|
Period clothing vs. costumes What is the difference between a costume and period clothing? Costumes are designed to provide a certain look. They are typically designed to be viewed from a distance and do not hold up to close inspection. They often do not include accurate portrayals nor are they always made from correct materials - image is their only purpose. Period clothing is copied from the originals. It is made of appropriate fabric and construction techniques. Such garments will last longer and look better over the long run. These garments are like the originals and are more than just an image. Time frame The Spirit of Vincennes Rendezvous allows individuals to wear clothing from a wide time frame, including periods from both the 18th century (1700s) and the 19th century (1800s). As it does today, fashion changed. It is important to know which period of history your clothing represents and to insure that everything you wear is from that period. The most common period of the Rendezvous is the Revolutionary War period (1775 - 1783). All of the military units represent this period. You also may see some individuals dressed in the 1810 -1812 period; this era is in keeping with the Rendezvous theme and matches clothing which would have been worn at both the William Henry Harrison Home and the Indiana Territorial Capital. It is possible to find people dressed to represent the French and Indian War period (1750's - 1763) though there are fewer of these - The differences, in clothing, between the Revolutionary War and the French and Indian War is minimal. Most notably in men's dress is the longer waistcoat (vest). Fabrics Use only natural fabrics. Synthetic fabrics show a shine or sheen that is inappropriate for period clothing. This sheen will become worse over the years as the fabric becomes worn. Not only are man-made fabrics inappropriate, they can be dangerous around reenactments. Most man-made fabrics melt when hot and can create horribly bad burns. This is not good when working around fires etc. Cotton - Was not yet in its heyday but was gaining popularity. It was widely available in the colonies, probably less so within the French communities. Linen - was the most common cloth type during this period. Today, if you can find it, it is often expensive. Be aware of stores which sell "linen" or "linen look". Many of these fabrics are a blend and may contain as little as 5% linen with the remainder being man-made. Check the fiber contents listed on the end of the bolt and/or conduct a burn test to determine fiber content (burn test information appendix 1). Linen/cotton combinations are wonderful for period clothing and are comfortable to wear. Wool - Though most of us are leery of the idea of wool clothing in late May, it actually is a good choice. Wool was worn year-round even into the early 1900s. Wool is an insulator from heat. Wool is durable and will outlast several times a cotton garment. Wool is absolutely the best choice for aprons and for clothing used while working around fires. In addition to being a great insulator from the fire, wool will not burn. It will smolder and smoke when placed in the fire but will immediately go out once it is removed, unlike most other fabrics. Most of the uniforms worn by the military units are wool. Buckskin - No discussion of clothing material is complete without mention of buckskin. Buckskin is just that, the tanned hide of a buck or deer. Buckskin is tough and durable and was often used to make clothing on the frontier after all other cloth was worn out. However, buckskin is uncomfortable, cold, clammy, and near impossible to keep clean. The Hollywood image of Daniel Boone in buckskins sporting long fringe is incorrect. Most clothing would not have any fringe and if it did have fringe it would be short, less than an inch long. Buckskin would have been a last choice option among material types. Fabric Colors When people think about clothing of the 1700s they often believe that everything was earthtone, dull, and home dyed. However, commercial dye operations were quite common. Most any color we have today could probably be made then. Some colors would be more expensive than others and some harder to achieve. Some colors also would have been short lived, fading rather quickly. The French especially enjoyed bright colors. French citizens (before the British took control in 1763) were prohibited from making their own cloth. As subjects of France they were required to buy French cloth which was often colorful and of fine quality. Black - available and used frequently, especially popular among the affluent Blue - widely available but a more expensive dye than some other colors. This color should be used sparingly for frontier personas Brown - Widely used, easy to dye this color even in the remote frontier. Green - Tough dye to make in this period but was available Grey - widely available Pink - available Purple - available but not common Red - harder to dye but was available, like blue, it would be a little more costly Rose-tan - common color Tan - very common Yellow - one of most widely available colors with many natural dyes on the frontier Orange - also available Fabric designs and patterns If one looks through paintings, drawings, descriptions, and remaining garments from the period, a preponderance of plain colors is found. Most people wore garments made of a single color. However, color coordination was not considered important. It would have been perfectly acceptable to wear orange breeches, purple socks, green waistcoat, and a yellow overcoat. After solid colors, stripes would be the next most common design. Stripes were typically wide at least 1/2". Narrow stripes are less common. Stripes can be either horizontal or vertical. Sleeves typically followed the body of a shirt (i.e. a shirt with stripes running vertical would have stripes running around the sleeve as opposed to lengthwise down it.) Best utilization of the fabric was probably more important than which direction the stripes ran. Printed cloth was available. Printing was accomplished by using a wooden block cut with the design. It would then be hand dipped in paint and applied to the fabric. As you can imagine this is a very slow and labor-intensive process, therefore it also was quite expensive. Printed fabrics were typically two colors - the first color would be the color of the fabric - the second color would be the color of the paint. Patterns or designs that used more than one color compounded the problems - not only was it necessary to do all the work by hand but the second color had to be lined up and applied in coordination with the first printing. This compounded the price.
Most printed fabrics in the pre-1800s were made in India.
When choosing patterns for printed material the best advice is to keep it simple. Small floral prints (often believed to be appropriate for French attire) are best avoided. As stated above most prints were only of two colors and contained designs that were rather large (at least one inch). The small multicolor "calico" of today would have been impossible to make during this period. These floral prints would not come into fashion till the 1840's. The word calico comes into usage via the town of Calico, India where much of the printing was done. Checks and plaids were available, theoretically any pattern which is woven today, could have been woven then. While kilts and other Scottish items sport plaids, there is little evidence that they were used elsewhere. Checks on the other hand were fairly common. But, be careful picking checked material, checks should be at least 3/4" with 1" being preferred. Do not use checked gingham! The bottom line is that the best design is no design. Plain cloth is right for any period. Style, Decency, and Social Class Our ideas of decency are very different from those of the 1700s and early 1800s. Basics of right and wrong must be considered when dressing in period clothes.
Decent women would not venture into public without a hat to cover their
head. Women of the early 1800s saw resounding changes in fashion. By 1808 short sleeves were fashionable as the empire style dress spread across the country. Women also would be found without head covers. Men
also need to be aware of common decency issues. Few men would be found
in public without a headcover. Men should also be aware that to be
seen in public without a waistcoat (left), coat, or frock was considered
The social class and setting of the individual being portrayed also must be considered before acquiring clothing for the part. Many people getting started in living history wander through tents at the Rendezvous or page through catalogues picking out the pretty, neat, or interesting items to purchase for their outfit. The result often is a bunch of mismatched items which would not have been worn together by any person from 200 years ago. When purchasing items some decisions about persona must be made (persona is the type of individual you will portray). Where did this person live? Frontier clothing was by necessity different than city clothing. What was this person's social class? Wealthy individuals would have clothing of finer quality, better tailored, and with more intricate prints and details. For example a frontier individual may wear moccasins, while a poor city person would wear shoes with ties. A business man or soldier may wear brass buckles on his shoes while the more affluent may have silver buckles. A wealthy woman may own a gown with intricate printed patters or elaborate embroidery while the frontier woman would have plain clothing of durable fabric. Most common people would own little more than one set of clothing. The wealthy rarely had more than four of five sets of clothing. The individual's nationality becomes a factor in selecting clothing. It is impossible to mention all of the differences and anyone serious about reenacting should do some research. For example American or English women wore petticoats which covered the ankles while French residents of Vincennes may commonly be spotted with petticoats barely below the knee. |
|
The
Spirit of Vincennes, Inc.
is a non-profit organization Web Master Frank Doughman, Webmaster @ spiritofvincennes.org |
As
the printing blocks also were made in India, there is an obvious
connection between the two. Flowers would represent flowers of India -
Roses were not produced on printed cloth prior to the Victorian period
of the late 1800s and are completely wrong for any garment at the
Rendezvous. During the late 1700s the roller press was available
to print fabric (example pictured: note that flowers are still
indicative of India). By 1810 roller printed fabric was quite common.
Fabrics printed in this manner often had rows of repeating patterns and
frequently utilized flowered prints.
While the mobcap is the best known head covering it actually was not so
common. The mobcap was typically worn indoors or worn under a straw or
wool hat. A simple cap (right) would be a better garment for most
women. During the 1700s women would not show elbows or ankles yet
necklines were typically low with little discretion about revealing
cleavage.
to
be naked! No man would go to a "fair" wearing only a white shirt. A
hunting shirt may be worn alone as many frontier people owned nothing
more. However, a shirt and waistcoat would be the preferred dress of
any individual from both periods.