A place for historical garments, past patterns, illustrations, demonstrations, perukes, petticoats, hoops, codpieces, houppelandes, hennins, restorations and recreations from long ago. Fashion historians, costumers and enthusiasts are welcome to celebrate some good-old-fashioned fashion.
Sort by:
Best
Open comment sort options
Best
Top
New
Controversial
Old
Q&A
Thomas Gainsborough - Mrs. Grace Dalrymple Elliott, 1778
John Copley - Dorothy Quincy Hancock, 1772
Alexander Roslin - Marie-Suzanne Giroust, 1770
Joseph Siffred Duplessis - Portrait of Marie Antoinette, 1772-1773
John Copley - Mrs. Thomas Gage, 1771
Joseph Wright of Derby - Portrait of a Woman, ca. 1770
John Singleton Copley - Mrs. John Winthrop, 1773
Anne Vallayer-Coster - Portait of a violinist, 1773
Anna Dorothea Therbusch - Self-portrait, 1776
Marie-Geneviève Navarre, Portrait of a Woman, 1774
Sir Joshua Reynolds - Lady Elizabeth Delmé and Her Children, 1777-1779
Sir Joshua Reynolds - Sarah Campbell, 1777-78
Laurent Pécheux - Margherita Sparapani Gentili Boccapadule, 1777
Alexander Roslin - Portrait of Hedwig Elizabeth Charlotte of Holstein-Gottorp, 1775
Johann Zoffany - Archduchess Maria Christina, 1776
Sir Joshua Reynolds - Mrs. Elisha Matthew, 1777
Johann Zoffany - Portrait of the Archduchess Maria Amalia of Austria, 1778
Benjamin West - Queen Charlotte, 1779
Sir Joshua Reynolds - Lady Worsley, 1779
Sir Joshua Reynolds - Jane Fleming, later Countess of Harrington, 1778-1779
Number 6, Portrait of a Woman, is absolutely captivating!
ETA: whoops I meant number 5 sorry!
So isn't Marchesa Margherita in number...13!
Wowzers!
What’s number 6 holding in her hand? I’m guessing the satin and gold tassels with ribbon (on the table) is something she’s working on? Or is that a cap?
And she has a long needle-type thing in each hand (scissors on the table). What’s the knotted fabric with the sort of… decorated cone in her left hand on her lap?
Edit: also number 20, Jane Fleming future countess has SUCH a face, like a 16 year old supermodel
It looks like she's holding circular knitting needles. Example I think she's working on adding lace to a solid fabric. It's long. Maybe she's making lace curtains? Or a fancy apron? Maybe another hair scarf thing?
I'm not sure what the black and gold sash/belt thing around her waist is.
I think it might be tatting, I feel like I’ve seen this mentioned in a Frances Burney book but I’m not sure and not sure what tatting is. I don’t think it’s knitting though
It's not tatting, which uses only a small single shuttle, not needles. If you zoom in on her left hand you can see the stitches sitting on the needle; it's definitely knitting.
Following up u/MelodicMaintenance13 ‘s comment, I looked up two needle tatting and came across videos on it.
Isn't number 6 just captivating!? I just commented above!
I haven't gotten past it yet to look at others.
Sorry, I meant number five.
ETA: a quill of some sort? Maybe for applying makeup, going by the table to her side? Nope looks like she's doing some lacework/ needlework
Love these, thank you. Assuming the painters “corrected” things to be more in line with current preferences, I find the very low neckline and small bust combination prevalent in these very interesting. I associate the low neckline with a preference for a buxom full-busted look but that doesn’t seem to be the fashion for this decade.
Is that some sort of monocule in pic 9?
Yes, she has another portrait with a monocle
I have never seen anything like that. Interesting piece of eyewear.
I bet the hair alone adds like 5 lbs plus of weight, never mind all the accessories (for the hair).
Beautiful compilation. I wonder how comfortable it was to look so good.
One of my favorite periods for fashion- great portrait collection, OP!
Amazing! I'm noticing that many of them have very flushed cheeks, not just subtly blushed as I'd might expect. Was this flushed look particularly in fashion or merely a coincidence?
Flushing was considered becoming of a woman and highlighted her light/"translucent" skin. Diderot wrote about it, along with the artist's struggles trying to nail the human skintone and its ephemoral nature. It's in his 1765 work Essais sur la Peinture:
“On a dit que la plus belle couleur qu’il y eût au monde, étoit cette rougeur aimable dont l’innocence, la jeunesse, la santé, la modestie et lapudeur coloroient les joues d’une fille.” (It has been said that the most beautiful color in the world is that lovely redness which innocence, youth, health, modesty and chastity use to color a young girl’s cheek.)
In contrast, because a blush is hard to notice on dark skin, its "opaqueness" was considered untrustworthy and in women's cases, even unwomanly. If you can get access to it (I can send it to you if you want), the article Portraiture, race, and subjectivity: the opacity of Marie-Guillemine Benoist’s Portrait d’une négresse by Cécile Bishop dives into this. It becomes a bit convoluted near the end but I like the analysis of blush and perceived femininity. The article is also where I pulled the Diderot quote from.
Fascinating! Thank you so much for your response 😊
I edited my comment a bit to include a relevant Diderot quote, you might like it :)
I liked seeing the butterfly collection in image #13. A lepidopterist could probably identify the species if the wings are detailed enough.
I love these--among my very favorite decades for clothing and hair.
I did want to point out though that several of these paintings show women dressed in things that they would not have worn for customary daytime activities. In some cases, the painter may be depicting something from a print (a garment that the subject never even saw--sometimes emulating the shapeless gowns seen in portraits by Godfrey Kneller).
In some cases ladies are clad in some version of "Turquerie," fashions inspired by clothing of the Ottoman Empire (John Singleton Copley's Margaret Kemble Gage wears something also seen on several of her contemporaries). This allowed a scintillating absence of stays, for example, while still including modest coverage, as well as demonstrating familiarity with trendy exoticism. So some of these pieces might have appeared in real life at masquerades, but no respectable lady would walk down the streets of Europe dressed this way.
Annoyingly, Sir Joshua Reynolds felt that it was appropriate to elevate his subjects by depicting them in some kind of "classical" garb rather than contemporary dress as well. All that to say that while these images all show a presumably cooperative depiction of the subject, they do not all necessarily show them in their own clothing or indeed in clothing that existed at all.
edited to correct artist name
Curious, 13/20 has two clips(?) at her waist band. Does anyone know what these would have been for?
Hair was so complicated.
And chests were so small. sigh
I love the Grace Dalrymple!
The portrait of Charlotte with her children at Windsor Castle is my favorite.
The last one and number five are runners up.
Seems pink was very in that decade
I don’t care is she is an archduchess, 17’s dress is really tacky. It looks like whatever the 18th century equivalent of SHEIN made it. It really shows no taste, poor woman, and she’s doomed to wearing it for all of posterity. I know women chose their dresses and dressmakers weren’t going to argue with royalty! All the other dresses are gorgeous. This is my favorite dress period as well.
Wow, #14 is captivating.