The Fashion Historian

Myth: Is it true that only lewd women wore underwear before the 20th century?

It depends on what you consider underwear. If this is what you consider underwear:


Victoria's Secret Models

Then no, women didn't wear underwear like that before the 20th century. But if this is what you consider underwear:


1830s Undergarments from The Metropolitan Museum of Art

Then yes, women have been wearing underwear for thousands of years!

Before industrialization and mass production, clothing was extremely expensive. Not only was fabric time consuming to produce, the making of the garments themselves was a time consuming process. People didn't have a million pieces of clothing like we do today. Colorfast dyes, ie dyes that won't wash away, are a relatively new invention, having only been around for a couple hundred years. So clothing was not washed very often to preserve the color, and also to save the textile from too much wear. Furthermore, clothes had to be protected from the grime of the human body. Something needed to be worn directly against the skin, which would absorb sweat and oils, and could be washed regularly. And, after shaped silhouettes came in style, women needed something to mold their outerwear into the correct, fashionable shape. Thus, underwear was very important. Undergarments were almost always white, and could be washed and changed regularly.

Underwear changed through the ages. Ancient women tied bands of cloth around their breasts for support, a very very early form of the bra. The base garment for all women since the middle ages is the chemise or shift, a plainly cut white garment that fit close to the body. The historic equivalent of an undershirt. At various times, women have also had bloomer-like garments, which fit around each leg and connected around the waist. It's important to note though that these were always crotchless, to make going to the bathroom easier. Once we get further into history, women started adding petticoats and shaping garments and padding in order to achieve the correct silhouette. In fact, the most important part of an historic garment is the underwear, as that is what gives the garment the correct shape.

All the cool kids are following The Fashion Historian on twitter, @PastFashion.

Charles Frederick Worth (1825-1895) is widely considered the first couturier. My most popular blog post in history is about him, and can be found here. After Worth's death in 1895, his descendents continued the fashion house, until it was closed in 1952 after the death of his great-grandson. But in 2010, the House of Worth returned to the couture stage. The revival is done through the House of Worth Ltd, a new company created by Dilesh Mehta and Martin McCarthy. The head designer is Giovanni Bedin, a graduate of the Chambre Syndicale de la Couture Parisienne, who has previously worked with Karl Lagerfeld and Thierry Mugler. "We're taking baby steps because Worth is a huge brand with a big heritage and it's brand new again and we have to tell this beautiful story and make people know again the heritage," said Bedin on his rather daunting task of reviving the great couture legend.


House of Worth, Spring/Summer 2011 Couture

My favorite so far is the Spring/Summer 2011 couture collection, which is particularly interesting from an historians perspective. The collection is called Night and Day, and was inspired by an original 19th century Worth dress, which embodied both night and day. “When I saw this dress – the Night and Day dress – it was like a revelation. It's cut in two – one side for day and the other for night with all of the elements like the sun, the moon, bees, flowers, a bat. It was so modern,” said Bedin.


House of Worth, Spring/Summer 2011 Couture

Another obvious inspiration is the tutu, the famous garment worn by ballet dancers the world over. Says Bedin on the tutus: “The tutus – I like the idea that women in the 19th Century didn’t wear mini skirts but the basque was very important and I like the idea of wearing the volume but reducing the length.” His creations certainly capture the opulence of 19th century Worth designs while bringing in a more modern concept of short skirts for women. But is it really that modern?


House of Worth, Spring/Summer 2011 Couture

Well if you wanted to be technical about it, the tutu did develop during the 19th century which most historians categorize as the modern period. The birth of the tutu is quite mysterious, but its first famous appearance was in 1832 in the ballet Les Sylphide, and was designed by Eugène Lami (however no renderings for the tutu remain). It was worn by celebrated ballerina Marie Taglioni, who starred in the ballet as a sylph- an otherworldy spirit who inhabited the air. Soon the tutu became the standard for ballerinas everywhere, its light and floaty qualities emphasizing the ethereal beauty and lightness of the dancers. As the century progressed, the tutu began to get shorter and stiffer, and by the 20th century became the pancake shaped tutu we know today.


Carlotta Grisi in Giselle by J. Brandard, c. 1841. Collection of Marie Rambert.

The history of the tutu is fascinating (and hopefully a lengthy article I have written on the subject will soon be published!) because of the dichotomy of its symbolism. On the one hand it transformed ballerinas into graceful, beautiful creatures, floating about the stage as fairies and princesses, the delicate fabrics and sparkly decorations of the tutu adding to the magic. But on the other hand, the tutu revealed the legs of women in a period when showing legs was a social taboo. It subsequently became an extremely controversial garment. Furthermore, the fairies and princesses of the stage were mostly low class girls in reality. While the famous prima ballerinas enjoyed a celebrity lifestyle, the majority of dancers were simply ballet girls, poor and transformed into sexual objects. The soliciting of sexual relationships with ballet girls was practically institutionalized. At the Paris Opera, rich and influential gentlemen known as abonnés could gain access to the backstage rehearsal hall, where they could flirt with the dancers. While not all ballet girls prostituted themselves, many did and the reputation of the ballet girl as a sexual object was widespread.


In The Wings No. 3, by Jean-Louis Forain, shows a rotund abonné flirting with a dancer. In the collection of the Boston Public Library.

So what does all this have to do with the beautiful couture creations of Bedin? The tutu was always beautiful, but it was also once a symbol of sexuality and immorality, only donned by the lowest class of women. It is true that ballerinas today have risen far above this heritage, but I think it's interesting to look at these couture tutus in the context of their inspiration- the 19th century. What was once a marker of a lower status has now become a marker of the highest status- the woman able to afford couture. The thought of the House of Worth designing tutus to be purchased by the wealthy and (hopefully) put on display in museums someday would have been absurd in the 19th century. Now it is perfectly normal. And furthermore, in featuring tutus as couture Bedin has taken them off the stage and put them into the "real world", they no longer belong in the realm of costumes but in fashion itself (not that costumes are not a part of fashion, but I think you know what I mean). This is a garment that has made quite a journey!!

Don't forget to follow The Fashion Historian on twitter, @PastFashion!


Left: Valentino Fall couture 2010.
Right: Late 18th century illustration of a woman getting dressed.

The ruff is the fashion item most associated with the Renaissance. It evolved from the collars of the shirts worn by men underneath their doublets. The collars would have a small decorative ruffle around the top, which would add a bit of visual interest. Gradually this ruffle grew larger, becoming its own independent garment.


The Darnley Portrait of Queen Elizabeth I of England, c. 1575

What made the ruff possible was starch. In the early sixteenth century, starch was imported from the Low Countries. But the ruff really began to blossom in the 1560s when starch production came to England. In 1564, Mistress Dinghen van der Plasse moved from Flanders to London, opening up her own starch making business. The business flourished, and soon there were manufacturers all over London. Starch was derived from cereal grains such as wheat or corn, which caused some contention. William Cecil, chief minister to Elizabeth I once said, "Is it not a very lamentable thing that we should bestow that upon starch to the setting forth of vanity and pride which would staunch the hunger of many that starve in the streets for want of bread?"


Sir Francis Walsingham by John De Critz the Elder.

Ruffs were made from starched linen cambric, edged with lace, although as the century wore on, ruffs could be made entirely of lace. Lace was a new textile, having developed in the early sixteenth century. It was immensely time consuming to make, therefore it was EXTREMELY expensive. And while we think of linen as a basic fabric today, the quality of linen in the sixteenth century was highly superior to the quality of linen today. One surviving ruff has linen with a thread count of fifty threads to one centimeter. The fabric was put into a figure 8 pattern, called goffering, and sewn with gossamer threads. The larger ruffs, called cartwheel ruffs, had a basic wire support system called a supportasse or underproper.


Detail of a procession portrait of Queen Elizabeth I of England, c. 1600.

Ruffs were highly luxurious garments. They could take hours to set, and could only be worn once as body heat and the weather would cause it to droop and loose shape. Their placement on the neck affected posture, forcing the wearer to keep their chin up and assume a proud and haughty pose. They were a potent symbol of status and wealth, as anyone who could afford to wear and maintain a ruff was clearly not doing any manual labor.


The Infanta Isabella Clara Eugenia, Archduchess of Austria by Frans Pourbus, c. 1599

The ruff continued to be worn in the early 17th century, but was beginning to peter out. By the time King Charles I came to the English throne in 1625, the ruff had disappeared and been replaced by a loose lace collar which draped over the shoulders, called a falling band collar.

Sustainability is a big issue these days and applies to every aspect of life, including fashion. It can mean a lot of things, using sustainable materials, using sustainable construction methods, recycling old clothes, etc. Sustainability also raises some issues with fashion, as fashion changes constantly by it's very nature, which means throwing out the old and bringing in the new. You can read some great posts on sustainable fashion at Worn Through here and here.

With this theme in mind, last spring I was a designer for COUTURevolution, the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill's second annual sustainability fashion show. The designers took many different routs with their clothes, from reworking old clothes into new fashionable pieces to using recycled products. As for me, I chose to bring a little history into my designs.



This dress was made from issues of The Daily Tar Heel, UNC's daily newspaper. I raided all the newspaper boxes late one night, much to the confusion of everyone who walked past me, but I'm quite proud of the result. The flowers are made from fabric scraps I took from the scrap bin at the UNC costume shop. The skirt is made of pleated newspapers built on top of my hoop skirt (unfortunately as the day wore on all my perfectly sculpted folds started getting a little messy, one of the hazards of working with newspaper), which I adjusted into a conical 16th century shape (it would have been called a farthingale back then). The bodice is pleated newspapers on a muslin base.



Not only does this dress invoke the 16th century, it also invokes the 1960s, when there was a fad for wearing dresses made of actual paper. A topic for a future post!



My other dress was an homage to my favorite era ever, the 18th century.



This one is made out of black and white trash bags, and unfortunately did not photograph as well as the newspaper dress. The bodice is actually made of very tightly gathered trash bags, the vertical folds created were just gorgeous. The skirt is three layers, and the trim is actually pleated in an 18th century style. The skirt is supported by plastic shopping bags stuffed with more plastic shopping bags (my roommate was thrilled to get rid of all the plastic shopping bags we had sitting around).





More amazing photos, of my dresses and the others, taken by an actual professional can be found here.

Big big thanks go out to my two amazing models, who worked their outfits like pros. They were fierce!

"For a dress to survive from one era to the next, it must be marked with an extreme purity." ~ Madame Grès


Madame Grès c. 1946.
Photo Credits: Eugene Rubin/ FNAC/Centre national des arts plastiques, Paris

Madame Grès (1903-1993) was a remarkable couturier in the 20th century, known for using delicate pleats which turned ordinary fabric into Greek sculpture.


On display at the Musée Bourdelle in Paris.

Grès was born Germaine Krebs in Paris in 1903. She originally wanted to be a sculptor, but was unsuccessful. She then ventured into millinery, changing her name to Alix Barton. Her design house would be known as Alix from 1934 through 1942. She first gained attention by designing the costumes for Jean Giraudoux's play The Trojan War Will Not Take Place, and quickly became a leading designer of the day, whose clients included everything from duchesses to movie stars (Grace Kelly, Greta Garbo and Marlene Dietrich are a few of her more famous clients). In 1942 she created the name Grès, a partial anagram of the first name of her husband at the time, Serge Czerefkov. The New York Times called her couture house "the most intellectual place in Europe to buy clothes".


On display at the Musée Bourdelle in Paris.

“I wanted to be a sculptor. For me, it’s the same thing to work the fabric or the stone” Grès once said. And it is a truth universally acknowledged that Grès was indeed a true sculptor of fabric. Her favorite fabric was silk jersey, and a single dress could take from 13 to 21 meters. Her talent for pleating could reduce 9 feet of fabric into a mere 2.8 inches. The drapery of her gowns also showed her technical virtuosity. Long swags of continuous strips of fabric would be incorporated into the front and back of a gown, giving her work a sense of classical antiquity. She also introduced the idea of cutouts, creating little windows in her gowns which revealed the back or shoulder. Wearers of her gowns have said that they felt perfectly secure in her gowns, so impeccable was the construction.


On display at the Musée Bourdelle in Paris.

While Grès is most known for her draped Grecianesque gowns, she also showed talent in less formal designs. Her every day wear showed the same attention to detail and impeccable tailoring that her gowns did.


On display at the Musée Bourdelle in Paris.

Grès had an extraordinarily long career, working until the late 1980s. Throughout this period, which encompassed huge changes in fashion, her work remained consistent and timeless. "Once one has found something of a personal and unique character, its execution must be exploited and pursued without stopping," she said. Her work remains timeless, any one of her elegant gowns could be seen walking a red carpet today. It is easy to see the "extreme purity" Grès would strive for in her work.


On display at the Musée Bourdelle in Paris.

The ceremony of the toilette was an important part of fashionable society in the 18th century. The toilette was the act of getting prepared for the day, including dressing, and doing your hair and make up. It first became a ritual during the reign of great Absolute Monarch Louis XIV. In yet another brilliant move at consolidating his power and controlling the nobility, Louis XIV ritualized the process of dressing (lever) and undressing (coucher), giving nobles in the royal favor the privilege of watching the great monarch prepare for the day or night. The ritual then spread to other courts in Europe, and to the nobility, with different levels of formality accompanying the event.


From the Monument du Costume Physique et Moral de la fin du Dix-huitième siècle, 1789

For most, the most intimate portion of the toilette was performed in private, as it's rather difficult to look glamorous when you first wake up. After privately putting on the most intimate garments and getting your hair and face to look presentable, although casual, it was time to present yourself to your visitors. Fashion historian Aileen Ribeiro describes the process:

“On awakening, the fashionable lady rang for her maid who handed her a lace-trimmed manteau de lit for her early ablutions, after which she was dressed in a negligee du matin, a loose robe worn over chemise and stays. Then she was ready to receive visitors in her cabinet de toilette; these could include men, and very often abbes, who acted the part of cicisbei and were always there with the latest news and gossip. It was then that her hair was done, either by a personal maid or a male hairdresser, and the finishing touches applied to the face… The light-hearted intimacy of the lingering toilette was an essential part of dressing in the eighteenth century."

Ribeiro also notes the intimacy of the ceremony, with the lady getting dressed lingering on the undergarments, giving an almost sexual experience. Men also had a morning toilette, using the time to discuss business affairs rather than social ones.


From the Monument du Costume Physique et Moral de la fin du Dix-huitième siècle, 1789

The toilette is often called a ritual, bringing a religious connotation to the event and subsequently showing the importance of fashion in society. The very act of dressing itself is not just a simple daily task, but an important, ‘religious’ experience, showing the status clothing took in eighteenth century society. Clothing was not merely something to cover the body, but to express position and quality. By ritualizing the activity of dressing, each layer takes on an importance, not simply the outermost layer, showing that fashion was not only what was seen but what was unseen. Furthermore, ritualizing the act of dressing makes fashion a performance. A morning dressing ritual shows the elegance and wealth in each layer, not just the ones that will be seen, an important consideration for a culture obsessed with showing off wealth and power. While the toilette started with the French monarchy, in becoming a ritual for the rest of society, the non-royals could emulate the power and style of the monarchy.

A perhaps unintended consequence of turning dressing into a performance is dressing then becomes playing a part. Just as a theater performance is false reality, a woman dressing is emulating a false reality of herself. On the one hand, this performance she is beginning could be an act of submission. As viewers watch her body on display, with each layer she becomes the woman society wants her to be— beautiful, accomplished in the arts, and most importantly a dutiful daughter, wife, and mother. On the other hand, this performance could be an act of rebellion. While society wants to mold the woman into one ideal, with each layer she makes herself into who she wants to be and takes control of herself. The Petit Dictionnaire de la Cour wrote in 1788 that "a charming woman uses more subtlety and politics in her dressing than there are in all the governments of Europe."


The Toilette from William Hogarth's Marriage a la Mode series, 1743-1745.

A similar dichotomy can be seen with men, with the act of dressing either turning a man into a dutiful son or respectable patriarch, or expressing his personal fashion taste which may have been in rebellion to his family or societies' expectations (for example, many young Englishmen, returning from a Grand Tour of continental Europe, would dress in a flamboyant French style, much to the disapproval of the more subdued English view on fashion). It may be argued that taking control of ones identity was far less important for a man, as he already had greater personal autonomy in society. But it may also be argued that men too were under pressure to fit into a certain mold- father sons, run estates, be active in politics, etc- when their desire may have been for another path in life. Society wanted Louis XVI to be a great and gallant monarch like his predecessors, while the man himself was quiet and shy and had no taste for the court ceremonies he nonetheless was forced to participate in (his wife, on the other hand, bucked tradition entirely which greatly contributed to her downfall, but that's for another post).

Mary Victoria Leiter Curzon, Baroness Curzon of Kedleston and Vicereine of India (1870-1906), was born in America and was the daughter of Levi Z. Leiter, an early partner in Marshall Field and Co. After being introduced to London society, in 1895 she married George Nathaniel Curzon, a British statesman who would have an extremely successful career. In January 1899 George Curzon was appointed Viceroy of India, giving Mary the honor of holding the highest political position ever gained by an American woman. Tragically, after a long illness, Mary died at age 36 in 1906.

Mary was known for her beauty, and the owner of many stylish gowns. And as a rich and powerful woman, she was able to afford the very best couture, designed by the House of Worth, founded by the father of couture himself, Charles Frederick Worth.




Oak leaf dress by House of Worth, copyright of the Fashion Museum in Bath and the NE Somerset Council.

The oak leaf dress was created in 1903, several years after Worth's death. However, his sons continued his couture business and it is clear that they inherited their fathers skill in design and detail. The silk satin dress features over 400 oak leaves, outlined in satin cord and chenille thread. The darker leaves on the skirt were created by actually cutting out oak leaf shapes, and backing the holes with silk net.

But this beautiful dress is merely a walk in the park compared to Lady Curzon's most famous gown, the peacock dress.


The peacock dress by House of Worth, in the collection at Kedleston Hall.

The peacock dress was commissioned for the Delhi Durbar in 1903, a celebration honoring the coronation of Edward VII. The dress is made of cloth of gold, worked by craftsmen in India, and has a pattern of overlapping peacock feathers. The eye of each feather is not an emerald, as many guests believed, but an iridescent green wing from the scarab beetle (cetonia cyrata).


Detail of peacock feathers.

The fabric was sent over to the House of Worth in Paris and designed into the ornate dress seen today. In addition to the sparkling fabric itself, the hem of the dress is decorated with white roses, and elaborate jewel work sparkles on the bodice.


Detail of bodice front, photograph by Victor Swain.

With all of the decoration, the dress weighed over 10 pounds. Lady Curzon sparkled in the new electric lights, and reportedly left guests breathless. One commented, "You cannot conceive what a dream she looked."

The dress is currently on display at the historic Curzon family house, Kedleston Hall in Derby, England. Although it's over 100 years old and the metal has tarnished, it is still breathtaking. The detail of the cloth is extraordinary and the way the dress sparkles is magical. I imagine Lady Curzon looked like a fairy queen or a goddess when she moved in her gown.

When some one says medieval fashion, one of the first thoughts that come to mind is the tall cone shaped hats worn by little girls pretending to be princesses everywhere. But what were these hats actually called and when were the actually worn?


Detail from Presentation of Christ at the Temple by Hans Holbein the Elder, 1500-1501

Princess Hats aka henin appeared in the mid to late fifteenth century, when height began to replace width as the dominant feature of womens headwear. Henin were a continental trend, originating in Burgundy, and it is unlikely that they were ever worn in England. The henin appeared during the period when the gothic style still dominated architecture, and may be a reflection of the tall spires reaching towards heaven.


Chartres Cathedral.

The henin was worn with a veil called a cointoise, which was either attached to the point of the cone or swathed around it. The cointoise could vary in length, reaching anywhere from the shoulders to the hemline of the dress. It's not exactly clear how a henin stayed on a womans head. They feature a small v-shaped loop in front, called a frontlet, which may provide some anchorage. Others have suggested that a small bit of glue was put on the frontlet to attach it to the forehead. An extremely high hairline was considered beautiful in this period, and the henin allowed women to show off their prominent foreheads.


Image from Mary of Burgundy's Book of Hours, 1467-1480.

Naturally the henin took a great amount of abuse. Pierre de Gros said in Le Jardin des Nobles that "the younger and more beauitufl the ladies were, the higher were the chimneys that they carried."

The Maasai peoples are pastoral nomads, living in the Serengeti Plains. Their wealth, livelihood, and religion all revolve around cattle. The Maasai have also cleverly adapted to increasing globalization. They charge a fee for any photographs taken of them, using Western curiosity about traditional African cultures to their advantage.


Maasai people in their shukas.

The main garment worn by the Maasai is the shuka, which is a basic piece of fabric that can be worn in a variety of ways, depending on the personal style of the wearer. It was initially made out of animal skins, mostly cowhide but never elephant skin, but cotton is now the main material. The fabric is rubbed with color or dye to make it red, becoming a sort of camouflage with the red dirt of that part of Africa. In the dry grass plains the shuka can be white to camouflage with the grain.


Maasai warriors.

Maasai life is predicated by age sets. For men there are three stages. Childhood, warriorhood, and elderhood. A boy reaches warriorhood around the age of 15, undergoing a series of rituals called almal lengipaata. The warriorhood is the most fabulous time of a mans life, and lasts for about fifteen to twenty years. A young man in warriorhood can be recognized by his appearance. The hair is grown out and braided in very intricate patterns, sometimes using as much as 16 strands at a time. They wear earrings and bracelets, as well as beaded necklaces that hang down the front and back of their bodies. They also wear symbols to show off their achievements. The errap is worn around the top part of the arm, made of leather with coils of metal wire in the front and the back, and shows that this man has fought and killed another man. The Olawaru is a lions mane headdress, meant to show that the man has killed a lion. The enkuwaru is a headdress made of ostrich plumes, meant to show that the man has fought a lion but the lion survived. The body is decorated with white limestone chalk in intricate non-symbolic patterns, and the hair is colored red with ochre and animal fat.


Elaborately braided hair colored with ochre.

The transition from warriorhood to elderhood takes place during a ceremony called the eunoto, which can be extremely traumatic because all of the mans carefully tended hair is shaved off by his mother. The first man to have his head shaved wears a leather cape called an engilaa alamal. The head is then covered in ochre. The elders are expected to take a wife and have children and take on serious responsibilities within the tribe. He will carry a fly whisk made from an elephant tail as a symbol of authority.


Maasai women.

There are only two stages of life for women, childhood and adulthood. A woman enters adulthood after she has undergone circumcision. Mothers of warriors wear surutia, coiled metal medallions. If her son is the first to get his head shaved during the eunoto ceremony, he wears his mothers surutia and it becomes loosurutia. Married women can also wear elongated leather earrings. But the main distinguishing feature for women is their elaborate beaded collars, which are higher in front and lower in back. The collars are made by the women themselves, and thus become more elaborate as women grow and acquire more skill. Heads are shaved to show off the beaded collars, which move around when the women dance.

Beads in particular have some meaning to the Maasai, with red beads having a connection to blood, blue beads having a connection to the heavens and the Gods, and green beads having a connection to prosperity, fertility of the land, and peace. All other colors are purely decorative.

This is the last part! I hope you all have enjoyed your detailed foray into the works of two amazing painters. I've included my bibliography if you would like to do further reading on the topic.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7
Part 8

How they were represented, whether as classical goddesses or modern fashionistas, was extremely important to the sitters for both Reynolds and Gainsborough. When both these painters were active the cult of celebrity was at its height. According to Mark Hallett, “Celebrity, among other things, is about the commodification of fame, about the dissemination of images representing the individual celebrity, and about the collective conversations and fantasies generated by these processes.” By the mid eighteenth century, a new freedom of the press and extremely lax libel laws allowed for the rumor mills to run wild, and writers and cartoonists to portray the celebrities of the day in any manner they chose. The public was fascinated with the scandals and glamour of the lives of celebrities. For women, celebrity came either from the top or the bottom of the social chain- aristocrats and actresses and courtesans. The common denominator in these women was their wealth. To have their portrait painted was an opportunity not only to be remembered but to represent themselves to the eager public who followed their every move. Thus how they were represented was extremely important.

Those who sat for Reynolds, portrayed in classical drapery, aligned themselves with the lofty ideals of ancient civilizations. They expressed intelligence, timelessness, an association with the greatest artists, architects, and philosophers the world has ever known. Contemporary society held up Ancient Greece and Rome as the pinnacle of western civilization, a height of perfection that has yet to be reached again. By wearing the clothing of these worlds, Reynolds’ sitters became associated with the perfection of these ancient societies and subsequently hoped the public would make the same connections. There is also a sort of power associated with ancient women, for example the powerful goddesses or rulers such as Cleopatra and Olympias, mother to Alexander the Great. In aligning themselves with a culture which worshipped female deities and allowed powerful female rulers, Reynolds’ sitters were asserting their own power, something strongly lacking in the life of the eighteenth century woman.

Gainsborough’s sitters, on the other hand, were mostly portrayed in the eighteenth century equivalent of couture. In wearing the latest fashions, these women were giving a different representation of themselves to the public. Rather than being associated with the intelligence and gravity of ancient civilizations, these women associated themselves with the height of eighteenth century society. Those who were the most in style and set the trends were also the wealthiest, and they wished to show off both their wealth and fashion know-how. By showing off their good fashion sense Gainsborough’s sitters aligned themselves with the world of wit and pleasure. If they were fashionable enough to set trends, and wealthy enough to afford the latest styles, then these women were also witty conversationalists, excelled at artistic endeavors such as music or dancing, and had a healthy interest in politics and the latest literature. Thus by showing off their best style, Gainsborough’s sitters showed off their accomplishments in society on the whole. This in turn also gave Gainsborough’s sitters a kind of power, one that was slightly more tangible than that gained by Reynolds’ sitters. While Reynolds’ sitters merely associated with the great women of antiquity, Gainsborough’s sitters were the great women of contemporary society. Although women were still second class citizens, by dominating society these women were able to gain some form of personal autonomy.

Bibliography
1. Ribeiro, Aileen. The Art of Dress: Fashion in England and France 1750-1820. 2nd ed. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1995. Print.

2. Rosenthal, Michael. The Art of Thomas Gainsborough: 'A little business for the Eye'. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press, 1999. Print.

3. Joshua Reynolds: The Creation of Celebrity. Ed. Martin Postle. London: Tate Publishing, 2005. Print.

4. "Queen Charlotte." The Royal Collection. The Royal Collection, n.d. Web. 4 Dec 2010. .

5. Bradfield, Nancy. Costume in Detail: 1730-1930. 1st ed. Hollywood, CA: Costume & Fashion Press, 1958. Print.

6. Anawalt, Patricia Rieff. The Worldwide History of Dress. New York, NY: Thames & Hudson Inc., 2007. Print.

This is a shortened version of a paper I wrote for my History of Sea Power class. Ignore the less than stellar prose, I was pretty tired when I wrote it. For further reading on the subject consult King Cotton Diplomacy: Foreign Relations of the Confederate States of America by Frank Lawrence Owsley.



In 1861, a naval blockade was declared on Southern ports, as part of the Union effort to win the American Civil War. Southern society was agrarian, taking more interest in good manners than in industrialization, and thus depended on trade for necessities. This was especially important during the war, when the South needed to import weapons, uniforms, and other necessities. Thus, with no significant navy of its own, the Union blockade produced a serious problem for the South. The one thing the South could rely on was it’s dominance in the cotton market, in particular, the British dependence on American cotton. Cotton exports to England valued about $150 million at the outbreak of the war, and the British milling industry was the livelihood of one sixth of the British population. Thus the Union blockade was a serious threat to the British textile industry. Southern planters even tried to use this threat to their advantage, placing an embargo on cotton in the early years of the war in the hopes that the subsequent loss of raw materials to British mills would cause English intervention. However, the outcome was not to the favor of the South, and the British textile industry continued to thrive despite the short lived embargo and the Union blockade.

In 1861, the Confederacy issued a cotton embargo in the hopes that the British would be so desperate for cotton that they would intervene on behalf of the Confederacy in the war. The embargo lasted until the spring of 1862, when cotton became the currency for supplies needed by the army. In the UK, a “cotton famine” coincided with the cotton embargo, causing unemployment rates to jump significantly in cotton mills. While some attribute a relationship between the embargo and the famine, this is not necessarily the case. Even during the cotton embargo, the British textile industry had a ready supply of raw cotton. The cotton crops of 1859 and 1860 were larger than normal, and the UK was beginning to import cotton from other countries such as India, Brazil, and Egypt, causing a surplus of raw cotton in the UK. In fact, there was such a surplus that the UK re-exported much of their cotton. The export of cotton increased every year from 1862 to 1866, and during the supposed cotton famine of 1861 to 1862, when the cotton embargo by the Confederacy was in place, the re-export of cotton to France was increased by a multiple of more than five. Clearly, the lack of American cotton was not severely affecting the supplies of the British textile industry.

In conjunction with the surplus of raw cotton, there was an overproduction of textiles in the years leading up to the American Civil War. Stores were packed with fabrics and yarns which greatly exceeded the actual demand of the public. Therefore it only made sense to close down textile production until the current stock could be sold off. Another theory is that, due to the threat of less cotton caused by the Union blockade, the prices for cotton soared during the early years of the war, and British cotton mills held onto their raw cotton stock, in hopes that they might use price increases to obtain a profit. Either way, it is clear that while unemployment rates in cotton mills were high during the cotton famine, the textile industry itself maintained efficiency and profit.

While there was a decrease in the cotton exported during the American Civil War, especially during the cotton embargo, the Confederacy soon realized that cotton was their only method of payment for much needed supplies. Thus the blockade runners were employed, slipping through the Union blockade to bring raw cotton to England in exchange for weapons and other necessities. Although many blockade runners made a limited amount of voyages, it was still a highly profitable and successful business. The Confederate coast stretched for 3,549 miles, and contained a great number of rivers and bays which provided access to the sea. Even with Union naval forces reached their peak, there was still plenty of room for Confederate ships to escape to the open ocean. Blockade runners such as the “Hattie”, the “Kate”, and the “Antonica” made multiple successful journeys through the blockade, and when the blockade was at its height only one out of six blockade runners failed.

The success of the blockade runners could also be attributed to their advanced construction. Steam power provided a greater speed than the ships of the US Navy could reach, the ships sat extremely low in the water, burned smokeless coal, and painted dull colors to provide a sense of invisibility. The content held in these blockade runners was cotton. Sources vary on how much cotton was actually exported, but some estimate that about one million bales were sent to Europe from 1862 to 1864. With this cotton, blockade runners were able to obtain both military and luxury goods to sell back to the Confederacy, captains making profits of $5000 during the height of the blockade.

Another important reason for the lack of impact of the Union blockade on the textile industry was the ready supply of cotton from markets outside of America. The potential for using India as an agricultural provider had been around since the 1820s, but the American Civil War spurred the British to action. They rapidly transported the necessary equipment for maintaining and harvesting a successful cotton crop, and even worked to redefine contract laws to give an advantage to merchants. By 1862 India provided seventy percent of the raw cotton used in the UK. In Egypt, the Ottoman viceroy Sa’id Pasha converted his lands into cotton farms, becoming one of the largest cotton producers in the world. This was part of a larger scheme to modernize Egypt via cotton sales, and in order to help Egyptian cotton production new canals, railroads, and processing technologies were built. Almost half of all fertile land in Egypt was devoted to cotton by the closing years of the American Civil War. Brazil doubled raw cotton exports during the war years, going from 32.4 million pounds in the 1850s to 61 million pounds in 1865. While these were the three biggest markets, they were by no means the only ones. Argentina, China, Central Asia, and parts of Africa all contributed to the cotton market.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6
Part 7

One connection in the dress of the sitters for both Reynolds and Gainsborough was the exotic references both painters often used. Orientalism was all the rage in the eighteenth century, and in particular Turkish styles permeated fashion. The robe a la turque was a highly fashionable and popular appropriation of Turkish dress. Lady Mary Wortley Montagu described Turkish costume in the eighteenth century when she traveled abroad:

“The first part of my dress is a pair of drawers, very full that reach to my shoes, and conceal the legs more modestly than your petticoats… Over this hangs my smock, of a fine white silk gauze, edged with embroidery. This smock has wide sleeves hanging halfway down the arm, and is closed at the neck with a diamond button… The antery is a waistcoat, made close to the shape, of white and gold damask, with very long sleeves falling back, and fringed with deep gold frienge… My caftan, of the same stuff with my drawers, is a robe exactly fitted to my shape, and reaching to my feet, with very long strait falling sleeves. Over this is my gridle, of about four fingers broad, which, all that can afford it, have entirely diamonds and other precious stones…”

In assuming this foreign style, the wearer implies that they are well traveled and knowledgeable of cultures other than their own.




In his painting Mrs Hester Lynch Thrale with her Daughter Hester Maria from 1777-8, Reynolds brings elements of Turkish dress into his traditional classical drapery. Like Reynolds’ other sitters, Mrs. Thrale is dressed in a made up costume that calls to mind both classical civilizations and the silhouette of contemporary fashion. Yet her gown is made of a lustrous silk, bordered with a zig-zag and polkadot pattern done in gold embroidery, calling to mind both the wealth and an interpretation of the visual aesthetic of the east. Around her waist is a bright red sash, trimmed with gold and heavy fringe, which drapes lightly to the floor and is clearly an echo of a kuşak, the waist girdle worn in Turkish costume. Her whole costume is carries many elements similar to the ones described by Lady Montagu. Although there is nothing in the landscape to suggest an oriental locale, Mrs. Thrale is clearly aligning herself with the exoticism and excitement of a foreign world. However, she also aligns herself with the height of western fashion with the combination of her fashionable tall hairstyle and the trend for Turkish styles.




Gainsborough’s portrait of Sarah Siddons, entitled Mrs. Siddons and dating from c. 1783-85, also indulges in an orientalist Turkish fantasy, although his version is more within the current trends of western fashion. Mrs. Siddons wears a blue and white striped wrap gown of the very latest style with a blue sash around her waist, a picture hat like the one worn by the Duchess of Devonshire, and is wrapped in a cloak lined with fur and carries a fur muff. As a famous actress, Mrs. Siddons could afford to wear the latest styles and surround herself with luxuries like fur, thus she wished to show this symbol of wealth and power off in her portrait. Henry Bates described the portrait, saying

“The resemblance is admirable, and the features are without the theatrical distortion which several painters have been fond of delineating. In addition to the great force and likeness which the portrait possesses, the new style of drapery might be mentioned. Mrs. Siddons’s dress is particularly novella, and the fur around her cloak and fox-skin muff are most happy imitations of nature.”

The style of wrapped dress, along with the striped design, is influenced by anteri- the robe worn in Turkish dress, showing her connection with the exotic as well as with the latest trends.

Whether Gainsborough’s foray into orientalist Turkish fashion is more or less of a fantasy than Reynolds’ is up for debate. The gown painted by Gainsborough is clearly a western style, something which could be seen walking down the street or in a fashionable park. The clothing of Reynolds’ sitter, on the other hand, is clearly a fantasy costume meant to invoke both Turkish and classical societies. The costume-like nature of the dress in Reynolds’ painting could indicate a greater accuracy, yet it also brings in elements of other cultures and could be just as contrived as the western appropriation of Turkish costume seen in Gainsborough’s painting. What is most important is the different expressions of orientalist fantasy. In Reynolds’ work, the costume-like nature of the garment and the non-specificity of the background places the sitter within an orientalist fantasy world, giving her the attributes of the western fantasy of a beautiful Turkish lady. Gainsborough’s painting, on the other hand, shows distinctly western trends throughout, placing the sitter within her own modern, local context and showing her to be an exotic lady but still a contemporary lady of eighteenth century London.

When we think of ancient clothing, we think of loose draped fabric with not a whole lot of shape. This is mostly true, but not completely true. While Ancient Greece and Rome may have had the elegance of draped fabric, Ancient Crete and Mycenae were the true fashion pioneers, predicting the direction fashion would take in the Western world.

Crete and Mycenaean cities had a lot of contact, trading with each other and picking up artistic styles and religion. Subsequently the clothing of Mycenaean women was greatly influenced by Cretan fashion.


Cretan snake goddess figurine, 1700-1550 BC.

This statue shows a snake goddess wearing a tightly fitted bodice with three quarter length sleeves and an extremely low square neckline showing the breasts, a tightly cinched waist, and a full cone shaped skirt made up of flounces or pleats. The apron-like garment worn around the waist may be ceremonial, as existing frescoes from Crete showing more ordinary women do not feature one, but then again we have limited information about the ancient world and wearing an apron or not might have just been a fashion choice. Breasts were supported by lacing or wide belts. Garments were elaborately decorated, in Mycenae they could have gold sequins, shapes made from gold foil such as rosettes, silver, lead, and iron. Evidence also suggest that these clothes were highly colorful.


A Mycenaean fresco from Tiryns, 1375-1200 BC.

While other ancient clothing was made of simple square shapes pinned together, Ancient Cretan and Mycenaean clothing was highly shaped, and involved patterning and sewing. They conformed to and emphasized the curves of a woman's body, and created a geometric silhouette which will not be seen again until the sixteenth century when the farthingale was introduced into womens fashion, turning skirts into cones. The complex fashion worn by the women of Ancient Crete and Mycenae was centuries ahead of its time, making these civilizations the true trend setters of the Western world.

Terrible joke: When Helen of Troy ran away with Paris and started the Trojan War, she ran away from her husband and home in Mycenae. Perhaps she was not just the face that launched a thousand ships? BUH DUM CHING!!!

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5
Part 6




Another powerful lady painted by Gainsborough was Queen Charlotte, who posed for her portrait in 1781. Although the robe a la francaise had gone mostly out of style in everyday wear by the time this portrait was painted, it continued to be used for court dress. As the highest ranking lady of the court, naturally the queen would be painted in a court gown. The wealth of the monarchy is established in the delicacy and sumptuousness of the gown, which is made of white silk net shot through with gold and overlaid onto white silk. The difficulty of construction of net and lace made it an extremely expensive luxury item. To have an entire dress of net, and one that is shot through with gold, shows an enormous amount of wealth. But unlike many other court gowns, this one does not look heavy. Instead it seems to float around the body of the Queen, who clearly has no problem maneuvering in wide panniers and a long train. One of Reynolds’ pupils, James Northcote, described the grace of the painting saying “With what a graceful sweep she seems to move through the picture! ‘Tis actual motion, and done with such a light airy facility… The drapery was done in one night by Gainsborough and his nephew, Gainsborough Dupont; they sat up all night, and painted it by lamplight.” Queen Charlotte is represented as stylish, wealthy, and possessed with the natural grace to float through space just as her gown floats about her body. She seems to take on the role of a contemporary goddess, shimmering and in and out of focus as she walks.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4
Part 5




Other paintings by Gainsborough forgo any reference historic dress at all, instead focusing on the most in the moment fashions. His famous portrait of Lady Georgiana Cavendish, Duchess of Devonshire, painted in 1783, caused a millinery sensation. The Duchess wears a white robe a l’anglaise tied with a turquoise sash, and a highly structured black hat is perched atop her hedgehog hairstyle. The hat was one of the Duchess’s own creations, featuring a wide brim and medium crown, perhaps taking inspiration from the cavalier hats worn in the early seventeenth century. The hat is relatively simple, only decorated with a few black ostrich feathers (the Duchess had popularized wearing ostrich feathers in tall hairstyles a few years earlier) and a band of white fabric around the bottom of the crown to match the dress. After the painting was displayed at the Royal Academy, women of style everywhere clamored for a “picture hat”, just like that worn by the Duchess of Devonshire. As it was her own creation, the Duchess’s hat had no official name, being referenced to as the picture hat until the Victorian period when it would gain the moniker of the Gainsborough hat. The picture hat started a new trend, and anyone who was anyone wore one. Through the nature of the construction of the picture hat, it only works well when it is worn with the fashionable hedgehog style, reinforcing its role as a top fashionable item.


In wearing a hat of her own creation in her portrait, the Duchess asserts herself as a trendsetter at the top of society. Aware of her own fashion influence, she probably knew that her hat would be copied, thus her wearing of it strengthens her position as the most stylish lady in England, able to influence every other woman of style. The Duchess also shows her creativity, as the hat was of her own design. She shows herself to be something of an artist, able to create new styles, as opposed to just a woman who went with whatever the current trends dictated. The Duchess also gains power through her ability to create her own hats and influence the fashion of women all over England. While the Duchess’s portrait by Reynolds associated her with the timeless beauty and wisdom of classical societies, her portrait by Gainsborough reinforced her position of power in contemporary society.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3
Part 4




Gainsborough’s work The Three Eldest Princesses from 1784 was commissioned by the Prince of Wales, and shows Princess Charlotte, Augusta, and Elizabeth, the eldest daughters of King George III. Gainsborough uses soft pastel colors, painting the princesses in pink, yellow, and turquoise. The princess in pink has pearls wrapped around her arms, separating her sleeves into puffs, much like the sleeves on the dress of Lady Sheffield, and is wrapped in a sheer shawl shot through with thin stripes of gold. The princess in yellow wears a sash of metallic fabric around her waist, and the princess in blue has golden fringe on her dress as well as gold stripes shot through her sleeves and her shawl. Overall it is a display of the wealth, which reflects on the wealth of the monarchy. The sumptuous and delicate fabrics show that the princesses are true royals- they do not work and can afford the most luxurious and delicate materials. Despite the wealth of the gowns, they are relatively simple in design, the only decoration being very subtle. This reflects on the modesty and good taste of the princesses, as well as represents the English style of dress which often looked down on the excess of French styles. In this painting, the three women are true representations of the proper English woman, and the English monarchy on the whole.

Part 1
Part 2
Part 3

Thomas Gainsborough was seen as Reynolds’ great rival and opposite. While Reynolds preferred to dress his subjects in classical dress, Gainsborough used a wide array of costumes and styles. Many of his most notable portraits show his sitters wearing the latest styles, showing them to be at the height of fashion. According to Aileen Ribeiro, “his letters tell us that he aimed in painting to make the heart dance and to portray ‘modern truth’” and that often made up dress detracted from the beauty of the portrait.


Gainsborough was not against incorporating elements of history into his sitters clothing, however, although the overall silhouette and style are very modern. In his portrait Sophia Charlotte, Lady Sheffield, painted in 1785, Lady Sheffield’s clothing is within the current fashions, but also adds a few historic touches which not only bring an element of the fantasy into the portrait but in fact heighten the fashionableness of the sitter, as elements of seventeenth century costume were often worked into the fashionable looks of the day.





Lady Sheffield wears a pale yellow silk robe a l’anglaise, very much in line with the fashionable style of the day. The robe a l’anglaise became the dominant style during the end of the eighteenth century, and was considerably simpler and less fussy than the robe a la francaise. The back was fitted, and the skirt was no longer held out by panniers but instead by soft round padding, giving an elegant and more natural silhouette. Lady Sheffield’s hair is frizzed in a horizontal style known as the hedgehog style, and her hat is a very fashionable pouf, most likely coming from a Paris marchandes de modes. There are also some elements of seventeenth century fashion, as seen in the soft Vandyke collar and appliqué on the underside of the brim of the hat, as well as the string of pearls dividing the sleeves into two puffs.


These elements of seventeenth century fashion only heighten Lady Sheffield’s status as fashionable, much like many fashionable people wear vintage clothing today. The pale yellow of the dress and simplicity of design and decoration are in line with the toned down fashions of the end of the eighteenth century. The richness of the fabric and decorations shows the wealth of the sitter, as well as her ability to purchase a hat from France. A Parisian hat furthers her role as fashionista, as Paris was the center of the fashion world in the eighteenth century and consequently those who were the most stylish dressed in the Parisian mode. Furthermore, Gainsborough sets his portrait at the edge of a small wooded area, as if Lady Sheffield had gone for a walk amongst nature, referencing Rousseauean ideals of communing with nature.

The 14th century is really when fashion began to pick up. The lower classes are beginning to try to imitated the upper classes so to keep some semblance of social order sumptuary laws are passed, dictating which classes can wear what. But then people began to modify their dress to get around the laws, and fashion really begins.

Hairstyles and headwear began to get more complex in the 14th century. Women could wear a wimple or head veil, or for outdoors activities a hood or hat similar to what a man might wear. Hair was parted in the center and styled into two long braids which could be coiled over the ear or draped forward in front of the ear and then brought back to the crown of the head. These 'dos could then be topped with a jeweled mesh cage or wire-framed net called a crespine.


An image from Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 264, a mid-fourteenth-century edition of the Romance of Alexander, showing an elaborate hairstyle.

A ladies wardrobe starts with a chemise, a simple linen garment which had a variety of necklines, from the low cut to the high necked. Her legs would be covered with hose with hose which came in a variety of colors and were secured above the knee with garters.


Detail of February from Les Très Riches Heures du Duc de Berry, 1412. A lower class woman warms her legs, showing off her hose.

Now for the garment people would actually see. Fabric and therefore clothing was extremely expensive, so if you could afford to wear multiple layers you wanted to show that off. The main garment worn by women was the cotehardie, a tightly fitted gown with a low waistline and a wide, scooped neckline. The tight fit was achieved by buttons or lacing up the sides or front. To showcase your wealth with multiple layers of clothing, wealthier women wore a kirtle, a tight fitting garment, underneath their cotehardies. To show off the kirtle underneath cotehardies could be slit down the sides, or for unslit versions the kirtle could show at the neckline and cuffs.


Another image from Bodleian Library MS Bodl. 264, a mid-fourteenth-century edition of the Romance of Alexander. The woman, so romantically giving away her heart, wears a purple kirtle and green cotehardie.

The sleeves would end at the elbow have a sort of tail coming off of them, called a lappet (if the tail was made out of the extra fabric) or a tippet (if the tail was a separate piece of fabric attached to the sleeve). Gowns were long and dragged on the floor, another way to show off wealth. Because if your dress is that long it means you aren't working, just sitting around and looking pretty. Fitchets were slits made in the garment so that a lady could reach inside for her purse. Consider fitchets the precursor to the pocket, which wouldn't arrive for several more centuries.


Statue of Joan de la Tour from 1377. She wears a cotehardie with lappets, and has her hands tucked into her fitchets.

Another option for women was the sideless surcoat, a decorative overgown with enormously long armholes, making the gown basically sideless. The Church did not approve, calling these slits the windows to hell. As the century progressed the band of fabric in the middle became narrower and narrower. A plastron, a stiffened and highly decorated piece of fabric, could be added to the front and back of the garment for some pizazz. The sideless surcoat quickly moved to being a ceremonial garment, leaving the cotehardie as the main fashion choice for women.


Statue of Jean of Bourbon from 1364-1380. She wears a sideless surcoat with a plastron.

It's hard to know what shoes women wore, as their feet rarely show in images from the period. But when feet do show, women seem to be wearing pointy toed shoes similar to what men wore, called crackowes or poulaines.



Special thanks to Got Medieval, a fabulous history blog with a wealth of medieval images for me to kindly borrow (no but seriously, do you know how hard it is to find 1. Medieval images and 2. Medieval images with reliable date and source information?). Go visit it and see more medieval fashion! Also monkeys.