Introduction
This is the second of two posts on women’s clothing in the period 1620-50 from the information in probates and wills. Part 1 looked at women with a probate estate of less than £30. This part is information mainly from wills, where we do not how much the woman was worth, but there is much more information on the textiles and colours of the clothing. Section 1 will provide an introduction and cover the main garments: petticoats, gowns, waistcoats etc. Section 2 will cover linens: coifs, neckwear, wristwear, etc. Section 3 will cover accessories: aprons, gloves, hats, shoes, stockings, etc.
 |
|
Figure 1: Anne Knight 1632, attributed to Augustine Clement. Reading Museum (CC BY NC) |
The parameters
Like probate inventories, women’s wills were less common than men’s. The wills examined, with two exceptions, were proved in consistory courts, that is the court of the local diocese. The start of the Civil War caused disruption to this process, with consistory courts falling into abeyance, and from 1653-60 wills could only be proved at the London based Prerogative Court of Canterbury. Before 1650 where people had items in more than one diocese, then the will would be proved in either York or Canterbury, but otherwise the local bishop’s court was used. The first of the two exceptions is the 1641 will of Frances Middleton, spinster, of Halton, Lancashire, it was proved at York. (1 p. 218) She was described as a gentlewoman, and she left a lot of clothes, but her executor was Christopher Bowes of Halton, a yeoman. The second exception is Elizabeth Sherburne of Heysham, Lancashire, widow of a gentleman. (1 p. 213) The only clothing mentioned in her 1637 will is her best black stuff gown, though she does leave jewellery. Her will was also proved at York.
These are therefore the wills of people who had some money, but were not very rich. In total three hundred and five wills have had information on clothing extracted from them. They are mostly the middling sort and the local gentry. The majority of the women are simply listed as widows, with only 41 of the 305 listed as a spinster or single woman, and only three as “wife of,” indicating their husband was still alive. There are very few where we know the status the husband, but there are widows of yeomen, clerks, rectors, and tradesmen, for example the widow of a skinner. There are several who describe themselves as the widow of an esquire or a gentleman. The silk garments are mainly from the two wills proved in York.
Few women of the middling sort had portraits painted. Figure 1 is Ann Knight, painted in 1632, her husband Roger was a mercer and served as Mayor of Reading in 1615 and 1623. The wives and daughters of aldermen and mayors or towns, the urban elites, are depicted on the tombs of their husbands and fathers. An example of this are the two, very fashionable dressed, daughters of George Monox, Esquire, on the family tomb in St John’s Cirencester. George Monox died aged 68 in 1638, while the daughters are dressed in the latest fashions, both George and his wife wear ruffs. The monument to Sir Moyle Finch (died 1615) and his wife Elizabeth (died 1634) [Figure 2] was made around 1630.
 |
|
Figure 2: Monument to Sir Moyle and Lady Elizabeth Finch. c.1630. Victoria & Albert Museum |
General Appearance
The general appearance of the women of the middling sort can be gathered from the manuscript life of Adam Martindale (1623-86) who wrote, “Freeholders’ daughters were then confined to their felts, pettiecoates and wastcoates, crosse handkerchiefs around their neckes, and white cross-clothes upon their heads, with coifes under them wrought with black silk or worsted. ‘Tis true the finest sort of them wore gold or silver lace upon their wastcoats, good silk laces (and store of them) about their pettiecoats, and bone laces or workes about their linnens. But the proudest of them (below the gentry) durst not have offered to wear an hood or a scarfe (which now every beggar’s brat that can get them thinks not above her) noe, nor so much as a gowne till her wedding day. And if any of them had transgressed these bounds, she would have been accounted an ambitious foole.” (2 pp. 6-7) This image coincides very well with Hollar’s 1640 depiction of a woman often described as a kitchen maid. She wears a waistcoat and two petticoats, and she has lace around the hem of her outer petticoat. Her linen coif has a lace edging, but her neckerchief is plain. [Figure 3] Hollar’s depiction [Figure 4] of the wife of a burgess or master craftsman shows her wearing her gown pulled and pinned back to show her petticoat, she also has an apron, and a plain kerchief.
 |
|
Figure 3: Wenceslaus Hollar. “Kitchen maid” from Ornatus Muliebris, 1640 |
The types of clothing listed
One hundred and thirty two of the wills use the general terms apparel, or raiment, or clothes, often after specific items have been given. In 1621 Margaret Runacre’s will specifies the “rest of wearing apparel not before bequeathed to Susan Keeble.” (3 p. 119) In 1624 Ann Hutton, the widow of a rector, left “unto my servant Jane Harrison my workdaye apparell, ...” (4 p. 173) While most of these residuals are left to daughters, or other relations, many are left servants and, as with Ann Hutton, they are usually the workday or older clothes. In 1620 Katherine Grimble left to her daughters, “all usual wearing linen and woollen, except one petticoat worn everyday and an old cloth gown to my servant Catherine Catchpole.” (3 p. 70)
Main garments
The garments most commonly gifted in wills are the large items, and often information is given on the textile and colour of the garment. There are 276 petticoats (plus 35 kirtles), 178 gowns, 114 waistcoats and 69 cloaks, plus 17 bodies. It is uncertain what suits and riding suits comprised of, however there were 6 suits and 9 riding suits.
Petticoats and kirtles
Six of the petticoats are described as under petticoats, and two of the kirtles as riding kirtles. Seventy five of the garments give a textile, almost all are wool based textiles, there was an occasional mixed fabric such as linsey wolsey (a mixture of linen and wool), and camlet, a textile of which Beck said, “in their production the changes have been rung with all materials in nearly every possible combination ; sometimes of wool, sometimes of silk, sometimes hair, sometimes of hair with wool or silk, at others of silk and wool warp and hair woof.” (5 p. 50) The textile that appears most, twenty five times, is stammel. Stammel can be both a cloth and a colour, it is a type of worsted cloth, almost invariably red, but not always. (5 p. 325) In 1631 Joan Eldred, the wife of clerk and it was noted that she “made her will with the consent of her husband,” left two stammel petticoats, the one she left to her mother is just described as stammel, the other given to Elizabeth Gilman her servant is a “red stammmell petticoat.” This implies that the one given to her mother may not have been red. (6 p. 148) Other common textiles are stuff, appearing eleven times, this is usually a worsted cloth; and cloth, which is a woollen cloth. Worsted cloth is woven from long stapled wool combed straight; cloth is woven from short stapled wool carded not combed. Other wool based textiles appearing less frequently are baize, russet, say and serge. Only six of the petticoats are silk based, three satin and two taffeta, while one is just referred to as silk. Two of these silk garments belonged to Frances Middleton, whose will was proved in York. (1 p. 218)
Seventy eight of the wills give a colour for the petticoat or kirtle. Forty seven are reds: 42 red, 1 crimson, 2 scarlet and 2 grain – grain indicates they were dyed with kermes, which was known as grain. Eight are black and twelve are blues: 8 blue, 3 watchet and 1 azure. Other colours include: 5 green, 2 grey, 2 murrey, 1 violet and 1 deroy. Deroy, according to Cotgrave, “was in old time Purple; but now is the bright Tawnie.” (7)
Petticoats and gowns could be trimmed with laces. Although many may have been needle-made or bobbin laces, some would today be called braid rather than lace. In 1624 Rose Groome had a “best stammel petticoat, laid about with three laces.” (3 pp. 417-8) In 1630 Katherine Goslen had a “petticoat with the black fringe and green binding.” (6 p. 27) In 1622 Joan Marchant left a “stammell petticoat with black and green lace.” (3 p. 204) A few surviving garments that would have had such decoration have had the decoration removed some time in the past. A gown in the Victoria and Albert Museum has fragments of the metal lace that was once around the armhole and down the front of the garment.
 |
| Figure 4: Wenceslaus Hollar. Wife of a London burgess or master craftsman. 1649. |
Gowns
Of the 178 gowns, seven were owned by one woman, Lucy Gobert (1 p. 53), while other women certainly owned more than one gown. In 1620 Christian Smith left to her daughter Joan Oard, “..2 of the worst gowns,” which implies she owns more. (3 p. 77)
Forty five of the gowns give a textile, and unlike petticoats stammel does not appear at all. Like petticoats the predominant textiles are wool based: 14 cloth, 13 stuff, 2 serge, plus frieze, kersey, and say. Eight of the gowns are of grogram, with five of those belonging to Joan Marchant. (3 p. 204) Grograms were imported mainly from the Levant, and appear to be either a coarse silk, or a mixture of silk and mohair. Stubbes separated grograms from silks listing gown textiles thus: “There Gownes be no lesse famous also, for some are of silk, some of velvet, some of grogran, some of taffetie, some of scarlet, and some of fine cloth, of ten, twentie or fortie shillings a yard.” (8) There are two satin gowns, two velvet, one taffeta, and one of a silk damask. Two belong to Frances Middleton, who had her will proved at York, and two to Dame Elizabeth Frevile, whose 1630 will left her niece, “my velvet gowne, my damaske gowne, my satten petticoate, my scarlet petticoat and my riding suite.” (4 pp. 225-9)
Only sixteen gowns have a colour and nine of those are black. The other colours are two red, and one each of green, murrey, violet, pink and deroy. Note that the portrait of Ann Knight [Figure 1], the 1628 portrait of Henry and Dorothy Holme, and the 1645 portrait of the Streatfeilds family (he was an ironmaster and wool merchant) [Figure 5] the women are all wearing black.
 |
|
Figure 5. The Streatfeilds family by William Dobson. 1645. Yale Center for British Art (CC0) |
Waistcoats
While there are 114 waistcoats only fourteen give a textile: 5 cloth, 3 fustian, 2 stuff, 2 linen, one peniston and one taffeta. In addition one is russet, but it is unclear if this is the textile or the colour. Fustian is a mixed textile of wool and cotton. (9) Peniston is a heavy frieze, made from the sheep in the area around Penistone, Yorkshire, those sheep in the sixteenth century were called Forest White (now known as Whitefaced Woodland) and an Act of 1551-2 said the cloth should weigh two pound per square yard. (5 p. 247) Only ten waistcoats give a colour, and three of those are white. The other colours are two red, and one each of blue, green, grey, murrey and tawney.
In 1633 Bridget Barwick, a singlewoman, left her sister Mary, “my best hat, my third petticoat, my best gown, my best cloth waistcoat, and my needlework waistcoat.” (6 p. 256) In 1635 Lucy Gobert, for whom there is an extensive probate listing of clothes, owned “2 wrought and 6 playne wascoates £4.” (1 p. 53) Wrought indicates that the waistcoats would have been embroidered. Waistcoats could also be decorated with lace, for example in 1624 Susan Mason left her daughter a “stuff gown and petticoat, and cloth waistcoat with lace.” (3 p. 422) A fustian waistcoat in the Victoria and Albert Museum has a meandering embroidered pattern and a simple silver bobbin lace trim down the front and around the skirts. [Figure 6]
 |
|
Figure 6: Fustian embroidered waistcoat, c.1630. Victoria and Albert Museum. Acc. No. T.70-2004 |
In 1641 one woman leaves her “best wastcoat and best wast coat sleves,” from which it would seem the sleeves could be separate. (10) Similarly waistcoats could have skirts, Bridget Edwards in 1637 leaves, “To my god-daughter Andrew Gurney's daughter, my daughter Susan's waistcoat with skirts, and her white apron.” (11 p. 120) Occasionally waistcoat linings are mentioned, Joan Balls in 1624 leaves, “To wife of William Allgerson a waistcoat lined with red.” (3 p. 341)
Bodies
There are seventeen bodies in the wills, two are described as overbodies and seven as upper bodies. Margaret Gilliebrowne in 1638 leaves her sister “my best foresleeves and my best overbodice.” (11 p. 222) In 1635 Elizabeth Ory leaves, “to a maid servant of Edward Marten's a pair of upper bodies.” (6 p. 328)
Cloaks [and safeguards]
Only two of the 69 cloaks have a textile, one is linsey woolsey and the other is cloth, also only two of the cloaks give a colour, one is blue and the other red. The cloaks are sometimes matched with a safeguard (a protective overskirt) indicating that they were worn whilst riding. In 1647 Alice Lowe left her daughter in law, “my best coat, cloak and safeguard.” (1 p. 64) In 1636 Margery Noble left her daughter “my best cloak, [and] a riding kirtle.” (11 p. 39)
Coats
There are 36 coats belonging to twenty one women. Only four of the coats give a textile: two of russet, one of linsey woolsey and one of purwcas [probably peropus]. Peropus in the “Allegations on behalf of the worsted weavers” was described as one of “the stuffs called new draperies, or of new invention, [and] are worsted cloths." (12) Sixteen of the coats give a colour: 7 red, 3 blue, 2 green and one each of black, murrey and violet, with one described as russet coloured. One of the coats is decorated with lace, in 1647 Alice Lowe left “To Mary, now wife of Robert Duerden a linsey woollsey coat and a russet colour coat with two laces about the bottom.” (1 p. 64)
References
1. Earwaker, J.P. Lancashire and Cheshire wills and inventories 1572-1696. Manchester : Chetham Society, 1893.
2. Martindale, Adam. The Life of Adam Martindale. s.l. : Cheetham Society, 1845.
3. Allen, M. E. ed. Wills in the Archdeaconry of Suffolk 1620-1624. Woodbridge : Suffolk Records Society, 1988.
4. Wood, H. W. ed. Wills and inventories from the registry at Durham, part 4, [1603-1649]. Publications of the Surtees Society. 1929, Vol. 142.
5. Beck, S. William. The Draper's Dictionary. London : The Warehousemen & Draper's Journal Office, 1882.
6. Evans, Nesta, ed. Wills of the Archdeaconry of Sudbury 1630-1635. Suffolk Records Society. 1987, Vol. 29.
7. Cotgrave, Randle. A Dictionarie of the French and English Tongues. London : Printed by Adam Islip, 1611.
8. Stubbes, Philip. Anatomie of Abuses. London : Richard Jones, 1583. https://www.bl.uk/collection-items/the-anatomy-of-abuses-by-philip-stubbes-1583.
9. Sykas, Philip A. Fustians in Englishmen’s Dress: From Cloth to Emblem. Costume. 2009, Vol. 43, 1.
10. South Pennine Probate Archive. Jane Stansfield of Stansfield, 1641-2, will 1640, probate 1641. [Online] [Cited: Jan 18, 2026.] https://probate.southpenninehistorygroup.org.uk/probate-record/stansfield-jane/.
11. Evans, Nesta, ed. (1993) Wills of the Archdeaconry of Sudbury, 1636-1638. Suffolk Records Society. 1993, Vol. 35.
12. British Library Add. MSS 12504, 64. Allegations on behalf of the worsted weavers ...
