Sumptuary Laws
Portia Scott • February 27, 2025

The Odd Use of Sumptuary Laws in Old England’s Fashion

Sumptuary Laws are laws or codes enacted to restrict what a government might consider excessive expenditures or improper posturing. Of course, in these United States, we have nothing which would prevent us from buying a dozen jet planes if we wanted to do so and many wealthy folks have collections of interesting cars and boats and all sorts of conspicuous consumption. Although, it is illegal for folks to wear certain uniforms to which they are not entitled: military and law enforcement, for instance. But, in the middle ages England, there were laws which limited, among other things, what kind of fabric one could wear, based on the person’s social status and identity.


You may have known that at that time, unless royal, people could not wear the color purple - it was strictly forbidden and wearing it could result in an accusation of treason, and we all know what happened to folks accused of treason against the crown. (Just one of the outrages surrounding Anne Boleyn’s romance with Henry VIII: she showed up at Court wearing purple before she was married to him, proclaiming herself as royal - which she was not yet - and the King had bought her the fabric: scandalous!)


However, when it came to fashion in merry old England, there were many other similar taboos. 


Even if you could afford it, you could not wear cloth of gold (a fabric with actual gold woven into it) or certain furs, unless you were Royal. Similarly, if you were the wife of a knight, you could wear damask, silk, or taffeta, but you could not if you were of a lower rank.


Everyone could wear linen, but knights were prohibited from using weasel fur in their clothing. Only Royalty and Peers could wear ermine, and one still had to be Noble to wear fox hides.


Only knights and higher social status folks were allowed to wear satin or velvet.


But these laws were not just limitations; there were also compulsory items. Woolen caps had to be worn by males over age 6 on Sundays for anyone lower than a noble; it was mandatory.


Speaking of wool, even the type of wool was restricted to different classes or ranks.


Beyond that, even if you were of the correct rank, you also had to have a certain level of income to be allowed to wear what you wanted.


There were other aspects of Sumptuary Law beyond fabrics and accessories. These could include restrictions on the cut of woman’s gown, gemstones and precious metals, the style of carriages or furniture, the permitted length of a man’s sword, even what food one could eat. 


The reasons given for these rules were stated as minimizing English money going abroad for fabrics and to keep folks from overspending for the good of their souls, but it also allowed people to know each other’s rank and status at a glance.


Share this article

By Portia B. Scott, J.D.,L.L.M. February 19, 2026
For those of you who like history, consider the study and application of law. Studying history is, effectively, 90% of what we attorneys do. When there is a lawsuit, for instance, you obviously want your client to win. The methods of winning are, of course, having the facts on your side but you also need to have the law on your side or, extremely rarely, you change the law. The first question for the attorney is, "What does the applicable statute say?" followed closely by "How have other courts handled this question in the past?" These are the starting point for an attorney, once she knows (or think she knows) what has happened. Let's take an incapacity determination as an example. The worried daughter comes in after having spent some quality time with her father over the holidays. She indicates that her dad said and did some things which made her question if it is okay for him to continue to live alone. The attorney asks questions about her father, including how long has he been living alone? Has he been diagnosed with anything? How about his physical abilities, are they impaired at all? The daughter tells us that, after his wife died a few months ago, Dad suddenly spiraled downward. This may or may not be true, though it is certainly the daughter's perception. Was his wife actually covering for him for years and did such a good job no one noticed? Maybe. We learn that father has a degree in accounting and supported himself and the family with an accounting business. Now, he does not seem to know how to balance his accounts. Still, when asked, he said he did not need to write it down. "It is all up 'in the cloud' now." He needs a walker, but often forgets to use it. He has fallen twice in the last couple of months, but does not remember how long ago or that he went to the hospital, saying later, "oh, yes, but that was just the ER." He used to wear button down shirts but now only pull overs - saying that he wore a shirt and tie for too many years while he worked. But, he did mis-buttoned his shirt the one night when they went out for dinner. He cannot figure out how to turn off his phone and sometimes confuses the handset from his land-line for the remote control for the television. Specifically, the daughter met a young man who has been helping dad around the house and who says he can get insurance to pay for his help if dad will sign an "insurance" form. Dad's eyesight isn't so good, but the young man has been so helpful and he would like him to get paid from Medicare, so he signs. But, the young man won't give a copy to her father or the daughter. The daughter is concerned about that happening again, with an unscrupulous person and, perhaps, this young man. So, our first study of history is the father's own immediate past. Over the last 10 years, what has changed. For the answers to this, we need to consult with the daughter. Maybe he was always like this. Once we know that, no, this is different, the daughter decides that, because Dad has a financial Power of Attorney and a Designation of Health Care decision-maker, there is no need for a Guardian. She just needs to make sure that Father cannot do himself any financial harm, unless he understands truly what he is doing. Now, we start our next historical search. What are the standards which our elected officials over the past years (the legislature) have established for the Judges to observe. After a review of the prior Legislatures' directions on how to proceed and who may do so, we perform quick up-date to see if that statutory law has undergone any changes and, if not, the real history search begins. We need to look at the decisions prior courts have made about any special question. Does the fact that dad had not been diagnosed wth dementia prior to him signing the nice young man's "insurance authority" matter? Especially now that we have discovered it was actually a Deed to his house? We find the cases which were argued and won by people in the daughter's position. Then we find the similarities and, equally important, the differences. If our history lesson provides us with old cases, which have been approved time after time before us clearly reflecting the daughter's position, we can bring those cases to our judge's attention to be successful in our attempt to keep her father from signing away his house again, after being exploited by his illness and the young man's greed. This is but one, tiny example of how our history is part of everything we, as attorneys do, day in and day out. It emphasizes that we are history ourselves. Some day in the not-too-distant future, attorneys (or their Al assistants) will cite our very work either as an example of how things should be done or, heaven forbid!, how they should not be done.
By Portia B. Scott, J.D., L.L.M. September 22, 2025
For many families, the home is the single asset with the most value. I understand that financial planners do not like to include the equity in the home when making determinations of wealth, but sometimes it is worth considering. Three questions and accompanying scenarios especially come to mind for the Elder Law practitioner. First, how can a client use the equity in the home to fulfill the client's desire to age in place? Second, does the client need to spend all of the home's value before Medicaid will help when moving into long term care? Third, what, if anything, can be left by the client for the children once the client is gone? In Florida, the answers are as follow. If the client has significant equity in the client's home, a Home Equity Line of Credit ("HELOC") or a Reverse Mortgage are options to be considered. The differences between the two are that a HELOC tends to be less expensive way of accessing the equity in the home, at least initially, but does require monthly repayments to be made on the loan. So, the borrower witl need to include some repayment in the monthly household budget. The borrower has greater options about where the borrower lives. For instance, if the borrower chooses to go live in an assisted living facility, as long as the HELOC is being repaid, there is no issue. This means, among other things, the borrower could rent the property out and use the net proceeds to pay the HELOC. (There are other issues this would bring up including those regarding homestead, however.) A Reverse Mortgage, on the other hand, tends to be more expensive (typically higher interest rates and, often, origination expenses) but does not have to be paid back until the borrower dies or otherwise stops living in the home. This means that if the borrower wants to live at home, the borrower can use the equity to pay for household expenses, taxes, home health aides or companions, lawn care and any other duties the borrower can not, or maybe just does not want to, perform. Does the dient need to spend all of the home's value before Medicaid will help with long term care? Not in Florida, no. In 2025 if a single persons owns a home with less than $730,000.00 in equity and that person need Medicaid to help with long term care bills (nursing home), as long as the patient otherwise meets Medicaid requirements, the patient may keep their home. When the person passes away, the family can inherit the home without worrying about that particular asset being subject to Medicaid State Estate Recovery ("claw back"). With the right plan in place, the last, possibly most valuable asset of the nursing home patient, the client can create the legacy for the children after the patient is gone. More than $730,000.00 in equity? Maybe the client can borrow against the house and use the funds (not gifting the funds) thereby lowering the actual equity down to below $730,000.00? Buying a more expensive car, putting on that new roof the insurance company is going to require soon anyway, upgrading to impact windows, remodeling the kitchen with all new appliances and flooring throughout, taking a trip to see loved ones, paying estimated future income taxes: all of these are ways to spend that "excess" equity. For a married couple when one of them is in a nursing home and the other is not and remains in the community, this community spouse does not have to spend down any of the equity of the house the couple owns.  Finally, if a homestead is left to someone who is descended from the homeowner's grandparent (l know, it is a long way to say blood relative), the home can be left to such a person without having to pay Medicaid any of the asset the homestead represents. Further, because of the "stepped up" basis in the house, leaving a home can truly create a way of ensuring an inheritance which many people consider very valuable indeed.