Charles II, Period of

(Another historical costume more representative of the late 19th century than its original era of the 1660s. The illustration is taken from the 1896 edition and is very much in the hourglass style of that year; presumably the 1887 version is envisioned similarly adapted to the bustle silhouette!)

1887:
CHARLES II., PERIOD OF.  The women's dress of this period is familiar from the bevy of beauties associated with it at Hampton Court in négligé attire.  The bodices alone are stiff, but they expose rather than cover the bust and neck; the curled locks fall on the shoulders, and are simply confined by a row of pearls round the head; the arms are bare from the elbow; a train and distinct front breadth form the skirt, and there is a plethora of lace.  More homely women wore plain skirts, an upper one of a contrasting tone; pointed bodices, high to the throat, with a plain turn-down collar from the throat; the full sleeves to elbow are caught up with jewels at the bend of the arm; the shoes high on the instep, and very high in the heel, with roses or buckles.  The following is a good dress: -- Blue and gold brocade, ith flounces of gold embroidery and point d'Alençon lace, and train of old gold satin; puffed petticoat looped at the side with bows, pearls, and lace; bodice low with sleeves fastened in to elbow with diamond ornaments; diamond tiara, and ornaments.  The skirt made plain and long, the bodices low, with lace turning downwards from shoulders.  Hair in ringlets, with bandeau of pearls.

1896:
CHARLES II., PERIOD OF.  The dress illustrated [above left; click to enlarge] may be carried out in plain satin.  The skirt full, the bodice low and stiff, with handsome jewelled trimming on front at neck, and fur bands which can be replaced if desired by a fall of lace, a full sleeve to elbow with an undersleeve of muslin and satin caught up in the fore-arm with a jewel.  Ruffle, gloves, pearls round the throat, and a small bouquet of flowers at the side of the head.  The women's dress of this era is familiar from the bevy of beauties associated with it at Hampton Court in négligé attire.  The bodices expose rather than cover the bust and neck; the curled locks fall on the shoulders, and are simply confined by a row of pearls; the arms are bare from the elbow; a train and distinct front breadth form the skirt, and there is a plethora of lace.  More homely women wore plain skirts, an upper one of a contrasting tone; pointed bodices, high to the throat, with a plain turn-down collar; the full sleeves to elbow are caught up with jewels at the bend of the arm; the shoes high on the instep, and very high in the heel, with roses or buckles.  The following is a good example: -- Long skirt of blue and gold brocade, with flounces of gold embroidery and point d'Alençon lace, train of old gold satin puffed and looped at the side with bows and pearls; bodice low with lace turning downwards from shoulders, sleeves fastened into elbow with diamond ornaments; diamond tiara.

At right (click to enlarge), an actual portrait of a courtier of Charles II in the fashion of the era: "Frances Teresa Stuart", c1662-1665 by Sir Peter Lely.  Frances Teresa Stewart was the Duchess of Richmond & Lennox and a prominent member of the Restoration Court.  Notice the dramatically lengthened bodice and the much softer skirt shape compared to the 1896 illustration above!

 

Sources:
Holt, Ardern.  Fancy Dresses Described, 5th Edition.  London: Debenham & Freebody, 1887.
Holt, Ardern.  Fancy Dresses Described, Sixth Edition.  London: Debenham & Freebody, 1896.

The 1896 edition of Holt may be found online at the University of Wisconsin Digital Collections.

Comments

[Neil W]

Should that read "Hampton Court" rather than "Hampton Couty"? It's entirely possible, perhaps even likely, that Charles II kept a bevy of beauties in négligé attire at Hampton Court.

[Susan de Guardiola]

Erp, yes, typo, will fix.