Mostly due to historical revisionism. Remember, behind every movie there's a message being said

Most people slept in the same linen shirts they wore as undergarments during the day. And thank you!

Probably the best information available is that of various illustrations and engravings from the 15th, 16th and 17th century which actually shows both unpointing the doublet from the breeches or taking off the doublet and letting it hang from the waist of the breeches. As a personal thought about the awkwardness of re-tying the doublet and breeches back together after the call of nature, if it is what you know, all you know and you have grown up with such things, it probably isn't all that awkward. And while the second option might leave one's doublet in the dust, I think that most folks were a little less fussy than we are -- BUT -- its honestly not any different for those today that wear boilersuits, overalls, coveralls, or jumpsuits.

If you check out the show "The Tudor Monastery Farm" Peter comments that he has got used to visiting the outhouse before tying himself together every morning.

Thank you!

Thanks for the questions. Yes, laborers could take of their doublets without dropping their breeches. The garments were laced together, but the breeches were snug enough that they would stay up without being laced to the doublet. We do like this painting -- upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/3/30/Sebastiaan_Vrancx_-_Harvest_-_WGA25383.jpg It shows agricultural labor in their shirts and waistcoats and without stockings. You may also enjoy this video about the Farrar Papers and what they said about clothing purchased for Virginia -- kzfaq.info/get/bejne/hsCKg7ZnvJa0oIk.html When not laboring workers would again put on their outer garments On the topic of shoes, we tend to use latchet shoes because they are commonly reproduced and easy to purchase for our staff but there were several common styles of shoes available during the period.

@@JYFMuseums Thank you for your quick answer. Much appreciated! The picture tells the story just perfect! One more question, living in Sweden I know all about the Ice age and I wonder if they had anything over their stockings during winter?

On particularly cold days there was nothing to stop a person from wearing an extra pair of stockings, especially heavy Irish stockings over another pair of stockings. Brian covers some of the other clothing items in this video -- kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ed-hiMpmubDRgn0.html

You might find this video useful - kzfaq.info/get/bejne/ed-hiMpmubDRgn0.html The video covers recommended clothing for Virginia and the costs. The amount of clothing that individuals have will depend on their economic status, plus there were sumptuary laws that regulated clothing as well - what articles of clothing one was required to have, not allowed to have or what materials clothing articles were permitted to be made from, based on social class. Plus there was well established trade in the buying and selling of second hand clothing. A popular number seems to be three suits of clothes, while shirts tended to be more common. The ideal being that outer garments should not need to be laundered very often, while shirts worn against the body should be laundered regularly.

Thanks for the question! Maybe? We wish we could give a more definitive answer. From paintings and engravings, we can see that short hair is probably most common. Hair appears to be as short as off the ears and collar, to as long as over the ears and reaching to the collar. There are portraits of men with long hair, as a display of fashion and of wealth with all the expenses that comes with the styling of long hair. At the late-16th century and early 17th century there is also the rise of the fashionable love lock and much commentary written against the love lock and that it was a style created an influenced by those men returning from the New World and that love lock was a fashion copied from the indigenous peoples. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lovelock_(hair) And this is our problem, much of the art that serves as primary sources are of men of the noble or gentry classes. There are very few portraits of men of the common classes.

Oh We'd have to disagree. Clearly after 64 years frozen in a block of ice, Adam Adamant would have lost any fashion sense. And we hear that The Face claims better fashion. 😂🤣😅

@@JYFMuseums yeah Adam adamant was a stylish dresser and a proper English gentleman

@James vloc Other Stuff But Edmund, Lord Blackadder was an even more stylish dresser and no mere gentleman but a proper English nobleman. 😂🤣

Peter Henlein of Nuremberg generally receives credit for creating the watch in the early 16th century. But these watches were rare, very expensive, and fashionable among the nobility that could afford them and the watch tended to be worn as a pendent. It was not until the late-17th century and the reign of King Charles II that the pocket watch as we know it would begin to take shape and until the 19th century the pocket watch continued to be an expensive luxury item. It is highly unlikely that an Englishman as portrayed in this video could ever have afforded the cost of a watch.

@@JYFMuseums what about a house clock or a clock tower or sundial?

@TheOttomanEmpire could your clarify your question? What about house clocks, clock towers, or sundials? In what context? Continuing with the theme of personal or small time keeping pieces, the Jamestown Rediscovery Project has excavated the fragments of at least four diptych dials, apparently discarded about 1610. A diptych dial is a sundial compass used to keep time. Check out this link about diptychs from Jamestowne Rediscovery -- historicjamestowne.org/collections/artifacts/diptych-dial/

@@JYFMuseums I was just wondering if maybe there was a village sundial or maybe a clock tower built near there

@TheOttomanEmpire There was no clock tower in early 17th century Virginia and for time keeping the archeological evidence for the diptych dial is the strongest evidence available.