Given the parameters you mention, Lauren, I think your theory makes
sense. It is what I would do to avoid cutting the fabric-- sew the two
selvedges together and allow an opening which would not have to be
cut. Any cut edges to be placed at the bottoms and hemmed or finished
some way, where there is no weight to be born.
I am certainly no medieval expert, however, and will look forward to
see what others will say. Loved the included links, though the last
gave a not found error.
== Marjorie
On Nov 6, 2011, at 10:06 AM, Lauren Walker wrote(in part):
I just can't see cutting a slit with the grain of the fabric right
where the whole weight of the garment is going to be pulling on the
cut.
<snip> The seam is the center back, the unsewn part is the neck-
hole, and you end up with a cone- shaped garment that drapes very
much like the drawings. If you want to make a curve in the back hem,
you're now cutting mostly edges that are already cut, so this design
detail doesn't add significantly to the work involved. Since the
necklines are almost always concealed by drapery or women's veils,
it's hard to know whether they bothered to shape the shoulders or
neckline any further than this, but they wouldn't have needed to.
Now the neckline stress is on a selvage and is pulling mostly on the
bias over the shoulders, rather than with the grain, so the weave is
less likely to separate. It stays in place, and the wrist-length
front means you can continue to do work with your hands quite
easily. (I've been wearing it around this morning since our heat is
out.) If you turn it around, you can pull it over your head for a
kind of hood. And there's
at least one picture where a woman has thrown the long fronts of
her cloak over her shoulders.
So, I imagine I'm not the first to think of this -- has this
construction been tried and/or rejected by others?
_______________________________________________
h-costume mailing list
h-costume@mail.indra.com
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume
