#9 - Elizabeth I and Potatoes (1550 - 1600 ce)

William Harrison (b. 1534 - d. 1593) is a writer who was asked to write "Descriptions of Britan and England" for a work which was to be a "Universal Cosmography of the whole world, and therewith also certain particular histories of every known nation."  Obviously a project that huge never got finished, but the parts about England, Scotland, and Ireland did get done and are now known as the Holinshed's Chronicles.  (Raphel Holinshed was the dude in charge of writing about the history of England, Scotland, and Ireland so they're named after him.)    Our man Harrison, though, wrote about contemporary England and since he lived right in the middle of the time period we are discussing, let's listen to his opinion of the Apparrel and Attire of his time.

  "...no form of apparel liketh us longer than the first garment is in the wearing, if it continue so long, and be not laid aside to receive some other trinket newly devised by the fickle-headed tailors, who covet to have several tricks in cutting, thereby to draw fond customers to more expense of money. For my part, I can tell better how to inveigh against this enormity than describe any certainty of our attire; sith pearl, in their ears, whereby they imagine the workmanship of God not to be a little amended. But herein they rather disgrace than adorn their persons, as by their niceness in apparel, for which I say most nations do not unjustly deride us, as also for that we do seem to imitate all nations round about us, wherein we be like to the polypus or chameleon; and thereunto bestow most cost upon our arses, and much more than upon all the rest of our bodies, as women do likewise upon their heads and shoulders, In women also, it is most to be lamented, that they do now far exceed the lightness of our men (who nevertheless are transformed from the cap even to the very shoe), and such staring attire as in time past was supposed meet for none but light housewives only is now become a habit for chaste and sober matrons. What should I say of their doublets with pendant codpieces on the breast full of jags and cuts, and sleeves of sundry colours? Their galligascons to bear out their bums and make their attire to fit plum round (as they term it) about them. Their fardingals, and diversely coloured nether stocks of silk, jerdsey, and such like, whereby their bodies are rather deformed than commended? I have met with some of these trulls in London so disguised that it hath passed my skill to discern whether they were men or women.

Thus it is now come to pass, that women are become men, and men transformed into monsters; and those good gifts which Almighty God hath given unto us to relieve our necessities withal (as a nation turning altogether the grace of God into wantonness, for "Luxuriant animi rebus plerunque fecundis,"[copy the phrase "Luxuriant anime rebus plerumque fecundus" and paste it into Google Translate.]) not otherwise bestowed than in all excess, as if we wist not otherwise how to consume and waste them. I pray God that in this behalf our sin be not like unto that of Sodom and Gomorrah, whose errors were pride, excess of diet; and abuse of God's benefits abundantly bestowed upon them, beside want of charity towards the poor, and certain other points which the prophet shutteth up in silence. Certes the commonwealth cannot be said to flourish where these abuses reign, but is rather oppressed by unreasonable exactions made upon rich farmers, and of poor tenants, wherewith to maintain the same. Neither was it ever merrier with England than when an Englishman was known abroad by his own cloth, and contended himself at home with his fine carsey hosen, and a mean slop; his coat, gown, and cloak of brown, blue, or puke, with some pretty furniture of velvet or fur, and a doublet of sad tawny, or black velvet, or other comely silk, without such cuts and garish colours as are worn in these days, and never brought in but by the consent of the French, who think themselves the gayest men when they have most diversities of jags and change of colours about them. Certes of all estates our merchants do least alter their attire, and therefore are most to be commended; for albeit that which they wear be very fine and costly, yet in form and colour it representeth a great piece of the ancient gravity appertaining to citizens and burgesses, albeit the younger sort of their wives, both in attire and costly housekeeping, cannot tell when and how to make an end, as being women indeed in whom all kind of curiosity is to be found and seen, and in far greater measure than in women of higher calling. I might here name a sort of hues devised for the nonce, wherewith to please fantastical heads, as goose-turd green, peas-porridge tawny, popinjay blue, lusty gallant, the devil-in-the-head (I should say the hedge), and such like; but I pass them over, thinking it sufficient to have said thus much of apparel generally, when nothing can particularly be spoken of any constancy thereof.

This painting from 1595 is by Isaac Oliver and depicts virtuous folks on the left and licentious folks on the right

I really like good old William though mainly because he's snarky and has a way of describing color.   The color "puke" is especially interesting and according to this site: Color in Elizabethian Dress: puke is a dirty brown.  Which, if you think about it, makes sense.  Dirty brown certainly makes me want to puke.   Also, I just read an interesting article about color which yall might like.  Find it here:  

The Crayola Fiction of the World.


So that's utterly facinating, I think.  And, yes, you should read that because it WILL be on your test.   But, what else do we learn about our time period from William?  Well, I think that if you managed to read everything he said and can figure out the grammar, then you will notice that he said the way folks were dressing in excess meant they were immoral and ripe for destruction just like the folks in Sodom and Gommorah.

"Yup.  This outfit means England is totally about to be blown
up in an explosion of holy cleansing fire.  Also, I have a weasle on my arm."

Um, sure he also said that the taxes were terrible on the small businessman and there was a seeking of foreign and non-local resources for frivolous ornamentation.  But he is wonderfully demonstrating that fashion changes can be scary, and cultural shifts which can be seen all around in the way people dress themselves (because how you dress shows everyone how you think about yourself) can make an observer uncomfortable, judgemental, or critical if those social changes aren't shared by the observer.   For example, I was looking at the GQ Spring Style Guide and I realized that I find this style of seersucker suit terrifying.

"Don't let our misery fool you.  These suits are exactly what you neeeed...."

But, I am a product of the 90's, where the ideal was to be natural in shape, style and bearing.  Clothing which looks like it was made for your little brother or makes you look like a life-size replica of a 1960's Ken doll

"Hi Barbie!"

totally creeps me out because it's against my unconcious value system.  Bumping up against these new styles helps me see that A) society is changing and B) I need to start figuring out what these changes are.  Not because I necessarily need to change my value system but because it might be better if I stopped sounding like good ol' William Harrison and instead start trying to understand the people who want to wear stuff like this,

"Whaaa..?"

because I already understand people who wear stuff like this.

"Oh, hey! Nice belt!"

Right.  So there's that.   Now, let's start looking at the rapid changes in fashion which happened in the latter half of the 16th century.   To begin with, let's talk about potatoes.

Riveting, I know.

Potatoes aren't terribly glamorous, but their introduction to Europe allowed for an exciting fashion trend.   That's right, the ruff.

A ruff is that exciting bit of white nonsense which is tucked up under Elizabeth of Austria's chin there.   Starch is what makes stiff fabric like that possible, and potatoes are not just full of starch, but are packed with easily extractable starch.  In fact, it's so easy, all you need is a potato, a grater, some cheesecloth, and some water.  Tammy here explains how (in case you were wondering.)  The cool thing about starch is that it acts as a stain barrier.  Starch on fabric will absorb oils and sweat and so when you wash the item, the yucky stuff washes out with the starch and the fabric remains white.  

This is a pretty big deal because the good people of this century were really bath-averse.  The Black Plague convinced everyone that baths caused death so everyone took a bath about once or twice a year, and they usually kept their clothes on while bathing (because it was cold), so the stink/grime factor was off the charts.  Also, unless you were actually royal, you didn't have that many clothes.  Remember, each outfit you see in the paintings is hand made, one tiny stitch at a time, and all the fabric was hand woven as well.  So, one's "linnens", or the white chemise/shift/shirt you wore under your clothes, was the item which was changed daily, and your outerwear was washed MUCH less regularly and was worn a lot more often, if not daily.

Unless you were Queen.  And then folks just GAVE you clothes
on a daily basis.  She probably ate fried chicken in this pearl-encrusted
little number.

The shape of the ruff itself is derived from the chemise everyone wore.  The chemise was pretty full (or large) so it could stick out of slits in your gown and absorb lots of sweat.   You could wear the neck low like this

"Don't make me get out of this chair and smack you with my fur purse,
you know exactly where the gold embroidered edge of my chemise is."

or gathered by a string or band at the neck and wrists where it makes a little ruffle at the edge.

"Seriously, it's freaking COLD here!"

Someone decided that the little ruffle was cute and could be made much bigger and prettier with some handy potato starch.

Men, of course, wore them too.

"Hey"

Though some wore them better than others:

"Oh, helloo there!"

Other changes happened in fashion as well.  The ideal body shapes (two trianges for women, large box shape for men) moved into a leaner overall shape for everyone, with a pointy waistline in the front.  Men in particular wore a pointy waistline and actually padded the area above it to look like they had a belly.  This is called a peascod belly and it's kinda cute if a little silly.

If you will notice, this man is also wearing some exciting looking shorts.   These are called trunk hose, or round hose, and are padded and pretty short.  On top of these hose are strips of fabric called panes so these would be called paned trunk hose, or my favorite, pansied trunk hose.   This style of pant is also called pumpkin hose these days because of the obvious correlation but they wern't called that back in the day.  Probably because pumpkins were still really rare.

Also, during this time, beards became kind of a big deal.  All sorts of styles were named and developed, and experienced differing popularity.  I don't feel like explaining it all so if you care to know more click here to find out.

And I think that's more than enough.   Let's get to the test:

https://docs.google.com/forms/d/12xtalP-GfvzE-79Qi8yYlwguqRxnk3vYW9lb-WK2sVI/viewform