From: ewright@convex.com (Edward V. Wright)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Elizabethan Fashions
Date: 26 Aug 92 20:22:47 GMT
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

Aryk (A.J.S. Nusbacher) writes:

>Why, if you're interested in Elizabethan clothes, you should get your hands
>on a copy of the 

>			ELIZABETHAN HANDBOOK!

I obtained a copy of this book at Pennsic and, while I have not 
had the opportunity to give it a thorough reading, I must say
that while it may be "out, real, and very beautiful," it is far
from error-free.  When it comes to costuming, the authors seem
to have relied heavily on such dubious sources as Janet Winters
and Carolyn Savoy's "Elizabethan Costuming" and Max Tilke's
"Costume Patterns and Designs." Some of the major errors I noticed 
in the costuming section are

  * The pattern for the Venetian breeches. The accompanying text 
    states that they will close via a button fly, but there is no 
    fly in the pattern.  The pattern would be correct if the beeches
    closed with hooks and eyes, which is also period, but this is not
    mentioned in the text.  The text states that Venetian breeches
    "normally reached beneath the knee."  Actually, Venetian breeches
    (as opposed to breeches in general) *always* reached below the knee,
    by definition.

  * There is a section entitled "shifts and partlets," which does
    not discuss partlets or even give a pattern.  I suspect the authors
    may have been laboring under the misconception, found in Winters and
    Savoy, that a partlet and a shift are the same thing.

  * The pattern for the corset does not have nearly enough boning,
    especially if you use the rigilene plastic boning recommended.
    The illustration shows a woman's figure with rather graceful
    curves at the sides.  It is these curves that the Elizabethan
    corset was designed to eliminate, giving the woman a nice, smooth,
    flat figure, much like a man's.

  * The method shown for making a ruff will work, but it is extremely
    difficult to make the pleats even enough.  A better method would
    use two stitches at the top and bottom of each pleat instead of
    only one.

  * The text states that a doublet is a sleeved garment and a jerkin
    is a sleeveless one.  This is not correct.  Both doublets and
    jerkins could be either sleeved or sleeveless.  The difference is
    that the jerkin was meant to be worn over a doublet, as an additional
    layer.

  * The "cassock" pattern is a complete disaster.  This is redrawn
    from Tilke who, in turn, claims to have based it on a pattern 
    given in Carl Kohler's "History of Costume."  I presume the errors 
    are Tilke's, although I have not checked this out.  The first problem 
    is that the pattern given in Kohler is based on a *cape*, not a cassock, 
    in a German museum. There are at least three major differences between 
    Tilke's pattern and Kohler's.  These changes are required to produce
    the garment Tilke calls a "cassock."  However, even with these
    changes, the garment that Tilke's pattern produces shows scant 
    resemblence to those produced by actual 16th Century cassock patterns,
    which are cut very much like a doublet or a jerkin, differing from a
    jerkin mainly in the skirts.

>That wasn't an advert.  Advertisements are a gross violation of netiquette.
>If I had said that the handbook sells for US$12, then maybe you could accuse
>me of advertising...

This wasn't a review.  If it was a review, I would say, go ahead 
and buy the book, but don't take everything it contains at face value.  
Verify it with more reliable sources.

-- Nicholas van Leyden
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca