Footnotes are designated with boldface numbers in parentheses. Click
on the number to take you to the footnote. Click on the first word
of the note to take you back to its place in the text.
This review of literature is a part of ongoing presentation of my
thesis project on 15th and early 16th century men’s headdress.
The previous article on 15th century visual evidence as sources of
costume information (in the Archive)
was also derived that study.
Due to the scarcity of extant garments and to the limited nature of
other types of primary sources for the study of medieval and early Renaissance
clothing, the secondary literature pertaining to fifteenth century clothing
is meager. Most of the literature is descriptive of a few chosen examples
and little or no attempt is made to examine the overall patterns of change
of styles over time or to examine the social or culture implications
of the clothing. This review will first examine some of the literature
on late medieval and early Renaissance clothing found in general surveys
of western clothing that cover all time periods to the twentieth century,
followed by the literature devoted specifically to medieval and early
Renaissance clothing, and, finally, as the origin of this review was
a study on fifteenth-century headdress, literature concentrating on headdress.
The secondary sources were reviewed for their intended audience, use
of primary and secondary sources, method of study and information about
fifteenth and early sixteenth century clothing, especially headdress.
This review is not entirely complete; there are some sources of information
in other languages than English and some commonly-available sources that
are not, or are no longer, considered reliable sources.
Back to top
Surveys of Western Clothing From
Ancient Times to the Twentieth Century
Some of the most commonly available overall surveys of western clothing
are Blanche Payne’s History of Costume, Milia
Davenport’s The Book of Costume, James
Laver’s Costume & Fashion, and Francois Boucher’s 20,000
Years of Fashion. (2) Since
these books are intended for a popular audience, the information found
in them is very brief and over-generalized, and tends to be based on
the subjective, impressionistic study of a few visual sources. These
surveys are also accounts of what was new or unusual, or of what belonged
to the social elites. Little or no attention is paid to the typical,
to the lower classes, or to places that lagged behind in the adoption
of the latest styles.
Of these four, James Laver’s Costume & Fashion has
the briefest and most over-simplified description of medieval and early
Renaissance clothing. The number or nature of the sources in his exposition
are not stated nor is the method of study, but the method seems to be
an subjective evaluation of art work. His bibliography is a mix of scholarly
works with outdated and often unreliable works. The most useful parts
of the book are the clearly-reproduced illustrations. Only one page of
the text is devoted to men’s headdress of the fifteenth century
and is primarily descriptive of one type of headdress.
Somewhat stronger is Francois Boucher’s 20,000 Years of Fashion which
uses the development of French upper-class civilian clothing as the basis
for comparison for the development of clothing in Europe. His primary
sources include extant garments when they are available and visual art
works which are studied qualitatively. The secondary sources are noted
English and French costume historians mostly from the early 20th century.
He does not specifically mention verbal sources, but does quote from
contemporary chronicles and literature in the text. Boucher acknowledges
societal influences upon clothing such as economics, religion, politics,
status delineation, and personal expression, but does not demonstrate
the role these factors play in the changes in fashion. The material on
fifteenth-century men’s headdress is brief and simplistic.
Both Davenport and Payne have produced more detailed texts. Milia Davenport’s The
Book of Costume was written
as much for theatrical designers as for a general audience interested
in costume. Her primary sources include extant garments, extant textiles,
art works, contemporary literature, contemporary sermons and commentary,
sumptuary laws, correspondence, and printed inventories of notable
persons (primarily royalty). Her main secondary sources include Jacob
Burckhardt, Max von Boehn, numerous art historians, but generally disdains
costume historians. Davenport states that the ideal book on costume
would “...provide so many pictures (all documents, arranged chronologically,
and in color) that the story would tell itself without words.”(3) However,
pictures alone cannot tell the whole story and some interpretation
is necessary for a modern viewer to understand the times that produced
the picture. She has tried to produce such a book of mostly primary
source pictures, albeit in black and white and poorly reproduced, with
supplemental descriptions to provide color, sometimes, literally. As
such, the book is comprehensive and shows many visual sources of clothing
from several regions and all social classes. However, the supplemental
commentary on the reproductions focus on the unusual and the different
rather than what may be typical, and on the clothing of the social
elites. Little attempt is made to integrate all the visual information
given into coherent patterns, or to make comparisons between regions
or times. Her commentaries include unsubstantiated “conventional
wisdom” about garments and their use or meanings and her assumption
seems to be that there is a linear progression of fashion.
Headdress is often shown in the sources but not much discussed in the
commentaries unless it is showy or otherwise unique. Social or cultural
uses of headdress is not discussed.
There are now two editions of Blanche Payne’s History of Costume.The
first was published in 1965 and the second in 1992 with two co-authors,
Geitel Winakor and Jane Farrell-Beck. Since the first edition was often
used in undergraduate courses on the history of costume and is still
found in many public libraries, I will discuss it first, then discuss
the much-improved second edition. The 1965 edition is a history of western
clothing from about 3000 BCE to 1900 CE devoted to the clothing of the
upper and upper-middle classes, and appears to be an impressionistic
analysis of a few art works depicting notable persons. Her primary sources
included extant garments, and garment and textile fragments, when they
exist, and art works, but she does not seem to use verbal documentary
sources. Her main secondary sources include Max von Boehn, Herbert Norris,
Kelly and Schwabe, Milia Davenport, and C. Willett and Phillis Cunnington.
Many of the illustrations used are redrawings from original sources rather
than reproductions of the originals.
Back to top
For headdress, and for clothing in general, Payne concentrates on the
new and unusual, ignoring common-place items. The basic assumption seems
to be that there is a linear evolution of fashion, rather than there
being a number of different trends from different regions and/or social
classes that are adopted differentially by the fashionable. Payne also
makes broad generalizations about fashion from a few selected sources
that depict the powerful, the social elites, and the rich. The working
classes are dismissed in three paragraphs and only agricultural workers
are discussed.
She does acknowledge regional differences, and gives a summary of the
main trends for each of the regions studied (Italy, Burgundy/Flanders,
France, Germany, and England), but fails to compare and contrast each
of the regional trends. Rather, Payne studies the “fashion” trends
of each region by applying the standard of French fashion to each of
them. She also states that Italy was the fashion leader due to the imagination
and sumptuousness shown in its clothing, but does not demonstrate that
Italian clothing has any influence on the clothing of other regions. (4)
Headdress is only mentioned in passing and only if it is unusual or
bizarre. No attempt is made to examine wearing patterns of headdress
for various social classes or demographic groups, and no systematic attempt
is made to examine regional similarities or differences.
The second edition (1992) of History of Costume pays
greater attention to current research and discusses the problems of sources
and methods regarding the time period discussed here. It is greatly preferable
to the first edition, but still is overly concerned with the exceptional
rather than the typical. For example, the open-fronted hood is a rather
prevalent form of 15th century Northern European women’s headdress,
but receives no mention in that section of the book, while the elaborate
horned headdresses, worn by a small minority of the population, were
described in detail. As with the previous edition, the method of study
for the sections on the Middle Ages and Renaissance tended towards the
impressionistic rather than the systematic, and the secondary sources
are limited, many coming from general histories of a period rather than
from detailed studies of clothing from the periods studied.
Penelope Byrde’s The Male Image: Men’s Fashion in Britain
1300-1970 is a both a survey
of English upper-class men’s clothing and an interpretation of
the development of men’s examined in the light of the ideals
of masculine image, aesthetic ideals, and delineation of social status. (5) The
structure of the book includes a chapter on the influences on men’s
clothing, a chapter on showing a pictorial survey of English men’s
clothing, and chapters on individual clothing items. The chapter devoted
to headdress gives a more detailed narrative about the development
of headdress and is more sensitive to variations in type and structure
than the text describing headdress in the other general surveys reviewed
here.
Byrde examines visual works of art, contemporary literature, diaries,
letter and memoirs, and extant garments. In addition to these primary
sources, for fifteenth-century clothing, Byrde relies heavily on secondary
sources by Elizabeth Birbari, C. Willet and Phillis Cunnington, and J.
R. Planche. The text is extensively annotated and the notes provides
excellent sources, but the bibliography is better suited to a non-specialist
audience.
Byrde attempts to examine the changes in men’s clothing in the
context of gender roles: how men perceived themselves and how they structured
their images to accord with these perceptions. Also she looks at how
and what clothing can communicate within a society and how men’s
dress have developed and changed to adapt to communicate new messages
about social status, moral values, and contemporary aesthetics. She does
sometimes broadly attributes concepts about male and female roles predominant
in one time period to all time periods in her range. While nineteenth-century
concepts of male and female roles may satisfactorily explain the differences
in the character and pace of change of men’s and women’s
clothing in the nineteenth century, they do not adequately explain the
similarities in men’s and women’s clothing prior to the eighteenth
century.
Back to top
Surveys of Medieval/Renaissance
Clothing
Literature concentrating on the dress of the Middle Ages, such as Medieval
Costume in England and France, by
Mary Houston; Dress in Medieval France, by
Joan Evans; The Handbook of English Mediaeval Costume, by
C. Willett Cunnington and Phillis Cunnington; or The Visual History
of Costume: The Fourteenth & Fifteenth Centuries by
Margaret Scott are also intended for a popular audience and have many
of the same problems as the previous sources. (6) These
surveys are also accounts of what was new or unusual, or of what belonged
to the social elites with little or no attention paid to the typical,
or to classes or countries that were outside of the main trends of
fashionable change. They do, however, often supplement their analyses
with contemporary literature and such historical records as household
accounts and customs records, and have more detailed descriptions of
clothing.
Medieval Costume in England and France, by
Mary G. Houston surveys fashionable change in the clothing of the social
elites of thirteenth-, fourteenth-, and fifteenth-century England and
France. She uses manuscript illumination, tomb effigies, paintings, stained
glasses, and extant church vestments as primary sources, but she relies
heavily on nineteenth-century secondary sources. Unlike the other authors,
she does cover the development of ecclesiastical vestments for these
three centuries, the sight of which would have been most frequent in
medieval society, and of professional and academic dress. For the most
part, her information is composed of descriptions of the garments worn
in a few visual sources without placing them into an aesthetic, cultural
or social context. The 350 illustrations consist of line redrawings of
original images.
Joan Evans, in Dress in Medieval France, also
mainly describes some of the garments seen in visual sources, but she
also includes commentary in contemporary chronicles and literature. Her
scope of study is French and Burgundian clothing from 1060 to 1515 CE
of the upper and occasionally, upper-middle classes. Evans’s source
materials for fifteenth century clothing include extant garments and
garment and textile fragments, when they exist, but she does not describe
them accurately. (7) Her other primary
sources are art works, contemporary prose and poetry, and correspondences
and inventories of notable persons. The main secondary sources include
Viollet-le-Duc, Quicherat, Demay, and Harmand; the works of which were
published more than twenty years prior to the printing of her book. Evans
also makes extensive use of 19th-century transcriptions of medieval texts
and documents rather than using the original sources themselves. She
includes a section of black and white reproductions of the visual sources
to illustrate the text, but uses renderings of Viollet-le-Duc’s
redrawings within the text. Overall, Dress in Medieval France has
much fragmented description with little interpretation and synthesis
of general trends.
Much better with delineating general trends, at least with regards to
change over time, is The Handbook of English Mediaeval Costume, by
C. Willett Cunnington and Phillis Cunnington. As the title suggests,
the scope of the book is English clothing of the upper and middle classes
from 800 to 1500 CE. The intention was to create a general reference
of the main features of English medieval clothing for an interested general
audience and for theatrical designers. Their study uses some manuscript
illuminations, memorial effigies, and contemporary literature. Secondary
sources include noted nineteenth- and early twentieth-century clothing
historians and art historians. The subject matter is primarily descriptive
and social and cultural contexts are kept to a minimum. Contemporary
literature is used to illustrate a particular garment rather than to
analyze that garment. The material is arranged first chronologically,
then by sex of the wearers, and for each sex, by type of garment. Each
type is then described chronologically to give a sense of an evolution
of style. The verbal descriptions are supplemented by line redrawings
of original images, but the originals sources are cited. Often, features
from one period are related to features from the previous period and
to features from the next. As an overview of the main features of dress,
it is well-organized and lucidly written, but it is not detailed enough
for use in interpretive analyses.
The Visual History of Costume: The Fourteenth & Fifteenth
Centuries by
Margaret Scott is also a general pictorial survey of upper class English,
Burgundian, Flemish, French, and some German clothing from 1300–1500
CE. Unlike the previous surveys, this survey is rooted in a strong, scholarly
evaluation of manuscript illumination, paintings, funerary sculpture,
royal wardrobe accounts, sumptuary legislation, household accounts, contemporary
chronicles, wills and inventories, and contemporary literature. Each
type of information is considered in terms of the other types to see
if each supports or contradicts each other. Her secondary sources include
scholarly works of later-twentieth-century historians, clothing historians
and art historians. The introduction to the book frankly describes the
types of primary sources available for research into the clothing of
the late Middle Ages and their limitations, her methods for using these
sources, and a brief overview of the general trends of fashionable change
while acknowledging, but not describing in detail, national and cultural
complexities. The rest of the book is comprised of 150 reproductions
of visual sources, arranged in chronological order, each with a description
of the treatment of the head, body, and accessories worn by the persons
portrayed. Some of these descriptions discuss briefly the aesthetic,
cultural, or social contexts of the item described. The bibliography
provides a solid staring point for more detailed study of the subject.
Back to top
Accounts of Fifteenth- and Early
Sixteenth-Century Clothing
Most of the previous literature was published before 1970. More recent
writers, while still using a subjective method of analysis, have brought
more discipline to the study of fifteenth century clothing. The last
two decades saw the publication of several books concentrating on the
clothing of the fifteenth or fifteenth and early sixteenth century. These
include Dress in Italian Painting 1460–1500, by
Elizabeth Birbari; Renaissance Dress in Italy, 1400–1500, by
Jacqueline Herald; Late Gothic Europe: 1400–1500, by
Margaret Scott; and Hispanic Costume: 1480–1530, by
Ruth M. Anderson. Most of these are more complete than the previous surveys,
using a variety of documentary sources to interpret clothing in a social
setting. A better attempt to examine clothing of the lower classes and
men’s clothing is made, but these sources still concentrate on
the clothing of the fashionable elites and of women. Scott, Herald, and
Anderson attempt to firmly place their narrative of the changes in dress
into a social and cultural context, while Birbari concentrates on what
can be perceived in painting alone, almost divorced from a social context. (8)
Dress in Italian Painting 1460–1500, by
Elizabeth Birbari is a primer on how to look at the portrayal of dress
in works of art and how to interpret its construction and components,
provided one looks with an open mind and without unsupported assumptions
about the nature of the art. Unfortunately, Birbari makes the assumption
about Italian art that the portrayal of every object, especially clothing,
was a literally true and faithful recording of that object to the most
minute detail. (9) Art
historical scholarship does not support that assumption. This assumption
creates
conclusions about the types of garments worn in daily life and how it
was constructed that are highly questionable. Birbari does not recognize
the role that fantasy, idealization, and symbolism often play in the
portrayal of human figures in art, and consequently garments that were
most likely to be theatrical adaptations of clothing, she takes as clothing
worn in daily life.
Although the title implies that all of Italian dress is discussed, the
one-hundred paintings Birbari analyzes comes mostly from Northern Italy
as most of the innovative artists whose works she uses were employed
in these areas. She then uses these paintings as guides to the construction
of various items of Italian men’s and women’s clothing. For
some of the illustrated garments, she shows photographs of reconstructions
based on her analysis of the paintings. Other than women’s veils,
headdress is not analyzed.
Most of Birbari’s secondary sources are the works of art historians
of Italian painting writing in the 1930s and 1940s, more
than thirty years before this book was written. Comparison of Italian
painting with Northern European painting may have contributed to a revision
of her assumption of the absolute veracity of Italian painting, as may
have knowledge of clothing and textile production, the general social
structure, and the concepts of Renaissance thought.
In contrast to the narrow focus on painting as the only source material
of Dress in Italian Painting 1460–1500 is
Jacqueline Herald’s Renaissance Dress in Italy, 1400–1500. (10) This
is a much broader interpretative and descriptive study using a wide variety
of primary sources to analyze and place Italian clothing into a social
context. Like Birbari, the sources Herald uses come primarily from the
northern half of Italy since this area was the leader in the development
of Renaissance thought and aesthetics.
Primary source materials include works of art, fabric fragments, inventories,
wills, household accounts, personal correspondence, and literature, all
carefully considered together to give a comprehensive picture of the
use of clothing in the life of upper-class Italians. Although the surviving
evidence is strongly biased to representation of the upper classes, Herald
does moderately discuss the role of clothing in the lives of the middle
and lower classes based on the evidence she has found.
The main portion of the book intersperses chronologically arranged chapters
descriptive of the types of garments worn and their physical characteristics
placed into cultural contexts such as concepts of beauty, the spread
of Renaissance aesthetics and the decline of the Gothic, or the use of
dress as a method of communicating status, taste, or moral values, with
chapters detailing textiles and textile production used for clothing,
jewelry and accessories and heraldry.
Margaret Scott has also written a more detailed history of fifteenth
century upper-class French, Burgundian, and Flemish clothing and contains
some descriptions of English and German clothing as well. The focus of Late
Gothic Europe: 1400–1500 is the
interpretation of clothing in aesthetic and cultural contexts. Much of
the structure of the book and the sources and method of study mirrors
Jacqueline Herald. Scott evaluates manuscript illumination, paintings,
funerary sculpture, royal wardrobe accounts, sumptuary legislation, household
accounts, contemporary chronicles, wills and inventories, and contemporary
literature synthesizing the historical evidence into a coherent narrative.
Her secondary sources include scholarly works of later-twentieth-century
historians, clothing historians and art historians.
Scott’s chronological account of the changes in fashionable dress
is preceded by chapters describing the political historical setting and
how it affected the visual arts and the aesthetic concepts held by Northern
European artists of the fifteenth century. The clothing described in
the chronological chapters are placed in the context of changes in aesthetics
and the decline of medieval thought.
Another well-organized and scholarly survey has been written by Ruth
M. Anderson. Hispanic Costume: 1480–1530 concentrates
on a region and time period not often examined: Spain and Portugal of
the late fifteenth and early sixteenth centuries. The book is divided
into two sections, one for men’s clothing and one for women’s
clothing, which are further subdivided into types of clothing items and
of personal adornment starting with the head (hair and headdress) proceeding
systematically to the toes (shoes and other foot coverings) and also
including outer garments and accessories.
Anderson’s primary sources include art works, correspondences
and inventories of notable persons (primarily royalty and nobility),
contemporary chronicles, sumptuary laws, guild and town regulations for
producers of clothing, and some contemporary literature. There are numerous
illustrations for each type of garment or accessory discussed. Her main
secondary sources include the works of Carmen Bernis Madrazo, C. Willett
and Phillis Cunnington, Maurice Leloir, James Laver, Rosita Levi Pisetsky
and numerous scholars of Spanish history.
This is a systematic qualitative analysis of many art works and verbal
sources primarily concerning notable persons. Anderson analyzes clothing
items in the contexts of their makers and their wearers and integrates
this information into a comprehensive interpretation of clothing worn
on the Iberian peninsula in the late fifteenth and early sixteenth century.
She examines the clothing items in terms of their construction and their
material components, who would have worn them and for what occasions,
and their cultural and social meanings.
Anderson does not make the assumption that clothing developed along
a single line of evolution, but rather acknowledges that different elements
of clothing had their own independent evolutions and so she examined
each element in isolation. The illustrations for each type show only
the headdress or the doublet or the sleeves, and one does not always
get a sense of an integrated outfit or a sense of what often goes with
what. Another of the few weaknesses of this book is that the degree to
which changes in one element may effect changes in another element is
inadequately explored. The separation of men’s from women’s
clothing, in a book that stresses social context, also made it difficult
to see the interrelationships between men’s and women’s clothing.
Otherwise, this is a brief and readable, yet scholarly and well-documented
source for information about clothing for this period and place.
Headdress is discussed in its own section with ample illustrations of
each type of headdress discussed. Anderson also briefly examines the
uses of headdress in courtesy rituals, the qualifications for master’s
status in hat- and cap-makers guilds, as well as a discussion of various
headdress types, their changes, and their appearances in inventories
and literature.
The following two articles describe social aspects of fifteenth-century
clothing or of the way clothing is portrayed in art. They both discuss
two facets of the topic, how clothing is used to mark one’s social
status and the importance of firmly delineated status to a culture which
stressed adherence to the proper place and duties of each estate. Laura
Rinaldi Dufresne examines the contrasts among the depiction of a popular
author, Christine of Pisa, in fifteenth-century manuscript illumination,
her actual social status, and her advice and commentary on dress and
status in the article, “A Woman of Excellent Character: A Case
Study of Dress, Reputation, and the Changing Costume of Christine de
Pizan in the Fifteenth Century.”(11) Dufresne
compares Christine of Pisa’s textual admonishments to dress for
one’s status with Christine’s depiction in five French and
Flemish manuscript copies of her works. Christine of Pisa, court author
and scribe, had advised women to always dress appropriately for their
social statuses, and while she was alive to control her portrayal in
manuscripts, only approved of her image shown dressed in clothing appropriate
to her status. Her works were immensely popular in the fifteenth, and
after her death in 1430, she was increasing portrayed in clothing appropriate
to a social status far above her own in keeping with her reputation.
John Scattergood analyzes the phrasing of English sumptuary legislation
and compares it to such literary sources as poetry, song lyrics, sermons,
chronicles, and correspondence to seek underlying attitudes and beliefs
towards innovation and luxury in clothing in “Fashion and Morality
in the Late Middle Ages.”(12) He
concludes that the overriding concerns spurring the creation of sumptuary
laws and contemporary commentary on dress were the fear that those adopting
new “skimpy” fashions were indulging in the mortal sin of
pride and those adopting costly fashions and materials beyond their means
were blurring class distinctions and violating the concept of a rigid
social hierarchy.
Back to top
Accounts of Fifteenth- and Early
Sixteenth-Century Headdress
Literature specifically about fifteenth century headdress is, of course,
more scarce than literature about clothing in general. Four articles
were found that discussed fifteenth-century headdress or have fifteenth-century
headdress within its purview. Three of the articles are descriptive,
sometimes baldly so; the latter examines the role of headdress in concepts
of gender and religious priesthood. (13) Cheunsoon
Song and Lucy Roy Sibley’s article, “The Vertical Headdress
of Fifteenth Century Northern Europe,” discusses the evolution
and construction of fifteenth-century Northern European women’s
headdress of the upper and upper-middle classes. Her primary sources
include art work by different artists of the same period. Her main secondary
sources include Margaret Scott, Francois Boucher, Millia Davenport, Blanche
Payne and Herbert Norris. Margaret Scott is cited in 31 of 55 footnotes
and they seem quite dependent on her work. Song and Sibley examined art
works and developed a classification of women’s headdress by perceived
method of construction, using the depicted shape, and types of elements
used.
The article primarily describes their six categories of women’s
headdress, suggests how they could have been constructed, and shows examples
of each type. It would have been beneficial if some of their proposed
constructions could have been tested by trying to recreate them to see
if they would really work. Song and Sibley also make some suggestions
as to how social class may be depicted through the use of different types
of headdress for each class, through the use of larger headdresses for
higher classes, or the amount of decoration.
Finally they suggest an evolution of this type of headdress based on
a small sample. From the article, it appears that the evolution is based
on the dating of about 12 sources; more sources should be examined before
drawing a conclusion about the evolution of a headdress type.
These two articles from Textile History are
merely descriptions of the physical characteristics of extant men’s
hats. Karen Finch’s “A Medieval Hat Rediscovered,” comprises
a description of a late fourteenth- or early fifteenth-century hat containing
the dimensions, construction details, and materials of the hat. Photographs
of the hat from various angles and of details of construction are included.
S. M. Levey briefly describes a early sixteenth-century knitted hat in
her article, “Illustrations of the History of Knitting Selected
from the Collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum.” This briefly
gives the physical characteristics of the hat and discusses such knitted
hats in context of royal legislation and of other verbal documentation.
A photograph of the hat is included.
“Gender, Headwear and Power in Judiac and Christian Traditions,” by
Beverly Chico is an examination of the meanings of covering one’s
head in the Judaic and Christian religions. Chico contrasts the different
functions of head coverings for men and women within these traditions
using extant ritual headdress, photographs, scripture, religious commentaries,
histories of Judaic religious garments and Christian ecclesiastical garments,
and literature on the role of women in the Judaic and Christian faiths.
Chico identifies the headdress worn by both Jewish and Christian male
religious leaders as symbols of power and of men’s relationship
to God; and women’s traditional headdress, such as veils, as symbols
of submission and modesty and of women’s relationships to God through
their relationships with men.
This was intended to help the reader understand some of the strengths
and weaknesses of current secondary literature pertaining to fifteenth-century
clothing, and to give a guide to sources a reader may not easily find
in a public library. Many of these books can be obtained at a public
library through Interlibrary Loan. Occasionally copies of periodical
articles also can be acquired by Interlibrary Loan for the cost of copying;
check with the reference librarian for this possibility.
Back to top
End Notes
- This review of literature was excerpted
from Susan Downs Reed, “From Chaperones to Chaplets: Aspects
of Men’s Headdress 1400–1519,” (M.S. thesis, University
of Maryland, 1992), 15–34, and was revised with new information
in 1997. Ms. Reed’s thesis advisor was Dr. Jo. B. Paoletti.
- Blanche Payne, History of Costume:
From the Ancient Egyptians to the Twentieth Century (New
York: Harper & Row, Publishers, 1965) and Blanche Payne, Geitel
Sinakor, and Jane Farrell-Beck, History of Costume: From the
Ancient Egyptians to the Twentieth Century. 2d
ed. (New York: HarperCollins Publishers, Inc., 1992); Milia Davenport, The
Book of Costume (New York: Crown Publishers, 1948) ;
James Laver, Costume and Fashion: A Concise History (New
York: Thames and Hudson, Inc., 1985); and Francois Boucher, 20,000
Years of Fashion (New York:
Harry N. Abrams, Inc., n.d.). Payne’s History of Costume has
been completely revised with two co-authors.
- Davenport, ix.
- Payne, 1st ed., 200.
- Penelope Byrde, The Male Image:
Men’s Fashion in Britain 1300–1970 (London:
B. T. Batsford Ltd, 1979).
- Mary G. Houston, Medieval Costume
in England and France: The 13th, 14th and 15th Centuries (London:
Adam & Charles Black, 1939); Joan Evans, Dress in Medieval
France (Oxford, UK: Clarendon
Press, 1952); C. Willett Cunnington and Phillis Cunnington, Handbook
of English Mediaeval Costume (Boston:
Plays, Inc. 1969); and Margaret Scott, A Visual History of Costume:
The Fourteenth & Fifteenth Centuries (London:
B. T. Batsford Ltd, 1986).
- Evans, 30 and 48. On these two pages,
she shows drawings of the cutting diagrams of two pourpoints. One of
the drawings on page 30 is captioned as the pourpoint belonging to
Charles of Blois. The cut of the pourpoint attributed as belonging
to Charles of Blois, has been documented in many others sources and
its cutting diagram is generally depicted as the one she shows on page
48. One might think that this is merely a typographical error except
that she discusses them in the accompanying text as they are captioned
and drawn.
- Elizabeth Birbari, Dress in Italian
Painting 1460–1500 (London:
John Murray LTD, 1975); Jacqueline Herald, Renaissance Dress
in Italy 1400–1500, History
of Dress Series (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press, Inc.,
1981); Margaret Scott, Late Gothic Europe, 1400–1500, The
History of Dress Series (Atlantic Highlands, NJ: Humanities Press,
Inc., 1980); and Ruth M. Anderson, Hispanic Costume: 1480–1530 (New
York: Hispanic Society of America, 1979).
- Birbari, 1–3.
- It is interesting to note that Byrde,
Birbari, and Herald all received their academic training in the history
of dress at the Courtauld Institute, University of London with Birbari
preceding Herald and Byrde by about five years.
- Laura Rinaldi Dufresne, “A Woman
of Excellent Character: A Case Study of Dress, Reputation and the Changing
Costume of Christine de Pizan in the Fifteenth Century,” Dress 16:2
(1990), 105–117.
- John Scattergood, “Fashion and
Morality in the Late Middle Ages,” in England in the Fifteenth
Century: Proceedings of the 1986 Harlaxton Symposium, ed.
Daniel Williams, (Woodbridge, Suffolk, UK: The Boydell Press, 1987)
255–272.
- Cheunsoon Song and Lucy Roy Sibley, “The
Vertical Headdress of Fifteenth Century Northern Europe,” Dress 16:1
(1990), pp. 5–15; Karen Finch,“A Medieval Hat Rediscovered,” Textile
History 14 (Spring 1983), pp.
67–70; S. M. Levey, “Illustrations of the History of Knitting
Selected from the Collection of the Victoria and Albert Museum.” Textile
History 1:2 (1968–1970),
pp. 183–205; and Beverly Chico, “Gender, Headwear and Power
in Judiac and Christian Traditions.” Dress 16:2
(1990), pp. 127–140.
Back to top
|
|
