nuranar | Brunswicks and Jesuits! (Not the priestly dudes!) (Reply)

When I first saw Kendra's Brunswick three years ago, I was fascinated and puzzled. I'd never heard of such a thing before, but it sounded really neat and unusual. One of those "I wish I could have one" thoughts that stays with you although you don't make real plans for it. Then Katherine made hers, and there was a minor convocation of them at Williamsburg. I loved them. But this time, I think my knowledge and skills are sufficient to tackle it!

So I dived into research again. I found two primary informational sources online: Kendra's page on Brunswicks and Jesuits, and Brunswick jackets on Diary of a Mantua Maker. There are also a few Pinterest boards. But mostly I did a lot of searching of general 18th century images, and collecting possibles on my own board.

I immediately ran into the issue that the vast majority of information and pictures are 1760s, while I want to do 1780s. For a variety of reasons, but mostly that there are other things in the 1780s that interest me, but little about the 1760s. Both Kendra and Cole took the B&T Brunswick class; their information, coming from the same source, seemed to imply that the Brunswick continued in popularity into the 1780s. But there was little indication of any differences from the 1760s ones, except for the lack of sleeve ruffles. I got hung up on trying to prove that, though, for quite a while.

Another issue was the frustratingly vast variation in garments that could be considered Brunswicks or Jesuits. The modern definitions I found include Colonial Williamsburg's glossary:

Brunswick: A three-quarter length jacket worn with a petticoat, the Brunswick was an informal gown or a traveling gown. It had a high neck, unstiffened bodice that buttoned, long sleeves, and frequently had a sack back (loose pleats) and a hood.

It also mentions the Jesuit:

Similar to the Brunswick, but the skirt of the gown was full length.

While Aileen Ribeiro, in Dress in Eighteenth Century Europe, says (p. 146):

A long-sleeved version of the sack, usually three-quarter-length and with a high neck and a buttoned, unstiffened bodice, was called a 'German habit' or a 'Brunswick.'... The early sleeves had a break at the elbow with a ruffle (so ingrained was the notion of a natural break there), but the sleeve of the late 1760s ended in a small ruched cuff... As was customary with informal clothing, the latest textile designs were used, the tiny spots, checks and plain stripes anticipating the formal silk designs of a decade later.

The one actually identified visual instance that I am aware of is a Reynolds,"Mrs Pelham feeding poultry," exhibited in 1774. According to Ribeiro in A Visual History of Costume: The Eighteenth Century, the Public Advertiser described Mrs Pelham's gown as "a flowered muslin Brunswick dress." While it has long sleeves and a hood, and appears to be a sack-back and a buttoning bodice, it is not high-necked.

And when I started looking at the pictures I collected, I realized a sizeable number did not have all the elements I thought were required: The hood, the long sleeves, and the waistcoat front. Still, there are plenty of examples that seem to show all of these: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12. And more that are missing just one element, like the hood (1, 2, 3, and 4) or the sleeves (which could have been lost) (1).

Of the rest, I seemed to find some particular variations that I (for what it's worth) would still consider Brunswicks. One is the fur-trimmed ones. While they had long sleeves, and waistcoat-like lines, with one exception they did not have hoods. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 6. Other distinctions about these portraits are their dates (1770s-1780s), their origins (Germanic), and the sitters' ages (mostly middle-aged or elderly). Hypothesis is that these are women who've worn the original "German habit" since the 1750s and 1760s; the extensive use of fur is also more typical of German/eastern European fashion.

My favorite variation, and IMHO the most interesting, is the quilted one. I found five examples: one Norwegian (blue, 1720-1750), two English (white 1745-1760, at Snowshill [drawn in both Patterns of Fashion I and Costume in Detail]; and white 1760-1770, at Platt Hall/Manchester), and two Danish (pink, c. 1775; and yellow "bridal morning dress", c. 1778).

These five all have hoods, and they all have sleeve ruffles, with the exception of the blue one which is much earlier. Note that this isn't really in line with Ribeiro's statement about the ruffles disappearing by the late 1760s; but really, it's hard to make rules for this stuff!

* Long sleeves: The two Danish examples do not have lower sleeves extensions. It's conceivable that they were lost, or they may have been worn with mitts; this may be a regional variation.
* Backs: Three of five have sack backs: The Platt Hall white, the yellow Danish one, and the blue Norwegian. Of the other two, the white Snowshill one is fitted like a jacket, while the pink Danish one may be cut like a sack, but with the pleats sewn down at the waist so that it the effect is fitted.
* Fronts: Only two have the waistcoat front, and even of those only the Norwegian fits the "Brunswick" definition by pairing it with the sack back. The other, the Snowshill one, pairs the waistcoat with the most fitted back. The other white one at Platt Hall seems to have a loose pleated front similar to the old robe volante; the description may indicate it fastens with tape ties. The yellow one has a loose front, shaped at the side seams only and tying with two sets of ribbons. The pink one is fitted in front; I think I see a long vertical dart on the outside of the bust, and at least one shallow pleat releasing into the skirt.

My favorite example of all of these is the pink Danish one. I particularly love the back, since it pairs the traditional pleats with a fitted shape, and the hood is lovely. I like that this isn't completely high-necked. I'll be doing removable long sleeves, too.

So yes, I will be hand quilting! This will definitely not be a fast project, but I do want to get it done in a timely manner. So I'll do more general research on quilting before finalizing the design. But I suspect most of it will be reasonably large diamonds (close to the yellow one) with some kind of not-too-intricate border. Oh, and it will be silk satin, in either pink or blue. I don't want or need heavy duchesse satin, so the color will depend on what I can find in a lighter weight silk.

Any thoughts on the construction? I'm beginning to wonder if it was initially constructed like the yellow one, with a traditional sack back and a loose front, but fitted at a later date. The back pleats seem to be topstitched down like a waistband, and the vertical dart in front could also have been added.

Somewhat unexpectedly, I found myself also taken by the full-length variation, the Jesuit. There is less information on them, but a couple of clearly-identified examples. (1 and below) In addition, many of the general Brunswick examples above do not show a jacket hem, which indicates they are either very long jackets (the three-quarter-length in the definitions) or actually Jesuits. The two examples both show lounging in interiors, so while they are informal dress, they seem more like 19th-century wrappers or 20th-century hostess gowns than the more practical Brunswick traveling outfits.

So while I was fabric-shopping for Brunswick fabric, I stumbled across something on ebay.

Slub-free embroidered silk, 12+ yards, less than $10/yd. Whee!! A deal like that I just couldn't leave. I'm gambling, from my limited knowledge, that it will be a decent choice for a 1780s Jesuit. Ribeiro did indicate that these informal gowns were made with the latest designs, and these less-ornate sprigged designs are definitely post-1760. It's also rather similar to the Reynolds 1770s portrait of the cotton Brunswick. I hope I chose wisely!