Book Log 12/2012: Tanya Lloyd Kyl: 50 Underwear Questions

[jacey]

The fun history of underwear for children, useful for ages 7 – 10, or even slightly older, depending on the child, of course. Underwear isn't a subject you can find much source material on, especially for this age range, so this is a welcome addition to books on costume even if it does have a jokey approach and cartoon illustrations that are more about appeal than accuracy. It offers a pretty good outline of different types of underwear for men and women through the ages. There was one glaring omission in women's body shapes/corsetry. The timeline jumped from 18th century panniers to 19th century Victorian hooped skirts and completely missed out the more relaxed Regency styles and shapes, which was a short but important fashion period. That apart it seemed to cover most points from loin-cloths via jockstraps to boxers and from corsets via bloomers to thongs.

Comments

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

That was one of the other things that it missed out. It did describe them, but it didn't call them 'braies' - but then it is a bit Ameri-centric.

Wikipedia only says: Braies are a type of trouser worn by Celtic and Germanic tribes in antiquity and by Europeans subsequently into the Middle ages. In the later middle ages they were used exclusively as undergarments. Braies generally hung to the knees or mid-calf, resembling what are today called shorts. They were made of leather, wool, or, in later years, cotton or linen. Adopted by the Romans as Braccae.

There are lots of images on google - mostly from reenactors. Try this http://i3.squidoocdn.com/resize/squidoo_images/250/draft_lens2249299module12534265photo_1309211270braies-and-chausses.jpg or this http://www.cloakedanddaggered.com/related-search/13th-century/

The consensus seems to be that they were long, loosish linen underpants with a drawstring waist, possibly coming down to below the knee, but with single leg hose worn on top of them so that there was considerable overlap, the hose being tighter than the braies and holding the leg fabric in place. Think legwarmers with a tie at the top to suspend them from a belt or a waist cord. Some hose had a foot but not all.

You can kind of see how this led to the balloon shape of the bum-covering in that typical doublet-and-hose shape that developed in the later Medieval period, can't you? The hose being tight fitting and the braies bunching out above. Of course braies would have them been covered by the gambeson.

The regia angelorum site suggests that wealthy men would have worn hose over braies but peasants wold have worn hose over a loincloth. I guess there was no such thing as standard underwear in those days, showing a sad lack of Marks and Spencers.

[watervole.livejournal.com]

Interesting.

My book suggested that they were sometimes rolled around the waist string. They would be drawn up and rolled down, so to speak.

I do wonder how long it would have taken men to undo them when they wanted to take a quick leak, especially if they had hose attached to them.

[birdsedge.livejournal.com]

Though it's only a kid's book it did - interestingly enough - chronicle the development of the fly front - ramakably late in the development of the gentleman's undergarment.
:-)