Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [SCA-Garb] Re: French Hood

Expand Messages
  • Chris Catalfamo
    Bear with me. There is a point to this...or, scroll right to the bottom. OK--on the authentic list I have been soliciting opinions about Herbert Norris. It
    Message 1 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
    View Source
    • 0 Attachment
      Bear with me. There is a point to this...or, scroll right to the bottom. OK--on the authentic list I have been soliciting opinions about Herbert Norris. It seems to me that everyone (including myself) attacks Norris from her/his particular specialty/interest and particularly because Norris doesn't have footnotes in the 1920's. I kind of agree with the preface written by the Curator of the Metropolitan Museum of Art and I admire Norris and challenge the critics to footnote their critiques. I find Norris delightful. He didn't do the book for folks creating garb. And so far, at least to me, his patterns for the most part look just like the patterns I have bought from reputable pattern makers. I think his drawings are pretty close based upon what I have seem in books and on websites including dug artifacts, art images, extant garments, primary accounts and documents etc. They're not meant to be patterns. He created an affordable work on which he did a massive amount of research, visited a remarkable number of people and institutions, and it has a voluminous bibliography. OK so it's old fashioned antiquarian/cultural history. That doesn't make it completely wrong. So what's the point?
      Norris has drawings of his perception of what French hoods looked like from the side. Take it or leave it. But it may be worth checking out.

      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • Kimiko Small
      I like Norris as well for some thing, but he has to be checked against current info, and especially against the images he s taken his drawings from. The
      Message 2 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
      View Source
      • 0 Attachment
        I like Norris as well for some thing, but he has to be checked
        against current info, and especially against the images he's taken
        his drawings from.

        The biggest one that comes to mind is his color plate of Eleanor of
        Austria, Queen of Portugal, which is plate XI. He puts her into a
        farthingale and a lovely gown and forepart. This is iffy for that
        time, about 1518, according to his date. Yes the Spanish wore
        farthingales, but did she? If you look at the original painting, who
        knows as it shows her from the waist up, and her arms block any view
        of how her gown may or may not be swelling. And this image is dated
        about 1530.
        http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:EleonoreofAustria.jpg
        He also added a bit to her jewels, and gave her a gold cap.

        The image of Henry VIII (plate XIII) across the page from Eleanor is
        also a redone outfit, and is missing the vital codpiece. I know, I
        just remade this one for my client. I had to go to the original
        Holbein copy to get the rest of the details. Yes, it is close, and it
        looks good, but if I had made the outfit from just this one image,
        the guy would not have the one item that makes a Henrician male stand
        out, which is the codpiece.

        This is only a couple of reasons why his images and drawings have to
        be checked. He made presumptions on a few things, so if he presumed
        about a farthingale, or removed a codpiece, what else may he have
        adjusted as well?

        Joane


        On Jul 2, 2007, at 10:38 AM, Chris Catalfamo wrote:

        > I think his drawings are pretty close based upon what I have seem
        > in books and on websites including dug artifacts, art images,
        > extant garments, primary accounts and documents etc.



        [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      • Kimiko Small
        If someone wants a clear side view image of a French hood, in full color, from an illumation of the time period, here was my enlightening image. The one that
        Message 3 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
        View Source
        • 0 Attachment
          If someone wants a clear side view image of a French hood, in full
          color, from an illumation of the time period, here was my
          enlightening image. The one that said... I made my French hood
          incorrectly for what I was going for (and that Sarah Lorraine, Teddy
          and a few others are probably correct in that this is based on a
          linen coif, without a stiffened brim.)
          http://www.kimiko1.com/research-16th/FrenchHood/1530/BathshebaHead1.html
          The full image is here:
          http://www.kimiko1.com/research-16th/FrenchHood/1530/Bathsheba.html
          Front and back views (back shows the upright bongrace style) offered
          from that image here:
          http://www.kimiko1.com/research-16th/FrenchHood/1530/BathshebaHead2.html

          Mind you, other images from other sources may give different clues
          (especially those on later Elizabethan effigies), which makes me
          think that there was more than one way to skin this cat, so to speak.

          Joane

          On Jul 2, 2007, at 10:38 AM, Chris Catalfamo wrote:

          > Norris has drawings of his perception of what French hoods looked
          > like from the side.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • unclrashid
          ... I think his drawings are pretty close based upon what I have seem in books and on websites including dug artifacts, art images, extant garments, primary
          Message 4 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
          View Source
          • 0 Attachment
            --- In SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com, "Chris Catalfamo"
            <catalfamo1190@...> wrote:
            >
            I think his drawings are pretty close based upon what I have seem in
            books and on websites including dug artifacts, art images, extant
            garments, primary accounts and documents etc.


            Here's the issue: his drawings are tertiary sources at best for
            garb, so by the time you make any garb based on them, there are at
            least three layers of "interpretation" between what you make and the
            original artifact you are trying to reproduce.

            If you are just wanting to get an idea what people's clothing looked
            like in general, he's not bad. If you have a burning passion to
            reproduce a drop-dead-authentic garment and to really understand
            what was going on with the clothes, it's a different kettle of fish
            entirely.

            From that perspective, Norris is like a jar of strained baby food
            when you are craving prime rib.

            Rashid
          • borderlands15213
            ... If we re talking SCA use, then it doesn t much matter----as long as you re not using Norris for documentation. As you pointed out a week or so ago, what is
            Message 5 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
            View Source
            • 0 Attachment
              --- In SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com, "unclrashid" <unclrashid@...> wrote:

              > Here's the issue: his drawings are tertiary sources at best for
              > garb, so by the time you make any garb based on them, there are at
              > least three layers of "interpretation" between what you make and the
              > original artifact you are trying to reproduce.
              >
              If we're talking SCA use, then it doesn't much matter----as long as
              you're not using Norris for documentation.
              As you pointed out a week or so ago, what is being done is an
              *interpretation,* not a dead-on recreation. The most accurate
              information will, theoretically, enable one to make the most accurate
              interpretation, but without that time machine we all long for we'll
              never really know. Even a handful of extant garments tells us only
              how *those* garments were put together: we just don't have the data
              base we want to have for 16thC clothing.
              Having patterns isn't always meaningful to the person doing the
              sewing, anyway. One dear older lady of my acquaintance was a great
              sewer, and her [contemporary, mundane] clothes looked quite all right,
              but the only thing she wanted a commercial pattern for was the pinning
              and cutting: ignored directions, didn't transfer markings, just "wung
              [past tense of the verb 'to wing'] it" and amazingly never had the
              bust darts uneven or pointing in different, odd, or inappropriate
              directions. A number of times on this list people have recommended
              doing pretty much just that when someone has asked about using MedMisc
              patterns: "Directions are unclear, confusing: ignore them and follow
              the pictures."
              No official manuals for putting things together, so it does seem
              possible that not everyone did a given thing the same way when it came
              to clothing----since garb is what we discuss on this list.


              > If you are just wanting to get an idea what people's clothing looked
              > like in general, he's not bad. If you have a burning passion to
              > reproduce a drop-dead-authentic garment and to really understand
              > what was going on with the clothes, it's a different kettle of fish
              > entirely.
              >
              Again, unless it's a documentation-required situation---SCA or
              otherwise---it shouldn't be an issue at all.

              Yseult the Gentle
            • unclrashid
              ... at ... the ... I think it matters as much as you want it to... In other words, it s not an SCA requirement, but one can choose to use stuff like Norris,
              Message 6 of 20 , Jul 2, 2007
              View Source
              • 0 Attachment
                --- In SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com, "borderlands15213"
                <borderlands15213@...> wrote:
                >
                > --- In SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com, "unclrashid" <unclrashid@> wrote:
                >
                > > Here's the issue: his drawings are tertiary sources at best for
                > > garb, so by the time you make any garb based on them, there are
                at
                > > least three layers of "interpretation" between what you make and
                the
                > > original artifact you are trying to reproduce.
                > >
                > If we're talking SCA use, then it doesn't much matter----as long as
                > you're not using Norris for documentation.

                I think it matters as much as you want it to... In other words,
                it's not an SCA requirement, but one can choose to use stuff like
                Norris, or one can decide that they'd prefer to make their own
                mistakes, rather than make Norris's mistakes. And I'm not just
                picking on Norris in particular, any book that shows re-drawings of
                period art rather than the art itself is bound to have errors of
                interpretation in it. There will of course, be errors in what we
                do, also, but if enough people get the bug for working as close as
                possible to period sources, then the over-all level will go up!

                And I'm not saying everyone should want to do drop-dead authentic,
                either. This is a game, after all and you have to decide when it
                has stopped being fun before it makes you crazy! But I do feel that
                in order to make an informed choice, people should understand enough
                about it to see the pros and cons of the various resources out there.

                Besides, I just won't ever condone the use of a reference source
                that you need to know more than the author did to use it safely.
                (that old caveat "Norris is a fine reference as long as you know
                which pictures to ignore"... surely that was sarcasm, not an
                endorsement)

                Rashid
              • Bonnie Booker
                ... That may have been true 25-30 years ago, but the SCA grew up. For those who just want to make a best effort Norris is fine. For someone who wants more
                Message 7 of 20 , Jul 3, 2007
                View Source
                • 0 Attachment
                  >
                  > > > Here's the issue: his drawings are tertiary sources at best for
                  > > > garb, so by the time you make any garb based on them, there are
                  > at
                  > > > least three layers of "interpretation" between what you make and
                  > the
                  > > > original artifact you are trying to reproduce.
                  > > >
                  > > If we're talking SCA use, then it doesn't much matter----as long as
                  > > you're not using Norris for documentation.
                  >
                  > I think it matters as much as you want it to... In other words,
                  > it's not an SCA requirement, but one can choose to use stuff like
                  > Norris, or one can decide that they'd prefer to make their own
                  > mistakes, rather than make Norris's mistakes. And I'm not just
                  > picking on Norris in particular, any book that shows re-drawings of
                  > period art rather than the art itself is bound to have errors of
                  > interpretation in it. There will of course, be errors in what we
                  > do, also, but if enough people get the bug for working as close as
                  > possible to period sources, then the over-all level will go up!
                  >
                  > And I'm not saying everyone should want to do drop-dead authentic,
                  > either. This is a game, after all and you have to decide when it
                  > has stopped being fun before it makes you crazy! But I do feel that
                  > in order to make an informed choice, people should understand enough
                  > about it to see the pros and cons of the various resources out there.
                  >
                  > Besides, I just won't ever condone the use of a reference source
                  > that you need to know more than the author did to use it safely.
                  > (that old caveat "Norris is a fine reference as long as you know
                  > which pictures to ignore"... surely that was sarcasm, not an
                  > endorsement)
                  >
                  > Rashid
                  >
                  > .
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  That may have been true 25-30 years ago, but the SCA grew up. For those who
                  just want to make a "best effort" Norris is fine. For someone who wants more
                  accuracy I recommend THE TUDOR TAILOR by Ninya Mikhaila and Jane
                  Malcolm-Davies ISBN 0-89676-255-6. They work in a museum handleing and
                  recreating such things. If you can't buy it, try Inter-Library Loan.


                  --
                  Aspasia Moonwind


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • borderlands15213
                  ... for ... are ... and ... long as ... brevity ... those who ... wants more ... and ... Gentle, learned laurels: I don t disagree with either of you. I do
                  Message 8 of 20 , Jul 3, 2007
                  View Source
                  • 0 Attachment
                    --- In SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com, "Bonnie Booker" <Aspasia1@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > >
                    > > > > Here's the issue: his drawings are tertiary sources at best
                    for
                    > > > > garb, so by the time you make any garb based on them, there
                    are
                    > > at
                    > > > > least three layers of "interpretation" between what you make
                    and
                    > > the
                    > > > > original artifact you are trying to reproduce.
                    > > > >
                    > > > If we're talking SCA use, then it doesn't much matter----as
                    long as
                    > > > you're not using Norris for documentation.
                    > >
                    > > I think it matters as much as you want it to... In other words,
                    > > it's not an SCA requirement, but one can choose to use stuff like
                    > > Norris, or one can decide that they'd prefer to make their own
                    > > mistakes, rather than make Norris's mistakes. <<<snipped for
                    brevity>>>
                    > > Besides, I just won't ever condone the use of a reference source
                    > > that you need to know more than the author did to use it safely.
                    > > (that old caveat "Norris is a fine reference as long as you know
                    > > which pictures to ignore"... surely that was sarcasm, not an
                    > > endorsement)
                    > >
                    > > Rashid
                    > >
                    > That may have been true 25-30 years ago, but the SCA grew up. For
                    those who
                    > just want to make a "best effort" Norris is fine. For someone who
                    wants more
                    > accuracy I recommend THE TUDOR TAILOR by Ninya Mikhaila and Jane
                    > Malcolm-Davies ISBN 0-89676-255-6. They work in a museum handleing
                    and
                    > recreating such things. If you can't buy it, try Inter-Library Loan.
                    > --
                    > Aspasia Moonwind

                    Gentle, learned laurels:
                    I don't disagree with either of you.
                    I do believe it has to be a matter of personal choice, though, if one
                    plays SCA, to what level of accuracy one aspires at any given time.
                    If one chooses to make one's own errors instead of duplicating
                    someone else's (in this instance Norris's), fine: there are still
                    mistakes.
                    We aren't going to know with absolute certainty, not even using The
                    Tudor Tailor as a resource, simply because that gives us an accurate
                    rendition of the garments which have survived, but those are very
                    few, relatively speaking. There's bound to be room in history for
                    variances: what the clothing that has survived shows us is how those
                    surviving articles were made and if we want to speak scientifically
                    about construction we have to say, "...based on the evidence of these
                    few surviving garments...it is our conjecture/supposition/we believe
                    it logical to conclude," but we can't say *everything* was done in
                    thus-and-such a manner.
                    It's great to encourage others to be as accurate as they can be, but
                    very often how accurate they *can* be is equated in their minds with
                    how accurate they are *willing* to be---and then it's a different
                    question.

                    Yseult the Gentle
                  • Kimiko Small
                    Not to disparage this recommendation, which I highly recommend as well. But after talking with Jane and Ninya at their workshop, they will both tell you that
                    Message 9 of 20 , Jul 4, 2007
                    View Source
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Not to disparage this recommendation, which I highly recommend as
                      well. But after talking with Jane and Ninya at their workshop, they
                      will both tell you that these were their recommendations on how to
                      create the garments, based on their research with documents, images,
                      a few extant garments, and on *their experience with what works*.
                      They admit the reality of the garments might have been something else
                      entirely.

                      There are sadly very few garments surviving (mostly Elizabethan era)
                      that they worked with, no garments from the Henrician period (I only
                      know of a glove set, and a Cap of Maintenance that I've seen online)
                      which was the bulk of their research originally, so it is as much an
                      "interpretation" of the images as anything we might do. They do
                      however get to work from the original paintings, drawings and
                      effigies, not just photo images of the same we might work from, so
                      they get to see details we don't, unless we view things in person as
                      they do.

                      I still would love to work in their world, and still love their book
                      for all the wonderful, well researched info that is provided.

                      Joane


                      On Jul 3, 2007, at 7:48 AM, Bonnie Booker wrote:

                      > For someone who wants more
                      > accuracy I recommend THE TUDOR TAILOR by Ninya Mikhaila and Jane
                      > Malcolm-Davies ISBN 0-89676-255-6. They work in a museum handleing and
                      > recreating such things.



                      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    • Kimberly Karn
                      I looked on the net for medieval nuns and after sifting through some very interesting pictures I did find a few good ones. In case anyone is interested I
                      Message 10 of 20 , Jul 7, 2007
                      View Source
                      • 0 Attachment
                        I looked on the net for medieval nuns and after sifting through some
                        very "interesting" pictures I did find a few good ones. In case anyone
                        is interested I uploaded those pictures of nuns in period that I
                        garnered from my search to my flickr account.

                        http://www.flickr.com/photos/kkarn/sets/72157600703688365/

                        Kimberly/Roisin
                      • Chris Catalfamo
                        I m jumping in late so this so flagellate me if someone has already sent some of this. Don t forget to hit the Catholic saint books. Back when I was a
                        Message 11 of 20 , Jul 7, 2007
                        View Source
                        • 0 Attachment
                          I'm jumping in late so this so flagellate me if someone has already sent some of this.
                          Don't forget to hit the Catholic saint books. Back when I was a sporadically practicing Catholic, St. Catherine of Siena was my patron. I used to portray her white habit, wimple, crown of thorns and all on All Saints Day. (AHA!!!!) I even named my two daughters after her (Josephine Siena and Catherine Rose). She always looked so cool and serene in her white Dominican habit which is easily a robe/tunic, wimple and veil. Probably a great idea for summer in the SCA. They also had a black cloak and if you8 google their history, the habit is described. There are many post medieval portraits of her. And the Dominican habit can actually still be purchased in 100% white wool--probably a modern variation. One site has the monk tailor making them and they don't look like simple T-tunics. Also the florilegium website has the last link below on the Domincan history and habit. I also wonder if the white wool was just undyed. Cloak would be easier.
                          http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12354c.htm
                          http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_of_Siena
                          http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?aid=485516442&item=1947536&GCID=C15100x011&KEYWORD=1947536
                          http://www.catherineofsiena.com/page.cfm?Web_ID=21
                          http://www.clevelandart.org/explore/work.asp?searchText=Giovanni+di+Paolo&display=list&tab=2&recNo=1
                          http://www.gothicgarments.net/menu1/index.html
                          http://www.florilegium.org/files/NICOLAA/Domin-Order-art.text

                          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        • Chris Catalfamo
                          Oh, and Catherine was a third order sister not a (cloistered) nun. She and her girlfriends nursed plague victims and visited prisons. ... From: Chris
                          Message 12 of 20 , Jul 7, 2007
                          View Source
                          • 0 Attachment
                            Oh, and Catherine was a "third order" sister not a (cloistered) nun. She and her girlfriends nursed plague victims and visited prisons.
                            ----- Original Message -----
                            From: Chris Catalfamo
                            To: SCA-Garb@yahoogroups.com
                            Sent: Saturday, July 07, 2007 5:08 PM
                            Subject: Re: [SCA-Garb] nuns on the run


                            I'm jumping in late so this so flagellate me if someone has already sent some of this.
                            Don't forget to hit the Catholic saint books. Back when I was a sporadically practicing Catholic, St. Catherine of Siena was my patron. I used to portray her white habit, wimple, crown of thorns and all on All Saints Day. (AHA!!!!) I even named my two daughters after her (Josephine Siena and Catherine Rose). She always looked so cool and serene in her white Dominican habit which is easily a robe/tunic, wimple and veil. Probably a great idea for summer in the SCA. They also had a black cloak and if you8 google their history, the habit is described. There are many post medieval portraits of her. And the Dominican habit can actually still be purchased in 100% white wool--probably a modern variation. One site has the monk tailor making them and they don't look like simple T-tunics. Also the florilegium website has the last link below on the Domincan history and habit. I also wonder if the white wool was just undyed. Cloak would be easier.
                            http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/12354c.htm
                            http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catherine_of_Siena
                            http://www.allposters.com/gallery.asp?aid=485516442&item=1947536&GCID=C15100x011&KEYWORD=1947536
                            http://www.catherineofsiena.com/page.cfm?Web_ID=21
                            http://www.clevelandart.org/explore/work.asp?searchText=Giovanni+di+Paolo&display=list&tab=2&recNo=1
                            http://www.gothicgarments.net/menu1/index.html
                            http://www.florilegium.org/files/NICOLAA/Domin-Order-art.text

                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]





                            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.