Medieval Fashion Sources: A Note
|
|
Many of the primary sources that we have are disengaged from each other. In other words, we have a multitude of written sources. Some commenting directly on the clothing and dress of a period and some merely obliquely referencing it. At the same time, we have many separate illuminations that depicts dress of the same period. These sources are disengaged in the sense that one is not trying to supplement or inform the other. This can be a benefit because if we see continuity between sources, especially different types of sources, we can be confident that we are receiving accurate and reliable information. However, this also presents a difficulty for the scholar. The disengaged sources are not interested in answering all of our modern questions. Nor are they interested in answering the questions of parallel sources. Thus, we tend to see that inventories and wills catalog dress with little comment on the nature of dress, contemporaries write without describing the specifics of a garment in detail with the assumption that the reader is generally aware of the subject matter, and finally, illuminations depict dress in a way that may be aspirational, idealized, or reductionist.
Because the sources are not trying to address the weak points in other external and disengaged sources, there are some questions that are hard or impossible to definitively answer. However, acknowledging these gaps, biases, and shortcomings will be helpful in overcoming them and working through them. For example, few written sources address the cut or style of a garment. They will merely name it and describe its rich colors or embroidery. The authors are less interested in a taxonomic description of the clothing than they are in telling the reader what the clothing represents and what, in turn, we are to think of the wearer.
Some written sources are more mundane. Many are dedicated to cataloging articles of clothing or wills bequeathing a mantle or a belt. These sources are helpful to understand what people owned and what garments were important enough to them to pass on. Reading many wills helps us to know what sort of garments were common and the other items bequeathed in a will or external information about the deceased help us to know the owner’s status. Unfortunately, these descriptions do not typically describe the garments in detail. Instead, they focus on the garment’s mere existence and to its transfer, tracking, or keeping.
One written source that we do not possess are written accounts from tailors or interested writers seeking to pass on the tailors’ knowledge. This is unfortunate, because it precludes the technical and detailed reconstruction of garments short of analyzing extant garments. However, even the lack of a source can sometimes render telling clues. We do have sources from various cities and guilds talking about tailors, their guilds, their craft, and their organization. While not focused on process, they do offer insight into the trade itself, such as how different types of shops produced different garments and that there was a market for used or remade clothing.
Extant garments are, of course, another source. There are precious few remaining garments and what we can learn from them is immense. We can observe the cuts, fabric quality, stitching, and tailoring first hand and learn a great deal through specific surviving pieces. But even these extant garments cannot teach us everything nor can they be said to hold universal authority over all medieval fashion. The issue of survivorship bias also factors into the difficulty with this source. Many surviving garments from the period are extremely ornate and were produced for kings and nobles. The fact that they survive is mostly due to their high value and their artistic value. The other type of surviving garments are typically bog finds. While there have been a fair number of such finds, most notably the Bocksten man, the same general problem arises of assessing an entire society from finds associated with specific regions or individuals who would end up in bogs. It is therefore hard to assess all of medieval tailoring from extant garments.
Perhaps most obviously, we have illuminations in manuscripts which depict clothing through art. Also related to illuminations are wall paintings and church triptychs or diptychs which are less numerous and are also limited by the same constraints of the medium. By studying the illuminations, we can observe changes over time. We also observe similarities in fashion between different artists, different regions, and different countries. The skill to see how trends change and develop over time and to understand cut, styles, tailoring is a subtle skill and limitations to the medium will always create friction between reality and art. However, the sheer volume of illuminations in the period and the variety of artists, sources, and contexts is immeasurably beneficial to a study of medieval fashion.
Of course, the phrase "art imitates life" should give pause in reviewing illuminated manuscripts. Art does indeed imitate life, but it does not always render it accurately. It is not uncommon to see shorthand techniques that represent reality but do not accurately portray reality. For example, the techniques used to depict fur in artwork are stylized in most manuscripts in the medieval period. Another limitation is the subject of the illumination. The main subject will typically be a noble patron or a subject matter of interest to a patron. When medieval art depicts ordinary people, it often minimizes them. Many illuminations feature servants who are literally drawn smaller or in less detail than the main subjects as a means to save time and materials. This minimization speaks to the glaring status differences in the medieval period. Further, an artist is able to place a patron aspirationally. They may paint their clothes to be fancier, richer, and fuller than reality and we would not know this.
Another important source are sculptures and effigies. This is a very good source for high status clothing because the sculpture must account for three dimensions and do so in a way that portrays the drape and cut of clothing. The level of detail is often much higher than in illuminations as well. Still, this source is not perfect and will not answer every question. This is particularly the case with lower rungs of society. Stained glass and tapestry work are also helpful sources. Like manuscript illuminations, they have certain drawbacks and limitations to the medium which may make it difficult to interpret finer details about medieval fashion. Still, their contribution serves to flesh out our knowledge and information and every resource helps to build a larger and fuller understanding.
Finally, while not a “source” in the true sense, we have reenactment and living history which informs us of the practicalities of fashion and dress. In a work directed toward reenactment, ironically, this may be an overlooked point but not a forgotten one. Medieval Costume and Dress by Dorothy Hartley written in 1931 was an early work in understanding medieval fashion with an eye to recreating it. The purpose was to more fully understand how people made and wore the dress of the day and to try to understand how to create the things that we see in illuminations and read about in other sources. Since that time, living history efforts have come a long way and have answered some of the questions raised in Hartley’s earlier work. Still, Hartley does essentially capture and explain how to recreate medieval dress. While we have made progress in the details and advanced in specificity, the overall picture presented by Hartley is accurate, helpful, and still applicable today. For example, Hartley’s discussions of how to make hose is particularly insightful. [1]
The reason that doing, rather than merely observing, is so important in this field is that the act of making and experiencing something first hand will be helpful to understand the obscure illuminations that just do not seem to work in the real world. It may shed light on gaps in other sources or may reveal “shorthand” ways of illustrating or describing fashion. It may cause new questions to be asked and shatter unknown and unrevealed assumptions or biases. It may and it will do all of these things.
If we merely read, observe, and theorize on medieval fashion, we will have stopped far short of truly grasping this important subject. Indeed, to study culinary arts, one does not merely study recipes on a page. We cook, we taste, and we experience. To study music we similarly listen, practice, and play. Thus, to study medieval fashion we must also be willing to make, wear, and live in medieval dress to better understand the essential components.
Indeed, fashion is one of the elements of life that touched every single person who lived through the fourteenth century. History altering events abound in the fourteenth century. The 100 Years’ war began, the plague ravaged the world, the papacy was factionalized amid schism, the Lollard movement lit the fuse for future church reformation, and much more. Through all of this, some people were directly impacted and involved, some merely heard about these events, and some lived daily lives untouched by these seismic events. Yet, though all of these changes, the fashion changed and impacted the lives of people wearing and interacting with others. We all wear something for comfort, for protection, for show, and to accommodate the demands of our society.
[1]Dorothy Hartley, Medieval Costume and Dress, New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, 1931, 36-43.
Because the sources are not trying to address the weak points in other external and disengaged sources, there are some questions that are hard or impossible to definitively answer. However, acknowledging these gaps, biases, and shortcomings will be helpful in overcoming them and working through them. For example, few written sources address the cut or style of a garment. They will merely name it and describe its rich colors or embroidery. The authors are less interested in a taxonomic description of the clothing than they are in telling the reader what the clothing represents and what, in turn, we are to think of the wearer.
Some written sources are more mundane. Many are dedicated to cataloging articles of clothing or wills bequeathing a mantle or a belt. These sources are helpful to understand what people owned and what garments were important enough to them to pass on. Reading many wills helps us to know what sort of garments were common and the other items bequeathed in a will or external information about the deceased help us to know the owner’s status. Unfortunately, these descriptions do not typically describe the garments in detail. Instead, they focus on the garment’s mere existence and to its transfer, tracking, or keeping.
One written source that we do not possess are written accounts from tailors or interested writers seeking to pass on the tailors’ knowledge. This is unfortunate, because it precludes the technical and detailed reconstruction of garments short of analyzing extant garments. However, even the lack of a source can sometimes render telling clues. We do have sources from various cities and guilds talking about tailors, their guilds, their craft, and their organization. While not focused on process, they do offer insight into the trade itself, such as how different types of shops produced different garments and that there was a market for used or remade clothing.
Extant garments are, of course, another source. There are precious few remaining garments and what we can learn from them is immense. We can observe the cuts, fabric quality, stitching, and tailoring first hand and learn a great deal through specific surviving pieces. But even these extant garments cannot teach us everything nor can they be said to hold universal authority over all medieval fashion. The issue of survivorship bias also factors into the difficulty with this source. Many surviving garments from the period are extremely ornate and were produced for kings and nobles. The fact that they survive is mostly due to their high value and their artistic value. The other type of surviving garments are typically bog finds. While there have been a fair number of such finds, most notably the Bocksten man, the same general problem arises of assessing an entire society from finds associated with specific regions or individuals who would end up in bogs. It is therefore hard to assess all of medieval tailoring from extant garments.
Perhaps most obviously, we have illuminations in manuscripts which depict clothing through art. Also related to illuminations are wall paintings and church triptychs or diptychs which are less numerous and are also limited by the same constraints of the medium. By studying the illuminations, we can observe changes over time. We also observe similarities in fashion between different artists, different regions, and different countries. The skill to see how trends change and develop over time and to understand cut, styles, tailoring is a subtle skill and limitations to the medium will always create friction between reality and art. However, the sheer volume of illuminations in the period and the variety of artists, sources, and contexts is immeasurably beneficial to a study of medieval fashion.
Of course, the phrase "art imitates life" should give pause in reviewing illuminated manuscripts. Art does indeed imitate life, but it does not always render it accurately. It is not uncommon to see shorthand techniques that represent reality but do not accurately portray reality. For example, the techniques used to depict fur in artwork are stylized in most manuscripts in the medieval period. Another limitation is the subject of the illumination. The main subject will typically be a noble patron or a subject matter of interest to a patron. When medieval art depicts ordinary people, it often minimizes them. Many illuminations feature servants who are literally drawn smaller or in less detail than the main subjects as a means to save time and materials. This minimization speaks to the glaring status differences in the medieval period. Further, an artist is able to place a patron aspirationally. They may paint their clothes to be fancier, richer, and fuller than reality and we would not know this.
Another important source are sculptures and effigies. This is a very good source for high status clothing because the sculpture must account for three dimensions and do so in a way that portrays the drape and cut of clothing. The level of detail is often much higher than in illuminations as well. Still, this source is not perfect and will not answer every question. This is particularly the case with lower rungs of society. Stained glass and tapestry work are also helpful sources. Like manuscript illuminations, they have certain drawbacks and limitations to the medium which may make it difficult to interpret finer details about medieval fashion. Still, their contribution serves to flesh out our knowledge and information and every resource helps to build a larger and fuller understanding.
Finally, while not a “source” in the true sense, we have reenactment and living history which informs us of the practicalities of fashion and dress. In a work directed toward reenactment, ironically, this may be an overlooked point but not a forgotten one. Medieval Costume and Dress by Dorothy Hartley written in 1931 was an early work in understanding medieval fashion with an eye to recreating it. The purpose was to more fully understand how people made and wore the dress of the day and to try to understand how to create the things that we see in illuminations and read about in other sources. Since that time, living history efforts have come a long way and have answered some of the questions raised in Hartley’s earlier work. Still, Hartley does essentially capture and explain how to recreate medieval dress. While we have made progress in the details and advanced in specificity, the overall picture presented by Hartley is accurate, helpful, and still applicable today. For example, Hartley’s discussions of how to make hose is particularly insightful. [1]
The reason that doing, rather than merely observing, is so important in this field is that the act of making and experiencing something first hand will be helpful to understand the obscure illuminations that just do not seem to work in the real world. It may shed light on gaps in other sources or may reveal “shorthand” ways of illustrating or describing fashion. It may cause new questions to be asked and shatter unknown and unrevealed assumptions or biases. It may and it will do all of these things.
If we merely read, observe, and theorize on medieval fashion, we will have stopped far short of truly grasping this important subject. Indeed, to study culinary arts, one does not merely study recipes on a page. We cook, we taste, and we experience. To study music we similarly listen, practice, and play. Thus, to study medieval fashion we must also be willing to make, wear, and live in medieval dress to better understand the essential components.
Indeed, fashion is one of the elements of life that touched every single person who lived through the fourteenth century. History altering events abound in the fourteenth century. The 100 Years’ war began, the plague ravaged the world, the papacy was factionalized amid schism, the Lollard movement lit the fuse for future church reformation, and much more. Through all of this, some people were directly impacted and involved, some merely heard about these events, and some lived daily lives untouched by these seismic events. Yet, though all of these changes, the fashion changed and impacted the lives of people wearing and interacting with others. We all wear something for comfort, for protection, for show, and to accommodate the demands of our society.
[1]Dorothy Hartley, Medieval Costume and Dress, New York: Charles Scribner and Sons, 1931, 36-43.
|
|