Err... okay. I'm no expert on armour, but those lace-on sleeviewhatsits aren't consistent with anything I've seen in any Medieval art, anywhere. I can't tell if they're laced to the overtunic, but they damned well shouldn't be. And what's the deal with a sleeveless tunic in the first place? Either besleeve it, or give this man a tabard! Oh, and fix the gathered drop-waist. This is not a feature of period tunic construction and neither is the split front with curving hemlines. The trim and decoration look awfully tacky in the full-sized picture. And speaking of tacky, what the hell is this guy doing? Posing for the latest Mystic Knights of Tyr Nan Og action figure? Yeesh, tone it down and comb your fucking hair.
C'mon guys, do some research. In the days of hooded cowls, tunics did not have waist seams. If you look at paintings carefully, you'll see that all that 'gathering' was a consequence of belting the waist. Actual waist seams didn't show up until later, by which time people were tailoring a lot more carefully than this. They did not use gathers. They used pleats. And whatever era you're going for, you need some sleeves on that red thing. As it is, you're just a guy in drag.
Ugh. They did not have fake fur back then. Or weird crushed velvet. Or whatever that shit is. If you're going to use stretch velour or fake stuff, can't you at least choose the non-crushed version or a fur that looks real? I've never seen a cowl that long before, either; it looks like he's wearing a tent around his neck. Meanwhile, the yardage of the actual tunic looks a mite bit stingy. Oh, and that yellow panel in front? That's not an undertunic. If you look at the page for this thing, you'll see that it has four contrasting panels inserted into the... into the... well, I guess I should call it a skirt, because they probably stuck in a waist seam. Contrasting skirt panels are not Medieval (or Renaissance, either), and I haven't seen them in anything pre 20th century.
I might finally add that when they do make tunics with sleeves, these people do it wrong. Attaching the hanging portion of a sleeve with a seam is not period, and they commit this blunder with several outfits...
I have never seen a short-sleeved overtunic with hanging sleeves on the tunic beneath. It should be the other way around... because people in the middle ages had common sense, and constructing things this way would make them a hell of a lot harder to put on. The hanging bits are also attached with a seam instead of being continuous with the rest of the sleeve (wrong!) and contrast with the whole damn mud coloured tunic they're dangling off (wrong!). And speaking of stingy yardage, the bloke's practically wearing a hobble skirt. What good are clothes you can't walk in?
Oh joy, they're attempting the Renaissance. Too bad they didn't try it with fabric that looks period. That print on the doublet is Art Nouveau at the earliest, and I'd call the colour scheme completely modern. No one would have worn a black lace collar, or a purple undershirt. The slashes in the sleeves and slops are too broad and set too far apart, and don't look to me like real slashes at all. I think they've just sewn a bunch of contrasting strips together. Grumble growl cheaters grumble grumble. Oh, and those dags at the base of the doublet are comically HUGE. They didn't get this big until the Baroque era, and even then, they never looked this sloppy. For one thing, they overlapped. For another, they were structurally related to the rest of the garment and made of the same fabric, and weren't just tacked on as an afterthought.
Oh joy, a doublet with a built in khaki miniskirt! And mini sleeves, too. They really ought to cover the undersleeves completely. And people were using buttons back then, not lacings. I don't know what the deal is with the bib around his neck... maybe an actual collar was too complicated for our Drachenfug friends to handle. Clearly actual slops were too challenging also, and they settled for omgwhaddafuck striped pantaloons! And though I know they're not selling the outfit complete with shoes, can't the model do better than just sticking bows on loafers?
One final note. I admire their attempt at a Landsknecht. I really do, because Landsknecht costumes are way cool. But if you look at pictures of real Landsknechts, you'll see that the clothing actually fit. For 600 Euros, can't you make something that doesn't bag like hell under the armpits? And must you model it with 80's tights and cotton socks!?
I'd better make a note, just because I see this missed so often: even for quite early tunics, sometimes they put darts in the sides to add fullness, so it's not only belting but it's definitely not a waist seam either.
ReplyDeleteAnd a correction, actually: they did have fake fur! I believe that a fake fur made from wool is documented for 10th-12th century Scandinavia.
I'd like to also lodge a further protest against that lacing. In the medieval period, you see, they were attempting to make their clothes look *good* and well-tailored; and so I'd expect to see four times as many lacing-holes for lacings about a quarter that size - if not smaller.