Two Centuries of Costume in America, Volume 1 (1620-1820)Earle, Alice Morse
History
Two Centuries of Costume in America, Volume 1 (1620-1820)
Earle, Alice Morse
Clothing and dress -- United States -- History
In truth, however, such laws had existed not only in France and
England, but since the days of the old Locrian legislation, when it was
ordered that no woman should go attended with more than one maid in the
street “unless she were drunk.” Ancient Rome and Sparta were surrounded
by dress restrictions which were broken just as were similar ones in
more modern times. The Roman could wear a robe but of a single color;
he could wear in embroideries not more than half an ounce of gold; and,
with what seems churlishness he was forbidden to ride in a carriage. At
that time, just as in later days, dress was made to emphasize class
distinction, and the clergy joined with the magistrates in denouncing
extravagant dress in both men and women. The chronicles of the monks
are ever chiding men for their peaked shoes, deep sleeves and curled
locks like women, and Savonarola outdid them all in severity. The
English kings and queens, jealous of the rich dress of their opulent
subjects, multiplied restrictions, and some very curious anecdotes
exist of the calm assumption by both Elizabeth and Mary to their own
wardrobe of the rich finery of some lady at the court who displayed
some new and too becoming fancy.
Old Venice Point Lace. Old Venice Point Lace.
Adam Smith declared it “an act of highest impertinence and presumption
for kings and rulers to pretend to watch over the earnings and
expenditure of private persons,” nevertheless this public interference
lingered long, especially under monarchies.
These sumptuary laws of New England followed in spirit and letter
similar laws in England. Winthrop had seen the many apprentices who ran
through London streets, dressed under laws as full of details of dress
as is a modern journal of the modes. For instance, the apprentice’s
head-covering must be a small, flat, round cap, called often a bonnet—a
hat like a pie-dish. The facing of the hat could not exceed three
inches in breadth in the head; nor could the hat with band and facing
cost over five shillings. His band or collar could have no lace edge;
it must be of linen not over five shillings an ell in price; and could
have no other work or ornament save “a plain hem and one stitch”—which
was a hemstitch. If he wore a ruff, it must not be over three inches
wide before it was gathered and set into the “stock.” The collar of his
doublet could have neither “point, well-bone or plait,” but must be
made “close and comely.” The stuff of his doublet and breeches could
not cost over two shillings and sixpence a yard. It could be either
cloth, kersey, fustian, sackcloth, canvas, or “English stuff”; or
leather could be used. The breeches were generally of the shape known
as “round slops.” His stockings could be knit or of cloth; but his
shoes could have no polonia heels. His hair was to be cut close, with
no “tuft or lock.”
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account