p-sumpt-laws-msg - 11/24/13
Period sumptuary laws.
NOTE: See also the files: fashion-msg, clothing-msg, trim-msg, jewelry-msg, gem-sources-msg, coronets-msg, wearg-p-fshns-msg, wearng-cornts-msg.
************************************************************************
NOTICE -
This file is a collection of various messages having a common theme that I have collected from my reading of the various computer networks. Some messages date back to 1989, some may be as recent as yesterday.
This file is part of a collection of files called Stefan's Florilegium. These files are available on the Internet at: http://www.florilegium.org
I have done a limited amount of editing. Messages having to do with separate topics were sometimes split into different files and sometimes extraneous information was removed. For instance, the message IDs were removed to save space and remove clutter.
The comments made in these messages are not necessarily my viewpoints. I make no claims as to the accuracy of the information given by the individual authors.
Please respect the time and efforts of those who have written these messages. The copyright status of these messages is unclear at this time. If information is published from these messages, please give credit to the originator(s).
Thank you,
Mark S. Harris AKA: THLord Stefan li Rous
Stefan at florilegium.org
************************************************************************
From: mittle at panix.com (Josh Mittleman)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: medieval sumptuary laws
Date: 27 Mar 1997 12:03:22 -0500
Organization: PANIX Public Access Internet and Unix, NYC
Cync329 at aol.com wrote:
> Greetings, My sixth grader is doing a paper on medieval clothing and is
> looking for clothing law, both sumptuary and any restricting certain
> colors or items to only a certain group or class. We are looking for
> historical law, not SCA rules.
The first fact is that in most times and most places, there were no such
laws. They certainly existed at some times an and places, but they were
more an aberration than the general rule. Where they did exist, they were
usually poorly enforced, and where they were enforced, enforced consisted
of levying fines rather than banning violations outright. In short, they
were more a form of luxury tax than a curb on behavior.
Arval
From: dickeney at access5.digex.net (Dick Eney)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: medieval sumptuary laws
Date: 27 Mar 1997 18:58:39 -0500
Organization: Express Access Online Communications, Greenbelt, MD USA
In article <859388327.13110 at dejanews.com>, <Cync329 at aol.com> wrote:
>Greetings, My sixth grader is doing a paper on medieval clothing and is
>looking for clothing law, both sumptuary and any restricting certain
>colors or items to only a certain group or class. We are looking for
>historical law, not SCA rules. Any quotes would be great. Bibliography
>would be good, too, but we might have trouble finding books since we're
>not near a major library. Many thanks to those who e-mail me at
>Cync329 at aol.com
_A History of Costume_ by Carl Kohler, 1928 (English translation
republished by Dover Books). page 289: "From the death of Henry IV (of
France) onward, the lavish use of expensive materials, ornaments, and
jewellery had again become so general that in 1633 a law passed in 1629
was renewed forbidding all except princes and nobles to wear clothing
decked with precious stones and gold embroidery, or caps, shirts, collars,
cuffs, and other linen embroidered wit gold, silver, cord, or lace, either
real or imitation. These edicts, however, were as ineffectual as all
other similar ones had been."
_The Mode in Costume_ by R. Turner Wilcox, 1942, 1948, 1958. Second
revised and expanded edition. Scribner's.
page 59: "The long-pointed masculine shoes, called in England "crackowes"
after the town of their origin, Cracow, Poland, lengthened to such a
degree that in 1463, an ordinance was passed permitting persons of rank to
have points but two inches beyond their toes."
Wilcox mentions that velvet was made in France in the 13th century.
_A History of Costume_ by Rachel H. Kemper, 1977, Newsweek Books. page 78
"Sumptuary laws, which regulated extravagance in dress on ostensibly moral
or religious grounds, had been around since at least Roman times, when the
Senate had vainly tried to curb the rage for silk. Adam Smith was later
to describe such laws as "the highest impertinence and presumption in
kings and ministers." Philip the Fair of France published in the
thirteenth century a series of edicts restricting furs and luxury fabrics
to the nobility, even going so far as to specify which qualities of cloth
could be worn by the different social classes. The Renaissance saw dozens
of these restrictive laws solemnly passed in every major European city.
Sometimes the laws were aimed at banning certain elements of fashion
altogether; low necklines, trains, and pointed shoes, for example, were
outlawed in Milan and Venice. In other areas the laws limited the number
of silk and velvet garments that could be owned at one time by a single
individual. Furs were portioned out according to rank: ermine for
royalty, humble squirrel or rabbit for the bourgeoisie. Of couse, the
real function of these laws was to confine extremes of fashion to the
nobility to preserve class distinctions."
It is said that the Irish in the Bronze Age and Iron Age indicated social
rank by the number of colors in a person's clothing, but details are very
sketchy. When the English made laws outlawing traditional Irish clothing,
they did so for two reasons: first, to try to destroy Irish culture, and
second, to make money by collecting fines from anyone wearing traditional
Irish clothing. Reports sent back to England about any meeting with an
Irish leader always detailed what the leader was wearing and how much it
was estimated to have cost; it was a way of gauging the financial
situation of the group, since the leader was always dressed as richly as
the group could afford, even when everyone else was in rags. (information
from McClintock, _Old Irish And Highland Dress_.)
I read somewhere that Queen Elizabeth once outlawed the wearing of
anything red by anyone not of royal blood, but you could pay a modest fine
and wear whatever it was for the day. It's pretty clear that that was a
fundraising method.
_Fabrics and Colors_ by Carol Mitch, 1978 (known as Kathryn Goodwin in the
SCA). self published.
"Silk was introduced to the west by Emperor Justinian in the 6th century
AD, cultivated at Palermo by King Roger in 1146 AD. Italy was at its peak
of silk manufacture from about 1330-1450, and in France, Italian weavers
wove beautiful silk around 1450 in Lyons, under the patronage of Louis XI.
By the 1460s, foreign silk workers were weaving in England, but England
was not able to approach the quantity or quality of French and Italian
silk until the 17th century." (pg. 10)
"Russet: a coarse cloth which was probably known to the Saxons but there
is no record of it in England until a statute of 1225, which regulates its
width. It was a homespun of low esteem, and much used by the religious
orders and the poorer classes.... The color of russet was usually gray.
Later it was dyed brown, and eventually became the name of a color,
red-brown. A statue of 1364 mentions russet and blanket as being the only
fabrics allowed farmers and the poor." (pg. 17)
"Camlet, chamblet: ... in the 15th century it was of silk....Silk
chamlet was a favorite of the English from 1423, and it was expensive. A
sumptuary law of 1532 limits it to the nobility." (pg. 24)
16th century England: "1552 law (due to false colors being passed off):
no cloth could be dyed any color but: scarlet, red, crimson, murrey,
violet, puke, brown-blue, black, yellow, green, blue, orange-tawny,
russet, marble, sad new color, azure, watchet, sheep's color, lion's
color, motley, or iron grey." .... "In 1577 there was a complaint about
(fantastical colors), especially: gooseturd green, pease-porridge, tawny,
popinjay blue, lusty gallant, and the devil in the head." ... "Colors
were seasonable, and it is dizzying to try to keep track of what was worn
when." (pg. 28)
Note that many costume books say that only peasants wore blue; since
nobles wore many different shades of blue, this statement must be
qualified. It was almost certainly a combination of style, cut, quality
of cloth, and a particular shade of blue that might have distinguished a
peasant.
As Arval said, for the most part, sumptuary laws as such were ignored more
than obeyed.
Tamar the Gypsy (mka Tamar Lindsay) (sharing account
dickeney at access.digex.net)
Date: Sun, 21 Sep 1997 21:19:19 -0400
From: James Pratt <cathal at mindspring.com>
To: sca-arts at raven.cc.ukans.edu
Subject: Re: Pearls (was Re: Arts and Sciences Awards)
Actually there were a few instances in which the sumptuary laws served
a beneficial purpose. For example, many of the sumptuary laws in England required the use of wool in the place of more expensive fabrics. This expanded the domestic market base for the principal export of the country. Likewise Florence's laws were almost invariably aimed at making the purchase and possession of commodities which were not in some way beneficial to the government difficult if not illegal.
Salve,
Cathal Mac Edan na faeled
Barony of the South Downs, Meridies
(btw-the Kingdom with the largest number of
Sumptuary Laws in the Known World. . .)
Subject: ANST - Purple, Black, & History
Date: Fri, 27 Feb 98 14:02:21 MST
From: "Mike C. Baker" <kihe at rocketmail.com>
To: ansteorra at Ansteorra.ORG
---j'lynn yeates <jyeates at bga.com> wrote:
> On 25 Feb 98 at 13:45, ldaude at ns.vvm.com wrote:
> > Purple is wonderful. Purple is great! Think purple!
> > Remember purple is the highest frequency of visible light for us
> > poor humans. As SCA'ers we always strive for the highest level in
> > anything we do; sooooo dear mouse brother strive for the purple!
> purple is the color of talking, immature t-rex's ...
>
> BLACK!
> ...one of the most difficult colors to dye properly and a color
> reserved for Irish royalty (per the Brehon Law code)
> 'wolf
... wherein I believe the extended form also preserves one of the
earliest documentable sumptuary *systems* (as opposed to scattered,
specific strictures). Made it easier to determine a persons status
upon first seeing them, certainly (from oft-faulty wetware memory:
seven or more colors in simultaneously worn in attire = highest
royalty or ollamh/ollave, six for lesser kings, five for clan
chiefs, etc., down to maximum of two for the absolute scum
prisoner-slaves...)
"Imperial purple" is, of course, also extremely limited, due to
scarcity, difficulty, and decree. Just a different cultural
epoch-area (very few keltoi left in Byzantium by then, and not of
the branch that kept the Brehon Law as I understand things...)
===
Adios -- Amra / Pax ... Kihe / TTFN -- Mike
(al-Sayyid) Amr ibn Majid al-Bakri al-Amra /
From: paximus at aol.com (PAXIMUS)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: sumptuary laws in Venice
Date: 27 Mar 1998 23:01:09 GMT
Cindy wrote:
>I recently read a romance novel set in 16th C Venice. It mentioned in passing
that Venetian sumptuary laws forbade noblewomen to wear more than one color
(excepting silver and gold).<<
Not wholly unusual, the Venetians were extremly covetous of their women,
especially their noblewomen.
Diane Owen Hughes in her book "Sumptuary Laws" states that "Prostitutes, were
allowed rich dress as a means of "shaming the virtous into simplicity," and
Noblewomen's dress was periodically restricted as a way of signaling the kind
of "virtous" practices that the courtesans and prostitute should uphold and
emulate.
The majority (it seems) of the sumptuary laws aimed at upperclass women were
"in part because of a prevalent concern with the enormous expense of sumptous
clothing, which was seen to be wasteful, and in part because such dress
challenged male authority." The author Stanley Chojnacki "Patrician women in
Early Renaissance Venice" says, "heavy spending on lavish dress could be viewed
as doubly assertive, calling visual attention to individual identity and
demonstrating the autonomous possession of wealth".
In general the (Noble) women of the 16th century did not wear a lot of color
combinations, (like parti-colors) the bodices matched and coordinated with the
dress colors. Very excellant examples of Venetian Noblewomens dress can be seen
in the movie" Dangerous Beauty", ignore the clothes worn by the Courtesans and
look in the back ground for the noblewomen.
And another one would be Zefferili's "Otello" this film is exquisite in its
clothing for the noblewomen and it also shows the range of clothes worn by the
people of the Venetian Republic (especially the party scenes) both of these
films were costumed by the same company from Rome. In fact if you watch Otello
first you will see a great deal of the clothes in Dangerous Beauty!
By the by I happen to love period romance novels what was the name of this one
and where is it available???
Buona Fortuna!
Don Giulio d'Medici
The Italians RPFS
http://members.aol.com/paximus/LaCompagnia.html
From: mikea at mikea.ath.cx (Mike Andrews)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Chimneys/guarderobe
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 21:05:19 +0000 (UTC)
georg <thegeorg at stny.rr.com> wrote:
> I do remember Sir John Harrington going on about how sumptuary laws need
> to be observed for one's close-stool, as that is a very dramatic
> statement of your opinion of your betters when your seat at that moment
> is clothed in velvet and you aren't permitted to wear any.
That's _lovely_!
--
Mike Andrews / Michael Fenwick Barony of Namron, Ansteorra
mikea at mikea.ath.cx
Tired old music Laurel
From: mikea at mikea.ath.cx (Mike Andrews)
Newsgroups: rec.org.sca
Subject: Re: Chimneys/guarderobe
Date: Fri, 7 May 2004 21:05:19 +0000 (UTC)
georg <thegeorg at stny.rr.com> wrote:
> I do remember Sir John Harrington going on about how sumptuary laws need
> to be observed for one's close-stool, as that is a very dramatic
> statement of your opinion of your betters when your seat at that moment
> is clothed in velvet and you aren't permitted to wear any.
That's _lovely_!
--
Mike Andrews / Michael Fenwick Barony of Namron, Ansteorra
mikea at mikea.ath.cx
Tired old music Laurel
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 08:21:15 +1000
From: Ian Whitchurch <ian.whitchurch at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] History of Circlets
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
<lochac at lochac.sca.org>
Hmm, this is a dangerous document, that must at all costs be kept away from
the vain and luxury loving wastrels of St Florians and elsewhere
http://wesscholar.wesleyan.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1333&;context=etd_hon_theses
Down to the Last Stitch: Sumptuary Law and Conspicuous Consumption in
Renaissance Italy by Amanda E. Facelle (2009, Honours thesis for Wesleyan.
The old man would have approved)
Mmmm useful quote from 1542 Venice
In Venice two bocche (or mouths) were constructed in 1562 outside the office
of the Magistrato alle pompe in the ducal palace. The first contained the
inscription,
"Denontie secrete in material d?ogni sorte di pompe contro cadauna persona
con benefici de ducati 42 per cento giusto alle leggi"
?Secret denunciations concerning every sort of luxury against any person
whatsoever with rewards of 42 ducats per 100 according to the laws.?
Killerby, Sumptuary Law, 149, cited on p20 of Facelle 2009
As an aside ... interesting. Beatrice d'Este wore *brown* to her mother's
funeral. Well, as the quattracentro fashionista who brought The Black Dress
to Italy, I guess that makes sense.
Anton
Date: Thu, 3 Jun 2010 12:29:27 +1000
From: Ian Whitchurch <ian.whitchurch at gmail.com>
Subject: Re: [Lochac] History of Circlets
To: "The Shambles: the SCA Lochac mailing list"
<lochac at lochac.sca.org>
Worked my way through the equivalent thesis for sumptuary laws in England
(warning, badly machine scanned document).
http://www.archive.org/stream/sumptuarylegisla00bald/sumptuarylegisla00bald_djvu.txt
As far as period sumptuary laws in England and Italy go, Coronets seem to be
just jewelry. Nothing more, nothing less.
My gut is telling me that ducal, viscounty etc etc coronets are a Victorian
innovation, but I cant back that up.
Anton
<the end>