Questions on feathers in hats

[LordPaulet]

There are several things i find to be conspicuous about this statement.  Cavalier hats were at their height of fashion during the english civil war...mid 1600's.  I wouldnt call those days "free sword play"  in fact many towns had laws and such of even having a sword upon ones person in the town.  Also everyone associates this style of hat with the Musketeers, being so called as their primary weapon was the musket...lol unfortunatly I do not have the time at the moment to currently scour the internet for a historical resource....however, I hardly count a hat shop's website as a site for quotation for historical debate.

[LordPaulet]

OK!
After researching period portraits of Musketeers, cavaliers, and anyone wearing a cavalier style hat (upper class to soldiers) there is NO real diffinitive side as to which should or should not be pinned up.  I think its more personal preference at the time.  Heck thats probably how the tricorn was born...someone got bored and pinned them all up silly

[WaywardWench]

I made a flop hat or flat hat  last night to go with my new garb but I am confused about feathers.  I have seen several images with and with out and was wondering if feathers in caps were a  *marker* for class in society?  Also is there a specific side that feathers should be on or does that really matter?
If I were to put feathers in my cap is there a specific length they should be or just proportionate?
Any help would be much appreciated!
Gens~

Besides the status, H/A, and other parameters, I will add practical to the list.

I never really thought about which side might be proper, I usually attach mine to the upside of the hat tilt so they don't brush against my shoulder when I turn my head.The length issue I will add the thought of your fellows. Long feathers sticking behind you bear the same responsibility as wearing a scabbard. Many times I have been in the lanes or at a show where someone had overly long or a plentiful array of plumes and been oblivious to those they were annoying, attacking or blocking when they turned their head.

I suggest you make the feather grouping into a pin or two to attach to the hat. One; you can change them from hat to hat, two; they can be removed for bad weather or washing the hat. If you are attaching the feathers permenantly by sewing into the hat I would lean to natural feathers. I would recommend against any dyed/colored or dye enhanced feathers (ie:colored peacock) in a permenantly attached grouping because of rain. Many of the colored feathers will bleed when they get wet. They can drip on to your garb and leave stains on it or your hat. Many folks have hats that can withstand being wet and just unclip the feathers and stash them away from the wet. Other folks create a separate "rain hat" to wear and stash the elaborate one away from the weather.
 
I went to the craft shop and bought a bag of flat back pins in the jewelry section. I used thread to whipstich/lash the feather(s) to the pin and then glued the thread to stabilize it further. Now I have several that I can mix and match as the urge and outfit calls to me. Forgive me if this has been mentioned already, some times the posts overlap in reading. I also saw mentioned on a thread using the boutineer cone pins from the bridal section as a way of stuffng/gluing several plumes together in one pin.

On the snarky (in my humble opinion) side, thank you for making a hat to wear. It so finishes and completes the outfit. Hats were such an integral and required part of life until quite recently when they became a very optional accessory. So many folks spend such time and money on wonderful outfits and then miss the mark when they do not dress their hair and/or wear a hat.

Have a merry and magical time.
Fionna

[Gauwyn of Bracknell]

There are several things i find to be conspicuous about this statement.  Cavalier hats were at their height of fashion during the english civil war...mid 1600's.  I wouldnt call those days "free sword play"  in fact many towns had laws and such of even having a sword upon ones person in the town.  Also everyone associates this style of hat with the Musketeers, being so called as their primary weapon was the musket...lol unfortunatly I do not have the time at the moment to currently scour the internet for a historical resource....however, I hardly count a hat shop's website as a site for quotation for historical debate.

I got my information from the internet -it HAS to be true     

[LordPaulet]

There are several things i find to be conspicuous about this statement.  Cavalier hats were at their height of fashion during the english civil war...mid 1600's.  I wouldnt call those days "free sword play"  in fact many towns had laws and such of even having a sword upon ones person in the town.  Also everyone associates this style of hat with the Musketeers, being so called as their primary weapon was the musket...lol unfortunatly I do not have the time at the moment to currently scour the internet for a historical resource....however, I hardly count a hat shop's website as a site for quotation for historical debate.

I got my information from the internet -it HAS to be true     

I now know why my professors HATE the internet lol

[Gauwyn of Bracknell]

I really like Wiki - if you don't like what you are reading you can just change it

[operafantomet]

This is unrelated to the topic, except that it is about headgarbs...

Some weeks ago (months, even?) someone asked about a funky headgarb depicted in the "Romance de la rose" illumination. Today I found a semi-large version of it, in Taschen's newest (gorgeous!) book on illuminations. I took a couple of pics of it, and although I still can't say for sure what she's wearing on her head (either a pointed hat/cap or a hairnet of some sort) I wanted to ask if the person requested pictures still needs it.

Anyone?

[gem]

Anea, I'm pretty sure that was Princess Sara.  You might PM her, or just post it to a new thread so we can all drool! 

[operafantomet]

Ha-ha... Pardon my laziness, but I'll post'em here. They are hat related, after all. 



The women in picture 3 and 4 seems to wear similar head garbs, while the woman in picture 2 seems to wear the forerunner of the Tudor gable hood.

[gem]

Hmmm... still hard to say, isn't it?!  I'm going to guess, though, that the one in Picture #4 (the one Sara was wondering about) is wearing an elaborate up-do of her hair (as conjectured by MollyMishap, IIRC), covered in a beaded net (with a jewelled edge).  Most of the "hat" shape is exactly the same color as her hair, but I think I can see regularly-spaced faint reddish dots that may be beads (or maybe just knots).

I'm not sure Sara is reading this thread, though, so I'll go PM her to come look.

[LordPaulet]

unless on pictures 4 that is not her hair at all and is a veil sticking out of a (what reminds me of) a russion/tibetian style crown/headdress?

[PrincessSara]

Oh operafan, those are great!  Thank you so much for posting those pictures.  What's the name of the book they came from?

As for the netting vs. hat debate, the lady in picture 3 appears to be wearing a coif, but I'm still not sure that the lady in picture 4 is wearing a hairnet.

Both of these ladies' hats have little "pooks" on top, but in #3 you can see that this pook is clearly part of the hat and not made by the hair.  So how would lady #4 get a hairnet to pook?  By the transitive properties of pooks if one is part of the hat, shouldn't the other also be part of the hat?  It seems a little too coincidental for them to both have this feature on the headdress, yet one is fabric and one is a hair.

Lady #4's headdress is very structured and clearly not soft - yes, she could do this with a lot of hairstyling and then cover it with the net, but then why is lady #3's headdress so limp?  If lady #4 can make her hair defy gravity, why can't lady #3?

And yes, the area between the netting seems to be the same colour as her hair, but then, the net is the same colour as her hair too.  It looks a little lighter because it has less shading.

You know, when you see her close up you can see that lady #4 doesn't look too happy.  I wonder why that is, when she's in the Garden of Mirth?