THE MONKEY IN BURLESQUE AND CARICATURE.--TOURNAMENTS AND SINGLE
COMBATS.--MONSTROUS COMBINATIONS OF ANIMAL FORMS.--CARICATURES ON
COSTUME.--THE HAT.--THE HELMET.--LADIES' HEAD-DRESSES.--THE GOWN,
AND ITS LONG SLEEVES.
The fox, the wolf, and their companions, were introduced as instruments
of satire, on account of their peculiar characters; but there were
other animals which were also favourites with the satirist, because
they displayed an innate inclination to imitate; they formed, as it
were, natural parodies upon mankind. I need hardly say that of these
the principal and most remarkable was the monkey. This animal must
have been known to our Anglo-Saxon forefathers from a remote period,
for they had a word for it in their own language--_apa_, our _ape_.
Monkey is a more modern name, and seems to be equivalent with maniken,
or a little man. The earliest _Bestiaries_, or popular treatises on
natural history, give anecdotes illustrative of the aptness of this
animal for imitating the actions of men, and ascribe to it a degree of
understanding which would almost raise it above the level of the brute
creation. Philip de Thaun, an Anglo-Norman poet of the reign of Henry
I., in his _Bestiary_, tells us that "the monkey, by imitation, as
books say, counterfeits what it sees, and mocks people:"--
_Li singe par figure, si cum dit escripture,
Ceo que il vait contrefait, de gent escar hait._[32]
He goes on to inform us, as a proof of the extraordinary instinct of
this animal, that it has more affection for some of its cubs than for
others, and that, when running away, it carried those which it liked
before it, and those it disliked behind its back. The sketch from the
illuminated manuscript of the Romance of the Comte d'Artois, of the
fifteenth century, which forms our cut No. 61, represents the monkey,
carrying, of course, its favourite child before it in its flight, and
what is more, it is taking that flight mounted on a donkey. A monkey on
horseback appears not to have been a novelty, as we shall see in the
sequel.
[32] See my "Popular Treatises on Science written during the Middle
Ages," p. 107.
[Illustration: _No. 61. A Monkey Mounted._]
Alexander Neckam, a very celebrated English scholar of the latter part
of the twelfth century, and one of the most interesting of the early
mediæval writers on natural history, gives us many anecdotes, which
show us how much attached our mediæval forefathers were to domesticated
animals, and how common a practice it was to keep them in their houses.
The baronial castle appears often to have presented the appearance
of a menagerie of animals, among which some were of that strong and
ferocious character that rendered it necessary to keep them in close
confinement, while others, such as monkeys, roamed about the buildings
at will. One of Neckam's stories is very curious in regard to our
subject, for it shows that the people in those days exercised their
tamed animals in practically caricaturing contemporary weaknesses and
fashions. This writer remarks that "the nature of the ape is so ready
at acting, by ridiculous gesticulations, the representations of things
it has seen, and thus gratifying the vain curiosity of worldly men
in public exhibitions, that it will even dare to imitate a military
conflict. A jougleur (_histrio_) was in the habit of constantly taking
two monkeys to the military exercises which are commonly called
tournaments, that the labour of teaching might be diminished by
frequent inspection. He afterwards taught two dogs to carry these apes,
who sat on their backs, furnished with proper arms. Nor did they want
spurs, with which they strenuously urged on the dogs. Having broken
their lances, they drew out their swords, with which they spent many
blows on each other's shields. Who at this sight could refrain from
laughter?"[33]
[33] Alexander Neckam, De Naturis Rerum, lib. ii. c. 129.
[Illustration: _No. 62. A Tournament._]
Such contemporary caricatures of the mediæval tournament, which was
in its greatest fashion during the period from the twelfth to the
fourteenth century, appear to have been extremely popular, and are not
unfrequently represented in the borders of illuminated manuscripts.
The manuscript now so well known as "Queen Mary's Psalter" (MS. Reg.
2 B vii.), and written and illuminated very early in the fourteenth
century, contains not a few illustrations of this description. One of
these, which forms our cut No. 62, represents a tournament not much
unlike that described by Alexander Neckam, except that the monkeys
are here riding upon other monkeys, and not upon dogs. In fact, all
the individuals here engaged are monkeys, and the parody is completed
by the introduction of the trumpeter on one side, and of minstrelsy,
represented by a monkey playing on the tabor, on the other; or,
perhaps, the two monkeys are simply playing on the pipe and tabor,
which were looked upon as the lowest description of minstrelsy, and are
therefore the more aptly introduced into the scene.
The same manuscript has furnished us with the cut No. 63. Here the
combat takes place between a monkey and a stag, the latter having
the claws of a griffin. They are mounted, too, on rather nondescript
animals--one having the head and body of a lion, with the forefeet
of an eagle; the other having a head somewhat like that of a lion,
on a lion's body, with the hind parts of a bear. This subject may,
perhaps, be intended as a burlesque on the mediæval romances, filled
with combats between the Christians and the Saracens; for the ape--who,
in the moralisations which accompany the _Bestiaries_, is said to
represent the devil--is here armed with what are evidently intended for
the sabre and shield of a Saracen, while the flag carries the shield
and lance of a Christian knight.
[Illustration: _No. 63. A Feat of Arms._]
The love of the mediæval artists for monstrous figures of animals,
and for mixtures of animals and men, has been alluded to in a former
chapter. The combatants in the accompanying cut (No. 64), taken from
the same manuscript, present a sort of combination of the rider and
the animal, and they again seem to be intended for a Saracen and a
Christian. The figure to the right, which is composed of the body of
a satyr, with the feet of a goose and the wings of a dragon, is armed
with a similar Saracenic sabre; while that to the left, which is on
the whole less monstrous, wields a Norman sword. Both have human faces
below the navel as well as above, which was a favourite idea in the
grotesque of the middle ages. Our mediæval forefathers appear to
have had a decided taste for monstrosities of every description, and
especially for mixtures of different kinds of animals, and of animals
and men. There is no doubt, to judge by the anecdotes recorded by such
writers as Giraldus Cambrensis, that a belief in the existence of such
unnatural creatures was widely entertained. In his account of Ireland,
this writer tells us of animals which were half ox and half man, half
stag and half cow, and half dog and half monkey.[34] It is certain that
there was a general belief in such animals, and nobody could be more
credulous than Giraldus himself.
[34] See Girald. Cambr., Topog. Hiberniæ, dist. ii. cc. 21, 22; and the
Itinerary of Wales, lib. ii. c. 11.
[Illustration: _No. 64. A Terrible Combat._]
[Illustration: _No. 65. Fashionable Dress._]
The design to caricature, which is tolerably evident in the subjects
just given, is still more apparent in other grotesques that adorn
the borders of the mediæval manuscripts, as well as in some of the
mediæval carvings and sculpture. Thus, in our cut No. 65, taken from
one of the borders in the Romance of the Comte d'Artois, a manuscript
of the fifteenth century, we cannot fail to recognise an attempt at
turning to ridicule the contemporary fashions in dress. The hat is
only an exaggerated form of one which appears to have been commonly
used in France in the latter half of the fifteenth century, and which
appears frequently in illuminated manuscripts executed in Burgundy;
and the boot also belongs to the same period. The latter reappeared at
different times, until at length it became developed into the modern
top-boots. In cut No. 66, from the same manuscript, where it forms the
letter T, we have the same form of hat, still more exaggerated, and
combined at the same time with grotesque faces.
[Illustration: _No. 66. Heads and Hats._]
Caricatures on costume are by no means uncommon among the artistic
remains of the middle ages, and are not confined to illuminated
manuscripts. The fashionable dresses of those days went into far more
ridiculous excesses of shape than anything we see in our times--at
least, so far as we can believe the drawings in the manuscripts;
but these, however seriously intended, were constantly degenerating
into caricature, from circumstances which are easily explained, and
which have, in fact, been explained already in their influence on
other parts of our subject. The mediæval artists in general were not
very good delineators of form, and their outlines are much inferior
to their finish. Conscious of this, though perhaps unknowingly,
they sought to remedy the defect in a spirit which has always been
adopted in the early stages of art-progress--they aimed at making
themselves understood by giving a special prominence to the peculiar
characteristics of the objects they wished to represent. These were
the points which naturally attracted people's first attention, and
the resemblance was felt most by people in general when these points
were put forward in excessive prominence in the picture. The dresses,
perhaps, hardly existed in the exact forms in which we see them in
the illuminations, or at least those were only exceptions to the
generally more moderate forms; and hence, in using these pictorial
records as materials for the history of costume, we ought to make a
certain allowance for exaggeration--we ought, indeed, to treat them
almost as caricatures. In fact, much of what we now call caricature,
was then characteristic of serious art, and of what was considered its
high development. Many of the attempts which have been made of late
years to introduce ancient costume on the stage, would probably be
regarded by the people who lived in the age which they were intended to
represent, as a mere design to turn them into ridicule. Nevertheless,
the fashions in dress were, especially from the twelfth century to the
sixteenth, carried to a great degree of extravagance, and were not only
the objects of satire and caricature, but drew forth the indignant
declamations of the Church, and furnished a continuous theme to the
preachers. The contemporary chronicles abound with bitter reflections
on the extravagance in costume, which was considered as one of the
outward signs of the great corruption of particular periods; and they
give us not unfrequent examples of the coarse manner in which the
clergy discussed them in their sermons. The readers of Chaucer will
remember the manner in which this subject is treated in the "Parson's
Tale." In this respect the satirists of the Church went hand in hand
with the pictorial caricaturists of the illuminated manuscripts,
and of the sculptures with which we sometimes meet in contemporary
architectural ornamentation. In the latter, this class of caricature is
perhaps less frequent, but it is sometimes very expressive. The very
curious _misereres_ in the church of Ludlow, in Shropshire, present the
caricature reproduced in our cut No. 67. It represents an ugly, and, to
judge by the expression of the countenance, an ill-tempered old woman,
wearing the fashionable head-dress of the earlier half of the fifteenth
century, which seems to have been carried to its greatest extravagance
in the beginning of the reign of Henry VI. It is the style of coiffure
known especially as the horned head-dress, and the very name carries
with it a sort of relationship to an individual who was notoriously
horned--the spirit of evil. This dashing dame of the olden time appears
to have struck terror into two unfortunates who have fallen within
her influence, one of whom, as though he took her for a new Gorgon,
is attempting to cover himself with his buckler, while the other,
apprehending danger of another kind, is prepared to defend himself with
his sword. The details of the head-dress in this figure are interesting
for the history of costume.
[Illustration: _No. 67. A Fashionable Beauty._]
[Illustration: _No. 68. A Man of War._]
Our next cut, No. 68, is taken from a manuscript in private possession,
which is now rather well known among antiquaries by the name of the
"Luttrell Psalter," and which belongs to the fourteenth century. It
seems to involve a satire on the aristocratic order of society--on the
knight who was distinguished by his helmet, his shield, and his armour.
The individual here represented presents a type which is anything
but aristocratic. While he holds a helmet in his hand to show the
meaning of the satire, his own helmet, which he wears on his head, is
simply a bellows. He may be a knight of the kitchen, or perhaps a mere
_quistron_, or kitchen lad.
[Illustration: _No. 69. A Lady's Head-dress._]
We have just seen a caricature of one of the ladies' head-dresses of
the earlier half of the fifteenth century, and our cut No. 69, from
an illuminated manuscript in the British Museum of the latter half of
the same century (MS. Harl., No. 4379), furnishes us with a caricature
of a head-dress of a different character, which came into fashion in
the reign of our Edward IV. The horned head-dress of the previous
generation had been entirely laid aside, and the ladies adopted in its
place a sort of steeple-shaped head-dress, or rather of the form of a
spire, made by rolling a piece of linen into the form of a long cone.
Over this lofty cap was thrown a piece of fine lawn or muslin, which
descended almost to the ground, and formed, as it were, two wings. A
short transparent veil was thrown over the face, and reached not quite
to the chin, resembling rather closely the veils in use among our
ladies of the present day (1864). The whole head-dress, indeed, has
been preserved by the Norman peasantry; for it may be observed that,
during the feudal ages, the fashions in France and England were always
identical. These steeple head-dresses greatly provoked the indignation
of the clergy, and zealous preachers attacked them roughly in their
sermons. A French monk, named Thomas Conecte, distinguished himself
especially in this crusade, and inveighed against the head-dress with
such effect, that we are assured that many of the women threw down
their head-dresses in the middle of the sermon, and made a bonfire
of them at its conclusion. The zeal of the preacher soon extended
itself to the populace, and, for a while, when ladies appeared in this
head-dress in public, they were exposed to be pelted by the rabble.
Under such a double persecution it disappeared for a moment, but when
the preacher was no longer present, it returned again, and, to use the
words of the old writer who has preserved this anecdote, "the women
who, like snails in a fright, had drawn in their horns, shot them out
again as soon as the danger was over." The caricaturist would hardly
overlook so extravagant a fashion, and accordingly the manuscript in
the British Museum, just mentioned, furnishes us with the subject of
our cut No. 69. In those times, when the passions were subjected to no
restraint, the fine ladies indulged in such luxury and licentiousness,
that the caricaturist has chosen as their fit representative a sow, who
wears the objectionable head-dress in full fashion. The original forms
one of the illustrations of a copy of the historian Froissart, and was,
therefore, executed in France, or, more probably, in Burgundy.
The sermons and satires against extravagance in costume began at
an early period. The Anglo-Norman ladies, in the earlier part of
the twelfth century, first brought in vogue in our island this
extravagance in fashion, which quickly fell under the lash of satirist
and caricaturist. It was first exhibited in the robes rather than
in the head-dress. These Anglo-Norman ladies are understood to have
first introduced stays, in order to give an artificial appearance of
slenderness to their waists; but the greatest extravagance appeared in
the forms of their sleeves. The robe, or gown, instead of being loose,
as among the Anglo-Saxons, was laced close round the body, and the
sleeves, which fitted the arm tightly till they reached the elbows,
or sometimes nearly to the wrist, then suddenly became larger, and
hung down to an extravagant length, often trailing on the ground, and
sometimes shortened by means of a knot. The gown, also, was itself
worn very long. The clergy preached against these extravagances in
fashion, and at times, it is said, with effect; and they fell under
the vigorous lash of the satirist. In a class of satires which became
extremely popular in the twelfth century, and which produced in the
thirteenth the immortal poem of Dante--the visions of purgatory and of
hell--these contemporary extravagances in fashion are held up to public
detestation, and are made the subject of severe punishment. They were
looked upon as among the outward forms of pride. It arose, no doubt,
from this taste--from the darker shade which spread over men's minds in
the twelfth century--that demons, instead of animals, were introduced
to personify the evil-doers of the time. Such is the figure (cut No.
70) which we take from a very interesting manuscript in the British
Museum (MS. Cotton. Nero, C iv.). The demon is here dressed in the
fashionable gown with its long sleeves, of which one appears to have
been usually much longer than the other. Both the gown and sleeve are
shortened by means of knots, while the former is brought close round
the waist by tight lacing. It is a picture of the use of stays made at
the time of their first introduction.
[Illustration: _No. 70. Sin in Satins._]
This superfluity of length in the different parts of the dress was a
subject of complaint and satire at various and very distant periods,
and contemporary illuminations of a perfectly serious character show
that these complaints were not without foundation.