Avoiding the 'Diaper' Look

[Sean M]

Mac, while I experiment with my new hosen pattern, here is my source for the drawstrings in 11th century hosen: James Barker's old site.

[LeoVIIIIV]

Hi Fellas,

I apologize for the abscence, work and such....

Sean M,
I agree with you on lining the upper part of the hosen with bias cut linen in the briaes area. Ive tried a couple of pair of split wool hosen, with a full linen liner cut on the bias. While in later artwork we see examples that they were fully lined, its very difficult to get the kind of fit you can achieve with just wool on the lower portions of the legs. They're also a pain to get on and off with full linen lining.

So excuse the artwork, (and the hosen type on the front view) but i was just doodling on photoshop quickly trying to work out some options, one being loosely similar to Mac's crossed tails speculation. I wonder on this, though. If we were to use the tails to attach to the center point on the back (with the traditional location of the apex of the tail being in-line with the rear seam of the hose) it would create an awful pull/twist on the hosen. With the twist of the hosen (from the crotch rotating outwards) you are also putting undue stress on a garment that is already under a fair amount of stress. This of course depends on the fit in relation to a mans corset (if corsets are still being worn by 1364)

The pointing locations height-wise on the CDBP are irregular. If you follow the quilting lines (which appear to be lined up properly) and look to the point on the left of the image, it is lower than the rest of the points. While the center back appears slightly higher.....im not sure what to make of this.


Really learning a lot on this thread. Thanks for the input gents

[Sean M]

On my look at the best photos I have the points are all mounted the same distance from the hem. I could be wrong!

Here is one half of my third pair of hose. I am aiming for the 'San Rocco' style with three points of suspension per leg and possibly one more point which uses one eyelet on each leg. This will be the kind with a separate sole and the top of the bootie cut in one with the leg.



This time my cloth is imitation madder red. The linen is lightweight and kind of nasty (loosely woven, aggressively bleached) but it will do. Each leg is pieced: part of the 'lateral 'butt and the whole of the 'medial' butt-flap are cut from scraps. This lets me get a whole pair in 100 x 140 cm of cloth.

I have put in the lining (right sides to right sides and sew down with backstitch and a 1/4" to 1/8" seam allowance, flip over, iron, whipstitch or some other discreet stitch along the bottom edge) except along the back seam where I need to test the fit.

[Mac]

Just a couple of quibbles....




The first is that under ideal conditions, we should not be able to see any of the underwear or butt crack. Sure, there will be some exposure of the braies when the wearer does something energetic, but in this very static pose, I'm pretty sure that we can close up that gap. Showing a gap in the working sketch is almost like admitting defeat right there in the design process. It's only by shooting for the stars that we can avoid the moon

The second is about the braies themselves. You have shown the waist line/drawstring a bit higher than what we see in art. This is especially true in front. There is no real support for the drawstring across the middle of the abdomen, and given the "uplifting" function of the garment, it will naturally sag here.

Mac

[LeoVIIIIV]

Hey Mac,
I look forward to seeing your hose complete. How will you be pointing them?
The one extra eyelet per hose on the back was my idea for the rear center pointing location on the CDBP Although the cut along the top of the hose is still a mystery to me. The flat cut ive illustrated (all be it poorly) makes the most sense to me.

I could be wrong on the points as well. Tasha in her book shows them even all around execept for the points at the sides which are higher than the rest. She has them listed at around 6" from the bottom hem. At the end of the day ill be making them even all around in line with my hip joint which will be at 8" from the bottom hem.

Thanks for the encouragement on that Mac, ive been catching flak from all sides on this one from the establishment
I'll ensure to take into account the height of the braies when tailoring. I've only made pairs in what was called the "old style" or something to that effect. Something akin to the braies we see in the Crusader's Bible.
Ill close up the backs on the hose patterns.

[Mac]

Hey Mac,
I look forward to seeing your hose complete. How will you be pointing them?

It's Sean M. who's making the hosen, but I look forward to seeing them complete too.

The one extra eyelet per hose on the back was my idea for the rear center pointing location on the CDBP Although the cut along the top of the hose is still a mystery to me. The flat cut ive illustrated (all be it poorly) makes the most sense to me.

I have pretty limited experience with BCSH. Like I think I mentioned somewhere earlier; I was working on them a couple of decades ago, but they never came to fruition. The thing I did find, though, is that the butt flaps need to be long enough that you can sit. This will make the butt a bit baggy when you stand up.

I could be wrong on the points as well. Tasha in her book shows them even all around execept for the points at the sides which are higher than the rest. She has them listed at around 6" from the bottom hem. At the end of the day ill be making them even all around in line with my hip joint which will be at 8" from the bottom hem.

Why make them farther from the hem? Are you making the skirt longer, or are you very tall? All things being equal, a 2" difference would be appropriate if you were 8 to 10 inches taller than Charles.

Thanks for the encouragement on that Mac, ive been catching flak from all sides on this one from the establishment
I'll ensure to take into account the height of the braies when tailoring. I've only made pairs in what was called the "old style" or something to that effect. Something akin to the braies we see in the Crusader's Bible.
Ill close up the backs on the hose patterns.

Those long, baggy braies pretty much went out of fashion by 1300. Anyone wearing a garment like the CDB would have closer fitting breais with short legs. Something that covers the same ground as modern "boxers" is probably about right.

My guess is that as soon as one commits to tying the hosen to the doublet/pourpoint/whetever the appropriate braies have a drawstring, rather than a belt. I have a pinterest board of braies like that, but the board is hidden till I am confident enough in my typology to make it public. If you would like, I can "invite" you to the board, and that will give you access to it.

Meanwhile, here are a couple of images of the sort of braies that I think are appropriate. They are all a bit later than the garment, but the contexts are historical or else show lower class persons who's clothing will be out of date. These are the braies I am tentatively calling "type III"







The other possibility is the sort I am calling "type II". These images are closer to the right time period, but again, they are historical or down-scale. The other thing about the type IIs is that they feature a wide casing and probably had a belt. This feels like a feature that an up to date fashionista in 1360 would eschew.







In any case, the guy who wears nice hose that go all the way up doesn't want to have any unsightly bulges from his baggy, long braies. Thus, the legs of the braies should be as short as possible while still maintaining decency with split hose. They should be long enough to stay in the hosen, but short and close enough to avoid bulgy "panty lines".

Mac

[Sean M]

I cut the other leg yesterday. Roger Mortimer's hosier required a yard and a quarter of cloth and a half-ell of linen for each pair of hose in 1393/4, and that seems like a good length of broadcloth. I can cut these in 100 cm, but 115 cm (a yard and a quarter) would make it easier or allow for a higher hemline.

This twill hosecloth stretches very well and breathes well, but it loses fibres to the pressure of chalk (!) or armour. It might not be the best choice for wearing under cuisses. I think that finding good cloth for hose is a mystery: Historic Enterprises settled on a fulled Merino wool jersey.

[LeoVIIIIV]

Hey Mac,
I look forward to seeing your hose complete. How will you be pointing them?

It's Sean M. who's making the hosen, but I look forward to seeing them complete too.

The one extra eyelet per hose on the back was my idea for the rear center pointing location on the CDBP Although the cut along the top of the hose is still a mystery to me. The flat cut ive illustrated (all be it poorly) makes the most sense to me.

I have pretty limited experience with BCSH. Like I think I mentioned somewhere earlier; I was working on them a couple of decades ago, but they never came to fruition. The thing I did find, though, is that the butt flaps need to be long enough that you can sit. This will make the butt a bit baggy when you stand up.

I could be wrong on the points as well. Tasha in her book shows them even all around execept for the points at the sides which are higher than the rest. She has them listed at around 6" from the bottom hem. At the end of the day ill be making them even all around in line with my hip joint which will be at 8" from the bottom hem.

Why make them farther from the hem? Are you making the skirt longer, or are you very tall? All things being equal, a 2" difference would be appropriate if you were 8 to 10 inches taller than Charles.

Thanks for the encouragement on that Mac, ive been catching flak from all sides on this one from the establishment
I'll ensure to take into account the height of the braies when tailoring. I've only made pairs in what was called the "old style" or something to that effect. Something akin to the braies we see in the Crusader's Bible.
Ill close up the backs on the hose patterns.

Those long, baggy braies pretty much went out of fashion by 1300. Anyone wearing a garment like the CDB would have closer fitting breais with short legs. Something that covers the same ground as modern "boxers" is probably about right.

My guess is that as soon as one commits to tying the hosen to the doublet/pourpoint/whetever the appropriate braies have a drawstring, rather than a belt. I have a pinterest board of braies like that, but the board is hidden till I am confident enough in my typology to make it public. If you would like, I can "invite" you to the board, and that will give you access to it.

Meanwhile, here are a couple of images of the sort of braies that I think are appropriate. They are all a bit later than the garment, but the contexts are historical or else show lower class persons who's clothing will be out of date. These are the braies I am tentatively calling "type III"







The other possibility is the sort I am calling "type II". These images are closer to the right time period, but again, they are historical or down-scale. The other thing about the type IIs is that they feature a wide casing and probably had a belt. This feels like a feature that an up to date fashionista in 1360 would eschew.







In any case, the guy who wears nice hose that go all the way up doesn't want to have any unsightly bulges from his baggy, long braies. Thus, the legs of the braies should be as short as possible while still maintaining decency with split hose. They should be long enough to stay in the hosen, but short and close enough to avoid bulgy "panty lines".

Mac

That wasn't my 1st time this week glossing as opposed to reading...…...

So Sean I'm looking forward to the hose being complete!

Mac, An invite would to the board would be great. Thanks for the images, some patterning to ponder.

Sean, 16th century hose finds (From: Textiles and Clothing 1150-1450) "...although the stitching holes are less evident in the worsted 2.2 twill from which they were made."
Also from "Textiles and Clothing" :
"The weaves of wool textiles present in London deposits of c.1150-1450"
During the years c. 1351-1400; 328 fragments of z/s-spun Tabby woven wool were found, being the greatest number of fragments in this diagram. Followed by 102 fragments of s-spun tabby woven wool, and 3rd with 37 fragments of z-spun 2.2 twill. These are all the fragments found, not specified to a particular garment. But z/s spun tabby seems to have been used a great deal during this time.

Soaking the wool in near boiling water for a short time before cutting is a great way to help tighten up fibres and make the fabric a bit more durable. Some hand felting (depending on your wool weave) helps as well.
Tabby woven wools cut on the bias work great for hose and are durable.
Hamilton Dry Goods (Period Fabrics) has a nice selection of wools. They are inexpensive but are a 1 time deal, so when they sell out its gone. Samples are cheap if not free.

BBlack&Sons has a nice selection. I have a few garments made from their Melton suiting wool %85/%15 blend and they've held up nicely.

Hope this helps

[LeoVIIIIV]

Hey Mac,
I look forward to seeing your hose complete. How will you be pointing them?

It's Sean M. who's making the hosen, but I look forward to seeing them complete too.

The one extra eyelet per hose on the back was my idea for the rear center pointing location on the CDBP Although the cut along the top of the hose is still a mystery to me. The flat cut ive illustrated (all be it poorly) makes the most sense to me.

I have pretty limited experience with BCSH. Like I think I mentioned somewhere earlier; I was working on them a couple of decades ago, but they never came to fruition. The thing I did find, though, is that the butt flaps need to be long enough that you can sit. This will make the butt a bit baggy when you stand up.

I could be wrong on the points as well. Tasha in her book shows them even all around execept for the points at the sides which are higher than the rest. She has them listed at around 6" from the bottom hem. At the end of the day ill be making them even all around in line with my hip joint which will be at 8" from the bottom hem.

Why make them farther from the hem? Are you making the skirt longer, or are you very tall? All things being equal, a 2" difference would be appropriate if you were 8 to 10 inches taller than Charles.

Thanks for the encouragement on that Mac, ive been catching flak from all sides on this one from the establishment
I'll ensure to take into account the height of the braies when tailoring. I've only made pairs in what was called the "old style" or something to that effect. Something akin to the braies we see in the Crusader's Bible.
Ill close up the backs on the hose patterns.

Those long, baggy braies pretty much went out of fashion by 1300. Anyone wearing a garment like the CDB would have closer fitting breais with short legs. Something that covers the same ground as modern "boxers" is probably about right.

My guess is that as soon as one commits to tying the hosen to the doublet/pourpoint/whetever the appropriate braies have a drawstring, rather than a belt. I have a pinterest board of braies like that, but the board is hidden till I am confident enough in my typology to make it public. If you would like, I can "invite" you to the board, and that will give you access to it.

Meanwhile, here are a couple of images of the sort of braies that I think are appropriate. They are all a bit later than the garment, but the contexts are historical or else show lower class persons who's clothing will be out of date. These are the braies I am tentatively calling "type III"







The other possibility is the sort I am calling "type II". These images are closer to the right time period, but again, they are historical or down-scale. The other thing about the type IIs is that they feature a wide casing and probably had a belt. This feels like a feature that an up to date fashionista in 1360 would eschew.







In any case, the guy who wears nice hose that go all the way up doesn't want to have any unsightly bulges from his baggy, long braies. Thus, the legs of the braies should be as short as possible while still maintaining decency with split hose. They should be long enough to stay in the hosen, but short and close enough to avoid bulgy "panty lines".

Mac

That wasn't my 1st time this week glossing as opposed to reading...…...

So Sean I'm looking forward to the hose being complete!

Mac, An invite would to the board would be great. Thanks for the images, some patterning to ponder.

Sean, 16th century hose finds (From: Textiles and Clothing 1150-1450) "...although the stitching holes are less evident in the worsted 2.2 twill from which they were made."
Also from "Textiles and Clothing" :
"The weaves of wool textiles present in London deposits of c.1150-1450"
During the years c. 1351-1400; 328 fragments of z/s-spun Tabby woven wool were found, being the greatest number of fragments in this diagram. Followed by 102 fragments of s-spun tabby woven wool, and 3rd with 37 fragments of z-spun 2.2 twill. These are all the fragments found, not specified to a particular garment. But z/s spun tabby seems to have been used a great deal during this time.

Soaking the wool in near boiling water for a short time before cutting is a great way to help tighten up fibres and make the fabric a bit more durable. Some hand felting (depending on your wool weave) helps as well.
Tabby woven wools cut on the bias work great for hose and are durable.
Hamilton Dry Goods (Period Fabrics) has a nice selection of wools. They are inexpensive but are a 1 time deal, so when they sell out its gone. Samples are cheap if not free.

BBlack&Sons has a nice selection. I have a few garments made from their Melton suiting wool %85/%15 blend and they've held up nicely.

Hope this helps

[Mac]

Mac, An invite would to the board would be great. Thanks for the images, some patterning to ponder.

I will gladly do that, but I need your Pinterest name or email. Please PM me.

Mac

[Sean M]

Right now I chose facta over verba, but here is the left leg basted together with the foot unfinished. The pourpoint has the same arrangement of points as the Charles de Blois, but has a double canvas strip-of-eyelets and removable points instead of 'split tabs' permanently sewn to the lining.

The fit in the calf needs work, but it looks better when the foot is stretching the cloth.



I might try shrinking and felting the cloth next time, I am worried that it would shrink the wool too narrow to get two hose in a width but too wide to cut one hose in a width efficiently. Modern fabric is often an awkward in-between width.

I have some vintage suiting in a dark blue which I might try. Right now I want a working pair of hosen which is less embarrassing than the single-point-at-the-front pair I have.

[Mac]

That seems to fit OK!

Mac

[LeoVIIIIV]

Looks like they do the trick in coverage. Look forward to seeing them finished.

[Sean M]

Thanks Mac and Leo, working on the foot of the left hose now.

I have the right hose cut, and started to insert the lining, but the angle is just slightly off and I am deciding whether to undo the seam at the top of the leg and re-sew it, or just accept a small wrinkle in the lining.

I hope to have time to draft at least a sketch pattern and scan it when I am satisfied with my design.

[LeoVIIIIV]

So after some tests with a couple of patterns, here is the one I decided to go with.

I used heavy weight unbleached linen (I know, burn me at the stake for heresy ) for the lining as is allows for more give than a finer, tightly woven linen. My hosen are usually unlined as my braies cover the majority of my thigh. That will soon change.
The liner shown here is mainly for some reinforcement for eyelets and to cover the front of my upper thigh. Which is the only area on my legs that wool seems to irritate.

The pointy bit, when tilted to the side, ( so that its edge aligns with the rest of the cut of the upper part of the hose) creates a pocket of sorts. It is also longer than needed to reach the center point.

This allows for some ease around the glute.

With the hose pinned to a tight t-shirt movement restrictions seem to be minimal (with the exception of sitting). This may change when actually pointed to the pourpoint.

There should be some slight overlap along the evolutionary centerline, covering the rear of the braies completely. Ill know for sure when the other is finished.
Ill have some better pictures in the future with the help of a 3rd party. Feedback as usual, is always welcome.

Thanks Mac and Leo, working on the foot of the left hose now.

I have the right hose cut, and started to insert the lining, but the angle is just slightly off and I am deciding whether to undo the seam at the top of the leg and re-sew it, or just accept a small wrinkle in the lining.

I hope to have time to draft at least a sketch pattern and scan it when I am satisfied with my design.

Sean I don't believe anyone would crucify you for a small wrinkle, and probably fewer would actually see it.

[Sean M]

I am going to finish these in the next few days, but until then, here is a St. Lucia by Jacobello del Fiore in the Pianoteca Civica, Fermo whose murderer wears split hose
https://www.bildindex.de/document/obj20088735?part=6

It might be worth searching out colour pictures of the original.

[Gustovic]

Here's some very short doublets from an Italian manuscript that I'd date around 1390-1400 about horse breeding and training, from the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vat.lat. 7228 M.

Full manuscript here https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.lat.7228

They are so short that you can actually see the underwear.

[Mac]

Here's some very short doublets from an Italian manuscript that I'd date around 1390-1400 about horse breeding and training, from the Biblioteca Apostolica Vaticana Vat.lat. 7228 M.

Full manuscript here https://digi.vatlib.it/view/MSS_Vat.lat.7228

You have found a treasure here, Augusto!

Mac

[Gustovic]

Not me, but some chap over Facebook.

The 1390 version is pretty hard to read for me, but there's a 1561 version that is fairly close to modern Italian, and there's a lot of interesting information about how to actually train a proper warhorse in the middle ages, like regularly riding through town, preferably in the blacksmith district, to get the horse used to noise and movement.

[Mac]

Here's a nice example of butt-covering-split-hosen, not quite covering the butt.



The important thing, of course, is that a decently dressed man will have all of this covered by some other garment. In this case it's an early giornea.



Mac

[Sean M]

Yes, thank you Gustovic! From now on I will cite that as the exception that proves the rule, before the Italians start shamelessly showing their linens off in the second quarter of the 15th century.

The Padua Picture Bible fol 74v shows the kind of guy at a siege who can't even afford a boiled leather skullcap crawling along the ground with nothing exposed.

[Sean M]

Here are my yellow pair in action, possibly without the center back point tied.



Now they are not perfect (too baggy, the seam of the linen lining is visible), but they have much less linen showing than the short one-point hose most people are wearing, and if I can make these I guarantee any of you can You can still roll them down around your knees just fine although they are a bit bulkier than single-point-hose.



Here is a more flattering angle on the same pourpoint.

[jenzinas]

Sean, what are your hose pointed to?

[Sean M]

The doublet has seven pairs of points passing through eyelets in a double canvas band at roughly hip level.

These hose were modified several times in the cutting, so are not my best pair, but I think they show that its not so hard to make hose which mostly hide your breeches with a doublet that ends just below the crotch.

[jenzinas]

Ok. and by doublet, you are referring to something worn under the pourpoint and not the pourpoint itself, right?

[Sean M]

H are the seven pairs of eyelets in the double canvas band for the hose, C are the four pairs of eyelets in tabs for the cuisses (mandatory Ian Laspina: there is not much evidence for what held up the cuisses, and slightly more for a lendenier than attaching them to the doublet, but its easy to move the tabs around until I have them just where I like them).

I am wearing linen breeches, a linen shirt, the blue pourpoint, the yellow hose, a straw hat and brown calfskin shoes (oh: and a black belt with my purse and basilard).

It was pretty common to wear two shaped garments, one underneath to hold up the hose and one on top, but right now I only have the one.

[jenzinas]

I was trying to figure out how the porpoint was supporting the hose when I wasn't seeing any lacing holes on the outside. Thanks for the clarification.

[Sean M]

I was trying to figure out how the porpoint was supporting the hose when I wasn't seeing any lacing holes on the outside. Thanks for the clarification.

Yes, as hemlines rise above the crotch towards the waist in the 15th century, you start to see hose pointed to the bottom edge of the doublet, and that became the usual solution until the early 17th century. A good example is the manuscript Vat. lat. 7228 which Gustovic found: I would date the fashions to 1410-1440 or so (doublets with collars do appear as early as 1380, but the hem is too high, the transition from breast to belly is too sharp, the giornea is more mid-15th century, the exposed breeches are more mid-15th-century, and in 1380 the people with high collars on their doublets are not the ones doctoring and shoeing horses, they are the ones who have people for that). Until the early 15th century, the hose are pointed to something underneath or inside the doublet, such as a belt or the points sewed inside the Charles du Blois garment.

I am representing a poor gentleman from Bolzano in the 1360s.

[Sean M]

Here is another view of the same setup after adjusting the hose.



I think with this style of hose, a polite person has to keep reaching back and adjusting it to make sure that what should be hidden is hidden, just like someone with a hip belt has to constantly adjust it to keep it from falling off, or someone with a tucked shirt needs to keep it tucked to avoid plumber's crack.

(Plate by Piotr Feret, pisane by Tom Biliter)

[Mac]

It looks like you did a fine job on the hosen!

A slightly longer skirt on the arming garment would be enough to keep the hosen "decent" under most circumstances. The ones in the iconography seem (mostly) to cover the gluteal fold. So... I'm thinking about three fingers longer in the back.

Mac