Probably not the best thing that my first post on here is on a bit of a controversial topic... I've just been reading these forums for quite a while now and eventually decided to move on from just lurking


I'd start by agreeing that this way of dressing is probably considered proper and formal... I'm just not sure that the sources that have been used to reinforce this point are completely reliable in how they're interpreted. Mainly the artwork of the time. True, the majority of paintings show people layered up in this way (and I'm aware there are exceptions in some specific cases), but I'm curious about the cultural mindset, and how strictly real people would adhere to the convention even on the sunniest days.
If we were to look at and interpret 21st century stock photos in a similar way 500 years from now, what impressions would we get about current fashions? I'm sitting opposite a big Health and Safety poster that shows immaculately presented builders, in brand new Hi-Vis vests, all the correct PPE etc... And yet when I've worked on building sites, I see dirty hoodies, knackered trainers, stubbled faces, hi-vis vests covered in oil and hardly distinguishable from the rest.
Or perhaps people could look at the "cereal box family" as shown modelling modern camping gear etc. Are they more likely to show dad in a smart-casual check shirt, loafers etc, everyone well presented... or are they more likely to show a more typical situation with bed hair, a mixture of pyjamas and winter jackets etc, and the family arguing over who gets the last of the milk...
Perhaps even more relevant is how businessmen are usually photographed in complete suits. As I see it, it's the closest cultural equivalent, where a certain, smart, dress standard is culturally expected rather than mandatory and enforced. Sure, they'd wear a complete 3-piece suit while meeting customers, while being photographed, while 'presenting' themselves in formal situations, but wandering around the City it's not unnaceptable to just have the shirt, and sling your jacket over your shoulder. I'm not saying that you'd hang a doublet off your shoulder like an 80's yuppie... But in situations where you want to present yourself properly, you'd have these layers... But I don't think everyone would rather die of heat than be considered 'naked'.
So perhaps in the context that medieval paintings would have been drawn, isn't that the same kind of airbrushing we see even nowadays totally misrepresenting reality? I'd agree that the proper and formal thing to do would be to wear these 3 layers, and in 'smart' situations i'd totally agree with needing to wear them. But at a re-enactment we usually portray a siege camp. Would people in siege camps have been so conscious about how smart they look? I think on the really scorching weekends, out of town, camping and campaigning, nobody would really care to see someone wearing just a shirt and pourpoint (admittedly at least something to tie your hose up with).
When I come off the field and de-armour after a battle on a hot day, I take off all the sweat soaked layers, and spend about 20 minutes shirtless before feeling dry enough to put something else dry on. I can't imagine people having been *that* different back then. Surely you wouldn't take off your breastplate and instantly replace it with heavy layers before anyone sees you nude in just a shirt and hose?
Sorry that's long, just my thoughts on the matter. I'm trying to look at more than just the pictures, and consider how the fashionable mindset adapts to 'real life'.