Historical Sew Monthly 2019: #2 - Linen/Linens

The Visby sewing continues! I've already completed two shifts for myself and a pair of braies for my husband (using the excellent loincloth-type pattern shared by Enes and Riku at Hibernaatio). Next on the list was a shirt for my husband. I continued using the delicious antique hand-woven hemp I bought last year to make something a bit like this:

Pierpoint Morgan MS G. 24, f. 19. N. France or Belgium,
possibly Tournai, c. 1350. Source.

Historical Sew Fortnightly: #1 Make do and mend

So, once again I'm trying the Dreamstress' Historical Sew Fortnightly challenge once again. As with last year, I'm not aiming for all of the challenges (or anywhere near all of them). Instead, I'm going to do ones that help me work on stuff I was going to make anyway and maybe the occasional small thing if a challenge sparks an idea. And I'm hoping I won't fall quite so badly off the bandwagon this year...

Challenge #1 of 2014 was 'Make do and Mend' and was due Weds 15th Jan. For this, I decided to finally finish my St. Birgitta's cap that has been sitting less than 30 mins from done for ... over 2 months. I finished on Mon (13th) but I haven't had a chance to get some natural light for photographing until today.

Blue wedding dress: finally! photos!

Last weekend I finally managed to find the time and got out my wedding dress. I was quite concerned that it would no longer fit as I've lost just over 2 stone since last year. Also, I needed to check its state. It was always intended to be a re-enactment dress after it was a wedding dress, but there is some minor damage that needs fixing (namely lost buttons). Also, as it was very much rush-finished (I sewed the eyelets and hem the day before the wedding!), there are bits that need re-doing or that were skipped which need doing now.

But, seeing as I had it all on, I thought I'd get Himself to take some photos so you could finally see it properly.

Historical Sew Fortnightly: #3 Under It All

Like many others, I have been caught up in The Dreamstress' Historical Sew Fortnightly Challenge.

So, today is the deadline for challenge #3: Under it All. Having failed miserably at challenge #2 (Unfinished Objects), I decided that since my UFOs were shifts that I could promote them to challenge #3 and try to get them finished anyway...

Unfortunately, my camera finally died today so I can't give you any photos of the finished garments. However, I do have some 'before' photos that I hope will suffice for now.

The missing 14th C sleeveless shift

I'm afraid work and hot weather mean no actual interesting things of my own to report on.

However, in more Lengberg-related news, Cathy Raymond has written an interesting blog post about late medieval underwear, specifically the Lengberg pants and whether they are a male or female garment.

She also links to a recent PDF by Rebecca Lucas, who has hunted through the literature to answer one of the great mysteries of late medieval underwear. Namely, the source of the sleeveless "chemise of the fourteenth century" shown in a black-and-white photograph in Kohler's "A History of Costume":

It is from a cash of objects found during building work in 1867 in Burg Rahnis, Thuringia, Germany. It is described as being made of coarse linen, not silk as has been previously speculated, with "inserted wedges on both sides" (translation by Rebecca Lucas). It was kept in a private collection, possibly the museum at Burg Rahnis - however, this museum was sacked in World War II and its contents stolen. The whereabouts of the shift is currently unknown.

However, that's a lot more information than I previously had - simply that it was lost in World War II.

Lengberg underwear: thoughts on the pants

Just pondering on the Lengberg underwear some more...

I am curious as to why some people (often re-enactors, or SCA) are so adamant that the bikini-like pants must be a female garment. The argument of "women must have worn pants" doesn't make much sense to me. We know that in many later eras women did not routinely wear pants (or wore crotchless ones), making that argument (at least in its most blanket form) false.

I can certainly understand the argument that "women must have done something at that time of the month" - but why does it have to be pants (a la mens'), and why does wearing something for one's period automatically equate to wearing something for the rest of the month too? This argument seems particularly nonsensical to me when it comes to the mid-1300s and before, when mens' braies were huge baggy things that would not be able to hold any conjectural medieval sanitary pad close against the crotch.

In any case, the argument I've been reading about the Lengberg pants in particular is that they look nothing like the mens' braies seen in 14th C and 15th C manuscript illustrations. True. However, a lot of those illustrations are French or English. Also, may I direct you to a woodcut and a sketch by Albrecht Durer: The Men's Bathhouse (c. 1498) and Self Portrait as an Act (c. 1507). Yes, these are at the very end of the 15th C / very beginning of the 16th C. However, I don't know how precise the Lengberg radiocarbon date of "15th C" is. Also, the images are from the correct country. In any case, they definitively show men wearing bikini-style pants.

Lengburg underwear: more articles

Seeing as I know there are a few of us out there who are waiting with baited breath for any fresh details regarding the Lengberg underwear finds, I thought I would share these two articles from medievalists.net. The latter article is particularly interesting as it describes the four 'bras'/'corslettes', including the placement of the sprang which had been mentioned previously. Apparently it is between the cups on at least one of the 'bras'.

And, of course, now that I go look there appears to be several new articles that have popped up over the last few months, which I have not noticed before: