Re: [Authentic_SCA] Thanks and more questsions WAS Alcega corded farthingale
- Gillian wrote:
>This is correct. It does give a slighly more bell than cone shaped look. This isn't a problem if you are going for a slightly lower class look, but if you want to replicate the really stiff, extreme cone farthingales I don't reccomend this pattern.
> If I'm correctly reading the directions at the URL below, this
> farthingale is not shaped -- that is, the skirk is a tube, not a cone?
> (Certainly would make it easier to get the cording tucks
> parallel ...) Am I right on this?
>I haven't tried that, but it might work. If I need to store mine, I usually store it on a hanger in the closet. Although I can't speak about driving in the thing, riding in a stiffly starched corded petticoat is quite possible. Even starched heavily, the petticoat compacts pretty well.
> How do you *transport* such a garment once it is stiffly starched?
> Can you collapse it into one circle along the welts, as you can a
> skirt with metal hoops?
I do highly reccomend starching, as it reduces buckling a bit, and increases the skirt-holding-out-ability of the petticoat.
NEW! Lycos Dating Search. The only place to search multiple dating sites at once.
> I think what you're doing wrong is trying to use rope or cord. Iquite a
> believe Juan de Alcega was assuming that you would use something
> bit sturdier, like willow bents, for the hoops. It is possible tomake
> a fairly rigid rope-stiffened petticoat, but you need to have_lots_ of
> channels, not just the (4? 5?) specified by Alcega.Where in Alcega is the 4-5 hoops mentioned? It's not in the
translated section, there's no mention of the number of hoops
required. As far as I know the 4-5 hoops is a modern choice for the
main part. All the images of hoops I've seen and found texts for* use
more than that. I managed to get 7 or 8 getting the hoops up as high
as possible (to just below the hips) as I was going for the very
rigid Spanish style, and images show the hoops going right up! I
could have got more in, but was struggling with the materials as it
The rope is only ever going to give a soft line, even if it's done as
19thC cording was done (no gaps between each channel.) The buckling
it as much a part of the technique as anything else, or so I've been
told by people who have made starched and corded petticoats. I'm
possibly going to be making a finely corded one to wear under my
c1848 dress as it gives this softly rounded shape.
For my farthingale (which is currently dismantled least I glare at it
even more than it rightly deserves I used willow wands. And if you do
decide on willow, go for ready made caning;) Seriously, it'll be much
more even. Mine will be re-hooped with whalebone substitute seeing as
I found more references to whalebone than anything else.
To get the cone I use the Alcega pattern as is to make the test,
which creates many puckers and folds simply not seen in the artwork
I've looked at. So I took my cue from Alcega in terms of approximate
shaping and draped the lining over the test to get a much more fitted
cone. I suspect you aren't supposed to use the "patterns" as is, as
many pieces simply do not match in the book;)
So advice from over here is:
If you want a soft support, slightly more dome shaped then cording
will be fine, and your buckling is a natural effect.
If you want a cone shaped support, either use Alcega as is and put
tucks on the inside, as it really does help the skirt lay smoothly
over the hoops.
Or make a more fitted cone by tweaking Alcega to make a more
documented type of support.
michaela de bruce,
Willemyne van Nymegen
*at some point I worked out how many hoops one could get from the
measurements given in Corsets and Crinolines in various texts.
- m d b wrote:
>>I think what you're doing wrong is trying to use rope or cord. IOK, going with Drea Leeds article on the subject "Alcega's pattern
>>believe Juan de Alcega was assuming that you would use something
>>bit sturdier, like willow bents, for the hoops. It is possible to
>>a fairly rigid rope-stiffened petticoat, but you need to have
>>channels, not just the (4? 5?) specified by Alcega.
>Where in Alcega is the 4-5 hoops mentioned? It's not in the
>translated section, there's no mention of the number of hoops
>required. As far as I know the 4-5 hoops is a modern choice for the
description and accompanying diagram included five casings plus one
casing in the hem at the bottom." That's a total of 6, which is more
than 4-5, but less that "lots".
Adele de Maisieres
Quot homines, tot sententiae.