Fashions for females in the Georgian Era changed dramatically, from wide skirts and narrow waists, high-piled coiffures, and fussy decoration to simple, high waisted gowns — and back again in the space of a few decades. Marie Antoinette (1755-1793), Queen of France, right, might have been the most extreme. She was painted in 1778 by Elisabeth Vigee le Brun (1755-1842) in a huge hooped skirt and hair powdered, drawn high and topped off with a fountain of feathers. In an upcoming post, we will look at some of the fashion plates from various lady’s magazines of the Georgian era. In this post, however, we will indulge in the representations of fashion shown in portraits by celebrated artists.
Left is Grace Dalrymple Elliott, subject of Jo Manning’s excellent biography. My Lady Scandalous: The Amazing Life and Outrageous Times of Grace Dalrymple Elliott, Royal Courtesan. She was painted by Gainsborough in the late 1770’s. One of the outstanding features of Gainsborough’s portraits is the depiction of the sumptuous silks and satins worn by his subjects. Again, the hair-do is exaggeratedly high and powdered to a pewter shade rather than the white powdering of a few years earlier. Imagine how many hours had to be spent by these ladies while their minions teased each strand up and over whatever bird-cage-like platform was used.
In the 1780’s and 1790’s, the styles became simpler, perhaps bucolic. Even the French Queen favored a version of the simple muslin chemise. The mode, color and fabric were copied by aristocrats on both sides of the Channel. Hair is more naturally arranged, though still powdered a little, and one could hardly say the hat would be worn by a peasant. Again, the painter is Vigee le Brun.
 |
| Jane Elizabeth, Countess of Oxford, 1797 by John Hoppner Tate Britain |
Gradually the gowns evolved into looser skirts with high waists just below the bosom. The two portraits below by Sir Henry Raeburn(1756-1823) show the exact changes.
 |
| Mrs. Eleanor Urquhart, 1795 National Gallery of Art, Washington, DC.  Elizabeth Campbell 1812 During the nine years of the Regency, fashions became more elaborate with fancy work and embellishments for the sleeves and around the hems. After about 1800, the hair powder is gone for good and the styles are simpler. By the official end of the regency in 1820, waistlines had begun to sneak back to their natural spot. In the 1820’s, the corseted waist and wide skirts returned, and in the 1830’s, the hair rose again. Below are two portraits by Thomas Sully (1783-1872), born in England but who lived most of his life in the United States.
 Abby Ann King Turner Van Pelt, 1832 Sir Thomas Lawrence (1769-1830) painted many portraits throughout the regency and afterwards. Here are a few of his portraits, showing the change from the late 18th century to several decades into the 19th.  Queen Charlotte, 1789, National Gallery, London
 Caroline of Brunswick, Princess of Wales, 1798, Victoria and Albert Museum, London  Mrs. Jens Wolff, 1815  Julia Hankey, later Lady Bathurst, c. 1825  Hair has remained unpowdered throughout the late Georgian period, but by the 1830’s, there were some fantastic top-knot arrangements, as seen below. Not to mention the fantastic hats that came back into style. To the left is a portrait of Fanny Kemble (1809-1893) with her aunt Sarah Siddons (1755-1831) painted by Henry Perronet Briggs (1791-1844) in 1831, shortly before Sarah went to her considerable reward.  The print to the right is Princess Victoria, later Queen, based on an 1833 painting by Sir George Hayter (1792-1871). Fanny and the princess share a top-knot hair style. Below is a feathered hat even Marie Antoinette would have loved. The painting hangs in the Hermitage, St. Petersburg; Sir George Hayter portrays Countess Vorontsova in 1832. Another hat the ill-fated queen might have enjoyed wearing is shown in a portrait of Julia, Lady Peel, nee Floyd (1795-1859) by Sir Thomas Lawrence; the real thing can be viewed at New York City’s Frick Collection. So the fashion cycle comes full circle in about seventy years from the 1760’s to the 1830’s.   |
I wanted to post you the very little word so as to thank you once again with the fantastic basics you have contributed on this page. It's quite wonderfully generous of you to grant without restraint just what a lot of people would have offered for sale for an e-book to make some money for themselves, and in particular seeing that you could possibly have tried it if you considered necessary. Those principles also acted like the easy way to be sure that someone else have the identical eagerness just like my very own to learn a whole lot more with regards to this problem. I'm certain there are millions of more enjoyable times up front for folks who look into your forum.
Kristine and Vicky are indeed generous! This was a wonderful essay. When I researched the fashions of the period I was intrigued by the little bits and pieces…like women having their hair shorn "a la victime", that is, cut off like the women victims of the guillotine. Some even wore thin red bands around their necks to indicate the cut. (Yipes!)
Unfortunately, Gainsborough, in his homage to Van Dyck in the Grace Elliott, portrait, paid more attention to that sumptuous gown (gorgeous!) than to her pretty face. He made up for it, though, with his later portrait-bust of Grace 🙂
Those two portraits by Henry Raeburn show what a wonderful painter he was. He's another one who's not at all known these days. Hmmm…maybe I should do some research…
Absolutely incredible, ladies! Thank you! Thank you! This post is going directly into my research binder. The portraits convey so much more than many of the prints from period magazines. Just wonderful!
And I was delighted to see some of the portraits here that hang in the National Gallery of Art, my local art museum and my favorite place to go in Washington, DC.