#bratanna

Historical Research:

The Irish use of fringe is mentioned by several period writers. In 1548, Paolo Giovio stated that most Irish men wore, "a soldier’s woollen cloak, with a fringed and variegated edge for elegance" (translation from Harris 2007). Similarly, William Good said Irish men and women wore "mantles or shag-rugs [. . .] fring'd round the edges with divers well mixt colours" (1586/1695). 17th century writers Luke Gernon (1620) and John Lynch (1661/1850) both described how the Irish continued to wear fringed mantles in spite of British colonial laws banning them. Gernon stated that the Irish mantle (ie brat) "differs nothing from a long cloke, but in the fringe at the upper end, which in could weather they [the Irish] weare over their heades for warmth," suggesting that this use of fringe was such an important part of Irish fashion that it was a marker of cultural identity.

This fringe appears to have been a separate trim, typically made of wool or silk, that was added to the garments. This is suggested by John Speed's description of Irish mantles as being "purfled with a deepe Fringe of divers colours" (1611). Applied fringe trim can be seen on the brat in Sir Neil O'Neill's portrait. In his poem "A Vision", 16th c. Irish poet Tadhg Dall Ó hUiginn describes a fairy woman wearing, "A purple mantle with satin fringes" (1550-1591/1921). Fringes made of silk and wool are found among recorded imports to Ireland in the late 16th c. (Flavin 2011).

Despite all this period evidence, I sadly do not know of any extant examples of Irish fringe from this period. Since at least some of the fringe used in Ireland was imported, I decided to look at examples from other parts of Europe to determine how Irish fringe might have been made. Looking at 15th-17th c. examples in the V&A, I saw 2 common manufacturing methods: warp-faced plain weave and tablet weave.

I decided to go with tablet weave for this project, because tablet woven bands have been found at earlier Medieval sites in Ireland (Wincott Heckett 2002). Following the historical costuming advice of The Welsh Viking that simple things less likely to be wrong, I used this simple late-15th c. fringe from Sweden as the basis for my pattern. Simple tablet-woven fringes continued to be used into the late 17th or early 18th century.

I used wool yarn for this project, because I wanted something that could have plausibly been made in Ireland and afforded by Irish commoners, instead of a luxury import like silk. Wool also seemed like the best fit for John Lynch's characterization of the fringe on a brat as a practical feature which protected the wearer's neck from the rain (1661/1850). I chose blue based on a combination of the availability of woad in 16th c. Ireland (Flavin 2011), the noted fondness of the Irish for bright colors (McClintock 1943), and personal preference.

My reconstruction:

I used Garnhuset wool weaving yarn I purchased from Vävstuga Weaving School in size 20/2 for the warp and 28/2 for the weft. (Check out this video, if you need an explanation of how tablet weaving works.) I made a box loom out of a cardboard box, although I suspect that any loom type that works for tablet weaving would also work for this.

Also used bamboo chopsticks, tape to cover the rough edges of the cardboard, and a shoelace. Not pretty or historically accurate, but cheap and easy to make.

My tablet weaving pattern uses 6 cards. Cards 1,3,5 are Z threaded. Cards 2,4,6 are S threaded. All 6 cards are turned in the same direction until too much twist is built up on the warp to continue, all 6 cards are then turned in the opposite direction until too much twist is build up to continue. Reverse direction and repeat until you run out of warp.

For the weft, I used 5 strands the of 28/2 yarn run together as if they were a single weft thread. I placed a rectangle of sturdy cardboard against the left side of the warp and looped the weft around it as I wove. I neglected to get a good picture of this on my actual loom, so here is a picture of my test piece setup.

The relevant part here is the light blue and purple threads. Ignore the shuttle of black thread.

As I advanced the warp, I slid the cardboard rectangle forward to continue weaving. After I took the completed fringe off the loom, I took a pair of scissors and cut the bottoms of the weft loops.

If you try this, I strongly recommend covering the long edges of your cardboard rectangle with tape. This will both protect your warp from being chewed up the cardboard and make the cardboard more slippery and easier to to slide forward. Also, make sure you are beating the shed well and pulling your weft tight. Once you cut the loops, the tightness of your weave is the only thing keeping your fringe from pulling out.

Results:

I whipstitched the completed fringe to the edge of my brat. I am extremely happy with how this turned out. I had never done tablet weaving with wool before, so I had no idea what to expect.

This method creates a thick, fluffy fringe which I think does a nice job recreating the look of "Drawn after the Quicke". You do lose quite a bit of length though. The wool yarn is kind of stretchy, and tablet weave is kind of stretchy (similarly to a twill-weave fabric). Between the ends of the warp lost to setting up the loom, and the stretchiness of the finished product, 11 ft (335 cm) of measured warp gave me 92 in (234 cm) of completed fringe. Oh, well. At least my loom can easily accommodate a longer warp, and this piece only used 20% of my 2 skeins of yarn.

I did also make a test piece out of DMC Pearl cotton. The warp is size 8 embroidery thread, and the weft is size 25 embroidery floss with all 6 strands used together. It is slightly easier to work with than the wool, (wool warps do have an annoying tendency to stick to each other), but I don't like the way it looks as much.

Wool fringe above, cotton below. Ignore the purple fringe. It has an extra weft thread that is not part of the fringe, which is why it looks more gappy than the light blue.

The cotton tends to stay in its discrete clumps rather than feathering out to form a nice fluffy, connected whole like the wool does.

I then went to the Ren Fair and located an appropriate sword.

(Yes, that's an English kirtle and smock. I haven't finished making my other Irish garments yet.) Me carrying a sword a la Albrecht Dürer's kern.

I really should have made this fringe longer. It's only 1 in (2.5 cm) long. Looking at the scale of Speed's "Civill" woman, I would estimate that hers is closer to 2 inches long. I may add a longer second layer. John Lynch does say that the brat has a doubled layer of fringe in the neck area (1661/1850). Adding a second color to the weft would probably better match William Good's description of "divers well mixt colours" and Paolo Giovio's "variegated," but I like the way the solid blue looks.

As a bonus, I will say that the wool fringe feels softer and nicer than the cheap coating wool I used to make my brat. I suspect that may be part of the reason the 16th-17th c. Irish were so fond of having thick fringes in the neck area, to protect the skin of their necks from the irritation of a brat made of coarse wool. The léine would have protected most of their body, but it largely left the neck bare.

Irish woman wearing a brat with a deep fringe by Wenceslaus Hollar published 1643

Want to give me a tip? Ko-fi page

Bibliography:

Flavin, Susan (2011). Consumption and Material Culture in Sixteenth-Century Ireland. [Doctoral thesis]. University of Bristol.

Gernon, Luke (1620). A Discourse of Ireland. https://celt.ucc.ie/published/E620001/

Good, William (1695). The Ancient and Modern Customs of the Irish. In W. Camden (ed) Camden's Britannia newly translated into English, with large additions and improvements; publish'd by Edmund Gibson (p. 1042-1048) (Edmund Gibson, Trans.). Edmund Gibson. (Original work published 1586) http://name.umdl.umich.edu/B18452.0001.001

Harris, Jason (2007). Ireland in Europe: Paolo Giovio's "Descriptio" (1548). Irish Historical Studies, 35(139), 265-288.

Lynch, John. (1850). Cambrensis Eversus (Matthew Kelly, Trans.). Dublin: The Celtic society. (Original work published 1660) https://archive.org/details/cambrensisevers04kellgoog/page/200/mode/2up

McClintock, H. F. (1943). Old Irish and Highland Dress. Dundalgan Press, Dundalk.

Ó hUiginn, Tadhg Dall (1921). The bardic poems of Tadhg Dall Ó Huiginn (1550–1591) (Eleanor Knott, Trans.). (Original work published 1550-1591) https://celt.ucc.ie/published/T402563/index.html

Speed, John (1611). The Theatre of the Empire of Great Britaine: presenting an exact geography of the kingdomes of England, Scotland, Ireland, and the iles adioyning. William Hall, London.

Killery triús (trews):

photo by hayling billy

Killery outfit with and without brat:

The outfit is generally dated to the 17th c. (Dunlevy 1989). It matches Luke Gernon's 1620 description of Irish men's winter apparel:

"in winter he weares a frise cote. The trowse is along stocke of frise, close to his thighes, and drawne on almost to his waste, but very scant, and the pryde of it is, to weare it so in suspence, that the beholder may still suspecte it to be falling from his arse. It is cutt with a pouche before, which is drawne together with a string."

Additional photos of the outfit: cóta front, hem, buttons, and brat.

Shinrone gown:

photo by hayling billy

The Shinrone gown was found in a bog in 1843 in Co. Tipperary near Shinrone, Co. Offaly. Unlike the Killery outfit, there were no human remains or other items found with it (Briggs and Turner 1986). The ends of the sleeves and possibly also the bottom of the skirt are missing. The sleeves would have had wrist cuffs or ties that allowed them to be fastened around the wearer's wrists. It probably also had loops or rings along the U-shaped center-front opening for lacing. It is typically dated late 16th-early 17th c, based on its similarity to a circa 1575 illustration by Lucas DeHeere and to the dresses described by Luke Gernon in 1620 (Dunlevy 1989, McGann 2000). It could be older however, because Laurent Vital described dresses with this type of sleeve in 1518.

Copyrighted, better quality photos: left front, right front, back Additional details: side-front, front waistline

Tipperary Cóta Mór:

photos from Dunlevy 1989 and hayling billy

Another Cóta Mór. This one is from Co. Tipperary, exact find spot and date unknown. Like the Shinrone gown, it was not found with human remains or other items (Ó Floinn 1995). It is probably also from the 17th century (Dunlevy 1989).

Additional photos: front, side, front buttons, front detail, side

Brat and hats:

photo by hayling billy

I haven't been able to find any clear photos of the label on this display, but based on the excellent condition and the presence of the leather tie, I think this is the Meenybradden woman's brat.

Closeup of the tie:

The Meenybradden woman is a bog body found in Meenybradden bog, Co. Donegal in 1978. The brat was wrapped around her as a shroud and secured with the leather tie (Delaney and Ó Floinn 1995). No other garments or artifacts were found with her, although she may have been wearing a linen garment such as a léine when she was buried. Linen tends to not survive in bogs. The Meenybradden woman has a calibrated radiocarbon date of AD 1130-1310, but some archaeologist have suggested humic contamination from the peat may be throwing off the dating. Her brat is identical in cut to others from the 16th-17th centuries (Delaney and Ó Floinn 1995).

Meenybradden brat laid flat. (photo from Delaney and Ó Floinn 1995)

Wool hats:

Hats from Boolabaun, Co. Tipperary made of wool felt which has been cut and sewn to form the shape. They have togs of unspun wool worked into them giving them the appearance of faux fur. Dunlevy suggests a 15th-16th c date for them (Dunlevy 1989, McClintock 1943).

Wool cloak:

photo by hayling billy

The museum label says it's from Glenmalin bog, Malinmore, Co. Donegal, but I think this may be a mistake. According to Ó Floinn (1995), the artifact with accession number 1946:416 from Malinmore, Co. Donegal is a bale of linen. Ó Floinn's table also gives accession number 1946:416* for a group of clothing from Owenduff, Co. Mayo which includes a gown, a jacket, and a cloak. If the cloak in the photo is actually the one from Owenduff, it is probably from the 17th c (Dunlevy 1989). Alternatively, someone might have misidentified a wool cloak as a bale of linen. The museum label dates this as late Medieval to post-Medieval.

*Either Ó Floinn made a typo or this is a mistake in the museum records. Museums are not supposed to give the same accession number to 2 different artifacts. In the NMI's defense, 1946 was probably a messy year for everyone.

Bibliography:

Briggs, C. S. and Turner, R. C. (1986). Appendix: a gazetteer of bog burials from Britain and Ireland. In I. Stead, J. B. Bourke and D. Brothwell (eds) Lindow Man: the Body in the Bog (p. 181–95). British Museum Publications Ltd.

Delaney, M. and Ó Floinn, R. (1995). A Bog Body from Meenybradden Bog, County Donegal, Ireland. In R. C. Turner and R. G. Scaife (eds) Bog Bodies: New Discoveries and New Perspectives (p. 123–32). British Museum Press.

Dunlevy, Mairead (1989). Dress in Ireland. B. T. Batsford LTD, London.

Gernon, Luke (1620). A Discourse of Ireland. https://celt.ucc.ie/published/E620001/

McClintock, H. F. (1943). Old Irish and Highland Dress. Dundalgan Press, Dundalk.

McGann, K. (2000). What the Irish Wore/The Shinrone Gown — An Irish Dress from the Elizabethan Age. Reconstructing History. http://web.archive.org/web/20080217032749/http:/www.reconstructinghistory.com/irish/shinrone.html

O’Floinn, R. (1995). Recent research into Irish bog bodies. In R. C. Turner and R. G. Scaife (eds) Bog Bodies: New Discoveries and New Perspectives (p. 137–45). British Museum Press.

Looking at this image, I think that Abraham de Bruyn either never actually saw an Irish rider and based this off description alone, or he was intentionally mocking the Irish. There are 2 glaring issues with this portrayal which, when taken together, convince me of this.

The first issue: the Irish man is riding bareback and bridleless. He is the only rider in de Bruyn's book of equestrians shown without some kind of tack. The 16th century Irish rode with saddles and bridles. Multiple primary sources confirm this. John Derrick, even though his book was anti-Irish propaganda, still showed the Irish using saddles and bridles:

The taking of the Earl of Ormond in anno 1600 also shows Irish horses with saddles:

The text next to the horses says, "More horses unbrideled feedinge [sic]," which implies that Irish horses wore bridles when not feeding. English writers Edmund Spenser and Luke Gernon, who lived in Ireland in the late 16th and early 17th centuries respectively, both explicitly described how the Irish saddle and style of riding differed from the English.

My second issue with de Bruyn's illustration: the Irish rider is grasping the horse's left ear in his right hand while the horse is galloping. There is a partial explanation for this bizarre position. An account from an anonymous traveler who visited Ireland c1579 mentions that the Irish mounted by seizing the left ear of the horse (Maxwell 1923), but de Bruyn's rider is shown riding a galloping horse. Even if the Irish were grasping the horse's left ear in their right hand to mount, I cannot imagine that they continued doing so while riding. It would be problematic for several reasons. Horses bob their heads up and down while they are running. (If you have never ridden a horse, this video gives a decent idea what that looks like.) This bobbing would make it difficult and tiring for the rider to keep hold of the horse's ear while they are running. Furthermore, grasping the horse's opposite ear while riding would require leaning forward over the horse's neck while simultaneously leaning slightly sideways. This would incredibly awkward and probably throw off the rider's balance. (It has been 20 years since I took horseback riding lessons, but I do remember that balance is important.) Finally, horses like to move their ears around, and I think they would fight this.

However, in spite of its mistimed portrayal, the fact that de Bruyn seems to have been aware of this specific detail of Irish horsemanship, but either didn't know about or chose not to include Irish tack suggests that he was either working with incomplete information or deliberately making a mockery of the Irish. Neither of these options makes me inclined to trust this image as a depiction of Irish clothing.

Irish soldier (left) and Scottish soldier (right) from Sacri Romani Imperii Ornatus. Item Germanorum, diversarumque gentium peculiares vestitus. vol. 1 by Caspar Rutz published 1588

Caspar Rutz' book Sacri Romani Imperii Ornatus includes a very similar-looking Irish soldier. From the publication dates, I initially assumed that Rutz' soldier was based on de Bruyn's rider. With one small exception, their outfits are basically identical.

Both the rider and the soldier wear a knee-length tunic with long fitted sleeves, belted at the waist. The tunic flares out significantly at the bottom, suggesting that it has triangular gores or godets in the lower part. The tunic is a soft, unstructured garment, a clear contrast to the shaped doublet of Rutz' Scottish soldier. Doublets from this period could be heavily stiffened and shaped with interlining (Arnold 1985). The tunic is probably made of linen or light-weight wool.

The shorter length and long tight-fitting sleeves make this tunic significantly different from the typical 16th c. léine. The 16th c. léine was an ankle-length garment that could be belted up to waist length and had voluminous hanging sleeves that stopped several inches above the wrist. The tunic in Rutz' and de Bruyn's prints does look like one in Albrecht Dürer's 1521 painting of 2 gallowglass, so it may be something that the Irish wore for combat.

A typical 16th c léine (left) and Dürer's gallowglass (right)

The men in both Rutz' and de Bruyn's illustrations are wearing sugarloaf hats embellished with feathers. The sugarloaf hat was a continental fashion rather than an Irish one. Several extant examples of imported 16th-17th c. hats have been found in Ireland though (Dunlevy 1989), so some Irish people were wearing foreign styles during this period.

Both the soldier and the rider are bare-legged. The Irish riding barelegged is another detail mentioned in the c1579 anonymous traveler's account (Maxwell 1923).

Both outfits include a simple knee-length cloak which fastens at the throat, but these cloaks have a significant difference in cut. The neckline of the cloak on de Bruyn's rider has a collar with straight or concave edges and a square corner. These square-cut collars are found on English and continental cloaks in this period (Arnold 1985). The neckline of the cloak on Rutz' soldier, on the other hand, has a turnback with a convex edge and no visible corners. This is a feature of an Irish brat rather than an English cloak.

de Bruyn's rider in an English cloak vs Rutz' soldier possibly wearing an Irish brat

This subtle but culturally significant difference makes me believe Rutz' illustration is not a copy of de Bruyn's, though they may have both been copied from the same source image. de Bruyn likely either didn't know or didn't care about the difference between a cloak and a brat.

Another German book, Stammbuch des Hans Lorenz von Trautskirchen und des Hans Jörg von Elrichshausen unter Verwendung von Bruyn, Abraham de: Diversarum gentium armatura equestris, published between 1575-1615 states in its title that it uses de Bruyn's illustrations of riders. Its version of the Irish rider is slightly different though.

This version leaves off the hat decoration and the cloak completely but keeps the unrealistic ear-grasping position of the rider. The position in the image is only possible because of the unrealistic proportions of the horse. Even on a small horse like a Shetland pony, this actually wouldn't work. Grasping the horse's ear would require the rider leaning forward or at least straightening out their arm.

Rider on a Shetland pony. Note the distance between the rider's hands and the pony's ears.

Finally, there is a painting of an Irish man in Kostüme und Sittenbilder des 16. Jahrhunderts aus West- und Osteuropa, Orient, der Neuen Welt und Afrika, published c.1575-1600 which might be based off of these.

I am not sure why he appears to have just one hanging sleeve or why his triús appear to be rolled up at the ankles. The images in this book appear to be poor-quality copies of other books. I discussed the Irish woman in this book in my previous post.

Biblography:

Arnold, Janet (1985). Patterns of Fashion 3. Macmillan, London.

Derrick, John (1581). The Image of Irelande. London.

Dunlevy, Mairead (1989). Dress in Ireland. B. T. Batsford LTD, London.

Gernon, Luke (1620). A Discourse of Ireland.

Maxwell, Constantia (1923). Irish History from Contemporary Sources (1509-l610). Unwin Brothers LTD, London.

McClintock, H. F. (1943). Old Irish and Highland Dress. Dundalgan Press, Dundalk.