Trousers. A piece of garment with history record longer than most of us think, became a part of women’s wardrobe relatively recently. Although, the above statement is not entirely precise – women of Middle East did wear trousers millenia ago and in modern societies of today it is not unheard of that trousers on a female silhouette are frowned upon or openly criticised.
They were first used in Phrygia, a kingdom in Asia Minor, more or less where central Turkey is today. They looked quite contemporary, resembling our leggins.
Phrygian state emerged around 1200 BC and collapsed by circa 700 BC, conquered subsequently by Lydians, Persians, Seleucids and finally by Romans. Persians dominated Phrygia particularly long and adopted its art and many elements of costume including trousers. In Persia trousers were worn by both sexes and besides simple cut with two narrow legs, a more complex form was introduced, the one often associated with “Arabian Nights” stories – loose and puffy shalvar also known today as harem pants or Turkish pants. In Europe at that time simple version of trousers was used by Celtic and Teutonic tribes who valued them for comfort, particularly during horse riding, and for protection against cold weather. Both Celts and Teutons granted that comfort to men only. A woman wearing trousers was an unthinkable concept.
One fundamental difference worth mentioning here is that Mediterranean antiquity, be it Egypt, Greece or Rome strongly preferred garments made of simple rectangles and oblongs, always draped, not cut and sewn. Hence tunics, togas, peplums, pallas etc – all kept in place with a simple belt and brooches. In the Middle East on the contrary, tailoring was more advanced. Garments were cut to reflect shape of the body, needles and threads were in common use, laces and buttons, also invented there, helped clothes to be even more shapely. Trousers and sleeved tunics in antiquity and early middle ages are a trade mark and a proof of commercial and/or diplomatic relations with the Middle East for dress historians. Disregarded and seen as barbaric by Rome, their popularity was rising amongst Roman troops as they marched further and further into cold north.
After the fall of Western Roman Empire, from early Middle Ages till about mid 19th century trousers were only used by men. I am still sure there were countless incidents throughout history when girls and women put on trousers but it was when they wanted to disguise themselves as men. Like Joan d’ Arc for example. For security she travelled through Burgundy disguised as a male solider and although she had pretty good reason to do so, that fact was later used against her in the court trial. Along with many other charges she was accused of “cross-dressing” ie dressing up with clothes that do not belong to one’s own sex. But why was it seen as such a bad thing?
Aileen Ribeiro in her book “Dress and Morality” points out to the Old Testament, namely to Deuteronomium 22,5 which says: “The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman’s garment; for all that do so are abomination unto the Lord thy God”.
The very same verses of the Bible were mentioned in point 62 of 6th Constantinopole General Council in early Christianity (680-681). Participants concluded that cross-dressing is a deadly sin and as such makes salvation of the soul impossible. Moreover, a person committing that sin will be excommunicated which means cannot enter any church building, ask for priest’s help, have a Christian funeral or be buried within the borders of consecrated cemetery. The idea of men and women swapping their clothes sometimes heats up emotions even today and can be seen as morally provocative. In 2017 Russian Orthodox religious portal published an article “Apostasy. New fashion and its effects” in which the above mentioned point 62 is presented as a rule of life, followed by conclusion that wearing trousers by women can bring infertility or difficult childbirth at best, and girls who cut their hair short risk heavy headaches. No mention of health hazards for Greek or Scottish men wearing skirts or boys with ponytails.
Only very few women in history of pre Enlightenment Europe managed to get away with wearing trousers without being stigmatised or threatened with sharing the fate of poor Joan d’Arc. Both of them very strong personalities, bright, open minds and both monarchs.
Christine , queen of Sweden (1626-1689, left, equestrian portrait painted by Sebastien Bourdon, 1656) since early childhood preferred male clothes, activities and company. She wore trousers often, enjoyed fencing, hunting and horse riding. She also had quite a reputation for swearing like like a mature solider. In 1649 instead of marrying her cousin, Karol Gustav as agreed earlier she abdicated, announced him the only righteous king of Sweden, packed her trunks and went to live in Rome, where she died in 1689. Some say she deeply disliked her own sex due to complicated and destructive relationship with her mother. True or not, by the late 19th century she became an icon of feminist movements.
The other one I know of is Catherine the Great, Empress of Russia (1728-1796, right, wearing theuniform of Preobrozhensky Regiment, circa 1762). She does not need much introduction being often present in popular culture. Admired by European philosophers of the Enlightenment for her scientific curiosity and passion for art, she was a strong ruler successfully commanding the army. Less known is the fact that in 1764 she opened the very first school for girls in Russia.
One of the first commoner women wearing trousers in public without pretending to be someone else was George Sand (1804-1876, left, portrait by na unknown artist), French novelist, one of the most popular writers of her times. A brave woman who could see many aspects of gender inequality and who was a protagonist of numerous scandals provoked by her public appearance in men’s outfit and openly smoking cigars.
When discussing the history of how women reached to wear trousers, two important names have to be mentioned: Elisabeth Smith Miller and Amelia Bloomer. Both Americans and strong believers in women’s rights. It was Mrs Miller who had the idea that for comfort, ladies’ skirt should be shortened to about knee length and puffy, “Turkish style” pants worn underneath for decency and warmth. Amelia Bloomer described the idea in her publication “The Lily”. In 1849 she travelled to London where she presented real life model provoking heavy sights of disbelief and disgust.
Bloomers, as they were named after Amelia, seem to have been inspired by Persian shalvar or harem pants. Wide and puffy, long and gathered at the ankle. True, they don’t look particularly attractive and that’s why Mrs Bloomer had only a small number of followers in England and her invention was cruely ridiculed in Punch magazine.
Punch magazine June-December 1951
Although bloomerism was short lived, it has left its mark and has not been entirely forgotten. About three decades later, when riding a bicycle became technological novelty and a popular way of exercise, nobody objected to women cyclist wearing trousers – bloomer shaped, only knee length but without a skirt on top. Just trousers, jacket and a hat. Nobody objected but wearing this outfit was allowed only and exclusively while cycling. However, even this very limited use of a new attire was a huge step forward comparing to the wave of critical malice Amelia Bloomer had to withstand.
Next milestone in this story was set shortly after Russian Ballet arrived in Paris in 1909 presenting performances such as “Scheherezade” with music written by Rimsky-Korsakov, “L’Oiseau de feu” composed by Igor Stravinsky or “Le Festin” by Modest Musorgsky. Stage costumes were designs by Leon Bakst. This breathtaking combo of modern music, innovative choreography and sumptuous, lavish costumes, all inspired with Orient threw the audience to its knees. Paris fell in love with everything they saw on the stage. Oriental opulence with shiny brocades, slinky silks and fluffy velvets soon influenced most fields of decorative art, with interior design, jewellery and clothes fashion to start with. A man who knew how to translate theatrical costumes into luxurious but wearable clothes was French fashion designer – Paul Poiret. He is remembered mostly as the one who freed women from corsets by shifting waistline a bit higher above the navel and draping the fabrics which when you work with silk satin, velvet or glittery lame brings particularly good effect.
Inspired by Ballets Russes, in 1911 Poiret presented his new design, jupe-culotte. They looked almost exactly like shalwar/harem pants, puffy, long, gathered at the ankle. A few of his affluent clients accepted Poiret’s new concept and were seen wearing jupe-culotte at various occasions in Paris. Some ladies however, along with their husband, lovers, sons and fathers were scandalised with both harem origin and cross-dressing aspect of new fashion. For a season or two “ladies’ trousers” were worn more as masquerade or theatrical costume rather than as a regular outfit. Then quickly forgotten.
Soon after that episode social life was completely transformed by the onset of Ist World War and I tend to agree with those historians who say that 19th century, in terms of society rules and ways of life ended in 1914, not in 1900.
When war ended, nothing was ever the same. In most countries women could finally vote and they did not stay at home all the time any more. Instead many started working, enjoying sports or having a good time in bars and clubs which was not regarded a deadly sin any more. Coco Chanel understood the wind of change and the list of her contributions towards modern fashion is very long. Little black dress, use of jersey fabric (which previously was regarded good enough only for underwear) to make comfy dress, wearing statement fake jewellery without being ridiculous, to name just a few. Mademoiselle offered women sporty, casual yet chic clothes much needed for the new lifestyle. She also liked to introduce male garments into ladies’ wardrobe. We wear buttoned shirts with collar thanks to her. Hence no wonder she came up with an idea for trousers.
Chanel’s trousers, designed in early 20-ties were long, with wide legs and high waist, often kept with a belt, made of white linen or other summery fabric. Frankly, if you’d like to wear them in summer 2020 they would not look dated – another Chanel’ s classic. That said, the outfit was acceptable to wear only during holidays, preferably by the water, hence they are known also as “yacht pants”, or in the country. Even Mademoiselle herself would not dress them in the city.
In brief but vibrant period between the two World Wars trousers for women became more and more popular and nobody was objecting for morality reasons but their use was restricted to leisure and sport activities.
Wars always change ways people lived and WWII was no different in that respect. After 1939 women were performing large number of occupations so far regarded as typically masculine such as factory worker, farmer, lorry drivers, not just nurses and typists. Or they were seriously involved in anti nazi resistance. Not only were all of these jobs easier to carry on with wearing trousers but also there were shortages of everything, including clothes. They had to borrow items from the wardrobes of their husbands and brothers. Not to make a statement this time but to be sufficiently and comfortably dressed in harsh circumstances. That was a very reasonable excuse to wear trousers, but putting them on for a social event was still unheard of. Forbidden. There ware some exceptions shortly before and during the war that include Marlene Dietrich and Kathrine Hepburn but they were rich and famous and so able to afford being eccentric.
The first haute couture fashion collection presented after WWII ended was famous Christian Dior’s “New Look” (1947). Classy and elegant but rather conservative, it did not include trousers at all. A year later however Sonja de Lennart, German born fashion designer introduced something I cannot live without – Capri pants.
With high waist, legs narrowing downwards and cropped a few centimeters above the ankle they became an easily recognisable mark of 50’ties and early 60’ties. Capri pants never went out of fashion ever since and are considered a classic. But they still belonged to leisure andweekend set of clothes.
I am quite convinced that a major breakthrough took place in 1966 when Yves Saint Laurent showed a ladies’ tuxedo as an evening outfit to be used and treated the same way as an evening gown. Black, worn with buttoned up white shirt and… high heels. This androgynic model provoked a lot of talk and its lesbian connotations did not pass unnoticed.
Now the door was wide open and after Barbara Streisand turned up at 1969 Oscar ceremony (where she got an award for her part in “Funny Girl”) dressed in trousers, women started wearing them to work and on official occasions.. However, there was still a catch.
Anti cross dressing laws were passed and applied in many US cities in 19th century, Detroit and Miami passed one in 1950s and Cincinnati did so as late as 1974! However even in states with less conservative attitude, such as California for example, it was not uncommon that women wearing trousers were refused entrance to a chic restaurant. In fact, the same happened to Brigitte Bardot, a French film star, in one of the restaurants in Paris in late 1960s. One could expect the French to be more liberal in that matter but that was not the case, which I learnt when I found out about a certain legal curiosity. Until 2011 in Paris there was an existing but not executed regulation obliging women intending to put a pair of trousers on to ask police for a permission to do so. Ladies applying for such permission should provide medical reasons to support their wish. This odd regulation was first introduced in 1799 and revised in 1892 and 1909. Both modifications recognised women’s need for trousers while holding a steering wheel of a car or reins of a carriage. Although in contradiction with current French constitution written in 1946 which guarantees gender equality in all fields of life, the regulation remained in place until about a decade ago. Senator Maryvonne Bloudin rediscovered it in 2010 and pushed Paris city council to demand the police to remove it. The police, busy as it is, replied that they have different priorities and will not deal with “legal archeology”. The regulation was eventually removed a year later.
Until recently the last two bastions of conservatism regarding trousers were diplomatic dress code and royal etiquette. The first one has fallen some time ago with Hillary Clinton, Angela Merkel and Theresa May taking the lead.
May 
Clinton 
Merkel
True, trousers are still associated with power and the freedom to wear them by women in diplomatic world is limited to those with leaders’ position. “Ordinary ” diplomats still have to follow less liberal dress code. Global Portal for Diplomats (www.ediplomat.com) recommends short cocktail dresses for ladies even for informal occasions.
Royal etiquette remains unchanged. You will not find a picture of a female member of any royal house wearing trousers during official events such as weddings, baptism, funerals, coronations, head of state visits etc. It might be however only a matter of time.
Lastly, the debate about women wearing trousers often leads to a conclusion that the game is not entirely fair for men since girls want and do wear both, trousers and dresses while men are limited to trousers only. Yes, but… trousers give the wearer the feeling of power and control. Even in dreams analysis wearing perfectly fitted trousers symbolise exactly that: control, position of power and domination. Dress on the contrary is unequivocal with less control, less protection and constant sexual availability. And as much as there is a long history of women wanting trousers, I do not think there is much of a rush on men’s side to jump into dresses. However, since definitions of gender roles fluctuate in our times it is not surprising that this process is reflected in fashion as well. There are no dresses for men yest but typically female colours and some accessories are slowly becoming part men’s wardrobes. And frankly, if men wanted to wear dresses, I wouldn’t object. We are equal after all.
