MR. EDITOR,

Among the many new things, which we may confidently look for in the course of this new year, must undoubtedly be numbered New Fashions. Our Exquisites will certainly ere long astonish and amuse us with some further external metamorphoses, though of what description they may be, it would be in vain to conjecture. Before the important era arrive, which must of course absorb the attention of your readers, permit me to draw their notice to a few curious anecdotes of the Dandyism of other days.

It seems, that Englishmen have, from the very earliest times, been infected with this ridiculous passion, if we may so call it. “To what cause,” says an entertaining old author, “our mutability may be referred, I know not, unless that we, as all Islanders, are Lunares, or the Moon’s men, which as it is in the old Epigram, would be fitted with no apparell. Our cousins the Germans have been immutable
herein.”

Robert, eldest son to the Conqueror, resolving to become the first exquisite of his day, sported short stockings, by which he obtained the appellation of Court-hose. I need not add that the fashion soon became general.

William Rufus, it appears, cared less about the make than the price of his apparel. Take the story out of our old rhyming historian, Robert of Gloucester: ,

“As his Chamberlain him brought, as he
rose on a day,
A morrow for to wear, a pair of those of Say;
He asked what they costned; ‘three shillings’
he said;
‘Fie a dibles,’ quoth the King, ‘who sey so
vile a deede?
King to wear so vile a cloth, but it costned
more,
Buy a pair for a marke, or thou shall ha
cory fore.’ ”
A worse pair enough, the other swith him
brought,
And said they costned a marke, and unneth
he them so bought:
“Aye bel-amy,’ quoth the King, ‘these
were well bougt,
In this manner serve me, other ne serve me
not.”

King Henry I. was too much of a scholar to be himself a dandy, but he had occasion greatly to reprehend the apparel of his subjects in those days. The particulars are not specified.

Henry II. was of a different taste. He introduced the short mantle, from which he acquired the bye-name of Court-mantle, and was the first Englishman who wore silk or bombazeen.

That the habits of the people were continually changing during the reigns of John, Henry III. and their successors, their monuments, old windows, and ancient arras still remaining, sufficiently show. In the time of Edward III. the height to which fashionable absurdities were arrived, provoked the following rhyme:

” Long beards, heartless,
Painted hoods, witless,
Gay coats, graceless,
Makes England thriftless.”

It had now even become necessary to provide many statutes relating to dress.

But I proceed to give you a full length portrait of an exquisite of that age, from an ancient Manuscript Chronicle in the Bodleian Library.

“The Commons were besotted in excess of apparel, in wide surcoats reaching to their loyns, some in a garment reaching to their heels, close before and strowting out on the sides, so that on the back, they make men seem women, and this they call by a ridiculous name, Gown: their hoods are little, tyed under the chin, and buttoned like the women’s, but set with gold, silver, and precious stones; their larripippes reach to their heels all jagged; they have another weed of silk which they call a Paltock; their hose are of two colours, or pied, with more, which, with latchets, which they call herlots, they tye to their paltocks without any breeches. Their girdles are of gold and silver, some worth 20 marks. Their shoes and pattens are snowted and piked more than a finger long, crooking upwards, which they call cracrows, resembling the devil’s claws, which were fastned to the knees with chains of gold and silver. And thus were they garmented, which were lyons in the hall, and hares in the field.”

I cannot go through all the particulars of succeeding fashions. A strange description of the attire of some of our countrymen under Rich. II. is to be found in Chaucer’s prose works. The title of one of Occleve’s Poems, who lived in the time of Hen. IV. is “Of Pride and of wast clothing.” “Not many years after,” says my author, “foolish pride so descended to the foot, that it was proclaimed -that no man should have his shoes -broader at the toes than six inches;” -and “it was enacted, in 22 E. 4. chap. -1. that no manner of person under the -estate of a Lord, shall wear from that -time any gown or mantle of less than -certain dimensions, upon pain to forfeit -to our Sovereign Lord the King -at every default 20 shillings.” -

I shall conclude by “telling you -how Sir Philip Calthrop purged John -Drakes, the shoemaker, of Norwich, -in the time of Henry the VIII. of the -proud humour which the people had -to be of the gentlemen’s cut.”

“This knight bought on a time as -much fine French tawney cloth as -should make him a gown, and sent it -to the Tayloures to be made; John -Drakes, a shoemaker of that town, -coming to the said taylour’s and seeing the Knight’s gown-cloath laying -there, liking it well, caused the taylour to buy him as much of the same -cloth and price, to the same intent, -and further bad him to make it of the -same fashion, that the Knight would -have his made of. Not long after, the -Knight coming to the taylour’s, to take measure of his gown, perceiveth the like gown-cloth lying there, asked of the taylour whose it was; quoth the taylour it is John Drake’s, who will have it made of the self-same fashion that yours is made of; well, said the Knight, in good time be it, I will (said he) have mine made as full of cuts as thy sheers can make it: it shall be done said the tailour, whereupon because the time drew near, he made haste of both their garments. John Drake, when he had no time to goe to the taylour’s till Christmas day, for serving of customers, when he had hoped to have worn his gown, perceiving the same to be full of cuts, began to swear with the taylour, for the making of his gown after that sort. I have done nothing (quoth the taylour) but that you bade me, for as Sir Philip Calthorpe’s is, even so have I made your’s. By my latchet, quoth John Drake, I will never wear gentleman’s fashion again.”

I suspect honest John Drake was no thorough-bred Dandy after all, or he would never have quarrelled with his garment for the absurdity of its cut.

I am, Your’s,

SIMON PLAINGARB.

Quoted from: The Country constitutional Guardian; and Literary Magazine. Vol. I, No. V. March 1822.