This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fashion, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Fashion on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FashionWikipedia:WikiProject FashionTemplate:WikiProject Fashionfashion articles
The widest width of panniers (as opposed to hoops) started late in this period, and had the most influence in the fashions of the 1760s and 1770s, so I'm not sure Marie Antoinette really belongs in this article. On page 425 of the 1st edition of Blanche Payne, there's a hugely wide 1751 Swedish court gown that might have more relevance to this article than Marie Antoinette. Churchh00:44, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Did you see Wetman's edits to pannier (clothing)? I need to include a Velasquez reference in the prior period (which has no women's section yet, though it will - I just unearthed the article on portraits in negligee that I was looking for). Will see if I can find that Swedish gown in a portrait - my take on copyright is that photos of actual clothes in museums are copyrightable, and therefore not fair game (though a case could be made for fair use...). - PKM16:53, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, Lorens Pasch didn't start painting for the court until 1766. And some online digging indicates that『änkedrottning』is Queen-Dowager (caption: Lovisa Ulrika som änkedrottning, porträtterad av Lorens Pasch d.y.). - PKM17:42, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
It was a regional fashion even before this period, but its greatest influence on pan-European fashions was still after this period... Churchh03:42, 30 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Peter Thornton, Baroque and Rococo Silks demonstrated that the cut of a woman's dress changed less year to year than the patterns that were fashionable. I rember the "bizarre pattern" silks of the 1710s he illustrated,, though I haven't seen the book in going on forty years! --Wetman05:52, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Oh yes, we need stuff on eighteenth century fabrics, and embroidery. Good point. I have some references - will try to find some good PD images to go with! - PKM02:11, 15 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Moved men after women, so now all articles in this series have that structure. I'm not entirely happy with the way I have the images laid out to support this change; will probably add some and move some around. - PKM20:03, 17 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The only bad thing about moving women up is that Mr. and Mrs. Andrews are dropped down to the middle of the page; not sure if anything should be done about that... Churchh05:59, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
That's one of the infelicities I am struggling with. Perhaps more overview to allow space to move it back up. - PKM16:03, 18 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This article was recategorized in 2006 in accordance with a scheme for organizing articles in Category:History of clothing.
I finally got around to scanning the formal mantua image I have been wanting, which takes care of the corset reference, so I moved this image as you correctly suggested.
The 50 year articles are problematic. One should probably rather have a 1680-1730 article (I know that is not possible) and move most of the present 1650-1700 stuff into that. The present article seems to be rather a 1730-1750 article, the 1730s shift in fashion (e.g. towards less opulent wigs is not really dated...) --Olaf Simons (talk) 17:20, 20 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]
You are correct the 50 year articles are problematic. They should run something like this: 1650 to 1665, 1665 to 1680, 1680 to 1720 (or so). Fashion for men had not changed much from 1690 to 1715. Azalea pomp (talk) 07:31, 11 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Does anyone have a source for a robe a la Francaise with a closed-front petticoat? I've never come across an example, either in paintings or extant garments, that doesn't have an exposed petticoat-- all round gowns I've seen have been robe a l'Anglaise. I can certainly believe they exist, but it seems prudent to maybe have an example picture to substantiate the claim that both robe a la Francaise and robe a l'Anglaise could be worn as round gowns. 131.229.236.145 (talk) 18:56, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Original commenter here, months later I’ve finally come across a single example of a robe a la française with a closed front. However, it’s noted that this particular gown was refashioned from an earlier robe volante with some constructional elements (such as the closed front) maintained. As such, I think it’s safe to assume this is an exception to the exposed-petticoat rule for robes a la française, so my edit of removing the mention of round gowns a la française still stands. Just wanted to share the find! PDFDownloader100 (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]