6 ms·

The Fashion Police in 16th-century Italy (2014)

116 points by ohjeez 3y ago

ChrisArchitect 3y ago
(2014) Syndicated from https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/fancy-pants-skirmishes-with-the-fashion-police-in-16th-century-italy https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/fancy-pants-skirmish...
- perihelions 3y ago
  They're not the same link—the articles' text are the same, but they come with different sets of images. The cam.ac.uk seems to be the "correct" version, since it contains the drawing described in the corresponding text as: "...such as the lady in a litter seen in this image taken from a travelogue (owned by Strahov Monastery) of...". The medievalists.net version erroneously omits this drawing. The medievalists.net version is... whatever the digital equivalent of a "misprint" is.
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
neilv 3y ago
[flagged]
deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
sorokod 3y ago
I thought that it was well understood that the purpose of sumptuary laws was to prop up social hierarchies. With this in mind the "startling discovery" is not startling at all.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
perihelions 3y ago
- "“It’s interesting that the majority of the offences relate to an outfit of black silk – taffeta, satin or velvet – ornamented with some sort of precious metal stitching or with lace. Just such an outfit appears in a portrait of an anonymous Genoese nobleman by the artist van Dyck which, to modern eyes, looks relatively sober. But black was a clear status symbol in Renaissance culture. Black dye was one of the most difficult to fix effectively, so we should be careful how we interpret these apparently ‘plain’ portraits,” said Galastro." Here's a related explanation from /r/AskHistorians, - "Black fabric was indeed more costly in the Middle Ages than many other colors, but it's not a straightforward question of dye expense. In terms of dyestuff, cost depended on two things: source of pigment and duration of dyeing process. The most popular option for dying fabric black in the Middle Ages was not, of course, "black pigment." It was to use woad, the bog-common blue pigment, to dye fabric to the darkest possible midnight tint. Then a second dye, typically a red (madder) or yellow (weld), would be added over the top to eliminate the blue tinge." - "Woad, weld, and madder were standard dyes, not prohbitively expensive for a decently-endowed monastic order. Benedictine monks could adhere to their Rule not to spend too much money on individual habits..." https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4b7lke/black_dye_and_the_hospitaller_knights_medieval_era/ https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4b7lke/black...
- Simon_ORourke 3y ago
  That's going to annoy any old school Goths out there!
  - bigiain 3y ago
    I shall write a stern LiveJournal post about this!
- xarope 3y ago
  If I recall, a good black suit color is actually midnight blue, since a plain black color actually looks green in light
  - ubutler 3y ago
senorrib 3y ago
I hate it when someone takes scientific research and willingly distort its meaning for whatever reason. The job of these magistrates were not to police “fashion”, or what people wore, but to police ostentation — two very different things. To reduce this to fashion significantly changes the interpretation of social rules of the period.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- pvg 3y ago
  This is a bit like complaining the people who fit the modern meaning of "Fashion Police" are not, in fact, officers of the law.
  - senorrib 3y ago
    Not really. Fashion is just means to an end in the actual case, but if you actually read the article instead of just the comment section you’ll see why I complained about them using this term.
    - SilasX 3y ago
      As opposed to today, when fashion is always solely an end in itself? It’s still a distinction without a difference.
  - AlbertCory 3y ago
    No, it's just complaining about the title being a harmless pun on the term "Fashion Police." Some people hate humor and ambiguity. Sumptuary laws were a tool of the upper classes to preserve their distinction from the lower classes.
    - ggm 3y ago
      Is there no basis for arguing that it also had economic benefits? Cloth until mechanisation was a hugely expensive business, in man/woman power, time. Basically, Sumptuary laws may well have done what you say, but I bet that isn't all they did. "The staple" was a highly regulated business for export of raw wool and cloth from England to the continent. Dying, weaving is at the foundation of much of the medieval trade networks. Sumpturary laws would go directly to the economics of fabric as well as the social structural policing. Paying sumptuary fines probably also played here, because coin was scarce oftentimes, and taxation complex. By all means wear the forbidden colours, for a small fee.
fsckboy 3y ago
It's a quibble maybe, but seems to me the term "fashion" police refers to attempts to uphold fashion, rather than requiring humbleness, etc. Fashion is frothy, it's not basic. Clothing police, ok, antifa(shion) police, ok.
bigbacaloa 3y ago
[dead]
fauria 3y ago
That wasn't Italy, was the Republic of Genoa. Trying to frame historical states into modern territories (today's Italy began to unify almost 300 years later, in the mid XIX century) makes no sense, and doesn't help understanding the historical context. For those interested, this is what that area looked like in 1559: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/It%C3%A0lia_-_Fin_dei_Gu%C3%A8rras_d%27It%C3%A0lia_%281559%29.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/It%C3%A0... (the article is about the green part). Update: typo
- teloli 3y ago
  The idea of Italy as a very specific place is much older than Italy as an independent, unified nation state though. A famous example from Dante’s Inferno: «Sì com’a Pola presso del Carnaro, ch’Italia chiude e i suoi termini bagna» (Inferno, Canto IX, 113-114).
- kjs3 3y ago
  The trope that some modern nation or culture 'invented' or 'created' something centuries or millennia before the modern incarnation existed is a tried and true page from the nationalist handbook[1]. It's unfortunate that it's so common and readily accepted. The real history of these kinds of finds is usually so much more interesting. [1] Not that I think the article or it's authors have a nationalist agenda.

116 points by ohjeez 3y ago

(2014) Syndicated from https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/fancy-pants-skirmishes-with-the-fashion-police-in-16th-century-italy https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/features/fancy-pants-skirmish...

perihelions 3y ago
They're not the same link—the articles' text are the same, but they come with different sets of images. The cam.ac.uk seems to be the "correct" version, since it contains the drawing described in the corresponding text as: "...such as the lady in a litter seen in this image taken from a travelogue (owned by Strahov Monastery) of...". The medievalists.net version erroneously omits this drawing. The medievalists.net version is... whatever the digital equivalent of a "misprint" is.

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

neilv 3y ago

[flagged]

deleted 3y ago

[deleted]

sorokod 3y ago

I thought that it was well understood that the purpose of sumptuary laws was to prop up social hierarchies. With this in mind the "startling discovery" is not startling at all.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]

perihelions 3y ago

- "“It’s interesting that the majority of the offences relate to an outfit of black silk – taffeta, satin or velvet – ornamented with some sort of precious metal stitching or with lace. Just such an outfit appears in a portrait of an anonymous Genoese nobleman by the artist van Dyck which, to modern eyes, looks relatively sober. But black was a clear status symbol in Renaissance culture. Black dye was one of the most difficult to fix effectively, so we should be careful how we interpret these apparently ‘plain’ portraits,” said Galastro." Here's a related explanation from /r/AskHistorians, - "Black fabric was indeed more costly in the Middle Ages than many other colors, but it's not a straightforward question of dye expense. In terms of dyestuff, cost depended on two things: source of pigment and duration of dyeing process. The most popular option for dying fabric black in the Middle Ages was not, of course, "black pigment." It was to use woad, the bog-common blue pigment, to dye fabric to the darkest possible midnight tint. Then a second dye, typically a red (madder) or yellow (weld), would be added over the top to eliminate the blue tinge." - "Woad, weld, and madder were standard dyes, not prohbitively expensive for a decently-endowed monastic order. Benedictine monks could adhere to their Rule not to spend too much money on individual habits..." https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4b7lke/black_dye_and_the_hospitaller_knights_medieval_era/ https://old.reddit.com/r/AskHistorians/comments/4b7lke/black...

Simon_ORourke 3y ago
That's going to annoy any old school Goths out there!
- bigiain 3y ago
  I shall write a stern LiveJournal post about this!
xarope 3y ago
If I recall, a good black suit color is actually midnight blue, since a plain black color actually looks green in light
- ubutler 3y ago

senorrib 3y ago

I hate it when someone takes scientific research and willingly distort its meaning for whatever reason. The job of these magistrates were not to police “fashion”, or what people wore, but to police ostentation — two very different things. To reduce this to fashion significantly changes the interpretation of social rules of the period.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
pvg 3y ago
This is a bit like complaining the people who fit the modern meaning of "Fashion Police" are not, in fact, officers of the law.
- senorrib 3y ago
  Not really. Fashion is just means to an end in the actual case, but if you actually read the article instead of just the comment section you’ll see why I complained about them using this term.
  - SilasX 3y ago
    As opposed to today, when fashion is always solely an end in itself? It’s still a distinction without a difference.
- AlbertCory 3y ago
  No, it's just complaining about the title being a harmless pun on the term "Fashion Police." Some people hate humor and ambiguity. Sumptuary laws were a tool of the upper classes to preserve their distinction from the lower classes.
  - ggm 3y ago
    Is there no basis for arguing that it also had economic benefits? Cloth until mechanisation was a hugely expensive business, in man/woman power, time. Basically, Sumptuary laws may well have done what you say, but I bet that isn't all they did. "The staple" was a highly regulated business for export of raw wool and cloth from England to the continent. Dying, weaving is at the foundation of much of the medieval trade networks. Sumpturary laws would go directly to the economics of fabric as well as the social structural policing. Paying sumptuary fines probably also played here, because coin was scarce oftentimes, and taxation complex. By all means wear the forbidden colours, for a small fee.

fsckboy 3y ago

It's a quibble maybe, but seems to me the term "fashion" police refers to attempts to uphold fashion, rather than requiring humbleness, etc. Fashion is frothy, it's not basic. Clothing police, ok, antifa(shion) police, ok.

bigbacaloa 3y ago

[dead]

fauria 3y ago

That wasn't Italy, was the Republic of Genoa. Trying to frame historical states into modern territories (today's Italy began to unify almost 300 years later, in the mid XIX century) makes no sense, and doesn't help understanding the historical context. For those interested, this is what that area looked like in 1559: https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/It%C3%A0lia_-_Fin_dei_Gu%C3%A8rras_d%27It%C3%A0lia_%281559%29.png https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/91/It%C3%A0... (the article is about the green part). Update: typo

teloli 3y ago
The idea of Italy as a very specific place is much older than Italy as an independent, unified nation state though. A famous example from Dante’s Inferno: «Sì com’a Pola presso del Carnaro, ch’Italia chiude e i suoi termini bagna» (Inferno, Canto IX, 113-114).
kjs3 3y ago
The trope that some modern nation or culture 'invented' or 'created' something centuries or millennia before the modern incarnation existed is a tried and true page from the nationalist handbook[1]. It's unfortunate that it's so common and readily accepted. The real history of these kinds of finds is usually so much more interesting. [1] Not that I think the article or it's authors have a nationalist agenda.