![]() ![]() The overall effect was that of a wig with a long tail and bow. Later in the century, hair was likewise tied back, greased and powdered, but false hair pigtails were adopted, kept in a tubular queue and tied back with ribbons to the soldier’s own hair. It was then liberally dusted with powdered chalk to give the impression of a powdered wig. Instead, the men used tallow or other fat to grease the hair, which was then fashioned into pigtails and tied back into the scalp hair to give the impression of short hair. In the case of British soldiers of the 1740s, contemporary artwork suggests that they cut their hair short, which was not the case. ![]() Instead of wigs, the men grew their hair long and according to the prevailing fashion in a nation’s army, hair was either allowed to grow long with simple modeling, as in the French army of the 1740s, or else was elaborately coiffured as in Prussian and British armies. Whilst officers normally wore their own hair short under a powdered wig, the rank and file of the infantry was not afforded such luxury. The elaborate, over-sized court-styles of the late 18th century were not followed by armies in the field however, as they were impractical to withstand the rigours of military life and simpler wigs were worn. ![]() The late 17th century saw officers wearing full-bottomed natural-coloured wigs, but the civilian change to shorter, powdered styles with pigtails in the early 18th century saw officers adopting similar styles. As part of that uniform, officers wore wigs more suited to the drawing rooms of Europe than its battlefields. From the late 17th to early 19th centuries, European armies wore uniforms more or less imitating the civilian fashions of the time, but with militarized additions. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |