Page:EB1911 - Volume 27.djvu/601

 of the unicorn’s horn against poison, which in England remained even in the time of Charles II., though Sir E. Ray Lankester (Science from an Easy Chair, London, 1910, p. 127) mentions that a cup made of rhinoceros horn was then handed over to the Royal Society for experiment, with the result of entirely disproving the superstition. In the court ceremonial of France as late as 1789 instruments of “unicorn’s” horn were still used for testing the royal food for poison. So-called unicorns’ horns, or articles made of unicorn’s horn, have always been sought after as “curiosities”; some of them, like the cup mentioned above, were of rhinoceros horn; others, like the horn seen at Windsor by Heutzner, a German traveller, in 1598 (see E. Phipson, Animal-lore of Shakespeare’s Time, p. 456), were probably narwhals’ tusks. Another medieval legend about the unicorn is that when it stooped to drink from a pool its horn, dipping into the water, purified and rendered it sweet. The traditional rivalry of the lion and the unicorn, which is generally considered to date at earliest from the Union of England and Scotland, when the lion and the unicorn appeared as the supporters of the royal arms, is referred to, curiously enough, in Spenser’s Faery Queene, ii. 5.

 UNIFORMS. The word “uniform” (Lat. unus, one, and forma, form), meaning adjectively homogeneous, is specifically used as a substantive for the distinctive naval and military dress, which serves, in its various styles, to give homogeneity to the several services, regiments and ranks. Although in ancient history we occasionally meet with uniformed soldiers, such as the white and crimson Spanish regiments of Hannibal, it was not until the beginning of large standing armies that uniforms were introduced in modern times. Before this, armed bodies were of two sorts, retainers and mercenaries, and while the former often wore their master’s livery, the latter were dressed each according to his own taste or means. The absence

of uniforms accounts very largely for the significance attached to the colours and standards, which alone formed rallying points for the soldier and his comrades, and thus acquired the sacred character which they have since possessed. A man who left the colours wandered into the terrifying unknown, for there was nothing to distinguish friend and foe. Even if the generals had ordered the men to wear some improvised badge such as a sprig of leaves, or the shirt outside the coat, such badges as these were easily lost or taken off. The next step in advance was a scarf of uniform colour, such as it is supposed was worn by the “green,” “yellow” and other similarly-named brigades of the Swedish army under Gustavus Adolphus. This too was easily removed, as in the example of the squire who at Edgehill put on the orange scarf of the parliamentarians and with no more elaborate disguise succeeded in recapturing the lost royal standard from the hands of Essex’s own secretary. By this time, in France at least, the general character of the clothes and accoutrements to be worn on various occasions was strictly regulated by orders. But uniformity of clothing was not to be expected so long as the “enlistment” system prevailed and soldiers came and went, were taken in and dismissed, at the beginning and 'end of every campaign. The beginnings of uniform are therefore to be found in truly national armies, in the Indelta of Gustavus, and the English armies of the Great Rebellion. In the earlier years of the latter, though the richer colonels uniformed their men (as, for instance, the marquess of Newcastle’s “Whitecoats” and the king’s own “Bluecoats”), the rustics and the citizens turned out for war in their ordinary rough clothes, donning armour and sword-belt. But in 1645 the parliament raised an army “all its own” for permanent service, and the colonels became officials rather than proprietors. The “new model” was clothed in the civilian costume of the date—ample coat, waistcoat, breeches, stockings and shoes (in the case of cavalry, boots)—but with the distinctive colour throughout the army of red and with regimental facings of various colours. The breeches were grey. Soon afterwards the helmet disappeared, and its place was taken by a grey broad-brimmed hat. From the coat was evolved the tunic of to-day, and the hat became the cocked hat of a later generation, which has never altogether disappeared, and has indeed reverted to its original form in the now familiar “slouch-hat.”

For service in Ireland the red coat was exchanged for one of russet colour, just as scarlet gave way to khaki for Indian service in the 19th century. The cavalry, however, wore buff leather coats and armour long after the infantry had abandoned them; the Austrians (see Plate I., line 1, No. 2), on account of their Turkish wars, retained them longer than any.

Thus the principle ever since followed—uniform coat and variegated facings—was established. Little or nothing of sentiment led to this. By choice or convenience the majority of the corps out of which the new model was formed had come to be dressed in red, with facings according to the colonel’s taste, and it is a curious fact that in Austria sixty years afterwards events took the same course. The colonels there uniforming their men as they saw fit, had by tacit consent, probably to obtain “wholesale” prices, agreed upon a serviceable colour (pearl grey), and when in 1707 Prince Eugene procured the issue of uniform regulations, few line regiments had to be reclothed. The preferences of the colonel were exhibited in the colour of the facings (Plate I., line 1, fig. 3). In France, as in England and Austria, the cavalry, as yet rather led by the wealthy classes than officered by the professional, was not uniformed upon an army system until after the infantry. But in 1688 six-sevenths of the French cavalry was uniformed in light grey with red facings; and about half the dragoon regiments had red uniforms and blue facings. Louvois, in creating a standing army, had introduced an infantry uniform as a necessary consequence. The native French regiments had light grey coats, the Swiss red, the German black and the Italian blue, with various facings. The French grey was probably decided upon, like the Austrian grey, as being a good “service” colour, which could be cheaply manufactured (Plate I.,