Sacque Rationalizations

Before I get any farther along in the process of making a sacque (and I have not made much progress) I thought I should start to really look at gowns, and try to understand them.

Not only do I need to understand how they’re made, I want to understand how they change over time, and what’s appropriate for different time periods and situations. This will, or could, have some bearing on what I make for the gentleman accompanying me to the celebrations for which this gown is being made. If I start from Mr S, whose best coat right now is the 1777 Saratoga private’s coat, then I ought to have nothing better than a second-hand sacque several years out of date, and that is reaching indeed.

SacqueBySacque_back
What good fortune it is that the LACMA dress seems to be a gown in flux! This is the brown silk cross-barred gown with an assigned date of ca. 1760, which seems to have been abandoned in mid-alterations. Trim down the rights and left fronts ends abruptly at the waist, and two halves of what might have been a compère front lack any trim but boast plenty of holes. The front skirts come close together, but it’s hard to tell if they are meant to nearly close, or if the gown is fitted to a mannequin that’s too small and not adequately padded out.

Replicating a gown in mid-alterations would be interesting, but not what you’d wear to a ball, so I kept looking. In Hamburg there is another cross-barred sacque-back gown from about this era. There are similarities and differences, and never as much information as you’d like to have. Who owned and wore these? Who made them? When and where were they worn? We’ll never know, but at least with two similar gowns one can fill in some details for another, or help us understand them both.

The serpentine trim on the pink gown in Hamburg makes clear how unfinished or mid-alteration the brown gown in LA really is despite the visual interest created by the fabric itself.

Sacque_by_SacqueFront

So, what to do for my gown? And when will it be from? LACMA is hedging their bets with ca. 1760. I think Hamburg is pushing it a bit late with ca. 1775, but a ca. 1770 date for a gown based on the two seems reasonable. That would mean that the coat Mr S wears should also be ca. 1770, or newer than his green linen coat and older than his Saratoga coat. And luckily, I already have a plan, some fabric, and a pattern as a place to start.

While the ball itself has no date per se, it is in celebration of Washington’s Birthday, which puts it after 1775 at the earliest (think transfer of command of the Continental Army in Cambridge). Does that make a ca. 1770 gown too early? It would depend, I think on how one imagined the ball and oneself. If you’re a frugal woman who has lost much in the war, you’ll remake your gown; should the flounces become the shirred cuffs of later gowns? Could the kind-of compère front of the LACMA gown be a stomacher cut in half and stitched to the sides, with the pin hole indicating where trim had been removed from a once-was stomacher? Is it reasonable to make a compère front for a ca. 1770 gown? I want one mostly to avoid the stomacher angst I always seem to have, and in a way it marks a place between stomacher-front and front-closing gowns.

These unprovenanced gowns stand without the particular context and personality of their owners; the fun and the challenge for us, as costumers and reenactors, is in trying to bring our personalities to the fact-based garments we create.

Green Indeed

Regency Green: Kochan & Philips + Robert Land = Matchy-matchy.

As expected, Mr Najekci dispatched the K&C wool before the Hook, so last Thursday evening when I arrived home after Gallery Night, there was a box of delicious waiting for me. And, also as expected though mostly hoped for, the wool and shoes were super simpatico. This will be a fun project when I get myself sorted to it.

I have not yet had the time to put all the projects into a spreadsheet, but I think it would help keep things organized and on schedule. For example, I have:

  • to work out the details and rationale of the sacque, vis-a-vis date and style
  • to finalize the Spencer pattern
  • to pattern and fit a frock coat, waistcoat and breeches for Mr S ca. 1775
  • to ask about the regimental for Mr S, which will be wanted eventually
  • to face making a tent by next summer
  • a plan for kettle bags, since I’d like us to pack lighter & more authentically
  • to fix my stays situation
  • an inordinate desire for a splashy bonnet to go with that Spencer
  • two shirts to make up for Mr S and the Young Mr
  • a red short cloak, for easier movement

Once I have a schedule and a plan, making things by deadline is somewhat easier. It’s “bridge” season now, between cooling and heating, summer and winter fashion collections, and that’s as good a time as any to work out plans for the winter. There’s nothing the guys must have for an event that they haven’t got already–for Fort Lee, they can wear their short wool jackets under their 10th MA hunting frocks and be perfectly authentic and warm. (The brown and green coat is 1777, and the Fall of Fort Lee is 1776. The blue and white short-tailed regimentals are 1781. No coat for you!)

So it’s worth taking the time to regroup, even as I rush headlong into projects…and considering I have jury duty (no scissors!) this week, maybe I should add hand-knit stockings to that list.

Lovers & Fighters

The wife of Bob Munn, Keeper at Sandpit Gate. Paul Sandby, Royal Collection Trust  RCN 914337
The wife of Bob Munn, Keeper at Sandpit Gate. Paul Sandby, Royal Collection Trust RCN 914337

On Sunday,  Mr FC mentioned that they knew the names of at least two of the women of the 10th Massachusetts, including one notorious woman, Bridget Mahoney. I mentioned this in an email to Mr HC, and got back four solid paragraphs of information. I sincerely and earnestly wish I had those retention skills, but embedded in one paragraph was that they knew of a woman in Wallcott’s company, because the brigade chaplain, Enos Hitchcock, had baptized the child of a soldier in Wallcott’s company.

Enos Hitchcock was the pastor of the First Congregational Church in Providence, and I happen to be fairly familiar with his pastel portrait and his diaries. The Rhode Island Historical Society published his diaries in 1899, and they can be read online thanks to the Open Library.

Here’s what I found, reading and searching:

April 25, 1779
Baptized child of Richard Northover, Soldier of the Train, by the name of Mary.

May 5, 1779
Married Sgt Bates and Mrs Lucy Gun

May 9, 1779
Baptized Lydda, daughter of George Wilson and Letty, his wife, of Capt. Buckland’s Train—Baptiized Adaulph, son of John Degrove of the above company

May 31, 1779
Sent for to go aboard the Lady Washington galley to marry John Thompson and Abia Chase

June 21, 1779
Married Henry Smith and Phebe Cockswain, late Brewer’s Regt.

Three baptisms and three marriages in just over 8 weeks: that’s a busy regiment.

Of course, they did their share of fighting, and not just on the field. I did not witness the fight instigated on Sunday morning by Mr FC, against the New York troops in which there was shoving, the beating of Mr S with a hat, and the deflection of Mr McC, who upon arriving with a shovel, was put to work digging.

September 17, 1777. Enos Hitchcock diary.

September 17, 1777. Enos Hitchcock diary.

In Hitchcock’s diary, I found an account of a quarrel near Stillwater, NY on September 17, 1777. This was intramural knife-thrusting, but clearly, the 10th Massachusetts were very busy men.

Saratoga Summary

Mr S buttoning his overalls

Wow. Yet another learning experience up on the Hudson River this past weekend. It was as up-and-down a weekend as the rutted field in which we were camped, where walking felt more like swimming over the ground, and social calls were well nigh impossible. Also, we had considerable wind. By Sunday, Mrs P said we should feel grateful we never camp with a dining fly, because we knew it was wrong to feel smug that we hadn’t had to chase a fly down. Yes, every possible pun of “fly” got an outing.

Coats
The Coats, Grouped Around their Colors, Prepare for Action.

The coats turned out quite well, and there would have been one for the Young Mr if only I had not spent the past two weeks on a petticoat and patterning a gown for What Cheer Day at work. I have some regrets about that, just because they looked so very well in those unusual coats. They weren’t just a fashion statement, either: I know Mr Cooke answered a lot of questions about them, and I did, too (women ask women about the guys…). They’re a really good interpretive hook to talk about supplying the troops, and the differences in uniforms over time, and the kinds of documents historians and costume historians use in their work. Also, those coats are just plain handsome.


Down in the corner, in a lovely white gown, holding her hat on head, is Cassidy. The wind was hard on headwear.

The Battle, well, there was chaos on the public side of the battlefield, and it was difficult to see. The wrenching ground made visiting difficult (and we don’t have much of a parlor in our camp) so I did get to meet Cassidy in person but not much more.

Mr S, the Young Mr and I were grateful for Mr H’s excellent assistance with the fire.

My friend Mrs H and her husband, Mr H,  and I walked back from the battlefield to work on dinner. I’m not sure what we’re contemplating here, but the kettle is on and we’re thinking about something (probably what to add next).

As you can see in the photo, we had no iron “s” hooks. I don’t know what box they’re in, but they weren’t in the kitchen box. Mr FC made us hooks from branches he discovered on the way back from his car. They held up well, and were even better and more authentic than the “s” hooks would have been. With this, we were all delighted and not at all smug.

After dinner and washing up, we participated in the hospital vignette for the public tours. (By ‘participate,’ I do sort of mean ‘first person bombed’ the scenario.) In working this out, the Adjutant wondered which of the men was the smallest and lightest. His first thought was the Young Mr, but Mr S and I soon disabused him of that notion, and after I said, “It’s you, Mr C,” and we determined that even skinny Mr S was 5 pounds heavier than Mr C, we had our victim: Mr C. He became the wounded captain carried up by Mr S, the Young Mr, Mr FC and Mr McC on a litter made from a tent and poles. I carried the lantern.

At the hospital tent, we demanded attention for our wounded captain, who had taken shot in the groin, ‘near the back.’ (We covered the wound with a coat.) The men and I were insistent upon the Captain receiving attention, despite the enlisted men requiring attention to their head wounds and amputations. Although he was given laudanum, and the ball removed (ba-thump, yes, we’re here all weekend, tip your waitress), the captain developed a fever. We demanded rum and water, but he vomited upon the very noisy private with a head wound, while down the line another private cried out, “Why, captain? Why did you do this to us?”

After he vomited, the captain’s delirium increased, and the doctor bled him. He called for his wife, and reached for me, though I am but the lowly woman with the army. I held his hand and stroked his head to ease his passing while he talked of his wife and his son, “with the angels now.” After he died, the men were summoned again to remove him from the hospital and they carried him away.

Ready to leave with the entire kitchen on my back and in my hands.

The captain’s story may have been too quiet and subtle for the public to see in the dark, but around us nurses and doctors were busy and patients were yelling, and the scene presented was one of chaos and misery (and some humor). I’ll have to analyze it more later, because there’s a strand for the reenactors and another for the public and it’s hard, sometimes, to know if they combine satisfactorily for all. I know we were pleased with our dying captain, and the boundaries it pushed for those of us newer to the first person world.

On Sunday–well, less said the better, perhaps–some of us failed to eat or drink enough and felt quite ill until mid-morning and a second cup of coffee. It’s a lesson in having protein bars stashed in pockets and haversacks, and in how wretched the soldiers and women must have felt, and how limited their decision-making capacities. That’s the argument for officers getting better food and accommodations: they make the decisions, so they need fuel and rest for their brains. The rest of us just go where we’re told.