In the 80s, we had an art historian in the Netherlands who started to systematically trawl through historical records to find late medieval and early modern embroiderers. She published a couple of great articles on the topic. However, the large overview publication she promised in her 1987 article never saw the light of day. Instead, Prof. Dr. Saskia de Bodt switched to studying illustration. And although I am sure she has a lovely and fulfilling career, I am sad she switched topics! And I am wondering in what state this promised 'large overview publication' is? I did contact her, but never received an answer. In the meantime, I am grateful for the work she did! And I love sharing these somewhat obscure Dutch publications with you.

In the Low Countries, the embroiderers were never organised in their own guild in the medieval period. Could this be because there were rarely enough embroiderers in a particular city in the medieval period to make this worthwhile? Unfortunately, we have very limited sources for the late medieval period. But this seems to be a plausible explanation. So, how did they organise themselves? One thing most cities seem to have in common is that the embroiderers have been organised in one way or another since the late 15th century. Precisely the time when embroidery really takes off in the Low Countries. However, things usually become official much later.

But there are exceptions. Especially in the South (nowadays Belgium). For instance, embroiderers are mentioned as part of the guild of the tailors and doublet makers in AD 1403 in Ghent. Bruges follows in AD 1441. Again, embroiderers are part of a guild together with the quilters and doublet makers. In Antwerp, the embroiderers were among the initiators of the Saint Luke Guild in AD 1382. The Saint Luke Guild is a common guild for many different kinds of artists. The Antwerp Guild united painters, gold and silver smiths, glaziers and wood carvers.

The embroiderers in Amsterdam first belong to the Our Lady Guild of Masons. This guild was formed in the second half of the 15th century. Don't be fooled by the name. Painters, glaziers and other artisans were also part of this masons' guild. In the course of the 16th century, the embroiderers and the other artisans separated to form the Saint Luke guild. The embroiderers of Haarlem belong to the Saint Luke guild from its formation sometime during the late 15th century. Things become official in AD 1514. I found it shocking to read that after the reorganisation of the guild in AD 1631, the embroiderers belonged to the lowest rank of artisans represented by the guild. The painters were the top dogs, of course.

Other cities where the embroiderers belonged to the Saint Luke guild are: Dordrecht, Kampen, Gouda, Rotterdam, Delft, Middelburg, Vlissingen, Veere, Nijmegen, Zwolle, Den Bosch, Bergen op Zoom and Venlo. Why were the embroiderers part of a guild that was or at least became increasingly dominated by the painters? One reason might be that this is how they acquire their patterns. Another is that in sources written in Latin, their profession is named acupictores or painter with a needle. It thus seems that medieval people in the Low Countries (especially in the North) did see embroiderers as painters and not so much as textile workers.

But again, we have some exceptions. In Groningen, the embroiderers were part of the peddlers' guild, together with the passementerie workers. In Utrecht and Rhenen, the embroiderers were part of the tailors' guild. And in Arnhem, they essentially called the Saint Luke Guild the Saint Josef Guild.

And you would probably think that the embroiderers would be well off within the tailors' guild. After all, the embroiderer makes the orphreys that the tailor then attaches to the vestment he has cut and put together. Good relations between embroiderers and tailors are thus important. And they probably were amicable as long as the job was high-end and complicated. But things became muddled when the job required 'simple' embroidery or 'simple' sewing. For instance, when vestments were mended. This overlap was the centre of much dismay and legal action between the two professions.

I hope you've enjoyed learning a bit more about the organisation of medieval embroiderers in the Low Countries. My Journeyman and Master Patrons will have access to an English translation of the chapter by Saskia the Bodt on which this blog is based. It contains a wealth of information and a bibliography for further research.

Next week, I will have a brand new embroidery tutorial for you. And from the 1st of December onwards, all my Patrons will have access to a digital advent calendar with daily delicious embroidered eye candy. I am a huge fan of advent calendars! No matter what is in them. So far, I have tea, coffee, chocolate, illustrations, meditation texts and digital. An impressive 15 different ones! You see, my friends know about my advent calendar addiction too. And they are very glad to help me out :).

Literature
Bodt, S. de, 1987. De professionele borduurwerkers, in: Bodt, S. de, Caron, M.L. (Eds.), Schilderen met gouddraad en zijde. Rijksmuseum Het Catharijneconvent, Utrecht, pp. 8–19.

For my research into late-medieval goldwork embroidery, I sometimes stumble upon interesting papers that were published a long time ago. They are usually written in Dutch, German or French and thus probably inaccessible to most of you. Today, I am going to introduce the story of embroidery master Peter Joosten from Amsterdam who accepted an order for an embroidered chasuble cross for the St. Walburgskerk (St Walburg Church) in Zutphen, the Netherlands. Not everything went as smoothly as the churchwardens had hoped as master Joosten turned out to be quite a character. Unfortunately, the actual embroidery has not survived.

The story starts on the feast of Corpus Christi in AD 1544 when churchwarden Coenraad Slindewater and his brother receive master Joosten and his son. They discuss the possibility of master Joosten making a golden chasuble cross for a new chasuble for the Walburgskerk. The churchwarden pays for bed and board of master Joosten and his son at Evert Meijerijnck's house and for their travel expenses from Amsterdam to Zutphen. The church accounts also list expenses for the linen embroidery cloth and its shipping to Amsterdam and expenses for the design drawings. The payment for the later is made to glazier Johan Yseren. This is not unusual as embroidery patterns are more often made by glaziers (Van den Hoven van Genderen 2015) who needed to be able to paint in order to make leaded church windows.

Master Joosten and his son travel to Zutphen again on the last day of February AD 1545 to sign the work contract. All expenses are paid for by the churchwarden. Master Joosten and his son even receive money for the loss of earnings whilst travelling. The contract stipulates that the churchwardens lend the embroidery pattern to master Joosten and will receive it back when the chasuble cross is finished. The embroidery should look better as both that of the cross that was shown to master Joosten by the churchwardens and better than the cross master Joosten had taken with him to show the churchwardens. Regarding the embroidery materials used: Master Joosten should only use the best materials and he should source the pearls himself (and being paid separately for them).

Master Joosten demands a fee of 25 pont groit (probably the golden Carolus Guilder in use at the time). However, the churchwardens offer only 20 and the promise that the finished work will be valued upon completion. If to be found of a value more than 20 pont groit, master Joosten will receive a higher fee. It was apparently not easy for lay-people to judge the quality and value of goldwork embroidery. A stipulation like this in which the finished work is valued by a group of people is not unusual (for instance the work of Mabel of Saint Edmunds, embroideress for Henry III in London, was valued by "the better workers of the City of London" (Kent Lancaster, 1972)).

The work contract also stipulates that master Joosten will finish the work as quickly as he can. He is forbidden to take on other work as long as the golden chasuble cross has not been finished. And whilst the churchwardens sign the contract with their full names, master Joosten uses a mark similar to that seen with stonemasons. It is thus likely that he was illiterate.

On the 30th of July AD 1546, more than a year (!) after signing the work contract, master Joosten and his son travel to Zutphen again. They show the churchwardens part of the golden chasuble cross (the cross likely consists of several separate orphreys). Again, the churchwarden pays for travel, board and bed for both. And master Joosten goes back to Amsterdam and goes silent. It will take until the autumn of AD 1547 before a badly written letter reaches the churchwardens in which master Joosten asks for the patterns for the rest of the cross. He promises, that when he gets them in time, he will meet them at Easter to deliver the finished cross. However, Easter comes and goes and there is no chasuble cross. But the churchwardens do receive another letter in which master Joosten apologizes for the delay, but he has an abscess on his hand. He promises to meet them two weeks after Pentecost.

This time, he sticks to his word. Fourteen days after Pentecost AD 1548, he brings them so many orphreys that they can make up half of the cross. The churchwardens pay him 5 pont groit for his work. And as always, all the other expenses for him and his son.

Master Joosten does not speed up at all. Instead, he goes shopping. The Friday after the second Sunday of Lent in AD 1549 (!) he begs the churchwardens to pay for the oxen he has bought from Andries te Griffel. And guess what: the church wardens did pay for the oxen!

The churchwardens are finally having enough on the 25th of January AD 1550. They sent master Joosten a letter in which they threaten with the law. This helps. He and his daughter come to Zutphen and deliver the other half of the golden chasuble cross on the 14th of September AD 1550. The churchwardens, together with Johan Schymmelpenijncks (in which home the meeting takes place), Alphert van Till, Rense van Holthusen, the brother and brother-in-law of Coenraad Slindewater. These seven men appraise the work of master Joosten and decide that he shall get his 25 pont groit (minus part of the fee he had already been given in AD 1546). And again, they pay for everything for master Joosten and his daughter. In total, the chasuble cross has cost the churchwardens: I Cxxij gl. van xxviij st. br. xxij st. br. ende V placken. The author of the paper writes in a footnote that this amount "shall have been more than two-thousand guilders in today's money". According to the historical calculator on the website of the CBS, this would be the equivalent of € 25665 or $30480. No wonder the churchwardens were so lenient with master Joosten. They had invested thousands in AD 1546 and were afraid that it would all be for nougth if they pushed master Joosten over the edge. It also becomes clear that master Joosten probably violated the work contract as he must have taken on other work too. The above-mentioned fee would not have sustained him and his family over the six years it took to deliver the complete golden chasuble cross. But why he needed an oxen for his goldwork embroidery is anybody's guess :).

Literature
Hoven van Genderen, B. van den, 2015. Gewaden op papier. Kerkelijke textilia in Utrechtse archiefstukken. In: M. Leeflang & K. van Schooten (eds), Middeleeuwse borduurkunst uit de Nederlanden, p. 14-23.
Kent Lancaster, R., 1972. Artists, Suppliers and Clerks: The Human Factors in the Art Patronage of King Henry III. Journal of the Warburg and Courtauld Institutes 35, p. 81–107. This title can be read online for free through JSTOR.
Meinsma, K.O., 1901. Geschiedenis van een kazuifel, vervaardigd door Mr. Peter Joosten, borduurwerker te Amsterdam voor de St. Walburgskerk in Zutphen, Oud Holland 19 (2), p. 77-85. This title can be read online for free through JSTOR.

Research into professional embroidery goes in and out of fashion. At the moment, it is clearly in fashion with many new exciting publications becoming available in Germany, France and Italy. In many cases, their analysis of the embroidery trade in the medieval period depends on a few older sources. One of these famous sources is Goetz 1911 on the silk embroiderers of Munich. Unfortunately for most of us, it is written in German with the added difficulty of being printed in Frakturschrift. And since it was written more than a hundred years ago, it is quite difficult to get hold of. A few weeks ago, I was able to buy a second-hand copy! And I started to translate it into English. Being originally written in old-fashioned German with at least half of it in medieval and early-modern German, translation was slow. And since these older versions of German are even more fond of VERY long sentences, the resulting English is not always pretty. But it will do! A PDF of the result is available at the end of this blog article :).

So far, I have not been able to find out who the writer, Ms Gertrud Goetz, was. Since her article was published in the Journal of the Historical Society of Upper Bavaria, she was probably a member there. And the fact that she had access to the original historical sources and could decipher them, points at her being a historian or similar. The resulting article is really informative and quite lovely to read. One gains a lot of insight into the lives of embroiderers from the 15th- till the 18th-century.

Throughout the centuries, three main adversaries tried to mess with the official embroiderers of Munich: women, people from Augsburg and the French. Some things never change, LOL. No seriously: this is actually really sad. Although the guild regulations of Munich are often quoted to prove that women were allowed to embroider, when you read the original texts, a different picture emerges. One we already know from the guild regulations in the Netherlands. Women were not excluded from the embroidery guilds, but in real-life they just did not become master craftswomen nor do we see them individually in official documents related to the guilds. Only one of the Munich historical sources mentions a woman: a master's widow with her son. And guess what: she is not playing by the rules. Neither are the others. But she is perceived as a problem.

From what I deduct from the sources, the picture that emerges is this: In the beginning, the professional embroiderers of Munich were all male and they worked for the elite and the church. Since Munich was rather a large village than a metropolis, there was never really enough of this employment. The male embroiderers needed to supplement their schedule with 'simpler' work. Unfortunately for them, this was already the realm of women. One such item made by women was the Riegelhaube. This is a heavily gold-embroidered bonnet typical for the folk dress of the upper-middle class. In 1793, the only leftover embroidery master of Munich, Jakob Gelb, tries to forbid these practices by pressing the city council to hold a police raid. He even hands in a list with the addresses of the culprits. All women and a single man. And Jakob is not an unreasonable man: he demands that he can pull any of these illegal embroiderers in as workers when his workload demands it. Instead of giving them the same full rights to exercise the embroidery trade as he holds them, he wants these women to work for him when he so desires... Only three decades later, this results in new trade regulations for Bavaria. From now on, embroidery is a free trade exclusively executed by women. The reason for this: just like with other female occupations, embroidery is an occupation that does not require training nor learning. Just so you know!

In order for you to study the original sources for yourself and to draw your own conclusion, please find a PDF of the original publication and my crude translation below:

Literature
Goetz, G., 1911. Die Münchener Handstickerei zur Zeit der zünftigen Gewerbeverfassung (1420-1825), Altbayerische Monatsschrift 10 5/6, p. 107-114.
Wetter, E., 2012. Mittelalterliche Textilien III Stickerei bis um 1500 und figürlich gewebte Borten. Abegg Stiftung: Riggisberg.

P.S. The publication mentions a roll of coats which contains eight coats of arms of embroiderers. These coats of arms display broche/brodse/Bretsche. Unfortunately, the name of the document is so vague, that the librarian of the Bayrische Nationalmuseum so far could not identify it.