Friday, March 24, 2017

, , , ,

Royal Vintage - Deco Darling Collection Now on Pre-Order!

Hello Darlings!

We are super excited to announce that our sister company Royal Vintage has released the newest collection line for Pre-Order (Delivery in early June)! It's named Deco Darling and it is a jazzy collection of shoes from the 1920s and 30s.

Evelyn, Roxy, and Lillian


As with American Duchess and Royal Vintage Pre-Orders, if you place your order by the end of May you will receive $20 off (Reg. $150) and Free Shipping in the USA! The shoes are already in production, and so we only have a limited number of sizes available.

This line was created on the same last and heel as 23Skidoo, Harlow (Former Exclusive), and Claremont. We've made the adjustments to fix the oxford sizing issue that we had in Claremont, so the new oxford, Evelyn will run true to size. Also, with that 2 3/8" (6cm) heel, you'll be able to walk, work, or dance the whole day or night in comfort!


Above: Evelyn Tan/Brown Below: Evelyn Blue/Brown

Evelyn is a canvas and leather multi-season oxford. We love that the canvas upper with leather details will be cool enough to wear in the summer but the full foot coverage will protect your feet in the spring and fall. The tan and brown color-way will be that perfect neutral for business attire to crisp summer dresses while blue and brown gives a bit more 'KaPow! to your look, and will be especially fun for any menswear inspired outfits in your wardrobe.

Welly Sisters Outfit, Deauville, August 9, 1928, From the book Elegance pg 50 
More Oxfords! Renee Dress, Deauville, August 12, 1923, Elegance pg 156



Above: Lillian Navy/Ivory Below: Sage/Ivory
 Our Lillian shoes are our new colorful mary-jane spectators. Inspired by originals held in museums, our new Lillian is going to be the fun and flirty shoe for all of your garden parties and days out shopping. While we wanted to embrace the 20s and 30s love of color, Lillian will be able to go with all sorts of fun outfits in your wardrobe!

Check it out! Lillian in person! This is Lady Mortimer Davis at the Grand Prix de Deauville, August 1927,  from the book Elegance pg 62 
Shoe, 1920s, Shoe Icons



Shoe, 1930s via




Above: Roxy Gold Below: Roxy Silver

"The name on everybody's lips is going to be...Roxy" :) If you want glam, comfort, and jazz then Roxy is the shoe for you. With gold or silver leather and her rhinestone buckle, she's the perfect shoe for dressing up any outfit and having a glam night out on the town. Lauren wore her gold Roxy shoes all over New York City this fall and was comfortable the whole day.We're kind of obsessed with them... to be honest.

1920s Gold Shoes

1920s Shoes, Shoe Icons 
Silver Metallic Pumps with Ankle Straps, 1920-29, Goldstein Museum
So that's it! This is the newest Royal Vintage Collection. We're so excited about our shoes, and we hope that you are too. The 1920s was such a fun and exciting time for fashion, and we are thrilled with how our collection symbolizes and celebrates this era. Don't forget to check out Royal Vintage to snag yourself a pair today!


Share:
Read More

Wednesday, March 22, 2017

, ,

How to be a Boss at Research - Part 3

How to be a Boss at Research Part 3: Rules of Engagement - Primary Sources

Alright, kids, we're here. Part 3 of what appears to be a very long series about researching historic dress. Let's do a recap before we move on - yes?

Part 1: Introduction to this long series. Go back here if you're just now tuning in.

Part 2:  What are Primary sources and Where you can find them. This section directly coincides with what's coming up. This is a good link to just bookmark so you can refer back to the different databases I've listed in the post.

Rules of Engagement: Primary Sources (AKA how to actually use these silly databases so you get something out of it. (Note: All of my examples are related to the 18th century, but the guidelines are applicable to all time periods....it's just the best era for me to use as examples.)

1.      Spelling. In the 18th century there was more than one way to spell a word, and this lack of spelling formality affects how we research today. Just because you know that we spell Mantua-maker this way today, does not mean that will bring you up a lot of hits on your database. You might (and should) try multiple spellings of words to help you find what you’re looking for. For example: Mantuamaker, mantua-maker, manteau maker, manteau-maker, mantoe (seriously.), etc. You might get repetitive hits, but you also might find hidden information that you missed in your first search.

2.      Understand that our dress history terms are not the same as they were in the 18th century. This is crucial when you are searching 18th century American or English databases. We use French terminology today to describe a lot of the clothing and accessories, but 18th century Americans and Brits did not do that. For example, A robe a la franaise is called a Sacque or Sack in 18th century English. You might find a couple of hits if you search the French term, but you will find a lot more if you use Sacque. (Sack is problematic since it is…well…a sack and you’ll probably get a lot of hits on boring stuff like grain prices, etc.)
True Story.

3.      Accept all information for what it is, and do not leave out things of your research that you do not like because it does not fit your personal narrative of how history is supposed to be.  I cannot state this enough. I have seen time and time again (hell, I’ve probably been guilty of it too!) where people will purposefully manipulate or ignore primary documentation because it does not suit their personal opinion of how that time period is supposed to be. PLEASE DO NOT DO THIS. If you are researching a subject it is now your responsibility to try and understand it from the perspective of the 18th century. Listen to what history is telling you, and learn from it. History is not here to fit into our molds of what we think it was like. We learn from her.

4.      Beware of confirmation bias This is a lot like above, but instead of ignoring information you’re misinterpreting or manipulating faulty resources to suit your viewpoint instead of acknowledging that the information cannot confirm or deny your hypothesis.

Let’s use aprons as an example for both of these bad habits. You’re trying to figure out the most common way to tie an apron during the Rev War period, but information is kind of all over the place, and frankly, the more you look the more your eyes go cross. So you start to only look for images that suit your viewpoint and ignore ones that contradict it. When you do this though, you realize that your image and source documentation is weak, and so you start including images that are debatable (they do not prove or contradict your point, but you want to include them in the “prove” category), misidentify objects to validate your argument, and try to use how people wore aprons in the 1910s to validate how they wore them in the 1770s.  It’s hard for us as costumers and reenactors to acknowledge our deep desire to put history into sealed boxes. We want it to be easy. We want it to be clear. We want rules to follow so we’re not “farby” or “n00bs”. We don’t want to be attacked by people we consider our peers, idols, or anyone. The problem here is when it goes to an extreme and you are ignoring the human element. We are researching a culture. A people. And we are all different. Whether it was the 18th century or the 21st century people are as people are, and we cannot be put into boxes. The more I have researched the 18th century, the more I have realized that while there may be good solid guidelines, there are very few rules, and just like the English language, for every rule there is a lot of breaking of that rules. Look, it’s just human nature.




5.      Running around with a “UFO” as a rule. This goes to the opposite end of the spectrum that I discussed above. There was weird stuff happening in the 18th century. WEIRD. People wore weird fabrics, clothing, etc. They styled themselves differently. This all goes into the human nature element I was discussing above, but it’s also important that you do not take one weird ass story and make it gospel. For example: There is a man’s jacket in the Tailor’s shop at Colonial Williamsburg. It is made out of a bright red and white checked fabric that is commonly used for furniture. When you ask the tailors about the jacket, they’ll go on to explain that they recreated it based off a newspaper advertisement of a runaway slave. This enslaved person ran away…a lot…. so much so that it seems like his master had a jacket made out of the bold fabric check so that way he could be easier to spot. It was so weird, even for the 18th century, that it was made to be used a signifier. Does this mean that you should make a jacket out of red and white fabric check? Not unless you are portraying that particular individual, or one very similar to him, and you use that fabric as an education point. This jacket is a UFO and should be treated as such: Proceed with extreme caution. Context is everything.


Whew! We did it! We got through the Primary source part of this series! Next up is the readily available, but sometimes confusing Secondary sources!





Share:
Read More

Monday, March 20, 2017

,

1820s Green Dress - Basic Measurements and Sleeve Examination

Hey Everyone!

Abby here with another post about the 1820s Green Silk Lustring Dress that has recently come into my possession. (You can read about how I got the dress here. If you're curious as to why I've dated it in the 1820s check out the post here.)

Like I promised and many of you have asked, I'm now going to share with you those fun detail shots, interior pictures, and discuss my construction notes with you. Due to the insane amount of images and notes I've taken on this thing, I'm going to break up the posts into 3 parts: Sleeves, Bodice, and Skirt. Today, we're going to look at my general observations, list of measurements, and the sleeves.

General Observations

- Dress is made up of a bodice with separate skirt. Made up of bottle green silk lustring. Due to fading in places where moisture was present, I am inclined to believe that this green dress was created using yellow and blue dye & not arsenic.
- Minimal signs of damage (tears, holes, shatters).
- No evidence of major remakes or refashioning.
- Threads appear to be mostly 2 kinds. 1 of green silk and 1 of green (faded to yellow in some places) cotton or linen(?) There is black thread used in some cases which might be evidence of later mending & possible mild alteration.
- Bodice is lined in glazed cotton or linen. Unable to confirm without microscope.
- Waistband appears to be of a coarse linen. Also unable to confirm fiber content.
- Sleeves are Unlined.
- Original button still in place at the skirt (and OMG it's so cute!)
- Hooks and eyes are missing.
- Hem of skirt is faced in a brown cotton or linen, and then wrapped in what appears to be a green worsted wool.

Cute button is cute!
List of Measurements

Bust: 30-31"
Shoulder to Shoulder: 20" (dropped shoulder)
Bodice Length: CF- 10.25" CB - 13.375"
Bodice Waist:  26-28"
Skirt Waist: approx 25" (Altered to make smaller. Original size probably around 28")
Sleeve Length: 31.5"/14 nails* (top) & 23.5"/10+ nails (under)
Sleeve Poof: 23" around & about 13.5"/6 nails long (interior tape holding the poof in place is 6.25"/about 3 nails)
Sleeve Wrist: 9" around
9" up from Wrist: 10.75" around
Hem Circumference: 97.5" (5 panels of silk @ selvage to selvage approx. 19.5" wide)
Skirt Length: 40.25" long (not including waistband)

* "nails" is another form of measurement used during this period to get to ell (nail/quarters/ell). Special shout out to A Fashionable Frolick for my housewife w/ my special measuring tape that has nails and quarters marked out for me!
Screenshot from Workwoman's Guide that explains the units of measure. 1 English = 45" and 1 French Ell = 54"...do these numbers sound familiar? Now you know why fabrics are woven at those widths! It's a holdover from this unit of measure. :) 

Now let's talk about the sleeves:


This is the "deflated" sleeve with the broken interior tape. I used this one for my measurements.
Here's the broken tape. You can see how it was reattached with the black thread, but the other side is out of the same greenish thread that is seen all over the dress. I would guess this is linen tape. The other side is a later twill tape fix. 



Detail of the piping and gathering on the sleeve

This the end of the piping that is at the edge of the sleeve. It was originally split up the wrist with piping on the edge. It was whipped closed with the black thread later. I believe the piping is a natural wool yarn 1 to 2 yarns thick in the channel. 
Here's an interior shot of the piping at the wrist (shown above). You can see the knot (!) that secures the faded green thread. The piping is made with running stitches (visible).
There is piecing at the underside of the top of the sleeve. It's mostly invisible from the outside. I'm curious as to how common this was in silk gowns of the period, and if there was a standard "piecing" technique used. It makes sense since we need a lot of fullness at the sleeve head and the silk was only 19.5" wide.  


Another view with the side seam. They're about 3/4" wide and backstitched (12-14 stitches per inch). Also see where the green dye has faded to yellow due to the moisture? The blue dye faded away with the sweat. 



Top of armscye. You can see the back-stitching stops, and it seems like the are just running stitches holding the top of the sleeve in place. I'm a little unsure about what is really going on here. It's very messy, and hard to see. 

Silk side of the same sleeve. Just...yeah...messy. Overcasting....running stitches..just..everywhere. 

Alright, that's it for today! Next week we'll keep looking at the gown (either skirt or bodice - I have yet to decide as of writing this post).
Share:
Read More

Friday, March 17, 2017

, , , , ,

The 1790s "Jane Austen Goes to Ikea" Gown - The Corset

Ikea does it again - Ingmarie curtains >>
This year is 1790s year.

After completing all the book projects, Abby and I can finally settle into share-able projects. Both of us are mad for the 1790s after studying and re-creating various pieces for the '90s Round Gown chapter, so we've decided to explore further.

I'm making an open robe with a gathered bodice and long sleeves, to be worn over an embroidered white-work petticoat.

My sketch for the back of the gown.

I have three new pieces to make for this costume - the corset, petticoat, and gown itself. The corset was a quick project - two layers of linen with very little boning, lacing in front. I based my design on garments shown in Fashion: A History from the 18th to the 20th Century (the KCI book), Corsets: Historical Patterns & Techniques by Jill Salen, and Corsets and Crinolines by Norah Waugh.

My simple two-piece pattern for the '90s corset
The term "corset" or "corsette" existed throughout the 18th century, appearing to describe semi-boned, quilted, or stiffened bodices worn instead of stays. In the '90s there's a shift altogether from stiffly boned stays towards softer, lighter corsets, or stiffened bodices, that created a more natural bust shape while still lending support.

World, 1789 - "The French Corsett"
"Patent and [other] riding habit, elastic stay and corset maker, to which [her] Majesty and the Princesses have been pleased to express their most gracious approbation." - The Morning Post and Fashionable World, 1797                                                                  

"Corsettes about six inches long, and a buffon tucker of two inches high, are now the only defensive paraphernalia of our fashionable belles, between the necklace and the apron strings" - The Times, 1795

Interestingly, many of the 1790s corsets were still to-the-waist and many still had tabs. In experimenting with short and long stays, I've found that the waist length actually effects the bust and how it is raised, supported, or separated (later on). It's boob engineering - the boning in the front of 1790s and early Regency corsets cantilevers off the stomach at the bottom to stay close to the sternum at the top.

A quick try-on. The bust is low and full and round, unlike the high, compressed busts of earlier and later silhouettes.

The corset is bones at the center and side back all the way down into the "tail."
The corset vs. stays has been a bit of a mind melt for me. My inner staymaker wanted this garment to be stiff, with no wrinkles, but 1790s corsets were soft, form fitting, but not *tight* the way stays were. The point is not to reduce the waist but instead to support the bust, so lacing the corset loosely is key. Additionally, the shoulder straps and bustline drawstrings both play important roles - the shoulder straps keep the corset up and pulled in at the very wide side of the bust and the drawstrings on each side pull the sides in further, to eliminate gapping. I've also constructed my shoulder straps in an 18th century posture-correcting configuration seen on several extant pairs, such as these late 18th century stays from the Philadelphia Museum of Art:

Stays, late 18th c., Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1998-162-50 
My '90s stays complete and laid out flat. They're not perfect, but they get the job done.
With the corset done, it's on to the gown. More on that soon...!


Share:
Read More