Originally published
in Fashioning
the Body: An Intimate History of the Silhouette, edited by Denis Bruna.
Published for Bard Graduate Center: Decorative Arts, Design History, Material
Culture, New York. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2015. 39–45.
One often imagines that only women’s
bodies, the upper body in particular, used to be constrained by clothing. Seen
simply in contrast to those of women, men’s bodies would appear to have escaped
all sorts of restrictions. While the one was fettered, however, the other was
hardly any freer.
Illuminated manuscripts, frescoes,
panel paintings, and sculptures created during the second half of the
fourteenth century show a variety of scenes from everyday life, each one more precise
than the last, offering us a better understanding of medieval dress and its
evolution.
One type of garment worn by knights
and men-at-arms is emblematic of men’s fashion at the time of Charles V: the
pourpoint, or doublet. The word
comes from the Old French pour-poindre, a garment meant to be stitched.
In fact, this garment, which covered the torso to just below the waist, was
made out of several layers of cloth, between which padding made out of cotton
or silk cocoon scraps was added and held in place by means of stitching. The
doublet is a lined or “double” garment, as it was made of several layers of
fabric and padding, giving us the origin of the English word “doublet,” still
used to designate both medieval and modern garments.
Between 1360 and 1380, illuminated
manuscripts depict a great number of these garments. In the Grandes Chroniques de France de Charles V,
a manuscript copied and illuminated in Paris between 1375 and 1379,
men-at-arms, servants, loyal followers of the king, craftsmen, and even hangmen
are dressed in doublets, which would appear to have been considered highly
fashionable, given the sheer number of these images.
Let us
look specifically at the example of the scene of the banquet held by Charles V
for the Holy Roman Emperor Charles IV and his son Wenceslas in 1378. In the foreground,
in front of a table set for princes and church dignitaries, three men are dressed
in this emblematic garment, short and closely fitted at the hips. The waist is
clearly delineated by an addition to the doublet: a belt, low-slung and just
barely held up by the curve of the hips. It is the
outsized padding of the torso that constitutes the essential originality of
this garment, however, during the last decades of the fourteenth century. This
protuberance could only be achieved through hidden artifice or, in other words,
padding. Cotton or wadding could be used to augment the volume of any given
part of the garment, in this case the torso.
Narrow at the bottom, broader above,
the doublet hugs the body as well as modifying it. This playful contrast
creates a silhouette we find, for example, in the image of Jean de Vaudetar, adviser
to Charles V, as he is depicted in the frontispiece of the Bible he gave to the
king in 1372. On the
left, Charles V wears the long and outmoded surcoat (we know that the king, afflicted
with rheumatism, preferred voluminous clothing) while to the right, Jean
de Vaudetar is dressed in a short and padded doublet. The lines of the garment
are not unlike the doublet of Charles de Blois, made in the late fourteenth century. Here it was
not the cotton padding held in place by stitching that created the visible
cambering. It was
more likely the doublet worn underneath, or even a convex metal breastplate,
that created the desired distension. On the front, the prominent line created by the numerous
buttons accentuated this ostentatious protuberance.
Before it was recreated as an
overgarment, the civilian doublet originated in military dress, where it was an
undergarment covered with armor. Well before the fourteenth century, knights already
wore various padded garments beneath their breastplates; aside from the
doublet, often padded with silk or cotton, there was also the aketon, filled with cotton, or the
gambison, filled with hemp. These articles of padded clothing, covering the torso
and thighs, were worn as protection in sword-fighting.
During the last third of the
fourteenth century, the doublet was increasingly worn as a civilian garment,
over hose but no longer beneath armor. The French-English conflict, urban
uprisings, and the ravages of widespread military actions led to hordes of
armed men and mercenaries flooding the towns and countryside. It is probable
that this keen interest in the padded doublet originated in the daily
cohabitation with soldiers, whose breastplates already boasted such aggressive
protuberances. This
silhouette, with a pronounced chest and
constricted waist, was all the rage.
Moralists and chroniclers have left
a record of their sharp opinions of this disturbing novelty. In Prague in the
year 1367, the canon Benesch of Weitmühl mentioned the new garb, which he considered
so strange that he assumed it must have been foreign. The torso, swollen with
thick cotton padding, looked, according to the ecclesiastical dignitary, like a
woman’s bust (mamillas mulierum).
Later on, Benesch of Weitmühl compared men with such tight waists (constricti) to greyhounds.
Around 1400, the doublet lost its
convexity. The houppelande, a long and voluminous overgarment, continued a
moderate exaggeration of the chest area, notably with wide sleeves and an emphasis
placed on the layering of garments. The overly long sleeves and tapered trains
also lengthened the figure.
In the middle of the fifteenth
century, the male silhouette was again broadened, not with chest padding this
time, but by expanding the chest with maheutres,
a kind of cylindrical roll placed around the armholes. Furthermore, the
lightening of the lower body, often covered with fitted hose, and tapered
poulaines (a type of shoe), also contributed, by visual contrast, to broadening
the upper body. A comparison of the portrait of Charles VII by Jean Fouquet,
from around 1450, with that of François I by Jean Clouet, from around 1530,
shows little formal evolution of the male form over the course of those decades.
Nonetheless, the broadening of the shoulders of François I is due to a chamarre, a new outer garment with
puffed sleeves. The great originality of the sixteenth century, in the formal evolution
of men’s bodies through dress, lay in the return of the padded doublet. During
the reign of Henri III, the attention was no longer on the shoulders, but
rather the abdomen, with the appearance of the peascod, an ingenious padding distended
with supports sculpting the front of the garment in a hanging paunch. The
peascod was quite visible at the time, as men wore small capes on their
shoulders, more like collars than coats, leaving their chests and paunches in full
view.
During the course of its brief
history (between 1570 and 1590), the size of the peascod tended to vary. In
extreme cases, it assumed the curved and pointed shape of a falling horn,
happily dipping below the waist. The engraving of the standard-bearer, executed
by Hendrick Goltzius in 1587, illustrates this extravagance, which was not spared by the pamphleteers. One
of them, Philip Stubbs, in The Anatomie
of Abuses, published in 1583, “finds no beauty in the men who wear them.”
Further on, his virulence toward this fashion, colored by exaggeration, prompts
him to say that men outfitted with such artifices are “so stuffed, wadded, and
sewn that they can’t even bend down to the ground.” That same year,
Blaise de Vigenère, in his French translation of Titus Livy, rails against the
new men’s fashions to underscore, in his opinion, the sobriety of the Romans in
their “manner of dress.” He delivers the following assessment of the new
doublet: “the poulaine peascod:
wadded, stuffed, stopped-up, embossed, rounded, and padded like the pack-saddle
of a mule.” The poulaine peascod described by Blaise de
Vigenère supposedly displays the presumed Polish origin of the garment, believed
to have been brought back from Poland by Henri III.
All sorts of dense materials, easily
packed together, were used to create the doublet’s bulk: horsehair, wool,
cotton, tow, rags, and even bran. Nonetheless, the hieratic portraits of aristocratic men
between around 1570 and 1590 show the appendage protruding so much that even
the cleverest padding would not have been enough to support it. In order to
create the center ridge, which divided the lower part of the wearer’s abdomen
with a symmetrical axis, a pronounced busk, made out of wood or metal, or even
a triangular armature, was necessary. Maurice Leloir, in his Dictionnaire du costume, mentions the
use, in addition to the central busk, of strips of shaped cardboard or beaten
leather. Such a
mechanism created the doublet’s bulk, without folds or wrinkles, maintained the
rigidity expected in the aristocratic figure, and consecrated the “triumph of
the upper body.”
The military origin of the bombé doublet of the fourteenth century
engendered a rigid garment, inaugurating the history of the restrictive men’s garment,
which the sixteenth-century peascod and other padded frock coats of the
following centuries perpetuated. Although the garment could be fitted, by the end
of the Middle Ages it no longer reflected anatomical lines and volumes faithfully.
Padding, metal pieces borrowed from military dress, busks, and other hidden armatures
contradicted basic human anatomy, creating another. Fabric and its embellishments
imposed a distorting effect. In the same way that a woman’s form could be
changed through the use of farthingales and other artifices, a man’s body
presented itself as a volume refashioned by its garments.
© Bard Graduate Center, Denis Bruna.
On the subject of the doublet,
see Odile Blanc, “Pourpoints, gilets et corsets: invention d’une plastique du Moyen
Âge au XIXe siècle,”
in Danielle Allérès, Mode, des parures
aux marques de luxe (Paris:
Economica, 2003), 106–10.
The Hague, Museum Meermanno-Westreenianum,
MS 10 B 23, fol. 2.
Lyon, Musée des Tissus, MT 30307.
See the essay in this volume by Maximilien Durand, as well as the
bibliographical material in note 1 of the essay.
Concerning the padding and
quilting of medieval and modern garments, see Alexandre Fiette, ed., L’Étoffe du relief: Quilts, boutis et autres
textiles matelassés, exh. cat. (Paris: Somogy, and Geneva: Musée d’Art et
d’Histoire, 2006), 92–93.
Traces of rust on the lining lead
one to think that the doublet was worn over a metal armor plate. I thank
Maximilien Durand, director of the Musée des Tissus et des Arts Décoratifs of
Lyon, for providing this information.
Françoise Piponnier and Perrine
Mane, Dress in the Middle Ages (New
Haven and London: Yale University Press, 1997), 63–64.
Blanc, “Pourpoints, gilets et
corsets,” 72.
“Circum parecordia de bombace
magnam spissitudinem, ut mamillas mulierum habere viderentur. Circa ventre mita
constricti erant, ut canes venatici, qui veltres dicuntur, esse viderentur,” Scriptores rerum Bohemicarum … (Prague,
1784), 2: 367.
Philip Stubbs, The Anatomie of Abuses (London, 1583);
sig. E2r, E2v, quoted in Susan J. Vincent, The
Anatomy of Fashion. Dressing the Body from the Renaissance to Today (New
York and Oxford: Berg, 2009), 49.
Blaise de Vigenère, Les Décades qui se trouvent de Tite-Live … (Paris: Jacques du Puys, 1583), 917.
This origin is evoked
specifically in the glossary in Paraître
et se vêtir au XV Ie siècle (Saint-Étienne: Publications de l’université de
Saint-Étienne, 2006), 285.
See also on this subject Fiette,
L’Étoffe du relief, 93.
Maurice Leloir, Dictionnaire du costume et de ses
accessoires, des armes et des étoffes, des origines à nos jours (Paris:
Gründ, 1951), see “panseron.”
Georges Vigarello, Histoire de la beauté: le corps et l’art d’embellir
de la Renaissance à nos jours (Paris: Le Seuil, 2004), 20.
Concerning these ideas, see
Odile Blanc, Parades et parures: L’invention
du corps de mode à la fin du Moyen Âge (Paris: Gallimard, 1997), 79.