Is there no basis for arguing that it also had economic benefits? Cloth until mechanisation was a hugely expensive business, in man/woman power, time. Basically, Sumptuary laws may well have done what you say, but I bet that isn't all they did.
"The staple" was a highly regulated business for export of raw wool and cloth from England to the continent. Dying, weaving is at the foundation of much of the medieval trade networks.
Sumpturary laws would go directly to the economics of fabric as well as the social structural policing. Paying sumptuary fines probably also played here, because coin was scarce oftentimes, and taxation complex. By all means wear the forbidden colours, for a small fee.
Not really. Fashion is just means to an end in the actual case, but if you actually read the article instead of just the comment section you’ll see why I complained about them using this term.
