The San Francisco call. [volume] (San Francisco [Calif.]) 1895-1913, 1896-01-26
HISTORY OF DRESS.
The Philosophy of Clothes as Seen 1
Former Fashions.


Former Fashions.
The following is an extract from an en-
pertaining lecture on dress delivered at
Workingmen's College, London, by Mrs,
Green:
Mrs. Green, in comprehensive survey,
showed how dress, in respect of materials,
colors, style and ornament, had been af-
fected by exploration, conquest, trade, in
cidents Of the battlefield International re-
latious, political partisanship, the diff
fusion of wealth, social distinction
and the means of internal COM
munication. She pointed out that
behind the strange changes of fashion
there often lay meaning which made
curious and interesting history. When
ever there was great interest in new
styles of dress some singular prosperity or
increase in trade had happened to the
country. Before the reformation most
people had very little money, according
to our modern ideas, and they used to
be clad in sober gowns, cut much after
the same pattern. But this was altered
in the time of Elizabeth, when we
began to trade with the East Indies
and to receive the gold of Peru
and the plumber of Spanish dominions.
Men gave up wearing the long gowns of
their fathers, and copied the fashions of
| Venice, France or Germany. The ladies
adopted silk, satin and cloth of gold,
painted their faces and had their hair
'wreathed and crested" and hung with
bugles and many childish gewgaws, but
the piercing of the ears was "not so much
frequented amongst women as men,"
Great ruffs stood out round the heads of
women like "pillars of PRIDE" strength
ened by what the Puritans called "the
devils liquor, starch" AT this period
came in pocket handkerchief, silk stock
ings, fans and ostrich feathers. People in
| trade began to adopt the new finery.
Two hundred years later, when we were
lighting Holland and France, new wealth
again showed itself in splenQor and cost
of our rich folk s dresses. Women collected
| their clothing from ali parts of the earth.
The men were fully as smart, and wore
| quite as many bright colors-bows of
rlband and silks and satins. Then came
| the romantic imitation of humble life and
| its simplicity. A wealthy man would
dress like shepherd and carry crook,
but that was golden, and his coat
was OF velvet and lace. Titled ladies
made themselves into mock milk
maids, in silk frocks covered with dia-
monds. Gentlemen wore loose coats called
wrap rascals" and gold : laced hats,
slouched IN imitation of stage coachmen;
others were mock grooms In dirty boots
and spurs. pretty fancy in women's
dress at that time, and for hundreds of
years before, was the wearing of aprons as
part of their smartest dress, as the symbol
OF the housewifery and dainty qualities of
q capable and well-bred woman. Some
men had their boards starched and put IN
pasteboard cases over night. A man ap-
peared in st. James Park in coat loaded
with gilt buttons, skirts long, a scarlet
walstcoat set off with lace and otherwise
peculiar, and he was a blacksmith.
AT the time of the first French revolu-
ton we copied the simplicity of the French
! peasants, and then the flowing lines OF
Grecian and Roman dress were copied by
our women, so far as they understood them.
The love of good conduct and morality
affected dress in the cases OF the Puritans
and Quakers. The people who from these
motives protested against extravaganza did
| not invent new costumes; they simply
| held to what was custo mary in their own
class and time. The Judges robe and
the clergyman's cassock represented the
old costumes which were once common.
Living men could remember
bishop preaching in wig, and the
Archbishop of Canterbury wore one at
the Queens coronation. The clerical
broad-brimmed hat with low crown was
worn by respectable people 300 years ago.
The falling collars OF clergymen and law
l., and the white bands were survivals
OF those collars once worn by all
the. laity. Thus the costumes thought
to be odd were the remains OF what
was once common. Among these were
powdered hair, the big wig of the coach
man, the parlor maids cap and apron, the
hats and coats of the beef-eaters at the
Tower, the dress of boys and girls at char
| lty schools, the veil of the nun and the
court dress of gentleman. In general,
all were survivals of something that was
once common. There was one motive
which had seldom had power to affect
dress, and that was the desire to discover
and to wear what YVES beautiful, and this
was lasting shame and disgrace to
Europe, for no gift of man was more lofty
than the love of beauty. 1t might be
hoped that some day when the people
have grown intelligent and cultivated,
they will understand the value of true
beauty, dignity and self-respect in dress
London Times.
a letter was received recently at the
Chicago postoffice addressed to Lame