RESEARCH - Medieval England - Post 16: Fashion

 Fashion

Phew, this could be a massive post. But I shall try to keep it concise.

I once heard it said on a history programme (sorry, I can't remember which), that there is a change of fashion along with a change of monarch. On the whole, this seems to be a pretty good rule of thumb. 

Now, the medieval era, as repeatedly stated, covers a very long time (500-1485). There were seven changes of king between 1422-1485 alone (although some were repeated)! And yes, this is applicable to both men and women.

Can I get the obvious out of the way? The main difference between rich and poor at this time was not in the style, but more the quality of material. 

Let us glimpse at Sumptuary Laws. Edward III, in the 14th century, seems to have been the first English monarch to impose such restrictions on what one was permitted to wear. His statute denied anyone under the rank of knight from wearing fur. And also forbade the import of textiles from outside of the British isle and the export of wool. Some surmise this was to put a cap on the cost of household liveries. 

In 1363, part of the laws determined that knights (and their families) with land worth 400 marks annually may wear whatever they wish, with the exclusion of weasel and ermine furs, or clothing of precious stones (except those worn in ladies' hair).

However, knights (and their families) with land worth 200 marks may not wear fabric over the worth of £4 in total. No cloth of gold, nor a cloak, mantle or gown lined with pure miniver, sleeves of ermine or any material embroidered with precious stones; women may not wear ermine or weasel-fur, or jewels except those worn in their hair.

In 1463, a further Act introduced by Edward IV, placed further clothing restrictions, determined by social class. 

Knights below the rank of lord were prohibited from wearing any cloth of gold, anything wrought with gold or sable fur, and no velvet upon velvet. Their wives and children must follow these rules as well, any person in this category caught with prohibited items will forfeit 20 marks to the King for each and every offense.    

People with an income of less than 40s per annum were not permitted to wear any item prohibited in the higher classes or fustian, bustian, any scarlet cloth (purple or red), nor any fur except black or white lamb. A fine of 40s would be issued to any disobeying this. 

A slightly more amusing section of this one was the legislation against the wearing of long-toed shoes. They had become longer than the entire length of the foot! This just sounds like a trip hazard to me, but they you have it. Those less than a lord were restricted to a 2 inch pike on their shoes or boots.

In 1483, they took this even further still. All persons in England except for the royal family were forbidden to wear gold or purple silk. Persons below the level of duke were not permitted to wear cloth of gold or tissue, and no one below a lord could wear plain cloth of gold. 

Servants of husbandry/peasants were not allowed to wear any material which cost more than 2s for the broad yard.

Eurgh! 

These were all fairly hard to enforce. People will always wear what they want, punishment be damned.

Whilst I'm discussing shoes, these beauties are patten shoes - worn over the top of other shoes so as to better avoid the deep mud and err... excrement in the roads.

From bottom to top...headwear

 

The conical hennin (pictured) is perhaps the most commonly associated with the medieval period, thanks to movie princesses. However, they really only emerged from around 1430, according to some sources.

However, from around 1250-1500, the escoffion was en vogue. A thick, circular woollen/felt/silk band was rolled and worn in a horn shape. Gauze or silk could then be draped over. This is also of the hennin family of headwear. 

Beehive (shorter, squatter) and butterfly hennins (wider, split horns) also had their time.

I rather like the crespine; fine netting worn either side of the head attached to a circlet (like the bottom left of the above image).

Whatever style of headwear a woman chose, whether rich or poor, one should always cover their hair. This was a pious, religious stipulation. In fact, in 1162, prostitutes were forbidden from wearing a veil lest they should be mistaken for someone with virtue!

As the Middle Ages continued, the hairlines grew higher. Ladies were known to pluck their hairline and wear their hats further back. 

From the 13th to 15th centuries, women wore wimples (or gorgets). This should be worn over the chin. Unlike today's nuns who generally wear it under.

The coif was worn by men and women. A simple, linen bonnet/cap, usually tied under the chin. The rich tended to only wear these as nightcaps. The poor would keep it as daywear under other headwear.

Oddly, ladies' gowns/dresses didn't undergo much of a change. It was more their headwear. There was usually a kirtle worn over a chemise. An overgown was then worn over these.

Colours could hold significance though. I may have used this symbology in my book 😉

Blue - fidelity (& represents the Virgin Mary)

Green - love

Grey - sorrow

Red (crimson) - privilege/power/blood of Christ

Yellow - hostility (but also certain saints days)

Men's clothing saw more variations. From short to long houppelanades. And who can ever unsee those hose, boys? With shorter styles, no wonder the codpiece was worn, otherwise one's family jewels would be on display! 

Knickers! Historians are very excited - the above items have been found and dated to around the 15th century. 

And that seems like a delightful note to end this series of research posts on! 😊

I hope you've found all this info useful. 

It's at least a starting point to show what you may want to delve into.

In some ways, the Middle Ages were very different from our modern world. But surprisingly, in many ways, not that much has changed at the same time. I guess humans will always been humans. 

Always in love and light,

TL

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

My book, Love in the Roses is available for pre-order (click here).

To protect her family, she must marry the enemy!

The fictitious tale of a knight’s daughter, living life as it very well may have been in 1484.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------