A 14th century tourney

[Cet]

Well, there are more armourers than there are makers of foundation garments and none I know of doing hand finished foundation garments on a full time basis.

Master Galleron has the closest thing I'm aware of to what I'd call a LH quality kit for this period and as far as I know he lacks gauntlets and a cervellier.

How stringent is reasonable? Would Wolf Argents' standards be a good model?

[Charlotte J]

Personally, I wouldn't worry about it on something like a tent. On an arming garment, on the field, I'm not sure which way I lean. For civilian garments, it's actually very easy to create a garment with little to no visible stitching at all, outside of eyelets or buttonholes.

It doesn't have to be all or nothing.

[Cet]

It has to be "something" though and that's the hard part. the ideal is relativly easy to define.

[Duane W]

This is the guide the folks hosting the Hastings event are using. I think with a little bit of modification we could use it as well. I especially like the check lists for class portrayals. It can be found at:


http://hastings.vikingsonline.org.uk/H2006/

Alexander

[MelanieC]

Thanks for the map, Alexander. I didn't know about that area.

I'm so excited about the Emprise and have already threatened the husband with new clothes for the event. I also think that the middle Saturday (before War Week) would be the best time for our day-long Deed of Arms.

[SyrRhys]

God's balls, I'm out of touch for a couple of years and you guys go getting all medieval? What's happening here?

So, may I play? I've done a couple of Deeds of Armes over the years.

Regards,
Hugh
www.schlachtschule.org

[Duane W]

Rhys;

I'd be very upset if you didn't come and play.

Alexander

[Karen Larsdatter]

A description of the tournament (its basis and expectations) might be a really good article for Tournaments Illuminated, if you can get it written up in time for the Spring 2007 issue.

It'll have to get written up pretty soon so it can get published in that issue.

[Tailoress]

I think Galleron is your man, Karen, as he's been doing some pretty steady research into textual accounts of various foot combats (not to be confused with the mounted tournaments).

I wonder what he'll think of me volunteering him...? Hhhmm

-Tasha

[Galleron]

[quote="Cet"]Well, there are more armourers than there are makers of foundation garments and none I know of doing hand finished foundation garments on a full time basis.

Master Galleron has the closest thing I'm aware of to what I'd call a LH quality kit for this period and as far as I know he lacks gauntlets and a cervellier.


"SCA legal gauntlets" and "Living History Quality Gauntlets" are two sets which may not necessarily intersect.

At least for the 14th c.

Galleron

Willscommonplacebook.blogspot.com

[Guy Dawkins]

"As I stood on the field waiting for the layon one of my teammates said to another, "I should be a little faster than most" as he tapped his b.plate and leg harness to show that it was NOT metal. I don't know if it was leather or plastic but the BOT assumes all are in PLATE. In this context what ever it was it was sport armour.

I say BAN PLASTIC.

My corizina weighs 12 pounds!

Course I've got no dog in this fight. Only thing that comes close to these standards is my helm. My soft kit will get me admision to the unwashed section.

NEW THOUGHT!

This thread has now gone to 7 pages.
It is in need of a summary for those joining late.

[Murdock]

Machine Stitching


I'm of 2 minds

You can buy soft kit off the rack with no visible machine stitching, you can make it by machine and hand finish the seams.

I like the no visible machine stitching. I have the best arming clothes commercialy availible imo, and i know that there is machine stiching in places. I know he does hand sticthing where the machine won't go.

I think we should be going for pretty damn good, not perfect.



BUT

I have people freak out when they see that i have rivited mail on my helm and feet....even now. "Wow man thats rare" Rivited mail has been out for what a decade?

Some peoples brains are gonna shut off when they read "no visible machine stitching".

Now are those people gonna be the ones we're aiming at, probly not.

As i've said i'm thinking we'll have MAYBE 15 fighters (i'm playing only assuming i can get my finger guants done, cased greaves, rebraces and complete my sabatons.) I think they'll have maybe 2 attendants a piece. So thats 45 folks total, Fighters ladies. So we're up to 60, and with all others in attendance i'd bet we get fewer than 125 people in total attendance.

But 125 folks ata party hosted by the 14c Mafia, imo thats huge.

[Ringlancer]

I have to do this!

[Muriel]

Machine Stitching

You can buy soft kit off the rack with no visible machine stitching, you can make it by machine and hand finish the seams.

(Please keep in mind that I'm just busting on you, Murdock )

IS the purchased off-the-rack kit REALLY no visible machine stitching? Keep in mind that some folks (yup - I'm one of them) consider machined buttonholes or eyelets as visible machine stitching. A machined buttonhole/eyelet is made completely differently from hand-sewn ones (sewn first, THEN slit - medieval ones have the fabric slit/hole made first, then sewn - they do look different). If the off-the-rack garment has machined buttonholes and eyelets - it would not pass (for me). Of course, I would have no problem with someone taking a purchased garment and going over the buttonholes and eyelets by hand. Did I MENTION the "I'm crazy" part??

BTW - the hosen I made for you would pass (if I were vetting the clothing). Mainly because of all the hand-stitching. The only machines seam was the back-seam - no one would see it. BUT it was tacked down by hand. LOTS of visible hand-stitching.

OH and my standard for "perfect" would be a) fabric appropriately dyed by period available dyestuffs b) absolutely correct weaves (counts etc) and c) all internal construction stitched by hand. Asking for no visible machine stitching is not perfection (per my standards).

[Murdock]

" OH and my standard for "perfect" would be a) fabric appropriately dyed by period available dyestuffs b) absolutely correct weaves (counts etc) and c) all internal construction stitched by hand. Asking for no visible machine stitching is not perfection (per my standards). Smile Smile "

Yup i'd call that perfect.

I'm more or less for the no visible machine stitching on soft kits muhself. Kate wanted to hand finish some of the button holes and such anyway.

[Eamonn MacCampbell]

Since there is all this talk about the stiching, If it goes to all hand stitched stuff...Where would someone look to find someone willing to do something, like say....The Von Hohenklingon padded jacket(have no real clue what it is called I have heard several things).

For my self...This would be WAY over the top for me to do, most the rest, I can find in sizes for me or make and the hand stitching wouldn't be too terrible...But for this....Too much for me....I am a large guy so it would be alot, I figure.

[Murdock]

As i said i think that we're talking no visible machine stiching on _soft_ kits.

Klaus makes pretty much the best 14th century arming clothes Commercially avalible. His still have a fair bit of machine work.

I think Tasha does the occasional hand sewn one, maybe a couple others.

If we're gonna require hand sewn arming clothes then we should ban stainless and most other metals. Only mild and spring. I'm not going for that... this time.


But you can go to HE/ Revival/ Medieval Designs and pretty much buy a soft kit. You might have to hand sew the button holes. Thats good imo.

ORRrr in a year you could comission a handsewn soft kit oooorrr in a year you could make one, and you'd be "uber".

[Eamonn MacCampbell]

ORRrr in a year you could comission a handsewn soft kit oooorrr in a year you could make one, and you'd be "uber".

O Great and Wise Don of the 14C Mafia....You read my mind....Been looking at Klaus's stuff, but there seems to be no prices...Will have to wait till he gets all set back up again and then do some chatting..

[Jeff J]

But you can go to HE/ Revival/ Medieval Designs and pretty much buy a soft kit. You might have to hand sew the button holes. Thats good imo.

In many LH groups, you can over-sew machined button holes - leaving the machine stichery in place and essentially covering it with the hand stitching. The other visible machine stichery is usually the hem, collar and wrists. Even the fumble-thumbed like myself can usually knock that out in a few hours.

[Duane W]

[quote="Murdock"]As i said i think that we're talking no visible machine stiching on _soft_ kits.
...

If we're gonna require hand sewn arming clothes then we should ban stainless and most other metals. Only mild and spring. I'm not going for that... this time.


[\quote]

But just as machine sewn button holes are offensive to a costumer's eye, stainless is offensive to my eye. Neither Mac or myself works in that material because it is not found in period. It looks different, works differently and to the trained ear, sounds different. What's worse is that while I cannot spot the difference between a hand sewn garmet and a machine sewn one at 10' (Unless the machine sewn one was done by a person sans clueage.) I can spot bright polished stainless ( The norm for the Combat of the 30 this year) across the main battle field.

Am I going to have a fit if stainless shows up? Nope! Why? Becuase it is a good compromise for the first try at doing this. In one aspect of getting ready, I'm lucky. I have the time and skill to make a new harness out of mild or 1050. What about the other folks out there?

I'm not lucky because I depend on my wife ( who is an MD and has very little time) to make my arming clothes for me. Right now she is busy hand sewing two aketons for Hastings and I'm really hoping they'll be done in time. ( Even at that I have to do all the heavy cloth-to-leather hand sewing. Believe I'm not complaining about that chore. )

My point is that when the standards are set please in mind that some reasonable compromises may have to be set for those amoung who are close , but will have trouble being perfect. The Hastings criteia have A, B and C graded examples. They appear to be good compromises. I look at the A and B grade examples and think they are good enough. the C graded example are not acceptable. (I think they are rated "C" because they look like another thing that starts with the letter "C".)

Is there room in this event for a little give and take, or are the standards going to set so high that the only way we get to see people participate is that groups arriving at the gate have to strip down and contribute the best of what they have to one member of their group so only that one person can get in?

Alexander

[Jeff J]

Since there is all this talk about the stiching, If it goes to all hand stitched stuff...Where would someone look to find someone willing to do something, like say....The Von Hohenklingon padded jacket(

James B, and three highly-skilled ladies who are already posting here about this event are the most likely candidates in my mind for such a task. Charlotte is booked, though - she has a LOT of projects of our own to complete. I've been married to her for nigh 2 years, and she's made me a shirt, while making several complete outfits for others. She reminds me that she also made me a couple of babies and clothes for them, so I won't complain.

Anywho, the hand-stitchery is tedious work, but the bulk of it is fairly simple. Were I in most guy's position, I'd have someone skilled fit the garment and do the bulk of the hand-stichery myself.

[Cunian]

I would say stick to high-level what-can-be-readily-bought. Otherwise you end up with way varying standards according to whose peeves are most peevish.

For example, I don't see a lot of "true" turnshoes on the racks, certainly not hand-stitched. But most look pretty okay, and I don't think TSA-like shoe examinging at the gate would be becoming.

But I'm not fourteenth century, so it doesn't really matter.

[Charlotte J]

In many LH groups, you can over-sew machined button holes - leaving the machine stichery in place and essentially covering it with the hand stitching. The other visible machine stichery is usually the hem, collar and wrists. Even the fumble-thumbed like myself can usually knock that out in a few hours.

If the garment is lined, you don't even have that much to do. Also, I'm very fond of the blind hem stitch. It's machine, but it's barely visible and I'd certainly accept it.

Basic civilian garments are pretty easy to do with no visible machining. It sounds scary, but it's not that hefty of a requirement, really.

[Charlotte J]

But 125 folks ata party hosted by the 14c Mafia, imo thats huge.

Hell ya! 125 people, all dressed out in quality kit? That IS huge. Considering that many LH groups are happy to have 15 or 20 people show? Oh yeah.

Some peoples brains are gonna shut off when they read "no visible machine stitching".

Even though it's not in the plans to inspire random onlookers walking by, it might just inspire people who are close, but haven't gotten the nudge yet. We all need a little nudge every so often. Tasha gave me one once, when she said "we have to get you doing hand-sewn eyelets". She knew me, so she could say it. I'd always *meant* to do it, but having it said got me off of my @$$. Heh, I think my next garment was 100% hand-sewn, inside and out. She nudges well.

[Gilebert]

Okay. Serious question here...

I know that while the persons are being vetted, you will be looking closely at the way in which it was made...

BUT... is that really necessary for looking at something 10 to 100 fet away? Can you really tell the difference between a hand-sewn button-hole and machine made from that distance> At least, most 'common' people. I know I can't from more than 10 feet... and my Lady and I make hand-sewn button- and lacing-holes.

I do machine work on the internal seams and on the hems... and blind stitch things like facings (yes.. I put a facing on my button/button-hole surfaces - same material)..

Oh.. and I am definately against machine embroidery.

I know we are going for immersion, but a nice even temperature is much better than being scalded when you first set your foot in.

I am in no way trying to poo-poo any of this.. just advocating reasonable allowances.

[James B.]

Hand vs. Machine stitching.

I know for many costume people this is a big deal, I only have one civilian garment I wear with machine buttonholes and it is a pourpoint with 76 buttons. I also have an arming cote under my armor that is machined.

Frankly the hours and I mean HOURS it would take to re-quilt an arming cote seems way over the top for the first year of this grand Emprise. People are going to want to make new clothing, armor, arming cotes, tabards, furniture, and so on. Adding a requirement of hundreds of hours of sewing for even a skilled person seems a bit harsh. Again I will bend to the majorities will but I vote against required hand sewing on button holes and arming garments.



One idea if we move this way is one Wolf's mother came up with. Sew the arming cote with a machine using a thread that is glaring on the garment, in her case a red doublet with white thread, simply unstitch the machined thread and sew through the holes with your linen thread.

[Tailoress]

Okay. Serious question here...

I know that while the persons are being vetted, you will be looking closely at the way in which it was made...

BUT... is that really necessary for looking at something 10 to 100 fet away?

I wouldn't assume that vetters would be looking everything over the way a judge might at a competition -- inspecting exact weave, turning it inside out to see the inner seams, etc. I think it's more likely that they will be able to see at pretty much a glance whether or not the kit has the right silhoutte and general effect. If people submit a pic or two in advance, a simple, "any visible machining?" could be answered "no," and a big "Pass" stamp used.

I think the vetters would really dislike having to disappoint people. I know I would dislike it. I'd be looking for reasons to say "good work" and "welcome".

-Tasha
PS -- Thanks Char -- see I don't even remember saying that to you, but it's nice to know that it had a positive effect (and how!)

[Tailoress]

Just to put the hand-sewing thing in perspective a little, I sewed 30 eyelets a day for three days straight at Pennsic this year so that I'd have a finished dress to wear the next day. That was done in between everything else, a few here and there. It was not hard, time-wise. Buttonholes are only a bit more time than eyelets.

Someone needs to start a biz where they finish people's buttonholes and eyelets for them.

(Not me!)

-Tasha

[Charlotte J]

Frankly the hours and I mean HOURS it would take to re-quilt an arming cote seems way over the top for the first year of this grand Emprise. People are going to want to make new clothing, armor, arming cotes, tabards, furniture, and so on. Adding a requirement of hundreds of hours of sewing for even a skilled person seems a bit harsh. Again I will bend to the majorities will but I vote against required hand sewing on button holes and arming garments.

Button or eyelet holes on a civilian garment do not take hundreds of hours.

A button or eyelet hole takes me 10 minutes. Let's say 20 minutes each for a beginner. A plain-sleeved, laced ladies' supportive cote might have 30 eyelets. That's 600 minutes, or 10 hours. What's 10 hours, when we have a year to get ready?

Or, go lower class with a pullober Herjolfsness dress, and you can skip buttonholes and eyelet holes altogether.

I take about 10 hours to make a completely machine-sewn dress (give or take, I haven't tracked it, or done it, really, in a while). I take about 30, give or take, to make a dress with all visible hand finishing. That includes flat-felling the bodice seams, eyelets or buttonholes, hand-stiching facings down over the neck and front opening, and a hand-sewn hem. 30 hours in a year? Not so hard.

Also consider that there are vendors out there who will do the eyelet holes by hand, if you pay them for it. Medieval Designs will do anything that you want by hand.

for the first year of this grand Emprise.

IMHO, the standards for the second year shouldn't be any higher than the first year. Armour and high-authenticity clothing aren't something that are replaced every year. Now, after a while, I'd hope that standards won't even matter, as we all try to out-do each other.

[James B.]

Button or eyelet holes on a civilian garment do not take hundreds of hours.

No but quilting an arming garment can take that long was my point. Hell it's been 2 years and I am not done with my jack.

I am slow with button holes 15-30 minutes each for me and I have 75 on my pourpoint; we are talking 30 hours of buttonholes. I have a wool pourpoint from 2 years ago with only 10 finished button holes because I have so much on my plate I can't find time to come back and finish the other 65.

[Gilebert]

Hi Tasha,

I know what you are saying... ,y Lady and I did the same thing... only she did over 100 button-holes and atatched the buttons in about 5 days. On the drive to Pennsic, she did 40 eyelets in about 6 hours... on a simple cotte for a friend.

Once you get doing the holes/eyelets, it simply becomes tedium... its not really that difficult after the first 10 or so.

Just to put the hand-sewing thing in perspective a little, I sewed 30 eyelets a day for three days straight at Pennsic this year so that I'd have a finished dress to wear the next day. That was done in between everything else, a few here and there. It was not hard, time-wise. Buttonholes are only a bit more time than eyelets.

Someone needs to start a biz where they finish people's buttonholes and eyelets for them.

(Not me!)

-Tasha

Gaukler had asked her about doing the holes on a doublet he d, but she didn't have the spare time. (I think she was just burned out from doing so many the last few days... )

[Sir Crispin]

"Oh, I'll have a soft kit to be there for sure. Murrdock, do you want a really tall lacky? " Lacky?? No good sir, you need to fight. I am sure we can get you outfitted again. Whats your head size? I have many helms. And we know you fit a fine 14th century rig already. You have a year to prepare.
You know you want to play. I will endevor to give you a proper pollaxe match.

I'll measure my head. I won' buy the kit (defiently refusing to join the 14th C Mafia)

Speaking of which I have to point out some irony.
When talking of food to serve Murdock quoted the Hastings Man. which is 15thC.
When debating the spurs vs. no spurs the picture posted was, you guessed it, 15th C.

Admit it, yall wanna be 15th C. where men wear pants not boxers with dark socks (my Dad used to sport that look mowing the lawn, but he wasn't doing LH)
Ask yourself, wouldn't a sallet feel good right about now?

returning now to the 15th C and my HANDSEWN arming coat and HANDSEWN hosen
in the 15th C you're all dead to me

ps Gilebert, that was a fun fight

[white mountain armoury]

Hand stitching and proper fabrics does not always equate to a correct finnished piece. I have seen a great deal of wonderful clothing made by hand, but that does not address shape and fit and tailoring.
I have yet to see a grand asiette made by anyone that shows the proper stuffed breast shown in period illuminations, i am sure there is one out there. I have just not seen one on the field.
You dont want to loose the forest for the trees so to speak.
Properly executed kits both hard and soft, correct in appearance and shape should be required. Proper containers for refreshment etc etc.
Thread counting may be counter productive to the process imho.
The bar should be set high, but should still be attainable.
My wife will sew anything i like, by hand or by machine, she can do an eyelet in 5 min, she has made hundreds, she did 30 in the car on the way to pennsic. I have a shop and moderate skills to handle the hard suit, but not everyone has these options.
There are decent commercially available makers of clothing out there that should be good enough.
Getting your hard and soft kit done for the one who intends to fight, in addition to clothing for your lady and retainers is a pretty tall order, certainly something that can be done.
A machine stitch here and there would not bother me if the overall execution was correct.

[Karen Larsdatter]

I think Galleron is your man, Karen, as he's been doing some pretty steady research into textual accounts of various foot combats (not to be confused with the mounted tournaments).

Well, for the pre-Pennsic article, what I think would be good would be something covering the basics:
- When and where the tournament will be taking place
- What the general concept & inspiration behind this tournament is
- Where people can go for more specific information (guidelines, kit-standards, etc.)
- A generally enthusiastic tone that will make people want to get involved
- Maybe some options (if any) for "observers" whose kit may not be up to standards, who'd like to view the goings-on
Essentially, it'd boil down to a promotional piece with a few FAQ-esque pieces of information.

Then, in a later issue, perhaps a follow-up article (with photos) on how the tournament went. How well did it correspond with accounts of foot-combat tournaments? Did it meet or exceed expectations? How many people attended? fought? observed? Will there be tournaments like this at future Pennsics, or other events? Flowery descriptions of the pageantry of the day; description of the action on the tournament-field, and among the "civilian" (non-fighting participants) contingent, etc.

Keep in mind -- I'm not in any official position to be offering up space in upcoming issues of Tournaments Illuminated, nor can I make any promises on the publication's behalf.

Well -- not in any official position yet.

But I think this content would be of mutual benefit to this tournament, and to Tournaments Illuminated in general. The editor can at least give you an estimate of the deadline for content for the Spring 2007 issue.

[Tailoress]

I have yet to see a grand asiette made by anyone that shows the proper stuffed breast shown in period illuminations, i am sure there is one out there.

I stuffed the GA cotte worn by Kelson at his second coronation. IMO, it looked right. I see more evidence for that look in the civilian use of these garments, myself.



I don't stuff arming cottes when they're intended for under hard armor in the SCA. But, I haven't done so many that I've explored all the options. (At this point I won't be doing much more of that sort of thing anyway, as I'm working fulltime again.)

Galleron has a martial one that is stuffed for the pigeon look. I've got it in my possession right now and am adjusting the stuffing so his habergeon hangs better over it. The woman who made it is named Joann, and she's another La Belle Compagnie member. I'm not sure, but Bob Charrette's arming cotte might also be stuffed. I know it's g.a., but don't know about chest stuffing for sure.

Anyway, such things have been done for a while, just probably out of your line of sight... it's a big world of LH/SCA/re-enactment out there, and we're undoubtedly not all up on what others are doing.

-Tasha