For and against a linen kirtle

[frualeydis]

Arguments against and for the linen garment from Rauma being a kirtle/bodiced petticoat and not a smock:

Against: It's linen and, as Pylkkänen says, there are later examples of smocks with a waist seam.
The fact that the bodice is from finer twill and the skirt from a coarser tabby is much like smocks from the 18th and 19th century.

For: On the other hand, there are examples of bodice and skirt being of different fabric on kirtles/bodiced petticoats in the 16th century (Tudor Tailor p 36).
The estimated hem width of the garment is 4,5 metres, which is very wide for a smock; unnecessary wide. The skirt is also pleated to the waist (from gored pieces), which isn't common on the later smocks with waist seams.

Comments

[clothsprogs.livejournal.com]

It sounds to me as if the linen in question is form a kirtle/bodiced petticoat, but I'd personally still shy clear of it being the outer layer and assume instead it's the surviving lining and the wool or whatever that formed the outer layer has not survived.

Teddy

[clothsprogs.livejournal.com]

I should add that my only knowledge of the garment in question is what you've posted in your LJ. This is by no means an informed theory, merely what occured to me from reading your descriptions of it.

Teddy

[frualeydis.livejournal.com]

There are no remnants of outer fabric for example at the waist seam so I think it isn't a lining, since they didn't make up clothing with the lining being a wholly separate garment in those days. But I don't think it's the layer worn outside when properly dressed either. Germany was the main flax growing region in Europe in the 16th and 17th century so that may be a reason for using linen for a bodiced petticoat. Especially since linen canvas was used for outer layers in men's clothing in the 16th century.

There's a child's gown in linen too and there the bodice is in two layers of linen, one lining the other so to say.

/Eva

[frualeydis.livejournal.com]

I realized that.

/Eva

Linen Undergowns

[jillwheezul.livejournal.com]

I spent a little time reading through Textiler Hausrat last night on your linen question. She's very clear that from the inventories and wills that gowns and undergowns are made of linen from the period 1500-1650. The words used included the armelrock (sleeved gown) unterrock (undergown - not shift), halbrock (skirt) and a specific word that I have always interpreted as a kirtle, the stock. She unfortunately didn't actually footnote a reference to a linen undergown before the 1540's so I can't hand you any original source for specific date you wanted(yet). I say it's a pretty safe bet that records could be found. Maybe Marion has gathered more evidence, and I really want to look for more, but my class deadline is rapidly approaching - but only 3 more papers to write! If you want I could post the quotations for you.

Re: Linen Undergowns

[frualeydis.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

/Eva

Re: Linen Undergowns

[frualeydis.livejournal.com]

Eh, and I'd love to have the quotations.

/Eva

Re: Linen Undergowns

[jillwheezul.livejournal.com]

Oops, didn't get this message until now. I'll look them up.