The wearing of wigs by judges and lawyers in court is one of the most distinctive traditions of British courts. We can also see this British characteristic in some former British colonial areas that are deeply influenced by the British judicial system. cultural imprint, such as China’s Hong Kong Special Administrative Region.
Why do British judges and lawyers wear wigs? Many people who study history have put forward various explanations, but it is difficult to convince everyone.
Some people say that in the Middle Ages, overwork and disease caused judicial officers to lose their hair prematurely. In order to conceal their "extreme intelligence" in public, wigs became popular and became a common practice in Britain. A scene from the courtroom.
Some people say that judges wear wigs to show their high moral standing, while lawyers wearing wigs can conceal and protect them to a certain extent because they worry that the results of their defense will not be recognized by the defendant and his family. recognized. But this is not so much a reasonable explanation as a joke made up by people who have had issues with lawyers to discredit them. Because according to a recent survey, 57% of lawyers are dissatisfied with wearing wigs and want to take them off. The reason is that these wigs made of horsehair are very expensive and unhygienic. Generally, a wig costs For a lifetime, there was a family of lawyers who owned a 94-year-old antique that had been passed down for four generations, making it a family heirloom.
According to research by historians and folklorists, the British fashion tradition of wearing wigs began around the twelfth century. At that time, it was not just a patent for judges and lawyers, but also worn by people in the upper class. Wigs are considered a fashion and a formal dress for formal occasions or salon gatherings.
Experts point out that there are differences between wigs used by the judiciary and ordinary wigs. In England, judicial wigs have three curls on each side, while royal wigs have only two. Whether this represents a subtle metaphor is unknown. But the Scots always love to quarrel with the English, because in Scotland, the situation is just reversed. The royal family members use three curly wigs while the judicial officers only have two curly wigs.
The cost of making wigs lies in labor rather than materials, because it is not difficult to obtain horsehair, but the making of wigs is a delicate job, and there is no way to mass-produce them through machines or production lines.
Producing a wig requires a skilled craftsman to spend approximately 44 hours of labor, including weaving and curling. The finished product generally has four colors: white, golden yellow, light gray and gray. In some old British colonies, such as West Africa and the Caribbean, white is very popular, while in the UK, golden yellow and gray are the most popular.
A judge's wig generally costs more than 1,500 pounds (equivalent to about 18,000 yuan in RMB, wow, it's not cheap), and the most common wig is no less than 300 pounds.
Most people would rather endure having lice than change their wigs as often as ladies change their hats. The reason is not because they are reluctant to buy multiple wigs. It is based on a saying: the longer you wear a wig, the older it is, the dirtier it is, and the darker the color, which means that you have been practicing law for a long time. In the judicial field, seniority and age are valuable, just like the old doctors in hospitals are the most popular. Same. In a sense, wigs with older heads have become a century-old brand for lawyers to attract business, while judges’ antique wigs are a sign of rich trial experience.
After a law student qualified as a lawyer, the best gift his family or friends gave him was a wig made by a famous artist. Many craftsmen engaged in wig making inherit the business from their fathers, and even belong to aristocratic families. Their history of making wigs is longer than the family genealogy of some British nobles.
Customizing a wig is also a process that requires patience, because the appointment period for many famous craftsmen is already several years later. Even if it can be customized immediately, your head needs to be measured at least ten times with a ruler during the production process. Secondly, this is not because the craftsmen deliberately torment you, but because of the requirements of exquisite craftsmanship.
Of course, you can also buy a ready-made one, but after all, it is not as gentle as a tailor-made one to kiss your smart head. What’s more, in the eyes of many legal professionals, a casually bought wig is like wearing jeans to attend the meeting. A solemn banquet is just as disrespectful. The British are known for their conservative spirit, and this is especially true in the judiciary. Judiciary requires precision and even rigidity, emphasizes stability and balance, and is less compatible with personalized things.
Many families of wig makers keep records of every wig sold and require the buyer to sign for record. Over the centuries, the autographs of many celebrities can be found in these records, because many well-known politicians Most of them worked as lawyers before becoming famous.
The storage of wigs is also a meticulous job. Generally, each set of wigs is equipped with a ventilated iron box or wooden box. Some boxes are even another independent work of art, and their value far exceeds that of the wigs. itself. In the earliest days, when lice often appeared on British heads, wigs would be sprinkled with medicated powder during storage to prevent lice.
The last issue related to China is: for a long time, most of the raw materials used in wigs, horsehair, came from China. This was also the reason why, except for tea, the Chinese exports in Sino-British trade before the Opium War It is an important foreign trade item, because the mane of European horses is not easy to spin and breaks easily, and the mane needs constant bleaching and cleaning during the production process. Only the mane produced by Chinese horses can withstand various tests.
When talking about British judges or lawyers, the gray and slightly curly wigs naturally come to mind. For people outside the legal tradition of the Commonwealth, although wigs have become a symbolic feature of Commonwealth legal persons, such an outfit does not automatically give off a solemn and majestic look. On the contrary, it often gives the viewer a strange feeling. From time to time, I would sweat for them, worrying that the barrister's graceful bow would slip off and make a fool of himself in court. Thomas Jefferson, the third president of the United States, once said, "(British judges) are like mice peeking out from under cotton wool." The device also caused a child who testified in court to burst into tears, leading the UK's Special Court, which specializes in cases involving teenagers, to abolish wigs altogether.
The history of wigs has a long history, and there are relevant records in the documents of ancient Egypt and the ancient Roman Empire. However, it is generally believed that it became popular among the upper classes in Europe around 1620, when Louis XIII wore wigs in order to cover up his baldness, which caused the nobles who often visited the court to imitate. Later, it became popular in Europe, so much so that even women wore various wigs. Attend social events. By the 1760s, this fashion was spread to the British Isles by King Charles II. The seventeenth-century Englishman Samuel. The diary of Samuel Pepys truly records the history of the popularity of wigs in Britain. On November 2, 1663, Pepys learned of the rumors that both the king and the duke would wear wigs. The next day, he eagerly shaved off his hair and ordered wigs made. Pepys wrote: "It's still a little sad to say goodbye to my hair, but it's over and I'm going to wear a wig." It can be seen that wigs are popular in Britain and role models play a great role.
In addition to role models, there is another reason for the popularity of wigs. According to Ede & Ravenscroft, which monopolizes the wig industry in the Commonwealth, due to the lack of heating systems in Europe in the seventeenth century, it was inconvenient for people to take hot baths. In order to prevent the growth of parasites, the best The solution is to keep your hair short and replace it with a long wig.
Early wigs were made from human hair, such as hair used by debtors to pay debts, or even from dead people. At that time, the smell of various wigs in the courtroom was so suffocating that judges sometimes had to bring a bouquet of flowers to relieve the smell. This situation did not end until 1822, when Humphrey Ravenscroft invented the process of making wigs from ponytails.
Commonwealth lawyers wore wigs when appearing in court or participating in major ceremonies. This was entirely due to the fashion at the time and there was no mandatory legal requirement. Hundreds of years have passed, and wigs are no longer fashionable, but have become a conservative image of legal practitioners following tradition. And wigs are unhygienic, too hot, scratchy, and even a little ridiculous. However, it is difficult to change. People habitually associate wigs with status, identity and even justice. After solicitors obtained the right to appear in court, they made several unsuccessful submissions to the House of Lords because they were not qualified to wear wigs. Many defendants also gave priority to barristers who could wear wigs to defend them. It is said that whether they wear wigs or not It is also directly related to the ability to persuade the jury!
Although the era of Charles II has long passed, it seems that the original fashion-at least when it comes to wigs-still reaches out from the grave to firmly bind the contemporary Commonwealth lawyers. .
In the 1970s, Australia abolished wigs in order to comply with the trend of reducing the form of the Family Court and promoting harmony. But by 1987, reportedly due to numerous attacks on members of the judiciary, the wigs were reinstated. The author believes that this approach in Australia is more due to traditional psychology, or that traditionalists are just using these attacks to make excuses in order to keep their wigs on their heads. It is definitely difficult to say that it is the right medicine. Because in the UK, after the practice of wearing wigs for judicial officers in the Special Juvenile Court was abolished in 1992, there seemed to be no negative consequences similar to those in Australia. In 2003, the UK conducted another survey on whether to abolish wigs and found that most senior judges and solicitors wanted to abolish wigs, while lower judges and barristers insisted on tradition. 68% of the public hope that judges, especially in criminal cases, will wear wigs, which shows that wigs still have a strong symbolic role in representing judicial justice in the UK.
Controversy being debate, it doesn’t look like wigs are going away from the Commonwealth’s courts any time soon. Lord Donaldson summed up the debate in a sentence, "Since wigs have been out of fashion for at least a century, there is no need to rush to cancel them."
Reference: /b/3376261.html< /p>
Reference materials: /question/3251931.html