What shirt do you wear under this?
see you space cowboy...
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Thu 09 Jul, 2015 6:17 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

S. Andrew B. wrote:
Now I remember what else I wanted to ask! What shirt do you wear under this?


I wear just a plain linen shirt under it, nothing fancy.

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Dan Howard




Location: Maitland, NSW, Australia
Joined: 08 Dec 2004

Spotlight topics: 2
Posts: 3,636

PostPosted: Thu 09 Jul, 2015 7:09 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Nice job. We need to see more of these kinds of projects.
Author: Bronze Age Military Equipment, Pen and Sword Books
View user's profile Send private message
Scott Hrouda




Location: Minnesota, USA
Joined: 17 Nov 2006
Likes: 15 pages
Reading list: 87 books

Posts: 643

PostPosted: Mon 13 Jul, 2015 8:44 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Dan Howard wrote:
Nice job. We need to see more of these kinds of projects.


Very nice job indeed. Ian has the combat experience, critical eye and tailoring skills to pull off a well researched project such as this. He also seems to be a glutton for punishment! Wink

...and that, my liege, is how we know the Earth to be banana shaped. - Sir Bedevere
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,698

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 7:21 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ian S LaSpina wrote:
A normal armhole will be much easier to wrangle than a multi-gored grand-assiette sleeve but the mobility is worth it in my opinion, and if you plan to suspend a leg harness from the garment, I would amend that to say it is a necessity. If you don't plan to hang leg armor from your garment you may not need to worry about a grand-assiette style sleeves. If you think that is a possibility though, consider that with a conventional armhole you will have a very hard time lifting your arms above your shoulder without either trying to lift your entire arm harness at the same time (and consequently right into your groin), or even worse you just won't be able to lift them above your shoulders at all. If you plan to use an alternate method of suspending leg armor then you could get away with less mobile armholes.


I might take some issue with this statement, since late-medieval inset sleeves differed in some important construction details from modern ones (especially in how far the armscye cuts into the body pieces in the front and back -- not that different from the enormous holes needed for a proper grande assiette construction, in fact) and they shouldn't impair the wearer's mobility that much when properly built. Of course, the grande assiette sleeve would still have some advantage in range of motion, but that advantage seems to have become increasingly marginal with time; by the last few decades of the 15th century, many arming garments were built with inset rather than grande assiette sleeves, probably indicating that the extra cost in time and effort needed to pattern out and construct a grande assiette sleeve might no longer be universally seen as a cost-effective measure for the extra mobility it provided.

For the late14th century, though -- yes, I don't really see any other way out to the mobility problem. Grande assiette is simply the way to go.
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 8:10 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

To be more clear, my focus is specifically on the late 14th and early 15th century when it comes to my living history endeavors. I don't intend to make any statements on the tailoring of garments outside of that period. Nor do I claim any level of expertise on my period specifically. I can only offer my personal observations and experiences. I will be the first to admit I have not studied much tailoring outside of my area of focus.

That being said, examining the artwork from this period where shoulder seams are plainly visible the majority of gowns and doublets that aren't obviously of the grand assiette style have their sleeve set just at the point of the shoulder. Some feature a more rounded 'swoop' into the chest and back, but nothing so extreme as a grand assiette. That would definitely aid in mobility, but it has its limitations. I don't doubt that counter examples exist, but the examples I've attached seem to be representative of what's most 'typical.' Variations like underarm gores and gussets for shaping (like in the Herjolfsnes G-63) are also common, but still don't have the same full effect of the de Blois. Having sewn all of those variations, they all offer varying degrees of mobility, but for hanging a leg harness, nothing competes with the grand assiette. It's the only variant that I can definitively state has no effect on the bottom hem of the garment throughout the shoulder's entire range of motion. If you use a discrete arming girdle and the doublet won't be supporting your legs, then I believe any of the above variations would work fine, with increasing levels of comfort the more the armhole gets bigger and more deeply inset.



 Attachment: 31.8 KB
chess.jpg


 Attachment: 36.45 KB
gown.jpg


 Attachment: 22.94 KB
hunstman.jpg


 Attachment: 21.4 KB
raised arm.jpg


My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Mart Shearer




Location: Jackson, MS, USA
Joined: 18 Aug 2012

Posts: 1,302

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 10:19 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ian S LaSpina wrote:
Having sewn all of those variations, they all offer varying degrees of mobility, but for hanging a leg harness, nothing competes with the grand assiette. It's the only variant that I can definitively state has no effect on the bottom hem of the garment throughout the shoulder's entire range of motion. If you use a discrete arming girdle and the doublet won't be supporting your legs, then I believe any of the above variations would work fine, with increasing levels of comfort the more the armhole gets bigger and more deeply inset.


Quite interesting. Are there any references to the use of a lendeniere to hold up the legs after the introduction of the grand assiette? Perhaps the fashion is dictated by the change in leg harness and suspension. Is the weight of plate cuisses vs. gartered mail chausses really so great as to warrant a change in the method of suspension?

ferrum ferro acuitur et homo exacuit faciem amici sui
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 10:43 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Mart Shearer wrote:

Quite interesting. Are there any references to the use of a lendeniere to hold up the legs after the introduction of the grand assiette? Perhaps the fashion is dictated by the change in leg harness and suspension. Is the weight of plate cuisses vs. gartered mail chausses really so great as to warrant a change in the method of suspension?




Mart, I actually utilize both methods in La Belle. But because we have not found any direct documentation for a discrete girdle used for leg suspension, we consider the girdle to be speculative. There is some indirect evidence that I don't have at my finger tips that may imply a discrete suspension for legs because no arming points or any other means of support is visible on an otherwise visible arming garment. The weight difference between modern high-end reproduction plate cuisses and the standard Indian mail chausses is not that different, but I have no data on originals and their comparative weights.

As far as modern practice goes, both a discrete girdle and arming doublet are very comfortable for wear over long periods of time. The girdle is a lot easier to make and get right. The doublet requires pretty careful tailoring to ensure all the weight ends up where it should be and that you retain full freedom of motion of the arms without affecting the leg harness.

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,698

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 11:26 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Yes, all the counterexamples I have a from much later in the second half of the 15th century -- well outside your period, and even then the best cuts of the inset sleeve are still marginally less good than the grande assiette at isolating the movements of the arm from those of the body. On the other hand, it's possible to argue that the difference between the two eventually grew small enough over time that the inset sleeve's advantage in ease of construction eventually outweighed the grande assiette's lingering advantage in mobility, especially in the case of hybrid constructions (not quite grande assiette but not quite inset sleeves either) like some of the illustrations in the 1459 Talhoffer.

It still doesn't weaken your thesis that grande assiette seems to be pretty much the only way to get enough range of motion for an effective arming garment in the cotehardie and houppelande eras. I was just pointing out that the generalisations that hold for these eras do not necessarily carry over into the late 15th century when the inset sleeve began to dominate once more.
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,698

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 11:37 am    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Ian S LaSpina wrote:
As far as modern practice goes, both a discrete girdle and arming doublet are very comfortable for wear over long periods of time. The girdle is a lot easier to make and get right. The doublet requires pretty careful tailoring to ensure all the weight ends up where it should be and that you retain full freedom of motion of the arms without affecting the leg harness.


Do you have any pictures of your (or your group's) interpretation of the "arming girdle" thing, then? Does it look essentially like the bottom half of a doublet or something else entirely? For a garment with so little hard historical evidence to guide us about the specific details of its shape and construction, it'd certainly be interesting to see the diversity of interpretations that different groups and different people have come up with.
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 12:37 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:
...On the other hand, it's possible to argue that the difference between the two eventually grew small enough over time that the inset sleeve's advantage in ease of construction eventually outweighed the grande assiette's lingering advantage in mobility...


I suspect that's a really good possibility.

Lafayette C Curtis wrote:

Do you have any pictures of your (or your group's) interpretation of the "arming girdle" thing, then? Does it look essentially like the bottom half of a doublet or something else entirely? For a garment with so little hard historical evidence to guide us about the specific details of its shape and construction, it'd certainly be interesting to see the diversity of interpretations that different groups and different people have come up with.


Yes.

A couple important details; The first is the overall shape. When laid out flat, it is a gently curving U. The upper and lower edges are curved with the upper edge being shorter than the lower edge. When worn it forms a conical surface with the top chopped off. The advantage is that the upper edge's circumference is smaller than the widest point of the hips, locking the girdle in the vertical axis so that it cannot ride down or slip over time as would happen with a simple rectangular shaped belt.

The second part is I chose to make mine out of leather. I think leather offers one distinct advantage over fabric in this case. The leather has a bit of stretch to it. The upper edge is reinforced specifically to prevent stretch, ensuring that the upper edge's circumference remains fixed and prevents slippage. But the remainder of the girdle has the natural stretch of leather which when buckled tight aids in the material's tendency to *grip* the hips and create friction.

You could just as easily make this as you describe, basically the lower 1/3 of a doublet, quilted and padded in the usual way. I have not yet experimented with making a quilted fabric version so I cannot comment on how one would perform versus the other, but so far I've had no problems with the leather version.

Regardless of what you choose to make it out of, the nice thing about it is that it's soft and supple, not stiff like a thick leather belt. This means it never cuts in to you after 8 hrs in harness, and it's completely flexible with your body movements so it never inhibits normal movements, or things like sitting down. It also fits comfortably under your arming double and doesn't add any bulk because it is so thin.

The other nice thing about a discrete arming girdle like this, is that if you were to wear a mail skirt instead of a full haubergeon, this makes for a great surface to whip-stitch your skirt to and it will not affect it's primary function of supporting your legs. I don't wear a backplate with my kit, so I wear a full haubergeon, but if I did wear a full cuirass I would wear paunces (skirt of mail) and sleeves instead of a haubergeon and attach the mail to the 'girdle.'

**Just a note, the second photo is old, and the arming points have since been moved to the inside of the girdle in keeping with a more appropriate medieval leatherwork aesthetic**

I configured mine to buckle in the back:


And here it is being worn I've sinced move the arming points to the *inside* of the garment as you can see in the top photo, but this photo was taken when I first prototyped it.



My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Lafayette C Curtis




Location: Indonesia
Joined: 29 Nov 2006
Reading list: 7 books

Posts: 2,698

PostPosted: Thu 23 Jul, 2015 1:55 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Thanks for the example. I once sketched and patterned out a design for a (quilted) suspension girdle that looks rather like the unholy bastard of a doublet cut off at the waist and a modern garter belt (for women's hosiery) but never really got around to making it since I don't currently have any leg armour that needs the suspension. Of course that also means I have absolutely no idea about whether it's going to work or not!
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Tue 15 Sep, 2015 1:11 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Just as an update to this, based on the specific mid 14th century sources that mention a lendener, I went ahead an made a textile version. This is what it looks like, and thus far it works very well. I will have the opportunity in a few weeks to test it for 3 days in harness to get a more realistic feel for how it works.

It's heavy linen on the outside, a medium linen as a lining, and then stuffed with 5 layers of batting, and then quilted. The arming points and closure are just hand-sewn eyelets of heavy waxed linen thread.


My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Tomas B




Location: Ireland, Wales, Canada...I'm transient
Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Reading list: 3 books

Posts: 84

PostPosted: Tue 15 Sep, 2015 1:32 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Do you know specifically what weight linen you used for these garments (oz/yard is how I think it's measured)? I live in a land with very poor linen supply so I will need to order online and I'd like to avoid mistakes.

Tomas
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Tue 15 Sep, 2015 1:39 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Tomas B wrote:
Do you know specifically what weight linen you used for these garments (oz/yard is how I think it's measured)? I live in a land with very poor linen supply so I will need to order online and I'd like to avoid mistakes.

Tomas


For both the doublet and the lendener, the shell is constructed from 8 oz linen, and the lining from 5.3 oz. You can certainly go to a full canvas weight on the shell if you wanted to make them really strong, but I didn't find it necessary. I wouldn't go lighter than 8 oz though.

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message
Tomas B




Location: Ireland, Wales, Canada...I'm transient
Joined: 02 Mar 2007
Reading list: 3 books

Posts: 84

PostPosted: Tue 15 Sep, 2015 1:57 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Brilliant! That is exactly the details I was hoping for.
Does cotton batting come in a standard thickness? I just realized that I've only used it once and I can't remember if there are options.

Thanks,

Tomas
View user's profile Send private message
Ian S LaSpina




Location: Virginia, US
Joined: 01 Jun 2010
Reading list: 5 books

Spotlight topics: 1
Posts: 301

PostPosted: Tue 15 Sep, 2015 2:24 pm    Post subject:         Reply with quote

Tomas B wrote:
Brilliant! That is exactly the details I was hoping for.
Does cotton batting come in a standard thickness?
Tomas


That I do not know. The only sizes I ever see listed are in reference to the 'bed size' it's intended for, but I've never seen anything listing thicknesses. I've always used the 'Warm and Natural' brand for anything I've needed to pad out with batting.

My YouTube Channel - Knyght Errant
My Pinterest
"Monsters are dangerous, and just now Kings are dying like flies..."
View user's profile Send private message


Display posts from previous:   
Forum Index > Off-topic Talk > Charles de Blois Pourpoint, a sewing projectDIY Project
Page 2 of 3 Reply to topic
Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next All times are GMT - 8 Hours

View previous topic :: View next topic
Jump to:  
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