Chapter VI: Preface (6)

A garment called the “_petticoat breeches_” was introduced into England in 1658. These are well illustrated in Figs. 6, 7, and 8 (from a drawing about 1658). The doublet, or jacket, which, in the early part of the reign, barely reached to the waist, was now lengthened, reaching the middle of the thighs, with sleeves to the elbows, terminated by rows and bunches of ribbon, from under which bulged forth the sleeves of the shirt, ruffed, and adorned also profusely with ribbons. When buttons and button holes were added down the front, it became a coat.

Neckcloths or cravats, of Brussels and Flanders lace, came into use towards the close of the reign, being tied in a knot, with the ends hanging down (Fig. 5).

The sober citizen of London was dressed in black coarse woollen, breeches, a broad skirted doublet, a girdle about the middle, and a short black coat. A broad-brimmed hat, with a great twisted hat-band, with a rose at the end of it, completed his costume, and the natural hair was worn uncovered by a wig.

_James II. and William III._

There were few novelties in civil costumes during these reigns. The petticoat breeches were exchanged for those tied beneath the knee. The periwig became more monstrous, and it was the fashion for the beau to comb his wig in public just as a modern gallant would twirl his moustache.

Gentlemen appeared in little, low hats, with a bow at the side; and long coats and waistcoats were worn, with rows of buttons down the front, breeches, moderately wide, reaching to the knee, close stockings, and high-heeled shoes, with roses or buckles (Fig. 15).

The full-bottomed wig was worn by the learned professions. The broad brims of the hats were frequently turned up on two sides, and were ornamented with feathers or ribbons. “To turn up the brim or flap of the hat was to ‘cock’ it; the mode following the custom of the Duke of Monmouth was called ‘the Monmouth’ cock.”

The broad, falling bands around the neck were replaced by small Geneva bands, similar to those now worn by barristers.

(Fig. 1): Costume of a gentleman of the time of Charles I.,
from a contemporary print. (Fig. 2): An exquisite of 1646,
from a rare broadside, entitled “The Picture of an English
Antick,” with all details of the costume exaggerated, patches
on the face, and two love-locks tied with bows of ribbon.
(Fig. 3): Head of George, Earl of Albemarle, showing the
voluminous periwig of the time of James II. (Fig. 4): A
Roundhead, from a print of 1649, showing the plainness and
simplicity of costume adopted by the Puritans. (Fig. 5):
Neckcloth which succeeded the ruff and band, and was generally
worn by the courtiers during the reign of Charles II., by whom
it was introduced from France. (Figs. 6, 7 and 8): “Petticoat
breeches,” three types, as worn in 1656, 1658, and 1659,
from Holmes’s “Contemporary Notebook on Costume,” preserved
in the British Museum. (Fig. 9): Head of Sir Thomas Meautys,
secretary to Sir Francis Bacon, showing a waved love-lock
reaching to the elbow. (Fig. 10): King James I. in hunting
costume, from “A Jewell for Gentrie,” published in 1614. He
is shown wearing the stuffed or “bombasted” breeches. (Fig.
11): Costume of a Cavalier in the early part of Charles II.’s
reign, from Ogilvie’s “Book of the Coronation.” (Fig. 12):
A shoe (introduced from France), worn by the courtiers of
Charles II., from a contemporary work, 1670. (Fig. 13): A
boot with wide tops, worn in 1646, from a print of the time.
(Fig. 14): A Jack-boot of the time of William III., such as
was worn by the Cavalry of the time, from Meyrick’s “Arms and
Armour.” (Fig. 15): Winter costume of a gentleman of the time
of William III.]

FEMALE COSTUMES.

_James I._

The female costume of this reign presents few variations from that in use at the end of Elizabeth’s reign. The portrait of Anne of Denmark, Queen of James I. (Pl. 49, Fig. 1), in the general character of the dress, resembles that of Queen Elizabeth painted by Holbein. The enormous farthingale was worn throughout this reign by the nobility, the ruffs and collars worn at this time by the ladies being generally stiffened with yellow starch, like those of the gentleman.

“The fondness of ladies for painting their faces and exposing the bosom was severely reprimanded by the divines and satirists at the early part of the 17th century. While a ruff or band of immoderate size stretched forth from the neck, the front of the dress was cut away immediately beneath it, nearly to the waist, which made the fashion more noticeable, as all the other part of the bust was over-clothed, while the bosom was perfectly bare.”

Masks were worn by ladies on all public occasions, and it was considered a sign of impropriety to appear without them (Fig. 2).

The ruff went out of fashion during this reign, because Mrs. Annie Turner, a starcher of ruffs, who was executed for poisoning Sir Thomas Overbury, wore a starched ruff of the approved colour at her execution.

_Charles I. and the Commonwealth._

There was little change in female costume at the beginning of this reign. The French hood and farthingale were still worn, and the high-crowned hat was generally worn by countrywomen and the wives of the citizens (Figs. 5 and 7), especially when they belonged to the Puritanical party. In the course of the reign of Charles, there came a change in female costume, contemporary with and as elegant as that which took place in the male costume.

The hood, the farthingale, and the starched bands disappeared. A good specimen of the new costume is given in Fig. 1, after Hollar. The dress is full, and falls gracefully about the body; the bodice is tight-fitting, and the sleeves are rich and full, but gathered at the wrist, and there is an elegant falling collar edged with lace.

The long petticoat was generally displayed in a certain measure by the robe, which was, at times, quite gathered up at the waist.

As a matter of course, the ladies of the Republican party, following the example set by their men folk, dressed very soberly, some of them adhering to old-fashioned articles of dress, such as the hood and high-crowned hat. A fashion introduced in the previous reign was that of wearing _patches_ on the face. Fig. 3 gives a curious specimen of this fashionable absurdity. It excited the derision of the satirists, who repeatedly decried it in their works; but it continued in fashion for a long time--until the end of the 17th century.

The usual costume of a Puritan woman is shown in Fig. 5.

The female costume in the later years of the Protectorate is illustrated by Fig. 6 from the monumental effigy of Elizabeth Sacheverell, 1657 A.D., in Morley Church, Derbyshire.

_Charles II._

With the Restoration, England threw off the sober, kill-joy aspect that it had worn, and the Court, with its gaiety, set the fashion in a studied negligence and elegant déshabille.

The glossy ringlets of the ladies, escaping from a simple bandeau of pearls, or adorned by a single rose, fell in graceful profusion upon bare, snowy necks, and the arms were bare to the elbow.

This was carried to such an extent that a book was published entitled “A Just and Seasonable Reprehension of Naked Breasts and Shoulders,” with a preface by Richard Baxter.

The richest and brightest materials were employed for the dresses and petticoats. The costume of this period is very well known from the portraits of the ladies of the Court by Sir Peter Lely (see Pl. 49, Fig. 2).

_James II. and William III._

There was no change in female costume during the short and unfortunate reign of James, but when William and Mary ascended the throne, they and their entourage brought with them, as might be expected, a number of Dutch fashions. The very low-necked dresses were replaced by those with a formal stomacher.

The elegant full sleeve gave place to a tight one, with a cuff above the elbow, from which fell a profusion of lace in the form of ruffles.

The hair, which had been allowed to hang loose in ringlets, was now “put up” and combed from the forehead like a rising billow, and surmounted by piles of ribbons and lace. This was called the “commode,” and was sometimes covered by a lace scarf or veil that streamed down each side of the coiffure.

Stiff stays, tightly laced over the stomacher and very long in the waist, became fashionable, so that a lady’s body, from the shoulder to the hips, looked like the letter V.

(Fig. 1): A lady of the Court of Charles I. (1643), after the
engraver Hollar, wearing a lace collar on a low cut neck.
The robe is not draped, and the hair is combed tightly back
from the forehead and gathered in close rolls behind, being
allowed to flow freely at the sides. (Fig. 2): A lady wearing
a mask of the time of James I., from a contemporary print. She
holds a folding bone fan in her right hand, and attached to
her girdle, hanging over the farthingale, are a looking glass,
a ball-shaped pomander (containing perfumes) with tassels,
and a toilet case, probably of silver. In the Court of James
I., which was very dissolute, the mask was worn on all public
occasions by ladies; and those who appeared without it were
called “bare-faced.” (Fig. 3): A lady wearing patches, from a
woodcut in Bulwer’s “Artificial Changeling,” 1650. The custom
of patching was introduced in the reign of James I. A coach,
with a coachman and two horses, with postillions, appears
on her forehead; both sides of her face have crescents upon
them; a star is on one side of her mouth, and a plain circular
patch on her chin. (Fig. 4): A lady of Charles I.’s reign,
showing the arrangement of the hair, with a coif covering
the head. (From a tomb in Morley Church, Derbyshire.) (Fig.
5): An English tradesman’s wife, 1649, after Hollar. (Fig.
6): Dress of an elderly lady of the middle class during the
Protectorate. She wears a close hood and band, with ample
gown. (From the effigy of Elizabeth Sacheverell, 1657, in
Morley Church, Derbyshire.) (Fig. 7): A Puritan woman, 1646,
from a contemporary print. (Fig. 8): A “Tower” head-dress,
also known as a “Commode,” as worn at the close of the 17th
century. It consisted of rows of lace stuck bolt upright over
the forehead, rising one above the other, forming a kind of
pyramid, with streaming lappets hanging over the shoulders
from the head. The hair was combed upwards to form a support
to the structure. (From a contemporary print.) (Fig. 9): Side
view of a similar head-dress, of one “storey” only, backed by
dark coloured ribbons, the hair at the front and sides being
arranged in short, close curls. (From a contemporary print.)
(Fig. 10): Head of a lady of the early time of Charles II.,
showing the method of dressing the hair with a “foretop” or
tuft of hair turned up from the forehead. This fashion, being
introduced by Catherine of Braganza, was probably Portuguese.
(From a print in the Pepysian Library.)]

(Fig. 1): Anne of Denmark, Queen of James I. (from a
contemporary portrait). This costume differs in no way from
that worn at the Court at the end of Elizabeth’s reign. The
farthingale, or enormous hooped petticoat, projected more at
the sides than in front. It was absolutely flat on the top,
with a series of radiating pleats upon the surface of it. The
exquisite design in needlework upon the robe, with gems worked
into the pattern, is shown clearly in the illustration. The
ruff, composed of rich lace and needlework, stretches back
from the neck, and the front of the dress is cut very low.
The Queen holds a feathered fan and a book in her hands. (Fig.
2): A lady of the Court of Charles II. (from a contemporary
portrait). There is the greatest contrast between the costume
shown in Fig. 1 and this, the former being most uncomfortable
and artificial. Fig. 2 shows the prevailing character of the
female costume of this reign--unconfined ease. “The ringlets
hang loosely upon the exposed neck, which is quite innocent
of the transparent lawn of the band or the partlet. The gown
is striking by its very simplicity, the sleeves being merely
looped material covering the undersleeves of lawn.”]

ARMS AND ARMOUR.

(To end of CHARLES II.)

_James I._

During the reign of Elizabeth the decay of the use of armour had set in on account of the enormous weight and unwieldly nature of the harness.

It prevented free action, and, indeed, seriously crippled the physical frames of many of the wearers.

The increasing use of fire arms also tended to hasten the disuse of armour, for it became difficult to make plates that would be sufficiently strong to oppose a bullet, unless the armour were made of great thickness. By the end of the reign of James I. its use had been so modified that the armour of the heaviest cavalry terminated at the knees. Sometimes the arms were encased in armour, and occasionally complete armour was worn by the commanders.

A contemporary engraving of Prince Henry of Wales, the eldest son of James I. (Pl. 50, Fig. 1), shows the nature and extent of the armour usually worn.

Through the intercourse with Spain, the cavalry soldier was often termed a cavalier instead of lancer. The infantry consisted of pikemen, armed with pikes or spears 18ft. long, and musketeers, armed with fire arms. Before this reign, on account of their weight, a soldier carrying a fire arm also bore a forked rest in which to place the musket when firing it; but at this time the caliver or matchlock, that could be fired without a rest, came into use generally.

The musketeers were armed with long, rapier-like blades (for their personal defence), nicknamed a “sweyne’s feather” or a “hog’s bristle” (Fig. 9).

_Charles I. and the Commonwealth._

During the struggle between King and people, the armour consisted, at the most, of helmet, backplate and breastplate, or cuirass, with tassets.

In fact, the only armour worn by many noblemen and gentlemen was a cuirass over a buff leather coat, with a helmet or hat to cover the head; and some entire regiments of cavalry were raised, attired in this fashion and named “Cuirassiers.” They were armed with a good sword, stiff, cutting, and sharp-pointed, and pistols hanging at the saddle.

The lancers carried a pike-shaped lance, about 18ft. long, a sword similar to that carried by the cuirassiers, and one or two pistols.

One class of cavalry was called dragoons, because they were armed with a fire arm shorter than that in general use, called a “dragon.”

The full length portrait of Sir Denner Strutt, 1641 (Fig. 10) from his tomb in Whalley Church, Essex, well illustrates the armour of the period as worn by officers in the field. The upper part of the body is completely armed, but the lower part is not so, as the back of the figure and the thighs, which would, in fact, be defended by the position of riding, could need no other protection in the field. The front of the thigh is covered, and the entire leg below the knee. A broad sword-belt passes across the chest, and the plain fashionable collar and long hair repose peacefully on the armed shoulders. Some officers wore helmets completely covering the head (Fig. 8), but often helmets of the form shown in Fig. 5 were in use. Flexible ear-pieces covered the cheeks, and overlapping plates (lobster-tailed) covered the back of the neck. The costume of a General of the Parliamentary Army (Lord Fairfax, General for the County of York) is shown in Fig. 2, where the only articles of armour he wears appear to be the cuirass and gauntlets, the former over a buff coat. His breeches also appear to be of buff leather, and large boots, with wide tops, encase his feet and legs. The modern fire-lock was invented about this time, and a spark being struck by a piece of steel from a flint, so that the spark fell upon the powder in the pan.

_Charles II._

The military costume of this reign was nearly that worn in the Civil Wars.

The defensive armour of the cavalry consisted of “a back, breast, and pot (helmet), the two latter to be pistol proof.” As offensive arms they carried a sword and case of pistols with barrels not under 14 inches in length. The musketeers were ordered to carry a musket with a barrel not under three feet in length, a collar of bandoliers, and a sword.

During this reign the bayonet was first invented, at Bayonne, and was made like a dagger, with a round wooden hilt, screwed or merely stuck into the muzzle of the gun. It is now known as a “plug bayonet.” The gun could not be fired while the bayonet was fixed without the loss of the bayonet also.

(Fig. 1): Henry, Prince of Wales, eldest son of James I.
(from Drayton’s “Polyolbion”), showing the amount of armour
that was generally worn. The Prince wears only armour to the
waist, with large, bombasted trunk hose, and is represented
as balancing a pike. (Fig. 2): Costume, with armour of
“Ferdinand, Lord Fairfax, the father of the more celebrated
Parliamentary General, who also served in the same cause, and
was appointed General for the County of York.” He wears as
armour only the cuirass and gauntlets. (Figs. 3 and 4): Plug
bayonets (the earliest form), invented at Bayonne; formerly
in the Meyrick collection. (Fig. 5): Single-barred helmet
with “lobster-tail” neck piece and ear-pieces, usually worn
by dragoons. (Fig. 6): Helmet with triple bars which protect
the face, as worn by harquebussiers in 1645. (Fig. 7): Pot
helmet or open head-piece, with cheeks, and a fluted ornament
over the top, of the time of Cromwell. (Fig. 8): Close helmet
of the time of Charles I., with ear-pieces and a perforated
vizor which may be drawn down to cover the face. (Fig. 9):
A “sweyne’s feather” or “hog’s bristle,” a kind of rapier,
carried by the musketeer for his defence. (Fig. 10): Effigy
of Sir Denner Strutt, 1641, from his tomb in Whatley Church,
Essex, illustrating the armour of the period as worn by
officers in the field. (Fig. 11): A pikeman of the time of
James I. (from a broadside in the possession of the Society
of Antiquaries). He wears a morion-shaped helmet with plumes,
back and breast plates reaching to the waist, with two
broad tassets fastened to the breast plate over padded knee
breeches. He is armed with a long pike and sword. (Fig. 12):
A musketeer of the time of James I. (from the same source as
Fig. 11). Musketeers at first wore morions on the head, but,
later on, large hats with plumes were adopted. This one is
represented as wearing only back and breast plates, and he is
armed with a musket and a sword. In his right hand he carries
a rest for his musket, and slung over his shoulder he wears a
bandolier or set of leather cases, in each of which a complete
change of powder for a musket was carried, to facilitate the
loading of the piece. This was used until the end of the 17th
century, when the cartridge-box came into use.]

ANNE, GEORGE I. AND GEORGE II.

MALE COSTUMES.

The reign of Anne (a Stuart), is taken with those of the early Hanoverians, as the costumes of the three reigns were so similar.

_Anne and George I._

With the former of these reigns, all the chivalric costume except the sword disappeared, the latter still completing the full dress of the Court of St. James’.

Planché, in his “History of British Costume,” very tersely describes the costume of the gentlemen of these reigns:--

“Square-cut coats and long-flapped waistcoats with pockets in them, the latter meeting the stockings, still drawn up over the knee so high as to entirely conceal the breeches, but gartered below it; large hanging cuffs and lace ruffles; the skirts of the coats stiffened out with wire or buckram, from between which peeped the hilt of the sword, deprived of the broad and splendid belt in which it swung in the preceding reigns; blue or scarlet silk stockings, with gold or silver cloaks; lace neckcloths; square-toed, short-quartered shoes, with high red heels and small buckles; very long and formally curled perukes, black riding-wigs, bag-wigs and nightcap-wigs; small three-cornered hats laced with gold or silver galloon, and sometimes trimmed with feathers, comprise the habit of the nobleman and gentleman during the reigns of Queen Anne and George I.”

The large-skirted coat is really the precursor of the modern frock-coat. Full-bottomed wigs were very expensive to the wearer, for in a wig-maker’s bill, dated December 17th, 1712, we find an item as follows:--“For a long, full-bottomed periwig, £12:10:0.” Many interesting peeps are given us at the costume of the time from the advertisements which appeared in the public papers of the losses or robbery of clothes.

In 1714 a gentleman advertised that he was robbed of his wardrobe, consisting of “a scarlet cloth suit, laced with broad gold lace, lined and faced with blue, a fine cinnamon cloth suit with plate buttons, the waistcoat fringed with a silk fringe of the same colour; and a rich yellow flowered satin morning-gown lined with a cherry-coloured satin, with a pocket on the right side.”

George I. was not inclined to changes in dress, for he was by no means young when he succeeded to the throne. Indeed, it is said that from the days of Charles II. till the accession of George III. the Court gave little encouragement to dress.

The beau of 1727 is described as dressed in “a fine linen shirt, the ruffles and bosom of Mechlin lace, a small wig with an enormous queue or tail, his coat well garnished with lace, black velvet breeches, red heels to his shoes and gold clocks to his stockings, his hat beneath his arm, a sword by his side, and himself well scented.”

There were many minor changes in articles of dress, such as the introduction of the Ramilies cock of the hat (Fig. 3) soon after the battle of Ramilies, and a wig also took its name from the same event. It was invented by an enterprising wig-maker, and had the tail plaited to the taste of the Swiss female peasant, having a black tie at the top and another at the bottom. It is not flowing at the sides, but consists of a bushy heap of well-powdered hair (Fig. 3). The fashion of “cocking” the hat or turning up the brim, had many changes, and by the cock of the hat, the occupation of the man who wore it was known; and it varied from the modest broad brim of the clergy and countrymen to the slightly upturned hat of the country gentleman or citizen.

A large hat, called the Kevenhuller hat, of extravagant proportions, was worn (Fig. 7), and it was generally patronised by military men or bullies about town after the type of the Mohocks, Bloods, &c.

In the reign of George II. there was no alteration in the general character of male costumes. The pigtail appeared in 1745, and some young men wore their own hair, dressed and powdered, about 1751.

The costume of the ordinary classes during these reigns was very simple, and consisted of a plain coat, buttoned up the front, a long waistcoat reaching to the knees, both having capacious pockets with great overlapping flaps, plain bob (short and round) wigs, hats slightly turned up, and high quartered shoes.

The works of Hogarth afford abundant examples of the costumes of the reign of George II. Thanks to his skilful pencil we are familiar with the square-cut coats, flapped waistcoats and knee breeches of the first half of the 18th century. The use of muffs by men may be traced back to the exquisites of Louis XIV., and were as commonly carried by men as by women.

(Fig 1): Costume of a gentleman of the time of Queen Anne and
George I. (Fig. 2): A clergyman’s hat (1745), from Hogarth.
(Fig. 3): A fashionable cock, as worn by merchants and
well-to-do Londoners, known as the Ramilies cock, with the
Ramilies wig. (Fig. 4): Costume of a gentleman of the time of
George I. (1720). (Fig. 5): Costume of a gentleman of the
time of George II., from “The School of Venus, or the Lady’s
Miscellany,” 1739. He wears a small wig and hat, and a long
wide-skirted coat. (Fig. 6): A plain and decisively cocked
hat, which was in fashion in 1745, and a bag-wig beneath it.
(Fig. 7): The Kevenhuller hat, of extravagant proportions, as
worn by military men, or bullies about town. (Fig. 8): Costume
of a gentleman, from a print dated 1744.]

FEMALE COSTUMES.

At Anne’s accession little change was made in the costumes of ladies, as the Queen was of too retiring a disposition to introduce any originality in that direction.

In 1711 Addison, in the “Spectator,” devoted a whole number to the subject of ladies’ head-dress, commencing with a declaration “that there is not so variable a thing in nature,” adding, “within my own memory I have known it rise and fall about 30 degrees. About ten years ago it shot up to a very great height, insomuch that the female part of our species were much taller than the men” (allusion to the Commode). “I remember several ladies that were once very near seven feet high, and at present want some inches of five feet.” After about fifteen years the high Commode again came into fashion, but the startling novelty was the hoop-petticoat. It widened gradually from the waist to the ground, the gown being looped up round the body in front and falling in loose folds behind (Pl. 52, Fig. 1.). A writer of the time says of this fashion: “Nothing can be imagined more unnatural, and, consequently, less agreeable. When a slender woman stands upon a basis so inordinately wide, she resembles a funnel, a figure of no great elegancy.”

About this time, ladies, particularly in their riding costumes, imitated the costumes of the men, wearing a cocked beaver hat and feathers, hair curled and powdered and tied like a man’s, coat and waistcoat like a man, with a petticoat below the waist. Sir Roger de Coverley, when looking at a young sporting lady, was about to address her as “Sir,” until he cast his eye lower and saw her petticoat.

In contrast with the extravagance shown in the quantity and quality of the materials used for ladies’ dresses, how cheaply the poor could dress at this time may be gathered from an entry in some parish accounts in Norfolk in 1719: “Paid for clading of the Widow Bernard with a gown, petticoat, bodice, hose, shoes, apron and stomacher, 18s. 6d.”

In the time of George I. there were few innovations in fashion set by the Court.

In the reign of George II. the ladies still laced as tightly, and their hoops were as ugly and inconvenient as ever; but generally speaking, every lady dressed only as pleased herself, so that there was an enormous variety of costumes worn at all public assemblies. At the close of this reign there was a great rage for pastoral plays and Court masques, in which the ladies of the Court and the noblemen appeared as country-folk, shepherds, shepherdesses, milkmaids, &c.

Their garments were cut in a simple style after the characters whom they represented, but they were of very costly materials, with diamonds and other precious stones as ornaments. Ladies often wore white muslin aprons similar to that of a modern waitress, and it is said that Beau Nash, the Master of the Ceremonies, and “King of Bath,” disliked them so much at social gatherings, that he took one off a Duchess at one of the assemblies, and threw it among the waiting women.

The fashions in dress changed so rapidly, however, and were so numerous, that it is impossible to record all the variations of the times. Their diversity and variety will be seen by looking at any of the prints recording social events, which are found in our public collections and are reproduced in the magazines.

(Fig. 1): A lady with a very tightly laced bodice and hoop
petticoat, in fashion about 1718. (Fig. 2): A lady in the
fashion of 1755, showing a later development of the hoop
petticoat, when, owing to the torrent of invectives levelled
at it, it became more constricted in its dimensions. In this
form it much resembles the farthingale of Elizabeth’s time.
(Fig. 3): Hooded head-dress worn in 1727; a complete envelope
for the head, commonly used in riding and travelling, as well
as when walking in the parks. It was called a Nithisdale,
because when Lord Nithisdale escaped from the Tower dressed
as a woman, by the assistance of his devoted wife, his
features were concealed in a hood like this. (Fig. 4): Hat of
the milk-maid type, such as was affected by ladies in 1727
(from the “Musical Entertainer”). (Fig. 5): High-heeled and
small-pointed shoe of embroidered silk, with a thin sole of
leather such as was worn by the lady in Fig. 7. (Fig. 6):
The clog for the shoe seen in Fig. 5 is made of leather,
ornamented by coloured silk threads worked with a needle.
Figs. 5 and 6 are from Hone’s “Everyday Book.” (Fig. 7): A
good specimen of the fashion in the hoop petticoat, from a
curious print called the “Review,” published about 1740. The
hoop, which was formed of whalebone, stretches the dress on
all sides, so that it rises from the ground, and allows the
small-pointed, high-heeled shoes to be seen. The wearer had to
double the hoop round in front, or lifted it up on each side
when she entered a door or carriage, and, when seated, she
occupied the space usually allotted for half a dozen of the
male sex. (All the above are from contemporary engravings.)]

GEORGE III.

MALE COSTUMES.

King George III. was very young when he came to the throne, and he was retiring and modest in his personal habits, so that he did not set the fashion in any extravagant direction. The nobility and gentry started all that was new in the fashions without waiting for the royal sanction to their flippancies and extravagances.

Both ladies and gentlemen dressed simply at first, Fig. 1 being the type of the male costume of the time. It was only remarkable for the great quantity of lace with which the coat and waistcoat were trimmed.

The dress of the countryman at this time was conspicuous for its “bagginess.” The garments were full and easy, the natural hair was worn; a loosely-twisted neckcloth, enormous hat, and easy shoes completed a dress, which “was remarkable as fitting only where it touched.”

At the commencement of the reign, men’s hats were worn with very wide brims (about 6½ inches wide), and cocked in various styles according to the profession of the wearer. A favourite cocked hat was the Nivernois. It was very small, with large flaps, fastened up to the shallow crown by hooks and eyes. The corner in front was spout-shaped, and stiffened out by wire.

Gold-laced hats were generally worn again in 1775, because the wearers thought that they gave them a military and distinguished appearance, and it is said that many men wore them to escape the attentions of the press gang, that were remarkably active about this time. In 1772 a new fashion was introduced by young gentlemen who had been travelling in Italy. They formed themselves into the Maccaroni Club, which was intended as a rival to the Beefsteak Club, and distinguished themselves by a most extravagant and eccentric costume.

The new-fashioned dandy was known as a Maccaroni (Figs. 2 and 3). His hair was dressed into an enormous toupée, with large curls at the sides, while behind it was gathered and tied up into an enormous club or knot, that rested on the back of the neck. Upon this, a very small hat was often worn (Fig. 3). A full, white handkerchief was tied in a large bow round the neck. Both coat and waistcoat were shortened, and were edged with lace or braid. The garments were decorated with the wearer’s initials, pictures of windmills, horsemen, hounds, &c., showing to what extent a ridiculous fashion can be carried. Two watches were worn, one in each waistcoat pocket, from which hung large bunches of seals. Silk stockings, and small shoes with diamond buckles, completed the costume, which, however, remained in fashion only one season.

About the middle of the reign of George III., the square-cut coat and the long-flapped waistcoat of the three preceding reigns underwent an alteration. The stiffening was taken out of the skirts, the waists were shortened, and the cut of the present Court suit introduced. Cloth became the general material for the coat, and velvet, silk, satin, and embroidery, were reserved for Court dress or waistcoats and breeches only. The stockings were worn under the breeches, and shoes had large buckles. The lace cravat was abandoned in 1735, and a black ribbon, worn around the neck, was tied in a large bow in front. White cambric stocks, buckled behind, succeeded these, and then followed muslin cravats.

Round hats began to be worn in the mornings, and shortly after this time the French Revolution in 1789 completed the downfall of the three-cornered hat on both sides of the Channel. A flat, folding, crescent-shaped beaver, still called a cocked hat, distinguished the beaux at the theatre, and the chapeau-de-bras, a small triangular silk article, was slipped under the arm of the courtier.

The original three-cornered hat remains in the head-dress of State coachmen of Royal and noble families, and of the Lord Mayor of London, while the chapeau-de-bras is still worn as part of the Court dress.

The French Revolution also affected the wig. It had, during the latter half of the 18th century, become smaller and smaller, and the natural hair was plastered and powdered till it was, at last, as ugly as a wig. This fashion remains in the present day in the powdered hair of footmen in full dress. About 1793, French fashions, copied from the costumes of the leaders of the Revolution, became very much the vogue in this country. A high sugar-loaf hat covered the head, and the flowing hair was powdered; a frilled shirt, a white striped waistcoat, a loose cravat of white cambric tied in a large bow, were worn, and a long green coat covered the upper part of the body. The breeches were tight, and reached to the ankle, being buttoned from the bottom, up the sides to the middle of the thigh, and low top-boots were worn.

Towards the end of the reign, the shirt collar appeared, and the ruffle vanished. The coat was made with lapels and with a tail cut square in front above the hips, like the modern dress-coat. The waistcoat was cut ridiculously short, and pantaloons and Hessian boots were introduced about the same time.

(Fig. 1): Costume of a gentleman at the commencement of the
reign of George III. It is remarkable only for the extra
quantity of lace with which it is decorated, and the small
black cravat which he wears. (Fig. 2): Side view of head-dress
of a Maccaroni, showing (1) the height to which the hair was
raised and plastered, (2) the row of curls around it, and (3)
the large “club” tied with a broad ribbon. (Fig. 3): Complete
costume of a Maccaroni (1772) showing a different treatment
of the hair from that in Fig. 2, the ridiculously small hat,
and the ornamented coat are also shown. (Fig. 4): A hat of
the style worn in 1786. (Fig. 5): The last form of the cocked
hat. Both Figs. 4 and 5 may be taken as specimens of the
latter days of the wig, “large curls, ties and bob, ending
in a single pigtail.” (Fig. 6): Fashionable riding dress in
1786. The costume consists of a broad brimmed hat with band
and buckle, powdered wig and pigtail, a long-tailed coat
with large buttons, tight buckskin breeches buttoned at the
knee, and high boots. (Fig. 7): A hat of the newest fashion
of 1792, gaily decorated with gold strings and tassels. The
natural hair is worn powdered, and the high coat collar is
very characteristic of the time. (All the above are from
contemporary prints.)]

FEMALE COSTUMES.

Both George III. and his wife were decorous and retiring in their habits, and during their reign the fashions were started and maintained by the nobility and gentry of their Court.

The latter “did not wait for the royal sanction to their flippancies, and their taste or want of taste ran riot during this reign to an extent that equalled the absurdities of any previous period, and which makes the history of fashion during that time more varied than that of any similar length of time.”

At the commencement of the reign, ladies’ dresses were generally simple enough; but about 1763 the fashion came over from France of dressing the hair by curling and crisping it, and raising it by adding pomatum, upon a foundation of “many a good pound of wool,” into such an erection “that my lady is dressed for three months at least, during which time it is not in her power to comb her head.” So enormous were these head-dresses, that a satirist said: “Our fine ladies remind me of an apple stuck on the point of a small skewer.” A sign of the times was the number of works written by hairdressers, which appeared with many illustrations, describing the various styles of these monstrosities of hairdressing, “for in those days hairdressers were great men.”

When the Maccaroni costume was adopted in 1772 by some of the dandies, many ladies followed suit with a costume on similar, extravagant lines, particularly copying the enormous toupée.

In 1775 another fashion came in, depicted in Fig. 1. The head-dress is called a half-moon toupée, combed up from the forehead, large curls being made at the sides, and a plume of feathers surmounting the structure. Round the neck is a simple ribbon. The gown is high behind at the neck, and low in front, with a large bunch of flowers stuck in the breast, and the body is tightly confined in stays strengthened with steel busks. The sleeves reach to the elbow; long gloves are worn, and the fan is constantly displayed.

The gown is open from the waist, and gathered in festoons at the sides, the edges being ornamented with silk ribbons in puffs, forming a diamond shaped pattern and edged with lace. The petticoat, which is displayed by the open gown, is similarly decorated, and small, high-heeled shoes with rosettes complete the dress.

The head-dress continued as monstrous as ever until, in 1782, it reached the enormous size shown in Fig. 6. One hairdresser, on completing his task, told the lady that “heads, when properly dressed, kept for three weeks”; that they would not “keep” longer may be seen from the many recipes given for the destruction of the insects which bred in the flour and pomatum so liberally bestowed upon the head-dresses. Needless to say, these structures gave unlimited materials to the many satirists and caricaturists of the period. About 1786 the heads began to lower, and the hair was allowed to stream down the back, a fashion attributed to the portrait painters, led by Sir Joshua Reynolds. Hats with enormous brims were worn of the style shown in Fig. 4, which represents a lady in a fashionable riding dress of 1786.

In 1789 the hair began to be worn “frizzled” in a close bush all over, with pendant curls on the back and shoulders (Fig. 5). The high bonnet of the French peasants was introduced and was worn trimmed with lace, so that it hung over the face like an extinguisher. The puffed out chest, the little frilled jacket and tight sleeves, were also very characteristic of this time.

A curious fashion came in during 1783, in the use of straw as an ornament of dress. It was used to decorate everything, from the cap to the shoe buckle, and naturally this was the era of straw bonnets. In 1794 extremely short waists became fashionable; that is to say, the waists of dresses were carried up to the armpits. In derision of this fashion, a song commencing,

“Shepherds, I have lost my love,
Have you seen my Anna?”

was parodied thus by a wag:

“Shepherds, I have lost my waist,
Have you seen my body?”

The gown was worn without a hoop, and fell in straight, loose folds to the feet. The fashion of powdering the hair fell into disuse, for Mr. Pitt, computing that it would bring in a revenue of about £210,000, put a tax upon powdering the hair, and almost everyone, to his disgust, abandoned the fashion.

Although the hoop had been discarded in private life for some time, it appeared regularly at Court in as great state as ever (Fig. 7).

It was decorated with ribbons, cords, tassels, and bunches of flowers; the waist was pinched, and the head overloaded with feathers, jewels, ribbons, and ornaments--altogether a most uncomfortable attire.

Many of the fashions at the end of George’s reign became tasteful and simple, and illustrations of them will be seen in the portraits, engravings, and caricatures of the time.

(Fig. 1): Costume of a lady in 1775, from an illustration in
the “Ladies’ Magazine” of that year (taken from a drawing made
at Ranelagh). (Fig. 2): A bonnet “of unassisted British taste”
of the time of the Regency, 1811-1820. (Fig. 3): A head-dress
about 1768, from a curious work written by a hairdresser
named Stewart, under the astounding title of “Plocacosmos,
or the Whole Art of Hair Dressing.” It is a large but light
compound of gauze, wire, ribbons and flowers, sloping over
the forehead. (Fig. 4): A lady’s fashionable riding costume
in August, 1786 (from a print). (Fig. 5): A lady of fashion
in 1789 (from a print dated 1790). (Fig. 6): Head-dress of a
lady, 1766 (in Stewart’s “Plocacosmos”). (Fig. 7): A lady in
Court dress in 1796. The hoop petticoat, though fallen into
disuse generally, was retained in the Court dress.]

THE MONASTIC ORDERS.

1. _The Benedictines_ (Fig. 1) are the most ancient of the Monastic Orders, and have always been the most learned. They were founded by St. Benedict in Italy about A.D. 529, as a monastery for 12 monks, in order that they might live, in a religious community, a Christian life with lofty ideals. Originally, St. Benedict’s idea was not to found an Order whose branches should extend throughout Europe as one organisation, but rather that the various houses should be independent of one another.

The Order spread very rapidly, being very rational and elastic in its rules, and it displaced the others that were in existence. Pope Gregory the Great gave to it his high approval, for as the learned Abbot Gasquet says:--“In his (Gregory’s) opinion, it manifested no common wisdom in its provisions, which were dictated by a marvellous insight into human nature, and by a knowledge of the best possible conditions for attaining the end of a monastic life, the perfect love of God and of man.”

Its rule did _not_ enforce ascetism, and great liberty was given to the heads of the Order to modify its regulations to suit special circumstances. The Mission sent to England by St. Augustine, A.D. 597, consisted of a Prior and Monks of St. Benedict’s rule; and as Christianity spread in this country, so the number of houses of the Order increased, until “during the whole Saxon period, this was the only form of monasticism in England.”

2. _The Cluniacs_ grew out of the Benedictines, being established at Cluny, near Macon-sur-Saone, A.D. 912. By the Benedictine rule, all religious houses were self-centred. The Cluniac rule established a new principle--that there should be a great central monastery, with dependencies spread over many lands, all owing allegiance to the central authority. In every case, the Superior of the lesser houses was not elected by the community, but was nominated by the Abbot of Cluny.

The Order was established in England shortly after the Norman Conquest, and when the monasteries were suppressed in the 16th century, there were thirty-two Cluniac Monasteries in this country, one only--at Bermondsey--being an abbey.

3. _The Cistercians_ (Fig. 2).

This was the most flourishing offshoot of the Benedictines, and was founded at the Monastery of Citeaux, A.D. 1092. Though not the founder the greatest organiser was an Englishman, St. Stephen Harding. The Cistercians formed themselves “into an organised corporation, under the perpetual pre-eminence of the Abbot and house of Citeaux, with yearly Chapters, which all Superiors were bound to attend.”

The Order spread very rapidly, and the first abbey was founded in England A.D. 1129. At the general suppression there were one hundred Cistercian houses in this country.

4. _The Carthusians_ (Fig. 3).

This Order was founded in the 11th century on very strict and ascetic lines. The monks lived a life of the greatest austerity and practised the most self-denying ordinances. Their clothes were mean and rough; they never ate meat--fish and eggs being the only animal food allowed, and that only on two days in the week. On two days they had pulse or herbs boiled, and on three days bread and water--only two meals a day being taken.

The first Carthusian house was founded in England A.D. 1180, and there were only eight monasteries of the Order in this country at the dissolution of the monasteries.

Most of the above Orders had houses of Nuns affiliated to them.

GENERAL PLAN OF A MONASTERY.

The Abbeys and Monasteries of the Benedictines and the Orders founded from them, with the exception of the Carthusians, were built on the same general plan.

The _Church_ itself was, of course, the principal of the monastic buildings, and the most important part of the Church was the _Presbytery_, with the High Altar and the Choir. The Church was always cruciform and the Presbytery was the eastern arm. To it only the monks who were in priestly orders had access. The Choir, or Quire, frequently stretched in the _Nave_ beyond the _Transepts_, and was divided off from the more public part by the great screen.

In northern climates the Church was generally situated on the northern side of the monastic buildings. Being a lofty and substantial structure, it afforded protection, and acted as a screen to the other buildings from the keen north winds. Next to the Church in importance came the _Cloisters_, which were generally, in England, placed on the south side of the Nave. Around them were grouped the principal buildings. The Cloisters were covered and paved walks, surrounding a rectangular space called the _Cloister Garth_. They were the common dwelling place of the community, for in them the greater part of the work of the monks was carried on. The Northern Walk, by the wall of the Church, was naturally the warmest, as it had a southern aspect, and here the monks worked. The Prior sat near the eastern end of this walk, where there was the usual entrance to the Church, and along this side, the other seniors sat--not arranged in order of seniority, but in the positions that best suited them for the respective tasks on which they were engaged. The Abbot sat apart at the end of the eastern cloister nearest the Church door. In the same cloister, but toward the southern end, the Novice Master gave regular instruction to the novices, and the Western Cloister was given up to the junior monks.

The Southern Cloister, with a north aspect, was sunless and cheerless, and was not generally used as a working place. Here were placed the lavatories, and the towel cupboards.

Abbot Gasquet, in his “English Monastic Life,” says:--“Day after day for centuries, the Cloister was the centre of the activity of the religious establishment. The quadrangle was the place where the monks lived and studied and wrote. In the three sides--the Northern, the Eastern, and Western walls--were transacted the chief business of the house, other than what was merely external. Here the older monks laboured at the tasks appointed them by obedience, or discussed questions relating to ecclesiastical learning or regular observance; or at permitted times joined in recreative conversation. Here, too, in the parts set aside for the purpose, the younger members toiled at their studies under the eye of their teacher, learnt the monastic observance from the lips of the Novice Master, or practised the chants and melodies of the Divine Office with the Cantor or his assistant. How the work was done in the winter time, even supposing that the great windows looking out on to the Cloister Garth were glazed or closed with wooden shutters, must ever remain a mystery.”

The _Refectory_, also called the Fratry, or Frater House, was the dining hall of the establishment. It was always placed, with the kitchens, &c., as far as possible from the Church, so that the smell of the cooking should not penetrate the sacred structure. As a rule, the walls of the Refectory were wainscotted, and the floor was covered with hay or rushes. The monks sat in a single row on each side, with their backs to the wall. The Superior sat at a high table at the Eastern end, and a pulpit was erected at the western side or southern end of the hall. From it, one of the novices read aloud part of the Scriptures in Latin during meal times.

In Cistercian monasteries the Refectory was placed at right angles to the Southern Cloister, but in those of the Cluniacs and Benedictines its length ran east and west along this Cloister.

The kitchen, buttery, and other offices connected with the cooking and storing of food, were naturally placed near to the refractory.

The _Chapter House_ was situated on the eastern side of the Cloisters, being built near the Church. It was always a room of noble proportions and design, and here the Abbot and monks met daily to transact the solemn business of the Order. The latter sat along by the wall and the former in the east.

In a vestry or sacristy near it were kept, beside other things, the books of the house.

The _Parlour_ was a room in which the monks did what talking was necessary, when strict silence had to be observed in the cloisters, and here sometimes they interviewed visitors. It was generally situated near the Chapter House.

The _Common Room_, also called the _Calefactory_ or _Warming House_, was a room to which the monks resorted in winter to warm themselves at the common fire, and it was also used at times for the purposes of recreation.

Above the Chapter House and the other buildings on the eastern side was the _Dormitory_ or _Dorter_ of the monks, and it had one set of stairs leading to it from the Eastern Cloister, and another set leading down into the church.

Generally, too, on the eastern side was a passage leading to the _Infirmary_, which was placed some distance away from the other buildings, and near to it was the _Misericorde_, a room where monks, by permission of the Abbot, might eat meat, which was at other times forbidden.

By the Western Cloisters were the _Cellar_ and the Fratry of the lay brethren or Conversi, and over these was placed their Dorter.

There was also, in addition to these, a _Guest House_, often of great size and very well appointed, where strangers were entertained. This was generally built in such a place where it would least interfere with the privacy of the monks; and there was also an _Almonry_, where food and clothing were distributed by the monks to the poor who came for relief.

THE FRIARS AND CANONS.

From the beginning of the 10th to the end of the 12th century, a series of religious orders arose, each aiming at a more successful reproduction of the monastic ideal.

In the 13th century there arose the Orders of Friars, who were inspired by the principle of devotion to the performance of active and actual religious duties among their fellow-men, rather than by that of monastic seclusion. Their plan was “to mix with the world and work for the salvation of the world” in a state of absolute poverty.

Their houses were built in the poorest quarters of large towns, but they only used the houses as temporary resting-places, preaching and carrying out their ministrations throughout the country, and attending to the physical and spiritual needs of the lowest and poorest, including the lepers and the outcasts. They were great preachers, and this was particularly striking, because preaching had fallen into disuse among the monastic orders.

“Nothing in the histories of Wesley or of Whitfield can be compared with the enthusiasm which everywhere welcomed them,” and it is said that the work of the Friars staved off the Reformation for 200 years.