#great farthingale

[enchantedchocolatebars]

The Bum Roll

Summary: An interesting item is discovered by Kid Philip inside a laundry basket.

Original headcanon

Ao3 version

Enjoy!

As the warm sun casts a gentle glow on the set of clothes hanging on a clothesline in the front yard of a home, a woman hummed while putting each article of clothing into her round basket.

Once the final article of clothing was placed on top of the crisp pile, the woman placed her basket down in the sun and returned inside.

"That this, evil witch!" Philip cried out as he engaged in a pretend battle with an imaginary witch while on his way home.

As he struck and stabbed the "enchantress" multiple times, both his attacks and footwork were slightly uncoordinated.

During combat, Philip noticed something crescent-shaped in a laundry basket in someone's yard when he looked to his right.

"Huh?" Approaching the basket, he managed to get a better look at the item as he picked it up.

He then began squeezing and stretching the strange object, noting how soft it felt in his grasp.

"I've never seen something like this before," he whispered to himself in wonderment, tilting his head.

"I wonder what it could be."

As Philip continued to stare at the item, an idea of what it could be came into his mind.

A loud gasp soon escapes him, and an excited smile dances on his lips as his blue eyes fill with stars.

"Of course!" he shouted and hurried home to show his brother his new discovery.

Opening her door, the woman from before goes over to her basket and grabs it as she heads back into her home once more, failing to notice her missing farthingale.

...

"Caleb, Caleb, Caleb!"

"Hm?" The eldest turned his gaze when he heard his little brother burst through the front door, his bright voice brimming with excitement as he called out his name.

"Yes, Pip?" Caleb asked with a smile as Philip rushed up to him with what appeared to be a padded roll.

Philip showed off his recent discovery with great pride as he spoke.

"Caleb, look at this cool piece of armor that I found! Witches wear it while carrying out their evil deeds to protect themselves! We have to try it on! If we do, we might be able to absorb their magic and use it against them!"

As his brown brows furrowed, the brunette had a cute, mischievous smile on his face.

"Can you imagine the frightened look on their faces when they see us wearing this?" he inquired with a dark chuckle.

However, the only one who had a frightened expression was Caleb.

He quickly recognized the type of garment his brother was holding, and he felt the color drain from his face.

"P-Pip, where on earth did you get that from?!" Caleb squeaked out in shock, his eyes wide.

"Oh, this?" Philip began with a placid smile. "I found it in a laundry basket! Now help me put it on! Does it go on like this?" he asked, putting the padding roll around his hand like a bracelet.

When that doesn't feel right, he takes it off and places it around his neck like a necklace. "Maybe like this?"

"N-No!" Caleb shouts, cheeks flushed with embarrassment as he quickly but gently removes the garment from Philip's neck and holds it. "This is not meant to be worn by you, Pip."

"It's... not?" Philip blinked innocently. "Then... who's it meant for?"

"It's... meant for girls...," Caleb explained nervously, scratching the back of his head while breaking eye contact and looking away awkwardly.

He silently prayed that Philp wouldn't inquire further with questions.

"Girls?" Philip asked incredulously. "Caleb, why the heck would a girl want to wear that thing?"

"Well... it's so that... she's want to make her... look..." Caleb sighed, deciding to bring an end to the conversation.

"Look, we'll discuss it later when you're older."

"But Caleb--"

"When you're older, Pip!"

[marzipanandminutiae]

Hello! My friends and I just watched The Secret of Moonacre, and we were wondering if these exposed bustles in the dress were ever a thing. I wasn't sure what to do other than a quick google search, but I've been following you for a while, and hoped you might have some insights!

Not that I'm aware of! In the era this is riffing on bustle-wise (mid-late 1880s, looks like), great pains were taken to hide the lines of the bustle beneath the skirt. In fact, earlier satirical cartoons mocked the way "ignorant" maids supposedly wore cage crinolines by showing Visible Hoop Line:

(The Way To Wear 'Em, March 1864. Cage crinolines/hoop skirts were cheap and universally popular, which made some upper-class people very nervous about a potential narrowing of the symbolic gap between Haves and Have Nots.This manifested in classist satire, often tinged with anti-Irish prejudice in the US since many Irish immigrants worked in domestic service here.)

The hooping-wire used to create such understructures was meant to be hidden by a petticoat between the hoops or bustle and the outer skirt.

You do sometimes see much earlier Spanish farthingales worn as overskirts with decorative, colorful "ribs":

(Salome from the St. John Retable, Pedro Garcia de Benabarre, c. 1470-80)

but I don't think that's what the movie has adapted for its costumes

of course, it's a fantasy not set in our world at all, so the inaccuracy doesn't bother me. but there's the history behind it, since you asked!

[artaphant]

Corsetry design for creating a hoop skirt, best attached with webbing and buckles to avoid cutting into the waist.

Skirts!

Horsehair- sewn into the lower layer to give waves into a gown

HANG AND ALLOW FOR STRETCH ON A CIRCLE SKIRT then resize before designing.

Bodice!

Not always a corset or boned bodice

Boned bodices place boning along the seam lines to keep the fabric smooth and long. Will not change the shape of the bodice like a corset though.

Buy your bodice for the construction, not the style. Most measurements are made for a B cup- you're better off making a higher bust and taking in to fit.

SLASH AND SPREAD- great for adding poofs to sleeves.

References- Cosplay panel. Also the book "The Cosplay book of Ballgowns"

Corsets! W/ Cowbutt Crunchies Cosplay

Expect to have 3+ mockups before the finished product.

Check out the Facebook for Truly Victorian to get community help too.

Mockups should use cheaper fabric, usually muslin so you can draw on it and it won't tear. And add bones to the mockups! Heavy duty zip ties work well.

Middle's issue- the spacing is off in the lacing. The cup should be bigger.

Wrinkles are the best indicator of a problem, when in doubt try ripping a seam for how the fabric moves.

Prewash fabrics!! And follow the grain lines on the fabrics. Mark each piece, stay organized or things will go together upside down and you will cry.

Contille fabric is the standard for corset fabric. Get it all from a coset specialty store, farthingales is Canada based and good for gown supplies too. Some of those places will let you buy boning to length w/ tips and coatings.

Featherlite will not work for anything don't do it.

Bone casing- super helpful in setting in the bones where you need. Twill tape can also work- also good for hoop skirts.

Busk- front hooks to open the corset and will have a bone and seam included.

Corset flossing?

DO NOT MACHINE SEW AFTER THE BONES ARE IN STEEL V STEEL IS NO GOOD.

Magnets and buckles into a corset for armor pieces!!!

Bernadette Banner- historical costumer with scoliosis for good tips.

Foundational sewing books are best starts and "old lady" blogs. THREADS MAGAZINE- get the online archive for resources from 1970's on super helpful.

[isadomna]

Juana of Portugal (1439-1475)

She was the posthumous daughter of King Duarte of Portugal and his wife Leonor of Aragon. Juana grew up in exile with her mother, due to the intrigues of the Portuguese court, and lived first at the Monastery of Santa María in Medina del Campo and later in Toledo, where Leonor of Aragon died. At the age of six, Juana returned to the Portuguese court of her brother Afonso V.

In 1455 the young Juana married her cousin Enrique IV of Castile, who had repudiated his first consort after thirteen years of marriage. The couple produced no children. The marriage was annulled on the grounds of an impotence that was specific rather than general, an impotence that applied only to Enrique’s relationship with Blanca of Navarre. Yet such an extraordinary  explanation amounted to a case of maleficium (spell), with the clear implication that Blanca was the guilty party, and in addition she was obliged to leave Castile and return to Navarre.

Juana of Portugal was described as beautiful, cheerful and coquettish. The sources speak of the licentiousness introduced by the young Queen and her ladies in the austere Castilian court. They liked to use perfums, makeups, dresses that displayed too much décolletage, and flirting with men. One of her ladies, Guiomar de Castro, was King’s mistress, causing the anger of the Queen, and other, Mencía de Lemos, was Cardinal Mendoza’s mistress. 

Six years after her wedding, Queen Juana was pregnant. Some say it was a miracle, others that it was the result of some sort of artificial insemination that the couple had tried, as was recorded by a german traveler. During this period, Juana insisted that Enrique's teenaged brother and sister, Alfonso and Isabel, forcefully be brought to the court and away from their sick mother. Many saw this as a way of making sure her daughter's path to the crown would encounter no obstacles. The Queen gave birth to a daughter named Juana, officially proclaimed heir to the Crown of Castile and created Princess of Asturias.

Queen Juana planned the marriage between her sister-in-law, Isabel of Castile, and her brother Afonso V of Portugal, and her daughter with her nephew Prince Joao. She wanted with these weddings an annexation of the Crown of Castile with the kingdom of Portugal.

In early 1460s, Castilian nobles became dissatisfied with the rule of Enrique IV, and believed that Princess Juana was not King’s daughter. They called her la Beltraneja, a mocking reference to her supposed illegitimacy. Propaganda and rumour encouraged by the league of rebellious nobles argued that her father was Beltrán de la Cueva, a royal favorite of low background who had been elevated to enormous power by Enrique and who, by some, has been suggested as Enrique's lover.

Many nobles refused to recognise Princess Juana and preferred that Enrique instead name his younger half-brother, Alfonso as his heir. This was agreed to on the condition that Alfonso marries little Juana. Not long after this, Enrique reneged on his promise and began to support his daughter's claim once more. The nobles in league against him conducted a ceremonial deposition-in-effigy of Enrique outside the city of Avila and crowned Alfonso as a rival king. 

Queen Juana and her daughter were removed from the court. They lived in various castles as hostages, separately or together, protected by a faction of the nobility. The love affair of Queen Juana with the Bishop Fonseca’s nephew, Pedro of Castile, and the birth of her two illegitimate sons, caused great scandal. As a result of the need to conceal the pregnancy of her illegitimate sons, Juana of Portugal is considered the inventor of the farthingale.

In 1468, Alfonso of Castile died and Princess Juana was stripped of her succession-rights. Her aunt, Infanta Isabel, was placed before her, on condition that Isabel marry a man chosen out by the monarch. Queen Juana and her daughter sent a formal appeal to the Supreme Pontiff. Enrique accepted to divorce his wife and send her to Portugal, but Juana remained in Castile as king's wife, though separated of her husband. Isabel married Fernando of Aragon with the opposition of Enrique IV.

In 1470, Princess Juana was engaged and then married by proxy to the Duke of Guienne, brother of Louis XI of France. In the face of the French ambassador, King Enrique and Queen Juana swore before a crucifix that the Princess was their legitimate daughter. The French marriage never consummated, because the duke died two years later in France. Queen Juana always defended her daughter’s rights to the throne, and she had an active political participation. Queen Juana tried to get the support of nobles and cities, but with meager success and without palpable results. In 1474, Enrique IV died at the Alcázar of Madrid and rumors circulated that the late monarch had been poisoned, his wife and his daughter demanded an investigation. Queen Juana died a few months after her husband’s death at the age of 36. In the last months of her life, she lived at the convent of San Francisco in Madrid. The cause of her death is unknown.

Bárbara Lennie played Juana of Portugal in TV series "Isabel"

[helreginn]

"I could but I don't want to go there." She huffed, indignant and loud. "I was there, Em. For the Corsets and the Crinolines and the Baldricks and the Tippets and the Mahewters and the Farthingales and the Kirtles and the Ruffs. Much fun. So great." If the tone of her voice wasn't enough to establish her sarcasm, the eye roll probably hit that point home. "It wasn't all mead and giant turkey legs, you know? It was brutalitarion and dark. Not my idea of fun. Well, okay the tippets I do actually like.. "

"Then we'll hit up your house, get you a bath and new clothes first. A bath can be healing too!"

"You could look like yourself at a renfair."

Emrys pushed himself up to his feet, rubbing the palm of left hand with his right thumb. The glamor flickered around his fingertips, curling up his arms till his skin was smooth again.

"You realize I stink right?"

[sartorialadventure]

Princess Elizabeth Stuart of England, Queen of Bohemia, 1596-1662

1. 1603 (age 7) 2. By Nicholas Hilliard, ca 1605-1610 (age 9-14) 3. Ca. 1606 (age 10) 4. Ca. 1610 (age 14) 5. Exact identity of sitter unknown, but possibly Elizabeth Stuart. By Marcus Gheeraerts, 1612 (age 16) 6. In mourning for her elder brother, the Prince of Wales. From the studio of Michiel Jansz. van Miereveldt, ca. 1613 (age 17). The year of her marriage. 7. 1613, age 17, the year of her marriage 8. From the Atelier de Mierevelt, ca. 1630 (age 34) 9. From the studio of Gerrit van Honthorst, 1631 or later (age 35+) 10. By Gerrit Honthorst, 1650 (age 54)

[godlovesdykes]

wouldn't be surprised if i just missed it but have you made a compilation of refs you found useful while learning historical sewing?

i have not! that’s such a good idea. this is by no means extensive, but i hope it helps :)

resources for historical sewing

websites:

sew historical: this blog has everything from seam finishes to fashion timelines to drafting tutorials.

elizabethancostume.net: this website was invaluable to my first big project, a spanish farthingale.

james williams tailoring: for masculine clothing and tailoring techniques

met fashion plates database: for research and inspiration

youtube:

evelyn wood is indispensable if you are sewing from a pattern. she has videos on every possible machine technique to make you a better sewist.

cocovid was an online teaching event a few years ago; the videos are all still available on youtube. it’s a great playlist for basic skills, inspiration, and to introduce you to the resources available on youtube.

the costume community on youtube is very helpful, but each creator has their own blend of inspiration and tutorial. i suggest searching youtube for the project or period you would like to try and watching a bunch of videos to find out whose style works for you.

nicole rudolph’s fabric 101 videos

patterns:

here’s a free pattern for a very cute cape from american duchess, and another free pattern for cycling bloomers from black snail.

don’t use patterns by the big pattern companies (butterick, mccall’s, etc). use black snail, laughing moon, truly victorian, and other historically focussed companies. they will give real historical construction methods.

facebook groups: i know facebook is for old people, but these groups are very useful!

historybounding: for inspiration

historical sewing: for advice

historical costume sewing and sarcasm: for both

vintage clothing fixes: a highly opinionated group, but helpful especially for cleaning tips

time traveler’s rabbit hole: for primary sources

books: a lot of historical sewing books are very expensive. if you have university library access, you can get almost anything through interlibrary loan. talk to your librarian!

patterns of fashion: THE book series for historical costume. patterns for advanced sewists taken directly from extant garments. i just drool over them for now

bernadette banner has a new book out on hand sewing--i haven’t read it yet, but i really admire her hand sewing techniques.

general advice:

historical sewing takes a lot more time and effort than modern sewing. start small, with a cap or chemise, and prepare to be frustrated. don’t expect things to work the first time around. it’s okay to use modern construction methods or to not be historically accurate. trawl thrift stores for fabric, notions, bedsheets. work slowly. make mock-ups!!!

i learned a lot by examining vintage and antique clothing. one of the best purchases i made for my sewing journey was a vintage theatrical costume which had been taken in and out to fit many actors over the years. examining and fixing it was sooo useful.

for me, hand sewing is much more comfortable and soothing than machine, but i still use a machine for long seams and hems. if you want to hand sew, watch bernadette banner and juul thijssen’s videos on technique. learn to use a thimble!

take classes online and in your community. read 10-year old blog posts about highly specific projects. take your sewing everywhere. use cheap fabric the first time you make something.

talk to me on or off anon if you like! i’m by no means an expert, but i love talking about sewing and i can point you towards more specific resources.

[designsfromtime]

Hem Transitions: Yikes!

HEM TRANSITIONS: They are not that difficult if you follow a few basic rules! 

Today's Ted Talk is a short object lesson on what "TO AVOID.”

Those who have followed me for a while, or who know me personally, can attest to the fact that I usually avoid saying anything negative about another costumer's work - in public. I might comment in private and have WTF moments, such as with THIS example, but I rarely call attention to this kind of stuff, more especially using pictures. BUT having taken over this particular individual as a client and discussing what can possibly be done to rework this current gown, I want to offer this particular construction faux pas as a teaching moment.

FIRST: For the love of God, USE MORE FABRIC!

This is one of my pet peeves. I mean, as a perfectionist, it really sticks in my craw, ya’ll. Seriously. I see this all the time! Usually, it has to do with budget. The costumer or DIY’er is trying to be frugal with the amount of fabric they use so they scrimp on skirt volume. I get it, ya’ll. Fabric is costly! Linen, just basic old Linen is now up to $15+ a yard through Fabric-store.com.

But listen, I was raised by my grandmother who came from a generation that taught, “If you’re going to do something, do it CORRECTLY the first time.” It’s also the reason I am such a perfectionist because I was taught by a perfectionist, and I understand that these gowns are expensive – or at least those of quality, and my grandmother's generation, who lived through the Great Depression, taught and embraced sustainability. If it’s constructed correctly, if quality materials are used, if the craft person takes pride in his/her workmanship, then a gown (or a men’s ensemble) should last for several seasons. It should not fall apart after one weekend at faire, which I have seen happen to fellow rennies who purchased gowns overseas on the cheap. Now, I should add as a caveat that how the garment is stored and cleaned has a lot to do with sustainability. It hits hard when I have seen my gowns stuffed into a suitcase and toted to faire, then pulled out and it's a squashed mess. *face palm*

Long story short, if more fabric was added to the skirt in this picture, you would not see this drastic drop off, but a gradual transition. Also! Wear a bum roll, I beg of you.

WHERE SHOULD THE HEM START TO TRANSITION?

The front hem of these skirts should hit to about the top of your big toe. I usually have my clients take their measurement from their natural waist to the top of their big toe. I then generally take back an inch. You do not want your fabric to drag the ground or completely cover your feet. Why? Speaking as someone who has worn noble gowns, and who is SHORT (I’m only 5’2”), when your skirts are too long, just the slightest bend forward can cause you to step on your hem and trip. I’ve done that! Nothing says poise and grace like going arse over teakettle in front of the entire faire!

The width of the front of the gown hem should span from pelvic bone to pelvic bone, or the width of your forepart BEFORE it starts to transition. The sides of the gown, starting at about the pelvic bone, should begin to gradually transition from the shorter front hem (to avoid tripping) to the sides, and then to the back. The sides and back are usually a bit longer to accommodate the bulk of your bumroll. This is why it is imperative that you take your measurements wearing your bumroll AND your farthingale. The hem on the front, sides, and back should be subtlety different rather than a drastic cut-off. I start by adding a half inch to my side-front measurement, then graduate to 3/4 inches, then end up at 2 inches in the back - depending on the size of the bumroll. Sidenote: I HATE fat bumrolls. I usually cut my patterns down by about two inches!

HOW MUCH MORE FABRIC SHOULD I USE?

On average, I use about 6 to 7 yards of fabric for a skirt. My general yardage is: 10 yards for the gown, two yards for contrasting sleeves, and 4 yards for the forepart. Most of the time I’m working with fabrics that are 54” to 58” inches wide. I use on average FOUR panels to construct my skirts. Yes, four! If someone is very small, like a size 0 to a size 5 or 6, I will use three. The average woman in the US is about a size 14/16, so I use four panels. And if it's silk, flat line it! Otherwise, it's not going to drape properly.

Why so much volume?

It’s not just a personal preference, though it definitely is in my case, if you haven’t used enough fabrics your pleats don’t hang properly. To put it another way, they cannot hang at all! Rather, the fabric is stretched too tightly over the farthingale, which spreads out the pleats at the top and the fabric cannot drape. Now, there are some 16th Century gowns where the skirts were more tightly conical, but these were usually seen in early Tudor, or among middle class, who: #1 – could not afford a court gown, and #2 – certainly would have nowhere to wear said court gown, since to be a lady in waiting among the Queen’s court you needed to be titled, or at the very least among the gentry. That’s another topic for another time.

Aside from aesthetics, when you scrimp on fabric for your skirts your “transition” will be much more obvious, and I think we can all agree this is not an optimum outcome.

I get some folks may not spot these kinds of faux pas at a glance, but this old grey mare has been around for a while and because I have an eagle eye for detail, and I’m observant, I spot these kinds of things. Now that you’re aware, you can spot them too, and make some adjustments in your budget and construction to avoid these kinds of unsightly mistakes.

In a nutshell, the skirt should be full enough that your hem transitions are not obvious as seen in the photo above. Yeah, I get that adding another panel can mean the difference of about another 2 to 2.5 yards of fabric, but the outcome will be worth the additional $40 to $45 bucks, I promise you! 

P.S. I’m going to do a tutorial to teach you all a better way of installing the silver metallic trim to avoid just folding over the corners. *heavy sigh*

[vincentbriggs]

Do you have any recommendations for where to buy ribbon online, by any chance? I'm in Canada, looking for any solid colour ribbon in any natural fiber. Literally does not matter what kind. Everything I have seen so far has been polyester, and it's depressing.

I've bought a bit of silk ribbon from a few places - Renaissance Fabrics, Burnley & Trowbridge, and Wm. Booth Draper all have it. Those are all U.S. stores, and I'm sure there are more, but I don't know of any online sources in Canada. (I haven't looked particularly hard for ribbon specifically though)

Etsy is usually my go-to place to search when I'm looking for something odd that I can't find elsewhere, and I've had great success finding more affordable wooden button moulds, and specific embroidery supplies. I got some teeny tiny 2mm wide silk ribbon on etsy earlier this year, which I was worried I wouldn't be able to find at all! There are also a lot of nice vintage rayon ribbons on etsy, so it's definitely worth looking there. (Even if an annoying amount of search results for "ribbon" are just frayed strips of fabric.)

Since I'm in Canada too I'll include links to the few stores I know of and have ordered from that are in Canada, though they're not very ribbon related. Pure Linen Envy where I get my shirt linens, Farthingales Corset Making Supplies where we got our boning & eyelets from in the college sewing course I took, and Design Your Fabric which does custom printed fabric.

Here's a post with a big list of links to Canadian fabric stores. It's from 2018, so I'm sure some are outdated, but there are quite a lot of them. Edit: it seems the writer is still replying to comments and keeping it updated, good good!

[cloudninetonine]

Everyone kinda writes about yan chain, but I kinda want to write about yan Zelda…. and blasphemous: Hylia(?) Like Eldritch Goddess who would do morally wrong decisions for their darling? I’m a simple lady. ᕕ( ᐛ )ᕗ Imma go now, sorry for my simping.

As a Pansexual, I relate to this answer.

As a writer, I decided to do something about it. (AND YOU SHOULD TOO, MAKE SURE TO TAG ME IF YOU DO-)

There's a hint of suggestiveness under the tag and talk about NSFW topics but no outright smut. There's also talk about death, obsession, the usual yandere stuff.

Also, I didn't try to specify the Zelda, but it is hinted at as an older one.

It's not super long please forgive me :')

EDIT: This is gdner neutral! Tho it does talk about past lives having different genders in this piece the reader is not specified.

“You know that my love for you runs deep, my dear”

Your eyes raised from her leg, the stocking within your hand resting just at her toes when you met her warm, unyielding gaze, a love most foul reflecting off those glazed pools of aquamarine that had you ducking back down with an air of diffidence, slowly sliding the fabric up her smooth skin. “I am aware, your majesty”

Oh yes, you were quite aware. Her Majesty, Princess Zelda had made it very clear during your life- lives. There were too many of them now, too many people you had played as your role of the Princess’ love: The knight, the bard, the jester, the noble, the foreign royal and more- now the once great adventurer, a legend amongst men being reduced to a simple attendant, stitched to the woman’s side for so long should you live this life. It had been like this for so many generations, thousands upon thousands of years being the obscure, docile leman right up to the holy woman herself- Hylia was one to keep a tight leash around her pets.

It seemed this transcended beyond one lifetime.

“You are, aren’t you?” Her hand, delicate and soft, reached out towards your face, dragging a single finger down your cheek in an action to a caress. You made sure to keep your shiver down, lest you face the displeasure of breaking her fabricated truth of your shared affection and instead focused on tying her garters in place “Of course, I have made sure to ingrain it into your memory-”

You stood abruptly, a mixture of different scarring emotions churning within the chasm of your gut before you released a breathe, brushing away whatever wetness that gathered at your eyes then lending out your hand to her to help her stand. The woman took it gratefully, standing to her full height and just meeting your gaze, her heels which you had helped her into adding to her figure. “I will grab your farthingale”

‘Ingrain it into your memory’

The Goddess had cursed you with a heedful memory. You remembered all, everything about each past life you had experienced, nothing was lost to you. Hylia had so kindly gifted it to you so that you would never forget her ‘love’ and so you would never forget her. Not a single moment went by where you didn’t think about the many faces she wore, Princess Zelda was in every existence you ever saw, she wouldn’t let you forget her, just like she wouldn’t forget you. You were forced to live our eternity by her side.

You drew breath in a tortured metempsychosis all because she couldn’t let you rest, because she was selfish.

It enraged you.

Princess Zelda’s eyes stayed on your face when you gestured for her to raise her arms, the skirt bunched up in your hands. She studied you- she always did that, dazed in a sort of lovesick trace that made you want to coil in absolute disgust but you had learned to live with it by now, whatever went through her mind during these times was both a mystery and painstakingly obvious so you merely sighed, calling for her attention once again “Please raise your hands, my lady”

After another moment of silence, she sent you an elegant smile and raised her hands, letting you fit the farthingale over her head and tidying it around her waist, next turning to grab her corset. Zelda always liked this part, something you learned when the garments had begun to grow in popularity a few centuries ago, having you pull her closer, face just a few inches from her own as you so gently adjusted her front, then grabbed her hips to turn her around and tighten the strings accordingly (eyes always on you, she never let you escape her vision so she made it difficult at the start, always spinning and spinning and spinning with that infuriating giggle until you just grabbed her and twirled her around. She began to behave after that).

“You’ve always been so gentle with me” Grabbing your hand, she brought it to her face and nuzzled it against her cheek, eye falling close to focus on the sensation of your skin on hers (and leaving you a chance to roll your eyes in absurdity) “So kind, even back then, at the beginning of our love, your hands have always been tender”

Because of the lurking protector within the shadows, is what you reasoned. Impa, the royal advisor and bodyguard to the princess was always nearby, Goddesses, she was probably behind the door of Zelda’s room waiting for any slipups. The Sheikah woman had never strayed far from her side, but by choice opposed to you, something that you questioned time and time again each reincarnation when she showed her face. You remember a few times, in a few different lives, pleading with her to let escape for your sanity and the sake of freedom; she was faithful to the princess, so you turned to more violent actions in different times. Each attempt on Zelda’s life went unnoticed by the royal, thwarted by her ever-so-loyal guard and had you thrown into your room (if Zelda were ever to discover you were even near the royal dungeons she would have Impa’s head) to let you scream, cry or fight yourself to exhaustion.

“I’m sorry” A shawl was placed over your shoulders, the head of the royal guard leaning down to your height to pull you close to her warm side, only glancing around the ‘tantrum’ torn room once then turning back to you, body curled into self, arms around your legs and chin resting on your knees, dead eyes trained on the wall “But I cannot allow you to hurt the princess, she and The Hero are the only ones able to defeat Ganon or at least keep him at bay, the lives of millions greatly outweigh your own”

You didn’t bother to react.

You understood her position and you knew she did indeed hold sympathy for you, but you could only take so much from a supposed ‘ally’ before her character began to rot in your mind, Zelda’s control tainting your view of a strong, independent warrior into an obedient lapdog. (There were only a small handful of lives where she had advocated for your freedom, or even helped you escape, but those memories were lost to you now, overwhelmed by your bitterness and buried because of the consequences she faced for her actions, consequences that would have the guilt eating you alive.)

Although, Impa wasn’t there for your first life. No, just the Goddess and you, her faithful right hand. The existence you refused to dwell on because…well, you didn’t always harbour a hatred for the woman who you had come to know as your captor.

“Your majesty, please” Pulling your hand away, you focused back onto your duty, fetching the next garment for her attire “Your father ordered for you to be ready for the banquet by dusk- I must have you ready by then”

There was a huff behind you, no doubt a heavy scowl carved into her perfectly sculpted face with her hands coming to rest on her hips “That old fool and his incessant orders, does he not understand that I don’t want this? This engagement will lead to nothing, I refuse to associate with that vacuous fool and marrying him with not change things”

You grabbed the bum roll from the vanity “You will need to birth an heir to the throne and the king will only allow nobility within his bloodline-”

“His bloodline?” Zelda scoffed, her steps echoing off the hardwood floor as she approached you. Her dainty hands ran up and down your back, an exasperated sigh following after a thoughtful hum before her arms slid around your waist, chest meeting your back as she engulfed you in her hold, face pressing against your shoulder. “Such ignorance, it was and has always been my bloodline that has flown through the veins of royalty within the kingdom I practically established. I was his great, great, great grandmother and he thinks that he holds sway over me? I built the power he so carelessly squanders”

This Zelda never really liked the family she had been birthed from in this era. King Mephestis wasn’t the kindest of royals, nor did his wife hold a place in your list of ‘Top 10 parents that the princess has seemed to hijack’ but you really didn’t care for them anyway, you weren’t even from Hyrule in this life so why hold a thought for monarchs that weren’t even yours? They kept the facade of good sovereignty so they were but leaves in the wind on your repetitive existence. Though Zelda hated them with a passion, they had gotten in the way of your ‘love’, proclaimed you were dirt beneath their very expensive (and ugly) shoes, “A princess should marry royalty or nobility!” kind of rulers, compared to the last. You knew though, you knew she had already planned their murders, hell, you wouldn’t have been surprised if she had already ordered Impa to get an assassin ready for regicide, she had already ordered it before.

‘A brat throwing a tantrum being denied her toy.’

“My apologies, our bloodline- you did help a few times on the way” She giggled fondly at the memories and you rolled your eyes once again. You had lived out some steamy nights with the woman (by your own accord, you weren’t one to be forced) and yes, your past lives had helped within building the bloodline of the royal family, but it wasn’t something you dwelled on, unlike Zelda who reminisced frequently about those nights. You would have thought of her a pervert had you cared enough to dwindle on it.

The hands settled on your stomach began to dip when she continued “In fact, why don’t we relive those moments-”

You grabbed at her wrists and turned to face her once again “Can I please just finish getting you ready?”

Zelda pouted “Fine”

And you continued with your duty.

You pulled the bum roll around her waist, tightening the strings similar to how you had with the garters. Next was the petticoat, smoothed out atop the under-wear followed by the midnight blue cartridge overskirt and, finally pulling on her bodice and making sure it fit her to her likeness, standing before her form to look over the outfit then nod in approval of your work, glancing out the window to check for the sun: seeing it sitting on the horizon, you patted yourself on the back mentally for getting her ready in time.

“I will call for Impa-” Your hand was grabbed just before you reached the door, the Princess’ thumb stroking over your knuckles.

“This engagement means nothing to me, I hope you know that” Her words held love, held guilt and you felt the need to laugh at the ridiculousness of it all. Zelda was delusional as if you cared about the engagement- you knew how it would end anyway. You didn’t need reassurance, to be coddled, or apologised to, you didn’t want this life but she thought so badly that you loved her in return, as you had once before, in the beginning, but there was nothing that she could take, you were a husk to her affection now. “This wouldn’t be happening if it were my decision, I would be marrying you had it been my choice”

You huffed “I know, your majesty-”

“Call me by my name, my love” She squeezed your hand “Please”

You didn’t bother to look her way “I know, Zelda”

Silence hung over you both.

“I would burn this whole kingdom down if it meant being with you” Your fingers twitched, a memory of a forgotten country burning from the fires started by the Knights of Hyrule by the command of a Queen that held no love for any other life than your own, a life that had been merely mocked at banquet similar to the one soon to begin, the foreign King snorting over your lowly Knight status as you shadowed her Highness for her safety that night. You thought about the stable boy who dared offer you a flower on the day of Valentine, being pinned for a murder he didn’t commit and sentenced to death by hanging in front of a crowd that you stood amongst in absolute horror. The noblewoman you had been bewed to slaughtered in your shared home, coincidently a few nights after the Princess had discovered your whereabouts as a simple blacksmith. You knew she meant every word and it disgusted you how she said it in such a way that translated into devotion and endearment.

A kiss landed on your cheek “I would burn the entire world to see your face every morning”

Her free hand grabbed your face, turning and leaning in to kiss your lips tenderly “I would abandon my corporeal form to be with you for all eternity”

Yeah, you knew that all too well. “I will make sure come the end of the year, it will be me marrying you”

It wasn’t like you could do anything about it.

“Of course, it will, Zelda”

[assessthatdress]

on 'hoops' vs. 'paniers'

while 'paniers' is pretty broadly and universally used in modern costuming communities, period english language sources often use "hoops" - I just pulled out Waugh's 'Corsets and Crinolines' to verify - and almost all of the English language 18th-century sources she quotes use 'hoop'd petticoat' or simply 'hoops' with a smattering of other terms including 'great petticoat', 'whalebone petticoat' 'monstrous petticoat' (from a satirical poem so grain of salt on that one but 'monstrous' does show up as a descriptor in other quoted text describing hoops/paniers) and even a poem which references 'farthingales' (interesting that term was still at least known parlance even if old fashioned)

Interestingly, another term i've seen used widely in the modern costuming community, 'pocket hoops', doesn't appear at all (only able to find a couple 18th century refs using the term through google ngram ... I find it fascinating what terms people glom onto and which they decide to pass over)

Felicity has had two sets of underwear. The set on the left was a part of her original collection and the set on the right was a part of her BeForever collection. Felicity is the only doll to receive a corset, which I’m calling bullshit. Corsets were a part of girl’s wardrobes, even starting as young as six months. It was considered to improve posture and encourage proper development of the ideal figure. When you see Victorian-era dresses with impossibly tiny waists, it’s because the original wearer would have had her waist cinched since childhood.

For once, the BeForever corset is actually the better corset. While tan and beige corsets were pretty common, the cost of washing them was pretty high, so many women wore bright, colorful corsets that were better at hiding stains.

(The Museum at FIT)

(Nasjonalmuseet for Kunst, Arketektur, og Design)

While many corsets had hip rolls sewn into them, they were often worn as a separate garment.

(Museum of Fine Arts, Boston)

Her stockings show the wonderful way that stockings were often embroidered in the 18th century:

(The Met Museum)

Since stockings before the invention of elastic were made of non-stretchy non-clingy silk, they needed to be held up with garters. In the 18th century, It was popular to have little messages either woven or embroidered into them

(The Victoria & Albert Museum)

(Kerry Taylor Auctions)

One of the best things that they included in this collection is one of the best things about 18th century fashion: it has pocketsssss!

(The Victoria & Albert Museum)

Also, they’re called panniers, not hoops.

(The Met Museum)

[inky-duchess]

Fantasy Wardrobe: Popular Gowns of History

Fashion is one of my favourite worldbuilding components and choosing which way I want characters to look, is one part of research that is more fun than work. The use of different styles give each culture a defined feel and could act as a symbol of all kinds of lands in your WIP. Since it is your WIP, you can play with different elements of the gowns and pay fast and loose with the styles.

(If you want a more in-depth look at the structure of gowns and the composition of gowns have a look here)

Kirtle

The kirtle was technically an under dress to be worn under a grander gown though some women wore it as a gown itself over their chemise. The kirtle could be made of any material and worn by any woman of any rank. It could be laced at the back, front and even, though rarely, the side.

Sarafan

The sarafan is a traditional Russian dress worn mainly by the peasants (since Peter the Great banned traditional Russian costumes from the nobility in order to drag them toward Westernization). It rather resembles a pinafore and often worm under a lighter gown like a slip. During the reign of Nicholas I, the sarafan was allowed to be worn by the women of the Royal court. They fancied up the sarafan, adding a popular boat-line neckline and long dragging sleeves. It is one of my favourite looks of all time.

Gamurra

This was the most popular gown in Renaissance Italy. The waist was high, usually pleated beneath the bust and had a square neckline. The gown would be worn over the lady's chemise and corset and perhaps another under dress. It was worn by both nobles and commoners.

Burgundian Gowns/Houppelande

These gowns were high-waisted, belted underneath the bust. The neckline was classically shaped in a V, often showing off another fabric underneath. These gowns were worn by highborn women.

The Farthingale

This gown is named after the structure that held it in place. The skirts would be stretched into a dome-like, bell-jar shape, often fitted about the waist over a bum-roll (stop sniggering) a piece of padded fabric hung about the waist to widen the skirt's distance from the bodice. You know what they say, the bigger the Farthingale the bigger the rank. Worn through the 15th & 16th centuries.

Robe à l'Anglaise

This gown is the classic silhouette of the 18th century. The sleeves usually stopped at the elbow. The neckline was usually cut square. The bodice could be done up in front by laces or buttons. The skirts usually were supported by panniers and often reached staggering girth.

Robe à la Française

This French gown was similar to the Robe à l'Anglaise only that the back featured a train made from pleated fabric that draped from the shoulders to the floor. The gown often opened at the front to show another material beneath.

Robe à la Polonaise

The Robe à la Polonaise was similar to the last two gowns excepting a skirt that featured an overskirt which was picked up and pleated to show the under skirt.

Chiton

This dress is often seen in Roman or Greek art. The Doric version was made by draping material over the body and fastened at the shoulder by clasps The Ionic chiton version was draped about the body and pinned at the waist.

[elizabethan-memes]

The Boleyns: A Scandalous Review

TLDR: Not perfect, but definitely above average.

Can we talk about how good the music in this is? The opening of the documentary was rendered 500% more awesome by the music.

And no historical novelists masquerading as historians! We love to see it!

Estelle Paranque was born to talk history on TV, she lights up the screen with her presence. When MacCulloch appeared onscreen I shouted "THAT'S MY BOY" which confused my family.

Nice to see curators as well as writers among the historians. This is Owen Emmerson's first documentary as far as I know. I love that he wears a very sensible historian outfit but also studs in his ears. A funky boi!

The geisha girl analogy... you already know my thoughts on that. 

There's also a moment where a historian talks about Henry VIII's mental state and uses the phrase schizophrenic. I don't think it's a useful adjective given that schizophrenia is a mental illness. Diagnosing mental illness that far back is not easy. Just say Henry is being irrational.

I think there’s a lesson to be drawn from this: being knowledgeable in one field of history does not mean you are necessarily knowledgeable enough to draw on other fields of history or science.

The actor playing Thomas Howard did a great job. I love the moment he smashes Wolsey's glass decanter though I kind of wish he'd just yeeted it over his shoulder instead. All the actors were pretty good. And I like the decision not to show Henry's face- keeping the focus on the Boleyns and the Howards.

Generally the production values are high especially when it comes to the sets. The costumes are less than stellar (I don't know much about masque costumes but I assume they would involve sleeves and farthingales? And I don't think Anne would have danced like she's at a Dionysian festival) but I guess they blew the budget on them graphics.

I thought the choice to represent literal circles of influence was inspired. Jane Boleyn isn't represented in the graphics on the other hand- not the family tree, nor Anne's circle of friends. (Though Grace Parker is). OK, no time to talk Jane- but is the solution really to Unperson her altogether?

The documentary falls into the classic pitfall of presenting theory as fact. Whether Mary was Henry's enthusiastic or reluctant mistress is a question more of probabilities than evidence. Some people might say Henry was attractive so the most likely cause is seduction. Some people might say Henry was the king so the most likely cause is pressure to obey. But documentary audiences like their talking heads confident and their talking points straightforward, hence why documentaries assert without much evidence.

Susan Doran saying she can't imagine anyone being in love with Henry VIII... right after she'd just listed Henry's appealing qualities.

I thought Leanda de Lisle's closing remarks on Mary Boleyn were a bit too triumphalist. Yes, Mary survived.... but when survival involves knowing your only siblings died quick but violent deaths for lurid crimes they never committed...not exactly much to party about, is it? And yes, she had many descendants... most of whom she never met.

Quibbles aside, I think the documentary is solid and leagues better than some of the others I've seen this year. (Such as Armada:12 Days to Save England or the Last Days of Anne Boleyn.) It wasn't as entertaining as 1066, but then nothing can be more amusing than historians LARPing as historical figures and the implication that Tom Holland has just killed Janina Ramirez offscreen.

Yes, it doesn't cover everything, especially in just 3 parts, but no documentary can ever match the value of a (quality) history book.

[realcatalina]

Is this woman Isabella I of Castile or Mary Rose Tudor, Queen of France?-part 1

These two portraits are focus of very heated debate. Is this beautiful woman Queen Isabella I of Castile or Mary Rose Tudor, Queen of France(Henry VIII’s sister)? People want to know! Here is my ‘short’ take upon it.

First argument is Spanish fashion and the jewellery-which is without doubt Isabella’s. The necklace of arrows with emeralds:(tbh i don’t see arrows in it either, but it called this way)

is exactly the same one as on silver coin with Isabella I:

It was made in 1514 and might have been based upon original painting of Isabella by Sittow, but perhaps there were two of Isabella’s paintings by Sittow with this necklace. After all she loved it.

It is really similar to necklace on Juana’s tomb. I am not completely convinced it is same one though. The size of some pearls seems to be different and the front piece is missing, but it is possible Isabella had 2 necklaces of very similar style and this is the other one, or Juana wore it altered.

-detail of necklace on Juana’s tomb:

The necklace of arrows might be the same emerald necklace, Henry VII hoped Catherine of Aragon would bring as part of her dowry(he must have heard of it from his ambassadors, it was notable great piece of jewelry). But Isabella loved it too much, and didn’t want to part with it. Apparently, she wore it whenever she and  Ferdinand were apart, some parts of that necklace symbolized him.

The brooch in second portrait is same as in one of Isabella’s portraits.

It only looks bit different due to different skill of artists. Sittow was great painter, the other one was good, but not on same level as Sittow.

I also strongly suspect this is non-identified portrait of Isabella:

It is part of group painting called Life St.Thomas in India,the marriage feast of the King by Alonso de Sedano and if you look at her wrist the golden bracelets are same as in one of the portraits:

(These weren’t unique jewelry of Isabella but worn by spanish noblewomen too.)

I also found that Empress Isabella of Portugal, later worn jewelry similiar to some pieces we see at those two paintings(but it is not always obvious in certain versions of her paintings(the middle on) I tilted jewelry for better idea:

Ownership of many pieces of jewellery in those potraits is undoubted fact. They belonged to crown of Castile. 

Hence only women of belonging to castillian royalty could wear them. Not Germaine of Foix(because she was mere Queen of Aragon). On first glance that leaves us with just Isabella I, Juana I and Empress Isabella(she isn’t the sitter obviously).

 However, for sake of future portrait identifications and not spreading misinformation, I must point out that it was common practice for women betrothed or married to start to embrace her future  husband’s(or husband’s country/region) culture. Very small girls were even sent away to her fiancé’s court to learn his ways, and it could cause problems is bethrohal was cancelled. (See Margaret of Austria) If she wasn’t sent away, then they expected some proof that she started to learn the foreign ways. And portrait wearing foreign fashion would be perfect way to do it. Mary Rose Tudor wearing Spanish dress is not far fetched idea at all! 

Part of reason why many believed portrait of Catherine of Aragon by Sittow is not her, was that she wasn’t wearing English fashion. Because it was unusual for the time. She was to be bethrohed to English prince yet again, so her not wearing english fashion was strange!  Against custom, you could say.

But if you read biographies about her, after coming to England she and her ladies abandoned Spanish fashion (such as farthingale) and brought bits of it back only after she became Queen. But she preferred English fashion since.

Anne of Cleves’ miniature was mislabeled as Catherine Howard( despite being painted on 4 diamonds card) , because Anne wasn’t wearing fashion of her homeland in it. Instead during her short time as Queen(before annulment) she wore English style dress and jewels of Queens of England.

That was what was expected from married woman at those times! And for bethrohed girls too. Even if it was putting on a show, just when ambassadors were around or for portrait.

Hence I don’t agree with those who say Mary Rose Tudor wouldn’t have any reason to wear Spanish clothes. 

Yes, she ended up being Queen of France. But before that for long time(1506-1514) she was betrothed to Charles V and she was even styled as Princess of Castile in English court.

In cca 1512-1514, painter was sent to make painting of her to be sent to her betrothed and it is said it was requested she be depicted in spanish style.

Meaning in spanish fashion. 

It’s very different narrative than we have about these things nowadays. But at the time, this would be most probable scenario about that painting and its dress. It’d be as Spanish as possible! Headwear too. 

The issue, isn’t spanish jewelry by itself either. It would be expected to be worn too. We don’t know what Spanish jewellery Mary Rise got depicted with. Might have been some Queen Catherine lent to her. But it could have been the case that some jewels were sent to England especially for purpose of painting portrait of future princess of Castile and returned to Spain after betrothal got cancelled.

Or sent to her as bride in advance, that was done sometimes.

The ISSUE is such huge, unique and expensive jewelry being sent across sea.

Because if ship sank, you’d loose it. I think the jewelry is up for debate- It’d be great gesture if it got to England, and would sway English King in Spain’s favor-if it was sent. On other hand there would be reasons not to sent it. Reasons exist for both.

Hence Mary Rose in Spanish clothes-yes that would happen! In necklace of arrows prior to marriage? Unlikely, but not impossible.

Second argument is woman’s hair colour. Yet most people don’t know what hair colour either of those women had! And spread misinformation.

Take Mary Rose Tudor’s locks of hair( 3 of them, all supposedly taken from her remains) and supposed notion she was blond. On certain websites I’ve seen entire lenghtly descriptions of her(quotes from people who met her)-but with one detail changed: her hair described as blond. I don’t find it funny.

I’ve looked up supposed blond lock. It’s strawberry blond! And just to remind you another Mary Tudor(Mary I) was strawberry blond without doubt, so I strongly suspect it was contributed to wrong Mary Tudor. But even if it was real it wouldn’t exclude Mary Rose Tudor from this ‘competition’. My hair is dark brown around roots yet very light brown at ends. Hers could do the same.

Another problem is most people didn’t even hear of darkening of pigments or about changing nature of strawberry blond hair let alone dark golden strawberry blond hair(which Isabella had) and how it can seem golden to one person and to other red etc. Millions of people think Isabella was brunette! And hence argue it must have been Mary Rose! Ignoring that in marriage portrait of Mary Rose, she too has dark brown hair! Because her portrait also darkened!

Other people think Isabella must have had auburn hair, because Wikipedia said so! (Until somebody has changed it and also explained why Isabella’s portraits show brunette :)

I’ve looked at originals. Magdalene in The National Gallery in London:

and Portrait de Marie d'Angleterre in Musée des Arts Décoratifs in Paris:

Neither of those portraits shows as vivid red hair as the versions circulating online and we cannot tell, if sitter had red hair or dark strawberry blond. We simply can’t! It could be either! Hence both women are in!

Third point is background. Green background in paintings was already in England around 1500, but wasn’t in Spain(and spread to court of Emperor Maximilian only in late 1500s). However illumination of Isabella with Juana(or possibly Isabella, Queen of Portugal after she became heir) show green background.

So, Isabella might have chosen green background too and it doesn’t prove it is Mary Rose Tudor!

4th-the Red kirtle/petticoat:

Popular in England, but Spanish wore them too:

Next is (religious) symbolism:

Paris’ portrait:

On first glance you’d think the figure is holding jar of ointment(attribute of Mary Magdalene) and that it depicts woman as Mary Magdalene. But if you look at hands closely, it is clear originally they didn’t hold the jar(on left how it might have looked like). The jar was painted into painting afterwards.

Hence this is not a religious painting.

(Sitter was holding one of her rings, idk symbolism behind such gesture. But it doesn’t symbolize betrothal, because I later found some married characters who also held their rings in this way, but more about that later on.)

Magdalene portrait:

On first glance this one seems like it is correctly labeled as Magdalene. 

I explained that Catherine of Aragon as Mary Magdalene by Sittow, symbolized she was truthful and of good character, and that her arrival might even symbolize good things to come.

Such meaning could work with both Isabella(as ruler, that is good symbolic meaning) or with Mary Rose(as bride, it is good meaning also).

But:London’s Nationally gallery points out that originally woman held a gilded book and not a jar. (and one hand rested on top of book). And some of book’s ends are still visible(I recomend going to their webpage which has it HD). The book must have been fully painted for it to be gilded.

So that was the original prop. Yes, Isabella was painted with prayer book many times. But so were the countless other women at the time. It just proves the sitter wanted to show their piety.

There is also tulip as patern in Magdalena’s dress. New study now says tulip was in Spain since 11th century, hence it was there in Isabella’s lifetime. I looked at the symbolism, and it has nothing to do with Ottomans, with protestants etc.

So my conclusion it is simply flower that grew in Spain. Both women had reason to wear spanish clothes, hence spanish clothes with spanish flower also.

Fabric in Magdalene’s portrait is also cloth of gold and silver(or cloth of gold with silver embroidery) with crimson details. One of Isabella’s potraits shows very similiar fabric, but unfortunately golden colour in dress darkened to brown.

While seemingly it could point to Isabella, such fabric would be available to Mary Rose too(being royal) and would be way more likely to be sent to her than unique necklace of arrows. 

Another argument are the eyes. In portraits they look grey. Mary Rose Tudor was described as having pale grey eyes. Isabella’s as having blue.

But often painters used ultramarine blue for just mere detail of eyes(it wouldn’t fade), instead they used cheaper pigments, which faded over time.

Hence original blue eyes often in paintings end up as grey-Mary I is fine example of that. Mary Rose Tudor having supposedly grey eyes, raised big mystery for me. I’ve seen potrait of her father, detail of his eyes and they were blue. Her mum’s was supposedly blue-eyed too. I am not saying it is genetically impossible. (I know person who has AB+ blood and her biological mum is 0+, she wasn’t switched as baby.)

But there is lots of misinformation even among credible historians, who still describe her as blond-instead of strawberry blond. Some sources say grey eyes, and it is actually possible she had blue-grey eyes and her daughter too(if they were really that pale than it’d be really hard to tell if they were pale grey or pale blue or both). 

Pink ribbons and auger shells in Paris portrait also got us nowehere.

 Augers live in both countries! And while pink carnation was asociated with bethrohal, mere ribbon isn’t. Plus Isabella wore either pink or purple even as married woman:

Hence all previous points would work for both women, and don’t exclude anybody.

With this in mind we have to judge these portraits on other details such as features of sitter(to see if we can exclude one or both women) and fashion(dress and headwear) to see when the portrait was made.

Isabella died in 1504, I really doubt she’d have portrait done in her last dying months, Mary Rose Tudor would have been sitting for portrait cca 1513/1514.

Especially because sitter in both paintings is young. It is assumed it could be young Isabella aged 30(because there was portrait of her by Master Michel(Sittow) aged 30). Isabella in cca 1481 vs Mary Rose Tudor cca 1513, it shouldn’t be hard to determine! But of course now I’ve said it, I’ve jinxed it.

Because what I found out next made me question everything.

I did post about Isabella’s depictions and while going through various museums and art galleries’ webpages I realised, what should have been obvious to me from the start. 

The fashion in two potraits we’re trying to identify is not 15th century fashion.

It’s 1505-1520. That is my opinion and you’re welcomed to try to challenge/disprove it. 

Allow me to explain:

 Isabella last wore her hair up in 1470s and 1480s, but then never again(she wore it hanging low in 1490s.) 

But headwear(cofia) is not at all from her early days, but style exactly between late 1490s and 1525. It is different enough for me to suggest at least 5 years passed between last known potrait of Isabella and this one.

And dress support it. Even if I was totally off with my dates of Isabella’s paintings, in none she wears such fashion! Nobody is in 15th century!

Closest to it is Juana’s dress in The Virgin of Mercy with the Family of the Catholic Monarchs, but at same time cofia of her sister Isabela(Queen of Portugal) disproves that this could be from same time as our two potraits. It is way too different- the rounded neckline and sleeves from two parts etc.

Look at our unidentified potraits yet again. Hat pinched on side, how large the slashes are on one of them, the net parlet, the auger shells(which reminds you of those decorative pieces used in late 1530s and in 1540s). It’s too many details which scream 16th century.

Isabella didn’t wear net parlets, they very became popular in Portugal and France later on, but they were worn in Spain too. Which French woman in Spain wore net partlet?

Germaine of Foix:

We don’t know when her potrait was done, but it is her as married woman hence 1505+, and no later than 1516. Hers is decorated with pearls, but they didn’t need to be. Also note where her hair is, how high up.Aproximately same height as in our two potraits. The slashes on Germaine’s dress (though differently placed) are also rather long(as in one of potraits) This ties it stronger to timeframme 1505-1525. 

If that wasn’t prove enough.

I also compared features in bit more detail and figured distances in portraits don’t match. Especially the forehead and neck of Isabella are too short.

If eyes, nose and chin all are same distance, why isn’t forehead and neck then matching in distance also? It is almost exact same angle both women sit at and both these portraits are extremely realistic. You cannot have better ones for comparison. Yet the distances aren’t match and in all but one of Isabella’s known potraits she has really short forehead and short neck! Thick but short. 

Sorry folks, but is not her! At least not true contemporary unaltered potrait of her.

Posthumous altered portrait is possible I guess, but i doubt it. 

I thought, alright so let’s move to Mary Rose Tudor then. But then I’ve looked at this portrait of Juana with rather high forehead

and realised, it still can be Queen of Castile, just different one.

So part two will be Juana I of Castille vs Mary Rose Tudor.

[dresshistorynerd]

Yeah Fashioning The Body doesn't really speculate about the origins of the wide side hoops, and I think your best bet will be recent dress history studies. From what I've read, it seems like it's one of those many things in dress history that hasn't been so widely researched yet that there's widely accepted answers and you would find more information about it in book form.

I will definitely take a look at Sarah Bendall's research and that paper you linked, which had a very interesting sounding abstract! Thank you!! I've read one more research paper that might be interesting to you in some ways. It looks into the political implications early modern Spanish and French court fashions had in Naples specifically, but I think it's more widely applicable too. It has a section about farthingales and the politics around them, but not sure if it completely overlaps with the research on farthingales you've already read. Dress, gender and Identity in Early Modern Naples, 1501-1799 by Gabriel Guarino.

If you find more great sources, I'd love to also get my hands on them! :D

Hey, I'm doing a research project on mid 18th century panniers, do you have any recommendations for literature? I'm especially interested in construction (I will recreate a pannier for my fashion history class) but would also like to look into working class perspectives and differences between european countries and the politics/philosophy behind extreme shapings/silhouettes of the feminine body. Thank you so much and I love your blog!

Thank you so much!!

For construction, Janet Arnold's Patterns of Fashion 5: The content, cut, construction & content of bodies, stays, hoops and rumps c. 1595-1795 is probably perfect. I haven't gotten my hands on it yet (it's only available as physical book and none of the libraries near me has it), but from what I've seen of it by other's referencing it, it's excellent. Patterns of Fashion series is really great in general.

For the contextual side of 18th century silhouette I think Fashioning the Body: An Intimate History of the Silhouette by Denis Bruna is excellent. It's available to borrow from Internet Archives too. It occasionally does the thing, which I dislike, where it talks about the high fashion version of the undergarments, but then generalize these supporting garments as all around restrictive and uncomfortable. The extreme court fashion of 18th century with the massive panniers and highly shaping stays, was very outdated and didn't reflect the evolving general fashions of the time. Casual more comfortable clothing at the time was where the fashion progress was happening and it slowly trickled up to the court fashions. French court continued to use the rigid bodied gown, a relic from 17th century, as the official court gown till 1770s, while the English court used mantua, which went out of fashion in 1730s, still then also. For more information about the English court gown, there's an interesting study of it's political significance. To be clear, it's still a really good book.

The panniers were very much an upper class thing, and the most extreme forms of it were reserved to formal court events. Bourgeois women did use panniers, especially in mid-18th century, but it was never a working class style. Bum rolls, hip pads and rumps were instead used by working classes too (and for more casual styles of the upper classes), though working class women didn't always use even that. Unfortunately I haven't found very good sources on the working class dress of 18th century. I have been trying to piece that together (and the whole 18th century, it's a very complicated and messy period of fashion) and it's been a struggle.

[theabominableblogger]

My Reaction... to “Pocahontas II:  Journey to a New World”

Who decided that this was a good idea?  Who?

OH it just starts right away!  Oh dang.  No opening logo or nothing.

I will be extremely surprised if they somehow managed to wrangle Mel Gibson back as John Smith

AN:  It’s his younger brother Donal Gibson

Also this is such a strange way to start a movie about Pocahontas- a rooftop sword fight

What am I watching?

Why is the King of England wanting to start a war with the- oh wowww the animation really dipped

“Walt Disney Home Video” well that explains everything

How did they get the news of John Smith’s “death” already?  Mail must travel really freaking fast over the Atlantic

If this setting was animated with the original animation crew for the first movie, this scene with Pocahontas in the snow would look gorgeous

Wait wasn’t her necklace broken in the first movie?

It would have been interesting if we actually see a shot of Pocahontas just reacting to the news of John Smith’s “death”.  That way we as viewers just feel the gravitas and impact it has on her instead of just cutting to the shot of the ship leading into the opening credit bit.

Oh that shot [of Pocahontas above the frozen river in the snow) is gorgeous

“I beg your pardon!”  “All right.  You have it.”  *snorts*

I almost feel like they put a little more effort into the culture of Pocahontas’s tribe.  I mean I don’t know if it’s entirely accurate- probably not- but it feels like it.

HEY GET THIS THOUGH.  The original screenwriters thought that taking the plot of this movie for the FIRST one would be too complicated and violent.  WOW.

AND they took creative license anyway because of the actual story of Pocahontas is... not great.  Look I’m not even gonna deny that even though they made creative differences in order to convey the story to a younger audience and you can tell some of the filmmakers mean well to be partially accurate but the other executives just want the movie to make money and that’s it.  They don’t care that even though racism is addressed like in little spoonfuls here, it’s still racism.

Plus Katzenburg didn’t really have the balls to address the effect of assimilation or the whole “noble savage” concept.  He just wanted the moolah.

AN:  I’m sorry if I’m ranting but I’ve written ESSAYS ABOUT THIS.  I spent an ENTIRE SEMESTER writing about this stuff.  Seriously.

ALSO ALSO FUN FACT:  GREGORY PECK was originally cast as the spiritual ancestor in the first movie but he dropped out because he made the point to the writers that the character had to be a maternal figure instead of a male one.  Boom now we have Grandmother Willow.

Also I like that when the Indians first see the horse, they’re a little perturbed by it.

Meanwhile my anthropology part of my brain is just screaming

Oh my God I just realized where I’ve heard the actor that played Powhatan from... he’s the Navajo man from “Natural Born Killers”. 

Also yes I have seen “Natural Born Killers”

One kudos I’ll grant to this is that they put more nuance into Pocahontas’s facial expressions.  You can see her squint in frustration or just glare someone into oblivion.

Or this scene where her best friend says goodbye.  There is just so much emotion in this shot alone.  The animators had to have used reference shots for bits like this.

*Meeko gets stuck in the mop for cleaning the deck*  Comedy

“And honor is the backbone of our civilization.”  OK we’re getting somewhere.

Ah yes, London.  Nothing but the colors purple, yellow, blue and cobblestone as far as the eye can see.

Also yes England so they’re gonna throw in EVERY stereotypical European clothing style EVER on the general population

Freaking Shakespeare...

They bumped up the animation whenever Ratcliffe shows up.  Priorities.

Mrs. Potts is the teapot on the table!

You can tell that the writers are TrYinGGgg to mature the characters by addressing that yes Ratcliffe is manipulating the king to do what he wants. 

“You look lovely... in your underwear-”  SHE’S WEARING MORE THAN WHAT SHE ORIGINALLY WORE.  WHY ARE YOU AVERTING YOUR EYES?

*Pocahontas tries putting the corset on as a bonnet*  Yes

Why is Mrs. Jenkins giving Pocahontas a crinoline?  In 17th century London?  The hoop idea didn’t even come around until like the 1850s

Unless it’s a farthingale.  But it’s obviously NOT

“John’s always had a fondness for girls with curls.”  HMM

The sound of Pocahontas’s necklace hitting the table sounds exactly like those really thick magnetic rocks clashing together

This movie definitely has a different vibe from the first one.  It’s just focused on letting these events happen and there’s an emphasis on scale.  Like they let this scene where Pocahontas finally meets the king pause because she does not know how to address him.

Oh!  And the general population is established by them just being really curious about her and not immediately cursing her.  They’re just as “ooh and aah” about her as she is about them.

The king is 100% voiced by Jim Cummings

Oh man this animation... rough...

WHAT?!?

Did... did I just step into a different movie?  What the heck am I watching? 

This song is like a weird hybrid of “Playing with the Big Boys” from Prince of Egypt and one of the other songs from Hunchback of Notre Dame

Bear baiting?  What?

Discount Strider there’s gotta be John Smith

That animation of John Smith walking toward the screen was definitely rotoscoped

If the rest of this third act is just this weird sword fight, I’m signing out

Oh so no... third act fight?

“You [John Rolfe] love her.”  I mean it’s a little weak sauce but I can tell they tried.

I just realized what’s up with this movie:  it’s like a really weak Wonder Woman movie.  Seriously.

I... have actually no idea how the rest of the third act is gonna go.

What exactly is Governor Ratcliffe governor of?

John Smith is not written well at all in this movie.  And I don’t know what to think of his “mmm hmm good show old sport” back and forth with Rolfe

OK so if we’re gonna end this movie with the ships clashing together and a weird sword fight on board, at least tell me Pocahontas is gonna duke it out with Ratcliffe where she sends him overboard.  Please.

*John fights him instead*  COME ON

Well that was disappointing

They’re TRYING to amp up the romance between these two and it’s just... eehhh so close... but dishonest.

Whoever is voicing John Smith is like trying to do some pseudo-British version of Mel Gibson and it’s weird

I do like this contrast between John Smith who is like “I have great plans for exploring the world where we can always be together” and John Rolfe who is like “I want to establish a peace between us two without forsaking each other” and I wish more effort was spent on THAT

BUT WE CAN’T.  For historical reasons.

John Rolfe, what kind of shirt are you wearing?!?

THEY SAVED THE BEAR!

Hmm.  It just ended.

IS THIS JUDY KUHN AND BILLY ZANE SINGING IN THE END CREDITS??