“Extant” does not mean a good example for everywhere and everytime
Medieval Garments Reconstructed: Norse Clothing Patterns Full PDF: http://en.unipress.dk/media/3492090/9788779349018_medieval_garments.pdf
This is a book of patterns for the garments found in Greenland which have been dated to the 14th century. It has an interesting introduction with some helpful sewing hints. It leaves out some details which are crucial in the path from a picture of a pattern of the garment to an as-close-as-I-can-get-it-reproduction of the garment.. but it’s better than a bare line drawing.
Please pardon the rant.
The garments represented in this book are dated to the 14th century in Greenland. They are representative of the cut and construction of garments from Greenland in the 14th century. Any attempt to extend these garments as examples of garments that would have been worn on the mainland is foolish.
This means that NO, Herjolfnes #38 the so-called basis of the 12-gore style of cotehardie is NOT a good pattern to use as a basis of your 14th century French/English reproduction cotehardie (the find is described as a man’s garment, and even though it is somewhat shaped, it -still- isn’t form fitting. It can still be pulled on/off over the head. So, NO, it’s not a good example once you add a lacing to it).
This also means that NO, you cannot take all of the Herjolfnes finds and use these as patterns for your 10th century Norwegien impression. Despite the fact that Greenland is isolated from the rest of the mainland, some of the design features of the garments (notably the inset sleeves and hoods with liripipe) were not used in the 10th century. Inset sleeves seem to come into use on the mainland around 1340 and hoods with liripipe are a design feature of the 14th century.
The garments found at Herjolfnes are good examples and make good patterns for reproductions of Greenland garments from the 14th century. That is it. If you’re tring to use them as the basis for something else…
YOU’RE DOING IT WRONG!