Imágenes de páginas

The French Revolution in 1789 brought in a number of strange vagaries in dress, red and white striped waistcoats, stockings, striped blue and white in horizontal rings, white cravats wound round and round the neck until they reached the point of the chin, while at the same time the women wore the lightest and thinnest costume possible, in fancied imitation of the Romans. Cocked hats of exaggerated shape for the men alternated with steeple-crowned hats with curly brims; while the female costume was finished by the most elaborate pile of curls and crimps, crowned by an enormous cap, either simply of muslin and lace, or with these combined with a sort of hat half concealed with feathers, flowers, and ruffles of lace. The momentary prohibition of elegances of this sort under the Revolution led to a change in the dress of both sexes, which was not to be temporary, except in details. Thus the dress which we call that of the Empire,' the famous 'pink nightgown,' girded immediately below the breasts and hanging thence to the ankles, but so close that a woman could hardly walk and was utterly unable to step across a gutter, was worn with low shoes and with an unprotected neck, while the cold of winter was met by a pelisse, generally worn open in front and affording merely shelter for the shoulders and back, however richly it might be furred. The men fell immediately into the simple and not impressive dress of a time when the civilian was of little account, and any man who was elegant in his aspirations found some excuse to wear a military or official uniform. The civilian dress was then merely a waistcoat, over which was worn a long-skirted coat, and the pantalon, or tight-fitting breeches reaching to the ankle instead of the knee. The large and loose white cravat still continued. From these dresses all our modern fashions have followed, succeeding one another through such changes as this-the coat with a round skirt, projecting much from the hips, from 1830 to 1840; the double-breasted dress coat (habit), from 1840 to 1850, or thereabout, often blue, with gold buttons, often claret-colored or brown; both of these fashions, but disappearing about the very high coat-collar, worn with either or 1835; trousers succeeding the pantalon, and worn rather close-fitting, and with an immense spread, or 'spring,' at the bottom, covering the boot almost to the toes, succeeding the strapped trousers of an earlier time, and succeeded in turn by the bags,' as the English slang term very properly has it, which, since 1860, have remained in fashion throughout western Europe and the nations of European settlement, and constitute certainly the ugliest article of costume hitherto discovered by mankind. The dress of women, now that we approach our own time, and the changes of every year become known to us, has a relative importance so diverse, with so many and such almost imperceptible changes, that a consideration of this is left for the article FASHION.

medallions, and painted enamels of the time, exist in some quantity; and they agree in telling the most extraordinary tale of splendid extravagance in the dress of both sexes. Embroidery was loaded upon bodice and doublet, or was dispensed with only when a very rich brocade was employed; and lace, or its earlier forms of cutwork and drawn-work, and needle embroidery in pierced patterns like filigree, were used with freedom. The circular ruff, projecting like a dish on which the head seems to lie, appears, but is not yet so popular as the broad and flat laced collar, sometimes lying on the shoulders, sometimes standing stifly out horizontally, or for women in steep, upward slope behind the head and neck. The fashion of bombasted thigh-coverings for the men is identified in artistic history with the reign of Henry IV. of France, but it did not last very long, being replaced by the loose, short trousers of about 1625 and after. No costume in the modern sense is perhaps more graceful and spirited at once than the dress of the gentlemen of the time of Louis XIII., which, with its short trousers, the stocking below covering the calf of the leg, which was concealed by the boots commonly worn out of doors, the doublet, reaching a little below the waist, and worn loose, generally unbuttoned in front and showing the shirt in its full folds, the short cloak, worn on the left shoulder, except when it was gathered around the body, the flat hat, with very broad brim, and soft falling feather, and the broad, loose collar, is a complete and graceful translation into form of those ideas which the modern world has conceived-ideas absolutely contrary to those of antiquity. Simplicity and grace have given place to picturesque combination of small details; and here is the new theory, perfectly put into practice. The reign of Louis XIV. had but little influence on this dress of men, except to stiffen it and make it rigid and hard, but the dress of women improved on the whole in tastefulness throughout the seventeenth century, and as late as 1670 was introduced that admirable costume which we identify with Madame de Sévigné, a skirt not very full, over which was worn a short upper skirt, open in front; a bodice fitting snugly, but not involving very tight lacing; a stomacher, but not excessive in its length; sleeves reaching the elbow, and accompanied by lace ruffles, which partly shroud the lower arm; the bodice cut low, but not to excess, and a cape worn over the neck and shoulders on occasion of going out of doors. The same thing, in simpler stuffs and in graver colors, was worn by the wives of the wealthier bourgeois, and this is the dress which we identify with the women of Holland and the English Puritans. It is preserved for us in a great number of paintings, and in the prints from Hollar's engravings; and it has impressed itself upon modern designers as the most complete type of womanly costume which we know; but that is because the richer dress of the time is impossible to realize nowadays-it seems non-human, as if of fairyland. The eighteenth-century dress in England, which was at times popular and acceptable in decorative design, is a modification of it, not for the better. The fop of 1750 is less beautifully dressed than the muguet of 1650, and the ladies of 1775, with their enormous hoops, far less charming in appearance than Madame de Sévigné a hundred years earlier.

BIBLIOGRAPHY. A general work, containing 500 plates, most of them colored, and an elaborate commentary with an analysis of each plate, as well as some essays showing considerable insight, is Racinet, Le costume historique (6 vols., Paris, 1888), published both in folio and in a more convenient small quarto.

[ocr errors]

Ancient Costume.-Assyrian: Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, 100 plates (London, 1850); Botta, Letters on the Discoveries at Nineveh, trans. by Tobin (London, 1850). Egyptian: Wilkinson, Manners and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians (London, 1847). Greek and Roman: Hope, Costume of the Ancients (London, 1809; new ed., with 340 plates, 1841); Evans, Chapters on Greek Dress (London, 1893).

Modern Costume.-Eastern: Lane, Account of the Manners and Customs of the Modern Egyptians, ed. by Lane-Poole (London, 1871); the article "Dress," fully illustrated, in Hughes, Dictionary of Islam (London, 1885); Watson, Textile Manufactures and Costumes of the People of India (London, 1868), with numerous colored plates; Audley and Bowes, Keramic Art of Japan (Liverpool, 1875-80). European Countries: Hefner-Alteneck, Trachten, Kunstwerke, und Geräthschaften vom frühen Mittelalter bis Ende des 18ten Jahrhunderts (2d ed., 10 vols., Frankfort, 1879-89); Falke, Kostüm geschichte der Kulturvölker, 377 illustrations (Stuttgart, 1882); Planché, Cyclopædia of Costume (London, 187679); Lacroix, Manners, Customs, and Dress of the Middle Ages and the Renaissance (London, 1877); id., The Eighteenth Century, Its Institutions, Customs, Costumes (London, 1887); Bonnard and Mercuri, Costumes historiques des XIIe, XIII, XIVe et XVe siècles, 200 plates (Paris, 1867); Chevignard and Duplessis, Costumes historiques des XVIe, XVIIe, et XVIIIe siècles (2 vols., 150 plates, Paris, 1867); Viollet-leDuc, Dictionnaire raisonné du mobilier français, vols. iii. and iv. (Paris, 1872-73); Jacquemin, Iconographie générale et méthodique du costume du IVe au XIXe siècle, 315-1815 (Paris, 1876), a large folio of 200 elaborate plates, with supplement (Paris, n. d.) of 80 more; Strutt, Regal and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Great Britain, 72 plates (London, 1842); M'Ian and Logan, Clans of the Scottish Highlands (2 vols., 72 plates, London, 1857); Planché, History of British Costume (London, 1874); Hill, History of English Dress (London, 1900); Fairholt, Costume in England, Bohn's Library (London, 1885); Stratz, Die Frauenkleidung und ihre naturaliche Entwickelung (Stuttgart, 1904); Buss, Das Kostüm in Vergangenheit und Gegenwart (Leipzig, 1906). For the American aborigines: Dellenbaugh, North Americans of Yesterday (New York, 1901); for the English colonies in America: Earle, Two Centuries of Costume in America, 2 vols. (New York, 1904).

Books on decorative art often deal with parts of costumes, and collections of engravings, historically arranged, like Hirth, Kulturgeschichtliches Bilderbuch aus drei Jahrhunderten (Leipzig, 1895), as well as prints from the engravings of Dürer, Collot, and Hogarth.

COSTUME, ECCLESIASTICAL. The dress worn by ministers of religion as such, in contradistinction to the dress of ordinary life in different lands and periods. It may best be treated under two heads, the costume worn by the clergy in the exercise of their public functions, and that which constitutes the distinctive dress or habit of the various religious orders and communities.

minutely prescribed and rigidly observed through centuries. It seems, however, clearly established that in the earliest Christian centuries no other dress was worn by the officiating clergy than the ordinary costume of their locality. No quotation can be adduced from any author of the first five centuries alluding to any distinctive vestment. In the Middle Ages a theory was held that the vestments then in use were directly derived from the Jewish ceremonial; but so early as the middle of the ninth century Walafrid Strabo (see WALAFRID) clearly affirms that Christian priests in the early centuries officiated in the dress of common life. In this, as in so many other particulars of ritual, the delay in establishing elaborate and splendid observances may be attributed largely to the state of obscurity and proscription in which the Church lived until the time of Constantine. Special garments were sometimes set apart for use in public worship, of the same shape but of costlier material. The use of vestments since the establishment of a formal system must be considered chiefly under the usage of the Roman Catholic Church, which has regulated them most definitely and elaborately. They may be treated under three heads-sacrificial, episcopal, and general.

SACRIFICIAL. The chasuble is the principal vestment regarded as strictly sacerdotal or sacrificial. It was originally an ample round mantle falling over the arms, but this, while



Under the Jewish dispensation, the costumes of the officiating priests and Levites, like every thing else pertaining to the divine worship, was


a far more picturesque vestment than the modern 'fiddle-back,' was found practically so inconvenient that in the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries it was cut away more and more, until the arms were left entirely free. The change in form may best be seen from the accompanying illustrations. Traces of its use as a distinctively ecclesiastical vestment are found as early as the first half of the sixth century, and the Fourth Council of Toledo (633) expressly mentions it as such. Its use seems not to have been at first confined to priests; and even to this day the deacon and subdeacon at solemn mass in Advent

and Lent (except on Gaudete and Lætare Sundays) wear folded chasubles, which, however, they lay aside when they sing the Epistle and Gospel. Chasubles are also sometimes worn by canons and other dignitaries simply present in choir at a pontifical mass. In most Western countries a large cross is embroidered on the back; in Italy, usually on the front. The stole is a narrow strip of the same material as the chasuble, with at least one cross embroidered on it-generally three, and other elaborate deco

[merged small][ocr errors]

preserved certain traditional peculiarities, the priest wears it in that position until he reaches the altar. It is supposed to symbolize the helmet of salvation. The bands were worn by French ecclesiastics, even with street costume, and until recently very generally in Protestant pulpits, have been supposed to be a relic of the amice, but are more probably from the ruff or band of general sixteenth-century costume, which was formally prescribed by Queen Elizabeth to English clergymen. The special vestments of the deacon and subdeacon are the dalmatic and tunicle, which differ very slightly, both being close-fitting vestments of the same material as the chasuble, reaching to the knees and with tight sleeves.



ments. At mass the priest wears it crossed over his breast, and the deacon over his left shoulder; at other times it is worn hanging straight down. The earliest traces of its use in the West as a sacerdotal vestment are found in Spain, where the Council of Braga (563) speaks of the orarium as worn by deacons, and the Fourth Council of Toledo mentions it as a vestment of bishops, priests, and deacons. The name of stole (Gk. OTO2) is properly applied to an enveloping garment such as was commonly worn by women in ancient Rome; and therefore the earlier use of the word in the Greek ecclesiastical writers must not be taken as applying to what is now called a stole; orarium, however, in later Latin, meant a handkerchief, sometimes worn as a scarf. The employment of this word suggests that the stole may have been originally a practical appendage of linen, designed for wiping the face during the service. The maniple is similar to a shorter stole, worn pendent from the left wrist alike by priest, deacon, and subdeacon at mass. Its origin was very possibly similar to that suggested for the stole though a symbolical meaning has been found for it as typifying the cords with which Christ was bound before His passion. The alb is a close-fitting garment of plain white linen reaching to the feet, though the lower part is nowadays often made of lace, and sometimes pieces of embroidery called apparels are sewed on it in four places. Originally it was probably nothing more than the ordinary tunic of Greek and Roman costume. It is confined around the waist by a white linen girdle. The amice is a piece of fine linen, oblong in shape, which the priest rests for a moment on his head, and then spreads on his shoulders, tying it by strings in front. It originally covered the head, and to this day, in the Franciscan and Dominican rites, which have

The color of all vestments seems to have been white at the first. Even the pseudo-Alcuin (tenth or eleventh century) knows of no other, with one or two minor exceptions. Innocent III. (Pope 1198-1216) is the first to mention the use of four colors, naming black instead of the modern violet, which he regards as merely a variant of black. The modern usage prescribes white for the feasts of our Lord, of virgins who were not martyrs, and of confessors; red (the color of fire and of blood) for the feast of Pentecost and of all martyrs; the mourning violet for the season of Advent and from Septuagesima to Easter; and green (the color of hope) for ferial or ordinary days. Black is worn on Good Friday and in services for the dead. This covers the general rule; space will not allow the details of minor exceptions. Cloth of gold is supposed to take the place of white, red, or green.

EPISCOPAL. The vestments officially worn by a bishop in the exercise of his functions are numerous and partly general, partly peculiar to his office. A bishop fully vested for celebrating solemn mass wears (over a purple cassock or a black one with red buttons) amice, alb, girdle, stole, maniple, tunicle, dalmatic, chasuble, and mitre, and carries his pastoral staff in his hand. The ring and pectoral cross which he wears at other times must also be included, as must the buskins or sandals and the gloves, which complete the pontifical attire. There is also the gremial veil, an embroidered cloth which is spread over his knees when he sits during the service. In other functions, such as confirmation, he wears cope and mitre, with a stole for the administration of the sacraments; but if he wishes to administer e.g. confirmation less solemnly, he may wear simply the rochet. The mitre is the principal ornament peculiar to the episcopal office. It is a head-dress worn in solemn services by bishops and by certain abbots who preside over specially distinguished monasteries known as 'mitred' abbeys. It may be described as a tall, tongue-shaped cap, terminating in a twofold point, which is supposed to symbolize the cloven tongues in the form of which the Holy Ghost came upon the Apostles. Two mitres are worn in pontifical functions; one called the precious or costly mitre, the other of plainer material and ornament. The pastoral staff or crozier in the case of bishops resembles a shepherd's crook, and is given to them at their consecration as a symbol of the authority with which they are to rule their flocks. An archbishop's pastoral staff does not differ from a bishop's; but he sometimes has carried in front

[graphic][ocr errors][subsumed][merged small][merged small][ocr errors][merged small]
« AnteriorContinuar »