DRESS

covering, or clothing and accessories, for the human body. The variety of dress is immense, varying with different sexes, cultures, geographic areas, and historic eras. The term dress encompasses not only such familiar garments as shirts, skirts, trousers, jackets, and coats but also footwear, caps and hats, sleepwear, sports clothes, corsets, and gloves. Hairstyles and the wearing of beards, mustaches, and wigs at different times and in various forms are all linked to the history of fashion and dress. The same is true of the use of cosmetics and jewelry and other forms of body decoration. covering, or clothing and accessories, for the human body. The variety of dress is immense, varying with different sexes, cultures, geographic areas, and historic eras. This article considers the chronological development of fashionable dress and decorationthat is, the attire selected and adopted by the leading members of a society. This reflects the fact that in any group of peoplewhether constituting a small community or a great nationit is usually those with wealth and power who influence, and even dictate, fashions to other members. The discussion does not concentrate solely on clothing but also covers, as appropriate, features of coiffure, head coverings, footwear, accessories, and cosmetic beautification. In addition, the nature and purposes of dress and some of the specific social, political, economic, geographic, and technological factors influencing changes in fashion are treated. Not treated here are specialized attire, including ecclesiastical dress; military dress; academic, trade, or professional dress; and the national or regional costumes of peasant or primitive peoples. Additional reading General works Broad histories of Western dress and clothing accessories, spanning many centuries of development, include Franois Boucher and Yvonne Deslandres, 20,000 Years of Fashion: The History of Costume and Personal Adornment, new ed. (1987; also published as A History of Costume in the West; originally published in French, 1983); Millia Davenport, The Book of Costume, 2 vol. (1948, reissued in 1 vol., 1976); James Laver and Christina Probert, Costume and Fashion: A Concise History, new ed. (1982); Richard Corson, Fashions in Makeup: From Ancient to Modern Times (1972), and Fashions in Hair: The First Five Thousand Years (1969, reissued 1984); Doreen Yarwood, European Costume: 4000 Years of Fashion (1975, reprinted 1982), and English Costume: From the Second Century BC to the Present Day, 5th ed., rev. (1979); Nancy Bradfield, Historical Costumes of England: From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century, 3rd ed., rev. (1970); Alfred Rubens, A History of Jewish Costume, new and enlarged ed. (1973, reissued 1981); and J. Anderson Black, Madge Garland, and Frances Kennett, A History of Fashion, rev. ed. (1980). More thematically oriented studies include Margot Hamilton Hill and Peter A. Bucknell, The Evolution of Fashion: Pattern and Cut from 1066 to 1930 (1967, reprinted 1987); Elizabeth Ewing, Fur in Dress (1981), and Dress and Undress: A History of Women's Underwear (1978, reprinted 1989); C. Willett Cunnington and Phillis Cunnington, The History of Underclothes, new rev. ed., by A.D. Mansfield and Valerie Mansfield (1981); Diana De Marly, Working Dress: A History of Occupational Clothing (1986), and Fashion for Men: An Illustrated History (1985); and Penelope Byrde, The Male Image: Men's Fashion in Britain, 13001970 (1979).Most of the above cited works are well illustrated, but the following two are richly pictorial: Doreen Yarwood, Costume of the Western World: Pictorial Guide and Glossary (1980); and Ludmila Kybalov, Olga Herbenov, and Milena Lamarov, The Pictorial Encyclopedia of Fashion (1968; originally published in German, 1968). Other works suitable for quick reference include Doreen Yarwood, The Encyclopaedia of World Costume (1978, reissued 1986); C. Willett Cunnington, Phillis Cunnington, and Charles Beard, A Dictionary of English Costume (1968, reissued 1976); Mary Picken, The Fashion Dictionary: Fabric, Sewing, and Apparel as Expressed in the Language of Fashion, rev. and enlarged ed. (1973); and R. Turner Wilcox, The Dictionary of Costume (1969, reissued 1989). Ancient dress Clothes of the early period of civilization are studied in Mary G. Houston, Ancient Egyptian, Mesopotamian & Persian Costume and Decoration, 2nd ed. (1954, reprinted 1972), and Ancient Greek, Roman, and Byzantine Costume & Decoration, 2nd ed. (1947, reprinted 1966); Thomas Hope, Costume of the Ancients, new ed., enlarged; 2 vol. (1812, reissued in 1 vol. as Costumes of the Greeks and Romans, 1962); Lillian M. Wilson, The Clothing of the Ancient Romans (1938), and The Roman Toga (1924); Hans C. Broholm and Margrethe Hald, Costumes of the Bronze Age in Denmark, trans. from Danish (1940); and Erhard Klepper, Costume in Antiquity (1964; originally published in German, 1963). Medieval dress Readable and well-illustrated accounts of the developments in Western fashion include Stella Mary Newton, Fashion in the Age of the Black Prince: A Study of the Years 13401365 (1980); Mary G. Houston, Medieval Costume in England & France: The 13th, and 14th, and 15th Centuries (1939, reprinted 1965); and Joan Evans, Dress in Mediaeval France (1952). For non-European medieval dress, see Donald Cordry and Dorothy Cordry, Mexican Indian Costumes (1968, reprinted 1978); Sidney M. Mead, Traditional Maori Clothing: A Study of Technological and Functional Change (1969); and Te Rangi Hiroa (Peter H. Buck), Arts and Crafts of Hawaii (1957, reissued 1987). Modern Europe Histories of fashion include studies of various countries and stylistic trends: see Stella Mary Newton, The Dress of the Venetians, 14951525 (1988); John Telfer Dunbar, The Costume of Scotland (1981); Olga Sronkov, Fashions Through the Centuries: Renaissance, Baroque, and Rococo (1959); Diana De Marly, Louis XIV & Versailles (1987); Anne Buck, Dress in Eighteenth-Century England (1979), and Victorian Costume: And Costume Accessories, rev. 2nd ed. (1984); Margarete Braun-Ronsdorf, Mirror of Fashion: A History of European Costume, 17891929 (1964; originally published in German, 1963; also published as The Wheel of Fashion: Costume Since the French Revolution, 17891929); Nancy Bradfield, Costume in Detail: Women's Dress, 17301930, new ed. (1981); Norah Waugh, Corsets and Crinolines (1954, reissued 1987); Madge Garland, Fashion (1962); Diana De Marly, The History of Haute Couture, 18501950 (1980); Elizabeth Ewing, History of Twentieth Century Fashion, rev. ed. (1986); and O.E. Schoeffler and William Gale, Esquire's Encyclopedia of 20th Century Men's Fashions (1973).For insights into the work of fashion designers, see such surveys as Martin Battersby, Art Deco Fashion: French Designers 19081925 (1974, reprinted 1985); Irving Penn and Diana Vreeland, Inventive Paris Clothes, 19091939: A Photographic Essay (1977); and John Peacock, Fashion Sketchbook, 19201960 (1977, reissued 1984). See also such biographies and autobiographies as Diana De Marly, Worth: Father of Haute Couture, 2nd ed. (1990); Palmer White, Poiret (1973); Alfred Allan Lewis and Constance Woodworth, Miss Elizabeth Arden (1972); Christian Dior, Christian Dior and I (1957; originally published in French, 1956; also published as Dior: The Autobiography of Christian Dior); Mary Quant, Quant by Quant (1966, reissued 1974); and Elsa Schiaparelli, Shocking Life (1954). American dress Histories of American costume include Diana De Marly, Dress in North America: The New World, 14921800 (1990); Elisabeth Mcclellan, Historic Dress in America, 16071800 (1904), and Historic Dress in America, 18001870 (1910), reprinted together as Historic Dress in America, 16071870, 2 vol. (1990); Alice Earle, Two Centuries of Costume in America, 16201820, 2 vol. (1903, reprinted 1974); Estelle Ansley Worrell, Children's Costume in America, 16071910 (1980); and R. Turner Wilcox, Five Centuries of American Costume (1963, reissued 1988). Oriental dress Eastern tradition is explored and illustrated in Jacqueline Ayer, Oriental Costume (1974); Alan Priest, Costumes from the Forbidden City (1945, reissued 1974); Schuyler V.R. Cammann, China's Dragon Robes (1952); A.C. Scott, Chinese Costume in Transition (1958); Seiroku Noma, Japanese Costume and Textile Arts (1974; originally published in Japanese, 1965); Helen Benton Minnich, Japanese Costume and the Makers of Its Elegant Tradition (1963); G.S. Ghurye, Indian Costume, 2nd ed. (1966); and S.N. Dar, Costumes of India and Pakistan: A Historical and Cultural Study (1969). Nature and purpose of dress Social and psychological aspects of dress and the place of fashion in human culture are the subject of many works representing various disciplines. See John C. Flgel, The Psychology of Clothes (1930, reissued 1976); James Laver, Modesty in Dress: An Inquiry into the Fundamentals of Fashion (1969); Quentin Bell, On Human Finery, 2nd ed., rev. and enlarged (1976); Anne Hollander, Seeing Through Clothes (1978, reissued 1988); Alison Lurie, The Language of Clothes (1981); Elizabeth Wilson, Adorned in Dreams: Fashion and Modernity (1985); and Patricia A. Cunningham and Susan Voso Lab (eds.), Dress and Popular Culture (1991). Doreen Yarwood Diana Julia Alexandra de Marly The history of Eastern dress Western-style clothes, which many people find convenient to wear during business hours, are now a common sight in many large cities of eastern and southern Asia. This is particularly so in Japan, a country which, since 1945, has been especially influenced by the American way of life and has built a reputation as an international fashion centre. However, even here, as in much of Asia, it is not uncommon for a reversion to traditional dress to take place in the home. Over the centuries, notably in Korea and Japan, these traditional styles of dress have reflected marked Chinese influence, though both countries developed characteristic styles of their own. In like manner, modes of dress in the Indian subcontinent have been a source of inspiration to some of the countries of Southeast Asia and of the East Indian archipelago. China More than 2,000 years before the beginning of the Christian era, the Chinese discovered the marvelous properties of silk and shortly thereafter invented looms equipped with devices that enabled them to weave patterned silks rapidly enough to satisfy the demand for them by luxury-loving Chinese society. Thus, centuries before Chinese silks began to be shipped westward and still more centuries before the West learned the secret of sericulture, the people of China had already established ultrarefined standards of elegance in matters of dress. The earliest period of Chinese history for which reliable visual evidence of clothing styles is obtainable is the Han dynasty (206 BCAD 220). Han bas-reliefs and scenes painted in colour on tiles and lacquers show men and women dressed in wide-sleeved kimono-style garments which, girdled at the waist, fall in voluminous folds around their feet. The graceful dignity of this p'ao-style robe, which continued to be worn in China until the end of the Ming dynasty in 1644, is clearly revealed in Chinese figural paintings attributable to the interval between the 8th and the 17th century. Other traditional garments include the tunic or jacket, worn by both sexes over loosely cut trousers. For colder weather, clothing was padded with cotton or silk or lined with fur. Chinese records indicate that at least as early as the T'ang dynasty (618907) certain designs, colours, and accessories were used to distinguish the ranks of imperial, noble, and official families; but the earliest visual evidence of these emblematic distinctions in dress is to be found in Ming portraits. In some of these, emperors are portrayed in voluminous dark-coloured p'ao on which the 12 imperial symbols, which from time immemorial had been designated as imperial insignia, are displayed. Other Ming portraits show officials clothed in red p'ao that have large bird or animal squares (called mandarin squares, or p'u-fang) on the breast, specific bird and animal emblems to designate each of the nine ranks of civil and military officials having been adopted by the Ming in 1391. When the Manchus overthrew the Ming in 1644 and established the Ch'ing dynasty, it was decreed that new styles of dress should replace the voluminous p'ao costume. The most formal of the robes introduced by the Manchus was the ch'ao-fu, designed to be worn only at great state sacrifices and at the most important court functions. Men's ch'ao-fu had a kimono-style upper body, with long, close-fitting sleeves that terminated in the horsehoof cuff introduced by the Manchus, and a closely fitted neckband over which was worn a detached collar distinguished by winglike tips that extended over the shoulders. Below, attached to a set-in waistband, was a full, pleated or gathered skirt. Precisely stipulated colours and pattern arrangements of five-clawed dragons and clouds, waves, and mountains were specified for the ch'ao-fu of emperors, princes, nobles, and officials; the bright yellow of the emperor's robe and the 12 imperial symbols emblazoned on it clearly established his lofty rank. All other ranks wore stone blue ch'ao-fu decorated in accordance with prescribed rules about the number, type, and arrangement of dragon motifs. Only women of very high rank were permitted to wear ch'ao-fu. Women's robes were less commodious than the men's and were cut in long, straight lines with no break at the waist. The narrow sleeves with horsehoof cuffs of these ch'ao-fu robes and the arrangement of their dragon, cloud, mountain, and wave patterns were essentially the same as those of the so-called dragon robes discussed below. They were clearly differentiated from the dragon robes, however, by their capelike collars and by flaring set-on epaulets which, gradually narrowed, were carried down under the arms. Stolelike vests, always worn over women's ch'ao-fu, were also a distinguishing feature of this costume. Chi-fu, or dragon robes (lung-p'ao) as they were usually called, were designed for regular court wear by men and women of imperial, noble, and official rank. The chi-fu was a straight, kimono-sleeved robe with a closely fitted neckband that continued across the breast and down to the underarm closing on the right side, the long tubular sleeves terminating in horsehoof cuffs. The skirt of the chi-fu cleared the ground to permit easy walking and in men's garments was slit front and back as well as at the sides to facilitate riding; the extra slits were the only feature that distinguished the chi-fu of men below the rank of emperor from those of their wives. All chi-fu were elaborately patterned with specified arrangements of dragons, clouds, mountains, and waves, to which were added auspicious or Buddhist or Taoist motifs. Distinctions in rank were indicated by the colours of the robes and by slight variations in the basic patterns; however, because of the large number of personages who wore chi-fu, these distinctions were not always easily recognizable. Emperors' chi-fu, either yellow or blue, were always distinguished by the 12 imperial symbols. The informal Manchu ch'ang-fu, a plain long robe, was worn by all classes from the emperor down, though Chinese women also continued to wear their Ming-style costumes, which consisted of a three-quarter-length jacket and pleated skirt. Men's ch'ang-fu, cut in the style of the chi-fu, usually were made of monochrome patterned damask or gauze; women's ch'ang-fu had wide, loose sleeves finished off with especially designed sleevebands decorated with gay woven or embroidered patterns. The declining Ch'ing dynasty was finally swept aside in 1912, and Western influences exerted pressure on China to begin to emulate the world outside its boundaries. Under the new republic the traditional Chinese culture began to give way to modern ideas. Gradually this was reflected in dress. By the 1920s women, in particular, adopted a compromise attire. This was the ch'i-p'ao, better known in the West by its Cantonese name, cheongsam. The ch'i-p'ao had developed from the ch'ang-fu, and by 1930 the majority of women were wearing it. A close-fitting dress made from one piece of material, the ch'i-p'ao was fastened up the right front side. It had a high mandarin collar, and its skirt was slit up the sides to the knee. It was made of traditional Chinese fabrics, padded in winter for warmth. At first it was a long dress, but the hemline gradually rose to come into line with Western dress. In mainland China the communist revolution of 1949 brought strict directives on dress. Styles were to be the same for everyone, whether man or woman, intellectual or manual labourer. This drab uniform was a blend of peasant and military design. It consisted of a military-style high-collared jacket and long trousers. Men's hair was short and covered by a peaked cap. Women's hair was longer but uncurled. Shoes had flat heels. No cosmetics or jewelry was permitted. Traditional Chinese cotton was used to make the garments; colour designated the type of worker. After about 1960 a slow Westernization set in, permitting a variation in colour and fabric. Dresses were introduced for women. The nature and purposes of dress Perhaps the most obvious function of dress is to provide warmth and protection. Many scholars believe, however, that the first crude garments and ornaments worn by humans were designed not for utilitarian but for religious or ritual purposes. Other basic functions of dress include identifying the wearer (by providing information about sex, age, occupation, or other characteristic) and making the wearer appear more attractive. Although it is clear why such uses of dress developed and remain significant, it can often be difficult to determine how they are achieved. Some garments thought of as beautiful offer no protection whatsoever and may in fact even injure the wearer. Items that definitely identify one wearer can lose their meaning in another time and place. Clothes that are deemed handsome in one period are declared downright ugly in the next, and even uniformsthe simplest and most easily identified costumeare subject to change. What are the reasons for such changes? Why do people replace useful, attractive garments before they are worn out? In short, why does fashion, as opposed to mere dress, exist? There are no simple answers to such questions, of course, and any one reason is influenced by a multitude of others, but certainly one of the most prevalent theories is that fashion serves as a reflection of social and economic standing. Thus, in relatively static societies with limited movement between classes, as in many parts of Asia until modern times or in Europe before the Middle Ages (or later in some areas), styles generally did not undergo major or rapid change. In contrast, when lower classes have the ability to copy upper classes, the upper classes quickly instigate fashion changes that demonstrate their authority and high position. During the 20th century, for example, improved communication and manufacturing technology enabled new styles to trickle down from the elite to the masses at ever faster speeds, with the result that more styles were introduced than at any other time. Furthermore, the idea that fashion is a reflection of wealth and prestige can be used to explain the popularity of many styles throughout costume history. For example, courts have been a major source of fashion in the West, and clothes that are difficult to obtain and expensive to maintain have frequently been at the forefront of fashion. Ruffs, for example, required servants to reset them with hot irons and starch every day and so were not generally worn by ordinary folk. As such garments become easier to buy and care for, they lose their exclusivity and hence much of their appeal. For the same reason, when fabrics or materials are rare or costly, styles that require them in excessive, extravagant amounts become particularly fashionableas can be seen in the 16th-century vogue for slashing outer garments to reveal a second layer of luxurious fabric underneath. Similarly, impractical fashions that clearly demonstrate the wearer does not need to work, and indeed would find it difficult to do so dressed in such a manner, have often been considered beautiful. Examples include the Chinese practice of binding aristocratic women's feet, making it impossible for the women to walk far, and the recurrent popularity in Europe of styles that limited a woman's ability to maneuver or move by confining her into frequently injurious corsets and weighting her down with excessive layers of petticoats and skirts. Women have traditionally been the targets of the most extreme forms of impractical fashion because they have frequently been viewed as little more than a frivolous ornament for a man's arm or household. The fact that a woman is dressed in such a manner proves not only that she does not work but also that her husband or father can afford to hire servants to work for her. Men have worn their share of impractical clothing, however. The late Gothic houppelande, for example, a courtly style worn by both sexes, was far too voluminous for peasants to work in, even if they could have afforded all the material necessary for its manufacture. The best illustrations of the new garment are found in Les Trs Riches Heures du duc de Berry, at the Cond Museum, Chantilly, Fr. These show that the duke wore the houppelande down to the floor, but his servitors, who needed to move more freely, wore shorter gowns. Length thus provided an immediate signal of status. The foregoing discussion does not attempt to be a comprehensive introduction to even one influence on fashion; it merely tries to suggest some of the ways in which costume can be analyzed and interpreted. Similar treatments of four other factors affecting fashion follow. Display of the human physique Male display Male sexual display at its most blatant can be seen in parts of Papua New Guinea, where the men wear bamboo penis covers that are sometimes up to 15 inches long. The purpose is to impress both women and enemies, by showing that the warriors are more virile than their opponents. The competition between warriors has led to a great variety of additional adornments such as boars' tusks, animal skins, animal teeth, claws, feathers, shells, metal pieces, bamboo, and the use of paint. In general, the more naked a society is, the more body paint is employed to denote the warriors and the chiefs, with each rank having its individual pattern. In addition, in many societies, only after an individual has reached a certain age or satisfied some other requirements is he allowed to wear certain colours or decorations. Sometimes each item of adornment represents a specific achievement, so that the more decorations a man wears, the better, braver, or more powerful he is shown to be. Such martial display in Europe reached its apex with the tournaments of the Middle Ages. The males spent fortunes on enameled armour, ostrich plumes, pearl-embroidered tabards, ornate saddles and horsecloths, fine mounts, their retinue of grooms and squires, weapons, tents, and their declamations or speeches. It was a formalized kind of warfare, and foreign ambassadors were invited to be impressed by the martial display of the king or prince. An audience of females was also essential, as they had to confer favours on the knights, and the lady of the tournament had to present the bejeweled prize to the overall victor. Such blatant display as bamboo penis cases was typified in Europe by the codpiece. During the 14th century men started shortening their tunics until they reached the crotch. A special pouch, the codpiece, had to be created to fill in the gap between the hose at the top. Initially the codpiece was not padded, but it grew larger until by the 1540s the Spanish were wearing a vertical, or erect, codpiece. This styleand its spread to other parts of Europemay be seen to be a reflection of Spain's new dominance in the Western world and its new wealth. Spanish pride and influence were manifested in vertical codpieces, but they were soon deflated by England's Queen Elizabeth I and her navy. Perhaps in recognition of the arrival of queens regnant in England and Scotland, as well as a queen mother regent in France, both men's and women's dress began to feature a more rounded, feminine silhouette, and codpieces began to be covered up. Soon, female width, in the shape of the farthingale, caused codpieces to disappear completely, as men's breeches were padded out to match the ladies' skirts. A covered-up look then dominated male attire until the late 18th century, when the Neoclassical movement led to tighter, more revealing clothes. Skin-coloured knee breeches in buckskin became the rage, and waistcoats shrank, so that from the waist downward the male form was again on show. A naked style affected the army too; uniforms became skintight, and the male form was displayed most obviously in the Napoleonic period. Under Queen Victoria the frock coat concealed all such shocking elements as legs, waist, and bulge, which remained concealed until after World War II, when skintight jeans became the means for a renewal of male sexual display. By the 1990s, Lycra (trademark) had entered at least some men's wardrobes in the form of leisure wear, its clinging characteristics providing even more extreme naked outlines. Thus, since the 14th century in the West, the degree of exposure of the male body has alternated between total concealment and complete display.