Shoes
By Madeline | February 8, 2008
Shoes during the medieval days were very boring. They were often times made of plain leather that were either plain slide on slippers that required no fasteners or the fasteners were made of a plain toggle and loop. Men and women wore similar fashions and very little experimentation was done with stitching and decoration.
As the years progressed, the style of shoe remained about the same with the rounded toes and the basic slip on style, but silks were adhered to the leather giving them rich color and beauty and starting the issue for ever woman of “Do these shoes match my outfit?” Once the finer slippers came about, there was the issue of keeping them in good repair despite the muddy, unpaved roads in rainy areas. Thus the patten was born. Pattens were the first form of clogs - you know, those wooden shoes popular in Holland? The patten was made of wood (though later ones were also made of leather) and conneted to the foot over the shoe with usually a leather strap over the ball of the foot and around the heel. These usually had very thick soles - about one inch and kept the wearer’s shoes from being damaged by the muddy streets.
Over the years, there did come about the fashion of wearing the toes extremely pointed and long. Some people actually took this fashion to the extreme (there’s always that ONE guy, isn’t there?) and had points fashioned so long that they had to wear little chains on their knees to keep them up. How silly that must have looked and how uncomfortable to wear!
It is rumored that heels were initially introduced by Catharine de Medici stating that she was self conscious of her short stature and saw to fix that with the aid of heels. This fad spread through Europe and became very popular particularly with Italian courtesans and noble women. The heels didn’t really catch on in England though until the late 16th century. Once they did, they were often times favored more by men than by women. Though French and later in history, an example of a man famous for his heels is the Sun King, Louis XIV and his infamous red heeled shoes.
Over the years, shoes have had a wild ride - going from basic foot coverings like the ‘foot bags’ that are depicted on one cave drawing to the shoe craze of today where women (and some men) have countless pairs of shoes. I personally am a bit of a shoe freak myself, understanding exactly how a shoe can be called cute. :) I thought one of the interesting points in shoe history was the fad of men wearing heels more so or equally as often as women. It certainly makes sense as in almost every society throughout history, tall men are considered desireable. If anything, I think it strange that is taboo for a man in our society to wear heels (unless in drag, of course). Maybe in the next century they’ll come back into style and the men will understand a woman’s love for shoes… 
Topics: Clothing, Medieval Era, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Chains of Office
By Madeline | February 7, 2008
The chains of office, or livery collars as they are sometimes referred to as, came into popularity in the 14th century when introduced by the trend setter, Charles V of France in the late 1300’s. Typically the livery collar was given by people of power to their friends and employees to denote their loyalty. The chain of office was an overly long necklace that was made up of large pieces of metal (sometimes embedded with gems) that were linked together with chain, though sometimes with knotted string or ribbon. These were usually very flashy and made of precious metals. When it came to livery collars, most had a badge that hung down from the very center of the collar - this typically indicated the relation of the wearer to the person who the loyalty was being given…if that makes sense… Many chains of office were without badges though as they were just the fad of the time to wear. Basically, medieval bling. :) Yeah, I had to say that somewhere in there. Hehehe
Towards the end of the 16th century, the collars of state began to lose it’s opulence (most likely due to the expense to the ‘power’ people) and became little more than a chain with a miniature of the person attached to it. Miniatures were basically very, very small portraits of the ‘power’ person and actually were very prevalent during the time of Henry VIII. I remember reading a story somewhere about a particularly notable tantrum Anne Boleyn threw when she found Henry’s picture proudly displayed on the breast of Jane Seymour - this was so bad it’s rumored it was what ultimately caused one of her many miscarriages. I digress… ;) The chains and pictures (think on the lockets worn today by women) were so popular at one point that Elizabeth I actually had the good luck to find an incredible man who was not only a gold smith, but a skilled miniaturist as well.
When watching the Tudors series, my husband fell in love with the chains of office. As a treat for him, I wanted to get him one. I didn’t know what kind of badge to attach to it and just wanted a chain. I had a devil of a time trying to find someone who sold chains of office for a decent price and accidentally stumbled upon Rhonda at the Sapphire and Sage. I looked through her collection of chains of office and e-mailed her to see if she could make one that didn’t contain any rhinestones or pearls. Usually e-mails to specialty shops go unanswered or the artist takes forever to respond and is usually brusque and short. Rhonda responded back immediately and was not only very friendly, but very willing to accommodate me. Being the procrastinator that I am, I was on a time crunch because of the impeding Renaissance Faire my husband and I were planning on attending. Rhonda had no problem with that and made the chain of office to my specification - coming up with an entire new design just for me - over the weekend and had it shipped out that Tuesday where it arrived to me on Thursday. When I received it, the chain of office was an absolute piece of art and incredibly gorgeous!!! I am one to praise when I see exemplary work and experience exemplary service (both in this case!) because goodness knows I complain enough when it’s bad. I was so excited about stumbling on this gem of a merchant, I just had to share it!!!! If you are ever in the market for a chain of office or any Tudor/Renaissance jewelry for that matter, you HAVE to check out Rhonda’s collection at http://www.sapphireandsage.com/ They get five Tudor Roses in my book for quality and service!!!
I tried attaching a picture of the chain of office Rhonda made on here, but am having issues. I’ll have to consult the more technical half of my marriage and will hopefully get it posted later tonight.
Topics: Clothing, Merchant Reviews | No Comments »
Partlet & Detatchable Sleeves
By Madeline | January 31, 2008
For those in the Tudor era who were a little too conservative to wear the low cut stomachers that all but served as a platter for displaying their pushed up bosoms, there was the partlet. A partlet was kind of like a small yoke piece that covered the shoulders and chest. This was a rectangular piece of cloth that was solid in the back and open in the front with a standing collar attached to it. For the poorer people who wore partlets, this was usually made of rough linen or whatever fabric their smock/chemise was made out of. For the rich, this could be made of anything from silk to gauze to lace cloth of gold. The partlet had small ties attached to each corner of the piece. The purpose of the strings was to tie them under the armpits to keep the partlet into place.
The partlet served several purposes. Of course, it was a shield for the modest to keep from exposing all their goods. It was also a way to help keep a little warmer in the winter time and avoid sunburns in the summer time. As the ruff came into fashion, the partlets proved very helpful as it kept the neck from being itched by the starched ruff and kept the ruff from getting dirty so quickly and reduced the amount of laundering needed. The use of partlets became very, very popular during Elizabeth I’s reign and the fad not restricted to women alone as men also picked up on the fashion trend.
The partlet could be worn many ways: it could be secured at the chest and neck for full closure, open at the chest and neck, open at the chest yet closed at the neck and closed at the chest yet open at the neck. Typically in Tudor fashion, most of Elizabeth’s courtiers wore theirs open at the chest and closed at the neck. Several sites I found stated there was a rumor that unwed women were to wear their partlets open, where married women were to wear theirs fully closed. There is no truth to this, although I can only imagine that unwed women most likely left theirs open in an attempt to win a husband easier - especially if they had a lot to show off.
If you want something more modern to associate this to, think of the dickie. The ‘pretend’ shirt. :)
I’m including detatchable sleeves in this because I don’t think it really merits it’s own post. As the partlet grew in popularity, detatchable sleeves became an extension. Patlets were altered to accommodate the detatchable sleeves that attached to the partlet that was secured over the chemise and under the gown. Often times, the detatchable sleeves were made of the same fabric as the partlet and made the wearer appear to actually have a shirt under their gown, though this was obviously not the case.
I would think this would probably be one of the least comfortable items of clothing since it ties under the armpits, which it usually sensitive anyway - I imagine that in order to secure it well, you would have to tie it pretty tight. Also, while the lace made of cloth of gold was very pretty, I can’t imagine it would be very comfortable to lay next to the skin. I think I’ll be passing on th partlet as I dress for the Ren Fair this year…
Topics: Clothing, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Stomacher
By Madeline | January 30, 2008
The stomacher was an accessory that was part of the overdress - you’ll get more on the overall overdress later. Tantalizing, I know. ;) Hehehe The overdress usually was missing a large portion of the front of the gown, I’m not sure why but perhaps I’ll find out in my research of the overdress. At any rate, the missing portion would leave the corset in the front and center view of the dress. Obviously not something any lady of noble birth would want. So, the stomacher came into existance.
The stomacher was a triangular panel that was usually made of a good quality fabric and was typically decorated with pearls and gemstones as it was ultimately the centerpiece for the gown. In dressing, the stomacher was typically attached to the corset either with pins or was sewn on. Some were not secured at all and merely held on by the gown being laced into place.
During the 15th and 16th centuries, the stomacher was actually referred to as a placard or a placket and was not only worn by women, but also by men. I find it interesting that the stomacher started out being placed so low to reveal the tops of the breasts in the Tudor era, but then later in the 18th century, it covered the wearer from neck to waist. However, not all were so modest. In the court of Louis XVI, it was not uncommon to stumble upon a woman whose stomacher was actually below the breasts with only a gauzy ruffle to display her bared breasts and rouged nipples that were sometimes even pierced. And they say we are outrageous today! At least we know that bras that have the cups missing are meant only for the bedroom! Another interesting stomacher fad in history was the one in the late 18th century where the stomacher would actually extend about 10 inches past the waistline leaving the wearer out of options in the way of being able to sit down.
I haven’t done much research in the way of other 18th century clothing aside from what was mentioned about the stomacher, but based on those accounts alone, it sounds like women of the 18th century may have actually worn more clothes than women of the Tudor/Renaissance era!
Topics: Clothing, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Farthingale
By Madeline | January 29, 2008
The farthingale was actually the hoop skirt of the Tudor era. This was basically a dress that had hoops imbedded in the fabric, hence the modern day term of hoop skirt. The hoops were initially made of a green reed, but later made with willow cuttings and whale bones. Sometimes rope was even used to make it! The style of wearing the farthingale actually originated in Spain around 1470. When they first came into Spanish fashion, it was common to have the hoops readily apparent as they were sewn into the top most skirt. However, as the trend caught on, the hoops were hidden beneath layers of petticoats (see my article on petticoats for more info) so that the overskirt showed no sign of the hoops that gave their skirts that beautiful triangular shape.
The fad of wearing the farthingale spread from Spain to England with the eventful marriage of King Henry VIII to his first wife, Catharine of Aragon. She was apparently a very influential figure in fashion during those days as she was also the one who introduced the gable to court. The gable was a large, wooden framed hat that looked like a mini house and framed the face. This fad caught on quickly in Henry’s court as well. I attribute her trend setting to Henry’s initial affection for his first wife.
The farthingale certainly stayed in fashion for a very long time, though the shape changed considerably throughout the decades. Like the petticoats, this is one of my favorite items of the underclothing. Something about wearing a farthingale and petticoats just makes me feel so very much like a princess! 
Topics: Clothing, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Petticoats
By Madeline | January 24, 2008
The petticoat was another item in a women’s wardrobe, though typically this was only involved in a rich women’s wardrobe. Initially, women only had on petticoat to wear. The reason for the petticoat was to give the dress the woman wore a lovely belled shape. I know I personally love ANY dress that incorporates that belled skirt, no matter how uncomfortable it is to wear in the humid Florida heat. The reason the belled shape was desired was because it hid the hips and thighs, gave the waist a more narrowed appearance, the shoulders a more squared appearance and called attention to the bosom. No wonder I love those belled skirts - why the heck don’t we still wear them today?! Oh yeah, that humid Florida heat…
As time progressed, there were actually two layers of petticoats and their purpose was multifunctional. A hoop skirt (which I’ll go into later) separated the two petticoats.
The internal layer served two purposes: modesty and warmth. In case a woman, heaven forbid, were to have a tumble and her hoop skirt were to bell out, it wouldn’t be her privates and sprawled legs you’d see, but the layers and layers of silk, linen or wool of her internal petticoats. Additionaly, those English castles and manors were very drafty despite the numerous fireplaces, wood panelled walls and wall tapestries, the internal petticoat was a means of protecting women’s legs from getting chilled. In the coldest part of winter, these petticoats often were made of wool for layers and layers of warmth. The outer petticoat lay over the hoop skirt in the attempt to hide the oh so obvious shape of the hoops as they were unseemly and gave the bell shape of the skirt its smooth, clean appearance. Usually, neither petticoat extended more than a little lower than the last hoop to avoid the embarassment of the petticoat being seen, as a result, women who wore petticoats bent at the knees rather than at the waist to avoid exposing their under garments.
Towards the end of the 16th century, the petticoat became more than just underwear to be hidden beneath a fine overskirt, it became an accessory to the gown. Petticoats were made with lace and ribbons attached and made of beautiful silks, brocades and velvets for all to see. Think of Scarlet O’Hara - yeah, kinda like that. :)
One of the more interesting things I learned while studying up on this was that children, including boys, actually wore petticoats during the Tudor era as an every day part of their wardrobe up until the age of six. As far as the poor went, they usually didn’t have petticoats, or if they did, they were made of rough linen and held very few layers, nor did they concern themselves with the internal and external petticoat as they had no hoop skirt to cover.
Topics: Clothing, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Corsets
By Madeline | January 22, 2008
The corset was an interesting torture device that women during the Tudor era were subjected to. The ultimate goal of a corset was not to make the waist slender as it was during the Victoria era or the hold the breasts in place as it is in today’s society. The reason for the corset was to completely flatten a women’s chest. I’m assuming this was initially done as a way to make women less attractive. However, those scandalous Tudors found a way around that little staunch fashion by cutting their dresses lower displaying the cleavage, so that women who were fortunate enough to be well endowed could still display their bosoms in grace. The ones I feel bad for were the women who were already flat chests - they would look even more so without the benefit of the spillage on top.
These corsets were made of leather, wood and whale bone to ensure a smooth, clean front that was as effective as possible in flattening then chest. I find this interesting when you take into consideration the small codpieces that came into fashion during Elizabeth I’s reign (see my article on codpieces - it’s most interesting). It’s almost like the goal of the trend setters was to make everyone androgynous, yet they were being fashionably thwarted by everyone else - primarily at court.
While I personally LOVE to don my corset whenever we go to Ren Fairs, I cannot imagine how much I would dread having to wear it on a daily basis. I guess that would be something you would get used to though. Then again, I’ve worn a bra since I was sixteen when my mom got me a sympathy bra (meaning I didn’t NEED one, but was envious of all the girls who did) and I HATE wearing them. They are uncomfortable and dig in and I can’t wait to get home to get it off. Of course, Tudor women were only able to remove theirs once they were ready to go to sleep. Perhaps the anticipation of having to don them again made them sleep later… Hehehe
One of the aspects of corsetry that sticks out in my mind are the women who were notorious for demanding their corsets be cinched tighter as they began to show their pregnancies. I wonder how many pregnancies were lost as a result.
Topics: Tudor Era | No Comments »
Chemise
By Madeline | January 16, 2008
I was thinking the other day of all the amounts of clothes that a person had to wear during the Tudor era, primarily the women. So I thought it would be very interesting to post all the different layers that they wore on my blog.
Starting first and foremost is the chemise which today is French for shirt. The chemise was primarily cut out of rectangles and triangles – mainly the poor did this to try to preserve as much fabric as possible. It was made out of rough cloth for the poor, while the rich wore chemises made of thin, soft and fine linen.
The chemise was the first item that was donned not only by women, but by men too. The chemise was garment that was usually changed on a daily basis (at least for the rich who could easily afford multiple ones) and was washed regularly. The purpose of the chemise was to protect the outer garment, which was seldom, if ever, washed as it absorbed the natural oils produced by the body and kept the BO smell from becoming too obvious.
The chemise wins the award for longevity when it comes to fashion because it was used all the up until the 20th century before it was fashioned into panties, underwear, bras, slips, etc. However, many men typically still wear a sort of chemise which has taken shape in the basic white undershirt. I thought that was pretty interesting.
Topics: Medieval Era, Tudor Era | No Comments »
Rich vs. Poor Homes
By Madeline | January 13, 2008
As you can imagine, there was a vast difference between the homes of the nobles and the homes of the poor, but what exactly were they both like? Well, let’s start with the poor since it’s probably more interesting. Usually these homes contained at most three rooms. Only half of the home was the structured timber and the rest was made of wickerwork and plaster. The roof was thatched and had a hole cut out at the top for the fireplace. Usually the poor possessed little furniture as it was terribly expensive and probably never owned a chair as chairs were considered an extreme luxury; the usually sat on stools or benches. For the ones who were fortunate enough to own a bed, it was usually strung across with ropes and held a straw stuffed mattress. Lacking the funds to obtain windows as they were terribly expensive, window openings were covered with linen soaked with linseed oil. Again, as furniture was terrible expensive, they were usually heirlooms that were passed down through generations. There was certainly no, “Honey, I’m bored with this bedroom set, let’s get another one.” Certainly not like today.
Now, the rich were certainly in a much better standing when it came to their homes. Tudor homes were lined with oak paneling on the inside to help keep out some of the cold and some of them were even well off enough to place wallpaper on the walls, which usually was just yards and yards of fabric plastered onto the wall. It was very helpful in keeping out the cold, drafty English weather. Many well off families also had windows which were basically small pieces of glass held together with bits of lead. As windows were very expensive, it was not uncommon for the rich to bring their windows with them if they moved. Once chimney’s came about in the 16th century, it enabled the rich to create more rooms in their home as they were able to build more stories onto their homes. As furniture was still very expensive, much of theirs was still passed down through generations as well.
All in all, the rich were certainly much better off with their feather stuffed pillow mattresses and the warmer homes containing chimneys. Looking back on what few possessions even the wealthy had, it’s amazing how much one family can possess in today’s modern world. Before we had our daughter, my husband and I moved about once a year going from one home to another and every time we ended up having a garage sale with ridiculous amounts of things to sell. Now that our daughter’s been born we’ve actually been more grounded and have lived in our home for two and half years. I cannot even imagine what we’ve accumulated in that two and a half years. It’s amazing to think how we just take it all for granted.
Topics: Tudor Era | No Comments »
The Codpiece
By Madeline | January 13, 2008
The codpiece, or in Middle English was referred to as a codpece, which literally translated from Latin to mean scrotum bag, has an interesting origination. As is common knowledge, all men in the medieval days all the way through the Tudor era wore hose. These hose were not equipped with the convenient flap that most boxer shorts and pants have today, but were actually knit and sewn with the crotch completely missing. Honestly, this is where the teenager that still lives inside of me cannot help but giggle to imagine a man standing in his crotchless hose with his junk hanging out.
Anyhoo, back to the original topic – the codpiece. Initially, the crotchless pants that men wore were perfectly sensible and, of course, convenient as the tunics they wore were longer. As fashion began to shorten the tunics, it became obvious that men needed a more substantial covering over the boys, thus the codpiece came about. Originally, it was a simple flap or pouch that tied or buttoned to allow easy access for, you know, whatever it happened to be needed for. However, as the years progressed, it became the central focus of many mens attire and it was not uncommon to have them padded to embellish the size a little. It soon became popular to include codpieces on armor and this is where it really started getting fun, because they actually started to sculpt the metal into obscene and terrible humorous codpieces that were so large it’d make a forty year old whore cower in the corner.
The codpiece finally lost its appeal once Elizabeth I took over the throne as the style suddenly became prevalent for the crotches of men to be a slender as possible – probably to emulate the power of feminity as Elizabeth was their sole sovereign. I do find this a little strange though considering how much Elizabeth loved her men.
Ultimately, when the codpieces were in fashion, size certainly did matter. Yes, you know I HAD to throw that in here somewhere… Hehehe
Topics: Uncategorized | No Comments »
« Previous Entries Next Entries »