When James VI of Scotland (1567-1625) inherited the English throne in 1603 it meant the start of his rule as James I (1603-25), and the start of the Stuart dynasty in England which lasted until the death of James’ great-granddaughter, Queen Anne (1702-14). Events of the 17th century had a dramatic impact on royal styles and attitudes to fashion, demonstrating how politics, performance and fashion could be intimately connected.
At first, the fashions of the Stuart court were very similar to Tudor fashions. James I’s queen, Anne of Denmark (1574-1619), seems to have encouraged her court to continue wearing the formal French farthingale ‒ perhaps to show continuity with their Tudor predecessors ‒ while fashionable men continued to wear the doublet and hose.
By the start of Charles I’s reign in 1625, however, the Stuart dynasty seemed more secure and there was less need to follow previous styles. The stiff and constricting shapes of the Tudor era gave way to softer lines, and highly decorated fabrics were replaced by plain but lustrous silks. Children in the Tudor period had dressed like miniature versions of their parents and this trend continued into the 17th century as you can see in the portrait of 6-year-old Princess Mary (1631-1660) by Sir Anthony van Dyck.
Even though the century started off relatively peacefully, by the 1640s the impact of first James’ and then Charles’ religious policies and attitudes to their governments had caused friction across the British Isles. The Civil Wars culminated with regicide in 1649, and the beheading of Charles I (1625-49) marked the era of the Commonwealth under the rule of Oliver Cromwell, the Lord Protector. With the royal family in exile on the continent, royal influence on fashion decreased. When Charles II (1660-85) was crowned in 1660, however, there was once again a royal court to set trends. Compared with the austere years of the Commonwealth, Charles II’s court was a hotbed of extravagance and decadence. There was a flurry of fashions for billowing shirts, a profusion of ribbons and full, curly wigs.
By the end of the century, therefore, both men’s and women’s wear looked significantly different from the fashions that had been worn by James I and his court. The ruff of the 16th century had evolved into flowing lace collars and eventually cravats, the short doublet worn by men had been replaced by knee-length vests (or waistcoats) and coats, and wigs had become the ultimate accessory. A key development in women’s fashion was the evolution of an informal gown worn at home as a counter to the more formal structured and boned gowns worn at court. These loose gowns contained lots of fabric, which would be pinned in pleats and folds to the body, this was the start of the ‘mantua’, a name given to a gown that saw a number of different styles and lasted into the 18th century.
There were also new means of finding out about fashion. Before the end of the 17th century news about fashion generally spread through word of mouth or, in some cases, via ‘fashion dolls’, which dressmakers and milliners would use to copy the cut and construction of the latest styles. Such means were slow and/or expensive, however, so by the end of the century there was a new format for fashion news – the fashion plate. These were small, detailed engravings of fashionable dress that were printed in journals. Many of these came from France, which was considered the fashion leader of Europe. They detailed both men’s and women’s fashions, often commenting on actual garments that the artists had spied being worn at court. Compared to today, when the internet provides constant access to images and fashion news, these fashion plates were produced at irregular intervals and were reserved mainly for the elite levels of society. However, they were the start of an important development in how fashion news was disseminated across the country.
No comments:
Post a Comment