16th and 17th C. Drill Manuals

Years ago, I was introduced to Jacob de Gheyn's Exercise of Arms.  It's 245 pages and has many beautiful illustrations of how to drill with calivers, muskets and pike.  It's one of my go to's for details of men's dress at the beginning of the 17th century.  It was published in 1608, but many of the illustrations date as much as 10 years prior.

Not long ago, I came across a reference to another one.  This one by Adam van Breen is from 1618 and includes 118 pages of illustrations for drill with shield, spear, rapier and target.  The illustrations are all available on line and are even in color, which I love to see.  I might just need to trim my next pair of pants like this!

Turns out, there's a whole Wiki version dedicated to the various manuals and treatises!  I could spend hours looking at the clothing details.

Every Day Doublets

There are a few basic / simple doublets in existence.  Often we only see the elaborate examples that have been saved, so I was curious to see what if any differences there are with these basic doublets.  For example, are the buttons simple too?  Is there still evidence of as much shaping and stiffening?  Is there top stitching or pick stitching?

Two of these happen to be linen doublets.  The Reigate doublet was detailed in a thesis by Susan Stanton in 1995, so we know it consists of three layers of linen in the body with additional layers of stiffening around the collar and only two layers of linen for the sleeves and skirts.  The buttons are linen cord wrapped around a solid core (presumed to be wood).  It has a bound edge around the neck and piping several seams.  It is difficult to tell if there was top stitching of seams or not.

 

The Alspirbach doublet is intact, and described as linen lined with a coarser linen.  We don't know if there are additional layers internally.  From the few pictures available, it has no top stitching on the skirts.  The neck has a small binding and the center front is either top stitched or has a very small binding.  There are no buttons, but there are two eyelits at the neck and one or two eyelits at the waist.

Another example of a simple doublet comes from the V&A. This doublet is made of plain wool serge and lined in a linen (with a pile).  The museum does not mention if there is any interlining or stiffening. A close up shows that the buttons are worked.  The pictures are not detailed enough to see any top stitching.

Next we have a doublet and hose from Germany (LM-2396.1-7).  There is not much detail about it available. It seems to made of wool.  There is top stitching around the skirts, center front and on the arm wings. There are buttons, but the pictures are not detailed enough to show if they are worked or cast.

Another that I consider basic is the Nils Sture leather doublet. From Lena Rangstrom's description in Lions of Fashion and some additional close up pictures, it's clear that the leather was sewn as a fabric.  There is top stitching and piping around the neck.  She also describes additional stiffening in the collar, but there is no mention of interlining.  The doublet had small silver buttons.  While simple in decoration, we know that the owner of this doublet was very much upper class, so it is not a great example of an every day doublet, but it does illustrate what a basic traveling doublet for the wealthy was like.

Another example comes from the Vasa, which sunk in 1628.  I haven't been able to find any details published out this, so it's not much help in looking at construction or materials.

I recently came across another, known as the Abingdon doublet.  It is another concealed find, in rough condition.  It is made of wool and lined in linen.  Arnold dated it to 1620-1625.  It has an interlining and the collar is stiffened with paper/cardboard.  The buttons are chevron over a solid (likely wood) core.

So, even for basic clothes made for young boys or orphans, we see typical construction.  The proof for interlining is inconsistent, but extra stiffening at the neck seems common.

Top stitching was common but not consistent across this sample.

If we discount the silver Sture buttons, we see a few examples of worked buttons over what's likely a wooden core.  I really thought I might see a more basic (not as decorative) form of button on an every day doublet, but I have proven my own theory incorrect.

I will mention that one of the other linen doublets that is highly embroidered has buttons of "rolled rag" with button hole stitched worked over.  This is the only example of cloth buttons I have been able to document to this time period.

Linen Doublets

Due to our hot summers, I've made several linen doublets over the years, but was generally under the impression that wool and silk were more appropriate.  A few years ago, it was brought to my attention that there are some surviving linen doublets.  They generally seem to have used a stiffer, tighter linen than I've typically used and have also been described as linen canvas.

Here are the ones I've been able to find.

The Reigate Cache linen doublet.  A general description is given at the concealed garments site. Early 17th century.

The Alpirsbach Monastery linen doublet. A general description and pattern are available at germanrenaissance.net. c.1540-1575

The National Scotland Museums linen doublet.  Details from the museum site. c. 1650-1665

The V&A linen doublet. Details from the museum site. c. 1635-1640

The pinked linen doublet of Antonello Petrucci.  No details available other than pinterest. c.1585

The Manchester Art Gallery doublet. Details from the museum site, c. 1625-1630.

The quality of the available information varies quite a bit across the doublets, but from what details we have, they all seem to have a very tight weave and a multiple layer of construction.  Some are ornately decorated, or even pinked!

The first two are quite simple / plain and likely represent an everyday or common man's doublet.  This is the look I'm going for on my next linen doublet.

As a side note, there is another example of a common man's doublet in wool in the V&A.  It's interesting to compare the simplicity of design and similarity of construction between these examples of different outer material.