C15 Bras from Lengburg castle

[Munz]

It's interesting to read all of the different theories on who some of these mysterious figures might be. I do find it very clear that ALL of the disrobed men are wearing braes. There is not a single man depicted clearly naked (in the buff). At the top of the fountain there appears to be a fully "naked" man, but due to the angle of the fountain the artist may have forgone even a slight depiction of small clothes. But ALL of the woman are clearly rendered naked, and none but the mysterious he/she figure in the lower right is portrayed in briefs/braes at all. To me that is rather clear. I am chalking the lower left mystery figure's appearance to some possibly poor or unclear rendering since the rest of the evidence points the other direction.

7 men in braes
5 women naked
4 obscured bathing figures (3 men, 1 woman)
1 mystery person in shift

I really don't care either way if it's a man or a woman in knickers. I just don't think this is a good image for evidence of women's "braes".

[RandallMoffett]

Even though there are others that are show a similar garment on a woman?

[Tracy Justus]

Here's another photo of the same bra as in the original post, but from the front.

T.

[Tailoress]

Warning: details of menstrual hygiene mechanics follows.



This whole discussion of women wearing braies was started by the Tyrolian find of string-bikini-style braies. Elsewhere, I've been debating the tailoring of these braies as evidence for male clothing, not female clothing, based on the fact that the crotch is rather wide. In fact, way too wide to be of best use for menstrual purposes, which is the most adamant argument for these braies being for the ladies. Kotex belts were brought up, but when I went looking for images of these torture devices, I was rewarded with further evidence that my theory is a solid one, because the crotches in those belts narrow just as I would expect them to, in order to hold absorbent materials close to the body.

Anything that creates a pouch in the crotch is going to work directly against the physics of catching liquid in an as-leak-proof-as-possible way. You want that stuff smack up against you, held there snugly. There are two factors we women have to manage: volume and leakage. While a pouch would help with volume issues -- allowing lots of material to be stuffed in there -- it does crap-all for leakage. I can easily see women taking their absorbent material, stuffing it in a pair of narrow-crotched braies that holds it flat against them, and going about their business. I don't see women putting on this particular style of braies, however, and doing that, without creating the equivalent of what looks like a drag king packing, with the added dignity-killer of leak risk.

Keeping with the Occam's Razor approach, the pouch formed by the extra-wide crotch works well for an everyday man going about his business, filling out his braies as one would expect him to.

From another angle, let's consider how often men would fill out their braies pouch with their genitals: 100% of the time. Now let's consider how often a woman would need to wear braies due to menstruation: 25% of the time at most. Therefore, the extant braies seem more likely to have been owned by a man, simply because a man would likely wear this style all the time, thus owning more pairs, thus stacking the deck of likelihood that a pair of men's braies would survive to the current day over a pair of women's braies.

[MediumAevum]

Even though there are others that are show a similar garment on a woman?

Where?
Every image I know of thus far showing women wearing braes is indicative of gender reversal. While that doesn't make them wrong it makes them problematic.
Without those where is the evidence. That isn't Occam's razor, it is you've made up your mind and are hiding behind nothing and calling it something.

[FrauHirsch1]

But we never see any images of women in menstrual 'attire' either, and we know that was about 25% of the time. And then there is the question of the high percentage of at least stress incontinence in older people, especially post-menopausal women. Could that be why an older woman might be depicted in braes vice a younger one?

I would think they have had at least some midden finds that would provide more info on feminine hygiene issues.

[Charlotte J]

Not to mention that prior to the 15th century, men's braies would have been completely useless for the purpose of holding in any sort of padding or rags. If women used some sort of padding, they'd have had to devise a solution that wasn't "men's undies" well before this style came around.

[Robert of Canterbury]

There has been much media kerfuffle recently about the 15th century medieval underwear found in Lengberg Castle, Austria. Beatrix Nutz who is working on the pieces has put up the following websites with fuller details. 

http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/proj ... tyrol.html

http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/proj ... ex.html.en

Cheers

Robert
AKA
Dan Towse
Programme Secretary
The Medieval Dress and Textile Society
MEDATS
www.medats.org.uk/events

[Tailoress]

There has been much media kerfuffle recently about the 15th century medieval underwear found in Lengberg Castle, Austria. Beatrix Nutz who is working on the pieces has put up the following websites with fuller details. 

http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/proj ... tyrol.html

http://www.uibk.ac.at/urgeschichte/proj ... ex.html.en

I got this same info forwarded to me elsewhere, but it also had this to add:

Beatrix will be in London to speak at the Medieval Dress and Textile Society (Medats) Autumn meeting on Linens Next to the Skin on 27 October at the British Museum. If you would like to come along and learn more it's a great chance to ask the lady herself. http://www.medats.org.uk/events.

I hope I'm not speaking out of school by posting that here, but the original message said to feel free to pass it on.

[RandallMoffett]

Medium Aevum,

How can you say that? I provided the best evidence I could find so far and it is clearly not gender reversal in that case. Under the slip is some type of garment held in the area by strings or straps. To me it is underwear and I cannot see it being something else from what is show there. I did enhance the illustration as best I could and it looks like a triangle or something at the front. Unless someone gets an original hi res photos of it and can prove it is not I am fairly confident it is what I think it is. I of course can only be as accurate as the tools I have.

I never said it could not be, only there is little evidence for any of the conclusions covered here so far. I think you and others are the ones with a closed and decided mind. This has been the mindset on this garment so long that people are digging their heels in with the prospect of female underwear. She must be dressing like a man if she is in these as only men wear underwear. Sort of illogical as it is a chicken and egg argument. I have looked over thousands of inventories and wills with clothing and 99% of the time the description is vague and calls them linens and wools, so textual evidence is nil. Art is a mine field as it will always be. The connection between some art and these possible finds though is I think important and should not be simply shut down simply on gender frameworks. A handful of others are looking for possible places this might fit and I think that is good. Will your medieval construct of the world end if women did wear underwear for other than gender reversal? I still think my evidence is not showing gender reversal and is similar to this. When I get some free time I will revisit some other possible ones I cannot currently find. I think people are making guesses and assumptions based on very little evidence generally. That is fine. Myself I simply am stating what I feel is the only solid stance to take, some women were in underwear in period. You can keep what ever stance you wish but do not say mine is unsubstantiated because you do not share it. That is not only poor intellectually but you as your evidence is hardly substantial either and largely based on your own bias, unfair. Of course I have a point of view, who does not, mine is as I said simple- some women appear to be wearing underwear.

I'm not sure it is artists showing gender reversals, bathing attire, menstrual tools or anything. All I am saying is there is evidence showing women in underwear, which on all this info is fairly safe and I see no strong pattern or evidence for any of the limbs you and some others are out on. Does that mean you cannot go on those limbs, not at all. By all means, enjoy yourself. Does that mean I cannot sit on the tree trunk, no and if you disagree I frankly do not mind if you like it or not.


RPM

[MediumAevum]

How can you say that? I provided the best evidence I could find so far and it is clearly not gender reversal in that case. Under the slip is some type of garment held in the area by strings or straps. To me it is underwear and I cannot see it being something else from what is show there. I did enhance the illustration as best I could and it looks like a triangle or something at the front. Unless someone gets an original hi res photos of it and can prove it is not I am fairly confident it is what I think it is. I of course can only be as accurate as the tools I have.



I'm not sure it is artists showing gender reversals, bathing attire, menstrual tools or anything. All I am saying is there is evidence showing women in underwear, which on all this info is fairly safe and I see no strong pattern or evidence for any of the limbs you and some others are out on. Does that mean you cannot go on those limbs, not at all. By all means, enjoy yourself. Does that mean I cannot sit on the tree trunk, no and if you disagree I frankly do not mind if you like it or not.

At no point have I said women didn't wear underwear, all that I have said is that thus far all the information put forward is problematic as there is no good evidence for it. Based on the information we have all we can say is that the idea is not foreign. Before 2008 if you would have said Boob cups were used in this period the evidence would not have supported it.

Are we talking about the same image? I am talking about the Maestro della Manta - The Fountain of Youth. Occam's Razor says that since almost every image we have of women wearing underwear is indicative of gender role reversal that if there is reason to think that image falls into that we should assume it does. And there are reasons to hold that it falls into that category. Firstly the image itself, you can describe her relationship with the old man any way you want but she clearly has hold of for lack of a better term a blanket pulled over his head. Secondly there is an association between the story of Aristotle and Phylis, a known story of gender role reversal and the Fountain of Youth as they are both from the Romance of Alexander.

So all that image is, is another example of that. Do those images exist. Absolutely.

I'm not entrenched in anything, I've been having this conversation for over a decade, I've read the gynecological manuals, I've dug through piles and piles of art and in the end Munz sums up the evidence in general. There is a lot of art depicting men in underwear and women naked in the same scene and/or scenario. I have yet to see an unproblematic depiction of a woman in underwear. So I have seen no reason to believe the average medieval woman wore underwear. Was it done I have little doubt it was as it isn't that big a deal and you see all sorts of stranger behavior then that in the later Middle Ages from cross-dressing prostitutes to women screwing each other with strapons. (Ok I'm not sure there were actually straps used).

[Munz]

I'm not entrenched in anything, I've been having this conversation for over a decade, I've read the gynecological manuals, I've dug through piles and piles of art and in the end Munz sums up the evidence in general. There is a lot of art depicting men in underwear and women naked in the same scene and/or scenario. I have yet to see an unproblematic depiction of a woman in underwear. So I have seen no reason to believe the average medieval woman wore underwear. Was it done I have little doubt it was as it isn't that big a deal and you see all sorts of stranger behavior then that in the later Middle Ages from cross-dressing prostitutes to women screwing each other with strapons. (Ok I'm not sure there were actually straps used).

I agree with this statement.

[guthrie]

Did someone mention artwork?
This Durer woodcut shows men wearing underpants/ briefs very like that defined as linen male underpants at the uibk.at.ac link given above:
http://www.scottmcd.net/artanalysis/?p=702

(Link nicked from a post by Ghost on LH forum)

This does rather bolster the general lack of evidence for widespread use of female underwear.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

Male underwear ranged from large boxers to "Speedos" like in that woodcut.

[guthrie]

Male underwear ranged from large boxers to "Speedos" like in that woodcut.

Yes, I know that. In fact calling something more akin to long shorts and using a great deal of linen 'large boxers' is selling them short. Or are you specifying in the mid 15th century?

[Charlotte J]

Ms. Nutz was recently interviewed by CBC about the Lengberg bras.

Listen here:
http://www.cbc.ca/asithappens/features/ ... eval-bras/

A few things of note: one of the bras was carbon dated to the early-mid 15th c., and another was dated to the mid-3rd quarter 15th century. I don't know which was which. Also, it sound like there will be plenty of political finagling, but that it's likely they'll eventually be on display at the castle, if everybody gets their way.

I have to say, after adjusting all of my dresses last night because I lost 10 lbs since last Pennsic, having this sort of thing for additional support will be *awesome*. I want to play with using both these and fitted, shaped gowns.

[Tailoress]

I want to play with using both these and fitted, shaped gowns.

For real. It opens up so many possibilities!!

[azure d'or]

Jumping late into this conversation because it seems I'm rarely on the AA at all anymore - I too want to experiment. The first time I read about it, back when you couldn't find any more than a NESAT prospectus a couple ofyears back it made logical sense to me, especially based on images like the famous White Portrait that's everywhere, showing a collection of folks in white houppelades and "GFD" variations, with some women clearly wearing a supportive kirtle style undergarment and others looking like they might as well be wearing a modern bra.

I really do look forward to experiments, in part because I am seeing a lot lately in SCA houppelande construction where the wearer has neither a kirtle NOR a well-fit modern bra, and the result seems to be contrary to all the art I see, and the bust of even moderately sized women appears saggy and hangs unflatteringly over the belt. It looks neither attractive, nor medieval. (I admit some of this could be due to poor fitting on the houppelande garment as well, but I think it's a shame regardless - I've seen some pretty fabulous garments otherwise spoiled by a bad line at the bust).

Charlotte, Tasha and several others of us have spent years in our respective kingdoms and elsewhere trying to encourage a proper silhouette, and this discovery might really get SCA women thinking about that again, albeit from a different perspective.

As to the briefs, the jury is really still out for me. My plan about a year ago was to make a number of them in sizes for both sexes, and see how they worked in terms of actual wear, but life, both real world and SCA has worked against me in that. The short version in my opinion is that the best way to figure out how the garment works is to put it on bodies. It may be that these are male, but that doesn't preclude the female version having existed.

The best argument for the wearing of panties et al by women aside from menstruation is warmth - try running around without 'em on a really cold night at Gulf Wars (remember when they had those?), even if you've got stockings and several layers of wool on, and you'll see the appeal. Following that is the cleanliness argument, and there's still a bit of discussion as to how important that was to medieval folk as opposed to say, their Roman-era predecessors. But once you've gotten bugs, burrs, grass-seed and so on to work it's way up your skirt, you understand the multiple reasons cleanliness is a factor - it's not solely about peeing or menstruation here on the cleanliness front.

In terms of arguments against -there's ease of relieving one's self - also a male issue; sexual access; the perrenial fashion issue - line of dress in your close-fitting kirtle (even today, designers like Tom Ford urge against the wearing of panties for interfering with the line of the dress); and the issue of cost-effectiveness, which works both ways - does a pair of linen panties preserve and keep clean you other garments to the extent that its function is worth the expense of the linen (yes, if you're of a certain social class). Finally, there's the question all the previous discussion touches on - sexual titillation.

On that note, there are 15th Century references in German literature directly to the "bust bags" that women use to "beautifully display their breasts to best advantage" (and for that matter, for large busted young women to minimize theri assets)- but none to my knowledge on panties of any type.

Gwen

[azure d'or]

As an addendum - I suspect until a pair is found with a little tag in them reading "Made especially for Greta by Grandma" we're going to be having this discussion, and the find of these is quite rare enough.

[Black Swan Designs]

Lengberg underwear

Photos available here

on sale at Pennsic or on the HE website**. $21.95

(**Available August 5)

[azure d'or]

Um. Um... nice picture. Have you considered the fundraising possibilities of a calendar?

[Charlotte J]

Lengberg underwear

Photos available here

on sale at Pennsic or on the HE website**. $21.95

(**Available August 5)

You are AWESOME.

[olaf haraldson]

I'm not 15th century, but I'm SO getting a pair!

[Tailoress]

Here's the text of a poem by Eustache Deschamps (France's answer to Chaucer, in a way), dated to the late 14thc or turn of the 15thc (? unclear on exact date) that may provide a piece of this puzzle for the bra portion of this debate:

Balade sur Les Femmes Qui Troussent Leur Tetins.

Puis que tettine se moustra
En tou lieux si generalment
Couvoitise en pluserur entra
Pour le ravir couvertement;
Pour ce qui'l fait soubdainement,
Par veoir, maint cue dolereux,
A de gens trouvé si crueulx
Que prins l'ont et mis a gehine
A Paris, c'est un cas piteux:
Dame, aiez pité de tettine!

Car ce qui en ce point mis l'a
Est par juenesse seulement;
Rons, petiz, durs, lors se cela,
Sanz moustrer si publiquement;
Puis s'abandonna folement.
Et pour ce, a esté mis en deux
Sacs cousus par my la poitrine,
Estrains de cordes et de neux:
Dame aiez pité de tettine!

Ou certes en ce ploy mourra
Tenus est trop estroictement
Du delivrer grant bien sera
Et de lui faire aligement,
Car il seufre trop grief tourment
Pour avoir esté gracieux.
Amoureuses et amoureux
Qui d'amours sçavez le couvine,
Faictes secours au langoreux:
Dame aiez pité de tettine!

L'envoy:

Princes, qui ne le secourra,
En adventure se mettra
De saillir hors, prinson le mine,
Ou tous ses liens rompera;
Lors en fosse avalez cherra:
Dame aiez pité de tettine!

Translation by someone named Katherine -- this was forwarded to me over a year and a half ago from what I believe is the MEDATS email list (?):

Ballad ABOUT WOMEN WHO TRUSS THEIR BREASTS

That the breast can be displayed
In all places so generally,
Coveted in many encounters
For a secret ravishing,
For to putting under possession,
For to make [them] visible, many heavy hearts,
Have people found so cruel
That begin to have it and then must make a vow To Paris; that's a pitiful
case:
Lady, have pity of breast!

Because those who in this point take it
Is for youth only;
Round, petite, firm, then being that,
Without display so publicly;
Then will abandon folly,
Many become, though, ungracious,
And for that, have taken and put in two
sewn sacks upon the chest,
Squeezing with cords and knots:
Lady, have pity of breast!

Where, of course, this ploy will fail:
Held in too tightly;
In the delivery of great well-being
And of doing him allegiance
Therefore he suffers too much grievous torment
For to have a gracious bearing.
Desired ones and lovers
Who know what it is to covet love
Give relief to the languorous:
Lady, have pity of breast!

The conclusion:

My Lords, grant this no favor,
In adventure they will be put
To gush out, and beginning to mine it,
when all its ties will break;
Then you will be swallowed inside a pit and mocked.
Lady, have pity of breast!

*****

I could make the argument that the references to cords, knots, and sewn sacks could translate well enough to a dress with bust support built into it (cords and knots are used for lacing oneself in, after all), but if we have extant bra-like garments being dated as early as the early-mid 15thc, it's quite reasonable to extrapolate that Deschamps is refering to a separate garment under the dress.

In any event, fascinating stuff. I especially love that this poem also makes clear that women cared about the presentation of their breasts for vanity and attraction purposes at this point in cultural history. I have never subscribed to the idea that women universally just let The Girls swing around unaided beneath their otherwise-fitted dresses. From a more practical POV, anyone with a little heft to their bust appreciates support, especially in tight clothing. Without it, tight clothing smooshes things down and flat, and that can be very uncomfortable. I don't think this is just my modern sensibility talking, either. Physical discomfort is physical discomfort, in any age.

[azure d'or]

In any event, fascinating stuff. I especially love that this poem also makes clear that women cared about the presentation of their breasts for vanity and attraction purposes at this point in cultural history. I have never subscribed to the idea that women universally just let The Girls swing around unaided beneath their otherwise-fitted dresses. From a more practical POV, anyone with a little heft to their bust appreciates support, especially in tight clothing. Without it, tight clothing smooshes things down and flat, and that can be very uncomfortable. I don't think this is just my modern sensibility talking, either. Physical discomfort is physical discomfort, in any age.

Yes. This.

And for all the poet protests, I suspect he'd find those breasts less appealing if they'd never been supported and likewise sagged greatly though the woman was still youthful. We know from the art of a great many cultures that firm breasts were the ideal.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

Good find, Tasha! I'm sure that people will be finding more examples like that now!

Youth, breeding potential, nursing potential, all of that comes into play when we think about it.

I wonder if these examples survived because they were becoming more commercially available, and produced by specialists. If you are just wrapping a band of cloth around a torso, that could be reused for some other purpose, or when found in a pit was just a length of cloth with no apparent purpose.

And I'm sure we'll be reexamining paintings for evidence.


Piero della Francesca, Madonna and Child with Saints (1472-1474)




I don't think it is clear enough to be definitive, but I wonder if I'm looking only at shading, or evidence of some sort of bra on the woman off of Mary's R shoulder.

[Baron Alcyoneus]

The top few entries on the left of this Persian/English dictionary are handy, but it doesn't give any date for the origin of the words.

http://books.google.com/books?id=knA9Np ... ts&f=false

[jester]

I'm pretty sure the last line of each stanza should be translated as:
Lady, have pity on titties.

Which has not quite replaced tuttenseck at the top of my inner 13 year old's giggle list.

[MediumAevum]

I don't think it is clear enough to be definitive, but I wonder if I'm looking only at shading, or evidence of some sort of bra on the woman off of Mary's R shoulder.

It isn't. Its some sort of gold ribbon attached to the collar.

[Mac]

I am pretty sure that those androgynous figures in the Della Francesca painting are Angels. They are wearing the usual Angelic diadems on their foreheads , and you can see their wings just behind their shoulders. If they have breasts at all, they probably need no earthly support.

Mac

[azure d'or]

So Mac you're saying those Victoria's Secret Angels are a lie? Why then do I give them money

[Mac]

So Mac you're saying those Victoria's Secret Angels are a lie? Why then do I give them money

Tithing?

Mac

[MediumAevum]

German interview and video footage.
http://www.spiegel.de/video/bh-aus-dem- ... 11811.html

[Baron Alcyoneus]

I don't think it is clear enough to be definitive, but I wonder if I'm looking only at shading, or evidence of some sort of bra on the woman off of Mary's R shoulder.

It isn't. Its some sort of gold ribbon attached to the collar.

I wasn't talking about the collar, or the gold ribbon.

[MediumAevum]

I don't think it is clear enough to be definitive, but I wonder if I'm looking only at shading, or evidence of some sort of bra on the woman off of Mary's R shoulder.

It isn't. Its some sort of gold ribbon attached to the collar.

I wasn't talking about the collar, or the gold ribbon.

If there was a way that didn't require me to open several programs to copy and paste an image in I would but that's too much work.