Latest Posts

A set of Baroque pearl accessories

Published by The Dreamstress

One of the reasons I love 17th century fashion so much is the jewellery.

18th century jewellery is very pretty, but it tends to get a bit heavy on diamonds and overly ornamented, and just too bling-y.

Mid 17th century jewellery is fabulous though.  It’s all pearls.

Maria Maddalena Rospigliosi (1645—1695) by Carlo Maratta, ca. 1663

Maria Maddalena Rospigliosi (1645—1695) by Carlo Maratta, ca. 1663

Throat skimming  pearl necklaces, round or baroque.

Young Lady by a Fountain, Nicolaes Maes 1664, Bristol Museum and Art Gallery; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation

Young Lady by a Fountain, Nicolaes Maes 1664, Bristol Museum and Art Gallery; Supplied by The Public Catalogue Foundation

And pearl drop earrings the size of pigeon eggs, with more pearls twined through the hair.

Sophie of the Palatinate, electress of Hanover, ca. 1645, by an unknown artist

Sophie of the Palatinate, electress of Hanover, ca. 1645, by an unknown artist

Pearl trimmed clothes, and large hanging drop pearls dangling off broaches.

Élisabeth (Isabelle) d'Orleans, Duchess of Guise by Beaubrun, 1670

Élisabeth (Isabelle) d’Orleans, Duchess of Guise by Beaubrun, 1670

(sings) Pearls, Glorious Pearls!

Whenever I’ve worn Ninon, I’ve faked the pearls from my stash of random pearl necklaces, but have always intended to make a set of jewels that captured the look a little better.  With the masquerade ball coming up, I thought it was high time I did it.

I had a set  of really beautiful, high quality faux pearls, still unstrung, so I strung them, and added a vintage clasp (not 17th c HA, but still very pretty, and it gave the effect).  I remembered reading somewhere about women in the 17th century having strands of pearls that they just added to, and twined around their neck multiple times, so I made mine long enough to go around twice.  Having looked back over the visual evidence, I’m now beginning to doubt that a double necklace is correct for 17th c.  (Plus, I am struggling to remember the source, though I recall it vividly, because it reminded me of the story of  the Elizabethan noblewoman who assembled her pearl necklace one pearl at a time, until it was a full rope of pearls, and quite famous (and my brain has completely given up the ghost this time, because I can’t remember the name of the noblewoman either, and I KNOW I know this!))

17th century pearl accessories thedreamstress.com1

In any case, the necklace is beautiful, and looks lovely on, and will be accurate for SOME period.

And I do have a very nice strand of very large, real baroque pearls in pink, and as Maria Maddalena shows, baroque pearls are Baroque appropriate!  So I can always wear those…

17th century pearl jewellery thedreamstress.com1

For the earrings, I had more baroque pearls: beautiful pink baroque teardrops that I’d purchased in the Cook Islands on holiday almost 8 years ago, intending to make into earrings.

Six years ago I got organized enough to purchase sterling silver hooks (I can’t wear any other), and 18 karat gold beads for the earrings.  And two sets of sterling silver headpins.  One of which I managed to loose!

17th century pearl accessories thedreamstress.com2

So for now my earrings are held together with rubbish wire, and it’s off to Tiger Eye beads for me for new headpins (it turns out they come in gold too!  As do the French hooks.  I rather like the mix of gold and silver, but I think that all gold might be more accurate).

But I’m counting them as done, because they were worn, and they could be worn indefinitely, they just don’t look very good up close!

Side note: my hair turned out reasonably well, and if you compare it to the Maes portrait, and this portrait, and  this portrait, and this portrait, it’s really quite good.  And a very popular colour for the period.  Next time I’ll get it even better.

The last sort-off accessory I made was my mask.  There are very few depictions of masquerade masks in the 17th century, but early 18th c depictions show masks just like this, so I figured it was close enough.  And the paint colour is ‘Bastille!’

1660s Ninon bodice thedreamstress.com1

 

The Challenge:  #7  Accessorise

Fabric:  All notions

Pattern:  None

Year:  1660ish – but could easily be worn in most periods

Notions:  faux pearl beads, 1930s clasp, foxtail wire (necklace).  Baroque pearls, sterling silver french hooks, gold beads, wire (earrings).  Paper mask  & paint.

How historically accurate is it?:  Materials and techniques are probably pretty spot on for period jewellery, and 17th & 18th c masquerade masks were probably painted papier mache, so it’s all close, but still feels like cheating!

Hours to complete:  3.  Pretty quick and easy.

First worn:  Sat 11 July, to a French themed Masquerade ball.

Total cost:   Around  $30 for all.  I’ve been collecting the jewellery bits for years, and don’t remember exact pricing.  The mask was $4 including paint  

OK.  So this is a really soft HSM entry.  But I’ve got a better one planned too!

Rate the Dress: ca. 1900 florals, lace and satin

Published by The Dreamstress

Last week I showed you an all-white 1820s frock with a profusion of detailing.  I expected that you would dislike the slightly raised waistline, the mish-mash of design inspiration, and the plain white fabric, but, much to my surprise, most of you liked it! Some of you thought it was fussy, and that the hem was particularly misplaced, bringing the score down to 8.3 out of 10.

Since last week’s all white frock went over so well, we’re going to stick to pale tones this week, with just a bit of bright hues and florals to lift the design.

Sadly, the Metropolitan Museum of Art gives very little information about this gown, so we’re going to have to do a bit of guessing as we rate it:

The dress is of silk satin trimmed with lace (probably linen), and is shaped almost entirely through the use of pintucks.  Long graduated pintucks in the torso  nip in the dress around the waist, and short horizontal pintucks down  the front of the sleeves help the sleeves to curve with the arm

When I first saw the dress I thought the floral patterns might be warp-printing (chine a la branche), but a closer inspection reveals that they are appliques, and it almost looks as if they might be hand-painted.

The simple, smooth  silhouette without a waist seam, paired with very feminine trimmings and light colours, suggests that this gown may be a tea gown.

The relatively simple back closure, hidden under the floral appliques in the upper back, supports this, as it would make the dress easy to don.

While the dress is simple in some respects, the overall construction is very clever – the pintuck shaping is inspired, and the pink and blue flowers are carefully balanced across the dress.  Clever it may be, but does it work?

Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10.

The HSF/M ’15 Challenge #8: Heirlooms & Heritage

Published by The Dreamstress

As sewers and historians we’re part of a long heritage of women and men who sewed and created to clothe and costume their world.  We carry on traditions of techniques that have been used for hundreds, if not thousands of years, and which helped to sustain whole communities and civilisations.

We’re the products of all those years of knowledge, and experimentation, and we use it to recreate and understand the past as best as we can.  We’re also the products of our own heritage – the history and traditions of all the people who gave birth to children who gave birth to children who gave birth to us.

For Challenge #8 of the Historical Sew Monthly: Heirlooms & Heritage we’re honouring history and the future by celebrating our own personal heritage, or creating something that will be a heirloom for the next generation of sewers and makers as we:

re-create a garment one of your ancestors wore or would have worn, or use an heirloom sewing supply  to create a new heirloom to pass down to the next generations.

For some of us our ancestry is important: perhaps you grew up with the traditions of your culture, or have, or have always wanted to, research and understand them more.

For others, ancestry is just the DNA that happened to go together to make you, and what matters is what you put into the future: the heritage you create on your own.

The challenge is for both groups of people: honour the history of your family, or create some history of your own.

 

Personally, I’m a little bit of both groups.  I’m close to my family, and thanks to aunts on both sides who have done some amazing genealogy work, I know quite a bit about my family history.

On one side I can trace my ancestors past the first one to arrive in the US (before the Mayflower no less!), back to England, and across generations and generations of minor nobility, and then back across the English Channel with William the Conquerer to France, and back through the French nobility, all the way to Charlemagne, and back through him as far as his line can be followed.

I don’t feel ‘proud’ of these ancestors particularly, but it does amaze me to think that you can start with me and name my mother, and her mother, and her mother, and her father, and so on and so forth (mostly fathers.  I’m afraid the records get a bit fuzzy on female names for a 400 year stretch in the Middle Ages) back for over 1,000 years.

I’m a bit of the other group because I do believe that what is important is not where I came from, but what I make of myself.  The history  I create is what really counts.

Whichever path you decide to take for this challenge: family history, new heirloom, or creating a heirloom using a piece of family history, I think the important thing is to make it count.  To create an item that really is worthy of the future, and that is the best possible representation of what you know and can do.  Something that you can be completely proud to have created, and that hopefully your descendants can also admire and cherish.

To finish up, my favourite family photo.  I’d hoped to recreate this for the challenge, but my sewing schedule  won’t allow it, so it will have to wait for another opportunity.,

This is my great-something grandmother in the 1860s.

My Great-Something Grandmother

 

I’ve always loved this photo because she looks quite a bit like me.  We’ve got the same slightly-too-prominent chin and nose (the chin is a very distinctive family trait), the same rounded oval of a face, and slightly too-full lips that droop at the corners when our face is still.  Even the small bust and wide ribcage are there – and the asymmetrical shoulders!  The similarities start to  get a bit creepy if you look too closely…