Rose wrote:
>Hi Vittoria!  Didn't you tell me you'd be at
>Investiture?  I can pack along the Milanese Tailor's
>Album and QEWU for you to look at.

Hi Rose!  Yes, I'll be there :-)  I'd love to see the books, thanks!  As it
happens, I'm making this dress to *wear* to Investiture...Hopefully I can
finish it in time :-)

>I've also got the menu pages from Neopolitan Cuisine
>for you.

Yay!! Thank you! :-)

Vittoria

I am behaving, I am behaving, I am behaving.... <g>

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., "Amy L. Hornburg Heilveil" <aheilvei@u...>
wrote:
> At 06:27 PM 11/1/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>
> >I am behaving, I am behaving, I am behaving.... <g>
>
> why?

Largely because I am the middle of packing to move, and don't need
more books to pack just now.  <sigh>

Rowen

"There is no such thing as too many books.  Too few bookcases,
however, can be a problem."

Largely because I am the middle of packing to move, and don't need
more books to pack just now.  <sigh>

Hmm, you know, now that I'm thinking about it, Roseline d'Anjou is
pretty well versed in late period Italian costuming, and she runs a
sewing open house in Oakland (somewhere near Bart practice) on
Thursday nights.  If you're interested, I can dig up her contact info
for you.

Rose

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., Ariane Helou <ahelou@u...> wrote:
> Rose wrote:
> >Hi Vittoria!  Didn't you tell me you'd be at
> >Investiture?  I can pack along the Milanese Tailor's
> >Album and QEWU for you to look at.
>
> Hi Rose!  Yes, I'll be there :-)  I'd love to see the books, thanks!
As it
> happens, I'm making this dress to *wear* to Investiture...Hopefully
I can
> finish it in time :-)
>
> >I've also got the menu pages from Neopolitan Cuisine
> >for you.
>
> Yay!! Thank you! :-)
>
> Vittoria

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., "Amy L. Hornburg Heilveil" <aheilvei@u...>
wrote:
> Hairstyles are cool.  Cauls take two seconds.

Oh to be ambidextrous and have eyes in the back of my head. Or just
have a proper lady in waiting to produce non-lopsided coiffures for
me.....

Jehanne

Our cuisiniere is getting restless. If you are attending 100 Minutes
War on Saturday, November 10, PLEASE get your feast reservations in
right away. 100 Minutes War is combined with King's & Queen's Rapier
Champions this year so the feast WILL sell out.

Event details appear in this month's "Pikestaff" or at
http://www.eastkingdom.org/event-detail.html?eid=301

Jehanne de Wodeford, Rusted Woodlands

On Thu, 1 Nov 2001 wodeford@... wrote:

> Oh to be ambidextrous and have eyes in the back of my head. Or just
> have a proper lady in waiting to produce non-lopsided coiffures for
> me.....

Wouldn't your hair cover up those extra eyes?

Can't disagree with the ambidextrous or the lady in waiting part,
though...

Alianor

Sarah Michele Ford
/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
aka Alianor of Ravenglass
aka the Dark Melm of Sith
---------------------------
sarah@...
\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

Hello,

Just to add my two cents in...

Depending on how authentic you want to be becareful of sumptuary laws.
Depending on the time frame and the part of Italy there were laws against
wearing fake hair.

Lady Thyre of Andovere
(Hats and hair are my "thing")

On Wed, 31 Oct 2001 19:33:41 -0600, Authentic_SCA@yahoogroups.com wrote:

>  At 10:54 PM 10/30/01 +0000, you wrote:
>
>  >Well, here's another late-period lady in search of suggestions,
>  >rather than offering them.  I am certain I don't have the millinery
>  >skill to make the kind of hat I'd like to wear, and I haven't seen
>  >any I liked for sale.  But neither do I have hair long enough to do
>  >much with...it's just past shoulder length, which means it's not so
>  >short that I have to hide it but it's not long enough to do anything
>  >cool with.
>
>
>  Fake hair, ie, fake braids, falls, etc, will give you the ability to do
any
>  number of cool braided hair styles.
>
>  Brigit Olesdottir
>  (and really, the reason I keep my hair almost waist length isn't JUST
>  because its period)
>
>


--Lady Thyre of Andovere





_______________________________________________________
Send a cool gift with your E-Card
http://www.bluemountain.com/giftcenter/

At 08:29 AM 11/1/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>At 07:30 PM 10/31/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>>I do empathize on the hat thing though.. there are periods where I love the
>>clothes, but won't wear them because I hate the hats!  (German comes to mind)
>
>Oh, but I LOOOOOOVVVVVVVEEEEEEEEE the Germans, particularly for their
>hats!  I'm trying to figure out how to make this one in particular with
>the ostrich feathers going straight up from the center and they're really
>tall and the hat is beautiful and..... and..... and....... can you tell I
>love the Germans and their hats?
>
>Despina de la has to make something new soon.......

Actually, a fellow from Ealdormere named Tempus Perigrinator (sp?) has done
one of those successfully.  You might want to check with him...

http://www.pipcom.com/~tempus/  It looks like he's having problems with his
site right now but you could email him.

Cheers,
Gwendoline

At 09:35 AM 11/1/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>At 10:37 PM 10/31/2001 -0600, you wrote:
>>Yup.  Smock, kirtle, gown.  I've never seen any women's outfits from middle
>>ages through the Renaissance that didn't have a smock next to the skin.
>
>Thanks Gwen *grin*  I already told her that part.  The difficult part is,
>what type of smock and kirtle, similar to the English, with fairly tight,
>long sleeves in the smock or a short sleeved smock?  Basic tank-style,
>no-sleeve kirtle or kirtle with short sleeves?  She has the gown down
>pretty well.  She had been putting lacing up the front of her smocks but I
>*really* don't think that's correct.  I think she ought to be using a more
>fitted smock that one has to wiggle into......particularly as she is well
>endowed.  More thoughts?
>
>Smiles,
>Despina

Ah you want one that is basically a t-tunic (proper, period construction)
shape that has straight, fitted sleeves and reasonably snug.  You want it
long sleeved too.  I've never seen lacing up the front of smock in period
so, no I don't think that is correct either.

The smock isn't meant to be seen at that point.  Also, the puffy sleeves
seem to have moved out of southern Europe in the very late 15th or early
16th century.

Cheers,
Gwendoline

At 03:32 PM 11/1/2001 +0000, you wrote:
>--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., Danielle Nunn-Weinberg <dannw@m...> wrote:
> >  Keep in mind that in Elizabethan thinking,
> > sleeves were what you used to "mix & match."  There are paintings
>with
> > closed skirts and sleeves that contrast the gown.  Besides, sleeves
>are a good way to show of expensive fabric without the expense of a
>full gown (similar concept to the forepart).
> >
>
>I've uploaded a picture of a piece of crewel-work fabric I bought
>recently.  I think it should be about enough for a pair of sleeves -
>reasonable, or too gaudy?  (I haven't actually seen the piece yet, but
>I gather the color in the picture isn't quite right, so it may be hard
>to tell.)
>
>Rowen

Oooooo!  I'm so jealous!  Sleeves, definitely sleeves!  You MUST!  : )

Cheers,
Gwendoline

At 09:45 AM 11/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Gwendoline wrote:
> >Ah.  : )  In England, Spain, and France in the latter 16th c. things are
> >mostly constructed in the same fashion.  <snip>  Do you see what
> >I'm getting at?
>
>Yes!  Makes a lot of sense :-)

I'm glad I'm making sense, I feel like school ate my brain.

> >Most of that stuff can be learned from observation and
> >reading accounts from the time period.  Your layers would be: smock,
> >corset, farthingale, shirt (if a second/high necked one is worn - partlets
> >were a lot less common than the average re-enactor thinks...), petticoat
> >(sometimes one was worn under the farthingale in cold weather), kirtle,
> >gown, ropa (if worn).  Now there is some flexibility in this order, and it
> >depends if you are wearing a gown over the kirtle or a double over your
> >kirtle instead of a gown, etc...  I think you get the idea.
>
>Yes, I get it.  But I don't have a kirtle, and won't for a while.  I hope
>it won't look too funny to go without it - the gown, thus, would go
>directly over the corset, petticoat, and farthingale.

Hmm, you get away with it, but if your "hoops" show through the skirt, you
might want to whip up a petticoat.

> >Does that make any sense?
>
>Yes, it does, thanks!

I'm glad, and you're welcome.

> >since the Tudors and Elizabeth weren't monarchs in Italy they wouldn't
> >be Elizabethans - that is specific to the latter half of the 16th c. in
> >England.  You would just call it 16th c. Italian.
>
>OK :-)  I do usually do that, but recently I've just gotten lazy and refer
>to it as Elizabethan; it seems that people are more likely to recognize
>what sort of a costume it is when they have a more familiar name attached
>to it.  Whatever.

That makes sense, I've got "be precise" on the brain from school...  : )

> > >maybe the
> > >ropes will un-twist on their own and I won't have to worry about it?
> > ><keeping fingers crossed>
> >
> >Hmm, have you tried hanging it over night or kind of trying to roll it in
> >the casing?   Either might help.
>
>I tried rolling it, and that seems to work ok.  I don't think I have any
>place to hang it...it doesn't fit in the garb closet at any rate.  The
>blasted thing is so heavy that i need two or three hangers to support it.

Hm.  I can't wait to see pictures.

> >Hmm... Off the top of my head I haven't seen different bodices with one
> >possible exception but I believe that one is a jacket (as well as a whole
> >other story...)
>
>Well, here's one example that shows a bodice different from the
>skirt...then again, the bodice and sleeves match.
>http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/Concerto1565.JPG

True but the Italians were strange. : )  It seems that all bets were off
with them, particularly the Venetians.

> >Anyway, when and where is this from again?  Is it possible
> >to use the brocade for sleeves/undersleeves?
>
>Yes, that would be possible, I think there's enough for either.  How
>exactly would undersleeves work?  Would I make a fitted sleeve out of the
>brocade, and then a poof of the blue fabric on top of it?  Something like
>this, maybe...is that the right idea?
>http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/SofonisbaDouble2.JPG
>I have no idea how to construct it (might have a pattern for it, I'd have
>to check).  But I think that might look really cool :-)

Well, foresleeves are the wide under sleeves you see in Tudor
portraits.  Undersleeves would be the ones attached/laced to your kirtle
and showing either through a hanging sleeve or the rest of the arm as
different from the short puffy ones.  LIke the white sleeves in:
http://sunsite.dk/cgfa/c/p-clouet2.htm  The sleeves in the above portrait
would probably be constructed more like:
http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/Coccina1571.JPG you can
clearly see the break/seam separating the lower part of the sleeve from the
puffy top.  Kirtles don't alwasy have to have sleeves worn, especially if
the gown has full sleeves.

Cheers,
Gwendoline

At 10:04 AM 11/1/2001 -0800, you wrote:
>Carolle wrote:
> >On Bella's site, Carpaccio's "Two Venetian Courtesans" features a lady with
> >different (but coordinating) sleeves - bodice appears to match the skirt
> >from the print i have.
> >The Infamous "Lady in Green" has a black bodice, green (really full, fluffy)
> >green and white uper sleeves, and black, multi-slashed lower sleeves.
> >I have a copy of a painting called "lucrezia" where it looks like she's used
> >a reddish fabric for bodice and lower sleeves, and a tawny one for upper
> >sleeves and skirt.
> >raphaaci has one called "gravida" where her bodice is tan, trimmed in black,
> >and sleeves red.
> >www.artunframed.com/images/artmis7/empoli99.jpg  nobodies' sleeves match
> >their dress!
>
>Good point!  I like the dresses in that picture a lot :-)  On the other
>hand, I think this painting might fall into the Biblical/Allegorical
>category (it's titled "Susanna and the Elders"), so I don't know if these
>are necessarily everyday clothes they're wearing...

Allegory is always an important point to keep in mind.  However, there are
other examples of the Italian kirtle (gamumrra?) being worth with different
colour sleeves pinned on.

> >www.uvm.edu/~hag/sca/15th/vosp24jpg is another red sleeve/black bodice
>
>this link didn't work :-(

Are you thinking of http://www.uvm.edu/~hag/sca/15th/vosp235.jpg ?  The red
would be the under or kirtle sleeves.

> >http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/Lady1535.jpg (Bella's site!)
> >has a lovely lady in rusty bodice and upper sleeves trimmed in deep green,
> >with a green lower sleeve, and (i swear, on this screen at least) fuschia
> >skirt.
>
>Fuschia!  Wow <g>.  Well, I don't know if my screen is right either, but
>the bodice and skirt look the same color to me.
>OK, I confess myself once again confused.  Maybe it's just that I'm not
>looking right, but I can't see different lower and upper sleeves in this
>painting.  It looks like one piece of deep green fabric, with slashes in
>it.  And does lower/upper mean the same thing as the undersleeve/oversleeve
>that Gwendoline was talking about earlier?

Bodice & skirt are the same colour on my screen but what I find incredible
is the fact that her bodice appears to be held together by magic!  I'm not
sure this is the best example because she appears to be wearing her gown
without a kirtle underneath.  You're right about the green sleeves, I would
say they are one piece and slashed.  They would be the sleeves which are
normally fastened to the kirtle and wouldn't show all the smock between the
shoulder treatment of the gown and the sleeves.  Those green sleeves appear
to be held up by magic or staples as well.  It was sort of the idea I was
trying to get across. : )

Cheers,
Gwendoline

Gwendoline wrote:
>I'm glad I'm making sense, I feel like school ate my brain.

Trust me, I know the feeling! <g>

> >But I don't have a kirtle, and won't for a while.  I hope
> >it won't look too funny to go without it - the gown, thus, would go
> >directly over the corset, petticoat, and farthingale.
>
>Hmm, you get away with it, but if your "hoops" show through the skirt, you
>might want to whip up a petticoat.

OK.

> >I tried rolling it, and that seems to work ok.  I don't think I have any
> >place to hang it...it doesn't fit in the garb closet at any rate.  The
> >blasted thing is so heavy that i need two or three hangers to support it.
>
>Hm.  I can't wait to see pictures.

I will take some, I promise! :-)  I've been horribly lazy and *still*
haven't tried setting up my scanner since moving.  But I hope it works...

>True but the Italians were strange. : )

Strange? Never!

>It seems that all bets were off
>with them, particularly the Venetians.

Oh, the Venetians ;-p  We Florentines are much more civilized than they are.

>Well, foresleeves are the wide under sleeves you see in Tudor
>portraits.  Undersleeves would be the ones attached/laced to your kirtle

Could I attach them to the gown bodice?  Like I said, there's no kirtle as
of yet.

>and showing either through a hanging sleeve or the rest of the arm as
>different from the short puffy ones.  LIke the white sleeves in:
>http://sunsite.dk/cgfa/c/p-clouet2.htm

That's the sort of thing I was thinking of.

>The sleeves in the above portrait
>would probably be constructed more like:
>http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/Coccina1571.JPG you can
>clearly see the break/seam separating the lower part of the sleeve from the
>puffy top.

So, the puffy top in blue and the lower part in brocade?

>Kirtles don't alwasy have to have sleeves worn, especially if
>the gown has full sleeves.

OK :-)  The gown will almost certainly have full sleeves.

Vittoria

Gwendoline wrote:
>Allegory is always an important point to keep in mind.  However, there are
>other examples of the Italian kirtle (gamumrra?) being worth with different
>colour sleeves pinned on.

Would the kirtle ever be worn by itself, without a gown over it?  Because I
think the dresses in that painting, albeit allegorical, look very
comfortable.  (They're not wearing corsets or anything underneath either,
are they?  If only I could get away with that for camping events...)

>Bodice & skirt are the same colour on my screen but what I find incredible
>is the fact that her bodice appears to be held together by magic!

Really?  I think there's something very puzzling about how any of those
open-fronted Venetian gowns hold together - they're beautiful and I'd LOVE
to wear one, but I haven't the faintest clue how to go about constructing
one, especially in a wearable manner.  But I hardly need another costuming
project at this point <sigh>.

So, this weekend I'm going to mess around with some muslin and seem if I
can come up with a workable sleeve design.  Should be interesting!

Vittoria

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., Danielle Nunn-Weinberg <dannw@m...> wrote:

> >
> >I think you could get away with a closed forepart - they do turn
> >up... but you have to make something you feel happy with, first and
> >foremost.
> >
> >Don't despair - it all sounds lovely...
> >
> >Lisa
>
> Lisa, just out of curiosity is a "closed forepart?"  I've never
heard of
> them before...
>
> Cheers,
> Gwendoline

Umm - I knew you'd get me for this <G>.

I mean a skirt without an underskirt showing. That makes better
sense, I hope.

Lisa - the 40000 mile an hour poster...

Just sent mine in the other day.
See you their. Oh dear what shall I wear?

- Brynn

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., wodeford@y... wrote:
> Our cuisiniere is getting restless. If you are attending 100
Minutes
> War on Saturday, November 10, PLEASE get your feast reservations in
> right away. 100 Minutes War is combined with King's & Queen's
Rapier
> Champions this year so the feast WILL sell out.
>
> Event details appear in this month's "Pikestaff" or at
> http://www.eastkingdom.org/event-detail.html?eid=301
>
> Jehanne de Wodeford, Rusted Woodlands

Alright, they have posted a date for the East Kingdom Northern Lights
A&S Pentathalon, so Brynn now starts her sewing maddness. Or more
like "Darn now I have to document everything"
Here is the question. Do you folks put your name on your
documentation?
The bloody rules don't say one way or the other.
Last year I did have my name on everything and no one questioned it,
in fact most people did include their names.
However later in the year I was in another A&S competition where
again the rules did not state it, but was critizied for having my
name on the docs.
Which do you folks prefer? I can understand not wanting to create
bias in the judges, however how is one to get thier work out to be
seen by others if their name is not on it?

- Brynn the confused.

M'lord acts as my lady in waiting, he's very good with his hands
<grin> so fancy hairstyles are no problem.
Kate

Oh to be ambidextrous and have eyes in the back of my head. Or just
> > have a proper lady in waiting to produce non-lopsided coiffures
for
> > me.....
>
> Wouldn't your hair cover up those extra eyes?
>
> Can't disagree with the ambidextrous or the lady in waiting part,
> though...
>
> Alianor
>
> Sarah Michele Ford
> /\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\
> aka Alianor of Ravenglass
> aka the Dark Melm of Sith
> ---------------------------
> sarah@s...
> \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., s_krasley@r... wrote:
> <snip>
> Last year I did have my name on everything and no one questioned
it,
> in fact most people did include their names.
> However later in the year I was in another A&S competition where
> again the rules did not state it, but was critizied for having my
> name on the docs.
> Which do you folks prefer? I can understand not wanting to create
> bias in the judges, however how is one to get thier work out to be
> seen by others if their name is not on it?
>
> - Brynn the confused.

Hmmph - bad form to drop marks when they didn't make it clear if it
was preferable to be anonymous.

Personally I like to see names on stuff. That way I know who I can go
and talk to about something interesting.

Lisa

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., s_krasley@r... wrote:
> Just sent mine in the other day.
> See you their. Oh dear what shall I wear?

I know you, Brynn, it'll be lovely, whatever you choose. I, on the
other hand, will be marshalling archery all day, so I wear "boy
clothes" if the weather is going to be bad, then change into
something nicer for court.

Jehanne

Me too. I love to talk to people about their work, especially if it's
something I've wanted to try. Or if it's a really nice peice of work
I like to let them know they did a fabulous job.

- Brynn


> Hmmph - bad form to drop marks when they didn't make it clear if it
> was preferable to be anonymous.
>
> Personally I like to see names on stuff. That way I know who I can
go
> and talk to about something interesting.
>
> Lisa

Sentiment on this point seems to vary from year to year, and area to
area.  Some years ago, anything entered in an A&S in this neck of the
woods *had* to be "anonymous" - or at least not have one's name on.
(Although if everyone had seen you wearing that blackworked coif for
the last six months, it was something of a giveaway.)  Then some folk
began to agitate against "anonymity," in part because performing arts
competitors could not have it.  At this point, things have slid 'round
so that the preference is not only for the entrant to have their name
on the documentation, but to linger in the vicinity to answer any
questions the judges may have (which can be difficult if one wishes to
attend a class, or has entries in, say, culinary, textile and
perfoming arts.  (Last Kingdom A&S the categories were in different
rooms.)

Since there don't seem to be laws about it, you might ask your A&S
officer what they think the current local custom is.  I rather like
having my name on the documentation myself; that way if someone takes
a copy (as happens sometimes) at least they know who wrote it.  (I
also usually make some extra copies of documentation, particularly of
culinary or brewing entries, since I often get asked for it.)

Rowen



--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., s_krasley@r... wrote:
> Alright, they have posted a date for the East Kingdom Northern
Lights
> A&S Pentathalon, so Brynn now starts her sewing maddness. Or more
> like "Darn now I have to document everything"
> Here is the question. Do you folks put your name on your
> documentation?
<snip>

Boy clothes sound so cumfy. Maybe this year I'll wander out and watch
some of the archery.
Other wise you'll find be amoung a group, stitching and bitching.

- Brynn, wonder if my brown and gold cotehardie still fits?


>
> I know you, Brynn, it'll be lovely, whatever you choose. I, on the
> other hand, will be marshalling archery all day, so I wear "boy
> clothes" if the weather is going to be bad, then change into
> something nicer for court.
>
> Jehanne

> Good point!  I like the dresses in that picture a lot :-)  On the other
> hand, I think this painting might fall into the Biblical/Allegorical
> category (it's titled "Susanna and the Elders"), so I don't know if these
> are necessarily everyday clothes they're wearing...

Don't know, really.  To me it's a portrait with different sleeves, and
that's final (grin)!
> this link didn't work :-(
> http://www.uvm.edu/~hag/sca/15th/vosp24.jpg
I copy/pasted it this time from the actual site.  Hope it helps.

> >http://au.geocities.com/bella_lucia_da_verona/Lady1535.jpg (Bella's
site!)
> >has a lovely lady in rusty bodice and upper sleeves trimmed in deep
green,
> >with a green lower sleeve, and (i swear, on this screen at least) fuschia
> >skirt.
>
> Fuschia!  Wow <g>.  Well, I don't know if my screen is right either, but
> the bodice and skirt look the same color to me.

yanno, i printed the pic off, and the skirt comes off a tawny gold much like
the bodice.  Silly screen.   Sorry!

> OK, I confess myself once again confused.  Maybe it's just that I'm not
> looking right, but I can't see different lower and upper sleeves in this
> painting.  It looks like one piece of deep green fabric, with slashes in
> it.  And does lower/upper mean the same thing as the
undersleeve/oversleeve
> that Gwendoline was talking about earlier?

Well,Vittoria, it could also be that i'm not using correct terminology.
"upper sleeve" here is the part that continues from the bodice, the little
puff at her shoulder.  "lower sleeve" is, to me, the sleeve proper.  On both
my screen and the printout that is a solid deep green, multi-slashed sleeve.
Is that any help?

Hey you guys, watch those comments about Venetians!  I just might have to
send my friends to your friends. . . . . .

Gwendoline, at this time, i'm not sure there is a kirtle under this dress at
all.  They wore the camisa and a dress for most of Period.  The debate
appears to be whether the white showing on Brescia's Lady's dress is her
camisa or an additional layer.  I cannot for the life of me see anything
under it however.  But then, that bodice is certainly stiffened with
something or other, or it wouldn't hold that shape more'n a minute. I want a
time machine <sniff>!

Carolle

--- In Authentic_SCA@y..., s_krasley@r... wrote:
> Boy clothes sound so cumfy. Maybe this year I'll wander out and
> watch some of the archery.
So you can laugh if I wear the Polarfleece T-tunic? (Yes, I have one,
made specifically FOR marshalling at this event because I was tired
of freezing to death.)

Jehanne