On Sun, 19 Mar 2006, Jennifer Geard wrote: > Hi All, > > On Tue, 14 Mar 2006 04:50, Kate M Bunting wrote: > > We've debated this topic more than once and the general consensus seems to > > be that chemises/shifts before the 18th century had stitched-down gathers, > > not drawstrings. > > I'm well behind and paying only another flying visit, but for what > _might_ be another take on gathered chemise necklines, have a look at > Raphael's "La Donna Velata" > (http://gallery.euroweb.hu/html/r/raphael/5roma/3/03velata.html - > click image for larger version). Are the black bows with aglets > functional or purely decorative? > > Ten years ago I made a version of this assuming the bow laces were > functional and that they served to gather the camisa neckline. Using > very fine fabric, separate gathering cords for the front, back and > shoulders, and the tightest channel I could sew for the laces [*] I > managed to make something that captured the "look". It's quite > possibly a fake, but if so it's a good enough fake that it made me > wonder whether this might have been the way the gathering was > achieved, even if it was then secured to a woven band.
I remember this one! We had a great discussion of it in May 2004. I've saved a post I wrote then, which I'll append below. ISTR there were lots of different readings of the image, of which mine is only one. Probably worth going back to the archives to read them all, if this image interests you. --Robin Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 13:16:08 -0500 (CDT) From: Robin Netherton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: Historical Costume <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [h-cost] Drawstring chemise On Thu, 20 May 2004, Katie Pleasance wrote: > If you click on the picture enough times you get a *very* enlarged > image that shows much detail. Look at the bow on the right side of the > picture. Look at the left-hand aiglette. Follow that cord back to the > bow. Where the cord intersects the bow is a section of cord jutting to > the left and disappearing into the casing. The casing opening is even > rounded where the round cord enters the casing. To me this is evidence > of a casing with a cord coming out of the casing and the cord > (drawstring) being tied in a bow. The cord is a round cord as would be > used as a drawstring. The bow looks functional rather than decorative. This isn't my period, but I've learned to look for multiple possibilities, and I'm pretty suspicious of drawstrings at this date. I do agree that the bow is functional. And it's also clear that the chemise edge breaks at the point of the bow, so it's discontinuous there. But it's also worth noting that the aiglettes would never pass through the tiny channel that runs along the top edge of the chemise, below the ruffled bit. It's possible that it's a drawstring that was put in first, with the aiglettes added later. But I also wonder if the bow is made of a cord of about five or six inches long, passed through an eyelet on each side of the break at neck edge. Such fastenings (IIRC) appear on Elizabethan shirts, or so I remember reading on this list. It's also worth noting that the bows are placed perfectly for nursing openings, meaning we might be looking at a means of closing slits that run vertically down from the bow points. The fullness of the chemise would keep the slits from opening up in the space between dress and neckline. Not a proof, just another point to consider. > The pleats are a decorative edge trimming the neckline. The pleats > attach to the body of the chemise at the top of the casing. Why do you think that? I would think that such an attachment would add quite a bit of bulk in the seam, which I'm not seeing. The ruffled bit could just as easily be the top part of the chemise fabric whether you're assuming a casing or not, particularly if the casing is made by putting a ribbon along the back of the fabric and stitching top and bottom to form a channel. But I think it still looks more like two lines of stitching holding the chemise pleats in place. Remember also that the artist would paint his impression of the look, meaning we probably won't see individual stitches if they are very small. It also means he may not have had the remotest idea of how the bow was fastened in, but only painted what he saw -- the bow interrupting the line of the chemise top and disappearing into the chemise fabric at each side. --Robin _______________________________________________ h-costume mailing list h-costume@mail.indra.com http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
