Leather scarcity in pre-17th century Europe? -- myArmoury.com

Lewis Ballard

Gentlemen:

In reading posts in the Historical Arms forum regarding the emergence of the buff coat, I have seen references to a (previously unsuspected by me) scarcity of leather in Europe prior to the 1600s, and a speculation that the increase in cattle raising around that time led to the greater availability of leather.

Although general questions of agriculture are of scant interest to me, for some reason this intrigues me. (Here I use agriculture in its broader sense, to include both the planting of crops and animal husbandry.)

Does anyone have any information as to why cattle raising became more common and widespread around the turn of the 17th century? My only speculation would be tied to climate change, i.e. the end of the medieval warming period and the commencement of the Little Ice Age. (As a side note, I have in the past speculated that climate change was responsible for shifts in animal husbandry among the Scots, resulting in a shift away from linen production to the more widespread use of wool and thus leading to the development of the kilt.)

Any information would be greatly appreciated.

Mikael Ranelius · Posted: Tue 12 Jul, 2011 10:41 am Post subject:

Don't forget that cattle did not constitute the only source of leather, as also pigs, goats, sheep, game and other animals could yield that material. In Scandinavia by the way, the preferred material for buff coats came from moose a.k.a. european elk.

Michael Curl · Posted: Tue 12 Jul, 2011 11:01 am Post subject:

I do know if there is a link, but the enclosure problem was going on about this time, where (in Britain at least) people found it more profitable to raise sheep rather than farm, such a switch to livestock may have happened in other fields and may have led to the increase in leather.

Lewis Ballard · Posted: Tue 12 Jul, 2011 11:07 am Post subject:

Lewis Ballard · Posted: Tue 12 Jul, 2011 11:28 am Post subject:

Michael Curl · Posted: Tue 12 Jul, 2011 4:30 pm Post subject:

No worries, though I am not sure how much that contributed to the leather business, I know it increased the wool trade.

Randall Moffett · Posted: Wed 13 Jul, 2011 5:39 am Post subject:

Well.... not sure if this really works. Where I'd start is the tax on fells and hides which exist in many places but in England show up often in royal records. Having read all royal records I could find, likely most of them, I can say it seems to increase in the late medieval period. So clearly more are being produced or the levels of tax revenues on them would decline. I have to say this is just an overall and general view but I know of little evidence to support a lack in leather production.

RPM

Lewis Ballard · Posted: Wed 13 Jul, 2011 6:03 am Post subject:

E. Storesund · Posted: Wed 13 Jul, 2011 9:00 am Post subject:

Is it likely the value and need for parchment affected the prices of leather in literate societies? Parchment was expensive and calf skin was preferred, which seems to me ton suggest that a lot of resources were put into and industry that gave relatively little yield volume-wise, therefore it required extensive ammounts of animals.
If raising young cattle for parchment was a good way to earn a little, perhaps this had negative effects on the general production of leather for other purposes?

If so, did maybe the introduction of paper have an impact on the price of leather?

Edit: Then again, I'm basing this on the context of greater Scandinavia (Iceland included, or perhaps even with an emphasis on Iceland, where literacy was definitely greater and more common than many other countries)