I just watched the classic movie “THE ADVENTURES OF ROBIN HOOD” starring Errol Flynn…this was an early movie shot in technicolor. Of course, the costumes werelavish-but did peoplein medieval times REALLY have such colorful clothing? I know that colorful dyes were very expensive (and prized)in ancient times…the so-called “Tyrian Purple” of the Roamns was worth its weight in gold. Also, I have seen some natural died wool, using such colorings as moss, heather, walnut hulls, etc.the colorsobtained are quite muted. I know that modern dyes date from the 1850’s (with the discovery of anailine dyes by german chemists).
So, did the medieval people strut around in all those bright colors? Or isthis a modern thing?
I don’t really have an answer, but I’ve always wondered this too. I know that people didn’t bathe that often during that time period; it doesn’t seem logical that they would wash their clothes more often than they washed themselves, so the clothes would surely accumulate a fair amount of dirt and stains. Additionally, the probably primitive scrubbing involved in cleaning would take away some of the not-so-permanent dye.
Robin Hood’s famous Lincoln green outfit was dyed using blue woad and the yellow dyer’s rocket plant (weld).
I haven’t seen the film, so don’t know if the colours were accurate, but lots of colours were available in olde times:
http://www.egenterprises.net/asphodel/articles/Winterfyllith.html
Hmm. I suppose this author might be aware that Robin Hood and the Merry Men are fictional, and really means that the medieval dyers of Lincoln made green cloth this way. He/she/it might know that Robin Hood stories from the 1500s describe the Merry Men as dressed in Lincoln green, but the poets who wrote these things may or may not have known a damn thing about dyeing.
Anybody got a parade you need rained on? Call me!
The propensity for Middle Ages people to be dirty and stinky has been somewhat overstated. After all, these weren’t animals, they were people as smart as you or I. Humans like being clean. Bear in mind that people in that day thought diseases could be spread by bad odors, so they would have taken steps to avoid smelling like crap.
The modern propensity for avoiding colorful clothing is something of a new thing; people in Robin Hood’s day would have worn clothing as colorful and decorative as their station in life would allow. Flowers would have been a common addition.
Which people? Specifically where? Specifically when? In Italy, public baths were scandalously popular during the 14th century…
I assume that most literature and drama dealing with that period deals with the nobility who might have had relatively colorful clothing.
A story about the peasants would have been, Day one: Rise at dawn, work all day, go to bed at night. Day two: Repeat day one.
Look at the work schedule of the Amish, and that might give one a good idea of how much time peasants had for their own pleasure. Not a lot, but still some.
You’re right. I forgot day 7: Church.
I am not an expert, but there were sumptuary laws that forbade commoners from wearing certain types of clothing. For example, stripes were prohibited. (Maybe someone more knowledgeable can confirm this and supply links.) So I don’t know specifically about the Robin Hood movie, but there were things that common people were prohibited from wearing.
r_k, I have edited your post to remove most of the quoted material. The rest can be read at the link you provide. I’m not sure if that site is copyrighted, but I will assume it probably is, even if there is no copyright notice. Generally quoting more than a couple of paragraphs is too much.
bibliophage
moderator GQ
Here’s Some colorful dresses.
I can only speak of the Irish, they preferred saffron (when they could get it ) for their body linen. Dyed wools were popular as well as lots and lots of trim in the brightest colours they could get.
Here’s some more color.
This might be a slight hijack. Desculpame, but…
What kinds of dye fixatives were used in the day? I know that Alum is one type of dye fixer, but what else?
Vinegar is a mordant (dye fixer) for most natural fibers. Folk in the Days Of Yore also used tin and alum solutions.
You could get fairly bright colors back then, but you generally couldn’t get a full rainbow of colors. (Witness the rarity of purple, already mentioned.) You probably also couldn’t get today’s super-saturated hues. Good rich reds, rusts, yellows, and earth tones generally were quite possible, even for poor people. For example, the madder plant gives a whole range of reds, pinks, and oranges, depending on the mordant and the fiber. Consult a book on vegetable dyes–you’ll be surprised.
Richer people could get a really vivid red with cochineal, ground-up insects from the Canaries. After the Crusades, they also had (limited) access to indigo via the spice trade. Woad, another blue dye, was native to Europe, but tended to make a pale, not-too-colorfast dye. Indigo really took off in the Renaissance, with the opening of new trade routes to indigo-producing countries (the Far East and the New World).
If I may digress: paints were much easier to get than dyes; all you need is a pigment and a binder (egg whites, by serendipity or divine providence, make a great binder). Medieval people loved color–it’s thought that Back In The Day cathedrals were vividly, maybe even garishly, painted. You can get a great rich blue with ground-up lapis lazuli; that’s what they used on illuminated manuscripts.
(There’s a book called On Divers Arts that explains medieval paint-making techniques; it makes a fascinating read.)
I forgot to address the sumptuary laws. (These were laws restricting the kind of clothing you could wear based on your social position. For example, you couldn’t wear ermine fur unless you were, say, at least an earl.) Yes, color was one of the “controlled” aspects, especially if you were going around in more purple than Barney the Dinosaur, but my impression is that they were focused more on things like jewelry and furs and whatnot.
In any case, sumptuary laws were in reaction to the growing wealth of the middle class–the “threat” was the growing number of people who could actually afford clothing that was “above their station”. People throughout the Middle Ages (indeed, throughout history) tried to dress like people higher up on the social ladder [1], but only nobles could really afford to dress like nobles. Sumptuary laws came about when this was no longer true. Significant middle class population and wealth is associated with the late Middle Ages.
By the way, I’m no expert (just a history buff), so take everything above with a grain of salt.
[1] A clear case of “gilt by association”. Thank you, I’ll be here all week.
In the reality, these laws ended up amounting more to a revenue source than a prohibition. One could pay a “fine” and then violate the law.
Would the “liberation” from the sumptuary laws mentioned above have anything to do with the popular portrayal of the garish dress of pirates?