Or, they appear on spencers, for example, as decoration, but aren't
functional.
How do we know they are not functional ? Even if the extant examples arn't
is there any definitive proof buttons never were used ? I ask as I've seen
many reproductions with functional buttons, so their
Ah, you are correct, of course. There are so few extant examples that I
really shouldn't jump to conclusions. I had not seen the white one from
Vintage Textiles--it looks a little odd for the period--both the row of buttons
and the ribbon band--however, she is usually accurate in her
However, my overall philosophy for making clothing for reenacting is, stick
with what I have pretty good knowledge was really worn, rather than the
maybes or the exceptions.
It isn't a philosophy that I could argue with too strongly, as it certainly
stops the fantasy input one can get, but I
I don't think I mentioned but the style I'm reproducing is as mentioned in
English women's clothing in the nineteenth century
By Cecil Willett Cunnington
Inder the low stomacher
iii) The waistcoat bosom , for day use, the bodice being buttoned down the
middle
It does state the flap is
In a message dated 8/1/2009 9:12:15 AM Eastern Daylight Time,
melaniewil...@dragonflight.co.uk writes:
Given the button front is established in this style, buttons seem a
potential solution, hooks are another
Invisible hooks on the inside is certainly an option.
And just one more thing
Hi Ann
Thanks for all your input it has really helped
I've managed to get it to my satifaction with a ribbon tie, but my daughter
was still unsure and wanted buttons, so I've added buttons but inside the
waistband ie not visible. She'll be dancing in it at displays so I can
understand why
