The covered mouth of women

When dealing with depictions of 16th century women and fashion for more than ten years, its only a matter of time before one encounters a strange detail in some of the female clothing: depictions of women with their mouths covered by a piece of linen attached to their headgear. A reoccurring example of this is two women seen in the train of a military unit, from 1530, and they have caused both discussions and theories:


To the far left we see a woman with her mouth covered, friendly held by another woman in a big hat and a little dog under her arm:


To the far right we find an almost identical headgear with the mouth covered, this time worn by a woman with a walking stick and yet again a little dog as company:


As far as I can remember, at least in Sweden, these strange face coverings have been explained as simply covers for dust and dirt. This can definitely seem logic at first glance. But if this would be the case – how come we don’t see these “dust covers” a lot more often worn in trains for the army during this period? And never on men or children?

The “dust cover” theory does seem more improbable when you encounter quite different depictions of 16th century women with covered mouths. Firstly they depict women in entirely different situations where dust and dirt can hardly be the reason for covering their mouth. Secondly they depict higher class city women who are the very opposite from the socially low ranked women in the army trains. These women, often on their way to or in church, do they really need to protect their mouths from dust & dirt? Let me give you a couple of examples:


“Swiss Women on the way to church”, Hans Weigel. 1577


“Kneeling woman”, Hans Baldung gen. Grien. 1520.


“A woman from Leipzig dressed to go to church”, Hans Weigel. 1577.

In the Wavel Castle, in Krakow Poland, there is a 16th century head bust in the ceiling that depicts a woman with the very same covered mouth. It was here I first heard the explanation that this woman was having her mouth covered as a sign of grief – shes was a widow, they claimed. Here is a small replica of the Wavel head:


I found this explanation slightly macabre, until I recently stumbled over this depiction of Katharina von Bora – the wife of Reformation founder Martin Luther. The woodcut is from 1546, the same year Luther died:


This is where the theory of the “dust cover” is starting to crumble – why would the noblewoman and wife of the famous Martin Luther run around with a dust cover, in the middle of a German city? I decided to look further into this.

In the book “Women in Early Modern Europe, 1500-1700” we find this comment on the woodcut of Katharina von Bora:

We do not know whether she and other widows literally bandages their mouth as the portrait show, but the image suggests the power of these ideals. Because chastity, silence and obedience were even harder to achieve for widows, lacking male moral guidance, than for other women, widow were advised to lead quite lives, withdrawn for the world and its temptations, and to devote themselves to prayer.

As we have noticed there are many more depictions of women with covered mouths, in the same fashion as Katharina von Bora. But this idea that a widow should signal chastity, silence and obedience is something that is well spread during this period, and can be recognized in for example the humanist Juan Luis Vives (1492-1540) who proclaimed that:

A good widow ought to suppose that her husband is not utterly dead, but liveth both with life of his soul and beside her with remembrance. Therefore let her live and do so, as she shall think to please her husband—- let her take him for her keeper and spy, not only of her deeds but also of her conscience.

In practice this meant that the general opinion was that women should indeed continue practice chastity, silence and obedience even after her husband had passed, an attitude that is clearly demonstrated in the picture of grief of Katarina von Bora.

The historian Susan Kurant-Nunn noted in the book “Venomous Tongues: Speech and Gender in Late Medieval England” that:

[…] several sixteenth-century German funerary monuments of widows depict them with their clothing pulled up to cover their mouth. Karant-Nunn has interpreted the motif as a symbolic representation of Mundtod(“deadmouth”), the legal principle by which medieval German widows were denied a legal voice or identity but were instead covered by the legal personalitites of one of their male relatives.

Kurant-Nunn have also written the book “The reformation of Ritual, and interpretations of Early Modern Germany” where depictions of widows in attending burial ceremonies have the exact same covered mouths are also mentioned.

According to the book “Representing Judith in Early Modern French Literature the common view during the early modern period was that “silence, the closed mouth, made a sign of chastity. And silence and chastity are, in turn, homologous to woman’s enclosure within the house”. Especially silence, and the closed mouth, is during this period accordingly viewed as a social sign of chastity and possibly also religious devotion.

In the book “Widowhood in Medieval and Early Modern Europe” there is yet another passage on the woodcut of Katharina von Bora and her covered mouth:

A powerful image of the mourning widow has survived in the unique portrait of Katharina von Bora entitled “D Martini Lithers nachge-lassene Witfrawn/in ihrer Traurung” (the widow of Martin Luther in mourning). The colored woodcut is dominated by the figure of Katharina wrapped in a black fur coat with a prayer book in her hands. The command for silence is symbolized by a long ribbon, which falls from the hat and ties her mouth.

We now have in print that the woodcut of Katharina states that she is 1) a widow 2) in mourning. In the book “Widowhood in Medieval and Early Modern Europe” the author explains that within both catholic and protestant faith widows were expected to withdraw and lead a pious life after their husband had passed away. Widows were allowed to remarry, but only after one year of grieving had passed. During the 16th century this expectation of a one year abstinence slowly changed from being lawfully binding, into something that was more socially expected from society – especially in protestant countries where nunneries did not exist and was there for not an option for the widows. Instead widows were expected to remarry, but AFTER their period of grief.

Knowing this it seems quite logical that the women with covered mouths are signalling that they are going through a period of grief – symbolizing silence, chastity and inaccessibility to men or to marriage.9

But as we apparently find the same practice among simple low class women in the train of mercenaries (women of low social status hardly famous for their piety or religious devotion), there is reason to believe that the practice occurred among high born as well as low. Possibly during the one year of grief when women were expected to withdraw? And as we all know, deaths among males are quite frequent among military escapades.

Dare we conclude that the two women in the first 1530 depiction probably are soldier widows? I believe we can.

After publishing this entry for the first time in Swedish, I was contacted by some people with even more depictions of women covering their mouths. For example this painting that can be found in the city church of Wittenberg, painted by Cranach d.y, 1569:


What is this picture called? Well: “Resurrection of the Widows son from Nain“.

Also, a very nice English woman sent me these beautiful 16th century memorial pieces from the Stephansdom in Vienna, commemorating different important men and many of their wives are depicted with their mouths covered just the same way as above:

Stephansdom Vienna

Widow after a husband that died 1574


From the same church, where the husband died 1567.

After receiving this last depictions, I’m starting to wonder if the practice of covering the mouths of widows perhaps is a northern European one, as most of the sources I have are from Austria, Germany & English. At this point I’m still waiting to find evidence of this practice from other parts of Europe during the period – this would not be unlikely as the idea of silence as a female pious virtue is spread all over Europe during the 16th century.

Update 2018-07-24:

Noble woman from Meissen 1577

Noble woman from Meissen 1577

Today I received this picture from a swedish woman. It depicts a noble woman from Meissen in 1577. I asked friends to help me translate the old german text on it and behold, this is what it says:

Noble women from Meissen in mourning attire

When someone of noble birth (…)
in the land of Meissen dies
Noble women then
in such dress mourn

I dare say that my case just might be closed… 😉

Suggested further reading, for the curious:

Maids, Wives, Widows: Exploring Early Modern Woman’s Lives 1540-1714

Widows and Suitors in Early Modern English Comedy

From Wives to Widows in Early Modern Paris

11 thoughts on “The covered mouth of women

  1. Wow! I believe u nailed it with the grieving analysis! If u look at their eyes, most of them also have a post-crying and tired look as well. In the very first pic (and I think one other), it appears that there is a container hanging very low by their ankles and what appears to be a tube of some liquid on top with tubes running up the woman’s side and around / into the cloth covering the mouth. Given ur analysis, I am not sure what this might be other than perhaps a medicinal inhailant to calm her. My original thought in viewing this was that this was done for those with the Plague, but it looks like ur analysis is more on target! Very interesting.


    • Thank you so much for your positive feedback! 🙂 I had alot of joy writing this entry so I’m happy others find it interesting as well.

      About the low hanging devices hanging from some of the womens waists, these are actually just bags. They looked this way during this period, and women carried their bag very low hanging like that, almost down to their feet. You can see bags like this here:

      All the best!


  2. Howdy! On my travels in Germany last year I came across two monuments with the widow’s band – in Finsterwalde and Kirchhain, both towns in lower Lusatia (Brandenburg state). The latter is dated 1554 and the style of the other seems about the same. The practice seems to be very specific geographically (Germanic) and chronologically (c.16th). Certainly never seen the like anywhere in England. I was going to send you the pics I took but they didn’t want to go!


    • Hello & thanks for your comment!
      Im extremely interested in the monuments youre talking about – I will try to google them. If you have any pictures, please send them to me! Would be much appreciated! It does support the theory that have developed that it might be a german and/or northen european practice.

      All my best!


  3. I am very happy to have found your interesting text on the mysterious mouth cover. We have a similar specimen on a 1567 gravestone in the village church of Blankensee (30 km south of Berlin) which has given rise to much speculation. I have therefore tried to find out more. So I travelled around and did some online research.
    As to the Blankensee gravestone: the deceased, Anna von Thumen, is not a widow. She died during childbirth at age 23 and her husband became a widower. So he is in mourning, not Anna – which shatters the mourning-dress hypothesis.
    Also, in Wittenberg quite a few grave stones can be found at the Stadtkirche and the Fronleichnamskapelle. They depict deceased upper-class women wearing a mouth cover, most of them leaving a mourning widower behind, e.g.:
    Sara Cracow, daughter of famous Johannes Bugenhagen, (+ 1563); husband Georg Cracow surviving;
    Anna Winsheim (Oertel), born Stuempfel (+1588); husband Veit Winheim (Oertel) surviving;
    Margarethe Vogel (+ before 1562); husband Bartholomaeus Vogel (Luther’s publisher!) surviving.
    Interestingly, inside the Wittenberg Stadtkirche, there are famous oil painted epitaphs by Cranach for Sara Cracow, the Winsheim (Oertel) family, and the Vogel family – where Sara Cracow does not wear a mouth cover, while Anna Winsheim and Margarethe Vogel are depicted with a mouth cover. In contrast, Walpurga Bugenhagen, Sara’s mother, does not wear a mouth cover on the epitaph for her deceased husband Johannes Bugenhagen, although she certainly is a widow at the time.
    There is more: At the Moritzmonument in Dresden (1553), the widow, Agnes von Hessen, widowed Duchess of Saxony, wears the mouth cover. So she does (+ 1555), on her own epitaph in the Weimar Stadtkirche. So does Amalia of Saxony, widowed Duchess of Bavaria-Landshut (+ 1501) on her gravestone – btw: she died before Luther’s reformation.
    Katharina Luther, widow of Martin Luther, does not wear a mouth cover on her own epitaph in the Torgau Marienkirche, while she does on the picture you mentioned.
    I can send you pictures, if you like (I am looking for your email address).
    After all, in my opinion, the mouth cover is not an (obligatory) 16th century dress code for mourning widows exclusively and it is not isolated to Protestants.
    In her doctoral thesis (“Reformation der Memoria”, published in 2013), Doreen Zerbe concludes that the mouth cover’s meaning remains to be resolved.
    Best wishes,

    Liked by 1 person

  4. If you can read some German, you may want to download:

    Die Begräbnißstätten Wittenbergs und ihre Denkmäler: mit 10 Abbildungen / von Zitzlaff, Superintendent in Fehrbellin (dated 1896)

    Interesting (they all wear a “mouth cover” on their gravestones, some pictures in the book) e.g.:

    pp. 48/49: Barbara Stein, daughter of Luther’s publisher Bartholomaeus Vogel, married to Arnold Stein, + 1573
    p. 53/54: Ludmilla Weiss (Albina), wife of Petrus Albinus (, she wears a different style of mouth cover (see picture), + 1582
    p. 58: Sara Cracow, daughter of famous Johannes Bugenhagen, married to Georg Cracow, + 1563
    pp. 61/62: Margaretha Kellner, born Matthaei, + 1562

    Also, you may want to download these four volumes, dated 1604, in which Balthasar Menz gives an almost contemporary description of the Wittenberg gravestones, i.e. when inscriptions were still well readable (some knowledge of Latin is advisable):

    E.g., in Vol. 2, you find:

    pp. 49/50: Sara Cracow
    pp. 59/60: Bartholomaeus Vogel

    Best wishes,

    Liked by 1 person

  5. If they were not widows, the feminist theory that on the death of the husband (her voice) the widow’s mouth was symbolically shut goes to pot don’t it? Do you see any similarity to the more well known phenomenon of the Virgin’s Crown (“Maiden’s Garland”)? In England they were just cute folksy things but the German equivalent (Totenkronenbrauch) are more obviously replacements for the bride’s headpiece. Women’s traditional relation to the world being through marriage (if you haven’t married you haven’t properly lived)?

    Liked by 1 person

  6. Dear kaz69,

    As of today, my very tentative conclusion is: the mouth covered with a “Klagbinde” (mourning band) originally belonged to the widow in mourning. I have found many examples of women shown with a mourning band – yet, all of them in the 16th century and in north-east Germany, and, interestingly, all but one (Amalia of Saxony, + 1502) were Protestants.

    The women’s pictures that vulgarcrowd has given, most certainly were widows.

    But apparently the mourning band’s use was extended to depictions of deceased women (on their gravestones and/or in epitaph paintings), even if they had not died as widows, presumably in order to convey the impression that they were – by contemporary standards (contemporary political correctness) – decent and honorable persons.

    I would not go as far as to say that this means the widow’s mouth was symbolically shut. Particularly, if a young wife (who was not a widow) died and was depicted with the then fashionable mourning band.

    As to the Totenkronenbrauch you mention, I agree you may be right to see an analagous representation of the contemporary view of how you would live properly as a woman (however, this applied to men as well – mutatis mutandis). At the time of the “Klagbinde” (i.e. 16th century) it would have been politically correct for a woman to either marry (possibly re-marry as a widow) or to join a convent (with considerable carreer opportunities, provided she is of a noble descent, for Germany see e.g. the Quedlinburg free imperial convent and its powerful abesses) or to die as a virgin.

    When we look at the lives of our ancestors some five centuries ago, I feel obliged to be very cautious and sensitive in judging their contemporary political correctnesses, considering that in my own life´s time since the 1970s quite a few once firmly felt politically correct standards have been overturned (and also, politically correct standards we presently hold up may be overturned in the future).

    Best wishes,

    Liked by 1 person

  7. Pingback: Freude und Leid: Agnes von Hessen und Anna von Dänemark im Dresdner Moritzmonument (1555) – Hofkultur

  8. Thank you, I have just visited Wawel Castle and have been intrigued by the masked woman. Your article was very informative and helpful and has encouraged me to read further.

    Liked by 1 person

  9. Found this site and v interesting content, while searching for the answer as to why so many women in the 16th C paintings I’ve been looking at over the past few days in Leipzig and Naumberg have these bands over their mouths with long, trailing ends. In St Thomas’ Church in Leipzig there is a painting showing nine of such women in a row, with a single woman between them whose mouth is not covered. The other figures in the painting are 3 men and 4 children. I wondered how there could have been 9 roughly contemporaneous widows in one family. Thank you for all the references – it’s a fascinating subject.

    Liked by 1 person

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s