elaboration or simplicity of adornment variety was practically without the pale. There was but subtle distinction between the form of the tunic and the stola, yet perchance in the deftness of the adjustment of the drapery of the toga and the exact position of the girdle, taste could play some part. But the world of costume was a dull table-land exalted to a scene of battle only when the stringent laws relating to extravagances were liberally disregarded. It seems to have been a custom throughout the ages for some historian, ruler, or priest to interfere with the existing facts of fashion. One can find traces of such want of sympathy even in the eighteenth century. The Roman laws were arbitrary, and Numa actually forbade any woman to have more than half an ounce of gold on her robes, while he also prohibited the garment of many colours. It is pleasing, however, to realise that his strictures were not taken very seriously.
The one sartorial fact with which my youthful mind was burdened was that the earliest Britons stained their tattooed bodies with woad. Chroniclers are not in accord as to the precise shade of this blue dye, proving that the habits of chroniclers change but little, since fashion-writers of to-day may be accused of like conduct; and as woad is more correctly described as an undress uniform than as an article of clothing, I will not now discuss the question of its exact colour, but note contentedly that all authorities agree that the Britons clad themselves in skins decorated with beads and flowers, which, in conjunction with their painted and punctured persons, lent them a ferocious aspect, quite attractive.
