How did it impact social structures of English Society?

Although with the common knowledge that cross-dressing confronted the biblical law prohibiting the practice, it could still be evident in Early Modern English Society. Individuals who did practice cross-dressing were often punished for their transgressive actions. It was often that females in England would cross dress and would wear such appearances in public whereas men would solely cross dress within the environment of theatre. Cross-dressing was a theatrical tool due to the fact that women were restricted to participate on stage theatre, therefore a male actor was to dress as a female character to perform the play. As presented in past blog posts, gender fixated fashion was a vital aspect of continuation of social structures within England in Early Modern period. Supporting the idea that the women within England that practiced cross-dressing were challenging not only the patriarchy, gender roles and expectations but simultaneously these women were challenging social norms through dressing as they were. Early Modern beliefs of cross-dressing on stage compared to in public were counteractive to one another. As cross-dressing for theatrical purposes was supporting while cross-dressing for pleasure in the public eye was condemned and punishable. This double standard within Early Modern English society is an example of the power of the patriarchy of this time in history. As quoted by David Cressy discussed in class, women adopting male attire is described by historians as “represented as a challenge to patriarchal values, a bold assault on oppressive cultural boundaries” Furthermore, it supports the fact of socially organized expectations of both sexes during the Early Modern Period in the sense that conducting cross-dressing would be seen as transgressive because it was punishable by law.

For women found cross-dressing, punishments varied from attending ecclesiastical court and having to reprimand through prayer or if gone through the process of common court, the most punishable would be forced into public penance. The case of Mary Frith, as portrays through The Roaring Girl, exhibits the possible extremes that an incident of cross dressing could cause where she could have been charged with lewdness and bawdry. Due to her pleading guilty to roistering because of her being seen in public in mens attire.

Women being seen in mens attire, otherwise known as cross-dressing, can be seen as a punishable offence as well as a factor for social rejection and exile. Depending on what class you are derived from, this finding and possibly charge could be very detrimental to an individuals social reputation in Early Modern England. Otherwise then being acceptable for a men in Early Modern England to cross dress for the reason of theatre performances. The transgressive actions performed by women through cross-dressing was in retaliation of the control of the patriarchy, this was heavily denied by society in England, therefore furthering their rejection by society.

Bibliography:

Cressy, David. “Gender trouble and cross-dressing in early modern England.” Journal of British Studies 35, no. 4 (1996): 438-465.

Dollimore, Jonathan. “Early Modern: Cross-Dressing in Early Modern England.” In Sexual Dissidence: Augustine to Wilde, Freud to Foucault. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1991. Oxford Scholarship Online, 2011. doi: 10.1093/acprof:oso/9780198112259.003.0019.

Gilbert, Ruth. Early modern hermaphrodites: sex and other stories. Springer, 2002.

Gorman, Sara E. “The Theatricality of Transformation: cross-dressing and gender/sexuality spectra on the Elizabethan stage.” (2006).

Howard, Jean E. “Cross-dressing, the theater, and gender struggle in early modern England.” In Crossing the Stage, pp. 31-62. Routledge, 2005.

What did fashion have to do with anything?

The largest contributor to the division of women in Early Modern England was through clothing. The style of dress, the fabrics used, the colour of dress… Every aspect of what women wore everyday played an immense role in which women interacted with one another. The importance of what you wore became evident towards the end of the sixteenth century due to economic expansions. Meaning that your position in social class systems now relied greatly on what you chose to present yourself through clothing. The introduction of the Statute of Apparel from Elizabeth I, that further pushed for the social dependancy on clothing.

Elite Women’s Fashion Characteristics:

Elite women in society had much more freedom with fashion compared to other classes, due to their power in society in addition to the fact that these women were able to afford the work of designers, they were in a position where they could express themselves through their clothing. These wealthy individuals sought social distinction through the the materials of the clothes as well as the way it was produced. Women of wealth had the opportunity to collaborate with tailors and designers during the process of making their piece, while women of lower class were hand crafting their own clothes with less luxurious materials. The elite class could be identified by their clothing through:

1. The weaving techniques used as the more complex the weaving pattern got, the wealthier they were.
2. Embellishments on dresses were used as a tactic to show wealth through fashion.
3. High neck collared ruffles was a trend for higher class women to portray their wealth. This trend began with Elizabeth I who used lace as a high neckline for her dresses.
4. By mid 1630s “virago” sleeves, described as puffed long sleeves on a dress, were reserved for high class women.
5. Pearls as jewelry or worn on a dress was the most known characteristic to distinguish a woman’s wealth.

Lower Class Women’s Fashion Characteristics:

In contrast to elite fashion trends, women of the lower classes or peasant class in Early Modern England had very limited freedom with their choice of dress. The lower class of England’s clothing style throughout the seventeenth century remained relatively the same due to the fact that they were unable to afford a variety of materials to create different clothing pieces.

In accordance to the Statute of Apparel, issued by Elizabeth I, the peasantry were forbidden to wear gold, jewels, embellishments or rich fabrics. These pieces of fashion were primarily reserved for royalty or the elite class. Meaning if you were seen without those mentioned above, you would be recognized as lower class. Women of lower class were required to have their hair covered at all times while in public, ascribed by the Stature of Apparel. A “coif” was required to be used to cover the hair under a bonnet. It was common for lower class women to wear dresses that were ankle length with a full skirt and fitted, lace bodice. An apron was worn in addition to the dress, primarily to keep it clean while completing jobs that could possibly dirty the dress. Women who were “better-off” within the lower class wore an open gown on top of the dress, this was a variation of dress reserved specially for these women.

With that said, what has been mentioned above is all women of lower class in Early Modern England were able to wear. As a result of the lack of wealth, it was common to wear a smock and night cap to bed while higher class individuals wore proper nightwear.

With all things considered, it would be apparent within Early Modern English society to recognize a woman of wealth versus a woman of lower class due to the characteristic of dress mentioned above. Given the drastic difference between the two in addition to the Sumptuary Law in place, you were able to be recognizable of your class as a result of your clothing.

Bibliography:

Backhouse, Clare. Fashion and Popular Print in Early Modern England : Depicting Dress in Black-letter Ballads. London: I.B. Tauris &, 2017.

Edwards, Lydia. How to Read a Dress: A Guide to Changing Fashion from the 16th to the 20th Century. London; New York, NY: Bloomsbury Academic, an Imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc, 2017.

Jones, Ann R. “The Culture of Cloth in Early Modern England: Textual Constructions of a National Identity.” Textile-The Journal Of Cloth & Culture 8, no. 3 (2010): 389-90.

Lemire, Beverly. The Force of Fashion in Politics and Society : Global Perspectives from Early Modern to Contemporary times. History of Retailing and Consumption. Farnham, Surrey, England ; Burlington, VT: Ashgate, 2010.

Richardson, C. “Dressing the Elite: Clothes in Early Modern England.” Textile History 37, no. 1 (2006): 108-09.

The limits, freedoms and inventions of fashion during the Elizabethan age.

The most evident fashion trends followed the time when Elizabeth I was the Queen of England. Queen Elizabeth I had such an influence on fashion to the point where there have been accounts of women risking their health to paint their skin white to indicate high status in society, similar to how Queen Elizabeth did. The Elizabethan period fashion trends are known for its concentration of costume design rather than the practicality. The clothing of this time is astounding, unmistakable, ravishing and lastly with no doubt, they were works of art. The elaborate fashions of the elite at this time inspired the working class to create their own fashions to mimic the elite clothing through embellishments, expensive fabrics, and sewing techniques. Elizabeth’s dresses were crafted with the best fabrics such as silk, satin and velvet. Fabrics for royalty were specifically coloured red such as russet red or a bright crimson red because the colour red dye was imported and reserved specially for the royals of the time to demonstrate their wealth and power in England.

During the reign of Elizabeth I, Sumptuary Laws were implemented into English society which played a massive part in what commoners would be allowed to wear in public during throughout their daily lives. On June 15th, 1574 Queen Elizabeth implemented the new Sumptuary Law named the “Statute of Apparel”. The Statute of Apparel was a way in which social structure was maintained throughout the late sixteenth century English society. These laws were imposed by those in power to limit and control the behaviour of English society through the restrictions put on clothing. Elizabeth’s sumptuary laws dictated the fabrics, colours and style of clothing an individual was allowed to wear depending on their class standing. This was a tactic to easily identify those of lower class compared to upper class. Many fabrics were restricted for the lower, middle and upper class for the pure reason to reserve for the royal’s use. Queen Elizabeth used the reasoning of this Sumptuary Law was to protect Britain’s economy due to the excessive spending on luxury items, in which clothing was considered one. Another justification of this law to hide the fact that it was implementing greater class divisions, was that Queen Elizabeth I was worried for young men, that they would drive themselves into debt which would impact the crime rates in England at this time. The evident underlying factor that pushed for this law to be imposed onto English society was that class distinction lines were being blurred through the use of clothing and Queen Elizabeth I had to implement a law to stop the progression. The Statute of Apparel reinstated the blatant division of class structures within England during the reign of Elizabeth I.

Many historians covering fashion during the Elizabethan age tend to focus on women’s fashion within this period of history because of the abundance of information on women’s fashion rather than male fashion. In contrast, men’s fashion had its own advancements and trends that are not as popularly covered. For men at this time, wearing the colour black especially in the form of fabrics mentioned above was symbolic of wealth and status in Early Modern England. As well, men’s doublets, which can be defined as close fitted, padded jacket, were improved for the elite class with the introduction of the use of leather within the doublet. Similarly, breeches that were worn by men for occasions such as court or an evening event, were improved through the use of leather.

With all of that said, the reign of Elizabeth I drastically changed the course of fashion trends in England throughout and following her time on the throne. With her inspiration into costume fashion then to reverting those elaborate fashions with the Statute of Apparel, those decisions have impacted the history of fashion for generations following.

Bibliography:

Dyson, H., & DYSON, Humphrey. (1618). A Booke containing all such Proclamations, as were published during the Raigne of the late Queene Elizabeth. Collected together by the industry of H. Dyson. B.L.

England Wales. Sovereign. By the Queene. The Excesse of Apparel, and the Superfluitie of Unnecessary Forreyne Wares Therto Belongyng, Nowe of Late Yeeres Is Growen by Sufferance to Suche an Extremitie … Early English Books, 1475-1640 ; 456:8. London: By Richarde Iugge, Printer to the Queenes Maiestie, 1574.

Evelyn, John. Tyrannus, Or, The Mode: In a Discourse of Sumptuary Lawes. Early English Books Online. London: Printed for G. Bedel, T. Collins …, and J. Crook …, 1661.

By: Abagail Williams

How did a soldiers style of uniform demonstrate their role within the military in Early Modern England?

Uniforms, specifically speaking within the role of uniform in the military establishes a way of identification for countries on the battlefield as well as it establishes the sense of homogeneousness within the unit. Military uniforms that demonstrated this uniformity was not until after the military revolution between the years of 1560 to 1660. This revolution provided a drastic change to warfare, especially for the British army. Prior to the military revolution, there was only one form of uniform in British military culture which was the militia that held no official uniform and Yeoman of the Guard. During the civil war, the New Model Army adopted the red coats as a majoring characteristic of their uniform which then translated to England’s army following the civil war. From the perspective of a civilian, the reasoning for uniforms was for soldiers on the battlefield to distinguish their infantry from the enemy they are fighting against. This is factual but the implementation of uniforms within the British military was for the men within the unit to be able to identify their superiors and special commanders on the battlefield. In the beginning, it was only the unit’s commanders that wore a particular uniform for this reason of identification but it later spread to the dress of uniformity for all infantry levels. Explaining as to why particular roles within the military have fixed uniforms.

Particular roles such as grenadiers, cavalry, military academy soldiers, and liveries had distinct aspects of their uniform to be recognized by their men. Although these divisions of a unit were not intentionally created, it made an evident divide between subordinates and superiors within the British military. Meaning that depending on what uniform your are wearing in addition to the insignia emblem that is placed on your arm dictates your role within the military with little room to move up the ranks, similar to clothing in civilian society. Britain was and is still known for their infamous red military uniform, similar to France’s blue uniform, this colour of the uniform was adopted by the rest of the world to perceive their superiority on the battlefield. The Thirty Years War military uniforms for Britain translated into men’s everyday fashion through the style of clothing as well as the materials used. The dress code set out by the military after the military revolution has impacted dress codes that are evident today as a form of discipline sanctioned by political and economic institutions, the military being one. An example of this is dress codes for school uniforms, most evidently with private schools. This allows for the acknowledgement of being of higher status within society which can be apparent through military uniforms during the Early Modern Era in England.

Bibliography:

Howard, Michael. “The Military Revolution: Military Innovation and the Rise of the West, 1500–1800.” The Historical Journal 32, no. 1 (1989): 238-40.

Lawrence, David R. 2011. “Reappraising the Elizabethan and Early Stuart Soldier: Recent Historiography on Early Modern English Military Culture.” History Compass 9 (1): 16-33. doi:10.1111/j.1478-0542.2010.00748.x. http://resolver.scholarsportal.info/resolve/14780542/v09i0001/16_rteaesoememc.

Rogers, Clifford J. The Military Revolution Debate Readings on the Military Transformation of Early Modern Europe. History and Warfare. Boulder: Westview Press, 1995.

Roy, I. “Shorter Notice. The Civil Wars. A Military History of England, Scotland and Ireland, 1638-60. J Kenyon , J Ohlmeyer [edd].” The English Historical Review 115, no. 462, 727-28.

Considering the elaborate fashion trends of the Early Modern period, how did particular clothing styles and the quality of which they were produced, specifically detailing to women, translate to society what class they were involved in?

The rise in the symbolic meanings of fashion for individuals in Early Modern England increased the division of class structures within the country. Fashion in Early Modern England played a crucial role in an individuals daily life, as what they wore dictated to the public where they were accordance to the social hierarchy of the time. The Early Modern Era viewed fashion as a representation of an individual’s prominence in society on a daily basis, particularly considering the nobility and wealthy upper class. As quoted by the Earl of Chesterfield in a letter to his son on April 30th, 1750 he says, “If you are not in fashion, you are nobody.” This emphasizes the importance shown through what the Earl of Chesterfield has said to his son mentioning how crucial it was in the era of Early Modern England for your fashion choices, which depicted your social class. What an individual wore at this time can be considered a basis for ridicule or praise, depending on the quality of your outfit, the style of it and when it was worn. Distinguishing what style of clothing, where it was produced, and the materials used on such influenced a individuals and their family’s class in which it difficult to escape that label. Anthropologist Thomas Beidelman described the significance of fashion in Cloth and the Organization of Human Experience written by Jane Schneider and Annette B. Weiner, as “Cloths defines the limits and possibilities of people as actors in social relations.” This illuminates the positive and negative affects fashion has on individuals lives in England from the fourteenth century to the mid seventeenth century. Exhibiting that the clothes a man or woman wore during this time could greatly restrict their power and ability to act within society or it would be a tool used to rise within the social hierarchies of England. The study of fashion trends and the contrast of these trends in different levels of societal hierarchy can assist in defining the social climate between classes in Early Modern London, most evident with women during this time.

Bibliography

Buckley, Cheryl, and Hazel Clark. “Conceptualizing fashion in everyday lives.” Design Issues 28, no. 4 (2012): 18-28.

Gulick, Sidney L. “The Publication of Chesterfield’s Letters to His Son.” PMLA 51, no. 1 (1936): 165-77. doi:10.2307/458320.

Schneider, Jane, and Annette B. Weiner. “Cloth and the Organization of Human Experience.” Current Anthropology 27, no. 2 (1986): 178-84.