Today, when anthropologists visit the remote highland areas of western New Guinea, they find underwear history in the form of native males of various ethnic groups wearing only a single and unique body covering.
That sole covering is an extremely hard and durable, sometimes colorful, gourd that has been dried out and hollowed. It covers the men’s genital area – specifically the penis. These men wear nothing else.
Anthropologists call it a koteka, which, they say, is a phallocrypt or penis shaft. The fact that it is worn without other clothing indicates that it is not specifically a form of men’s underwear. But it does indicate to us that covering and protecting the male’s genital area speaks to the most primitive and basic of man’s needs – food, shelter and, in this case, clothing.
The koteka is basic, and essential, to men in this region and the rest of the world has a modern equivalent of it today – although it is now hidden from view.
The koteka’s antecedent is the hard cup, a vital and essential accessory in today’s sports apparel line. Like its name indicates, the cup is extremely hard and more durable than a gourd.
It provides protection from severe injury to the groin area for a specific group of athletes. No professional baseball catcher, hockey goalie or rugby player would ever think to enter the playing arena without fastidiously securing his koteka, his hard cup, within his jockstrap.
In this examination we will take a brief look at the historical evolution of men’s underwear. In addition, we will take a look at how many of the items within the historical line of men’s underwear are familiar to us today. They are, in many cases, direct or indirect antecedents of those worn throughout the ages.
In a nutshell, we’ll take a look as to how loincloths, codpieces, long johns and doublets evolved into briefs, boxers, shorts, trunks, thongs, athletic supporters, jockstraps, t-shirts and all the other items of men’s underwear that are available to us today.
Here we go.
In the animal kingdom, the male is usually more ostentatiously colorful than the female, presumably to validate his masculinity and, thus, make him more attractive to potential mates.
Male humans, up until the last two centuries, dressed with as much brio as women. But then their clothes, and their underwear in particular, developed on singularly colorless lines. The present and future, however, would seem to offer considerably wider options.
Differences in anatomy have always dictated basic differences between women and men’s undergarments. Women’s underwear has been more about form, often to the point of distortion. It was an attractive covering featuring lace, ruffles, handiwork, and sheer fabrics. This emphasized sexuality rather than serving practicality.
Men’s underwear, on the other hand, whether they are briefs or boxers, shorts or trunks, athletic supporters or jock straps have always been primarily functional in that they conform to the contours of the male body, and are made with sturdy and protective fabrics.
In the Beginning…
The oldest example of men’s underwear, the loincloth, dates back to the cave man. We know this because in 1991 a leather loincloth was discovered in the Alps along with the remains of Otzi, the iceman, who lived around 3300 B.C. Scientists discovered that Otzi wore a leather loincloth under his woven grass cloak.
The fact that he wore it under his cloak provides us with the earliest documentation of men’s underwear. Abel Hugo, brother of the noted French writer Victor, reported that this basic ancient loincloth continued to be worn by shepherds of the Landes area of southern France all the way up to 1835.
Egypt’s King Tut wore loincloths that were described by experts who studied them in 1979 – some fifty years after the discovery in his tomb. We are told that they were a long piece of linen shaped like an isosceles triangle with strings coming off the long ends.
These were tied around the hips and the length of cloth hanging down in back was brought forward between the legs and tucked over the tied strings from the outside in.
That being the case, the most visible and enduring artistic representation of the ancient times’ loincloth is apparent when viewing any of the multitudinous artistic renderings of Christ’s Crucifixion. And that event, Christians are told, occurred shortly after Jesus was “stripped of his garments.”
Thus Christ’s loincloth was indeed a form of men’s underwear. Almost without exception, every artistic rendering of the Crucifixion displays this sole visible article, which was Christ’s only clothing at that moment – his loincloth.
It is significant to note that the artist’s interpretation of the style of Christ’s loin covering was derived from his knowledge of waist coverings and undergarments that were contemporary to the time the portrait or sculpture was created.
To that end, we will sometimes see Christ’s midsection covered by a loincloth that’s joined together by ties or strings. Or maybe it will more closely resemble a bulky modern day bath towel with multiple folds that cover the entire groin area. Or it may appear to be a standard piece of white linen with a side tail flapping like a flag in the wind.
The latter was a favorite and important “interpretation” utilized by artists during the period of the Crusades. At that time, some artists portrayed the cuts at the ends of the “tail flap” of Christ’s loincloth to be identical to the cuts or shape on the flags of heraldry of a specific group of Crusaders.
Thus the masters were capable of, and indeed did, stylize the crucified Christ’s crucifixion garment, both to the political reality of the time as well as the designs of the undergarments that they were familiar with at that time the masterpiece was created.
Thus, it would be historically inaccurate, but artistically consistent, for a modern day rendering of the Crucifixion to depict the body of Christ wearing a pair of boxers or briefs, a thong, or even an athletic supporter.
As jarring and offensive as that would appear to the traditionalist (who would surely shout blasphemy), it would be traditionally acceptable in that today’s painter or sculptor would be adhering to the centuries old tradition of covering the midsection of the crucified Christ in a style of men’s undergarment that was contemporary to the time the image was being created.
“It’s All Greek to Me.”
The uninformed may find it strange that the Ancient Greeks never considered wearing any form of protection to the groin area during their celebrated Olympic Games. The Greeks had a lot of time to think about it because, after all, these events were the longest-running recurring event in antiquity.
The early Olympics were heady events. There were peripheral activities that came with the Olympic festival: artistic happenings, new writers, new painters and new sculptors. There were even fire-eaters, palm readers, and prostitutes. And, of course, there were the celebrated athletes, each of whom performed his feats without wearing as much as a single stitch of clothing.
A reader recently asked National Geographic magazine: “Why did the Olympic athletes compete in the nude?” Here’s how that esteemed periodical replied: “The truth is that no one knows.
According to one story, it began when a runner lost his loincloth and tripped on it. Everyone took off his loincloth after that. But ancient historians have traced it back to initiation rites—young men walking around naked and sort of entering manhood.”
The answer continued by adding: “We know how fundamental nudity was to Greek culture. It really appealed to the exhibitionism and the vanity of the Greeks. Only barbarians were afraid to show their bodies.”
“The nude athletes would parade like peacocks up and down the stadium. Poets would write in a shaky hand these wonderful odes to the bodies of the young men, their skin the color of fired clay. But other cultures, like the Persians and the Egyptians, looked at these Greek men oiling one another down and writhing in the mud, and found it very strange. They believed it promoted sexual degeneracy.”
We are told that Plato was a huge fan of Olympic wresting and Sophocles could be found hanging around the Olympic handball court. Aristotle and Socrates surely bounced around the various events.
One would think that the civilization that gave us these great thinkers would have had someone in their stable who would have thought hard enough on how to come up with the world’s first and greatest jockstrap. Even a thong, bikini or the precursors of today’s men’s briefs or boxers would have been sufficient. But, no, that thought never occurred to any of those great thinkers.
Couldn’t one of the women who were married to the “fathers of geometry” figure out the simple angles that are necessary to put together a men’s t-shirt? Couldn’t one of her sons have grabbed a brass wine goblet and modified it into some form of a genital protecting hard cup? Surely that would have been placed on a shelf at home after the festivities as a dearly cherished vessel that not only protected but benefited those early Olympic wrestlers.
The invention of a jockstrap or athletic supporter, or any other form of men’s underwear, never occurred to them because historians tell us the Greeks went without underwear all the time – even when they were off the playing field. Simply put, they didn’t wear underwear – ever. Oh well, great thinkers didn’t always look for practical results.
After all there was a widespread rumor floating around after World War II that claimed the now world-renowned scientist, Albert Einstein, father of the atomic bomb, didn’t know how to tie his own shoelaces.
A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum
In the 1950’s, a little tike visiting his gramma would occasionally hear the wise woman order the command “Pull up your britches or you’re gonna fall down.” The little lad had never heard the word britches before but he intuitively knew that gramma was ordering him to pull up his pants.
At the same time her husband, the boy’s grandpa, might have been entering the room wearing a new pair of gabardine slacks. The observant women would tell him, “You’ve got a piece of lint on your trousers.” Granma was born in the late 1800’s and probably didn’t know that her terminology, specifically britches and trousers, are derivatives that date all the way back to the Ancient Romans.
These garments were Roman underwear. Granma could care less; she just wanted her grandson to be safe and happy and her husband to be smartly dressed.
At least as early as the second century B.C., the Romans were exposed to bifurcated garments. That was when the Teutons defeated one of their armies.
These warriors from the North were garbed in short tunics under which breeches or baggy trousers were worn as a form of men’s underwear. This was sure proof to the Romans that they were barbarians.
Contrary to the usual result, instead of the defeated people adopting the conquerors’ mode of dress, it was here the other way around. The invaders soon began to wear something resembling Roman dress. However, the Romans gradually accepted both long and short trousers as their underwear.
They were adopted first by soldiers, who recognized their practicality – something that is always noteworthy when considering the appropriate style, form or fabric of men’s underwear.
In conservative Rome, meanwhile, both men and women continued to wear similar layers of tunic, plus toga, although men sometimes wore an extra under-tunic. These were usually shorter than those worn by women in order to accommodate their more active life style.
The subligaculum was also a kind of men’s underwear worn by ancient Romans as evidenced by the Latin prefix “sub” which translates as “under.”
However, gladiators, athletes, and stage actors frequently worn it as an outer garment – “for the sake of decency.” The subligaculum most closely resembles a pair of shorts or trunks, or it could also be a simple loincloth that was wrapped around the lower abdominal area.
In 481 AD, when King Clovis ruled in the area near the current boarder of France and Belgium, his subjects wore breeches or braies. These ended at the knee or were long and cross-gartered. Either way, they were worn under a knee-length tunic thus making them a form of men’s underwear.
It was much later that male and female attire diverged dramatically. Men shortened their tunics and exposed their legs in breeches.
These were not as short as men’s briefs or trunks. Women continued to hide their legs under long skirts that reached to their feet. Thus it was men, not women, who wore the first in history, shall we say, to wear “sexy underwear.”
Man of La Mancha and His Buddies
During the period when El Cid was galloping around Spain, the nobility wore fitted breeches under tunics that could reach to mid-calf or below – similar to the snug fit of today’s compression shorts.
The lower classes, however, wore tunics at knee level with breeches that were loose and baggy thus they were afforded the comfort provided by the today’s boxer shorts and men’s briefs.
A century later, when Genghis Khan stormed through Europe, he would find a noble class whose breeches had shrunk. (Historians do not report if this was the immediate result of Khan’s arrival – which assuredly meant doom.)
Nonetheless, he found the nobility of Europe wearing invisible drawers that served the same purpose of today’s boxers or men’s briefs. At the same time, the laboring classes made do with a breechcloth.
This was a strip of material, usually in the form of a narrow rectangle, which passed between the thighs and secured before and behind under a belt or string. The rectangular shape notwithstanding, this was clearly the predecessor of the currently popular men’s thong.
At about the same time, the rigidity of plate armor necessitated the addition of padded linen linings that served as protection against the cold harsh metal. Additionally, armor clad men on horseback began to wear padded loincloths. Historians say that these were the real antecedents to what has been worn as men’s underwear ever since.
The New World
The tunic started to disappear about the time Christopher Columbus set sail on his spice run to the Orient. It was morphed into the doublet which was a snug fitting buttoned jacket that men of his time wore. And, it is at this time that we see signs of men’s legs being newly revealed and their outer clothing becoming more colorful and flamboyant.
The top of the outfit was formfitting and laced up the front – much like the mountain men would wear three centuries later while cavorting around the American West.
Men as well as women wore stiffened stomachers with pointed front panels. However, underneath, both sexes wore chemises, which is the French word for “shirts.”
Thus at this point the world was introduced to what would evolve into the men’s t-shirt because their garments also served as a nightshirt and, like the t-shirt, it is still worn for that purpose by many men today.
The outer garment was slashed at various places including the wrists and neck. The purpose of which was to selectively display various sections of the undershirts. Thus at this point in history, we encounter the introduction of “revealing or sexy men’s underwear.”
The style of the time allowed men to wear stockings that were decorated with embroidery. They were even bejeweled. Early hose stopped at the knee. But a short time before, the men who rode with Richard the Lionheart wore hose that had risen to mid-thigh and were pulled over the breeches. Clearly, this was the introduction of pantyhose for men.
Later men’s hose often were tied with ribbons below the knees and were attached to the breeches. These were the decorative precursor of garters; they then were laced to the doublet. In the beginning, stockings were cut from either linen or wool cloth and shaped to the leg.
Knitting was little known until the time of Elizabeth I and when introduced, knitted hose meant greatly improved fit. Although elastic had not yet been invented the end result was not unlike the snug fit of today’s athletic supporters, briefs, trunks, shorts and t-shirts.
Another “knit-fit” accessory would also appear later, specifically in the current reign of Queen Elizabeth II. They are the readily available leg warmers worn during rehearsals by both male and female dance students and professionals.
Codpiece Rex
By the sixteenth century the male codpiece was dramatically apparent. Think Henry VIII. Who, thanks to the various portraits painted by Hans Holbein the Younger, is probably the most recognized of all the British monarchs.
The codpiece began in this era as a simple, three-cornered gusset in the upper part of what is referred to as trunk-hose. These were short full breeches reaching about half way down the thighs.
The codpiece was enlarged into a stiff stuffed protuberance that echoed and emphasized the shape of the male sexual organ. These exaggerated “centerpieces” were sometimes used as a storage place for coins, snuff or sweets. A costume historian has written, “During this time the entire male population above the age of three appeared to be suffering from a severe case of priapism.”
Today’s male athletes wear the codpiece’s lineal descendant, the athletic supporter or jockstrap, as a protection for their genitals. A derivative for male dancers is referred to as a dance belt.
In the world of ballet – the dance belt (or jock strap) is stuffed, not with a hard cup, but usually with women’s sanitary napkins. This not only provides a little extra protection to the dancers’ private parts but also permits the display of an enhanced symbol of masculinity for any number of ballerinos who need to portray that.
Renaissance men were also known to wear padding to flesh out their calves because a “fine leg” was considered to be most desirable.
Thus, the aforementioned Henry VIII, with his plumed hat, broad shouldered robe, slashed and decorated doublet, embroidered hose, beribboned garters and aggressive codpiece was the image of masculine power at that time.
Welcome to Brigadoon
Since Henry’s England shares its northern boarder with Scotland, this may be the time to answer the inevitable question, “What does a Scotsman wear under his kilt?”
The early answer was “trews.” This was a Celtic garment and a form of mens underwear, consisting of loose fitting breeches and hose. It was knitted into one piece and worn by Highlanders as they walked the moors.
Sometimes it was trimmed with leather, probably buckskin, especially on the inner leg, in order to prevent wear from riding on horseback.
While still not considered to be strictly an "accessory" of Highland or Scottish dress, the subject of kilt underwear has been of long standing interest.
Today, if a kilt wearer chooses to go without underwear it is often referred to as "going regimental" or in observance of "military practice." Some prefer to use the simpler term "dressing traditionally" in the name of Scottish national pride. This is because the former terms are associated with the British military. There is, in fact, no evidence of official policy regarding undergarments in military forces that wear the kilt.
When wearing the kilt it is not uncommon to be asked, "Are you a true Scotsman?" This does not refer to a man’s ancestry in any way but is a polite way of inquiring whether the person is naked beneath the kilt.
Today’s highland dancers and athletes, however, are bound by the nature of their competitions to clad themselves appropriately and modestly. In highland dance competitions and exhibitions, the regulations of the Scottish Official Board of Highland Dancing state the following regarding men’s underwear: "dark or toning with the kilt should be worn but not white."
Highland athletes are also required to wear shorts of some type during the athletic competitions and most opt for either regular shorts of a Lycra fabric. This is the most famous brand name associated with spandex. Compression shorts would appear to be ideal for this need – provided they follow the color guidelines stated above. Suffice it to say, men’s thongs, briefs, athletic supporters or jockstraps are a definite “no-no.”
Les Miserables
Up until the French Revolution men’s fashion was defined by knee breeches with stockings or tights worn underneath. The revolution’s date –1789, for the most part, abruptly ended the trend of visible men's stockings and knee breeches which are commonly referred to as “culottes” by the French today.
The revolutionary cry "sans culottes" rejected knee breeches which were widespread in the aristocracy at that time. Instead, the introduction of the new fashion of wearing long trousers with knee-length socks or normal socks occurred.
This was a turning point in the history of European fashion, which still shapes typical men's wear today. Stockings and tights, as men’s underwear, were still sporadically worn under knee breeches or long trousers but they became relatively rare at the time of the French Revolution.
The Age of Enlightenment introduced us to the dandies. These men did not subscribe to the relaxed mode of dress. The most notable dandy of this period was England’s George Byran “Beau” Brummel, who branded himself with the smooth, wrinkle free fit of his clothes. He was known particularly for his meticulously kept underwear at a time when cleanliness was not given a high priority.
As meticulous as Beau Brummel was about his underwear, it would be consistent with his fastidious nature to wear a more gallant type of men’s underwear in the form of men’s thongs, shorts, bikinis or any of the other kind of sexy underwear that we have today. However those items were obviously not available to him at the time. Beau’s contemporaries, the sporty Parisian dandies of the same era, were known to wear girdles.
This should not sound strange because throughout the centuries, some men in many nations, particularly those in the various militaries, have worn some form of a corset in order to facilitate the upright stance consistent with a warrior cult.
As recently as 1908 the Sears, Roebuck catalog offered a “male military corset giving the straight front effect that is so much admired.” No doubt some unknown upper-class male passenger on the Titanic was wearing one when the ship went down.
There were two versions available at the time. One sold for ninety-two cents; the other for $1.50. Some obscure mail order catalog may still offer the male equivalent of the panty-girdle and tout it in the same way as was the tradition in the early twentieth century – for their “health-giving” features. Needless to say, these ads also count on the vanity factor to attract what few buyers there might be.
