Linda cited this quote:

> > "The allegory of colour, which already at the end
> > of the thirteenth century showed slight signs of
> > development, had now become a language
> > comprehensible to nearly everyone, and the
> > full-fledged dandy had now the means of
> > proclaiming to the world his amorous adventures by
> > the scale of colours displayed in his dress.

Amy commented:

> What I'd argue with, though, is the idea that the language was
> "comprehensible to nearly everyone."  Often the specific meaning of a
> color depended on which text you consulted.

I also find the quoted statement highly suspicious. Certainly artists and
poets used color symbolism to telegraph the nature of various characters,
and ceremonial clothing (e.g. ecclesiastical vestments and dress for
knightings, coronations, etc.) used specific colors for symbolic purposes.
But whether this translated into secular clothing is problematic. It is
quite possible that in a few rarified circles, perhaps even within
specific courts, that there was such a "code," but it would likely have
changed from place to place and period to period.

Also, given that this author is discussing the 14th century, it's worth
remembering that most people had highly limited wardrobes -- even wealthy
nobles may have had only three or four gowns, and many people had only one
or two. Clothes were "durable goods" -- that is, buying a new set of
clothing was like buying a refrigerator or car today. So for anyone but
the very wealthiest, the ability to change one's gown color to declare
one's amorous adventures was unlikely.

I'm not sure what the author is thinking of regarding the "end of the
thirteenth century," but I seem to recall that at least one of the 12th
century manuals on courtly love (perhaps the one by Andreas Cappelanus)
dictated what colors suitors were supposed to wear to indicate the stage
they'd reached in negotiations with their prospective lovers. Whether
anyone outside of fictional romances and Eleanor of Acquitaine's court
actually did this is an open question. There's a wealth of literature on
the courtly love phenomenon, so I'm sure someone has already investigated
that. I'd start with Jane Burns' "Courtly Love Undressed" for some
insight; it focuses on literature, but it might contain some nuggets about
real-life clothing, or some references to other studies. (I've only
glanced at it myself.)
 
It's worth remembering that the 18th and 19th century English (and maybe
other Europeans?) were very fond of systems such as the "language of
flowers" and the "language of fans," and many authors (both historians and
literary writers) of those centuries imbued medieval people with all sorts
of fancy manners and mannerisms that struck them as suitably romantic.
These authors would not hesitate to pick up on a fancy such as the courtly
love color rules, or the Elizabethan lexicons that Amy mentions, and
declare that these rules were in force across a broad range of social
classes, regions, and centuries. Such non-facts would then be repeated in
book after book over many decades. Your author, writing in 1926, was very
likely drawing on such unreliable sources. (Costume books of this period
are notoriously derivative of Victorian pseudo-scholarship.)

--Robin




_______________________________________________
h-costume mailing list
[email protected]
http://mail.indra.com/mailman/listinfo/h-costume

Reply via email to