This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Italy didn't exist as an entity in this period. There were a bunch of city states where it now exists, and their fashions varied. Looking at images from the period, Florentine and Venetian fashions are distinctly different, so the generalization that "Italian dresses kept the open front bodice with parallel laces" is making me cringe. That's Venetian. Florentine women wore doublets not unlike the English. I'm about to update the image galleries to say what part of Italy they're from instead of just "Italian," but the paragraphs need some help too. I can pull out "Mode a Firenze: Lo Stilo de Eleonora di Toledo" and start citing from there for Florentine, but I don't have any books on Venetian fashion in my collection. Macoafi ( talk) 18:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
More on hats and hairstyles. German, French, and Spanish images. More on sleeve styles. Images of blackwork collars and cuffs. Either the Pelican or Phoenix portaits of Elizabeth for the partlets and chemises (but this is still Anglo-centric as it is). Work work work!
Added image galleries. Thoughts? Better? Worse? PKM 18:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted this sentence:
Fashion change wasn't particularly gradual in this era compared to the periods before and after, and I don't think this adds anything of use to the reader. - PKM 02:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
This article was recategorized in 2006 in accordance with a scheme for organizing articles in
Category:History of clothing. That effort has been superseded by
WikiProject Fashion. |
I have reverted back to what I think is the last complete good version after a series of vandalisms and partial corrections. I have have deleted any legitimate corrections I do apologize. - PKM 07:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Someone taggeed this "no footnotes" and someone else removed the tag, but I agree footnotes would be good and I will add some. - PKM 03:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I need help on Elizabethan fashion; i want to know the different types of clothes people would have worn in different weather?
it is hot and cold warm and hot cold and warm LD from Nad
Please answer me! this is really important! i need 2 know now! nad
This article was recently retitled "1550-1600 in Western European fashion", which makes sense out of context; however, this is part of a uniform series that covers fashion from the middle ages to the 20th century. Articles from the 18th century forward specifically include American (and Canadian) fashions where those are appropriate.
I would suggest that "fashion" itself is a western European concept that has now become global.
Retitling one article in the series makes no sense, and determining when the topic ceases to be exclusively European (somewhere between 1620 and 1776?) is difficult; long wrangling by editors last year essentially revolved around this topic.
Rather than simply undo the move, I want to open this for comment. How do others feel? Should we move back to "1550-1600 in fashion".- PKM ( talk) 19:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below (and above). - GTBacchus( talk) 02:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
And in the spirit of following a civilized process, I recommend that we move this article back to its prior name 1550-1600 in fashion for the reasons stated above under "Undo move". Please indicate your support or opposition. - PKM ( talk) 22:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a new version of this image (below right) with the correct title. The painting was done in about 1571 (the sitter was born in 1553), and so it may be in the wrong section. See image notes. qp10qp ( talk) 19:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I going to tweak and tighten this entry:
That's the description in Wikimedia Commons, but there are problems: Her sleeves are not made of ribbons, but have bands of gold embroidery or applied braid. And gloves aren't "a feminine object": both men and women hold gloves in many (most?) Elizabethan portraits. And that's a table, not a chair (though neither is relevant to this article).
Great picture, though. - PKM ( talk) 02:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I have changed the doublet description to simply read "with sleeves" until I can get the research to properly cite the sleeve attachments.
I have removed this comment "with attached sleeves. (separate sleeves tied or laced was born out of necessity in the theatre & perpetuated by the Renaissance Faire circuit)." The parenthetical comment doesn't belong in the text of an encyclopedic article - no need to refute what is not there in the text. Ii someone can find a scholarly citation to support that statement, it should be in a footnote as a comment on the "popular notion" of tied-on sleeves. I am sure I have an photo of lacing holes to attach sleeves - I just have to remember where.
No question that tied-on sleeves with three or four ties at the shoulder as we all wore at the Faires back in the day is a bit off. - PKM ( talk) 03:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 05:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
An alternative source that replaces the above link can be found here:
This edit has made undiscussed changes to the referencing style, contrary to WP:CITE. Normally I would revert on sight, but it it was a bit scrappy before. Are we happy with this? I think I'm neutral. Johnbod ( talk) 17:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't the title of this (and other similar pages) be "1550–1600 in fashion (Europe)" or maybe even "1550–1600 in fashion (England)"? Right now the title doesn't at all reflect the narrowness of scope of the article. Bookgrrl holler/ lookee here 13:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
The section on dyeing is a bit off for this period. Saffron is used to dye yellow, but it was always very expensive and the more common yellow dye was weld. Two important dyes in this period were woad and madder. I could add all of this, but it's moving pretty far off topic - and little of it is specific to this 50-year period, or significant in distinguishing this period from those before and after. I am thinking a link through to natural dye and mention of kermes red and Spanish black is sufficient. Thoughts? - PKM ( talk) 19:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
As I go, I am removing unencyclopedic and unsourced statements of opinion like "Wearing a matching partlet and sleeve set created a single silhouette to compliment the beauty of the dress/garment," "These adorned pieces were attached to the doublet to create the broad shoulder fashion that the ladies fancied," and "Apart from being fashionable, the partlet was essentially used as an undergarment to keep warm in the winter and prevent sunburn in the summer." - PKM ( talk) 18:21, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
ihr dreckigen hurensöhne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.215.129.7 ( talk) 15:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:1550–1600 in European fashion/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I am doing a report on Sofonisba Anguissola for my Intro to Art History class, and came across this page because it contains the painting Portrait of the Artist's Sisters and Brother by said artist. However, it is incorrectly dated here as being 1570, when Gardener's Art Through the Ages cites it as being ca. 1555. This book is readily available in any college bookstore or library and is pretty much an authority on art. |
Substituted at 01:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||
|
Italy didn't exist as an entity in this period. There were a bunch of city states where it now exists, and their fashions varied. Looking at images from the period, Florentine and Venetian fashions are distinctly different, so the generalization that "Italian dresses kept the open front bodice with parallel laces" is making me cringe. That's Venetian. Florentine women wore doublets not unlike the English. I'm about to update the image galleries to say what part of Italy they're from instead of just "Italian," but the paragraphs need some help too. I can pull out "Mode a Firenze: Lo Stilo de Eleonora di Toledo" and start citing from there for Florentine, but I don't have any books on Venetian fashion in my collection. Macoafi ( talk) 18:00, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
More on hats and hairstyles. German, French, and Spanish images. More on sleeve styles. Images of blackwork collars and cuffs. Either the Pelican or Phoenix portaits of Elizabeth for the partlets and chemises (but this is still Anglo-centric as it is). Work work work!
Added image galleries. Thoughts? Better? Worse? PKM 18:07, 14 January 2006 (UTC)
I have deleted this sentence:
Fashion change wasn't particularly gradual in this era compared to the periods before and after, and I don't think this adds anything of use to the reader. - PKM 02:42, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
This article was recategorized in 2006 in accordance with a scheme for organizing articles in
Category:History of clothing. That effort has been superseded by
WikiProject Fashion. |
I have reverted back to what I think is the last complete good version after a series of vandalisms and partial corrections. I have have deleted any legitimate corrections I do apologize. - PKM 07:15, 11 March 2007 (UTC)
Someone taggeed this "no footnotes" and someone else removed the tag, but I agree footnotes would be good and I will add some. - PKM 03:34, 16 March 2007 (UTC)
I need help on Elizabethan fashion; i want to know the different types of clothes people would have worn in different weather?
it is hot and cold warm and hot cold and warm LD from Nad
Please answer me! this is really important! i need 2 know now! nad
This article was recently retitled "1550-1600 in Western European fashion", which makes sense out of context; however, this is part of a uniform series that covers fashion from the middle ages to the 20th century. Articles from the 18th century forward specifically include American (and Canadian) fashions where those are appropriate.
I would suggest that "fashion" itself is a western European concept that has now become global.
Retitling one article in the series makes no sense, and determining when the topic ceases to be exclusively European (somewhere between 1620 and 1776?) is difficult; long wrangling by editors last year essentially revolved around this topic.
Rather than simply undo the move, I want to open this for comment. How do others feel? Should we move back to "1550-1600 in fashion".- PKM ( talk) 19:38, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
The result of the proposal was PAGE MOVED per discussion below (and above). - GTBacchus( talk) 02:19, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
And in the spirit of following a civilized process, I recommend that we move this article back to its prior name 1550-1600 in fashion for the reasons stated above under "Undo move". Please indicate your support or opposition. - PKM ( talk) 22:20, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
I've uploaded a new version of this image (below right) with the correct title. The painting was done in about 1571 (the sitter was born in 1553), and so it may be in the wrong section. See image notes. qp10qp ( talk) 19:45, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I going to tweak and tighten this entry:
That's the description in Wikimedia Commons, but there are problems: Her sleeves are not made of ribbons, but have bands of gold embroidery or applied braid. And gloves aren't "a feminine object": both men and women hold gloves in many (most?) Elizabethan portraits. And that's a table, not a chair (though neither is relevant to this article).
Great picture, though. - PKM ( talk) 02:05, 24 July 2009 (UTC)
I have changed the doublet description to simply read "with sleeves" until I can get the research to properly cite the sleeve attachments.
I have removed this comment "with attached sleeves. (separate sleeves tied or laced was born out of necessity in the theatre & perpetuated by the Renaissance Faire circuit)." The parenthetical comment doesn't belong in the text of an encyclopedic article - no need to refute what is not there in the text. Ii someone can find a scholarly citation to support that statement, it should be in a footnote as a comment on the "popular notion" of tied-on sleeves. I am sure I have an photo of lacing holes to attach sleeves - I just have to remember where.
No question that tied-on sleeves with three or four ties at the shoulder as we all wore at the Faires back in the day is a bit off. - PKM ( talk) 03:26, 10 May 2010 (UTC)
During several automated bot runs the following external link was found to be unavailable. Please check if the link is in fact down and fix or remove it in that case!
-- JeffGBot ( talk) 05:25, 20 June 2011 (UTC)
An alternative source that replaces the above link can be found here:
This edit has made undiscussed changes to the referencing style, contrary to WP:CITE. Normally I would revert on sight, but it it was a bit scrappy before. Are we happy with this? I think I'm neutral. Johnbod ( talk) 17:25, 9 June 2012 (UTC)
Shouldn't the title of this (and other similar pages) be "1550–1600 in fashion (Europe)" or maybe even "1550–1600 in fashion (England)"? Right now the title doesn't at all reflect the narrowness of scope of the article. Bookgrrl holler/ lookee here 13:30, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
The section on dyeing is a bit off for this period. Saffron is used to dye yellow, but it was always very expensive and the more common yellow dye was weld. Two important dyes in this period were woad and madder. I could add all of this, but it's moving pretty far off topic - and little of it is specific to this 50-year period, or significant in distinguishing this period from those before and after. I am thinking a link through to natural dye and mention of kermes red and Spanish black is sufficient. Thoughts? - PKM ( talk) 19:31, 18 October 2012 (UTC)
As I go, I am removing unencyclopedic and unsourced statements of opinion like "Wearing a matching partlet and sleeve set created a single silhouette to compliment the beauty of the dress/garment," "These adorned pieces were attached to the doublet to create the broad shoulder fashion that the ladies fancied," and "Apart from being fashionable, the partlet was essentially used as an undergarment to keep warm in the winter and prevent sunburn in the summer." - PKM ( talk) 18:21, 21 October 2012 (UTC)
ihr dreckigen hurensöhne — Preceding unsigned comment added by 79.215.129.7 ( talk) 15:09, 19 November 2015 (UTC)
The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:1550–1600 in European fashion/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.
I am doing a report on Sofonisba Anguissola for my Intro to Art History class, and came across this page because it contains the painting Portrait of the Artist's Sisters and Brother by said artist. However, it is incorrectly dated here as being 1570, when Gardener's Art Through the Ages cites it as being ca. 1555. This book is readily available in any college bookstore or library and is pretty much an authority on art. |
Substituted at 01:08, 22 May 2016 (UTC)