An Addendum To Heraldic Frocks

In Which Merouda Hopes to Refine the Research of a Scholar More Worthy Than She 

First, the article I intend to further: Heraldic Display: Women's Heraldic Frocks by Lady Sabine du Bourbonnais.

It's a fine article, easy to read and supported by some interesting pictorial evidence. One wonders what is happening in the Kingdoms of that far-away hemisphere that many of the articles online supporting the idea of heraldic clothing for women come from those places. It is my opinion that the heraldic clothing for women probably existed, although it may not have existed as a full-field cotehardie-type dress--that is, as it is typically interpreted in the SCA. However, there remains sufficient fragmentary evidence to suggest that women would wear heraldic clothing--indeed, Lady Sabine's article makes note of a Spanish heraldic sideless surcoat.

 Most women did not possess arms in their own right, limiting the evidence simply by virtue of the fact that arms are, in period, primarily possessed by men. It may simply be a matter of definition; a dress containing any heraldic element is, in fact, a heraldic frock. And it may also be a clash of modern cultures; in the modern world, where women in both the SCA and the real world have their own Arms, it is entirely consistent to do what those who possessed arms in period did: slap them on everything, including their clothing. In the later stages of our studied periods, when women ruled and wealthy widows controlled great manors, the use of heraldic elements in clothing and dress expands.

 At left, a figure from an Italian fresco of 1365. John Peacock, in his Chronicle of Western Fashion, includes it as an example of dress, but does not note the possible heraldic nature of the outfit. This Italian fresco series is described in Gothic Painting (J. Dupont & C. Gnudi, Rizzoli, New York, 1979) as allegorical and didactic in the terms of a worldly-wise cleric, and some of the dancing women in this fresco are likely representational. However, if we accept the other dresses as reflective of real dress, it's not unreasonable to accept the heraldic surcoat here depicted as reality based, especially if it is considered as a partial-arms surcoat.  The blazon for this may be Barry gules and or, a bordure argent. If it is not a full-field dress, then it may be Barry gules and Or. Notice that it is a short-sleeved surcoat over a kirtle/cotehardie; the clear slit up the side is a feature that is not discernible on memorial brasses.

There are plenty of examples in period of arms that are similar to this dress. Bergman's Armorial list the arms of Hoyen as Barry of seven Or and gules, a bordure argent;  the Getty features a Spanish tile floor featuring a "Tuscan coat of arms" comprised of barry metal and color (my monitor doesn't give a good look at the colors, can't tell if it's gules/sable or argent/or); the  V&A has two examples of barry arms as a part of a larger shield on material goods (click here and search for items numbered 334:1-1903  [Italian tiles, a barry quarter] and 710-1904 [table carpet with a barry quarter]) Brian Fitzalan bore Barry or and gules; a church in Yatton features impaled arms on a 15th c. shield described as gules three bars or in modern blazon, but probably barry gules and Or in period. The Seton Armorial describes the arms of the Duke of Lorraine as comprised, in part, of a quarter barry of six gules and Or. The primary point here is that there is evidence across Western Europe beginning at least within the 13th century of simple barry arms being bourne, and not so many extant examples of barry fabrics that are merely fashionable. It's not unreasonable to consider this a female heraldic surcoat. 

At left, fragment of heraldic fabric in the Art Institute of Chicago, pictured in Textiles (C. Thurman, The Art Institute of Chicago, Chicago, 1992). It is described as featuring the arms of the Nazrid (also, Nasrid) dynasty from Grenada, and is a Spanish silk circa 1400, evidence of Islamic-style heraldry in those areas of Iberia under Muslim influence. The book actually contains a number of textiles that are interesting for this discussion: a silk covered in rampant lions, another in foliate vines and crowns, a velvet featuring what is supposed to be a heraldic crest, a fabric altar frontal that identifies the Virgin Mary not by use of the classic blue dress, but via a blue cloak covered in heraldic lilies, et cetera.

This particular fragment struck me as the most interesting, with its crowned shields and lions. Its use is not specified. Undoubtedly it would be used only in accordance with the Sultan's wishes and not likely for Muslim female dress; however, it is included here as a reminder of the wide ranging ways in which heraldry can be incorporated into cloth by far-flung cultures. One can not dismiss clothing as "not heraldic" simply because it is not a full-blown heraldic surcoat.

At left, the gisant of Catherine de Medici. (click on photo for reference). The fleur-de-lys is all over: on her pillow, on her cloak, and on her dress, although it is a little difficult to see on this scan. This is clearly a heraldic dress without being the actual arms of France (by the sixteenth century, azure three fleur-de-lys Or).  While female, 16th c. heraldic dress in the SCA is often based on the dresses modeled in various late-period armorials, it is perhaps more correctly recreated as something that features badges or elements of one's arms.

 Anne Boleyn, by Lucas Horenbout, about 1525. Note the jewel in the center of her chest: it is her falcon badge.

Another period badge can be accessed through the V&A access to images: click here and search for M.375-1924.

One of the most famous jewels on display at the British Museum is The Dunstable Swan. The Swan is, in fact, a livery badge, and you may see it by clicking here.

Elizabeth I, Hilliard's Pelican Portrait, so named for the pelican in its piety at her chest. In 16th century portraiture, the sitter's identity is often revealed by a small shield of the arms painted off to the side. Here, Hilliard included a crowned Tudor Rose and a crowned Fleur-de-Lys as references to her royal status. However, notice the blackwork on the sleeves and partlet and the jewels just visible at the top of the skirt's opening. She is wearing tricked or white roses and red roses, the badges of the houses of York and Lancaster.  She also has a red rose tucked into the upper right (as you look at it) of her bodice. In contrast, Mary I's clothing in portraits is non-heraldic; she sometimes holds a red rose. The heraldic rose is a very popular motif in this era, in large part because of the Queen.

Of all the portraits of Elizabeth making symbolic or heraldic reference to her, I chose this one as an example because of the numerous references to embroidered sleeves given to her as gifts in her inventories (for example, "By Montague, a peir of sleves of cameryck wrought with roses and budds of black sylke." From the New Year's inventory of 157-8) . For a survey of Elizabeth's portraits, visit Marilee Cody's site. Many of the portraits feature heraldic references.

Questions, comments, suggestions, thoughts? I welcome correspondence at merouda (at) hotmail (dot) com.

Use your back button, or {Elyse Boucher} {Arts and Sciences Top} {A&S Heraldry} {Poopie the Pirate} {Help Support This Site}

(old link bar, some still active): {Elise Boucher} {Sept Pendray} {Merouda Pendray}

This document created April 23, 2005
Last edited, 23 April 2005