The châtelaine and the reticule

I came across this article written by C. Matthews (2010). It is about pocket issues in the Victorian times. I think it is perfect for my research, and I am now going to cite the article in this post.

According to Matthews, in Europe of the Victorian times (the 19th century) there was great controversy about how women, who were gaining more independence, should carry their personal belongings, such as a handkerchief, a money purse and a watch, with them. Pockets sewn inside garments, which were a standard in male clothing, were considered to cause visually disturbing and unpractical bulges that would spoil the ideal female figure (which at that time was managed with corsets and crinolines).

The châtelaine gained popularity in the 1850’s. It was a metallic belt hook from which desired items could be hung on a chain. These items might have been "numerous small and decorative items such as scissors and pin cushions, keys and note pads, perfume, and often a small purse or bag" (Wilcox 1999, quoted in Matthews 2010) However, the châtelaine caused amusement and irritation amongst people not wearing them. Châtelaines with sharp objects, such as scissors, hanging from them were claimed to be dangerous. In addition, they were made fun of as silly objects to which women would attach pots, pans and even children. They were also thought to slow women down, even in a disabling way, rather than making their lives easier and less dependent.


sporting a châtelaine, illustration from 1896






















A decorative handbag, at that time called the reticule, was suggested as the solution to the problem of female item-carrying. Although it had already been in use for decades (Warren, 1987), it was now more discussed than ever. However, Matthews mentions a slight problem: a soft hanging pouch including the woman’s dearest, even intimate, objects was in the Victorian community considered something that sent obvious signals about female sexuality. This, however, was not an issue great enough to stop the reticule, or the handbag, from gaining popularity which still lasts. (Warren, 1987)



a shell-shaped reticule























My comments:

I can personally understand why châtelaines did not become very commonly used afterwards. They must have been a little unpractical, save the fact that they kept both of the users hands free. I was like a woman's toolbelt of that time, although it was made of metal. I can imagine women polishing and oiling them to keep them representative!

For some reason I can see the resemblance to these certain kind of pendants females wear today. Although they are only used as decoration and do not hang from one's waist, the inspiration for them might originally have come from the châtelaine.


a far cousin of the châtelaine?






















As for the reticule, well, it is the mother of the handbag we know today. For a modern person it might be amusing to think that the Victorians found it sexually suggestive. But sexuality is so openly expressed these days that such small signals, as the ones the reticule was claimed to send, simply get ignored.



Bibliography

a far cousin of the châtelaine?. (2010) [Online image]. Available from: < http://www.alibaba.com/product-gs/513370234/Pendant_Necklace_With_Bird_Cross_Beauty.html > [Accessed 18 March 2012].
a shell-shaped reticule. (n.d.) [Online image]. Available from: < http://kleurrijkjaneausten.blogspot.com/2011/06/reticule-was-small-handbag-that-could.html > [Accessed 15 March 2012].
Matthews, C. (2010) Form and Deformity: The Trouble with Victorian Pockets. Victorian Studies, 52 (4) Summer, pp.561-90.
sporting a châtelaine, illustration from 1896. (1896) [Online image]. Available from: < http://www.google.co.uk/imgres?um=1&hl=en&client=firefox-a&sa=X&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&biw=1280&bih=930&tbm=isch&tbnid=OpUplpyIf2Dx6M:&imgrefurl=http://dressedintime.blogspot.com/2011/10/equipage-or-chatelaine.html&docid=xQnFy2DqcDARGM&imgurl=https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjmH_tyn4JkAg3StKvpC3COUdha-VRGn5tQKmBss6Rc_WnqhykDjBbsEnDftpj_MTgQO_o3J8uAYFaox8vk1MpphdjLRkRZZW6g3Luj8FEAcw5sq0vRD55XbfBwXi1tQ2q8rg_h3n6CdL2l/s1600/jingling-chatelaine-milford-mail-9-jan-1896.jpg&w=587&h=665&ei=o9dhT4-kDobV8QPGi5m4CA&zoom=1&iact=hc&vpx=1028&vpy=110&dur=46&hovh=239&hovw=211&tx=125&ty=115&sig=112135005222127571011&page=2&tbnh=151&tbnw=131&start=38&ndsp=43&ved=1t:429,r:28,s:38 > [Accessed 15 March 2012].
Warren, G. (1987) Fashion Accessories Since 1500. Avon, Unwin Hyman Limited.
Wilcox, C. (1999) Bags. London, V&A Publications. Quoted in: Matthews, C. (2010) Form and Deformity: The Trouble with Victorian Pockets. Victorian Studies, 52 (4) Summer, pp.561-90.