Necklines varied in shape and height over geography and times. One can find evidence for cotehardies that lie off the shoulder or up to the neck. Likewise, fabrics and decor of the garment varied over geography, time, and of course price ranges. A wealthier person may have been able to afford velvets and silks. (Velvet during this time was a special type of silk according to my sources.) Courderoy was also a period fabric for the wealthy. Poorer classes also wore a similar garment and theirs would most likely have been made from wool or other less expensive material. The wealthier one's class, the more fabric that could be used on a dress. Linen too was an extensively used material, made from grown flax. This was often the ubiquitous undergarment fabric for both the wealthy and common people. Frankly, I think it was the only stuff that probably didn't itch too much.
Undergarments are rare in pictoral evidence (though I have found some and included them on this page). Let's face it, the Church and medieval society probably didn't approve of painting people in their underwear. However, it is most likely that both men and women wore linen underdresses or shirts. The undergarment, if loosely shaped like the cotehardie itself was referred to as a kirtle (according to my sources). However, this term seems to vary much in period. Sometimes the undergarment appeared to just be a long shirt, unfitted, sometimes belted, referred to as a tunic. This would have been long on women and obviously shorter on men. Some recreationists support the fact that a chemise may have been worn under the cotehardie. This is of course possible because of the regional/time/status variation of the garment, and simply mysterious nature of undergarments. A chemise then was probably a tunic, but today we refer to a garment of this name as a loose shirt with drawstrings or gathering at the neckline and wrist, sometimes adjustable. I myself wear both chemises and tunics beneath my garments, depending on style and weather.
A very rich person could have afforded several layers of fabric, and often these are shown off by the gathering of an overskirt in a belt to show the layer(s) beneath. Short sleeved cotehardies over long sleeved garments also existed. Sleeves were decorated by long lines of buttons that could have been made of either cloth or potentially bone, wood, or precious metals or stones. (Some recreationist maintain the expensive technology limits the probability of button materials other than cloth, but I think anything is pretty much game.) Often tippets, or decorative bands of streamer like material, were secured around the arm for adornment. In later periods they seemed to grow more ornate. Some were made out of cloth, others were fur. The type of attachment varied--some appeared to have been sewn to the actual garment themselves. At any rate, they were a very effective way of showing off wealth.
Fabric varied as I mentioned in previous paragraphs. Patterned fabrics were certainly used, but I have noticed a slight trend. Cotehardies in Italian depictions seem to show patterned fabrics earlier than do pictures from other European nations. I think this is may be due to their access to eastern trade routes. Later on, as many visitors to this page have mentionned to me, patterned fabrics become more prevalent in northern European countries such as England and France. In either case, plain fabric could be worn above or below patterned fabric, and you will have to make up your own mind on whether you prefer a patterned overgarment or undergarment. Remember, please take this information with a grain of salt. I rely simply on what cotehardie depictions I've seen to make my statements.
Other forms of adornment shown with the cotehardie include long deocrated leather or metal belts, for both men and women. I would recommend looking at pictures on the various image pages. The surcoat was also a form of adornment for the cotehardie style of dress. It appears to have become more prevalent in the 1400's than earlier, and seems to be more popular on women than on men. From what I can gather, the surcoat appears to have originally started out centuries earlier as a form of male dress, typically worn over armor, and was adopted later in the 13th century by women. The surcoat is simply a sleeveless often unfitted tunic that fits over the top of the cotehardie. Later on, the sides were even taken out of the female style of this garment. I heard it was often referred to as the "Gates of Hell." My dear friend Elonwen says this is because you could look through the wide-open side and see the risque' lady figure beneath. Thank you Elonwen. :) At any rate, it was a good way to show off the cotehardie from beneath. The central part that was fitted over the torso has been seen made out of cloth, fur and even has exhibited what appears to be a long strip of precious metal, jewelry and more often buttons. The length of the surcoat extended to the floor over the cotehardie. You can see the Accessories page for examples.
Headpieces also varied greatly during this time, and I recommend looking at the other categories on this website, particularly Accessories if you want to get more ideas on head gear.
Below I have included a picture of an actual cotehardie garment from period. It is a woman's dress from the Norman settlement of Herjolfsnes, Greenland. It is said to have been made from the 14th to 15th century, and exibits goring. Gores gave fullness to the skirt because fabric width in period was much slimmer than it was today. (Looms simply weren't as wide.) I hope this gives you some idea as to what a cotehardie really is.
This short excerpt was written by my own eavesdropping, knowledge from acquaintances and my examination of historical-pictoral evidence. If you notice any errors in this description, please notify me. If you think I've copied someone elses work you know where to stick it. --A.L.N.
