| 
  • If you are citizen of an European Union member nation, you may not use this service unless you are at least 16 years old.

  • You already know Dokkio is an AI-powered assistant to organize & manage your digital files & messages. Very soon, Dokkio will support Outlook as well as One Drive. Check it out today!

View
 

Stockings

Page history last edited by Naomi Quinn 10 years ago

Stockings

 

 Introduction

Stockings were everywhere in eighteenth century England. And their associations and connotations were myriad in an age where fashion and dress were sources of great social anxiety and much commentary. As John Styles remarks, clothes could be "defences against the weather, marks of social distinction, products of successful industries, safeguards against ill health, badges of subcultural identity, tools in spiritual exercises and sources of erotic stimulation" (Styles, 181). Stockings were, simultaneously; a wardrobe staple, a relatively disposable necessity, a measure of national economics, a frivolous luxury item, as well as a symbolic item loaded with sexual suggestion. 

 

Here is a Google Ngram, for the purposes of illustrating broadly how much the phrases "stockings" and "silk stockings" were used in "English Fiction" between the years of 1650 and 1900, and it is interesting to see, that from a literary perspective, stockings seemed to become culturally much more relevant from the eighteenth century onwards. [1]

 

Stockings, the essential accessories

A stocking is described in the Oxford English Dictionary as: "A close-fitting garment covering the foot, the leg, and often the knee, usually made of knitted or woven wool, silk, or cotton" (cite) . And stockings were an important part of everyday dress in the eighteenth century for both men and women. And rich and poor also. In a catalogue of items lost in a fire in Brandon, Suffolk, in 1789, John Styles finds that "stockings made from worsted or cotton were common to rich and poor" (Styles, 34). So woollen and cotton stockings were worn by all, it would seem, at all times, considering that both the poorer women who lost garments in the Brandon fire had 3 or 4 pairs of these stockings. Adequate changes would have been necessary so that a pair of stockings would alway be clean to wear. The necessity of clean stockings to presenting a "decent appearance" (Styles, 35) is apparent when we consider that one of these women, Elizabeth Cooper, a mantuamaker- assuming she was wearing a gown at the time of the fire- had only one other gown, which she lost in the fire (Styles, 36). 

 

Stockings made up a part of a set of essential accessories, without it which, it seemed, an eighteenth century man or woman in England could not really be considered fully dressed. Styles elaborates: 

 

This combination of under- and outer garment was accompanied by a number of accessories to complete a decent appearance- a pair of shoes with removable buckles, a pair of stockings, a hat and some kind of neckwear, usually a handkerchief or neckcloth...The all-important accessories which completed the female outfit were a pair of shoes with removable buckles, a pair of stockings, an apron, a linen cap, a hat and some sort of neckwear, at this period usually a handkerchief or shawl. (Styles, 35-36)

 

And this designation of stockings as integral to being clothed in eighteenth century England is borne out in the art and popular media of  the day.

 

(2)

 

In the above painting, the artist is scrupulous to ensure that none of the accessorising elements of the humble Husbandman's attire are missing, even thought he is not wearing some of them, namely the hat and handkerchief. But his respectability is asserted and confirmed by the the items that complete his dress being laid beside him. And stockings are visibly part of his outfit. 

 

(3)

 

In Singleton's "The Ale-House Door", there is a similar emphasis on a comprehensively correct dress complete with every necessary accessory. The painter ensures that every aspect of both the male and female figures' dress is identifiable, down to buckles on shoes, and including the stockings that both of the wear, which would not necessarily be visible in real life considering the length of the lady's dress and the coverage her shoes provide, but it is apparently important to show that she is wearing stockings, so that we may observe the overall neatness and correctness of her dress, which would not be complete without stockings. 

 

In Fielding's "The Female Husband", Mary the deceptive woman who repeatedly dupes unsuspecting women into marrying her, is discovered to be female by her first wife, in a violent encounter, which leaves her shirt torn, and she runs from their bed off into the night to avoid capture and punishment. Mary hastily dresses herself before leaving and grabs the garments she does not have time to put on before leaving:

 

the poor female bridegroom, whipt on her breeches, in the pockets of which, she had stowed all the money she could, and slipping on her shoes, with her coat waiste-coat and stockings in her hands has made the best of her way into the street, leaving almost one half of her shirt behind, which the enraged wife had tore from her back. (Fielding, 12)

 

Mary makes sure to grab her coat, waistcoat and stockings before leaving, presumably to put on later. She does this over finding a new shirt to put on. We can possibly conjecture that her waistcoat and coat were necessary for warmth, and would cover the torn shirt, and thus be worth sacrifice of speed she makes to take them. And she can put them on as she runs away, and she will look less conspicuous out at night with a coat and waistcoat on, and less like someone running from their bed. But as for her stockings, her shoes are already on, there is no way she can put them on until she is well away and sure that she will not be caught. And cotton or worsted stockings were not so expensive, as we have seen, that she could not buy as many pairs as she needed with the money she managed to take. It would seem that Mary realises, that once she is safely away, being without stockings until she can buy some new ones would be so conspicuous as to be at least equally as risky as dallying in her escape to grab a pair. 

 

Stockings were therefore, an essential component of being well-presented sartorially, regardless of your financial situation, and their importance to a good outfit is also highlighted by their relative disposability. Stockings only had a lifespan of about, six months to a year which seems suggestive of how constantly they were worn (Styles, 73). In a period where clothes in an organised household would be kept in service for years through a constant vigilance to their "careful upkeep" (Styles, 73), mending and patching wherever necessary, and clothing in general was usually the foremost item in a working person's budget, the relatively disposable nature of stockings placed them as a regular expense that was almost always readily undertaken.

 

So constant and essential a part of the eighteenth century wardrobe were stockings, that it was thought necessary to pass legislation, ensuring that they were made in right fashion:

 

(4)

This is an image from a record of a parliamentary act, which is not entirely legible all the way through, so the exact stipulation of the act are uncertain. But what is clear is that this was an Act meant to curtail certain "frauds and abuses" in the work of those manufacturing certain textiles and stockings in Scotland. 

 

Stockings and Economics

As an essential part of being decently well-dressed, stockings, along with shoes,  had huge significance as indicators of economics. To the English mind, the absence of stockings and shoes could be be nothing but evidence of the most pitiful abject poverty, contemporary accounts suggest. And in holding this norm, England was actually rather singular, it appears. Rich and poor in England during the eighteenth century were living a time of "mercantile and imperial expansion" (Styles, 1), and as the commercial and colonial power of England spread, so did the material lives and expectations of its citizens. Styles argues that this can be seen in the way apparel figured in the lives of English and women, and that "Material abundance came to to play a crucial part in defining what it was to be English for rich and poor alike" (Styles, 2). 

 

This becomes apparent when we encounter accounts of travellers from other European countries and their surprise at the attire of the poorer members of English society, in which stockings figured consistently. Karl Philipp Moritz, travelled to London from Germany in 1782 and was shocked at how well-dressed he found the working people of the city : "I rarely even see a fellow with a wheelbarrow, who has not a shirt on; and that too such an one as shows it has been washed; nor even a beggar, without both a shirt, and shoes and stockings" (Styles, 20). So, for visitors, like Moritz, stockings, had a huge significance; they had the power to exemplify in material terms, the superior access to material goods of the English populace over most of their European neighbours. Through continental eyes, the ostensibly humble men and women of England, individuals who would have seemed economical and socially inferior to the middle classes of their own nation, in stepping out reasonably well-shod in their own estimation, were engaging in a sartorial language that was actually deeply political. The simple accessories of stockings and shoes were a way by which, visibly at the bottom rungs of society, the English asserted their position in the world system as a superior imperial and industrial power with relation to much of Europe.

 

Stockings in the eighteenth century can be pursued as an indicator of national material wealth and economic development, not just at a continental level, but also at the level of the individual British nations. Wales, Scotland and Ireland were significantly less developed than England, and this relative underdevelopment was often interpreted by contemporary commentators through the medium of "common dress". Styles notes that this was a very self-conscious comparison, are by English travellers: "[t]he deficiencies of the clothing typically worn by the poor of Scotland and Ireland, compared with their equivalents in England, became almost a cliché, especially the fact that so many of them went barefoot, a sure sign of impoverishment to Eighteenth century English eyes" (Styles, 21). So there is even the suggestion, that in this conscientious observation of the "deficiencies" in the apparel of poor people elsewhere in the British Isles, and the highlighting of being barefoot as a symbol of extreme poverty, English people were making a sort of quasi-nationalist statement. Drawing attention to the fact that the English poor wore superior clothing could be interpreted as a kind of confirmation of English legitimacy, of the English being better placed to be the sovereign British power. 

 

(5)

 

The following are accounts from eighteenth century travellers on the dress of poor people in Ireland and Scotland:

 

English agricultural writer, Arthur Young, travelling in Ireland, 1776-1778

"The common Irish are in general cloathed so very indifferently, that it impresses every stranger with a strong idea of universal poverty. Shoes and stockings are scarcely ever found on the feet of the children of either sex;and great numbers of men and women are without" (Styles, 21).

 

Great-niece of architect John Carr, Harriet Clark, on her visit to Glasgow in the 1790s

"The town class of women go half naked, without Shoes and Stockings hats or Cloaks, in short, half a bedgown and small petticoat, and sometimes a little plaid, is all their dress" (Styles, 21).

(6)

 

 

(7)

Stockings and Luxury

Clocked stocking, 1750-1770

Stockings, were of course not just for utility. They were also a hugely frivolous, extremely luxurious consumer item. Worsted and cotton coloured stockings were what poorer people would wear and what you would probably wear if you were doing any kind of manual labour. But white cotton stockings were where utility ended and luxury began, when it am to varieties of stockings: "white stockings were considered a sign of high status" (Styles, 44). White cotton stockings were less common that the run of the mill coloured and worsted ones, but they did not achieve the the pure luxury of silk stockings, which were one step below silk stockings with embroidered "clocks" adorning them. 

 

Stockings and Sexuality

Stockings seem to often play a textual role loaded with sexual significance in several eighteenth century texts. A gift of stockings, especially luxurious silk stockings, from a man to a woman recurs as a statement of sexual interest. It is an image that Richardson uses in Pamela and that Eliza Haywood, reworks, mining it for its rich social implications. Stockings also had a place in traditions of marriage and the bedroom: Beds. As part of a luxurious toilette were often very important to women working as prostitutes. It seems that self-presentation through clothing was often a very important part of the profession for sex workers, and stockings were a significant part of this. 

 

Giving the Gift of Stockings

Stockings played a very sexual role in the relationship of Emily Lennox (1731-1814) and her husband, James Fitzgerald, Duke of Leinster and Earl of Kildare. The couple, were a very aristocratic one, with Emily being the second daughter of the Duke of Richmond, and the letters of Emily and her sisters, which Stella Tillyard has used in her book on the sisters, paint a very full picture of their lives during the eighteenth century. Emily's letters to her husband and Kildare's to her are full of titillation and sexual suggestion, and stockings actually played an integral role in this epistolary foreplay. Tillyard, remarks that one of Kildare's favourite frivolities in their less than prudent lifestyle was stockings for Emily:

 

Kildare did not really want the spending spree to stop and he often contributed to the mounting debts himself with presents for his wife. Stockings were his particular favourite. They reminded him of the beautiful flesh they would so enticingly cover. Kildare knew that Emily was fond of stockings that had been 'clocked' or elaborately embroidered with silk. She bought them in London and fro there her husband wrote excitedly in 1762: 'I find I exceed your commission in regard to your stockings with coloured clocks. I bespoke two pairs with bright blue, two pairs with green and two pairs with pink clocks...I am sure when you have them on, your dear legs will set them off. I will bespoke you six more pairs with white clocks; you mean to have them embroideredI suppose, therefore [I] shall make you  present of the dozen. The writing about your stockings and dear, pretty legs makes me feel what is not to be expressed.' When the stockings came back from the seamstress, Kildare was excited anew. 'I think they are very pretty and when upon you dear pretty legs will look much better - Oh! What would I give to see them. I must stop here, for if I was to let myself go on to express what I feel by being absent, I should put my eyes out. ' But he did go on, adding in his next letter, I 'long very much for the acknowledgement [your] dear, dear legs are to make for the trouble I have had upon their account, and make no doubt but that I shall be amply rewarded for the care I have had about them.' After the stockings had finally arrived at Carton, Emily wrote coyly, 'Henry [one of the little boys] admires clocked stockings as much as you do; he is forever peeping under my petticoats - what nonsense I do fill my letters with.' (Tillyard, 66-67)

 

In these letters, stockings are a very sexualised object, they seem to serve as a kind of stand in for sexual contact while Kildare is away from Emily, they are used as a site for a kind of surrogate physical contact like some of the Gloves in courtship poems. But they are also a signifier of sexual possession, with Kildare explicitly using the stockings as a gesture that merits some kind of reciprocity: "I shall be amply rewarded for the care I have had about them". So, here there is set up a sense that is supported by other literature, that stockings as a gift from a man to a woman in this sort of context are deeply suggestive of sexual conquest and also that they possibly confer some kind of obligation on the recipient. 

 

A key literary instance where a man uses the gifting of stockings to a woman to stake some kind of sexual claim, or to as a semaphore for sexual desire is in Samuel Richardson's "Pamela". In her seventh letter, Pamela records the fact that she has received yet another set of sartorial gifts out of her old mistress's wardrobe from B. She has already accepted plenty of this sort of generosity from B, most of the clothes she receives being of a very luxurious construction and design, in the sixth letter, she receives clothes that she says are "too rich and too good for me, to be sure" (Richardson, 18). But it is the second set of gifts include some very luxurious white and silk stockings, and it is these that worry Pamela, and her father:

 

Dear Father,

 SINCE my last, my Master gave me more fine Things. He call’d me up to my old Lady’s Closet, and pulling out her Drawers, he gave me Two Suits of fine Flanders lac’d Headcloths, Three Pair of fine Silk Shoes, two hardly the worse, and just fit for me; for my old Lady had a very little Foot; and several Ribbands and Topknots of all Colours, and Four Pair of fine white Cotton Stockens, and Three Pair of fine Silk ones; and Two Pair of rich Stays, and a Pair of rich Silver Buckles in one Pair of the Shoes. I was quite astonish’d, and unable to speak for a while; but yet I was inwardly asham’d to take the Stockens; for Mrs Jervis was not there: If she had, it would have been nothing. I believe I receiv’d them very awkwardly; for he smil’d at my Awkwardness; and said, Don’t blush, Pamela: Dost think I don’t know pretty Maids wear Shoes and Stockens? (Richardson, 19)

 

 

Dear PAMELA,

 I Cannot but renew my Cautions to you on your Master's Kindness to you, and his free Expression to you about the Stockens (Richardson, 20).

 

 

There is not only the anxiety of sexual proposition that is suggested, here, the clothes that are given are much above the standard of a usual servant's dress and tis taps into the hot tops of contemporary debate that female servants had an unhealthy penchant for dressing far above their station (Batchelor, 24). But this is not why the stockings make Pamela anxious, because she has received several other garments that are far finer that she is accustomed to. It initially seems strange that out of all the garments that she is gifted, the ones that make Pamela uneasy, that make her and her father worry that something might well be expected in return, are the stockings, and them alone. And this seems even stranger to a contemporary reader when we consider that in with the stockings are stays, or corset-type garments, which to our modern perceptions, seem much more intimate, and in the sixth letter, B gives her "half a Dozen...Shifts" (Richardson, 18), which as the main feminine undergarment also seem eminently more private than stockings. But is it the stockings that carry the "erotic symbolism" (Batchelor, 28). There may be many reasons for why stockings held this suggestion of sexual proposition, but a possible theory is that, out of everything a woman wore, stockings were the most private garment. The layers a woman usually would be wearing in the eighteenth century, went in order something like this: shift and stockings; then stays (and other shaping garments like hoops and panniers, if worn; then a petticoat (or several, depending on style); then a gown and then perhaps a jacket and finally an apron, if they needed or wanted one; and finally a neckerchief or shawl. There would also be accessories such as hats, caps, and shoes. But, out of all of these garments, the only ones that would definitely not be regularly visible under any circumstances, are stockings. While shifts and stays would usually be covered by a gown while in public, women at home, or servants who worked inside often did not wear a gown over their stays and so their shift and stays would be visible, as in the image below.

 

(8)

In Sandby's "At Sandpit Gate: Washing Day", you can see the female servants doing the washing are fully clothed, but they are not in outdoor wear, they are both wearing white shifts (visible on their arms, shoulders, and about their necks), coloured petticoats, fully visible stays and a neckerchief is visible on one of them. The only part of their apparel that you cannot clearly see that they are wearing, is their stockings. In fact you would physically have to life their skirts to see their stockings. And eighteenth century women did not commonly wear any other undergarments apart from their shifts (Finley). So, if we pursue the idea that stockings are a garment only fully visible if you were to lift the skirts of an eighteenth century woman, and that underneath her skirts, she would be completely naked, then perhaps the fact that stockings seem so heavy with sexual suggestion seems more explicable. 

 

Eliza Haywood reworks the stockings scene in "Pamela", exploring somewhat more explicitly, the social issues with which the incident is so heavily loaded. Jennie Batchelor argues that one of the issues that Haywood engages with was that of the intense debates on how servants were clothed:

 

As is so often the case in eighteenth-century anti-fashion writing, however, the fear of social transgression expressed in debates on servant dress is closely allied to fears surrounding un- restrained female sexuality. Throughout the century, the efforts of female servants to emulate their betters were frequently cited as leading causes of prostitution. Richardson’s novel questions such long- standing assumptions by inverting the sexual dynamic of the master- servant relationship – Pamela is prey rather than predator (Batchelor, 28).

 

So, Batchelor suggests that, Pamela as a servant, is cast in a role of innocence in the novel; that she does not deliberately dress above her station to make herself sexually desirable to her master, or to any other man who could pay for her favours, as the bashful maid who accepts the garments out of a desire to avoid embarrassing conversation and the appearance of being ungrateful, any hint of sexual manipulation or control on her part is avoided. Haywood dismantles this presentation of uncomplicated innocence with her version of the stockings scene, in which the stockings are now not only suggestive of male sexual conquest but of female and servant sexual manipulation. 

 

(8)(9)

In the above two pages of "Anti Pamela", Syrena, the heroine, is offered and refuses the offer of a pair of very fine white stockings with pink clocks. She then goes home and contemplates whether her refusal was orchestrated to exactly the effect she was intending. She wants to be entirely sure that her demeanour was consistent with "such a Coyness, as might give him room to fancy I might at last be won". So, at Batchelor argues, Haywood subverts Pamela's apparently deferent innocence, exposing how innocence and virtue can themselves both be tools in sexual manipulation. And that even such a mercenary, scheming young woman as Syrena Tricksy can perform the outward display of innocence- in fact she performs it arguably better than Pamela, by refusing the stockings, and yet this very refusal is solely intended to increase her sexual allure (Batchelor, 28). 

 

Stockings and Prostitution

 


(10)

Above is an engraving of a prostitute, in which her clothing is hugely important. As is to be expected, appearance was a crucial issue for the prostitute and appearing as attractive as possible was paramount, and that often translated to being as luxuriously and genteelly dressed as possible. And being luxuriously and genteelly dressed would usually include white silk stockings or clocked stockings. The woman in the above image is wearing an outfit in which no expense has been spared, the clothes themselves are not to be distinguished from those of a much more affluent woman. The grubby appearance that her rooms present is telling, it suggests that all her fine clothing is not the result of doing well, and earning a good amount of money, rather it what she has spent her money on,  in order that she may continue to make money, or make more of it. She clearly cannot get better lodgings in which to receive her clients, but she can make herself seem more luxurious through her clothing. And the white stockings as a recognisable luxury item are part of that process. 

 

There are quite a number of accounts and artistic representations of prostitutes and their attire, and it appears, on examining these records, that an all-over luxurious standard of dress, including white or clocked was the ideal aim for a prostitute, because, understandably, as the illustration below suggests, once their standard of personal presentation fell, so did their ability to earn money and so would begin a downward spiral.

 

(11)

This illustration of different sort of prostitutes from 1802, shows how the most desirable prostitute is virtually indistinguishable from a fine lady, decked out in furs, and wearing a clean pair of white stockings. And three women, who from their facial expressions and the names they have been given: "Billingsgate Smack", "Fire Ship" and "Bum-Boat", are intended to be the least attractive, are the only three not wearing white stockings. 

 

It would seems that business was just much better for a prostitute if they were well dressed:

 

Some prostitutes were supplied with appropriate clothing by the women who employed them. Ann Smith was accused in 1754 of stealing clothes from Elizabeth Ward of Spring Gardens near Charing Cross in London, including a flowered cotton gown, a laced cap, own ruffles, a Dresden handkerchief, a cross-barred lawn apron, a French dimity petticoat, silk stockings, a stun hat and a pair of paste earrings. Ward claimed she made her living by sewing and washing, and had hired Smith as a live-in servant (italics mine). According to the constable, however, Ward kept a disorderly house. Smith, who had been wearing most of the clothes when apprehended, protested that Ward 'had lent her the things to appear in company with...as as lady' and had provided other girls icing in the house wit clothing for the same purpose(Styles, 54).

 

So here, silk stockings are being used as part of this apparatus of the "lady", which Ann Smith is anything but. So sumptuous stockings become an indicator of class and refinement that can become part of a disguise, somewhat similarly to that way Wigs worked to signify social standing. 

 

And it seems that prostitutes were liable to hang onto the ideal of a sumptuous, ladylike appearance, long after they were in no position to maintain the illusion, or so Hogarth's third picture in "The Rake's Progress" series would suggest.

 

(12)

In this image of "The Orgy", Tom Rakewell succumbs to the corrupting charms of a brothel in Covent Garden. We can observe prostitutes in various states of dress and undress, but mostly the fabrics seem quite fine and almost all of them wear frivolous beribboned caps. The only visible pair of stockings belongs to the woman in the bottom left. She seems to be undressing or adjusting her stockings, and the picture she presents is quite interesting. She, like most of the other women there is covered in patches, presumably to cover makes left by syphilis, and her expensive,clocked stockings are ragged and have holes, yet she persists in wearing them. She could very likely get a cheap pair of worsted or cotton stockings to avoid this lamentable raggedness in appearance, but it seems that the status, or perceived sexual attraction conferred by a pair of clocked stockings, outweighs their advanced state of wear. 

 

Annotated Bibliography

  Batchelor, Jennie. Dress Distress And Desire: Clothing And The Female Body In Eighteenth-Century Sentimental Literature. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 2005. Print.

-Discusses the sexual and social politics behind representation of female dress in the eighteenth century. Great for a critical account of what "Pamela" implies about female sexuality.

 

Fielding, John. The female husband: or, the surprising history of Mrs. Mary, alias Mr George Hamilton, who was convicted of having married a young woman of Wells and lived with her as her husband. Taken from her own mouth since her confinement. London,  1746. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale. University of Warwick Library. 13 Mar. 2014 

-Interesting aside on the tradition of throwing stockings at weddings. And passage of flight highlighting the necessity of stockings to looking normal and respectable.

 

Richardson, Samuel. Pamela: Or Virtue Rewarded (Oxford World's Classics). Oxford: Oxford University Press: 2008. Print.

-The famous stocking scene is very illuminating and sparked much critical debate about servant dress, sexuality and virtue. Eliza Haywood responded directly to it in "Anti-Pamela".

 

Styles, John. The Dress of the People. New Haven: Yale University, 2010. Print. 

-In this book, Styles examines "plebeian" dress. it was really helpful to see how stockings fit into normal everyday life of common people in the eighteenth century, and it placed things within their cultural, social and economic context. 

 

Tillyard, S. K. Aristocrats: Caroline, Emily, Louisa and Sarah Lennox, 1740-1832. London: Chatto & Windus:1994. Print.

-This detailed and sympathetic account of the lives of the Lenox sisters in the eighteenth century paints a very compelling picture of woman leading everyday lives, if of a somewhat privileged sort.

 

Websites

-Finley, Harry. "Some facts about European underwear, 1700 - 1900".MUM.org, 2001. Web. 12 Mar. 2014. http://www.mum.org/underhis.htm

"-A Rake's Progress" . Sir John Soane's Museum. Web. 13 Mar. 2014. http://www.soane.org/collections_legacy/the_soane_hogarths/rakes_progress

-"Stocking, n.2" Oxford English Dictionary. Oxford university Press, 2014. Web. 12. Mar. 2014. http://0-www.oed.com.pugwash.lib.warwick.ac.uk/view/Entry/190625?rskey=URNSPd&result=2#eid

-"Interactive: Side Hoop Underskirt and Linen Shift, 18th Century". V & A, 2014. Web. 12. Mar. 2014. http://www.vam.ac.uk/content/articles/i/interactive-womans-side-hoop-and-shift-1700s/

 

Images

(1)"Stockings, silk stockings" Google Books Ngram Viewer. Web. 12 Mar 2014. https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=stockings%2Csilk+stockings&case_insensitive=on&year_start=1650&year_end=1900&corpus=16&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t4%3B%2Cstockings%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bstockings%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BStockings%3B%2Cc0%3B.t4%3B%2Csilk%20stockings%3B%2Cc0%3B%2Cs0%3B%3Bsilk%20stockings%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BSilk%20Stockings%3B%2Cc0%3B%3BSilk%20stockings%3B%2Cc0

(2) The Husbandman's Enjoyment, 1793 . From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010. 

 (3) The Ale-House Door. c.1790. From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010. Print.

(4) Great Britain. An Act for ascertaining the breadths, and preventing frauds and abuses in manufacturing serges, pladings, and fingrums, and for regulating the manufactures of stockings in that part of Great Britain called Scotland. [London ],  [1720]. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale. University of Warwick Library. 13 Mar. 2014 

<http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=warwick&tabID=T001&docId=CB3332124213&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0&docLevel=FASCIMILE>.

  (5) Economy. c.1800. From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010. Print.

(6) Whole length Figure of Welch Peasants. 1797From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010. Print.

(7) Pair of Stockings. ca.1750-1770. Victoria and Albert Museum. http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O139660/pair-of-stockings-unknown/

(8) Haywood, Eliza. Anti-Pamela: or, feign'd innocence detected; in a series of Syrena's adventures. A narrative which has really its foundation in truth and nature; and at the same time that it entertains, by a vast variety of surprizing Incidents, arms against a partial Credulity, by shewing the Mischiefs that frequently arise from a too sudden Admiration. Publish'd as a necessary caution to all young gentlemen. London,  M.DCC.XLI. [1741]. Eighteenth Century Collections Online. Gale. University of Warwick Library. 13 Mar. 2014 

<http://find.galegroup.com/ecco/infomark.do?&source=gale&prodId=ECCO&userGroupName=warwick&tabID=T001&docId=CW3314139424&type=multipage&contentSet=ECCOArticles&version=1.0&docLevel=FASCIMILE>.

 (9) ibid.

(10) A St. Giles's Beauty. 1784. From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010

(11) British Vessels. Described for the use of Country Gentlemen.  1802. From "The Dress of the People". New Haven: Yale University, 2010

(12)A Rake's Progress: 3. The Rake at the Rose Tavern. 1734. BBC Your Paintings. 13 Mar. 2014. http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/paintings/a-rakes-progress-3-the-rake-at-the-rose-tavern-123975

 

 

 

Comments (0)

You don't have permission to comment on this page.