Construct and fabric question

[Ivan Henry aka Moose]

From 1699 this self portrait of Francois Desportes features one of my favorite outfits I've seen - his waistcoat is amazing - IMO. I have an interest in reproducing this outfit at some point in the future. My question is this. His waistcoat and breeches look to be shiny. What material would these have been? Are they wool or linen and the painting is just stylized by Francois or would they be of some other material? Also, what is that around his waist? Is it a leather sword belt with no sword, or is it a fabric belt? I appreciate the expertise here and thank you for your thoughts in advance!

[michaelsbagley]

From 1699 this self portrait of Francois Desportes features one of my favorite outfits I've seen - his waistcoat is amazing - IMO. I have an interest in reproducing this outfit at some point in the future. My question is this. His waistcoat and breeches look to be shiny. What material would these have been? Are they wool or linen and the painting is just stylized by Francois or would they be of some other material? Also, what is that around his waist? Is it a leather sword belt with no sword, or is it a fabric belt? I appreciate the expertise here and thank you for your thoughts in advance!

3

A favourite of mine as well!

My guess, the coat is wool, the waistcoat is probably silk, perhaps even silk velvet? I would guess the same for the breeches.

Around his waist would be a sword belt (for his hunting sword/knife), my guess would be that it is leather, although leather backed fabric was used in the period as well

Hope this has helped.

[Capt. Sterling]

I think I would agree with Mickey... but you would be safe making the coat wool, lined with silk and silk velvet for the waistcoat and breeches...

[Mission]

What's his hare made of?

Look how long his breeches are when he's sitting down. (I'm jealous.) Is that a higher class style, an affect for the painting or did most people do that? They would have run down mid-calf when he stood up.

[michaelsbagley]

What's his hare made of?

Look how long his breeches are when he's sitting down. (I'm jealous.) Is that a higher class style, an affect for the painting or did most people do that? They would have run down mid-calf when he stood up.

Actually Mission, the opposite is true... The breeches I have made you int he past are the later style (more fitted and shorter), whereas the earlier one goes, the fuller and generally longer the breeches get. If memory serves me well, this painting is dated to 1699(?).

I do not believe the length of breeches is indicative of class... But that is an opinion made from my general observations, and I should probably look into that and put some quantitative evidence to that observation some day.

[Capt. Sterling]

Casn't say that I have ever come across anything indicating that length of breeches was relevant to class distinction... although common sense could easily say that upper class could afford to have clothing custom cut/tailored for a better fit and the lower classes may have been dealing more with hand me downs and second hand shops to purchase their clothing...

Actually I would love to see your evidence for skin tight breeches for our time frame as most of what I have seen seems to show that doesn't come in until later along with the very full, baggy seats in order to accommodate the skin tight legs...

and actually Mission, in order to keep your breeches from riding up over your knees when you sit, you don't need to have them down along your calf, the addition of one simple inch can make all the difference...tis all a matter of measurement and fit... which is hard for a new tailor to do, especially if the body isn't around to measure...

Edited May 14, 2009 by Capt. Sterling

[Mission]

and actually Mission, in order to keep your breeches from riding up over your knees when you sit, you don't need to have them down along your calf, the addition of one simple inch can make all the difference...tis all a matter of measurement and fit... which is hard for a new tailor to do, especially if the body isn't around to measure...

I am not complaining about Michael's tailoring. He did not have me there to measure and I only gave him the simplest of dimensions. He did a sparkling job and I particularly like the second pair.

What I really want to wear long pants which I don't believe would be period correct for a barber/surgeon in the 1720s tropics. (Well...what I really want is to wear a light tropical double-breasted suit. I like the way I look in a double-breasted suit. But that's another discussion entirely...)

[Capt. Sterling]

.tis all a matter of measurement and fit... which is hard for a new tailor to do, especially if the body isn't around to measure...

hmmm thought I said that....

[Mission]

And I agreed and verified that this was the case. Michael has done a lot of research on behalf of my costume and I appreciate that. (I just want to rewrite history so I think I look cool.) As Kate said this weekend, "Hon, you picked the wrong period to re-enact."

Could we move it to the 1960s?

[michaelsbagley]

Actually I would love to see your evidence for skin tight breeches for our time frame as most of what I have seen seems to show that doesn't come in until later along with the very full, baggy seats in order to accommodate the skin tight legs...

Skin tight? I said fitted, not skin tight... If any of my breeches have come out skin tight, it was a case of not having the body to measure to. But going back through my mind I can find no "skin tight" breeches I cna recall making. I have mostly used the RH "Late Period" (1730s) breeches... Which I believe Kass based that pattern on a 1730s suit (from the Cut of Men's clothes?) Considering the patterns we have available, whether commercial (i.e. RH) or going from the "Cut of Men's clothes" leaves us the option of basing breeches patterns on either a 1680s or a 1730s set of breeches, I don't think any of us are doing it "right". If anyone has a solid pattern for circa 1700 to 1710 I would love to see it, and if possible get a copy of it, and that would likely inspire me to not use either the RH or the patterns from "The Cut oF Men's Clothes" patterns again.

That said, I find going either to the 1680s or 1730s pattern both valid, it is a case (in my opinion) of choosing your evil, going 10 to 20 years late or early (for those aiming for the 1700 to 17-teens era stuff.

and actually Mission, in order to keep your breeches from riding up over your knees when you sit, you don't need to have them down along your calf, the addition of one simple inch can make all the difference...tis all a matter of measurement and fit... which is hard for a new tailor to do, especially if the body isn't around to measure...

New tailor? Me? While at three years into clothing for this era hardly makes me an "old salt" I do think it does put me a tad beyond the "new" stage... especially if one considers the previous 6 or 7 years with early medieval stuff I did prior to my leap into GAoP.

[Capt. Sterling]

I said skin tight, never said that you said it...

and I agree to the validity of using Waugh's patterns since nothing else has come up as of yet.

and 6-7 years... Mickey ye are a new tailor... at least by my standards, but I don't find that any cause to take offense...as none was given..

[michaelsbagley]

I said skin tight, never said that you said it...

and I agree to the validity of using Waugh's patterns since nothing else has come up as of yet.

and 6-7 years... Mickey ye are a new tailor... at least by my standards, but I don't find that any cause to take offense...as none was given..

No offence was taken... I kind of guessed that was where you were coming from....

Sorry about the confusion over the "skin tight" thing, it just seemed to come out of left field, and I wasn't sure where you were headed with that.

Although I do think I have to correct myself, I think one of the Waugh breeches patterns were dated to the 1690s, so the options are pretty much 1690s or 1730s... either way, that annoying gap exists in the 17teens where I know many of us would prefer to base our portrayals.

[Capt. Sterling]

Isn't there a pattern with the 1720s coat as well for breeches? Sorry not home at the moment to check myself, but then neither are you...

Any way, the problem with fit is that, even though we do have some original garments to make patterns off of, other than artwork or a passing comment from the time frame and then we can only guess as to how accurate that is, we really have no way to properly judge the fit... as we have no idea of the how the original garment fit the original wearer...

[michaelsbagley]

While I only have copies of a few of the key pages from the book and not the whole book... The below is the earliest 18th century breeches pattern I could find in my collection, and I have it labelled as 1730s...

[LadyBarbossa]

I'll back up Michael and Sterling here with that painting and safely say that the waistcoat and breeches are silk velvet while the coat is wool. What kind of wool is the tough question. For all we know could be worsted wool or wolsey lindsay... or some other type of wool. But, it is wool.

Oh, and look at the item below the knee? Be those leather gaitors? Hmmm... much like perhaps those type shown in the other thread about shoes... we see the buttons down the side.

I've seen a few Rev War reenactors add a couple extra inches to the part around the knee to where it's form fitted about the knee; the person standing up, it's bunched up like slouch socks but when seated... there be plenty of fabric for the knee to bend with ease and no ride up. It works.

Mooseworth... I wish you luck with this project. It's a fine outfit indeed. :)

~Lady B

[gunner Gordon]

While I only have copies of a few of the key pages from the book and not the whole book... The below is the earliest 18th century breeches pattern I could find in my collection, and I have it labelled as 1730s...

believe the pattern you have is from the book 'The cut of men's clothes 1600-1900" by Norah Waugh from Routledge theatre arts books new york. An excellent book of patterns and construction methods. another good book is the "18th century clothing at Williams burg by Linda Baumgarten.

[Ivan Henry aka Moose]

I'll back up Michael and Sterling here with that painting and safely say that the waistcoat and breeches are silk velvet while the coat is wool. What kind of wool is the tough question. For all we know could be worsted wool or wolsey lindsay... or some other type of wool. But, it is wool.

Oh, and look at the item below the knee? Be those leather gaitors? Hmmm... much like perhaps those type shown in the other thread about shoes... we see the buttons down the side.

I've seen a few Rev War reenactors add a couple extra inches to the part around the knee to where it's form fitted about the knee; the person standing up, it's bunched up like slouch socks but when seated... there be plenty of fabric for the knee to bend with ease and no ride up. It works.

Mooseworth... I wish you luck with this project. It's a fine outfit indeed. :)

~Lady B

Thanks! I just sourced fabric and had a long discussion with someone I may use to make it - (I don't sew very well nor have much desire). I think I'll skip the gators and go with a less "hunting outfit" approach. I am pretty sure that's a pocket on the breeches, so I am going to go with one on each thigh.

Question or educated opinions please - Francis Desportes looks to be well off. So, what is the popular opinion here on his waistcoat? Do you believe it would have been short in the back and from some other material which as i understand it, was the way of the better off gentleman, or do you believe it to be matching fabric and length like a upper middleclass man?

[michaelsbagley]

Thanks! I just sourced fabric and had a long discussion with someone I may use to make it - (I don't sew very well nor have much desire). I think I'll skip the gators and go with a less "hunting outfit" approach. I am pretty sure that's a pocket on the breeches, so I am going to go with one on each thigh.

Question or educated opinions please - Francis Desportes looks to be well off. So, what is the popular opinion here on his waistcoat? Do you believe it would have been short in the back and from some other material which as i understand it, was the way of the better off gentleman, or do you believe it to be matching fabric and length like a upper middleclass man?

Every waistcoat I have seen of the period (whether archeological sketch or photo of extent museum garment or period artwork) shows waistcoats to be long all the way around. The short backs is a very later thing, perhaps not even until the 19th century (?).

That said, while I do not know of any evidence first hand, I have heard from people I tend to trust on the subject that sometimes inferior fabrics were used on the backside of a waistcoat, to save money.... I've never thought to make one this way, well at least until I had researched the matter more myself or seen some evidence to support that practise

Cheers