Quilted Cotton Jacket, ca. 1780 via de Young Museum

Coat for a woman's riding habit of blue worsted, 1750-59, English; pale blue silk cuffs

Women’s jacket and vest, c. 1790, Musée des Tissus de Lyon

Countess Olympe asked the question,

More “Bodice Mania”…. Reproduction by Reine des Centfeuilles, 1790 Kyoto Costume Institute

In her post this morning (well, morning for me, at least), fellow blogger Carolyn posed the question of why closures on womenswear are right over left, while those on menswear are left over right.There some commonly given answers to this, and her commenters, including yours truly, faithfully provided these: 1. men dressed themselves, women were dressed, making this closure easier for their usually right-handed maids or 2. It was a decency thing, this way the person helping a lady onto her horse, or holding the animal while she was mounted side-saddle couldn't peek between the buttons of her riding clothes. Those are the ones I knew. But they raise questions. Which way would you sit when riding side-saddle? How about the closures on the maid's dress? And when did this closure-rule start anyway? I could do something to answer the last question. I own a book on 19th century fashion, but as I had expected, all the clothes in it closed the way we would expect now: left over right for men, right over left for women. Luckily, I own another book on historical costume: the great 'Costume in detail' by Nancy Bradfield. This book is almost literally overflowing with detailed drawings of clothes from 1730 to 1930, also showing the insides and undergarments which you normally don't get to see. I can recommend it if you're a clothing, pattern and history geek like me. What I found there was interesting. This ladies' riding jacket, dated between 1720 and 1750, closes left over right. So does this unusual button-fronted stomacher from 1766. And this coat from 1828 as well. The jacket and the coat both seem to be utilitarian garments. Obviously cut for women, but less decorative than the fashion items of their times, obviously ment for outdoor activity and inspired by menswear in their details. Of course, the normal dress of the 18th century was open-fronted with petticoats underneath and a stomacher covering the chest between the edges of the dress. There simply were no overlapping closures in fashionable ladies' clothes. The buttoned stomacher is pictured with the comment that it's a highly unusual item. The coat is from a time when, after a few decades of empire-line dresses, the dress waist was starting to return to the position of the natural waist. Of the empire-line items, there are no clear images showing button closures, but surplice bodices are closed left over right. After 1835, small waists and big skirts are back and this time, they are often separated. 'Dresses' are now in many cases bodices with separate skirts. And these bodices are sometimes closed at the front, with buttons. And if so, they are closed right over left, like in this 1865 example. So, that's it then. The 'button-rule' is apperently a 19th century invention, made when buttoned clothes for women were starting to become common for every day wear. It seems that, historically, button closures entered womenswear as a menswear inspired fashion. Much like the left over right button flies on women's jeans today (other women's trousers with fly fronts usually close right over left and what's the point of a button fly for a woman?) They were copied as they were as long as they were only used for special outdoor kit, but it seems that when they started to be seen a lot, a 'female variation' was made. Does anyone know whether it is really in the Bible that women are not allowed to wear men's clothes? I know people believed this in the Middle Ages, and for some time after that. It was one of the reasons Joan of Arc was convicted as a witch and a heretic. That would explain the need to differentiate. (of course I'm aware that in many christian groups today, women don't wear trousers. I just don't know where biblical law meet time-honored tradition in this case) Well, that's my twopence on the button-rule. I hope I satisfied some curiosity, but I think I mainly raised more questions. I welcome your insight in this matter!

Casaca (Jacket), Spain, French silk, c. 1730 -1740

In preparation for the upcoming High Tea charity fundraiser for Ronald McDonald House I’m trimming my Indienne chintz pet-en-l’aire. I’ve dyed pretty new rayon and cotton ribbons (the closest I could get to silk) to replace the nasty synthetic ones on the front, and am figuring out how to do the ruffled trim. Earlier mid-18th century pet-en-l’aires, like this yellow example, have pinked ruffle trim: But later 18th century examples, the era I am aiming for, have flatter trim that is finished or turned on the edges: I’m trying to figure out exactly how the ruffles are made. I have 3.5 options to make the ruffles shown in the examples above: Option 1: The ruffles are cut in strips more than 2x the width of the ruffles, the sides are folded back and overlapped in the middle, and then the ruffles are sewn down, with the raw edges hidden on the middle underside of the ruffles. Option 2: The ruffles are cut in strips the width of the ruffles, plus turning allowance, and then the …

A reproduction of an 18th century ladies' riding habit suit, to be made to the buyers measurements. Consisting of 3 parts: Jacket, Waistcoat, and Petticoat. All visible stitching and top work will be done by hand. Buttonholes to be done by hand or machine (see purchase options). I have red linen and blue linen shown, but fabric options can be discussed =) The habit shown in the images is one I finished for another customer. To see many more photos and construction details, please visit the blog post here: https://antiquesewist.blogspot.com/2018/12/jp-ryan-riding-habit-red-linen.html JACKET: Includes 30 decorative buttons and decorative buttonholes. The closure at the center front is with hooks and eyes. The coat looks very well fully closed or left open over the waistcoat. The collar, cuffs, and front edges are interfaced with linen buckram. the pockets are functional and are about 5" deep. WAISTCOAT: Ends just past the natural waist. The front closure is with 10 buttons. The fronts are interfaced along the edge with linen buckram. The back is done with natural color linen and has lacing eyelets to adjust fit. PETTICOAT: The hem and the visible stitching along the side openings is done by hand. This petticoat is cut in the standard 18th century style, with a separate back and front waistband, opens at the sides. The back is cut 3" longer than the front to fit over a rump pad or bumroll, but that can be changed to whatever undergarments you plan to wear Buttonholes: There are two purchase options. One for machine made buttonholes, and another for handmade buttonholes. Making buttonholes by hand is very labor intensive, and for this riding habit represents almost 10 hours of work alone. This is why I now offer a separate price option for them. Since the buttonholes are all decorative, several past customers have expressed an interest in machined buttonholes for a reduced price :)

I have just finished my week long embroidery spree as I create a jacket and gilet for my up comming Der Schauspieldirektor photo shoot. You can read about the play in one of my previous posts, or f…

To celebrate St. Patty's Day, and end my "green week" on a high note, I'm highlighting some great greenery... c.1770 stays Historic New England, Accession Number 1936.409 Mid 18th century woman's stays Philadelphia Museum of Art, Accession Number 1903-135 c.1780 Silk Apple Green English Gown National Trust UK, Accession Number 602787 1778-1785 Sack Back Gown The Met, Accession Number C.1.65.13.2a-c 1770-1780 French Sacque Back Gown, PMA, Accession Number 1981-9-2a American, late 1790s gown MFA, Accession Number 51.1968 Late 18th century French figured silk jacket bodice From Augusta Auctions 18th century dark green figured silks shoes From Augusta Auctions c.1775 Child's leather pudding cap From Vintage Textiles Late 18th century green silk calash From AntiqueDress.com 18th century silk quilted petticoat The Met, Accession Number C.158.22 OK it's time for a shamrock shake!

I made this jacket a year ago, as my first real attempt at historical clothing. I have tried it a bit previously but never bothered to read up on historical techniques and silhouettes so the result…

This is incredibly modern to be me, I know! My latest infatuation has totally been the 18th century pattern drafting, mainly jackets, gowns and a whole bunch of skirts. And hats. Who doesn’t …

The Met, 1897-99 (via) - an excellent start to a fabulous Steampunk ensemble. My favorites are the original gowns that unknowingly have that Steampunk flavor. I haven't been working on my wedding gown. I'm quite terrible and maybe lazy, but I just haven't felt like it.

I made a new 18th century jacket this week, mainly because I wanted to have something new to wear at Isokyrö 18th century fair. I finished t...

A blog about sewing unique clothing from thrifted sheets, geeky crafts, and cats.

With our guild's upcoming 18th C Picnic in Balboa Park this coming Saturday I finally kicked myself in the butt last month to replace my earlier red floral linen caraco that was too short-waisted for me. Every time I raised my arms or stood up from a chair, there was a gap between the jacket and the skirt. I actually tried to find some more of the linen to remake one but had no luck since I bought it about 5 years ago. I had lucked out buying this fabric while at Michael Levine's in the LA Garment District after Costume College. Sally Queen was there giving a private shopping tour of 18th C fabrics and overheard her saying this was perfect. So after they left I bought some. And I bought the solid red linen to go with it for a petticoat aka skirt. For this picnic I wanted something quick to make and my new JP Ryan short jacket pattern fit the bill. I'd seen a couple of them with the lacing in front and thought that might help with some of the fitting problems I've had with those front closures. I've made a couple versions where I used hooks & eyes on the side or in the center but always had to cover it with ruching. I'm also not a pinner, ie pinning it closed as you historically would. I like the varieties on this jacket that are possible of using different colored ribbons, a contrasting stomacher, or a reversible one. So I chose the pattern pieces to do View B but with the ribbon closure that shows on D. I'm going to wear my red linen skirt and hope to use it multiple times with other fabrics. I decided to use the cotton fabrics I bought in Williamsburg a couple years ago, both of which will go with my red petticoat. After checking the fabric amounts, I had 3 yds of the blue and 5 yds of the red. Obviously I bought the red to make another longer caraco or Anglaise. So instead of wasting that on a short jacket, I decided to just do the blue one. And whenever I get a brown or blue petticoat done, I can wear it with that too. At the bottom of this page on the Silly Sisters site you can see some other lovely fabrics to educate your eye on what to look for while searching for your own. http://www.sillysisters.com/clothing2.htm I've seen similiar fabric patterns at Michael Levines in the LA Garment District where I bought this blue and brown floral patterned cotton. If I ever get a blue petticoat made I can wear both the blue jacket and this with it. I found this beautiful 1770s short jacket in the Cora Ginsburg Collection and this would be an easy fabric to find if you wanted to copy it. I liked both the short jackets and caracos (they're longer) because they use less fabric than the Anglaise or polonaise, are less work and time consuming, and you can use them with different colored petticoats for a variety of looks. *Edited to add- I recently learned that both the short jacket and caraco are used interchangeably with caraco being the French term.* This pattern only had three main pieces plus the stomacher (the center panel that is separate from the bodice) and the sleeves. How much easier is that? I didn't have to alter the waist length on this one like I did on my previous Period Impressions caraco. In fact the only alteration I did was my usual enlarging the upper arm portion. I made my muslin first out of a good cotton muslin and decided to use that also to flatline my bodice. With it being so horribly hot lately I just wasn't feeling like cutting another flatlining fabric out, plus another lining. Yes, I am lining this because it needs a little more body and for once I'm going to bag-line it. I know, I always say I won't do that and just do facings all around. But this time I'm going for quick and easy. It's also closer to the period correct way of finishing it. Even with the three layers of cotton it's not bulky. My first caraco was made with my Victorian-bodice-mindset and I flatlined it in twill and put boning in the seams. I was a real newbie at Georgian/Colonial fashion. This was also the one I wore to Colonial Williamsburg and was told that the neckline should be just above the nipple line, not halfway up my neck. This pattern was the generic size and you were expected to alter it to your own body. So I can thank Janea Whitacre there for that wonderful bit of advice. And then seeing my friend Barbee Mullin's bodices that were wafer-thin set me on a different path too. I have to say going to Colonial Williamsburg was a great learning location for my costuming. So no more binding myself in the dress. I'll let the stays (corset) do that. The three pieces sewed together very quickly although the pattern doesn't have the usual notches that I'm used to. It does have little lines that I'm assuming are for matching the pieces because it was a little confusing as to what side of each piece went to what. You'd think with only three pattern pieces it wouldn't be that hard. but if you've separated them and set them aside and then later pick them up, they're not very obvious as to what they are or what side they belong on. So here's my tip: make a light pen or pencil mark in your seam allowance telling you that it's a center back seam or side back to center panel, etc. Or maybe make up your own notches. Ok, so all pieces were sewn together and my shoulder seams were wider on the front bodice on the armhole side. I just trued it up cutting off a little wedge. This pattern has two back styles so I'm thinking the front bodice portion is the generic size for them. When I sewed the muslin together all the pieces lined up properly but after I sewed the fashion fabric and flatlining together both sides of the lower portion of the jacket was longer than the front portions. Stretch issues?? Maybe, because I'm sure I did stretch the muslin down to get the ends to fit and ease them in. But the final length on the bottom was a 3" difference. Because I'm doing the baglining of the jacket, it will at least make it easier to deal with finishing those edges. I'm guessing this is just part of the style or maybe I'm supposed to trim it because the pattern doesn't say anything about it. The directions are minimal. The pattern is mostly a no-brainer on construction other than a few things you obviously are already supposed to know. I may have to wait for another trip to Williamsburg for some more great tips. In the meantime, I'm leaving that 3" difference alone and letting it be part of the jacket. It kind of folds into the flared portions. I'm doing View B as opposed to View D. *Now that I'm writing this, I again remembered that the front of the jacket is the generic one because this pattern has two lengths so maybe I was supposed to trim off that extra? But I wanted the longer length. Honestly I don't know. I'm not really that knowledgeable in Georgian fashion. While looking at some other short jackets I noticed a similar uneven bit. So I'm rationalizing that it's part of the way it pleats. At least until I learn otherwise let's call it done. * I took this to a sewing workshop with Shelley Peters to work on the sleeves there and once again had issues with them fitting my upper arms. I had enlarged it but I still had too much fullness in the sleeve caps. Shelley tried a few different things but in the end she asked why do I try to pleat the fullness in and it never gets it spread out smoothly when I could just gather them and ease it around. ?? Umm, I don't know, I guess because I thought it was easier than having to run it through the sewing machine twice on each side to gather it? Maybe leftovers from working on later time periods? So I basted a gathering stitch and guess what? They went in much better~ Not perfect but better. And they're done. Now I have to decide if I'm going to do sleeve ruffs to go with the cuffs I made next. Next up were the eyelets on the front that I'll be running my ribbon through. I think I read somewhere that people are using grosgrain ribbon for extra strength but I don't think I'll be able to find a blue or red one. I had all intentions of putting grommets in while at Shelley's class using her grommet setter but on asking one of my friends online, I was quickly chastised that grommets weren't used back then and I had to do handsewn eyelets. Darn. So I dug up a video online on how to do them. http://www.ehow.com/video_12303912_make-handsewn-eyelet-fabric.html And found a photo tutorial also. http://www.elvenhippiegypsy.com/Eyelets.html One of my blogging friends, Laurie, who often goes to Williamsburg, had a couple posts on making her 18th C jacket and I picked up a couple ideas from her, like her eyelets and how they looked on the inside. Notice there's no cut thread between each eyelet? Not sure why but methinks maybe so you don't have knots and makes it look cleaner. To read more on her jacket- http://teacupsinthegarden.blogspot.com/2014/03/pink-floral-on-blue-18th-century-jacket.html I was finally down to two weeks before the picnic and still had to do those eyelets. I started making the holes with my awl and stitching them with two strands of embroidery floss but as fast as I stitched, the holes closed up. I have arthritis in my thumb and the more I fought this, the more it hurt. After getting two finally done and putting some Fray Check on so the holes would stop shrinking, I had to set it aside. It just hurt too much. And I still had 8 more to go. One evening Shelley stopped by on her way home with her grommet setter and we did it. Then I covered them with my embroidery floss stitches so they wouldn't show. I'm sorry all you historically correct people but I have my limits. I put it on my dressform to see if it’s going to work. I think so. I bought some royal blue 5/8" ribbon and pulled out my bodkins I bought a few years ago from Silly Sisters and laced it up. Umm, no. Not going to work with a ladder lacing. It needs to tie at the top with a pretty bow, darn it. So I did a crisscross lacing starting at the bottom and was able to lace it on top. Historically the stomacher is pinned to the stays to hold it in place and you wear your jacket over it. I'm a newbie and that's not working for me. I won't tell you what I'm doing to do that but you won't be able to see it, and right now that's all that's important to me. I get to wear it. Photos of it on me and everyone else at the picnic will be forthcoming next week. ~~Val~~

I first fell in love with this jacket two years ago. I probably found it on Pinterest, and followed it back to the V&A website. Victori...