There are various types of chasuble shapes:
- Conical
- Phelonion
- Gothic
- Borromean
- Fiddleback
- Roman
- Continental
- Monastic
A great many terms are attributed to the various shapes of the chasuble which have grown up over the centuries, particularly since the Gothic revival of the 19th century. Rather than trying to given authoritative definitions for these shapes, where no such definitions in fact exist, it might be helpful to give a brief history of the development of the chasuble, highlighting particular styles.
The chasuble (and also the cope) come from the same source: the Casula, the Roman equivalent of an overcoat. As fashions in Roman costume changed, the vestment stayed the same, for may centuries. The closest approximation to it which we have today would be the conical chasuble. This is a semi circle, with a seam up the centre front, with a steep angle on the shoulders. The cope came about by opening this centre seam, and making a clasp. From this we also the purpose of orphreys: a second piece of fabric is laid over the seam, to strengthen it.
Over time, this chasuble developed with the liturgies of the east and west. In the east, as priests began to spread their hands out over the offerings, a portion of the front was removed, thus giving the phelonion. In the west, the sides were opened up as priests began raising their arms. At various stages in history, in different parts of the world, this chasuble began to become more shaped and practical, but with the seam going down the centre. This gives us what is generally termed the Gothic chasuble.
The Gothic chasuble varied in fullness around the continent. Much was based on climate, and in southern Europe, vestments began to be more obviously and heavily cut in. St Charles Borromeo, archbishop of Milan, attempts to stem the tide of this skimping during the counter reformation, by demanding that chasubles in his diocese be no less then 55” wide. A chasuble of this dimension, with a wide opening at the head, and a pillar orphrey on the back and a “Tau” cross orphrey on the front we call a Borromean cut vestment.
St Charles was a voice crying in the wilderness, however, and over time vestments became more and more cut down, sometimes not even being as wide as the wearer’s shoulders. These are known by various names, such as fiddleback, Roman, or continental, shapes. There was much national variation, and even variation from city to city.
With the arrival of the Gothic revival, Augustus Pugin started to take and interest in vestments, and explored fabric and painted evidence of chasubles prior to the reformation, settling in particular on vestments originating in northern Germany. These he attempted to copy. But, being an architect, he failed to understand a chasuble as having a central seam. Rather he designed his chasubles with a front and a back elevation, as an architect would design a building. This is likely the first time in history that chasubles were made with seams on the shoulder.
The use of damasks however, made this approach successful, as it mean one could have the damask the correct way up on both the front and the back. Successive generations of architects therefor used this model as a base for designing their own vestments, with greater or lesser degrees of fullness in width and length, and also in altering the angle of the shoulder.
The Liturgical Movement of the 20th century saw attempts made to revive the conical chasuble, or to make vestments as wide and long as possible, thus giving us what might be termed monastic vestments, particularly as they were being made by monasteries (in this country in particular) such as Stanbrook, Downside, and Prinknash, as well as by vestment makers with a strong monastic influence, such as Val Kilbride.
This ideal of making chasubles as big as possible continues to this day, but often to very poor effect, particularly with mass produced works.