The truth about pants (dedicated to a disgruntled Toronto Star reader)

People tell me I’ve hit the big time when I receive hate mail.

I write as the men’s entrepreneurial image expert in the Toronto Star‘s Small Business section, and one day, I got a 4 am email from an intelligent but angry reader who couldn’t believe that I would waste his time talking about something as unimportant as socks.

He got personal, saying that I was the best journalist this side of Fox news, and expressed an interest in reading future posts he envisioned such as, “Belts vs Suspenders, which one makes you more money?” and “The Truth About Pants”.

I thought the latter would make a fine blog topic, so in honour of this angry man, I’m pleased to tell you the truth about pants!

History Costume is divided into five major types of clothing: draped (a wrapped cloth – e.g. togas), slip-on (over-the-head – e.g. poncho), closed sewn (e.g. tunic, shirt), open sewn costume (long cloth closed, stitched, worn over other garments – e.g. coats, caftan, Russian tulup), and sheath (sewn and tubular, fitted closely to the body – e.g. breeches, skirts).

There is evidence in Bronze Age paintings found in the Spanish Levant that men wore some kind of leather trouser that was adorned with fringe and sometimes garters, and there is mention of “linen breeches” for all “the sons of Aaron” in Exodus XXVIII, but it wasn’t until people started riding horses that these leg tubes caught on. Before this, men wore the types of clothing women wore – robes, mantles, and tunics.

When horses became the prime mode of transportation, riding with two free legs was preferable, so the garment was adopted by individual riders and mounted armies who, over time, made them part of military uniforms.

In Asia and Europe had some form of pants. In Japan, the Samurai wore a kind of pleated split skirt called the hakama, Turks had harem pants, and the Gauls and Celts wore breeches (brit-chez) and trousers.

European breeches morphed into hose or chausses, which looked like hip-waders made of wool that tied to the braies, short drawers tied around the waist.

Bracae, Latin for breeches took a while to catch on in Rome, though Italy was surrounded with cultures that wore some kind of leg covering. Ancient Roman men generally avoided wearing trousers or pants of any kind, considering them barbaric, and worn by “uncivilized” people who lived outside areas controlled by Rome, like the Gauls who lived in present-day France, or the Celts in the north. But during the Roman conquests of cooler northern Europe, the chilly Roman army adopted the local dress of short, tight leg coverings for warmth and protection, which were eventually brought to Rome.

These breeches they would have worn looked like pajama bottoms, tied to the waist and held to the legs by criss-crossed bands of linen or other material. Feminalia were snugly fitting knee-length pants that covered the length of the thighbone, or femur (hence the name). Augustus Caesar (63 B.C.E. –14 C.E. ), the famous Roman emperor wore feminalia through the winter “to protect his sometimes fragile health”. 

Evolution Parti-coloured hose in Medieval Spain In the 14th century, the cut and construction of men’s hose improved, and parti-coloured hose, hose with different coloured legs, were popular in Europe. These hose were made of knitted wool, sometimes lined with linen, and often coloured red, black, or brown – popular colours of the period made so with dyes of iron ore.

During Henry VI’s reign, men’s hose got a little more structured and laced to the doublet which, I assume, gave an increased feeling of security to the wearer. The 15th century saw the inclusion of the infamous codpiece that began as a triangle of fabric laced to the crotch to cover a gentleman’s tackle.

By the time of Henry VIII, codpieces were the order of the day, padded and exaggerated in size, sometimes used as pouches for coins and such. Codpieces peeked out from the divide of a Tudor gent’s waistcoat skirts, not to be ignored!

Hose separated into two parts in the middle of the 16th century, becoming upper and lower hosen. The lower hose were more like a stocking and the upper hose looked like puffed shorts, made of brocades if the wearer could afford it. This upper piece was known as trunk hose.

From this point in time, the trunk hose grew in length, becoming nether hosen during the Elizabethan reign, then into huge pleated knee-length slops in 1600, and heavily pleated bag breeches later in the century. For the next few hundred years, the lower garments grew longer and slimmer, becoming pantaloons by the 19th century.

Long pants as we know them today appeared during the early 1800s and have kept on since, varying in widths and rise lengths (the distance from waistband to crotch) during different eras. Front openings have evolved from tie-on crotch covers (codpieces) to button front flaps (fall-front) to a modern zippered fly.

Lots of changes, lots of forms. That is the true story of pants, an interesting and complex evolution of leg tubes developed for equine travel.

Views: 927

Tags: Star, Toronto, bracae, braies, breeches, chausses, codpiece, feminalia, hakama, harem, More…hate, hose, hosen, mail, nether, pantaloons, pants, parti-coloured, slops, trousers, trunk

Comment

You need to be a member of Art of Manliness to add comments!

Join Art of Manliness

Comment by Leah Morrigan on November 1, 2012 at 10:22am

Thanks Margie and Carl for your comments - it doesn't feel good to receive someone else's anger, but the trick is to turn it into a positive. Glad you liked it!

Comment by Carl Monster on October 26, 2012 at 1:27pm

Great, fascinating reading here. I stumbled upon this only because of Margie's comment; thanks Margie.

I especially like the development of the codpiece, never gave it serious thought but apparently men of that time did! 

You need more angry readers ;) to put out such cool, informative stuff, thanks!

Comment by Marlie on October 26, 2012 at 1:04pm

I thought the latter would make a fine blog topic, so in honour of this angry man, I’m pleased to tell you the truth about pants!

Good for you, Leah! lol

I'd previously missed this blog post of yours. I just never find myself over on this side of AoM unless I happen to see someone responding to Carl's blog. And as I've mentioned to you, I don't have all that much interest in men's clothing and yet I still enjoy your posts. I couldn't help noticing that your site has over 40,000 hits.

Congratulations! That's quite an accomplishment.

Latest Activity

Jack Bauer replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Why not?  Doesn't seem like too much to ask that people neither kill nor abandon their offspring.  Pretty much the order of things since the beginning of time. "Force" is a strong word (on the "keep it and care for…"
4 minutes ago
Shane replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Actually you can."
11 minutes ago
Shane replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Can't we just put the orphans to work like we used to?"
15 minutes ago
manInTheMaking replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Yes but you can't have it both ways.  You can't force someone to to carry a child to term and then force them to keep it and care for it.  Again you are just illustrating my point is that this is a gray issue.  I'm far…"
22 minutes ago
Jack Bauer replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"Higher taxes or dismembering gestating babies are not the only two choices.  I'm opposed to both. Mostly, parents should take responsibility, and pay for their own kids.  Where they cannot, I support private charities that can offer…"
24 minutes ago
David F. replied to David F.'s discussion When is it better to be morally correct knowing it causes a worse out come? (The failure of Abstinence only educations) in the group The Great Debate
"I agree very much that the world is not black and white.  It seems odd that we seem to have come to think it is.  While I was not alive in the main of the cold war, it seems to have driven black and white thinking. "
25 minutes ago
manInTheMaking replied to David F.'s discussion When is it better to be morally correct knowing it causes a worse out come? (The failure of Abstinence only educations) in the group The Great Debate
"No its a pretty destructive state of being.  Again the world isn't black and white.  Accepting that is the first step in clearing the dissonance."
31 minutes ago
Clinton R. Ausmus replied to Todd Serveto's discussion Revolting, Macabre Details About Planned Parenthood's Gruesome Barbarism--Where Are The Excuses? in the group The Great Debate
"I'm talking about two different statements you've made in this discussion in which you state two different things.  How about you make a stand and stay there.  Don't say rape is a bad thing but the mother should have to…"
32 minutes ago

© 2015   Created by Brett McKay.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service