Testing a theory, what do you think?

[mrsbrown]

Today I found this picture


between 1462 and 1467

I notice that the dress the woman has on is very similar to these dresses:

and [darn the British library manuscript collection doesn't include Royal MS 14 E ii, f.194]
"fin du XVe siècle"

The fur neckline thing looks a lot like the Bruegal partlets, could it be a partlet thing? and therefore detachable?

I know the first is middle class and the others are more noble, but the crossover dress style is easier to get a V neck with. Besides, we use the middle class pictures to give us the basis for the kirtle the nobles are wearing underneath their houppelandes, so why wouldn't they have a similar fashion thing going?

And I really, really need to go back and look at the rest of the manuscripts in the British Library collection

---

Also, for my future reference the garb I am making for Coronation is based on this picture (a bit):

Comments

[basal-surge.livejournal.com]

It seems to me, in the first picture (once I drag myself away from investigating the many and interesting woodworking tools...) that the front of the brown dress shows a crossover, her right over left, in the front - you can see it just above the cuff of the hand working the thread from the distaff, and then again below the cuff. It may be a seam, but it seems to run top right to bottom left, and overlap, rather than join. Which may make it a jacket or a caftan type overdress with overlapping front joint. I can't see that in the second picture, but then, the second picture is very much more stylised.

But I'm still mostly looking at the tools, mind.

[auntyyolly.livejournal.com]

This style of dress has regional variations across most of Northern Europe at this time, but there are a couple of consistencies: many are wholly fur-lined, and the collar is like an extended turn-back lapel in these instances, and all of them have pleating secured by a belt.

I don't think the partlet model works, the collared style is an upper class frock as opposed to the middle-class shown in the brown dress, but I do think that there is some validity to the coat model for these frocks. They are all worn over an underdress that does the structural work of holding breasts in place and keeping you warm, then these garments are wrapped and pinned in the first case or dropped and belted in the second over the top for glam and extra toastiness.

As to removable furs; in a broader sense that's quite true as the one fur lining or set of collar and cuffs (another frequent variation for this style) could be moved between various fabric shells. I like the new frock!

My naive observations

[celsa.livejournal.com]

I can see how this style might be interpreted as a fur stole tucked into the belt. The back view of the "fur thing" shows that it hangs over the belt at the back, indicating that it is to some extent not sewn down onto the bodice. It seems to be tucked into the belt in each case, which would serve to secure it if it were separate. The lady in the first picture does not seem to be wearing the high wide belt that the ladies in the second image might be using to secure their "fur thing". That and the fact that it appears to be under the belt at the front but not at the back suggests to me that it might be something that is put on after the belt, depending on the belt to keep it on. I suppose it's overly optimistic of me to ask if there are extant specimens of such things?