kass

Precisely, Chole! I was once in a medieval group with very lax standards. You could really wear anything you wanted. But I told people, "Don't wear your neon orange and white Nikes with the flashy thing in the heel! Wear black shoes. Everyone has a pair of black shoes, right?" They're nondescript and people won't notice them. This is not appropriate for reenactment, of course, but for kids? Sure! When my apprentices started reenacting, the first thing they did was make stays. They could borrow everything else from me (except shoes). Neither one is my size in either height or weight. But period women's clothing is so adjustable (see thread on pregnancy...) that little skinny Alli and little shorty Liz can both wear my kit. For shoes, at first they bought shoes at Payless with "the right jib". For girls, it's easy. I can walk into Payless and identify shoes that look right for 16th century Germany, 18th century America, and 17th century France right now. The styles just keep coming back... I have found that people are incredible intimidated by stays. They think they're difficult to make (yes, they are very time-consuming and it's hard for a beginning to get a perfect fit) or they are expensive to buy (see above -- we have to charge what it costs to make them). And then there are the people who have worn cheaply-made stays or bad Ren Faire bodice and assume stays are horrible and uncomfortable and tight and you can't breathe in them... (...and all that shit you learn in the movies...). But they aren't. And they are essential to the fit of women's clothing. And NOT just the upper classes. ALL women wore stays. Even the poor. Even prostitutes. And now I've gone completely off topic in Plunder where I don't belong. Forgive me folks... Later -- when they decided they were going to do events a lot -- they ordered period shoes.

Well said, Wages!

You're very welcome, Salty. This is one of those times where logic is actually backed up by the evidence.

And these are the choices we make. I wear glasses. And my contact lens prescription is out of date. So at the event this weekend, I will take my glasses off before the public arrives and put them back on when they leave, and deal with it in between. Actually, I'm not this much of a 'nazi'. I just think I look really dumb in glasses!

Hi Salty, For the most part, we believe that they made clothes that adjusted. There are a few extant pregnancy gowns in museums, but they can also be laced closed and worn when not pregnant. The frequency with which women were pregnant (or nursing) and the weight fluctuations that involves dictates that women need clothing that will adjust. And that's what we see in pictures and surviving clothing. Kass

I agree, Lady B. Especially if the newbies have borrowed their clothing from members of the group! It should be correct if the current members are wearing it. And you really have to go easy on newbies and encourage them. I loan out a lot of clothes so people can go to their first events. I don't think any of my apprentices actually have full outfits of their own. They're always borrowing something of mine! I really think that the people who criticise other people's historical accuracy have some kind of inadequacy problem. It's one thing to say to a guy who's been around for 5 years and isn't trying to replace his cowboy boots with period shoes yet that he needs to upgrade. It's another thing to tell someone at their first event that they're wrong. All the groups I've ever been in were "self-policing". That doesn't mean there was someone in the group who told you if your kit was right or wrong. That means that everyone monitors themselves and we've all agreed to be as historically accurate as we're comfortable with. But we might ask you to take off your glasses when the public arrive...

"No evidence against isn't proof for." Also: "Do not make the rare common and the common rare." Those are Kass's Rules of Research #9 and #1, respectively. Good Research Techniques I have every respect and admiration of your profession, Bonnie! But history is my profession and statements like "it's possible" get you in trouble in my line of work. Tattoo if you like it. But let's not say that GAoP sailors got tattoos without proof that they did.

Hey MacStink! Have you done a search here for "tattoo"? I dimly recall a discussion long ago in which Foxe gave some fairly compelling evidence against. I cannot remember if it was definitive in any way, and honestly I don't even remember if it was on this forum. But use that search function and see if something comes up. Kass

It looks excellent to me, Salty!

Truth! I have it on good authority that in another life, he was a beserker!

Flatterer...

Moved to PLUNDER by moderator. Neither. Not in shape nor style. They are both fantasy, made-up coats with quasi-historical elements. I hope you find one you really like.

Well then you have us all beat, Bess, because you look comfy AND sexy!

Bess, you look delightful!

Hee hee hee! Way to go, Jack!!! I have often said that linen shirts are the "gateway drug" of historical clothing. Once you get someone into one, they never want anything else!

But that's an excellent example, William! "People today" might take that as documentation of what men carried into battle in that time period. Historians, however, will not. There has been ample study on the phenomenon of people "dressing up" for portraits -- even before the advent of photography -- and the wild forms that it sometimes takes. Every book on period photographs (and portraits, painted or photographic) has dedicated whole chapters to the subject. The simple truth is that a studio photograph of a Civil War solider is only documentation of what he wore in the studio that day. That's it.

No. In fact I just sent you a question to your site (snicker) No rest for the wicked!

There's a beginning of such a list here, Kenneth. I don't know how well it's being updated though.

Let me begin by saying that I am no firearms historian. William, I am of the same mind as you. Those things are heavy! However, I am not a pirate. Or a sailor. Or anyone who carries a gun for a living. Or a person who lived in that time period. (This last point is the most important and the thing we are most often in danger of forgetting). From my research in other areas, I know that they did a lot of things that don't make sense to us as modern people, even those of us in similar modern professions. That being said, no proof is no proof. So here's some proof by people more knowledgeable than I: A discussion on the PB forums started by Bloody Davy Cash of the Pirate Brethren who's looked into the subject extensively. An article on the methods of carrying weapons by our own Blackjohn.

THAT's cute!

No! I mean they sit around and complain about themselves! They just make themselves miserable... I, for one, hate when people talk to me at events about what we should be wearing. Alas it is a hazzard of my profession... But can a girl get a day off?

I've been in a lot of reenactment groups and seen many more. Never saw any that were 100%. And frankly the ones that are in the 90s across the board are boring as all get out. All they do is sit around and complain about that other 10%.

Hey, you know I'm a terrible procrastinator! I just don't mark them until I'm about to pick up the needle. And the BEST buttonholes are done on the way to the event!

Oh not again... Okay. Once more... Greg is the big guy on the left. I'm the one in the middle... Just joshing ya, Silkie!

There's another kind of fabric marker that doesn't even need water. It's "air soluble" and it disappears in about 24-48 hours after marking. It's purple (the water soluble ones are typically blue). These are especially useful if you're stitching with or on fibres that might alter with water (like some silks). Bit of trivia that has nothing to do with the GAoP -- in ancient Japan, there was a derivitive of indigo used for the same purpose. It was so light sensitive that exposing it to sunlight made it fade. So it was used to mark clothing for embroidery or other types of embellishment. Who says modern technology improves everything? Sometimes modern technology just replicates ancient technology with new materials!