In Regency times, the prevailing fashion was for a Grecian look, and contemporary ideas on Grecian fashions were largely formed by examining Greek and Roman statues and other historical pictures. This meant that long, columnar, flowing dresses, with a short waist and a relatively natural bust were the principal fashion ideologies of the day. In order to aid the bust in its ‘natural form’, it was supported by stays which were designed to lift and separate the breasts, rather than compress them.
Changes from eighteenth century fashion to this new form of dress occurred as early as the 1790’s, even though the Regency period in English history did not strictly start until 1811. These changes in fashion were somewhat influenced by the French Revolution but also by the more widespread revolution of ideas (called the ‘Enlightenment’) that was sweeping Europe at the time. These ideas concerned notions of freedom, human rights, and equality, which were associated with the ancient ideals of Greece and Rome.
Of course, any changes in fashions (particularly extreme changes) were always accompanied by comments and caricatures in the press.
In the 1790’s, the Morning Herald published a rather severe critique on the ‘new’ position of the breast!
The bosom, which Nature planted at the bottom of her chest, is pushed up by means of wadding and whalebone to a station so near her chin that in a very full subject that feature is sometimes lost between the invading mounds. The stays – or coat of mail – must be laced as tight as strength can draw the cord, Not only is the shape thrust out of its proper place but the blood is thrown forcibly into the face, neck and arms … and were it not for the fine apparel of our ladies we should be at a loss at the first glance to decide, by their redundancy and universal redness, whether they were nurses or cooks. Over this strangely manufactured figure a scanty petticoat and as scanty a gown are put. The latter resembles a bolster-slip rather than a garment.
(quoted in Corsets and Crinolines, by Norah Waugh)
In 1791, James Gillray published a caricature of Mrs Fitzherbert, who had been secretly married to the future Prince Regent (George IV) in 1785. Their marriage was declared invalid, as it did not receive the prior approval of the King, and the Prince ended up marrying Caroline of Brunswick in 1795.
The caricature was entitled, Patent Bolsters;- Le moyen d’etre en-bon-point. The translation of “Le moyen d’etre embonpoint” is “The way to be overweight”. It depicts Mrs Fitzherbert standing at her dressing table, about to tie a pad on her breasts to make her very buxom figure even more plump! Her stays seem to be the transitional sort, with tabs at the bottom but pushing the bust upwards to form the characteristic “shelf”, where the chin is sometimes hidden between the “invading mounds”!
As an interesting aside, the picture frame on the wall depicts the Prince of Wales (George IV), and both the crown on the frame and the tiara on Mrs Fitzherbert’s head are inscribed with “Ich dien” or “I serve”.
By 1811, the bust was still very “shelf-ish”, as a lady of distinction writes in the book, The Mirror of the Graces.
The bosom, which nature formed with exquisite symmetry in itself, and admirable adaptation to the parts of the figure to which it is united, has been transformed into a shape, and transplanted to a place, which deprives it of its original beauty and harmony with the rest of the person. This hideous metamorphose has been effected by means of newly invented stays or corsets which, by an extraordinary construction and force of material, force the figure of the wearer into whatever form the artist pleases. […] In consequence we see, in eight women out of ten, the hips squeezed into a circumference little more than the waist; and the bosom shoved up to the chin, making a short of fleshy shelf, disgusting to the beholders, and certainly most incommodious to the bearer.
(quoted in Corsets and Crinolines, by Norah Waugh)
I am sure there are myriads of references to this particular extreme of fashion – the bust shelf. But I suppose with every aspect of fashion, someone will always take it to an extreme! As I write, I have mental pictures of today’s young men who currently wear their jeans around their thighs – below their bottom! This might be a modern example of the fall of the male waistline! (And I don’t think that has ever happened in history before!)
Related Posts
Fashion Advice from the Pulpit – extremes of fashion in the 1400’s
The Rococo: The Extremities of Hoops in the 1740’s – extremes of fashion in the 1700’s
My Regency Journey: Corset Construction – making a pair of long Regency stays
Sources and Relevant Links
Caricature Image Source: from The British Museum
Corsets and Crinolines, by Norah Waugh – buy on Amazon
The Mirror of the Graces; or, the English Lady’s Costume, by A Lady of Distinction (1830 edition) – read online
It doesn’t look very comfy! Glad ’tis no longer the fashion, wouldn’t like my upper body to go all red from too much squeezing.
hehe, No, it doesn’t sound that pleasant, does it? I suppose it might be the equivalent of the women of today in uncomfortable but highly fashionable high heels. Ouchie!
I’m wondering if it might have simply meant that ladies laid off on powdering and people were not used to it…? Wearing my own Regency stays, I find it by no means uncomfortable to THAT degree, even if I acccidentally lace them too tightly… But I haven’t tried tight-lacing more firmly boned 1790s stays yet, and don’t plan to!
By the way, “Ich dien” actually means “I serve”.
Thank you, I have made the translation change!
As you, I do not find my Regency stays uncomfortable either. Maybe the ladies that are the topic of these contemporary discussions on fashion were more extreme than their average peers? Or possibly the discussions are a reaction against a rapid change in fashion, as sometimes occurs in the present day as well.
what is the name of the statue you have pictured?
I am not sure, to be honest. I think I just searched for one on Pinterest or on Google.