IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY
A comparative simplicity marked the raiment of the thirteenth century,
when the elaborate detail yielded place to ample folds of drapery,
capacious mantles, and flowing trains. It was a simplicity, however,
which cannot conscientiously be congratulated upon its economical habits,
for the fabrics employed were of the richest and most sumptuous, and the
breadth of the garments was prodigious. The dress which is so proudly
worn by the Queen in the illustration on page 20, is characteristically
splendid, and a glance at it shows that it was fashioned of a thick
brocade traced in diamond design, and cut square in the neck and very
long in the sleeves, where a few folds of white lawn appear becomingly
above the wrists, the veil falling from neck to hem, and the enfolding
gorget being fastened tightly under the chin. Pre-eminently typical was
another dress honoured by this Eleanor of Provence--a most unpopular
lady, by the way, even though her taste in costume might have made for
some measure of success, at least amongst her feminine subjects. She
chose "a gown of gold brocade, sleeves reaching to the wrists, while
over this she wore a mantle bordered with gold and bearing a collar of
ermine. The mantle was held up by a brooch of gold set with jewels, the
head crowned with a Gothic design of floriated trefoils above a jewelled
band."
[Illustration: HENRY III.'S QUEEN.]
[Illustration: A SIMPLE BUTTONED GOWN.]
The following description, commendably brief, which I have read of a
dress worn by the wife of Edward I. will bring home the fashion of the
day to the understanding of the least initiated:--"A long gown with loose
sleeves; held at the breast by a narrow band is a long mantle, folds of
this covering the feet; ornaments none." But then no doubt the amiable
lady suffered from a popular leaning in favour of conjugal obedience, and
it is well known that King Edward himself strenuously upheld all simple
garb, though it must be admitted that his descendants showed but small
respect for his prejudices when they buried him in "a dalmatic of red
silk damask, a crimson satin mantle fastened on the shoulders by a gilt
fibula decorated with precious stones; a stola of white tissue ornamented
with gilt quatrefolds and knots crossed on the breast, and jewelled
gloves upon his august hands. The lower part of his body was wrapped in
a piece of cloth of gold."
Some severity also marked costume in France at this time, when there
was a suggestion of the ecclesiastical in the high _guimpe_ without
which no dress was complete. This was a fancy inaugurated by the second
wife of Philip III. for the special benefit of her long throat and flat
chest; and worn in company with a pointed head-dress and a flowing veil,
a closely-fitting long robe of brocade, and an embroidered mantle,
the general effect must have been entirely dignified and impressive.
Simplicity, however, did not reign here long, and Louis IX. of France
appears to have been quite lenient towards extravagance, and to have
had a nice taste of his own, judging from the picture which represents
him wearing a velvet cap, a tunic open at the neck, and a robe of brown
embroidered with red flowers, and possessing long sleeves trimmed
with fur. Fur was amongst his weaknesses evidently, for a deep cape
of fur covers his shoulders in another picture, where he is wearing a
fur-trimmed robe and has indulged himself with red stockings and black
shoes. This was the King who urged his courtiers to dress themselves
well and neatly, so that their wives would love them the more, and their
people esteem them higher.
[Illustration: IN THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY.]
Philip the Fair, or Unfair, of France decreed that "No damoiselle, if she
be not _châtelaine_ or dame owning 2000 levies yearly, shall have more
than one pair of gowns per year; and if she be, she shall have two pairs
and no more"--an edict which was, of course, defied fearlessly. Sumptuary
laws come somehow to be disregarded, proving the courage of women in
defence of their idol--fashion.
Very curious is a coiffure which obtained in the reign of Philip the
Bold, consisting of a covering like a plate in outline worn upon the
head, with a veil falling over the cheeks and pendent at the back. Far
more attractive must have been the head-dress of peacock's feathers
which obtained about that time, when prodigality began to assert itself
defiantly in magnificent jewels and gowns of condal emblazoned with
rubies and sapphires; and when silken hose, gold and silver embroidery,
and furred trimmings were amongst the attainable and the attained.
Lavishness ruled in Italy in the thirteenth century, when women wore long
full gowns of silk velvet brocade, and tissues of gold and silver, and
woollen materials dyed violet or scarlet. They had very large sleeves,
their hands often being more than half covered with these, which touched
the ground; and ornaments of pearls and borders of gold edged with pearls
were chapters in the story of magnificence, little hoods adorned with
gold and pearls and embroidery speaking the final word of splendour. The
Italian matron wore a long mantle touching the ground, and open in the
front, fastened with buttons or clasps enriched with pearls, and lined
with silk and decked with gold, and when the hood was dispensed with, the
hair was covered with a light transparent veil of silk.
The kirtle worn in England in the reign of Edward I. was in form plain to
the point of severity, but over it on occasions there flowed a robe with
a long train, the ladies of rank choosing the kirtle in as rich material
as the robe, which they removed as a mark of respect when attending on
illustrious guests.
The kirtle was a garment originally common to both sexes, and is best
described as a smock frock, although the term at different times has been
permitted to signify a cloak, a gown, a waistcoat, and even a petticoat,
and in the fifteenth century it was disgraced into a habit of penance.
Most frequently the kirtle was laced closely to the body and hung
straight downwards to the hem.
In the latter years of this century was introduced the _surkuane_,
which, according to a famous writer, was of Languedocian origin. He
describes it as being a bodice cut down the front and displaying in
the intervals left by the lacings, very wide apart, a transparent
tissue of the chemise elaborately pleated and embroidered in gold and
silver. The existence of this has, however, been disputed by no less
an authority than Planché, who has failed to discover any trace of a
thirteenth-century dress fulfilling such conditions. Yet it was at
this time that an edict was passed prohibiting the _cottes lacés_ and
_chemises brodées_, and had there been no such fashion of bodice, there
would have been no temptation for such luxuries, and no occasion for
legislation to check the indulgence. The embroidered shift was forbidden
to all save brides, who were permitted it on their wedding day and for
the twelve succeeding months. Surely to have set such limit on the wear
of dainty _lingerie_ encouraged that reprehensible being the slatternly
wife, whose charms do not outlive her trousseau. The costume of the
bridegroom is not specialised, but man under less ecstatic circumstances
seems to have been distinguished by a large cloak with full sleeves and
a hood, a white linen coif tied under his chin, while a fantastic sort of
close cap formed headgear common alike to France, Germany, and England,
the origin being doubtful. Beneath the long cloak men wore a long gown
reaching to the feet, and fastened at the waist, and as an alternative
to this they could choose a tunic to the knee, with wide sleeves to the
elbow, the fitting sleeves of the under-tunic terminating at the wrists
and fastening with a closely-set row of buttons, or, if the buttons were
omitted, sewn tightly round.
Briefly, women's dress in England in the thirteenth century consisted of
a wimple and gorget swathed round the neck and fastened by pins above
the ears, concealing alike brow and chin; the full gown worn loose
had sleeves trailing on the ground, and the under-garment, which was
generally darker than the gown, had tight-fitting sleeves turned up from
the wrists. The poorer women wore a somewhat shorter gown caught up under
the arm to reveal the under-garment, and high boots reaching to the calf
of the leg and fastened with a double row of buttons. In France, however,
the women of the middle and lower classes wore grey shoes, whence it is
supposed the word "grisette" was born, which from modern usage has come
to typify "somebody captivating who dwells in the Latin quarter."
There were, however, changes which deserve mention. The hood was still
in favour, and the long wide circular cloak was worn fastened at the
neck with double cords, and the trains of the dresses became abnormally
extended, evoking from idle critics many more or less witty quips which
may or may not have influenced the subsequent lessening of the trains.
Gradually the width of the dresses decreased as their length increased,
and the girdle had the privilege of existing merely as an ornament, while
the cuffs of the under-sleeves were adorned with buttons, and the hanging
over-sleeve was cut as a long bag from the elbow to the shoulders, where
it fastened into the robe and fell to the floor.
Amongst the wise saws of ancient instance was the advice in the _Romance
of the Rose_, "that ladies should let trailing robes hide the feet of
those too large and unsightly, but that the more beautifully gifted could
hold up their skirts and proceed in comfort." Herein may we realise
that wisdom is no new counsellor in the ways of vanity, and I am quite
convinced that some such philosopher must have guided the selection of
the dame whose picture faces page 22 in draperies of pink over mauve,
with a purple mantle lined with red. Nothing could be more becoming
than the simple lines of her gown which flow from neck to hem, trimmed
at the top with gold jewels set with emeralds, while round her brow is
a golden fillet, with a fold of white lawn under the chin holding this
from side to side. How attractive are these lawn folds may be noted again
on a famous canvas, which portrays a dress of the same period in thick
brocade, with a plain over-skirt bordered with embroidery, and the broad
flat turban hat flanked on either side by wings elaborately decked with
jewels, with a pendent veil from the back.
There is much virtue in the veil, and its length and condition were
varied to suit the individual and her circumstance. On state occasions
it would be overspread by another veil, and above it by the women of
quality would be placed a crown of gold; or it would assert its influence
over the hair, which was parted on the forehead, curled or plaited behind
the ears, and confined in a gold net known as a crispine; women of
highest degree choosing this crispine of gold thread set with jewels and
encircling it by a gold band also jewelled, which would form the frame
for the veil. This crispine in various forms was the common fashion for a
long time, and when discarded the hair was bound tightly to the head with
a silken fillet and garlands of flowers.
Alike in the decoration of the head and in the fabrics which were chosen
to glorify the simple gowns, it appears to have been quite possible to
evade the spirit, while obeying the letter, of the law of simplicity
which the rulers demanded at the hands of fashion. Fashion granted it
with a difference, and while rigidly austere in cut, clothes were so
generally magnificent in their material and so generous in their width,
that ruin might wait swiftly upon the prodigal with a pretty fancy in
frocks. And to think that the security of a Married Women's Property Act
was outside the ken and comfort of the weak and confiding lord, who loved
his lady too well to deny her caprice!