A Note About "Hornys"

During the Middle Ages, headpieces were an integral part of a woman’s dress. Married women were expected to cover their hair either partially or entirely since covering the hair was a sign of modesty and morality during this period. The extravagance of the headpiece depended on the wealth of the family. A woman of the humble means might have used a coif (a simple head covering of cloth which tied below the chin) while an upper class woman would have had a much more ornate headpiece. During the late 14th and 15th centuries wealthier women would have worn a version of the “hornys” that Lydgate refers to in his lyric.

These “hornys” were a particular style of headdress most commonly known as an escoffion (Wilcox 45). These headpieces were also called “bicorns” (sometimes “bicornes”) referring to the appearance of the headpiece which looked like two horns coming from the woman’s temples (“bicorn” is lit erally “two horns” in Latin) (Denny-Brown 144). Certain styles would have been known as bourrelets , which comes from French (as the style originated in France) meaning “to fold or roll” alluding to the way these headdresses were constructed. The horned headdress had evolved from earlier head coverings which were designed around the hair being wound into buns over the ears and covered with cauls (metal mesh used to hold the hair in place). As the style took shape, the cauls became much larger and began to protrude farther from the head. Initially, escoffions were constructed by putting fabrics over a metal framework. Later escoffion —particularly those referred to as bourrelets—were made by rolling or folding padded fabric in order to create the appea rance of horns.

Despite the differences along the range of headdresses called escoffion, there were certain aspects which were present in them all. The most obvious aspect is the presence of the two horns. The horns of early escoffions began at the temples and protruded out to the sides. However, as in the case of the escoffion in Figure 1, some merely had boxlike protrusions resembling the smaller cauls of earlier headpieces while others, like in Figure 2, had long, exaggerated horns. Another characteristic of escoffions was the veil hanging from the back of the headdress. Although they might vary in length—ranging from stopping shortly past the shoulders to nearly continuing to the ground—these veils were present in order to keep the hair covered thereby maintaining modesty. As escoffion styles evolved, the protrusions not only grew smaller but also changed direction.

The later styles of escoffion —mainly during the mid- to late-15th century—called bourrelet maintained the horn style but these horns rose from the head in lieu of out to the sides. These horns also became more rounded and softer as we see in Figures 3 and 4. Bourrelets retained the veil at the back of the headpiece but it was much less exaggerated. Likewise, bourrelets also preserved the covering of the ears with cauls although more exaggerated. Not only would the style of headdress differ from through time and from the wealthy to the poor, but the type of fabric used and the extent to which the pieces were jeweled or ornamented would also change due to sumptuary laws which outlined which fabrics and ornaments could be used by which classes and professions.

Sumptuary laws were enacted in response to the idea that some people dressed above their station—economic, professional, or social. The distinctions between each division and what those of which caste could wear were based on financial power. The more one owned or earned each year would let that person know what cloths and styles he could wear. For example, farmers could only wear clothing of wool while a merchant earning £500 per year could dress in the same manner as a gentleman (Kowleski 248). Moreover, women were only allowed to add certain types of ornamentation depending on rank. While a middle class woman might be able to use gold an upper class woman would be able to use rubies or diamonds in addition to gold or gold plating. However, sumptuary laws were not only about monetary value but also morality. These laws were also reacting to moral issues as they pertained to dress and fashion. Certain fashions—regardless of their popularity—were seen as immoral or promoting immoral actions and sumptuary laws sought to subvert this immorality. Lydgate, in writing his “Dyte” was also responding to these attacks on morality through fashion.

*All images have come from Georgine de Courtais’ Women’s Hats, Headdresses and Hairstyles (Mineola, NY: Dover Publications. 1973). 31-3.

Figure 2 Escoffion c. 1415

Figure 1 Escoffion c. 1415

Figure 4 Escoffion c. 1455

Figure 3 Escoffion c. 1440