'Sumptuary laws' (from
Latin ''sumptuariae leges'') are
laws which regulate habits based on subjective concerns.
Black's Law Dictionary defines them as "Laws made for the purpose of restraining luxury or extravagance, particularly against inordinate expenditures in the matter of apparel, food, furniture, etc."
[1]. Traditionally, they were laws which regulated and reinforced
social hierarchies and
morals through restrictions on
clothing,
food, and
luxury expenditures.
History
Throughout history, societies have used sumptuary laws for a variety of purposes. They were an easy way to identify
social rank and
privilege, and often were used for social
discrimination. This frequently meant preventing
commoners from imitating the appearance of aristocrats, and sometimes also to
stigmatize disfavored groups. In the
Late Middle Ages sumptuary laws were instated as a way for the
nobility to cap the
conspicuous consumption of the up-and-coming
bourgeoisie of
medieval cities.
The first written Greek law code (Locrian code), by
Zaleucus (seventh century BC) stipulated that "no free woman should be allowed any more than one maid to follow her, unless she was drunk: nor was to stir out of the city by night, wear jewels of gold about her, or go in an embroidered robe, unless she was a professed and public prostitute; that,
bravos excepted, no man was to wear a gold ring, nor be seen in one of those effeminate robes woven in the city of
Miletus." (Quoted from
Montaigne, see below.)
In
ancient Rome, the ''Sumptuariae Leges'' were various laws passed to prevent inordinate expense (sumptus) in banquets and dress, such as the use of expensive
Tyrian purple dye.
[2][3] It was considered the duty of government to put a check upon extravagance in the private expenses of persons,
[4] and such restrictions are found in laws attributed to the
kings of Rome and in the
Twelve Tables. The
Roman censors, who were entrusted with the ''disciplina'' or ''
cura morum'', published the ''
nota censoria''. In it was listed the names of everyone found guilty of a luxurious mode of living; a great many instances of this kind are recorded. As the
Roman Republic wore on, further such laws were passed; however, towards the end of the Republic they were virtually repealed.
During the
Tokugawa period (1603-1868) in
Japan, people of every class were subject to strict sumptuary laws, which extended even to the types of umbrellas different people could use. In the second half of that period (the 18th-19th centuries), the merchant class (''
chÅnin'') had grown far wealthier than the aristocratic samurai, and these laws sought to maintain class divisions despite the ability of the merchants to wear far more luxurious clothing and to own far more luxurious items. The
shogunate eventually gave in, and allowed for certain concessions, including the allowance of merchants of a certain prestige to wear one sword at their belt; samurai always wore
two.
During the
Middle Ages in
England, beginning with
Edward III and ending with
James I, sumptuary laws dictated what color and type of clothing as well as what types and breeds of dogs or hunting birds an individual was allowed to own ( An Eagle for an Emperor, a Gyrfalcon for a King, a Peregrine for a Prince, a Saker for a Knight, a Merlin for a Lady, a Goshawk for a Yeoman, a Sparrow Hawk for a Priest, a Musket for a Holy Water Clerk and a Kestrel for a Knave.). In the case of clothing this was intended, amongst other reasons, to reduce spending on foreign textiles. For the most part, these laws were poorly enforced and often ignored, though the
Parliament of England made repeated amendments to the laws and several monarchs (most notably the
Tudors) continually called for stricter enforcement.
Montaigne's brief essay ''On sumptuary laws'' criticized sixteenth century French laws, beginning "The way by which our laws attempt to regulate idle and vain expenses in meat and clothes, seems to be quite contrary to the end designed... For to enact that none but princes shall eat turbot, shall wear velvet or gold lace, and interdict these things to the people, what is it but to bring them into a greater esteem, and to set every one more agog to eat and wear them?" He also cites
Plato and
Zaleucus.
In
Renaissance Europe,
courtesans were sometimes limited in their apparel by various sumptuary laws and were restricted in where they could appear at social functions. In the Massachusetts Bay Colony, only people with a personal fortune of at least two hundred pounds could wear lace, silver or gold thread or buttons, cutwork, embroidery, hatbands, belts, ruffles, capes, and other articles. After a few decades, the law was widely defied -- one woman wore into court the dress she was charged with owning -- and it became a
dead letter.
[5]
Today
Today, the term "sumptuary laws" has been expanded to include any limitation of habits based on subjective concerns. The subjectivity can be based on moral, religious, or health concern. Recent examples of sumptuary laws include in 2007, the city of Atlanta outlawing the wearing of trousers that reveal the wearers' underwear. The term "sumptuary law" usually is used with negative connotations.
Alcohol prohibition
In the modern era, one set of laws often described as sumptuary laws are those which prohibit the possession and/or use of a substance, such as alcohol, drugs, or tobacco. As early as
1860,
Anthony Trollope, writing about his experiences in
Maine under the state's prohibition law, stated, "This law (prohibition), like all sumptuary laws, must fail."
[6] William Howard Taft decried
prohibition in the United States as a bad sumptuary law, stating that one of his reasons opposing prohibition was his belief that "sumptuary laws are matters for parochial adjustment."
[7] The
Supreme Court of Indiana did the same in its 1855 decision ''Herman v. State''.
[8]
Today, United States federal laws on alcohol include "sumptuary laws which are directed at the purchaser," including "Sales are not permitted to minors or intoxicated persons. Credit is often prohibited on liquor sales as well. Criminal penalties may be imposed for driving under the influence of alcohol as well as for drunken behavior."
[9]
Drug prohibition
When the U.S. State of
Washington considered
cannabis decriminalization in two initiatives, 229 and 248, the initiatives' language stated that "Cannabis prohibition is a sumptuary law of a nature repugnant to our Constitution's framers."
[10]
References
1. Black's Law Dictionary, Sixth Edition, p. 1436 (1999)
2. [1]
3. [2]
4. Census
5. Linda M. Scott, ''Fresh Lipstick: Redressing Fashion and Feminism'' p 24 ISBN 1-4039-6686-9
6. "A History of Alcohol," ''Portland Press Herald'', October 19, 1997.
7. ''Burton, Baker, Taft'', ''Time Magazine'' (October 15, 1928).
8. ''Herman v. State'', 8 Ind. 545 (1855).
9. Jane Lang McGrew, ''History of Alcohol Prohibition'', published for the National Commission on Marihuana and Drug Abuse, 1971.
10. Washington State Initiative 229.
See also
★
Clothing laws by country
★
Dress Act 1746, proscribing "the Highland dress" in
Scotland
★
Social aspects of clothing
★
Yellow badge
★
Prohibition in the United States
★
Drug prohibition
★
Smoking ban
★
Smokeasy
العربية
ä¸å›½
Français
Deutsch
Ελληνική
हिनà¥à¤¦à¥€
Italiano
日本語
Português
РуÑÑкий
Español
