velvet-msg - 3/23/99
Medieval velvets. Modern substitutions.
NOTE: See also the files: textiles-msg, felting-msg, silk-msg, looms-msg, piled-fabrics-msg, quilting-msg, weaving-msg.
************************************************************************
NOTICE -
This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.
This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org
I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.
The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.
Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).
Thank you,
Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous
Stefan at florilegium.org
************************************************************************
From: sclark at chass.utoronto.ca (Susan Carroll-Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 24 May 1996 13:18:15 -0400
Organization: University of Toronto -- EPAS
I remember reading somewhere (danged if I remember where) that the first
*mention* of velvet in a written source in England is in the 1270's or
1280's. This says nothing about its availability elsewhere before that,
and does not prove they _didn't_ have it before then, but it's a start.
Cheers--
Nicolaa de Bracton
sclark at chass.utoronto.ca
From: tamlyn18 at usa.pipeline.com(Wedevourouryoung)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 26 May 1996 12:29:43 GMT
Organization: Pipeline USA
On May 25, 1996 14:34:58 in article <Re: velvet use?>,
'sparrow at world.std.com (Sparrow)' wrote:
>Do remember if you decide to use velvet in your costuming that medieval
>velvets were in all probability denser and coarser than the shiny rayon
>kind most available in fabric stores today. Velveteen may be a more
>period-correct substitute.
>
>Philippa
Sorry - period velvets were made of silk - light, floating and nearly
weightless - I've used silk velvets, they're awsome. - Rayon-shiny "today"
velvets are CLOSER to period than velveteen, it is only our modern eye
which interprets rayon as undesireable, rayon was invented as a silk
replacement. Velveteen is closer to early fustians, one of the early uses
on wool-cotton blends. Tudor and Elizabethan fustians are most closly
emulated by narrow-wale corderoy.. see Linthicum,M.C. "Costume in the Drama
of Shakespear and his Contemporaries", Oxford, 1936 (reprinted, NY 1963)
for useful chapters on textiles and colors.
Don't get caught up in the fallacy that because its medieval it has to be
somehow cruder than modern. Many of the textile and needlework examples
extant are finer than can be replicated by modern machines. Imagine the
possible quality of all that has NOT survived the ages.
Tamlin
From: habura at matisse.its.rpi.edu (Andrea Marie Habura)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 26 May 1996 21:59:54 GMT
Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute
I have one citation that's pretty early, from 1295; the record says
"Item, Capa de dono domini Radulphi de Staneford de Indico velvetto,
cum aurifrigio de rubeo velvetto, cum platis et perlis desuper
positis". (EGI Christie, _English Medieval Embroidery, p. 19).
Since Latin _indicum_ refers to indigo, I think that this is a
liturgical cape of blue velvet with _something_ involving red
velvet; I don't have a translation for "aurifrigio".
There do seem to be a _lot_ of records from the 14th c. mentioning
velvet clothing. I'm afraid I don't have anything earlier than
that 1295 date, though.
Alison MacDermot
*Ex Ungue Leonem*
From: priest at vassar.edu (Carolyn Priest-Dorman)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 28 May 1996 02:46:07 GMT
Organization: Vassar College
Greeting from Thora Sharptooth!
Alison (habura at matisse.its.rpi.edu) wrote:
>I have one citation that's pretty early, from 1295; the record says
>"Item, Capa de dono domini Radulphi de Staneford de Indico velvetto,
>cum aurifrigio de rubeo velvetto, cum platis et perlis desuper
>positis". (EGI Christie, _English Medieval Embroidery, p. 19).
>
>Since Latin _indicum_ refers to indigo, I think that this is a
>liturgical cape of blue velvet with _something_ involving red
>velvet; I don't have a translation for "aurifrigio".
According to Agnes Geijer, _A History of Textile Art_, p. 218: "The Latin
term _aurifrisia_ (gold band) which occurs so frequently in the inventories
can mean a variety of techniques...." My guess is that the red aurifrigium
(note the reference is singular, not plural) in this inventory means an
orphrey made from a narrow loomwidth of either metallic gold and red velvet or
plain red velvet.
***************************************************************************
Carolyn Priest-Dorman Thora Sharptooth
priest at vassar.edu Frostahlid, Austrriki
Gules, three square weaver's tablets in bend Or
***************************************************************************
From: sclark at chass.utoronto.ca (Susan Carroll-Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 28 May 1996 12:27:32 -0400
Organization: University of Toronto -- EPAS
Greetings!
Tamlin said,
: Sorry - period velvets were made of silk - light, floating and nearly
: weightless - I've used silk velvets, they're awsome. - Rayon-shiny "today"
: velvets are CLOSER to period than velveteen, it is only our modern eye
: which interprets rayon as undesireable, rayon was invented as a silk
: replacement.
Where have you been able to find rayon velvets? All I can find is acetates....
That aside, I think it's important to note that not all velvets
(acetate or otherwise) are equal. A lot of the cheaper acetates do
not have as many loops per inch, which make them look shiny; whereas your
really spiff "double" or "triple" velvets have the rich, luxuriant look
that is desirable. These do not look shiny at all, but rather that dull,
rich glow that you just want to fondle :-) Personally, I would always
take a cotton velvet over a cheap acetate, but if the better quality
acetates were on sale, I'd grab them.
Second, velvet is a type of silk. Most of the silks readily available today
are light to medium weight, so it's easy to forget that many of the surviving
silk fragments in places like the V&A are quite substantial--medium to heavy
weight. I would imagine period velvets would be similar, in that both lighter
and heavier weights would exist for various uses. (Can anyone confirm my
suspicions?)
Cheers--
Nicolaa de Bracton
sclark at chass.utoronto.ca
From: holsten at nature.berkeley.edu (Donna Holsten)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: velvet use?
Date: 29 May 1996 21:16:13 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
In article <4of9hk$hm at chass.utoronto.ca>,
Susan Carroll-Clark <sclark at chass.utoronto.ca> wrote:
>Second, velvet is a type of silk. Most of the silks readily available today
>are light to medium weight, so it's easy to forget that many of the surviving
>silk fragments in places like the V&A are quite substantial--medium to heavy
>weight. I would imagine period velvets would be similar, in that both lighter
>and heavier weights would exist for various uses. (Can anyone confirm my
>suspicions?)
>
>Nicolaa de Bracton
Well, never having *felt* or weighed a period velvet, I can't say for
*sure*. But, I do know that the early velvets at the V&A, for example,
looked (from 12 inches away, through a glass case) much more like
upholstery velvet than velveteen, and more like velveteen than "modern"
velvet. And, in fact, there are plenty examples of period velvets with
several different heights/thicknesses of pile.
I recently wove some silk fabric for a pair of Byzantine outfits. It
was made out of *heavy* silk, and looks *nothing* like what the modern
eye thinks silk fabric should look like. So, yes, period velvets were
silk, but, no, they weren't necessarily as light-weight as modern silk
or artificial velvets.
Joanna
From: nancykd at wam.umd.edu (Nancy Dalton)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: Tue, 04 Jun 96 17:41:33 GMT
Organization: University of Maryland College Park
sdunham2 at aol.com (SDunham2) wrote:
>Period Velvet was usually cotton, much like the today's upolstry fabric.
>
>Brighid
I'm not disagreeing with the above, simply adding some information.
Actually the brocaded velvets that were made in Spain and Italy
beginning in the 15th century were generally made of silk and
sometimes gold or silver.
I also came across a modern textile definition for velvet and
velveteen. Velvet is a fabric with extra warp looped and then cut.
Velveteen is when the weft is looped and cut. (abridged definitions)
I'm not sure what that would mean as far as either one being in
period. Does anybody out there know?
Being reminded every day how much more there is to learn,
Nancy Dalton
aka Earnwynn van Zwaluwenburg
From: sclark at chass.utoronto.ca (Susan Carroll-Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: 5 Jun 1996 13:16:15 -0400
Organization: University of Toronto -- EPAS
Greetings!
>Period Velvet was usually cotton, much like the today's apolstry fabric.
And your source, m'lady? All of the velvets I have viewed in museums were
silk velvets or "half-silk velvets"--the other half being linen or
hemp in the weft.
"At first, only plain, solid cut pile velvet apprears to have been manufactured
in late 13th century silk weaving centres...."
"...plain velvets captured a sizable market in 14th century London.
Many of these were probably half-silk velvets, which means that they
had a weft of linen or hemp concealed beneath the silk pile and were
consequently cheaper to manufacture and buy".
(Crowfoot at al., _Textiles and Clothing c.1150-c.1450_ (Medieval
Finds from Excavations in London: 4; London: HMSO, 1992, p.127.)
(Incidentally, the same page cites the first reference to velvet in England:
1278, when Adinettus, the king's tailor, bought him a velvet bed furnishing
for 100s in Paris).
It should be mentioned that this work does not record a _single_ instance
of a cotton or cotton-blend cloth appearing in a London find from this period.
It is my understanding that cotton, while more prevalent in the Middle East,
was not common in Europe because linen was so much cheaper at the time.
However, many surviving velvets seem to be similar in weight to some upholstery
velvets--especially those made for bed furnishings, and so forth.
Cheers--
Nicolaa de Bracton
sclark at chass.utoronto.ca
From: Elaine Ragland <er37 at columbia.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: Thu, 6 Jun 1996 17:22:20 -0400
Organization: Columbia University
On Thu, 6 Jun 1996, Paula Peterka wrote:
> "Velvet" was by definition made of silk, both warp and weft. There
> were other napped fabrics, fustian and kersey among them, that used wool
> for warp and linen for weft (or vice versa, I forget). Having actually
> played with silk velvet (but not bought, sadly), I can say that it is
> shiny, and does look more than rayon and acetate than I would care to
> think about. I generally use cotton velvets (or velveteens) because
> they're cheaper per yard, more durable, breathe much better, and have the
> nice matte finish that looks more "period" to our eyes. Most portraiture
> I have seen shows velvets with a matte finish (subject I would guess to
> limitations in the media - I don't know, it just looks that way to me). I
> would not recommend to anyone that they make clothing from upholstery
> velvet, especially the kind backed with rubberizing. Upholstery velvet
> doesn't drape as well, and won't breathe.
>
> Paula Peterka, Crazy Lady in charge of all those Germans!
> aka Anjabeth Blode, Weib des Hauptmanns des TeufelsAlpdrucken Fahnlein.
I came across wool velvet in a New York fabric store once. I didn't
recognize it at once and I stroked it--which was a mistake since I am
allergic. Anyway, it occurred to me that they must have had wool velvets
in period, although I cannot remember any references. I take it from your
posting that they would not have called this "velvet", since that term was
reserved for silks? Any clue what they would have called it instead?
By the way, it was heavier than rayon velvet, draped alot like a cotton
velvet, and did not have a sheen. I wonder if any of the velvets seen in
Renaissance portraits are really wool?
Melanie de la Tour
From: mrcseverne at aol.com (MrCSeverne)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: 7 Jun 1996 07:21:41 -0400
Paula_Peterka at AirNSun.blkcat.com (Paula Peterka) writes:
> Having actually
>played with silk velvet (but not bought, sadly), I can say that it is
>shiny, and does look more than rayon and acetate than I would care to
>think about. I generally use cotton velvets (or velveteens) because
>they're cheaper per yard, more durable, breathe much better, and have the
>nice matte finish that looks more "period" to our eyes. Most portraiture
>I have seen shows velvets with a matte finish (subject I would guess to
>limitations in the media - I don't know, it just looks that way to me). I
>would not recommend to anyone that they make clothing from upholstery
>velvet, especially the kind backed with rubberizing. Upholstery velvet
>doesn't drape as well, and won't breathe.
A couple of notes:
Not all silk velvet is similar to the lightweight rayon and acetate
dress velvets; like so many things, it comes in various grades, from
light-as-a-whisper to heavy-as-carpet. I have even seen silk velveteen
(and it was *truly* luscious...) The heavier grades of silk velvet really
do look like the period pictures, with that matte sheen and the
lit-from-within look that only silk can achieve. Good heavyweight cotton
dress velvet, lightweight cotton upholstery velvet (and yes, avoid the
backed stuff like the plague...), or a grade of rayon or acetate velvet
which is referred to as "double velvet" will all work nicely.
As far as I am concerned, the real thing to strive for is an overall
effect which looks and behaves correctly... if you make a voluminous gown
of lightweight velvet, even if it is pure silk, it will not drape
correctly, and will not have the body or substance required to achieve the
right look. If you can get a good "next best" from cotton, why not use
it?
And on another track entirely, I really do trust the painters (for an
excellent discussion on the realistic depiction of clothing in Italian
Renaissance painting, check out Elisabeth Birbari's "Dress in Italian
Painting: 1450-1500. Having studied both painting and clothing, I feel
that painters like Van Eyck, Titian, Raphael, daVinci (et cetera, ad
nauseam...) who can render glass, stone, flesh, and a myriad of other
surfaces with such lifelike realism can surely manage to portray a velvet
dress in all of its glory. In these pictures, the subtle play of light on
the pile and the fulsome weighty drape of the fabric are both readily
evident, and the realism of the textures which surround the clothes makes
the rendering of the clothing absolutely believeable.
For an excellent discussion of the realistic depiction of costume in
Italian Renaissance painting, check out Elizabeth Birbari's "Dress in
Italian Painting: 1460-1500" For all that she is more interested in
construction than in fabrics, her discussions of the realism which allows
for successful reconstruction of garments from pictures is enlightening
and very thorough.
Colin
From: sdunham2 at aol.com (SDunham2)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: 8 Jun 1996 01:51:21 -0400
The attendants at my wedding were all clothed in Cotton Velvet, which was
bought as uplostery fabric. Other than the fact that they were HOT the
gowns were comfortable, had plenty of sheen, and no ruberized backing.
A quote from my History of Costuming by Donna Bartz - Early
Gothic1200-1350AD- "Material-Northern-heavy, but not stiff.
Southern-softer. Fabric imported from Italy and Sicily to the North was
also softer-silk or silk blend. Most sought after wool from
Flanders-usually scarlet and green with dot, circle, or square patterns.
Had Cotton, Wool, Silk (Satin and Velvet weaves), linen, gold or silver
cloth." From memory I recalled my Costuming Instructor saying that they
had Cotton Satins and Velvets so I looked it up (I'm not sure if the
Cotton and Velvet weave is referring to Silk alone or to Cotton, Wool, and
Silk).
Home grown Linen was cheaper than imported Cotton from India, but Cotton
was cheaper than imported Silk from China. Linen was also usually used
for undergarments, since they were replaced more often than the more
expensive over dresses, etc. I could see Linen as a base in a Pile fabric
since you wouldn't see it.
Brighid
________________________________________
| |
| Lord Aldric of Galway |
| & |
| M'lady Brighid O'Seachnasaigh |
|______________________________________|
From: rhayen at aol.com (Rhayen)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Cotton Velvet, how does it stack up?
Date: 10 Jun 1996 00:56:22 -0400
HI...just borrowing this puter for a while,,,,i'm a manager at a fabric
store and as such can tell you that cotton velvets are just as period as
their silk counterparts, and are much easier to care for...all my velvet
garb is of the cotton variety,,,it's much more comfortable than acetate
and rayon which dont breathe, much less expensive than silk (even if you
could find it), and the more you wash it (yes...it is machine washable),
the better it looks....
Robin
From: foxd at silver.ucs.indiana.edu (daniel fox)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Date: 9 Jun 1996 02:47:20 GMT
Organization: Indiana University, Bloomington
Someone asked about velvet as opposed to velvet weave, so.....
Velvet weave is a piled weave, that is it is a pile with a ground weave.
It is woven on a loom with two back beams and a special cage-like cloth beam too keep the fabric from being crushed.
The ground which is not necessarily of the same fabric as the pile; this is
the part that is most often the linen mentioned as being a part of velvet
cloth.
The ground is woven, in plain velvet it's usually a plain or tabby weave, then
the pile, a fine rod with a groove in it is woven after the next ground weft
so that a loop is made when the pile weft is woven.
If the loop is left in it is a looped velvet, mostly, however, it is sliced
along the groove in the rod.
Velvets can be woven solid, with a double pile weft, in patterns with the
ground showing (voided velvet), with gold and silver patterning, and in
period with a stamped design.
The first mention we have of velvet dates, according to Linthicum, to the 1
1200's.
Most period velvet appears to have been silk. I seem to recall, though it
could be a later definition of the fabric, that cotton velvet is called
"fustian." (It may also mean wool velvet.)
Some of the confusion about velvet's dating seems to be because some researchrs
referedd to fabric foundin early period graves as being "velvet-like" when
they were in fact felted wool, which is an entirely different process.
Audelindis de Rheims, OL
Date: Tue, 11 Jun 1996 00:00:02 -0400
From: Paula_Peterka at AirNSun.blkcat.com (Paula Peterka)
Subject: Re: Period Velvet?
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Greetings from Paula! Brighid (Sdunham2 at aol.com) recently wrote:
S >From: sdunham2 at aol.com (SDunham2)
S >
S >The attendants at my wedding were all clothed in Cotton Velvet, which
S >was bought as aplostery fabric. Other than the fact that they were HOT
S >the gowns were comfortable, had plenty of sheen, and no ruberized
S >backing.
HOT you can deal with, especially if there's plenty of water around. I
once helped dress a lady who was wearing a Tudor gown made from upholstery
velvet that WAS backed with rubber. (*Yuck*) We were doing a promo 4th of
July parade, in Maryland where the humidity can get nasty. I felt very
sorry for her, and we kept pouring water down her throat and fanning her
during the parade. The fact that several of us were playing
ladies-in-waiting for the day made it a lot easier. :)
S >A quote from my History of Costuming by Donna Bartz - Early
S >Gothic1200-1350AD- "Material-Northern-heavy, but not stiff.
S >Southern-softer. Fabric imported from Italy and Sicily to the North
S >was also softer-silk or silk blend. Most sought after wool from
S >Flanders-usually scarlet and green with dot, circle, or square
S >patterns.
S >Had Cotton, Wool, Silk (Satin and Velvet weaves), linen, gold or
S >silver cloth." From memory I recalled my Costuming Instructor saying