|
The British
were the first Europeans to develop an interest in Kashmir shawls.
A young Englishwoman who had been in Bombay, India, is said to have
brought one to London in 1765 (1). The East India Company started
importing and selling them in the last quarter of the eighteenth
century. At this time, the English fashion in women's clothing had
started moving towards simpler styles often made from Eastern textiles
such as Indian chintz, calico, and muslin fabrics.
Throughout
the last quarter of the eighteenth century, English styles had a
significant impact on Parisian fashion, a trend dubbed "Anglomania"
(2). Nevertheless, the wearing of simple muslin gowns, such as Marie-Antoinette's
"chemise a la reine", was limited to a handful of highly fashionable
French ladies. Not until the Revolution did the new simpler styles
based on Greek and Roman clothing gain momentum. The Revolution
acted as a catalyst for styles already in the pipeline which were
pushed to the forefront by the impact of politics(3).
Officers
returning from Napoleon's 1799 Egyptian campaign brought Kashmir
shawls as gifts, which helped to spread the fashion and fascination
for them. As neo-classical styles were adopted in France and spread
like wildfire around Europe and America, demand for Kashmir shawls
exceeded the supply, driving up the prices of an item already exorbitantly
costly. This fashion for simple cotton dresses and Indian shawls
was extremely detrimental to the French economy. In an effort to
remedy the situation, Napoleon banned their importation and ordered
that copies of shawls be produced in France. However, his role as
fashion dictator was undermined by his wife, Josephine, who continued
to have her own shawls smuggled in without his knowledge! An inventory
of her wardrobe in 1809 included 666 winter dresses, 230 summer
dresses, and 60 cashmere shawls, some of which had cost as much
as 8,000 to 12,000 francs, an outrageous price in those days (4).
__________________
(1) Phyllis
Tortora and Keith Eubank, Survey of Historic Costume (New York:
Fairchild Publications, 1994), 254.
(2) Ibid,
226.
(3) Ibid,
265.
(4) Ibid,
19.
|