Just when you think you've seen it all...

You know, I have come to the conclusion, after doing a great deal of reading and clicking and examining in extreme newbie desperation to nail down some hard and fast rules of 18th century clothing, that there are no rules. I have read and heard from self-proclaimed "veteran" re-enactors that solid browns and blues and yellows were about the only colors and linen about the only fabric available to colonists in America and should be the only colors worn at events. Interesting that extant wills from the area I reenact in (French Illinois territory, about as "on the outskirts" during the 18th century as you can get) list some of the inhabitants as having green and pink silk gowns, stockings and shoes, even though the families were mostly farmers and trappers. And then all over reenactment websites and costuming books, I have read that no 18th century woman in her right mind would have ever created or worn a gown out of the very picturesque Toile de Jouy fabric that was used for bedhangings and drapery. Well....

            TA-DA!  An Open Robe, dated 1785 - 1795, from the National Trust Snowshill Collection.

Granted, it is bizarre-looking, late in the century, and I wouldn't be caught dead in it, but it exists. If you are absolutely desperate to wear your drapery to a late 18th-century event, you now can do so and wave this picture in the face of all the finger-pointers.

It makes sense that there's particular commonalities and details specific to various decades within the 1700s, as well as regional differences, and there do seem to be a number of universally accepted facts about material, print and color that are borne out in existing pieces of clothing. However, if your fabric meets the major qualifications, unless you're using something way off base like My Little Pony quilting fabric or 1970s green, orange and brown floral couch fabric to make your gown (and even then there were some remarkably hideous almost "70s"-looking patterns in the early 18th century) nobody can with perfect accuracy say "that pattern would never have been used on fabric back then" or "they would never have constructed a gown with seams in that fashion." I keep finding astonishing exceptions to the so-called "rules" that a lot of re-enactors seem to have laid down. And yes, perhaps in many cases, these extant gowns/jackets/petticoats/hats were just that: exceptions. One of a kind mishaps or lapses in judgement or just plain making-do with the only materials they had. And when you think that none of these clothes came out of an industry or factory that was standardizing them, and each mantuamaker would have been taught certain basics but had their own preference for how to do things, it makes sense that a great deal of variation existed. The fact is that they DO exist and if you really want to justify your decision with an obscure example, why the heck not?  As long as we aren't trying to make sweeping generalizations and are willing to talk about the uncommonality of an item, I think it's important to appreciate the variety necessitated by the unregulated circumstances under which clothing was made.

Also, a few hapless seamstresses or tailors occasionally accomplished some unbelievably hideous stitchery and seams back then. I feel better about mine.

Belated pictures

At last I have remembered to get the pictures off my iPhone from Halloween...the only time so far I have worn the pink l'anglaise out anywhere. I had to work on Halloween night (I work at a library) and gave up telling people I was anyone in particular and just went with "English Aristocrat from the 1700s". To be fair, the dress isn't exactly trimmed like an upper class gown would've been, and the pastel colors weren't dramatic enough to be accessorized with a giant paste necklace from the thrift store, but it was still a great deal of fun and I didn't even get hot in all the layers, which bodes well for wearing the dress to Summer Rendezvous.

Buckles at just the right time from American Duchess!

Just when I think I have spent about all I am going to spend on 18th century pretties, American Duchess has come out with yet another frippery I MUST have!

"Closely based on antique 18th century shoe buckles, the "Fleur" silver rhinestone buckles are the perfect accessory to keep the latchets on your 18th century shoes closed. Our "Fleur" buckles are delicate, feminine, and lightweight. Add that extra sparkle to your outfit and keep your shoes fastened in the most historically accurate and beautiful way.  Read more about the Fleur buckles here.

"Fleur" buckles come in pairs, and are available to buy here."


Now really, can you look at that and say you don't want them? I can't.

I love mail.

There is no better feeling than reaching in your mailbox and pulling out a package that you've been waiting on. In this case, I had two, and they were shoe buckles!

It's a leetle hard to see the detail here, sorry, my camera was not really cooperating! And then the less fancy buckles came also and they have a really neat kind of antique finish on them already. I love that they're not pristine-ly shiny.

Tada! Also, before I took the pictures I noticed that my Georgies had grass stains on them...so I took a damp cloth and wiped them and amazingly the grass stains came right off and the dye did not...I am really impressed by the power of Scotchgard.

Still waiting on the rhinestone buckles, but I think I probably won't show those off until I get the leather paints and can decorate the Devvies.

Buckles and Bows

Today, after being bored out of my wits by the pink anglaise's never-ending hem (I like hand sewing but am feeling impatient lately) and not feeling like finishing my other mitt (the first one turned out nice...but one mitt isn't much good), I started looking seriously at my Georgiana silk and Devonshire leather shoes from American Duchess. These have been the most sizable investment I've made in my 18th century wardrobe by far, but so comfortable and worth it! I ordered the Angelus leather paint supplies for the Devonshires today and while they didn't have a nice cream or ivory color, I will attempt to mix mustard and white. To the best of my knowledge, there aren't any extant leather shoes with designs painted on them, but because I foolishly scotch-guarded my silk Georgies in a hurry to have them ready for an event and now (as far as I know) can't re-dye or paint on them again, I would love to have some shoes with a design on them. I may do a very subtle vine-like design on the leather Devvies to make up for this, and use the matte finish so they're not so obviously shiny leather.

But because the Angelus paints won't get here for some time, I got antsy and started looking at buckles. To date I have tied my Georgies with ribbon and it's pretty, but I want OPTIONS...."Accessories" is my middle name. Aren't these GORGEOUS (European, ca. 1770, V&A Museum).

So I did a little shopping around.....

A nice fall day

I went to a benefit event for the Fort in my blue jacket, new maize petticoat and sky-blue Georgies (from American Duchess) and it ended up being the nicest event I have done yet, because it was smallish reenactor-wise (compared to the hundreds at summer Rendezvous) and a number of the people who had bought tickets to attend were very curious about the reenactors and what they were doing. I was asked numerous times about my outfit, what I was sewing (a haversack), what I knew about the Fort and the area's history, etc. I think it was a great deal more enjoyable to go by myself (usually I'm with a very, well, shall we say extra-talkative gentleman-friend) because it made me a little more approachable and I got the chance to share some of what I do and know and I really loved being informative instead of just decorative. Hopefully I'll get to do this a lot more often!

Alright, enough of the text stuff...time for a few pictures...

More pink progress

I definitely squeaked a bit in exhausted joy once I got the skirt on just a few minutes ago at 1:45am. Ouch. It's looking pretty 80s (and by that I mean 1980s, not 1780s)  like a Laura Ashley frumptastic tea gown right now despite having a quilted puffer petticoat beneath, so I am going to have to do what I really wanted to avoid and make either a bumroll or some panniers. Once the bottom is cut off and hemmed though, that should lighten up the fabric load a bit. Plus Adeline is being a loose woman tonight and is not wearing stays in this shot...naughty dummy...so that might have an affect on the fit as well. For this being my first entirely hand-sewn, self-drafted gown, I don't think it's looking too terrible. It's almost a shame to cut it off at the bottom as it looks pretty trailing, but it's completely impractical for reenactments. I could polonaise it but the fabric is just too unreasonably heavy for it to have that nice poof.