Chapter X: Boots, Shoes, and Other Coverings for the Feet 279

INDEX 302

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

PORTRAIT OF MISS ELLEN TERRY AS LADY MACBETH, _Frontispiece_
by J. S. SARGENT, R.A.

HORNED HEAD-DRESS: BEATRICE, COUNTESS OF ARUNDEL, 1439 _Title-page_

PAGE

DUKE OF JULIERS AND CLEVES (ALDEGREVER) 6

CHAT I.--A GENERAL SURVEY.

Heading 19

The Comte d'Artois and Mademoiselle Clothilde 21

Charles Howard, Earl of Nottingham 23

Ludovicus Rex, by Thackeray 27

Travelling in a Horse-litter (from a Fourteenth Century MS.) 31

William III. 35

Queen Mary 39

Caricature: Pig Walking upon Stilts (Harleian MS.) 43

Caricature: Winged Devil (Cotton MS.) 43

Duchess of Ancaster (after Hudson) 47

Damask in Silk and Gold (Saracenic) 50

Venetian Fabric (Thirteenth Century) 51

London Promenade Dress, 1836 55

CHAT II.--THE TUNIC.

Tunic, Petticoat, and Girdle (Jutland) 62

Hunefer and his Wife ("Book of the Dead," _c._ B.C. 1370) 63

A Priest Burning Incense ("Book of the Dead") 65

Plan of the Tunic 66

The Tunic (Hope's "Costume of the Ancients") 67

Greek Figure (Ibid.) 70

Greek Figure (Ibid.) 71

Treuthe's Pilgryme atte Plow (Trinity College, Cambridge) 75

Anglo-Saxon Dress (Eighth Century) 76

CHAT III.--THE MANTLE.

Heading: The Imperial Coronation Mantle at Vienna 83

Plan of the Toga 86

The Toga (Hope's "Costume of the Ancients") 87

Statue of Queen Matilda at Rochester 91

Lord Burleigh (National Portrait Gallery) 93

Lodowick, Duke of Richmond and Lennox 97

Portion of the Picture of the Miracle of St. Bernard, Perugia 99

Prince Henry, eldest son of James I. 103

Earl of Rochester (National Portrait Gallery) 105

Duke of Buckingham 107

CHAT IV.--THE DOUBLET AND HOSE.

Heading: Italian Cassone (Fifteenth Century) 111

Figure by Fiorenzo di Lorenzo, Perugia 113

Paris on Mount Ida (Hope's "Costume of the Ancients") 115

Anglo-Saxon Retainer (G. W. Rhead) 116

Knightly Pastimes: Hawking, 1575 119

Sir Thomas Gresham (National Portrait Gallery) 121

Philip II. of Spain (National Portrait Gallery) 123

Henry, Prince of Wales 125

An Exquisite (from Jacquemin) 129

Philippe de Vendôme 131

CHAT V.--THE KIRTLE OR PETTICOAT.

The Close-fitting Jacket, _temp._ Edward III.
(from Viollet le Duc) 137

A Lady of Basle (Holbein) 139

The Children of Charles I. 143

Miss Lewis 145

The Gamut of Love (Watteau) 147

Madame de Mouchy 151

Walking Dress, 1810 152

Promenade Costume, 1833 154

Paris Evening Dress, 1833 155

CHAT VI.--THE RISE AND FALL OF THE CRINOLINE.

Heading: Figure from Jacquemin 159

Queen Charlotte (after Gainsborough) 161

Queen Elizabeth 163

James I. and his Queen, Anne of Denmark 165

Festal Dress, Otaheite 167

Mary Queen of Scots and Darnley 169

"Don't be afraid, my dear!" 171

King and Mrs. Baddeley 173

The Crinoletta Disfigurans (_Punch_) 177

CHAT VII.--COLLARS AND CUFFS.

Henrietta, Marquise d'Entragues 182

Henry IV. of France 185

The Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia 187

Son of the Painter Dirck de Vries 191

Charles I. in three views 193

Cravats 199

CHAT VIII.--HATS, CAPS, AND BONNETS.

Heading: Fools in a Morris Dance 205

Mrs. Anne Warren (after Romney) 207

Hunting Hat, Orcagna, Campo Santo, Pisa 210

Hunting Hat (Ibid.) 210

Figure with Long Net-caul (G. W. Rhead) 212

Hat, Fra Angelico, Florence 213

Hat (Ibid.) 213

Heart-shaped Head-dress 216

Horned Head-dress 216

Francis Bacon 219

Thomas Killigrew 221

The Development of the Pot Hat 223

Robert Devereux, second Earl of Essex 225

Letitia Bonaparte, mother of Napoleon 228

Anne Day 229

Two of the Wigginses (Gillray) 230

Parisian Head-dresses for 1812 231

Fool's Cap of Leather, German (S.K.M.) 233

CHAT IX.--THE DRESSING OF THE HAIR, MOUSTACHIOS, AND BEARD.

Heading: Comb (Italian, Fourteenth Century) 237

Assyrian Bas-relief 238

Bearded Bacchus (Hope's "Costume of the Ancients") 239

Greek Head-dresses (Ibid.) 241

Roman Head-dresses (Ibid.) 243

Head-dress from Viollet le Duc (Fifteenth Century) 248

A Painted Face (Roxburghe Ballads) 251

Wig, Egyptian, B.C. 1500 (British Museum) 254

Beau Fielding 257

Hyacinthe Rigaud 259

Ridiculous Taste; or, The Lady's Absurdity 261

The French Lady in London 263

Head-dress (from Jacquemin) 264

Louis XVI., Marie Antoinette, and the Dauphin 269

A Reigning Monarch 272

Philip IV. of Spain 273

CHAT X.--BOOTS, SHOES, AND OTHER COVERINGS FOR THE FEET.

Heading: Shoes (Seventeenth and Eighteenth Centuries) 281

Clog or Patten 282

Roman Sandals (Hope's "Costume of the Ancients") 285

Sandals of Italian Peasantry 286

Lords John and Bernard Stuart 287

Shoes, French (Fifteenth and Seventeenth Centuries) 290

Shoes, German (Sixteenth Century) 291

Shoes (Sixteenth and Seventeenth Centuries, Musée de Cluny) 293

Carved Wooden Shoe, French (Seventeenth Century) 294

Shoe, Dutch Officer of Guards, 1662 296

Shoe of a Musketeer, 1697 296

Top Boot, Louis XIII., 1611 297

Top Boot, Comte de Soissons, 1628 298

Bravoes (Martin Schongauer) 299

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Anglo-Saxon Chronicle.

Barclay: Ship of Fools of the World, 1508.

_Bell's Fashionable Magazine, 1812._

Bulwer: Pedigree of the English Gallant.

Carlyle, T.: Sartor Resartus; French Revolution.

Caxton: The Four Sons of Aymon.

Chaucer.

English Costume from Pocket-books, 1799.

Eginhart: Life of Charlemagne, 1619.

Fairholt: Costume in England, 1896.

Froissart's Chronicles, H. N. Humphreys, 1855.

Gregory of Tours: History of the Franks.

Gosson, Stephen: Schoole of Abuse, 1579.

Harding's Chronicle, 1543.

Holme, Randal: Notes on Dress, _c._ 1660.

Hope, T.: Costume of the Ancients.

Jonson, Ben: Plays.

John de Meun } } Romance of the Rose. William de Lorris}

Knight of La Tour Landry, 1371, Caxton.

Lydgate, Monk of Bury: Poems.

Le Blanc, H., Esq.: The Art of Tying the Cravat, 1828.

Paris, Matthew.

Piers Plowman: Pierce Ploughman's Vision.

Planché: British Costume, 1874; Cyclopædia of Costume, 1877.

Racinet: Costume.

Roxburghe Ballads, _c._ 1686.

Statutes: Henry III., Henry VIII.

Stothard, C.: Monumental Effigies, 1877.

Strutt: Dress and Habits of the English People, 1842.

Stubbes: Anatomy of Abuses.

Stow, John: Chronicle, 1615.

Stewart, J.: Plocacosmos, or the Whole Art of Hairdressing, 1782.

Viollet le Duc: Dictionnaire raisonné du mobilier Français, 1858-75.

Wright, T.: Caricature and History of the Georges, 1868.

William of Malmesbury.

I

A GENERAL SURVEY

"You see two individuals, one dressed in fine Red, the other
in coarse threadbare Blue: Red says to Blue: 'Be hanged and
anatomised;' Blue hears with a shudder, and (O wonder of wonders!)
marches sorrowfully to the gallows; is there noosed-up, vibrates
his hour, and the surgeons dissect him, and fit his bones into a
skeleton for medical purposes. How is this; or what make ye of your
Nothing can act but where it is? Red has no physical hold of Blue,
no clutch of him, is nowise in contact with him: neither are those
ministering Sheriffs and Lord-Lieutenants and Hangmen and Tipstaves
so related to commanding Red, that he can tug them hither and
thither; but each stands distinct within his own skin. Nevertheless
as it is spoken so it is done; the articulated Word sets all hands
in action; and Rope and Improved-drop perform their work.

"Thinking reader, the reason seems to me twofold: First, that man
is a Spirit, and bound by invisible bonds to All Men; secondly,
that he wears Clothes, which are the visible emblems of that
fact. Has not your Red hanging-individual a horsehair wig,
squirrel-skins and a plush-gown; whereby all mortals know that he
is a Judge?--Society, which the more I think of it astonishes me
the more, is founded upon Cloth."

CARLYLE, _Sartor Resartus_.

CHATS ON COSTUME

I

A GENERAL SURVEY

That singular clothes-philosopher, Diogenes Teufelsdröckh, whose revolutionary theories upon the subject of the "vestural tissue" first burst upon an astonished world some seventy odd years ago, has, with characteristic emphasis, drawn attention, amongst other things, to the fact that man is the only animal who is not provided with some Nature-made protection against the elements--a protection either of fur, feather, hide, or what not. Bounteous Nature, however, always kind, who never withholds a good without affording ample compensation, has endowed man with that fertile brain and cunning hand whereby he may convert hide into leather, wool of sheep into cloth, web of worm into silk, flax and cotton into linen of various kinds, and so restore that balance of endowment without which man would be at the mercy of every wind that blew.

The uses of clothes, or costume--the words may be here taken as synonymous--may be said to be threefold: first, for decency, which was their first and apparently only use, as we may assume that in Eden the sun always shone; secondly, for comfort and protection; thirdly, for beauty and adornment.

First, then, for decency. That is sufficiently clearly established if we may accept the Mosaic account of the world's juvenescence: "And the eyes of both of them were opened, and they knew that they were naked; and they sewed fig leaves together, and made themselves aprons"; "Unto Adam also and to his wife did the Lord God make coats of skins and clothed them."[1] This habit of observance of the decencies of life appears to be common to all nations. No people or tribe, however primitive the civilisation, but makes some sort of provision in this respect. The Veddas of Ceylon make girdles of leaves, which gives them a strangely fantastic appearance. We learn from the accounts of travellers in Central Africa that "clothing, though extremely simple, consisting of a little grass-cloth, ornaments of feathers, fur, shells, glass and metal beads, are worn, and the skin is decorated by stripes of paint or an extensive series of cicatrices." Among the aborigines of the Malay Peninsula (Sakais) "the men wear a strip of bark-cloth twisted round the waist and drawn between the legs. The women sometimes wear small cotton-cloth petticoats (sarongs) purchased from the Malays, and the men occasionally adopt Chinese trousers; but in their native forests, however, none of these luxuries are indulged in."

Secondly, for comfort and protection. The climatic influence on dress is, and must necessarily be, considerable. This is well illustrated by the well-known fable of "The Wind and the Sun." The more boisterously the wind blows, the more closely the man enwraps himself with his cloak; the more fiercely the sun shines, the more the man divests himself of raiment;[2] but between the skins of the Laplander, fashioned by the help of a thorn or a fishbone for a needle, and the sinews of the animal for thread, and the light gossamer clothing of the countries of the East there is a vast range, the extent of which, indeed, is almost boundless. Climate not only determines the amount or degree of warmth or otherwise, but also, as in architecture, influences its character both as to form and colour. Moreover, clothes are an index to the character or temper of an individual or nation. "What meaning lies in Colour! If the Cut betoken intellect and talent, so does the Colour betoken temper and heart."[3]

_Engraved by Thomas Cockson._]

Thirdly, for beauty and adornment--and it is with this latter aspect that this work is mainly concerned. That clothes _should_ be beautiful is an axiom which, one would think, might readily be accepted; that clothes _have been_ beautiful is a fact which cannot be denied. (It is only during the present utilitarian age that the æsthetic principle has been lost sight of.) That clothes _might again_ be beautiful, without suffering any loss on the score of utility, is also unquestionable. To attempt to follow the whims and vagaries of that jade, Fashion, through all her endless diversities and constant changes, would indeed be a Herculean task, and might well appal the boldest he (or she, for that matter) who would wield pen or pencil.

The will-o'-the-wisp of Fashion is, however, a less capricious person than would appear at first sight. There is some method in her madness. Similar types, similar decorative _motifs_, appear and reappear through the centuries with the regularity of the changing seasons. The veracious chronicler may therefore take some comfort from this fact; it lightens his burden, and makes his task less difficult than it would otherwise be. Moreover, dress, as in architectural form, to the careful student of decorative development, presents really less inherent variety than one would suppose; historical accuracy is the favourite bugbear of pedants, and, while appreciating to the full the great distinctiveness of such periods as the Elizabethan, the Stuart, and the Georgian, there are certain primitive forms, certain leading characteristics, which are common to most periods, and which, like the poor, are always with us. One might hazard the contention that a painter would be perfectly safe in introducing a pot-hat and a pair of trousers at practically any period of the world's history--_not in conjunction, mind_; no, that glorious consummation was reserved for this happy age of ours. The Greeks, however, as is well known, wore trousers. Some form of the trouser was worn by the lower classes at most periods of English history. Ben Jonson makes Peniboy junior walk in his "gowne, waistcoate, and _trouses_," expecting his tailor. Nay, do we not read in the Old Testament--in _some_ Old Testaments, at any rate--that even Adam and Eve made themselves--ahem!--breeches? As for the pot-hat, its origin is lost in the maze of antiquity. It crops up in its various developments at all sorts of odd times and periods. A fearsome variety of it is to be seen upon the head of Jan Arnolfini in Van Eyck's picture in the National Gallery. It appears in Durer's engravings and woodcuts, woolly, hairy structures, occasionally of abnormal height. It is perhaps not generally known that it occurs in the Raphael cartoons ("Paul preaching at Athens"). One would have imagined such a singular appearance as a pot-hat, in such surroundings, to have been evident at first sight. The reason it was not so was on account of its colour (vermilion). Had it been black, one would have spotted it at once; and this fact, when one comes to consider it, is a little singular, since, if one were to march down Piccadilly some fine afternoon crowned in a vermilion pot-hat, methinks one would not _altogether_ escape notice.

There is, however, still another aspect of clothes which remains to be considered, _i.e._, their symbolism. It has been written, "Manners maketh man." It might also be written with even a still greater degree of truth, "_Clothes_ maketh man," since clothes contribute so much to man's dignity. Carlyle finds it difficult to imagine a naked Duke of Windlestraw addressing a naked House of Lords, and asks, very pertinently, "Who ever saw any Lord my-lorded in tattered blanket fastened with a wooden skewer?" His King Toom-tabard (empty gown) reigning over Scotland long after the man John Baliol had gone! His quaint conceit of a suit of cast clothes, meekly bearing its honours, without haughty looks or scornful gesture, has been imitated by Thackeray in his amusing illustration of "Ludovicus Rex"--the "silent dignity" of "Rex" as represented by the suit of clothes, the forlorn appearance of Ludovicus, the magnificence of "Ludovicus Rex," all testify to the great importance and value of costume, as contrasted with the relatively trivial character of the wearer.

Who, then, shall dare to belittle the importance of costume? or to affirm that character can rise superior to its environment? Our subject is one of the most significant which can be presented to the reader's consideration. It provides one of the most curious and fascinating studies in the world.

_From "Paris Sketches."_]

The materials upon which we base our knowledge of the dress of the earlier periods of the world's history are necessarily scanty. For the Egyptian and Assyrian period we are dependent upon monumental inscriptions and carving, and the few papyri which have survived the ravages of time. For the Greek and Roman period, upon sculpture, pottery, and the written description of the more considerable authors. For the Byzantine, Frankish, and Gothic periods, upon mosaic, monumental effigies, and illuminated MSS. It is not until what may be called the age of the _painter_ that we may be said to emerge into the broad light of day, and the pencils of Holbein, Rubens, and Vandyke make things clearer for us. The sumptuary laws, however, enacted at various periods, against excess in apparel and extravagance in dress, let in a flood of light on the manners and customs of the times, and in them will be found many curious and interesting details. The principal Acts are the following: 2 Edw. II. c. 4; 37 Edw. III. cc. 8, 14; 3 Edw. IV. c. 1; 22 Edw. IV. c. 1; 1 Hen. VIII. c. 14; 6 Hen. VIII. c. 1; 7 Hen. VIII. c. 6; 24 Hen. VIII. c. 13; 1 and 2 Phil. and Mary, c. 2; 8 Eliz. c. 11. All these laws were repealed by an Act of 1 Jac. I.

This grandmotherly legislation, which was never effective, always evaded and even defied, had a double object in view, first to induce habits of thrift amongst all classes of the people, and secondly on æsthetic grounds.

In the thirty-seventh year of the reign of Edward III. (A.D. 1363), the Commons exhibited a complaint in Parliament against the general usage of expensive apparel not suited either to the degree or income of the people; and an Act was passed by which the following regulations were insisted upon: Furs of ermine and lettice, and embellishments of pearls, excepting for a head-dress, were strictly forbidden to any but the Royal Family, and nobles possessing upwards of £1,000 per annum.

Cloths of gold and silver, and habits embroidered with jewellery, lined with pure miniver, and other expensive furs, were permitted only to knights and ladies, whose incomes exceeded 400 marks yearly.

Knights whose income exceeded 200 marks, or squires possessing £200 in lands or tenements, were permitted to wear cloth of silver with ribands, girdles, &c., reasonably embellished with silver, and woollen cloth, of the value of six marks the whole piece; but all persons under the rank of knighthood, or of less property than the last mentioned, were confined to the use of cloth not exceeding four marks the piece, and were prohibited wearing silks and embroidered garments of any sort, or embellishing their apparel with any ornaments of gold, silver, or jewellery. Rings, buckles, ouches, girdles, and ribands were forbidden them, and the penalty annexed to the infringement of this statute was the forfeiture of the dress or ornament so made or worn.

In the reign of Henry IV. these laws were so little regarded that it was found necessary to revive them with considerable additions. It was enacted that--"No man not being a banneret, or person of high estate," was permitted to wear cloth of gold, of crimson, or cloth of velvet, or motley velvet, or large hanging sleeves open or closed, or gowns so long as to touch the ground, or to use the furs of ermine, lettice, or marten, excepting only "gens d'armes quant ils sont armez." Decorations of gold and silver were forbidden to all who possessed less than £200 in goods and chattels, or £20 per annum, unless they were heirs to estates of 50 marks per annum, or to £500 worth of goods and chattels.

Four years afterwards it was ordained that no man, let his condition be what it might, should be permitted to wear a gown or garment cut or slashed into pieces in the form of letters, rose leaves, and posies of various kinds, or any such-like devices, under the penalty of forfeiting the same, and the offending tailor was to be imprisoned during the King's pleasure.

In the third year of the reign of Edward IV. an Act was promulgated by which cloth of gold, cloth of silk of a purple colour, and fur of sables were prohibited to all knights under the estate of lords. Bachelor knights were forbidden to wear cloth of velvet upon velvet, unless they were Knights of the Garter; and simple esquires, or gentlemen, were restricted from the use of velvet, damask, or figured satin, or any counterfeit resembling such stuffs, except they possessed a yearly income to the value of £100, or were attached to the King's Court or household.

It was also forbidden to any persons who were not in the enjoyment of £40 yearly income to wear any of the richer furs; also girdles of gold, silver, or silver-gilt were forbidden.

_From the MS. 118 Français in the Bibliothèque Nationale (late Fourteenth Century)._]

No one under the estate of a lord was permitted to wear indecently short jackets, gowns, &c., mentioned by Monstrelet, or pikes or poleines to his shoes and boots exceeding two inches in length. No yeoman, or person under the degree of a yeoman, was allowed bolsters or stuffing of wool, cotton, or cadis in his purpoint or doublet under a penalty of six shillings and eightpence fine, and forfeiture awarded; the unfortunate tailor making such short or stuffed dresses, or shoemaker manufacturing such long-toed shoes for unprivileged persons, being under the pain of cursing by the clergy for the latter offence, as well as the forfeit of twenty shillings--one noble to the King, another to the cordwainers of London, and the third to the Chamber of London.

It will readily be seen that these laws were necessarily the cause of great hindrance to trade, which was, indeed, not the least of the evils occasioned by these absurd laws. Richard Onslow, Recorder of London, 1565 (given in Ellis's "Original Letters," vol. ii.), describes an interview which he had with the civic tailors, who were puzzled to know whether they might "line a slop-hose not cut in panes, with a lining of cotton stitched to the slop, over and besydes the linen lining straight to the leg."

The statutory laws, however, were not the _only_ hindrance to trade, since it would appear that during the Plantagenet period _dishonesty_ in trade was as rife as it is at the present time, and foreign competition as keen; the conditions, however, were slightly different, the foreign merchants obtaining high prices for their goods, instead of dumping cheap goods into the country at low prices. The remedy was directed to the enforcement of greater honesty in trade dealings, rather than to fortify themselves behind tariff walls.

It was enacted in the third year of the reign of Edward IV. c. 1:--"Firste, whereas many yeres paste & nowe at this daye, the workemanshyp of clothes & things requisite to the same, is & hath bene of such fraude disceite & falsite, that the sayde clothes in other landes & countreis, is had in small reputacyon, to the greate shame of this lande. And by reason thereof a great quantite of clothes of other strange landes be brought into this realme, & here solde at an highe & excessyve pryce, evydently shewynge thossens defaulte & falsyte of the maykynge of wollen clothes of this lande. Our soveraigne lorde the Kynge, for the remedy of the premisses, & to the preferment of such labours & occupacions, which hath been used by the makynge of the sayde clothes, by thaduyse assent & request & auctoritie aforsayd, hath ordeyned & establysshed, that every hole wollen clothe called brodclothe, which shal be made & set to sale after the feaste of Saynt Peter called ad vincula, which shal be in the yere of our Lorde M.CCCC.LXV. after the ful waterynge & rackyng straynyng or tenturyng of the same redy to sale, shall holde & conteyne in length xxiiii yardes, & to every yarde an ynche, conteynynge the bredthe of a mannes ynche, to be measured by the creste of the same clothe. And i brede ii yardes, or vii quarters at the leaste wythyn the lystes. & if the clothe be longer in measure than xxiiii yardes & the ynches than the byer therof shall paye to the seller for for as moche as doth excede such measure of xxiiii yardes, after the rate of the measure above ordeyned. Also it is ordeined & establisshed by auctoritie of the sayd lordes, that all maner clothes called streytes, to be made & put to sale after the same feaste, after the full watering & rackyng, streynynge or tenturynge therof redye to sale, shall holde & conteyne in lengthe xii yardes & the ynches, after the measure aforsaid, & in brede one yarde within the lystes. Also it is ordeyned & establysshed by thauctoritie aforsaid, that every clothe called kersey, to be made & put to sale after the sayde feaste, after the full waterynge & rackynge straynynge or tenturynge of the same redy to sale, shall holde & conteyne in lengthe xviii yardes & the ynches, as is aforsayd, & in brede one yarde & a nayle, or at the leaste one yarde within the lystes. & also it is ordeyned & establysshed, that every halfe clothe of every of the sayde hole clothes, streytes, & kerseys, shall kepe his measure in length & brede after the rate fourme & nature of his hole clothe aforsayde. & that no persone, whiche shall make or cause to be made any maner wollen clothe to sel after the said feaste shall medle or put in or upon the same cloth, nor the wolle, whereof the sayd clothe shall be made, any lambes wolle, flockes or corke in any maner, upon payne to forfayt xx_s._ for every clothe or halfe clothe, wherein & wherupon any such lambes wolle, flockes or corke shall be put or medled. The one halfe thereof to be to the Kyng, & the other halfe to hym that shall leyse the same clothe, & duely prove the same to be made contrarie to this ordinance, excepte that he shall chose to make of lambes wolle by itselfe without mynglyng with any other wolle. Excepte also that corke may be used in dyenge upon woded wolle, & also in dyenge of all suche clothe, that is onely made of woded wolle, so that the same wolle & clothe be perfytly boyled & madered, except also that corke may be put upon clothe, whiche is perfectly boyled & madered"--but enough of this. The sumptuary laws continued to be enacted against this, that, or the other abuse, or fancied abuse. If a new fashion sprung up, a brand new law would be immediately fashioned for the purpose of keeping it within bounds. It was to no purpose, however; the sumptuary laws continued to be disregarded as heretofore. "How often hath her majestie with the grave advice of her honorable Councell, sette downe the limits of apparell to every degree, & how soon again hath the pride of our harts overflowen the chanell!"[4]