Blog 11: Dress in the Renaissance

During the Renaissance, fashion changed over the years just as it does today. Like the distinct difference we see in clothes today versus the previous centuries, clothes between the 14^th to the 17^th century in England changed many, many times. Clothes were used as a way of expressing many things. They showed wealth, personality, personal/familial history, and status. If one looks at portraits from all those years ago, it is simple enough to pick out symbols that may have exemplified any of the aforementioned ideas. For example, monarchs and their children would dress well to show that they are royalty. When looking at Princess Elizabeth’s (the future Queen Elizabeth I), one sees her wearing a red dress with a square collar cut and beautiful pearls that dive into the neckline. Her cone skirts front even has a beautiful gold detail. Sure, the beauty and sophistication of the portrait may make one think it is obvious that she is a monarch. Yet there are different reasons why it would be obvious if someone from that century looked at the portrait. The color of the red itself was incredibly expensive, there for only someone of high rank and birth would be able to wear a dress of that color. As the daughter of Henry VIII, Elizabeth could have a dress in red. The embroidered gold part of the skirt also shows her status as a royal, because it cost a good amount to have gold detailing as well. On a different note from status, there was an interesting comment in the audio guide about how the pearls diving into the neckline of the thirteen year old princess were slightly provocative but also created a sense of power in her that would be very evident when she took the throne.

There were also many people who would dress outside their station, something that initiated the Sumptuary laws. Not that they were strictly adhered to, but the laws were to prevent everyone from dressing exactly the same as those of high birth and nobility had a right to be differentiated from milkmaids and prostitutes. For example, the color purple was only for the royalty and their families to wear. Anyone beneath that station should not wear purple or else risk being fined if tattled on. In the portrait of William Parr, which is really a sketch as colors are not in it much, was apparently wearing purple for the drawing. He should not have been as he was not actually of the royal bloodline. Yet, as he had royal standing in Henry VIII’s court as Henry’s wife’s brother, it was allowed.

Most people did not listen to these laws or the religious “laws” against cross-dressing. Cross-dressing was something the religious leaders were strongly against. First of all, women dressing as men were dressing of a higher status than they even had. Men who dressed like women were just making a mockery of themselves by being too feminine. Therefore, it was not to be done. And yet it was done anyway. For one, men dresses as women on stage frequently as female roles were typically played by males. There were clergy firmly against it, as Cressy mentions, but they were not about they were not about to put a woman on the stage now were they? The punishments for being caught were not all that severe either in most cases. Usually, a fine of some sort. And since people did not regulate other genders wearing clothes or people wearing clothes outside their status, things went on without much problems despite how disturbing some people found it. It is similar to today in a way. Even if it disturbs someone, they typically do not say anything unless it is to an official, and most people don’t take it that far.