![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
frualeydisI just visited AIPON and looked at a very nice 14th century dress made of linen dyed with madder. It really wasn't the dress that made me upset but something somebody posted about the use of linen in outer garments. If you don't want to see this less sunshine-y and smiling side of me, just skip this:What she/he said was that "the linen debate is just a debate", meaning that you can do as you like, because there are as many arguments for it as against it. It might be so within the SCA and some other re-enactor's groups, but there exists professional research in the field too and while no scholar in the field can say that outer garments in linen didn't exist, there are no published finds of linen outerwear from the middle ages and the general consensus is that wool was the preferred material.
Apart from the lack of finds which can be explained by the fact that vegetable fibres aren't preserved very well there is so much evidence for wool (and silk) and none for linen as material in outer gowns(There is some discussion about literary references to linen outerwear from 12th century southern France, but no clear conclusions can be drawn). I have studied 2000 documents from Norway and Sweden from the period 1200-1500 and found very few references to linen clothes, all of them for underwear. There is what might be a preserved late 15th c linen kirtle in the national museum of Finland (german origin) and queen Margaret's golden gown (early 15th c) is partially lined with blue linen. Compare this with the wealth of references to wool clothing in all kinds of medieval sources and at least I draw the conclusion that it is unlikely that linen was used as the top layer.
Note that I'm not saying that you can't use it, I don't snark people and I even use it for some of my children's clothes because they have more problems with heat than adults. Hell, I use cable ties in my corsets, nylon net on my current project, wool with some polyester in it and other things they never used in period, but then I never claim that they did. But if somebody discusses how it was in the middle ages I say that linen isn't documented in outerwear.
And it irritates the hell out of me when people just brush aside all mine and other's research with "it's just a debate, nobody knows for sure". Yes, nobody knows for sure, but all evidence points in one direction, shouldn't that count for something?
And about the argument that shows up all the time: "It must have been used this way, they just haven't found any evidence of it yet", you can just as well say that they must have had velcro. Yeah, they might have had it but since I'm no psychic I must rely on the evidence we have, which is plenty.
This is the bitchiest thing I've ever written on the internet and it's not intended to hurt or offend anyone. I don't mind using substitutions like cotton velvet if it looks ok when you do costumes, but I think there is a difference between making a conscious choice to use or not to use something and another thing to claim against all evidence that it is period.
I do love you all and I dont't think less of you even if you make your costumes out of reused milk cartons (maybe I would think more of you if you came up with a way of doing that).
Apart from the lack of finds which can be explained by the fact that vegetable fibres aren't preserved very well there is so much evidence for wool (and silk) and none for linen as material in outer gowns(There is some discussion about literary references to linen outerwear from 12th century southern France, but no clear conclusions can be drawn). I have studied 2000 documents from Norway and Sweden from the period 1200-1500 and found very few references to linen clothes, all of them for underwear. There is what might be a preserved late 15th c linen kirtle in the national museum of Finland (german origin) and queen Margaret's golden gown (early 15th c) is partially lined with blue linen. Compare this with the wealth of references to wool clothing in all kinds of medieval sources and at least I draw the conclusion that it is unlikely that linen was used as the top layer.
Note that I'm not saying that you can't use it, I don't snark people and I even use it for some of my children's clothes because they have more problems with heat than adults. Hell, I use cable ties in my corsets, nylon net on my current project, wool with some polyester in it and other things they never used in period, but then I never claim that they did. But if somebody discusses how it was in the middle ages I say that linen isn't documented in outerwear.
And it irritates the hell out of me when people just brush aside all mine and other's research with "it's just a debate, nobody knows for sure". Yes, nobody knows for sure, but all evidence points in one direction, shouldn't that count for something?
And about the argument that shows up all the time: "It must have been used this way, they just haven't found any evidence of it yet", you can just as well say that they must have had velcro. Yeah, they might have had it but since I'm no psychic I must rely on the evidence we have, which is plenty.
This is the bitchiest thing I've ever written on the internet and it's not intended to hurt or offend anyone. I don't mind using substitutions like cotton velvet if it looks ok when you do costumes, but I think there is a difference between making a conscious choice to use or not to use something and another thing to claim against all evidence that it is period.
I do love you all and I dont't think less of you even if you make your costumes out of reused milk cartons (maybe I would think more of you if you came up with a way of doing that).
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2004-01-09 12:55 pm (UTC)I'm not sure I understand this. To me, it sounds virtually the same as the "linen is cooler so I'm going to use it even though I know wool would be more authentic" example you presented. Linen *is* more period than cotton when you're talking about garments in the middle ages. If Lord Joe Shmoe of the SCA thinks that using linen in his garments is more period, he's right. His logic may be flawed, but the overall statement of "linen is more period than cotton" can be viewed as correct on certain levels. Even if he doesn't grasp the concept that "linen as outerwear is not justifiably period", he's at least not standing around in a tunic made from a cotton bed sheet, and that's pretty good progress, SCA-wise. Now, if you're just talking about appearances, that's another can of worms. In all of my relentless searching for a true hanky-weight linen, I haven't found any that even begins to compare with what's being represented in period portraiture during the 16th century. But I have found that cotton batiste is a great substitute as far as look is concerned. So, yeah, I'm substituting a non-period fabric for a more authentic fabric because the authentic fabric doesn't have the right look. I definitely think you're right about using non-period fibers if they're the best substitute for a period "look". This is why, to me, it's perfectly acceptible to use cotton batiste in a chemise, or polyester content in a brocade, or even (the much hated AIPON gripe) lurex threads in a brocade, because they provide a reasonable, affordable and available alternative to the real thing.
If people started with documentation, they wouldn't have such a hard time!
No kidding! Of course, people have issues with a lot of the way stuff looked back then and would rather try to contort documentation to suit their aesthetics than just say "Hey, this is what they did back in the day, live with it". :P
no subject
Date: 2004-01-09 07:41 pm (UTC)Okay, where's the evidence for linen *outer* garments? Where's the evidence for cotton *outer* garments? They're just about on the same footing, so the substitution of linen over cotton *for correctness* doesn't win you any points (in my book). Linen overgarments are just as wrong as cotton ones.
The substitution of linen over wool for comfort, however, is another story. My summer working garb (in the purple (http://people.clemson.edu/~denisen/pictures/2003-fo30/Siege-Engineers.jpg)) is entirely linen and it is COMFY. Is it right? Nope. I'm not sick from heat exhaustion either (has happened to me when I've tried to wear garb too warm for the weather).
I guess the difference to me is that in the second case I'm not fooling myself by thinking I'm being 'more period'. Linen outerwear is unattested in our period. ::grin::
Thought of another way to explain it
Date: 2004-01-09 07:49 pm (UTC)So when he does finally grasp the concept that "linen as outerwear is not justifiably period" (assuming that he cares, which I guess he would since he already made linen garb); he realizes that he's WASTED that money (except the most basic tunics, then he can wear it as an undertunic). If you're going to teach something, teach "linen is underwear material" and "wool/velvet/silk is outwear material" rather than "linen/wool/velvet/silk is acceptable."