Women's costume 1794 France, shifts and nightshifts

Consider Shifts

A shift is what we'd call a 'slip' in the US. The shift lay next to the skin and protected the wearer from the roughness of the outer garments . It protected the expensive outer garments from the body. It was cheaper to replace than the outer clothing, and the shift was washable.

The shift, for all of the Eighteenth Century is a simple garment, cut loose, straight, and ungathered, going to about the knee. It closed at the neck with a drawstring or was bound with a band.

Here to the right is an extant shift in the Boston Museum of Fine Arts. Drawstring neck. The little ruffles on the sleeve, IMO, would have been intended to show beneath a tight-fitting sleeve on the dress or caraco. This is made in England or France, late C18 to early C19.

The early C18 shift might be somewhat fuller than this example above. After 1785-ish, when the round gown and dresses of thin fabric became popular, the shift began to be cut closer to the body so as not to disturb the line of the dress -- something that wasn't a problem with the robe à l'Anglais or the simple jupe and caraco. The sleeves of the shift, which had been longer and fuller in the first half of the Eighteenth Century, became close fitting or short.

Here's an example of a modern reproduction mid-C18 shift being worn.

A difference between how we regard underwear in C21 and Eighteenth Century is that a shift -- underwear -- was often intended to be seen. It was meant to show beneath the jacket or vest or the neckline of the dress.

See , to the right.

(This is a screen capture from the latest remake of The Scarlet Pimpernel, included here under Fair Use for comment and review.)

I wouldn't go to the stake on the details of this. It looks fairly fancy, compared to the extant examples. Anyhow, what you got here is a C18 chemise being worn over front-fastening stays, and showing at the top.

(The opening scene of the movie, btw, is her getting dressed in petticoat, caraco and jupe, which is interesting to watch. Reminds me of the dressing scene in Les Liaisons Dangereuses. )

The neckline of the dress or caraco was cut low by our standards. This means the shift underneath was cut low too. The neckline of the shift tended to come just an inch or so above the stays, as it does in the picture above.

This left the heavy work of concealing the bosom to the fichu.

Here we got a caricature from just after 1794. This is not reliable as to what was actually worn, but it does illustrate a point about the length of the shift.

The shift wasn't a full-length garment down trailing in the mud and showing lace at the bottom when the dress blew up in the wind. A petticoat or underskirt might do that, but not the shift. The shift was short. You wouldn't see a shift if you raised your skirts some to step over a puddle.

Below we got us some delightful pictures of an extant shift from Vintage Textile which is at home here. This particular shift is listed as 1820 to 1830, but it's similar to what you would have seen in 1790s.

Vintage Textile says of the shift above:

Our chemise is fashioned from coarse linen and is completely hand sewn.

With time and multiple washings, the linen has whitened and softened. The neckline and sleeve edges are trimmed with hand-embroidered scallops. The chemise has a hand-embroidered, monogrammed "AF" in front.

Chemises, particularly in pattern catalogues, are picture flat so that you can see how they are cut. The triangular side panels in the flat pictures give the impression that the chemise stands out from the body on the side. In fact these side panels push the front and back into graceful bias folds.

A late-C18-to-early-C19 shift would be made of linen or cotton. In 1794, it would probably linen for the middle and lower class. Good quality cotton was still a luxury material in France.

There was a slow movment towards cotton for underclothing as cotton got cheaper in the early C19. Perception of linen in shirts and underwear changed. By the time we get to Beau Brummel ... linen was a more upperclass/stylish fabric than cotton. In 1794, linen would probably have been the fabric of choice, but without the same class

The English word 'shift' fell into disfavor after 1800. 'Shift' became regarded as old-fashioned and somewhat coarse. The snazzier French 'chemise' sneaked in to take its place. That's what we did in English for a century or two ... tossed out perfectly good English words and invited French hussies in.

Nightclothes

WARNING: Partial nudity below.

Women's nightclothes closely followed the design of the shift. In fact, one could be used for the other, pretty much.

There are differences The examples of nightshifts I've come across seem to have 3/4 or long sleeves and the shifts of late C18 don't. The nightshifts are often mid-calf length or longer, rather than more knee-ish. So the nightshifts were a specialized garment, similar to but not identical with the shift.

Note the low neckline on these nightshifts below. If that neck isn't tied up carefully with its ribbon or drawstring, the breasts get loose and go showing themselves.

The nightshifts are longer than the shift, but still only mid-calf length. You heroine wouldn't need to hold her hem up as she crept down the stairs, trembling, with a candle in her hand, investigating the noise.

Considering England's -- or France's -- climate, your heroine would be an idiot if she didn't put on some kind of a robe or peignoir so she don't get all clammy and freezing even before the villain has a chance to kidnap her.

The hero seeing your heroine in her nightshift takes on a whole new meaning when you stop picturing it as a floor-length, high-necked Victorian nightdress with 57 little pearl buttons up the front.

This is Baudouin, Le Lever. A bit before our period.

Wheatly gives us Mrs Wheatly Asleep. Close to the 1790s I think. The night cap Mrs. Wheatly is wearing -- see how fancy -- is part of the whole going-to-sleep ensemble.

Here's Blanchet, Perils of Love: Julia Seeks Solace with her Cat above. Again, a bit before 1794, but probably similar to what women were wearing in the decade.

This is Regnault, La Nuit.

And Boucher's famous L'Odalisque is wearing a 1745 shift. It's here, click at the site for a closer view. See the low neckline, mid-length sleeves, and the not-too-long length.

Admittedly, these particular nightshifts are painted largely for an excuse to show off skin, but it does look like nightshifts dipped low at the neck.

Night shifts, like shifts, were white or just off-white, made of cotton and linen.
Not silk. Sorry.

Images of the Sinti, circa 1800

I'm working on a scene in MAGGIE with a brief appearance of French gypsies in it.
I don't know whether the scene will stay in the manuscript.

The Sinti / Manouche / Bohemians / Roma / gypsies
are HARD to research in this period. There's just about no solid history on them.

The good part is I get to make stuff up.
The bad part is I have to make stuff up.

Here's some images.

I don't have a date on this one. The clothing is interesting. Striped skirt, unbound hair, long scarf over head and wrapped around, some sort of quilted shawl over shoulders and pinned in the front. There's something with sleeves under the shawl.

This is late C19, so I can't use it for details of clothing. But it's interesting.

We get -- lookit -- see the dishevelled, curly hair of the girl children. This appears in many pictures.

Here's 1750 London. See the loose red cloak. I find this red cloak over and over again for the whole century. I'm begining to think this may have been a long-term commonality.

The fortune teller is casting coffee grounds. I mean, how weird is that?

Close up view of the picture is here.

This one is from 1764. The print is Amsterdam, but I don't know where the scene is. It shows both male and female gypsy dress. And we got a cloak and head scarf on the woman. Hat with brim on man. Larger picture here.

Here's one from 1855. German, I think. The clothing is really irrelevant, so far from my date, but we got the hair loose. This seems to be a commonality, that long dark loose hair. Close up here.

Here's one from before 1818, probably in the north of England. This is very close to my target date of 1794.

And we got some cloaks, including two red ones, and the wide-brimmed, flat-crowned hats that we keep seeing. And we got dogs and a donkey.

The clothing, aside from the hats and the cloaks, looks pretty much like ordinary English country clothing of the period.
One can get a closer view here.

I took a look at Pyne's Microcosm. (I'll see if I can scan in pictures some time.) That dates from 1806. Microcosm shows English gypsies in the clothing of English country laborers.

In this painting we got a gypsy woman in England in 1839. This is sentimentalized and therefore not reliable as to clothing, but ... see the red cloak and the stripes and the loose hair. These would seem to be the stereotype that says 'gypsy' to sentimental painters.

For upclose here.

Another British painting here,

This one I can't copy to the blog, but you can track it down. We got with the donkey and the baskets on the donkey and, yes, a red cloak.

Nice set of period donkey baskets on this one.

And this cloak seems to have fringes on it.

Takes all kinds.

Moving along ...

This one was painted in England fairly close to the period. Red cloak again.

And lookit, lookit, lookit! see the baby strapped to the back under the cloak.

Oh my, yes. Good.

(They do this all over Africa today. It's how I used to carry the kid around when I was in Africa. Now I know the Rom did it. Yes! Lovely detail.)

Closeup view here.

Tents

The 1794 gypsies would have used 'bender tents'. here.

Here's a bender tent in use. This is loooong after 1794, of course, but the photo shows the form of the tent in detail.

These bender tents are typically shown in C18 and early C19 paintings with the fire built next to the entrance. There's a couple of paintings on this posting that show the tent and the fire next to it with a tripod and a pot.

They could also put the fire inside, which seems counter-intuitive.

(I had a period picture with a flap on top of the tent so the smoke could escape. My blog seems to have lost the image for me. I'll try to find it again.)

Here's a photo from 1910 or so with a 'double bender' tent on either side and the fire in between.

View of a two-wheeled cart as well.

Original here.

Here's a painting, England, 1797, so it is right on the dot in time. Red cloak. Turban sort of hat on the woman. A donkey.

Vardos

The traditional painted-wood, curved-top, live-in gypsy wagon described so well by Dickens in 1840 evolved roughly between 1810 and 1830.

(It's fairly easy to find exterior shots of late C19 vardos, but I haven't seen any C19 interior photos. It's after my period a good bit so I haven't pursued. One could start here, if fascinated.)

Before the 1830 wooden vardo, they had cloth- (canvas?) topped wagons.

These canvas-covered wagons were in use right up to C20. Canvas-tops and wood vardos were used by the same groups.

Here's a sentimental, undated painting, place unknown, but it looks European. Might be 1790 to 1830, going by the gentleman's outfit. And we got ourselves a canvas-covered wagon with four wheels. A larger version of this here.

These canvas-covered wagons were not 'living spaces' with windows and doors, stoves and built-in beds, like the vardos. The 1794 wagons and carts would have been enclosed from the rain and would have been used, along with the bender tents, for sleeping.

This is Czeck and far far later than the period, but it's how the cloth-covered wagons would have been used. See a larger, clearer version here.

In this painting from Van Gogh, 1888, we have both the traditional wooden vardo and a canvas-covered wagon.

And another mid C19 painting that shows a canvas covered wagon. Larger version here.

Here's an illustration from Guy Mannering, showing -- not very clearly -- a line of gypsies and their wagons. Publicaton date of the novel was 1815, but I don't know the date of the illustration.

Again, this is sentimentalize, so I distrust the details.

And here's a modern version of the canvas-covered wagon.

What's interesting about this photo ... the cart is two-wheeled. It's operating in a context of good roads. This implies that a four-wheeled cart is neither necessary nor universally desirable.

Interesting.

Now, am I justified in giving my French gypsies covered carts in 1794?


I have English gypsies with cloth-topped carts in the period.

So some gypsies had these carts.
And I have paintings of C18 French farmers with just exactly this type of two-wheeled covered cart.

So the technology was there.

But there's a plethora of pictorial gypsies without any carts at all.

Now, these are the Romantic paintings of 'Gypsies in a Woods' or 'Giving Alms to the Gypsies' and they tend to have a picturesque donkey curled to the side and no clutter anywhere and I just don't trust them on the workaday details at all.
(Pyne also doesn't show carts, but I think that's because he's concentrating on human figures at work.)


In the end, I have to make some guesses.

I'm also going to assume prosperous groups or large groups would have a cart or two. Small, poor families might not have carts.

I'm going to go with the assumption that French Rom had pretty much the same technology as English Rom and German Rom, etc.

(Records from the period show that about one-third of Gypsy men
condemned to the French galleys in C18 had been born outside France. So there was obviously much to-ing and forthing across borders.)

So I'm going to give my people carts.
Yeah!

Rules for Writing Historical Fiction

The Rules for Writing Historical Fiction

here

" No matter how prevalent the practice at the time or how wealthy or high-born the heroine is, she must be shocked and appalled at the idea of having a marriage arranged for her."

Oh giggle

How to make a quill pen

And for all you historical writers out there --- how to make a quill pen.

http://www.flick.com/%7Eliralen/quills/quills.html

who knew?