A woman's gown, c1810, England, Block-printed cotton, 1795-1799

English Costume 1600. Illustration from The Costumes of All Nations by Albert Kretschmer and Carl Rohrbach (Sotheran, 1882).

My bedgown, folded in half along the center back. There are several scaled-down patterns based on extant Swedish bedgowns. Some of them are in the popular book "Kvinnligt mode under två sekel" which can be found in many Swedish libraries, and there are a couple of free patterns online in Duran Textiles' newsletters (here and here). In spite of this, I chose to spend $30 on a full-scale pattern, that is 15 years old to boot… The pattern There are two main reasons why I chose to buy this pattern. It's the only Swedish cotton (cotton/linen, to be precise) bedgown pattern with full sewing instructions. In contrast, the extants in "Kvinnligt mode under två sekel" do have their sewing techniques analyzed, but they're all made from silk (like most extant bedgowns in Sweden). The Duran patterns are for cotton bedgowns but don't have detailed instructions. The pattern has detailed instructions for the extant petticoat as well, which I haven't found elsewhere either (and the petticoat pattern turned out to be very interesting, well worth a post of its own in the future). So, I see this pattern as an investment in learning more about period cutting and sewing. The bedgown has a very simple construction, with a single pattern piece, and seams only at the sides and center back. BTW, the pattern has Swedish text only. Neck detail, showing the gathered trim. The sewing instructions are written by a tailor, and largely match the bedgown in "Costume Close-up", except that they go into much more detail—especially on basting, which made all the sewing very easy. I love basting in general, because it makes hand sewing much more comfortable. I never risk losing a pin, or pricking myself on them, and everything stays neatly lined up. I was a little disappointed to see that the pattern instructions only have line drawings. There are no photos of the original bedgown and petticoat set, nor of a reconstruction, or of the fabric (the cotton/linen print was recreated along with the pattern, but is no longer available). The trim is very simple—self-fabric folded cuffs, and a lightly gathered self-fabric strip around the neck (all edges are folded under). While the pattern suggests adding ribbon ties based on other bedgowns, the original bedgown has no traces of closures and was probably pinned closed. My bedgown While the pattern instructions mention that the fabric was joined in some places due to the width of the fabric, there are no indications on the pattern of where this was done. The fabric width is mentioned though, so it can be figured out. I chose to cut my printed cotton about 100 cm (40") wide to simulate a period width, then joined on spare bits at the sides where needed, and finally used the pattern again to cut these additions to shape. I did the same with the lining, except that period linen came in other widths than printed cotton, so I cut the linen to match one of them (can't recall how wide—but IIRC Sweden seems to have used different widths than England). These joins across the sleeves and near the bottom of the side seams are typical of extant garments of this cut. Front, shown with the front edges overlapping because the back lays flat. Back view. Note the shaped back seam which flares out to form a peplum below the high waistline. Now, chronic fatigue is a major annoyance—sewing a bit now and then is doable, but arranging a basic photo shoot requires a larger effort and I keep postponing it in hopes that I'll have more energy some other time. The same goes for blogging. So my finished bedgown has been sitting here since April, unphotographed and unblogged. The only reason I'm getting this post done, is that I finally decided to just lay the bedgown out on the floor for the photos. Which was probably a good idea, really, as it shows the characteristic shaped back seam fairly well. Conclusions The pattern mentions that bedgowns were used by all classes in Sweden, and as informal wear even by upper-class women, so my bedgown ties in nicely with the March challenge of the Historical Sew Monthly. When I tried it on, it didn't just look informal, but very frumpy. While the back is shaped, the A-line sides provide ample width that allows the center front to be raised to an almost horizontal position. This cut can clearly be worn throughout pregnancy, even if you're overdue with twins. And I think that explains why there are so many well-preserved bedgowns of this cut in Swedish museum collections—women were probably very happy to put them away when they were no longer needed, and switch to a more fitted bedgown… The facts The Challenge: #3 Comfort at Home: Make something to wear around the (historical) house. My submission: A frumpy Swedish bedgown. Material: Ikea's "Ljusöga" duvet cover (thrifted), and linen for the lining (new, circa 20x20 threads/cm or 50x50 threads/inch). Pattern: A bought pattern based on an extant printed cotton/linen bedgown and matching petticoat in a Swedish museum. The pattern was printed by the Skansen museum in Stockholm around 2003, and they still carry it. Year: Around 1780, given the printed fabric I used. The pattern just says "18th century". Notions: Just linen thread and beeswax. How historically accurate is it? I used a period pattern, period fibers, reasonable thread counts, and period methods. Unfortunately the colors differ a bit from period prints, which is why I give it 75 % on the Peacock scale. Hours to complete: No idea—a little while now and then over about two months. First worn: I tried it on as soon as it was finished, that's all. Total cost: About $44 (pattern $30, fashion fabric $2, lining $12; thread from my stash).

Sometimes we forget that men can be just as fashion conscious as women, if not more so; and just as the ladies during the time of Marie Antoinette (Late 18th century France) had their extremes in fashion so to did the men. Men had to treed carefully between being fashionable and crossing that line that could place one's masculinity into question. Men of the time wanted to be "en mode" with the current fashion; however most did not want to push the limit to the extreme and find themselves the subject of ridicule for a fashion "faux pas" nor would he want his sexuality placed into question. There were so many choices to make such as: fabric selection, types of stockings, buttons, buckles, lace, braids and trims. These all needed to be chosen with great care to assure you were within the correct degree of fashion. It is also interesting to note that it was not uncommon for man to wear corsets or padding (shoulders and calves being quite popular) as needed to improve his figure. Several Male French Fashion Plates from around 1780 Today I present to you a selection of French Male fashion plates from the time of Marie Antoinette. These were originally created between the late 1770's on through the 1780's and were considered high fashion in their day. This time period is pre-French Revolution - (France); however, this style could also be considered Colonial - (America) or Georgian - (England) just in case you were wondering. There is a nice variety of male costumes here for you to see, including: a dressing gown, daily wear, formal attire and even what a Catholic Abbot would have worn. (he's the guy sitting down and wearing a brown outfit.) 1779 French Fashion Plate French Fashion Plate between 1774-1778 1787 French Fashion Plate 1778 French Fashion Plate 1778 French Fashion for a Clergyman (Catholic) 1780 French Fashion Plate 1780 French Fashion Plate - Men's Dressing Gown 1778 French Fashion Plate 1778 French Fashion Plate 1779 French Fashion Plate c1778 French Fashion Plate c1778 French Fashion Plate 1779 French Fashion Plate 1781 French Fashion Plate 1781 French Fashion Plate 1781 French Fashion Plate 1781 French Fashion Plate 1781 French Fashion Plate 1787 French Fashion Plate 1787 French Fashion Plate 1787 French Fashion Plate I hope you had fun seeing what the well dressed man would have worn in the late 18th century. I have to say there seems to be an outfit or two that may have raised an eyebrow or two. This last plate being a good example. Surely such an ensemble would have qualified this young buck as a "popinjay" and I believe only the right gent could have pulled this look off without causing a few snickers. Here again I'm looking at this from a 21st century perspective so this style might have been all the rage, but I just can't imagine it being the norm for a an Alpha Male if you know what I mean. If you enjoyed seeing these fashions for men, a few more are available HERE and HERE for your viewing pleasure. till next time...

Explore the British Museum collection and journey through two million years of human history.

Ann Forbes, 1745 - 1834. Artist

I continue my series of antique French Fashion plates from the time of Maire Antoinette with a few examples of some of the more extreme fashions of the day. Most of us modern ladies think of historical clothing prior to the 1920's as being very conservative and buttoned up; however this is not always the case. Low cut bodices were very much in fashion for much of the 16th - 19th Centuries. Strange how it was permissible to expose so much of ones bosom in public yet exposing ones shoulders would have been too risque'. Many fashionable women in the late 18th century even went so far as to expose one or both nipples on occasion; or their bodice was cut so low that with the slightest movement a nipple might make a surprise appearance. Now mind you the woman would act just slightly shocked at the occurrence but it was well known that by wearing gowns of that "cut" it was bound to happen. I can just image the men of the day placing bets as to when Madam X's nipple(s) would appear during a ball or supper. It must have been hilarious to watch. French Fashion plate from c1780 showing an exposed nipple Above is a French fashion plate from the 1780's showing just how low fashionable bodices had come. There is no question that the ladies nipple is indeed exposed. This is not a solo fashion plate. I have several that show exposed nipples from this same time period and others where a majority of the breast is exposed even if the nipple is not obvious to see. This extreme fashion was not only in France but to some extent in England and other progressive European countries. Not all women went as far as to expose their nipple(s), others chose only to allow the areolae to be visible and those more modest, would allow the bodice to come just to but not quite expose the that much of their charms. Any way you look at it, showing cleavage or one's décolletage was an acceptable fashion statement of the day. The question was not would you show cleavage but "how low will you go"? ***** I thought it would be interesting to post about some of the more daring fashions from this time of Marie Antoinette (the late 1770's through the late 1780's) that show how low the bodices could be. Some do not blatantly expose the nipple(s) as seen in the above engraving; however in many of them on closer inspection you realize just how exposed they really are. Extreme "Naughty" French Fashions Exposed nipples are shown in these fashion plates Both nipples are exposed in this fashion plate (they are very pale but they are there) A slight lean over to the side and her left nipple is exposed Age did not seem to matter either - both nipples are exposed but she does wear a scarf. Both nipples are in plane sight in this fashion plate These could be "exposed" if not they are very close to giving a peep show Looks like her left nipple is exposed to me Same here - her left nipple appears to be peeking just above the lace This time I believe there is a hint of nipple above the lace on her right breast "Exposure" is just a question of time With a deep breath or a slight turn - everyone would be in for quite a surprise. Almost exposed but not quite. Just below the lace - so don't breath too deep if you don't want all revealed She looks as if she is tugging up her bodice but it's too low to hide for long Widows Weeds with a bit of flash, because there isn't much keeping her in that bodice Just dare me! Just a bit of lace keeping her charms under wraps I say she is a good candidate for a possible show and tell session later in in that gown Hidden behind a scrap of lace - but not for long by the looks of it Looks like she is loosing/winning the battle with her right breast I still love historical fashions yet I can't say that I would have been very comfortable exposing myself in any of these gowns. I probably would have dared to go fairly low but I would not wished to risk putting myself "all out there" if you know what I mean. Still I wanted to have a bit of fun with one of these fashion plates and chose to make the last on into a png and then proceeded to play with colors. Here are an assortment for you pleasure. The original turned into a png file Toned down version of the original Blue and Teal version Teal and Blue version Olive and Blue version Blue version Teal version Olive version Brown and Olive version Brown version Olive and Brown version Purple two-tone version Purple version I hope these "flashy" fashion plates from the late 18th century have given you a few grins and giggles; as they have me. Till the next set of fashion plates from the late 1700's... For more information on Décolletage see HERE Portrait of Princess Lamballe with exposed nipples can be seen HERE with an interesting discussion about it HERE And if you find this subject "titillating" you might also enjoy viewing a few other blog post like those found at Isis' Wardrobe - HERE or "The Naked Child in Art" from novelactivist.com found HERE

I noticed in looking for period images that there seemed to be a running theme after 1771 of macaronis and love (be it courtesans or an old man after a young girl). For our purposes, the fashion still does quite well. I avoided most of the macaroni images because of their blatant exaggeration. As for the fashion itself, I found a great many fancy sheer aprons and Polonaised skirts. Front Closure: Stomacher and Closed fronts equally common Neckline: Much more rounded, with lower necklines Skirt opening: Varies greatly, often covered by apron Waistline: Pointed, flat, and curved Back Style: Both Sacque backs and English backs seen Pleats: Narrowing across shoulders, bringing neckline in to match Skirt Pleats: 1/2" or possibly slightly less Shoulder Span: Corner of sleeves still distinct, but beginning to narrow and rise slightly Sleeves 1 piece, slimmer fit, some end below elbow now. Pleats at top of shoulder. Trim Sleeves: Large ruffles still seen, great emphasis on the lace portion in size. Some have no fabric ruffles, just simple trim, but most likely had lace/cotton at the time. Style: Gathered (some single line, more of a ruffle), pleated, puffed. Straight trim of 3" or less width common. Edges: Pinked most popular Content: Self-fabric, occasionally in contrasting color Fabric Solid silks and occasional stripes. A few painted silks and subtler print brocades still seen (often two-toned). Shape Very straight, stiff cone bodice. Skirts width often comes from pulling up the hem, although panniers would still be used. This gathering up of the skirt also pushes more fullness to the back of the gown, rather than the oval shape seen earlier. The widest point is now sitting at the low hip level. CWF Painted Silk Gown, 1770 Met Silk Gown, 1770 Met Silk Gown, 1770-75 MFA Silk Brocade Gown, 1770 Met Cotton Print Gown, 1774 The Fond Doves, 1770 The Cotillion Dance, 1771 The Ladies Disaster, 1771 The Paintress of Macaroni's, 1772 The Polite Macaroni, 1772 A Pantheon No. Rep., 1772 An Evenings Invitation, 1773 A Decoy for the Old as well as the Young, 1773 Amorous Notions at Fourscore, 1774 The Invitation, 1774 The Linley Sisters by Thomas Gainsborough, 1772 The Love Letter by Jean-Honore Fragonard, 1770

Eleanor Frances Dixie, Henry Pickering, 1753

Have you ever looked at a fashion history book -- the kind with lots of illustrations of the changing silhouettes -- and wondered why on earth the eighteenth century dandy and his furbelow-decked lady suddenly would drop their silken finery for clinging muslins and tight, shrunken suits? Photo: Typical 1780s chemise ensemble. Auguste Wilhelmine Maria of Hessen-Darmstadt and children. Courtesy Wikimedia Commons. Much has been written, and was even at that period, about how 1790s fashion reflected the decade's social turbulence by shifting more rapidly than at any recorded time previous. The French revolution had quite an effect on what women wore, of course, as did ever-increasing international trade with India and the Far East, import bans and taxes. So did the passion for Classicism so apparent in all of the arts, and Enlightenment philosophy and its result, and what one article (Wikipedia) calls the "triumph of informality". Still, when I pick up a random fashion history book, more than likely the author has chosen to slice and dice this period into sharply delineated sections. Poor 1790s: so often split up, your history divided by politics or ethos! Fashion's short-shrift decade. Photo: A Regency ensemble, 1798. Louise von Preussen. Courtesy Wikimedia Commons. (Oh yes, I hear you, those of you who love Nancy Bradfield's Costume in Detail: Women's Dress 1730-1930. She keeps the decade whole, and I love her too, relying on her superb drawings perhaps more than those of any other book. However, perhaps because she wasn't able to examine extant garments of these types, her book doesn't feature two garment styles that were important in marking the transition from Enlightenment to Regency. Norah Waugh's The Cut of Women's Clothes does to some degree too, but many of us find that book exceedingly expensive, and interlibrary loan isn't available to all of us Finally, there is a terrific costume exhibit at the Kent State University Museum, curated by Anne Bissonnette, titled "The Age of Nudity", that ran in 2006-2007. The exhibit website is still up, the text concise and authoritative, and the images marvelous, but such a brief view, and no book produced! Alas.) Let's do something different this time. In this post, I've collected an unscientific, convenience sampling of paintings and engravings and fashion plates from Wikimedia Commons, from the 1780s through about 1800. As you scan them, you will see something fascinating. The 1780s chemise dress will morph into the Regency gown, the 1780s open robe and redingote styles will open up and travel towards the back of the body until the resulting overgarment feels more like a sort of long jacket or long vest than a gown. To keep things moving along, I have focused mostly on these garments rather than on the wider breadth of styles in that were in favor, so that we can watch them grow and change, much as we watch caterpillars morph into butterflies. By the way, all this examination relates to a project. I have five months to complete an ensemble for the Jane Austen Festival in Louisville, and have chosen to dress for the years 1795-1797. Given that the months are slipping by fast, I've forgone the much of the research I usually do, so sad to say, I haven't read literature of the period or looked for period magazine texts or other sources for help. As always, please click on the images to see larger versions. I've also included links to the Wikimedia Commons originals, some of which are very large files with good detail. Here We Go... Here is a portrait of Princess Marie Josephine Louise of Savoy, called "Madame", the future wife of Louis XVIII of France. Her painter, Élisabeth-Louise Vigée-Le Brun, made this painting in 1782. Le Brun has painted Madame in a chemise dress of the time, an informal style worn for "undress" occasions. As Norah Waugh has it, the style was popularized by stylemaker Marie Antoinette, and was dubbed the chemise a la reine, after a portrait by Vigee le Brun that appeared at the 1783 Paris Salon (Waugh, p. 73). I wonder whether the style was already on the rise, since other women wear versions of it in paintings of slightly earlier date -- like the portrait above. After all, children had been wearing chemise dresses for some years (look at the little child in the top photo and Miss Willoughby, at right, 1781-1783, by George Romney), and fashionable people had been tiring of heavy or trim-encrusted, stiff-bodiced formal dress that had proclaimed wealth and status for centuries. Those of you who have studied the philosophy and social history of this period, do you have details or pointers to add? This dress is likely of muslin. The collar is trimmed with lace, which I imagine may be whipped on right to the edge of the muslin so that the lace forms a smooth extension of the collar edge. Like so many of these dresses, drawstrings likely are used to close it at neck and waist, and more drawstrings and ribbons to create the puffs on the arms. Also like so many chemise dresses, the waist -- at natural level -- is defined by a silk sash. Often you see them in blue or pink, sometimes in green. Yet in the photo at the top of this post, Auguste Wilhelmine Maria of Hessen-Darmstadt is wearing not a silk sash, but a shaped flat belt. Yes, let's have a look at a detail from the top photo again. That belt -- isn't it handsome? It appears to be embroidered, with a "buckle" being perhaps a portrait. It is hard to see and I do not have a larger version of this painting to hand. This painting also makes clear that not all chemise dresses were as loose as those worn a little later. This dress is loose only at the bust, while the lower section of the bodice is quite shaped, and the bodice is long. The dress has a sheen too, which makes me wonder it it might be made of a soft silk, perhaps a gauze? Let's move on to another example or two. Here's a painting of Elizabeth Foster, by Joshua Reynolds. Ms. Foster is quite fluffed out, no? Have a look at her dress. Here the chemise collar is worn high up, and the waistline is a little raised, courtesy that very wide, colorful sash, and see the ribbons that tie around her sleeves? They're pink and do not match the sash. One last example. This is Sarah Villiers, Viscountess of Jersey, by Ozias Humphrey, and painted in 1786. In this case, the chemise dress has a wide falling collar that spreads out over the shoulders, and a far narrower sash. Look at her sleeves: how long they are! Regency sleeves would often do this: be very long and pushed back to wrinkle up on the lower arm. Note how she wears her bracelet: over the sleeve. As you can see, just this limited sampling of dresses shows the variety that the chemise dress could take. Now, let's have a look at a few other examples of late 1780s dress, and look for items that would carry on into the next decade. Here is a 1780s sample, a portrait of Frederika Sophia Wilhelmina of Prussia, painted by Tischbein in 1789. While the princess wears her gown long-waisted, as had been popular for so very long, the fabric appears a little lighter than earlier in the century, and it is closed down the front rather than open with a stomacher. These round gowns had grown in favor...and from this point on, women's dresses would generally be closed up front rather than pinned or laced partially open, revealing garments or decor beneath. The princess is also wearing a fichu. Long worn for modesty, cleanliness and style, fichus in the 1780s began to bouf out a little, and by the 1790s would get positively pigeon-breasted. The princess' fichu is a little bouffy, and fortells the later frontward expansion. And her hair? Positively puffy, as it had been most of the decade. Costumers these days call it hedgehog hair. Much of it is wig, and it's still tinted gray with powder...you will see more of this styling in the 1790s, and it will become even less styled, before moving to a more natural look. Here is another portrait, from 1787, the Marquise de Pezay (or Pezé) and the Marquise de Rougé with her sons. (Image courtesy Wikimedia Commons.) Both women are wearing sashes, and informal round gowns with tight sleeves, of drapey, light fabrics. Note the stripes! Now here's something exciting. Look at the necklines: bouffy and gathered and round-necked, almost like a Regency gown line. It almost appears that they are showing their chemises or wearing chemisettes or perhaps they are wearing habit shirts, since the neckline appears to be real, not folds in a fichu. Look at the sleeves: tight, except for pretty puffs at the shoulders. We will see many sleeve puffs durin the Regency. The setting for such gowns? Outdoors, or indoors in a private room far from formal public functions. A final note. The Marquise de Pezay appears not to be wearing powder. Look, here is lady in Italy wearing a similar dress at an informal outdoor dance. Il Ballo, dated 1790, is delightful, no? Like many prints, it's full of details, too. The dancer is wearing a round gown, and like the Marquise's dress, it has rounded, gathered fabric (from chemise or tucker or what?) and the pretty sash. At the same function, the lady at the right who faces us is wearing the long-fashionable conical shaped, long-waisted open robe, closed with laces at the bodice, and opening out in the skirt to show the petticoat. Another informal garment that I was interested to find was the riding coat or redingote, a 1787 image of which is shown. I understand that it was usually made of wool in menswear styling, complete with large lapels. Wikipedia's 1750 - 1795 in Fashion reports that the redingote would be later worn over the chemise dress. Hmmm. Around the turn of the decade, the riding coat -- or whatever you want to call it -- and hat over a dress start turning up more frequently in my little sample of paintings. Here's one, a portrait of Giulia Beccaria and her son, from 1790. There are the big lapels, along with fabric that looks like wool to me, and that riding hat. Now, scroll back up and look at the lady sitting in her long-waisted dress at the right side in Il Ballo. We know that the open robe was an ancient design. Here's a common example from a little earlier in the century, a portrait of the Archduchess Maria Christine, painted in 1770. Notice how the dress -- called in French a robe -- opens up in the bodice to show the decorate stomacher, and in the front of the skirt a smallish portion of the skirt, called a petticoat, beneath. By the very early 1790s, that open robe was opening up more and more in the skirt, and the bodice sides were angling farther and farther back. More and more of what was ostensibly "beneath" was showing. Here is Rose Adelaide Decreux in 1791, playing the harp, dressed smashingly in stripes. The side view of her robe shows it pulling further and further to the back, while her petticoat is really all you see in the front. Look at the base of the petticoat: the big tall flounce, so fashionable for so long, has become a small frill. You will see that small frill through much of the 1790s at the bottom of skirt bottoms, before all becomes the severe Early Regency look. Oh, and there is that fichu, too, all bouffed out and pigeon-breasty, and cutely tied in back. Here's what I find fascinating. In a 1791 fashion plate, source of the latest in design, we see a lady playing with a yo-yo. She is wearing the open robe, not with stomacher and petticoat, but worn like a riding coat, and over a dress. You can see the dress sleeves, the decor on the dress bodice, the sash, and that robe, pulled back in the same fashion as Rose Adelaide wears it. This makes me wonder if Rose Adelaide is really wearing a dress? Here is another example of the open robe, this one in brown silk, from the portrait of Joseph Arkwright and his family. I note that the dress or petticoat is plain, but not muslin -- it has the sheen of silk. Did you notice how tall and narrow the hats have become since the late 1780s? Not the turbaned heads of the 1780s had disappeared. Far from it. See for example this portrait, below, of the Frankland sisters, painted in 1795 by John Hoppner. This is a favorite of mine, although I don't quite know why. It appears that they may have been drawing or watercoloring outside, to the boredom of their spaniel, who is napping happily on, not just at, their feet. About their dresses: times were changing. The sister on the right seems to be wearing a white muslin round gown with a fichu, but look at the waistline. It's rising a little. Her sister to the left is wearing a chemise dress. If you look carefully at the neckline, it's gathered, the way chemise dresses usually were, but the pretty lace frill appears to be quite narrow. At this point in the decade, and this might just be my sample talking, but it seems as if chemise dresses start to appear more and more frequently, and they are far more plainly built than their counterparts of a decade before. A famous Heideloff fashion plate from The Gallery of Fashion shows two young ladies in morning dresses described as of "calico" (fine muslin) fabric out for a drive. The year, 1794. Frills were still a bit fashionable. The lady on the right's chemise dress has a fine neckline frill, and her sleeves are quite full, controlled by ribbons in the middle of the upper arm by a colored ribbon. The driver wears a ruffled shawl above her dress. Here is Goya's Maria Teresa Cayetana de Silva. Spanish dress was always a little different or so it seems to be, featuring brighter colors in higher contrast, but if the sash and ribbon are bright, the dress itself might be worn anywhere. There's the narrow frill at neckline again. The narrowness makes the gathered sensation stand out more, and in fact, the whole front is gathered in such a way to accentuate the bustline, just as it would be through the Regency. The dress appears to be spotted, perhaps with embroidery, as dresses began to be, and the base has just a narrow band of embroidered trim. It's her sash and heavy classically-styled jewelry that stand out. Speaking of which...she is wearing a double strand of what are probably coral beads. You will see "corals" for the next thirty-odd years. In this year, it happens...the great change...antiquity begins to assert her rule in earnest. Here is Madame Seriziat, by David. The chemise dress, with falling collar, but where is the neckline ruffle, where are all the fluffs and puffs? The narrow round-gown-style sleeves to her dress have just little buttons as ornament, and the fabric, none. Only the rosette on her sash and her frankly flirty little hat, and the transition corset, remind me of earlier decades. The satirists were already at it, too. I love this print . At first you think it's serious, then you look at it a little more...is the lady in white really making her lovers match the Classical statuary? Then you read the title, "The Imitation of Antiquity". Of course. Now, notice her dress. Regency waistline, Regency neckline, but just a little fuller skirted than dresses would be later. As we move towards the end of the century, we enter the early Regency. Next post, let's watch what happens to skirts, the bodice and corset line, and to the vestigial frillery. This has been fun! Now go to 1790s Fashion: A Transition from The Enlightenment to Regency, Part 2 ...the rest of the story. Interested in Reading More? See all my 1790s posts, plus experiments in costuming in 1790s: Costumes. You'll find a lot of research, such as analysis of extant clothing, portraits, portrait miniatures, fashion magazine texts and plates, even translations from the German Luxus und der Moden, and of course secondary sources, that I've done in efforts to document each part of the costumes made.

This week's picks

My second post about the exhibition ‘Sits – katoen in bloei’ (Chintz – cotton in bloom) in the Fries Museum! My first post was about color and patterns, and before that I wr…