Saturday, August 24, 2013

Lacing vs. Buttons

I've set my historical garment-making focus pretty solidly in the 14th century. (With a few notable exceptions!) I find the clothing of that time was simple and attractive, with just enough accessorizing to be interesting instead of overwhelming. And I thought I was doing pretty well with my wardrobe: linen smocks, my linen parti-dress for when it's hot, and my wool dresses for when it's cooler, but then I was looking at Hibernaatiopesake's Wisby pictures and I realized something: 

I have spiral lacing on my dresses, and everyone else has buttons.

Now, I do have my one dark blue woolen gown (lined in gold linen and heavy as anything) that has buttons up the front and on the sleeves to the elbows. But the brown wool I made last fall is laced and now I'm wondering if I've made a mistake. Or maybe underdresses are laced, but overdresses are buttoned? (It can't be because everyone loves making buttonholes so much; those things are a pain in the tush!)


I also think the lacing goes down too far here. Fortunately, I was generous in my cutting and it's a bit loose. I can probably hem back the eyelets and put buttons on, and I have enough of the wool to make buttons. 

Or is it just a "recreationalism" that everyone has buttons? I know that trends occur in garb just like anywhere else, to a certain extent -- if one person has a cute little brick-stitched bag, soon everyone is making one. Maybe lacing and buttons is like that, and I'm just seeing more buttons now. 

Next up is a tunic for Dave, and there will be buttons. So... many...buttons... at least on the sleeves. Also, he needs a linen undershirt, too. I'm looking forward to many happy fall evenings, stitching lovely wool. 

Any information you can share on buttons vs. lacing in the comments section would be appreciated! 



7 comments:

  1. Im not an expert, nor have i seen all the period art there is, but my opinion on the matter is that there are no specific rules that tells if you should only put lacing on the middle layer-dress and not on the surcoat. I cant remember the name, but there is ond really famous effigy that shows really detailed lacing on the outer garment. I have also seen picures of obvoius noble women with lacing in the front on surcoats. I dont believe these ladies would have liked to be depicted in only on layer of woolen dress because of their social status. In resdons of fancyness, the long rows of buttons are hard to beat, tough. Even if i myself favour the lacing... :)

    ReplyDelete
  2. I would say both buttons and lacing are just as correct for 14th century, but buttons was high fashion during the second half of the century. And for an underdress lacing is preferred before buttons for obvious reasons, but it doesn´t mean that lacing was not used in the outer garments.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Oh, one more thing, have you seen Neulakkos post on spiral lacing? Very inspiring, as always. http://www.neulakko.net/?p=1543

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neulakko always has great information. I found that link on the zen of spiral lacing a year or so back on http://elizabethancostume.net/ Part of the reason I was getting concerned about my lacing is thinking that maybe it came along later and wasn't period to the 14 century. Glad you guys are here to help me out!

      Delete
  4. Yes, buttons is a reanactment thing. If you look in to pictures or stonethingys? you can see many examples with lacings instead of buttons. And underdresses are most often laced since the buttons would make it look wierd with another dress ontop.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Buttons under buttons would certainly be lumpy. And I'm lumpy enough already! I think I'll go with lacing on inner layers, and buttons for outer layers.

      Delete
  5. And here's the link to the effigy! http://professor-moriarty.com/info/section/church-monument-art/14th-century-church-monuments-thomas-beauchamp-tomb-warwick-warwickshire

    ReplyDelete