belted plaid, and is in fact a petticoat and specially interesting,
seeing that it is a survival of this type as a man's garment. Of the
origin of the sporran which is worn in front of the kilt, little seems
to be known, and though it recalls to mind the time when men were
clothed in skins, it forms a pouch as well as an ornament, and possibly
also may have been useful as a protection. (See Figure 78.)
Having once derived the petticoat, however, from the ancestral shawl, it
is a very simple matter to proceed and evolve a pair of trousers. As a
matter of fact, the Eastern women, when they fasten their petticoats
between their ankles for convenience in walking, demonstrate the first
stage in the production of bifurcated garments.
A single row of stitches will give rise to a kind of divided skirt,
while two seams and a single cut made between, and parallel, to them,
will produce a pair of trousers.
It would be strange if so simple a process, which under many conditions
results in such a great improvement, had not been put into practice
in very early times, and trousers, although they seem to typify the
ugliness of modern costume, are in reality surrounded by a halo
of antiquity. It is only right, however, to point out that these
tubular garments were in olden days not associated with the highest
civilization. The Romans, for instance, did not wear trousers, though
the nations whom they were pleased to call barbarians, did. Some of the
enemies of Rome are shown on Trajan's column wearing nether garments of
the kind most familiar to us, and our illustration is taken from the
representation of a barbarian soldier carved on an ivory diptych of St.
Paul. (See Figure 79.)
[Illustration: FIG. 79.--A barbarian soldier wearing characteristic
trousers (from a diptych of St. Paul, after Marriott).]
The kilt is sometimes called the garb of old Gaul, but one province of
the latter owes its name--Gallia Braccata--to the custom among its
inhabitants of wearing braccæ or breeches. In our own country trousers
were in vogue before the advent of the Roman conquerors, and though
for a time the dress of the invaders was adopted by those who followed
their fashions, we find that in the time of the Saxons and Normans the
barbarian style found favour once more.
In the picture of a Saxon fighting man (see Figure 80), we see that he
wears trousers that somewhat recall those of the modern sailor, and
there seem to have been many different styles even in those early days.
[Illustration: FIG. 80.--A Saxon military man wearing wide trousers
(from the Harleian MS., No. 603, after Fairholt).]
During the course of our history, long trousers went out of fashion
for a very considerable period, though knee-breeches of various kinds
flourished from time to time, until recently, when the original and less
elegant garment once more triumphed and became part of the everyday
dress of men. Boys still wear knickerbockers in one stage of their
development, intermediate between the doffing of the petticoat and the
donning of the trouser, and there is a tendency, that does not diminish,
for the shorter garments to be used by men of all ages when they are not
occupied with formal business.
[Illustration: FIG. 81.--A peasant woman of Champéry wearing trousers.]
Trousers are often wrongly thought to be a modern invention, and it is
easy to go away with the idea that they are exclusively the attributes
of men. This is far from being the case, and as in Scotland we find the
petticoat still in use by men, so in France and Switzerland (see Figure
81) we see the peasant woman wearing trousers of the ordinary type, to
say nothing of Oriental countries like Persia and Siam (see Plate V),
where trousers form part of the dress of women even of the highest rank.
[Illustration: A SIAMESE PRINCESS, SHEWING THE TROUSERS WORN BY WOMEN OF
HIGH RANK.
_PLATE V._]
We must not forget the energetic crusade which is being carried on in
this country in favour of "rational dress" for women, on lines which are
more sensible than those laid down by Mrs. Bloomer, whose name has been
immortalized in connection with divided garments for women. It is not
intended, at the moment, to enter into a discussion of the advantages
that may be gained by banishing the skirt, as we shall consider clothes,
from the point of view of their effect upon the body, in a later
chapter. Suffice it to say that the ugly clothes worn a few years ago
by lady bicyclists who, while adopting divided garments, tried to
make them look like a skirt, did much to hinder the "rational dress"
movement.
[Illustration: FIG. 82.--A German Hussar of 1808.]
There is one vestige in connection with trousers that we may mention
before leaving this subject, and that is the stripes which are to be
seen on many official dresses, and which have been adopted by some men
in their evening dress of recent years. It seems that this takes us back
to a row of buttons which were once used along the whole length of the
breeches when these were too tight for the foot to be put through them,
and in consequence they had to be undone and done up again along the
side of the leg. (See Figure 82.)
There is little doubt but that the stripe represents a fold of cloth
that in some cases covered up these buttons. Just a few of such buttons
are still to be seen on riding breeches and those worn by liveried
servants.
IX
COATS OF ARMS
SIGNET RINGS--ARMORIAL BEARINGS--ESCUTCHEONS--CRESTS--BADGES
Before we deal with coverings for the hand, it will not be amiss to
consider something else which is worn on the fingers. Strictly speaking,
of course, rings should be reckoned as ornaments, but signet rings very
often bear upon them the crest or coat of arms of their wearer, and thus
we have still carried on the person at the present day, a small and
inconspicuous vestige of what were once most important articles of
costume. In fact, they had a significance as great if not greater than
any others, for when the face of their wearer was hidden by his helmet,
they told to those well versed in heraldry not only his name but his
lineage.
The crest was worn on the helmet, and might or might not be one of the
devices or charges embroidered on the surcoat,--which was worn over the
armour--and emblazoned on the shield and elsewhere.
At the present day, except in the case of ceremonial dress such as the
tabards of heralds, the only survivals are the crest and shield. The
devices on the latter are now called a coat of arms, as in olden times
they were, as already indicated, merely a repetition of those actually
worn on the dress or coat armour.
Let us compare for a moment the first two figures which illustrate this
chapter. In the first (see Figure 83) we have a tiny device engraved on
a ring that is worn on the little finger of the left hand. In the second
(see Figure 84) we have Sir Geoffrey Loutterell mounted on his charger
in the act of receiving his helmet and shield from some of the ladies
belonging to his family. All of the figures and the horse are decorated
with armorial bearings. We wonder whether there could be a greater
contrast. The knight has what is really his surcoat on his back
displaying six martlets with a bend between them. The charges are
repeated on a small square shield on his shoulder called an ailette,
which was used apparently more as an ornament than as a protection,
though it is said that ailettes were originally intended as a defence
for the neck. Sir Geoffrey holds his helmet, on which, in the place of
the crest, we again see his armorial bearings. They appear again on the
pavon or small flag held by one of the ladies, and on the shield which
the other carries. We find the same devices repeated five times on the
trappings of his charger; and as if this were not enough, the ladies
also have the bearings on their dresses. In the case of Lady Loutterell,
who was the daughter of Sir Richard Sutton, there is shown also the
lion rampant borne by her father.
[Illustration: FIG. 83.--The crest on a modern signet ring.]
[Illustration: FIG. 84.--Sir Geoffrey Loutterell and the ladies of his
family, showing the extent to which armorial bearings were worn in the
middle of the fourteenth century. From a psalter, made for Sir Geoffrey
(after Fairholt).]
We give another illustration taken from the effigy of Henry, the first
Duke of Lancaster, on a brass at Elsyng, in Norfolk. (See Figure 85.)
On this figure the surcoat is very well shown, and on it are emblazoned
the three lions (or leopards) of the Royal Arms of England. It is
interesting, too, owing to the label which differences the arms and
shows that the wearer was not the king himself. The label takes the form
of three vertical bars joined by a horizontal one, and is like that
which may be seen to-day on the Prince of Wales's banner in St. George's
Chapel at Windsor. In this illustration, too (Figure 85), the crest is
very well shown.
[Illustration: FIG. 85.--The crest and surcoat of Henry, first Duke of
Lancaster, A.D. 1347. From the brass to Sir Hugh Hasting at Elsyng,
Norfolk (after Charles Boutell).]
Armorial bearings are still used to a considerable extent in
architecture, but otherwise they are chiefly confined to notepaper,
carriage panels, and harness. Occasionally hatchments, or more properly
achievements, are put upon the fronts of the houses of important people
on the death of a member of the family, and afterwards transferred to
the church in which the body is buried. The hatchment consists of the
arms of the deceased person, painted on a lozenge-shaped field, which is
surrounded by a black frame, and if it indicates the death of a husband,
the right half of the field is sable (black), the left, argent (silver).
If it is a wife that is dead, the colours on the field are reversed.
When a widower, widow, or unmarried person dies, the whole of the field
is made black.
In olden times the actual helmet, surcoat, and shield were carried at
the funeral, and in some instances these were deposited over the tomb of
the deceased. Examples survive to the present day, and one of the most
interesting cases is to be found in Canterbury Cathedral, where the
shield, helmet, and surcoat of Edward the Black Prince are still to
be seen. (See Figures 86, 87, and 88.) The Black Prince left most
careful instructions in his will with regard to his funeral, and the
accoutrements which we are able to figure through the kindness of the
Society of Antiquaries, were the "arms of war," as he called them, that
were to be carried at the ceremony. His "arms of peace" consisted of his
ostrich feather badge, of which we shall again speak. There are traces
on the crest and surcoat of a label to distinguish them, but this is
absent from the shield, though it occurs on the arms many times repeated
on the tomb, alternately with the feather badge already mentioned.
[Illustration: FIG. 86.--The helmet and crest of the Black Prince. From
"Vetusta Monumenta" (after St. John Hope).]
[Illustration: FIG. 87.--The shield of the Black Prince. From "Vetusta
Monumenta" (after St. John Hope).]
[Illustration: FIG. 88.--The surcoat or jupon of the Black Prince. From
"Vetusta Monumenta" (after St. John Hope).]
With the exception of the signet rings and the ceremonial dress, which
were alluded to at the beginning of the chapter, there are now but
few cases where armorial bearings are worn on the person. School and
college arms are embroidered on the breast pockets of blazers and on the
fronts of caps, while perhaps the most common instances are the devices
which we see on the buttons of servants. Whole coats of arms may appear,
but usually it is the crest of the master, which has now taken the place
of the household badge which the retainers wore in olden times.
There is a difference generally between a crest and a badge, though in
some cases the badge was really a crest. This was so before armorial
bearings became hereditary, for the badge which the knight wore on his
helmet formed its crest. Afterwards the same device was handed down to
generation from generation. Individuals, possibly with a view of hiding
their identity, sometimes wore a special badge instead of their family
crest; but the badge as generally understood was, as has already been
indicated, worn by the retainers and was usually chosen by each head
of the family. The matter is further complicated, because badges were
sometimes hereditary and occasionally identical with the crest proper.
It is of course only the hereditary badges which have survived to the
present day, and in only one or two cases are they apparently still used
as such, though occasionally they survive for other purposes. The Prince
of Wales's feathers we have already mentioned. They were not adopted by
the Black Prince for the reasons usually given in history, as there is
nothing to show that the King of the Bohemians ever wore them, and long
before his time an ostrich feather was often used as a royal badge in
England.
On his carriage, the Marquis of Abergavenny wears his badges, a rose and
a portcullis, one on each side of his crest, and there are interesting
cases here and there of badges worn as part of a livery. The porters of
the Inner Temple wear the pascal lamb in silver. Watermen still have
badges on their arms, and not very long ago the private firemen of the
insurance companies wore badges bearing the sign of the company. When
speaking of signs, it is worthy of note that very many royal badges have
furnished signs for inns. We cannot go into details, but we may mention
the White Hart of Richard II, the Falcon and Fetterlock of Henry VII,
now degenerated into the hawk and buckle, and the Rose and Crown also
used by the Tudors.
Those who chance to see the dress of our convicts will hardly be
inclined to associate it in any way with that of royalty. Yet it is
true, nevertheless, that the broad arrow which marks--we can hardly say
adorns--the garments of the penitentiary, is in reality a royal badge.
The broad arrow can be traced to an ancient symbol consisting of three
converging rods or rays of light used by the Druids, and it was adopted
by Edward III as his badge. The symbol was also worn by the Black
Prince and other Princes of Wales. As early as the year 1386 the broad
arrow was used in the Royal household, and from the beginning of the
eighteenth century onwards it was adopted as a mark for distinguishing
Government stores.
[Illustration: FIG. 89.--The postilion of a Lord Mayor of London,
wearing a crest upon his cap, and a coat of arms upon his sleeve.
(Copied by permission from a plate published by the John Williamson Co.,
Ltd.)]
We may conclude our remarks upon this fascinating subject by alluding to
a case in which a crest is actually borne on the head. It will be seen
on looking at Figure 89, which represents the postilion of a Lord Mayor
of London, that he wears upon his jockey cap the actual crest of his
master, in the same way that in the days of chivalry the knights wore
their crests upon their helmets. On his sleeve also there is a full coat
of arms with helmet and crest, which takes the place of the badge, and
is similar to the instances which we have mentioned just above.
X
GLOVES AND MITTENS
ORIGIN OF THE BABY'S GLOVE--FOURCHETTES--THE "POINTS" ON THE BACKS OF
GLOVES
Gloves play a considerable part in our everyday life, and now exercise
a kind of mild tyranny over us. It is perhaps not to be wondered at,
seeing the importance which has been attached to these protectors of the
hand in the past.
Records show that in the earliest gloves there were no divisions between
the fingers, and only the thumbs had a separate covering. This is what
one might have expected to be the case, and if we look at the gloves
which tiny babies wear (see Figure 90), we shall find a similar state of
affairs, so that here we have a direct survival from very early times.
Such a case is on all fours with that of young animals which belong to
species that originally were spotted like the leopard, but which in
the course of their evolution have changed their spots, and are now,
like the lion, self-coloured. Among other animals which are spotted
when immature may be mentioned the wild boar and the tapir (see
Frontispiece). While these young ones are protected by their parents,
their primitive colouring is no detriment to them, but when they go out
into the world for themselves it would be disadvantageous under existing
conditions for them to retain their aboriginal markings. In a similar
way the baby wears the primitive glove, which its ancestors made shift
to use for purposes of warmth or protection, and the child continues to
do so until it is necessary or convenient for it to use its fingers to
help itself without removing its gloves.
[Illustration: FIG. 90.--A baby's glove without separate fingers.]
There is little doubt but that gloves are the products of a cold
climate, and it is interesting to note that in Iceland, where in order
that gloves may be put on quickly and easily they are made without
fingers; and what is more, so that no time shall be wasted in choosing
right or left-hand gloves, they are provided with two thumbs, one of
which is in use while the other remains idle.
Of vestiges, gloves offer a very curious instance. There are on the
backs of most of them, at the present day, three lines of raised
embroidery or fancy stitching, which run almost parallel with one
another, though they converge slightly as they approach the wrist. When
these are worked in black on the back of a white woollen glove, for
instance, they are very conspicuous, and to explain their origin may
well seem puzzling. (See Figure 91.)
[Illustration: FIG. 91.--The back of a woollen glove showing the three
vestiges known as "points."]
Inquiry into the history of these most persistent ornaments is apt to
produce a fine crop of speculations. One explanation that may be offered
is that the lines are vestiges that date from the time when gloves were
so ill-fitting that they had to be laced up the back with the help of a
string which was passed through eyelet holes. On hearing this one might
be tempted to ask why there should be three ornaments and not one.
Another guess which can be more easily shown to be wrong is that we are
dealing with the remains of ventilation holes. We say "more easily"
because an examination of the facts will show that openings through
which air was intended to enter were made in the palm of the glove.
[Illustration: FIG. 92.--A modern kid glove showing the fourchettes or
pieces between the fingers, which form three pointed V's.]
[Illustration: FIG. 93.--Queen Elizabeth's coronation glove showing
the stitching carried down on to the back. (From a photograph by the
courtesy of Messrs. Fownes Brothers and Co.)]
A third suggestion which may occur, is that the ornamentation is a
survival from the time when great men, particularly prelates, had
various devices and even jewels fixed to the back of their gloves. Once
more, however, we meet with the difficulty in the shape of the point
that there are always three of the marks.
In making a careful investigation into the true origin of the vestiges
we can, on the one side, endeavour to see whether there is anything in
the form of the hand which can have given rise to the number three,
that is so constant; and on the other, whether the glove-makers have any
particular name for the marks which may throw some light upon them. In
connection with the first line of research, it will be seen on spreading
out the fingers that there are, if we ignore the thumb which has its
insertion lower down in the hand, three "V"-shaped openings between
them, and we find on taking up our second clue that the ornaments are
called "points." Now there is a point at the bottom of a "V," and this
is well seen in looking at a glove where the pieces or fourchettes which
form the insides of the fingers meet (see Figure 92); but if this is
evident in a modern glove, it is very much more so in old gloves. (See
Figure 93.)
A result of this fact was that the stitching which made the fingers was
carried down for some distance on to the back of the glove, as seen in
Queen Elizabeth's coronation glove. (See Figure 93.)
This stitching was and is often somewhat elaborate, and in some cases a
line of embroidery covered it. This is well seen in the glove of Anne,
the Queen Consort of James I (see Figure 94); and here it is noticeable
that the two lines of embroidery at the points of the three "V's" run
parallel and touching each other, so that we get a beginning of the
three "points" as we know them. With improvements in the making of the
fourchettes, the stitching terminated more abruptly, and the embroidery
was allowed to remain on the back of the glove, where it is still to be
seen.
[Illustration: FIG. 94.--The glove of Anne, Queen Consort of James I,
showing the embroidery on the fingers, which is the ancestor of modern
"points." (From a photograph, by the courtesy of Messrs. Fownes Brothers
and Co.)]
Some mention should perhaps be made of mittens. When they are used for
the purpose of keeping the hands warm, they are usually on the principle
of a baby's glove, but with the end of the thumb and part of the bag for
the fingers cut off. Otherwise, when these articles are used merely to
cover part of the hands, or for ornament, they are more elaborate, and
divisions are introduced for some distance between the fingers. In the
construction of these, as in that of stockings and other garments, we
meet with the modern tendency towards transparency. Often also the
patterns are dependent upon the skin showing through, and we are once
more reminded of tattooing.
XI
TAGS, PINS, AND BALDRICS
LACES--THE EVOLUTION AND VAGARIES OF THE SAFETY-PIN--PRIMITIVE
METHODS OF CARRYING BURDENS AS ILLUSTRATED BY MUFF-CHAINS,
BALDRICS, AND YOKES
During the course of their evolution many little appurtenances in
connection with dress go through a number of changes. Some of them,
which at first are useful, afterwards become ornamental. Others, which
have reached a stage in which they are both necessary and decorative,
may for a time be simplified and retain a practical importance only,
while at a later period they resume their ornamental character once
more.
We have at the present day various laces which are provided with simple
metal tags, and which are as primitive as they very well can be. (See
Figure 95.)
If we examine the dresses of both sexes in the sixteenth and seventeenth
centuries, we shall find that ties were used to a great extent instead
of buttons, and they were provided with metal tags of an ornamental
character called aiglets, or, more properly, aiguillettes. In many
cases the chief object of the ribbons which they adorned was that of
embellishment, for as many as a dozen or more might be found round one
knee. Sometimes the tags were in the form of little figures, and in the
"Taming of the Shrew" it is said of Petruchio that if you gave him gold
enough any one "might marry him to a puppet or an aglet-baby."
[Illustration: FIG. 95.--A silk lace with simple metal tags.]
[Illustration: FIG. 96.--Ornamental metal tags on a velvet neck ribbon.]
Of recent years the velvet ribbons which ladies have worn round their
necks have been provided in like manner with little tags (see Figure
96), though the fashion does not seem to have developed again to any
very great extent.
The safety-pin is an object which may well occupy our attention for a
moment. As we knew it when we were children, it was merely a piece of
wire that had been pointed at one end and bent into the required shape.
(See Figure 97.)
[Illustration: FIG. 97.--A simple safety-pin.]