The Things We Wear

Hawera Star, Volume LI, 13 September 1930, Page 16

The Things We Wear

When Petticoats Were Worn by Men

jpEW people realise what an intricate jumble of past convolitions -and customs aa'o carry about on onr hacks in the -clothes avo wear. Some features’ in them have been preserA’ed almost unchanged right down from -Greece and Anglo-Saxon l England, others arc traditions that haA-c lost- -.ill- meaning or the words thems-elA'cs haA'e had a new j meaning given, to them, Avrites L. F. Easterbrook in; “John o’ London’s Weekly. ’ ’

The A'ery' word “garment,” for instance means “garnishment” or adornment. rather than a useful necessity, and the fashionable lady; Aviva chooses her latest “’robe” little ,dream® that the Avord is directly derived through the German from ’“rob” and once referred 1 only to the spoils stripped from a dead enemy. .Her “two-piece” sports costume is only' one ’of the many modes (which she has, stolon from tin; earliest days—in this case, from the ladies’ of Greece and, Crete, who wore a body “corslet” and skirt. Others, she has ! stolen from men, for men were the first to wear gowns, robes, frocks, blouses and even petticoats! Gowns were -originally' made of fur and were worn by monks, as also Avero frocks. a» the extant phrase “unfrocking” a priest still betokens. “Blouse” is a French word that referred ’to the smock or overall worn by peasants, although in the beginning it Avas a silken over.a 11 that knights wore to prevent the rain from spotting their armour. Petticoat, of course, is merely a “prttit” cr “little” coat, first applied to a man’s short jacket. “Jacket,” by' the way, is a diminutive of “jack,” a coat made cf many folds of cloth flind a stag 's> skin, which became so hardened that it could effectually' resist the point of an arrow or dagger. They must have been exceedingly uncomfortable, and; were, in fact, referred to as- “the great villainous English jacks.” “Jack” is evidea tlv connected Avith leather, as Aviti:css “jack boots’’ and the old leather flagons of that name. Our boots, correctly speaking, are really o-nly' half-boots, , Avhich Avere

AV'orn by the Saxons, avlio adapted them for riding by' using leather hose, Avhenee developed “boot” in its true meaning, A'iz., top-boat' “Golosh” is not. a pretty' Avord, and many AA'ill be surprised to hear that it is a classical one, being a conjunction of two Greek Avords that meant “wooden l foot,” i.e., the shoemaker’s last. In England it was applied to the Avooden clogs Avorn by the peasantry' and is mentioned in Piers Plmwinan in. the 14-th century' as being worn by a knight. Whence came the little perforated patterns on the. toecaps. of our modern boots and shoes no one seems to know. The Saxons copied them from the Romans, and Chaucer’s rather precious young priest, had his shoes adorned’ Avith them, but there seems no authority' for tracing any' useful purpose to this decoration, Avhich is unusual. One thinks of the utilitarian explanation of the cowboy'’s spectacular dress —his big hat that shields him from the sun, the handkerchief tied round his neck because it is the most convenient place for a- man with reins in one hand and at stock Avhip in the other, while his thick chaps af sheepskin protect his legs from the ] scrubby undergroAvtli through which lie rides.

The buttons on onr coats, now purely deeoratiA'e. are an obvious- survival of the clays Avhon coat tails and coat cuffs were buttoned back, even’ as the French infantry in 191-4 buttoned’ back, their blue coat, tails. Likewise the nick in our coat lapels is merely a surA'ival of the ’Georgian- fashion of a permanently turned up coat collar. “Cuff” used not to mean the end of the sleeve, but a fingerless glove, cr mitten, or “baggloA'e, ” still in use in cold countries and in the. English countryside, where they are called “hedger’s gloves.” The strips of braid on the backs of ’ordinary gl-OA'es are a testimony to tin* natural A-anity of man, for they' haA’C been added to make the hand and: fingers nppear long and slender!

One of the most peculiar -features in the development of our dress is- the

Loss of Their Original Meaning

manner in which fashion has been piled upon fashion, each nepvi garment being worn over the former one t-liat was once customary. Starting with the shirt, originally the “short” or ancient tunic, the waistcoat wa,s devised in Tudor times to be worn over it, and this tradition, is l still preserved in the white .jackets worn by the 'Guard's in undress, called waistcoats. Originally women wore them also. There followed the coat, imposed upon the waistcoat for added protection, with long tails looped baieik for convenience in riding. King Charles 11. introduced the “cassock,” or coat with long, full' skirts, reaching below the knees and buttoning in front. After that the top-coat or overcoat iwas invented, a- fearsome garment of vast weight anil size, with many layers of cepes. As this gained ini popularity, so there became less need for the. protection of the undier-coat. Gradually it became thinner and shorter (one can trace its evolution in the frock-coat, and morning coat) until eventually its tails' disappeared entirely and left us without lounge and reefer 1 jackets.

Now we seem to have reached the limit in the. number of garments we wear. Out' can hardily visualise an “over-overcoat.” If our dress undergoes further evolution, it is more likely to bo in the form of brighter colours, or in abolishing our barbarous and unhygienic fashion of tight collars or our hideous trousers. The revival in wear J ing a pair of extraordinary looking cylinders on our legs, by the way. seems wrapt in mystery. Saxons and Normans wore them occasionally .also shipmen and labourers in the 15th century; they existed' in the form of “trews” many yars ago in Ireland and Scotland.- But according t'o Mr 'Walter Skoat, who is a great authority on these things, they were only re-intro-duced into England as a general feature of dress some time about the date of Waterloo, when the trousers of General PI at off’s ’Cossacks' aroused' universal enthusiasm when their (wearers visited London.