Democratic Sentinel, Volume 10, Number 49, Rensselaer, Jasper County, 7 January 1887 — French Fashions Years Ago. [ARTICLE]

French Fashions Years Ago.

It appears that the rage gaudy finery which nowadays is the curse of the middle and lower classes is one of the outcomes of the present century to which the fashions of times past form a striking contrast. This is well set forth in a work on *Les Bourgeois d’Autrefois,” by M. A. Babeau, in which the author describes at great length the fashions of the middle classes. In the seventeenth century, he says, scholars were easily recognized by their dress, which differed from that of the merchant and nobleman. People of the lower middle classes had, as a rule, three suits of clothes—one for winter, another for summer, and a third for mourning. The different suits were put on at a certain date each year; their summer garments were worn from May 15 to the end of October, and the rest of the year winter dress was worn. Mourning was always worn for several years. Every suit was first worn on one side, then turned, and finally it was cut up for ga ments for children. The sword, originally only worn by nobles, was soon assumed by the middle classes, in many places, unfortunately, not as an ornament, but as a necessary weapon. On the whole, the middle classes were very modest in their apparel, with the one exception that their wigs were very expensive. The coiffure of women was mostly more sensible than that of men. At the time of Mme. de Sevigne and Mme. Pompadour no high chignons were worn by the women of the people, but the hair was simply arranged under caps, bows, or hoods. The colors mostly worn by these classes were brown and gray, and even shortly before the revolution no woman from the provinces dared to wear white ribbons, and even colored ones were looked upon as eccentric. At the age of 45 the woman assumed a matronly dress, avoiding light colors and a youthful cut to her dress. As a characteristic of the last two centuries M. Babeau points out that men’s dress was much more costly than women’s, and that, contrary to our present system, the wealth of a family was displayed in the husband’s or father’s apparel.