At Her Leisure

Last fall I made a 1690's-1700's mantua. Why? Because I wanted one. They're cool or even nifty. Unfortunately, it's not a period that has a lot of events. As far as I know there's nothing people celebrate from that period - Williamsburg, VA and Charleston, SC were both founded right about that time, but I haven't seen anyone breaking down doors to have celebratory parties, and anyway the tricentennials were twenty or thirty years ago. I thought I'd stretch the point and go to the DFWCG's Georgian Picnic as a relic from the Queen Anne period. Life intervened so I had an excellent time at Liendo Plantation instead. That left me with nowhere to wear my mantua so I decided to solve the problem by throwing an any-period party - wear whatever you want from whatever period you want.

Illness and a daughter moving out kept some of the people who had planned to attend from coming, but we still had seven guests and a really good time.

You've probably seen the whole timeline on nuranar's LJ, but here it is again.


( More pictures behind the cut... )

As always, thank you to the Grahams for supplying the pictures and giving me permission to post them.

I was going to put the mantua on last night to take some pictures, but I decided I really didn't want to do that. I'll get good pictures at the picnic next month. I did go ahead and put it on the dummy, though, so I could get something to share out of a month's sewing.

The usual disclaimer that it fits me better than the dummy applies here. The dummy is also currently shorter than I am for reasons beyond me, which is why the petticoat is poofing out at the floor.







I also took some construction detail shots.

( Construction pictures )

Many thanks to isiswardrobe for her help and suggestions when I was planning the gown and stays.

The mantua itself is done! I still need to procure something for a belt because I don't want to use self fabric, and I still need to make the petticoat, but the mantua is done. The panels are cut for the petticoat, and I've pinned pieces together for piecing the back. I goofed cutting the mantua and didn't do it the way I planned so I didn't have a solid piece for the back, but I do have enough fabric to make the petticoat solid taffeta, just not one solid piece.

Next up is the petticoat, but petticoats are quick, easy, and simple. I have vague hopes of finishing it before the weekend.

I was going to take pictures last night while I had it on, but I couldn't get anything that looked decent with my phone. It wasn't worth getting the camera out and doing pictures with the timer when I didn't have a petticoat so you'll just have to wait.

I am happy to say that I have started my turn-of-the-18th-century mantua. I started draping it on the dressform the other night and tried on what I had so far last night. As usual, it doesn't fit too well straight off the form because it's not the same size and shape I am. Still, it wasn't awful. I'll be fiddling with the side seams to get them looking decent - somehow there were about 2" extra in the back waist, probably because of the shape of the dummy. Hopefully, I'll have it all sorted out within a couple of days and can start sewing things together. I do not expect this to be a lengthy project, even with hand-sewing the dress.

Now that I've nearly finished my stays, I've started thinking a in more depth about the mantua that will go over the stays. To that end, I reread the article about the Kimberley Mantua from the Met and looked at the pattern taken from it in the Waugh book and reread the pages in Patterns of Fashion about the Clive mantua.

Somehow I had been thinking that these dresses were constructed like later 18th century dresses in the most basic form - make a fitted lining and pleat the outer fabric to it. That doesn't seem to be the case. While the article about the Kimberley Mantua says that it may have had a bodice lining at one time, there only seems to be a small piece of it at present to which pleats are stitched. Janet Arnold says that the Clive mantua has a small piece of fabric holding the pleats but no real lining. So either both gowns have lost their linings or these were made without linings in the first place. I'm voting for the latter.

From looking at the pictures of the Kimberley Mantua more closely, I see that the pleats certainly aren't stitched down along the outside of the pleat as they are on a robe a la anglaise. The could be stitched to a lining along the inside of the pleat, if there were a lining, but there's no lining so I conclude that they are loose except where they're probably tacked in place at the shoulder and waist. I haven't seen good enough pictures of the Clive mantua to decide about it, but the Arnold description doesn't make it sound like they are sewn down except to the little straight-grain piece of fabric.

I have only found two reproductions of this type of garment with any kind of construction information so far, and both of them made bodice linings for the gowns and mounted the outer fabric to the lining. (See here and here.) One of them shows sewing down the pleats. While isiswardrobe made a mantua from this period recently, hers was a different sort with the bodice cut separately from the skirt so it doesn't help there.

So where does this leave me? I'm going to forego the bodice lining and stitching down the pleats, but I will tack them in place at the shoulders and waist. I don't know whether this will make the dress easier or not because loose fabric could be obnoxious. I'm using a taffeta so it should be fairly obedient when I fold it into pleats. I don't expect to completely understand the skirt draping until I've got the lengths sewn together and can play with it on the stand.

Many thanks to isiswardrobe for her invaluable articles about late 17th century or early 18th century mantuas.

And now to finish the stays and a couple of odds and ends, and I'll be ready to start it in the next couple of weeks...assuming life doesn't get in the way!