Forensic Fashion
(c) 2006-present R. Macaraeg


>Costume Studies
>>1536 Tudor knight
Subject: knight
Culture: Tudor English
Setting: early Tudor dynasty, England early-mid 16thc
Evolution1066 Anglo-Norman knight > 1296 Plantagenet knight > 1356 English knyȝt 1471 English knight > 1536 Tudor knight

Context (Event Photos, Period Sources, Secondary Sources, Field Notes)

* Gravett/Turner 2006 p4
"Knighthood in the Tudor period had come a long way since 1066.  Increasingly, knights could be made from gentlemen who did not have a knightly background, while other eligible candidates were content to remain squires -- men of standing, yet happy to forego the expense and the burdens of sitting in parliament or attending law courts.  Those who fought often did so as officers in an increasingly professional army." 


* Dowen/Hurst 2020 p20
"The Renaissance was renowned for its outstanding artistic achievements.  It was an age when men of wealth actively encouraged artists and craftsmen to give full rein to their creativity, resulting in paintings and sculptures of incredible beauty.  Armour likewise reached new heights of sophistication.  Far from merely serving a defensive purpose, a suit of armour was also a visual art form, expressing the wealth and status of the wearer.  Artistic patronage upheld social status in a deeply hierarchical society, a point of crucial importance in a changing world."

* Gravett/Turner 2006 p16
"Men of rank wore full harness of steel that covered them from top to toe.  Initially this might not differ from that worn at the end of the 15th century, a western European style derived from Italian forms with some German influences."

​* Richardson 2019 p6-7
​"It is quite clear that English production was not up to the standard of the Flemish (or Italian or Austrian) craftsmen, and it is clear that Henry wished to have his own armour workshop, just like Holy Roman Emperor Maximilian (1459-1519).  Accordingly from 1511 Henry made several attempts to set up workshops, in Southwark and Greenwich.  Both these locations are south of the river Thames and hence outside the City of London where the London Companies and craft guilds held sway. ...  The early experiment with the Milanese, including Filippo de Grampis and Giovanni Angelo de Littis who were working there from 1512, did not prove long-lasting as they were gone by about 1515.  But the Flemings and Germans were to prove more permanent."


* Lipscomb 2009 p19-20
"Everyone had their place and station; all men were not created equal.  This fact was displayed even in what people wore.  Sumptuary laws governed the dress of each rank of society: no man under the degree of a lord could wear cloth of gold or silver, or sable (the brown fur of the arctic fox).  Only Knights of the Garter and above could wear crimson or blue velvet.  No person under knight could wear gowns or doublets of velvet.  Those who owned land yielding £20 a year might wear satin or damask in the doublets, while husbandry servants, shepherds and labourers were forbidden to wear cloth costing more than two shillings a yard.  The penalty for the latter was three days in the stocks.  The threat of such punishment represented the belief that dissatifaction with one's lot could engender disorder, injustice and anarchy."

* Gravett/Turner 2006 p28-29
"Sumptuary laws were designed to ensure that men's position in society was reflected in their dress and appearance.  Henry VIII produced the following version of the laws:
None shall wear ... cloth of gold or silver, or silk of purple colour ... except ... Earls, all above that rank, and Knights of the King (and then only in their mantles).  None shall wear ... cloth of gold or silver, tinselled satin, silk, cloth mixed or embroidered with gold or silver, or foreign woollen cloth ... except ... Barons, all above that rank, Knights of the Garter, and Privy Councillors.  None shall wear ... any lace of gold or silver, lace mixed with gold or silver, silk, spurs, swords, rapiers, daggers, buckles, or studes with gold, silver or gilt ... except ... Baron's Sons, all above that rank, shall wear ... velvet in gowns, cloaks, coats, or upper garments, or embroidery with silk, or hose of silk ... except ... Knights, all above that rank, and their heirs apparent.  None shall wear ... velvet, upper garments, or velvet in their jerkins, hose or doublets ... except ... Knight's Eldest Sons and all above that rank."


* Gravett/Turner 2006 p21-22
"The sword remained the favoured arm of the gentleman.  Military weapons at the beginning of the 16th century still had long thrusting blades but were wide enough to deliver a lethal cut from the sharpened edges.  The hilt was still essentially a simple cross, the wooden grip bound in cloth or leather and often overlaid by cords or wire either twined round or in a lattice, to help prevent the hand sliding off but more importantly provided counterbalance to the blade, so that the point of balance was as near to the hand as possible; this made the sword less point-heavy and less tiring to use.  Several styles of pommel had been developed, from a simple disc or flanged wheel to a scent-bottle style.  This type of cross-hilt continued to be worn with armour by a few enthusiasts until after the third quarter of the 16th century.  However, by the beginning of the century some infantry swords had already developed a half loop or a ring to guard the finger hooked over the blunted first section of blade to assist a swing.  This form was then seen on the swords of gentlemen.  By mid-century swords usually had finger-rings and side-rings, but frequently lacked the knuckle-guards and displayed none of the diagonal guards popular in Continental Europe.  The estoc was also known in England as the tuck.  The blade sometimes had three or even four unsharpened sides to produce a very stiff weapon for maximum thrust."


* Gravett/Turner 2006 p27
"Daggers were carried in a sheath on the right side, two staples on the locket attaching to the waist belt."


* Norris