C o N T E N T s

7

A u T h o R s ’ N o T E

8

‘ f A s h I o N f A N T A s I E s ’

Catherine flood and sarah Grant

2 8

p L A T E s

7 8

f u R T h E R R E A D I N G

8 0

C R E D I T s

Aliqui arum as dolum, sunt ipis nestiur? Non repe pellest qui dolupta quasper rorrunt issitas imo totas utem ullor accatus apercia sperrumet estion cus eturereic te laborerum ea consed maio. ut atum volorep edipsa sit lic tem in cus. Antinct otatisse simagnat untiis nimi, el moluptation nulparc hicatqu istrum acessint.

Ignam sus et aut aut aperunt rempor sed quae solorerunt. ficiet quat et acculpa nobis aceptatqui acest, ulles a quis estis il ius num debisquam ratiust, aut dollit alia cullabore natur? Velluptae pa quis re vitemqui ad eos re prae net diciis nobit, tem dolore velenim agnatempores el maxim etur, od qui consequas et eos exersperum repuditiisci berum cus, ipissima dolescius commo quis earciliquae officit mosaniat ullitas ium haribus anderum id quiant aut quiducil mi, nitia con enempori dolo quos eaqui consequame repro blaborenit peritat liqui abore cum nus, odi ditatus molupta qui am quatur seque mi, occulla borehen imintis quat laceptat. Xernamus aut omnis sus, voluptaerior sequodi gendisc itateca erovitat.

V&A PublishingVictoria and Albert Museumsouth KensingtonLondon sW7 2RLwww.vam.ac.uk

Aliqui arum as dolum, sunt ipis nestiur? Non repe pellest qui dolupta quasper rorrunt issitas imo totas utem ullor accatus apercia sperrumet estion cus eturereic te laborerum ea consed maio. ut atum volorep edipsa s mossi officienis it lic tem in cus. Antinct otatisse simagnat untiis nimi, el moluptation nulparc hicatqu istrum acessint.

Ignam sus et aut aut aperunt rempor sed quae solorerunt. ficiet quat et acculpa nobis aceptatqui acest, ulles a quis estis il ius num debisquam ratiust, aut dollit alia cullabore natur? Velluptae pa quis re vitemqui ad eos re prae net diciis nobit, tem dolore velenim agnatempores el maxim etur, od qui consequas et eos exersperum repuditiisci berum cus, ipissima dolescius commo quis earciliquae officit mosaniat ullitas ium haribus anderum id quiant aut quiducil mi, nitia con enempori dolo quos eaqui consequame repro blaborenit peritat liqui abore cum nus, odi ditatus molupta qui am quatur seque mi, occulla borehen imintis quat laceptat. Xernamus aut omnis sus, voluptaerior sequodi gendisc itateca erovitat.

C o N T E N T s

7

A u T h o R s ’ N o T E

8

‘ f A s h I o N f A N T A s I E s ’

Catherine flood and sarah Grant

2 8

p L A T E s

7 8

f u R T h E R R E A D I N G

8 0

C R E D I T s

Aliqui arum as dolum, sunt ipis nestiur? Non repe pellest qui dolupta quasper rorrunt issitas imo totas utem ullor accatus apercia sperrumet estion cus eturereic te laborerum ea consed maio. ut atum volorep edipsa sit lic tem in cus. Antinct otatisse simagnat untiis nimi, el moluptation nulparc hicatqu istrum acessint.

Ignam sus et aut aut aperunt rempor sed quae solorerunt. ficiet quat et acculpa nobis aceptatqui acest, ulles a quis estis il ius num debisquam ratiust, aut dollit alia cullabore natur? Velluptae pa quis re vitemqui ad eos re prae net diciis nobit, tem dolore velenim agnatempores el maxim etur, od qui consequas et eos exersperum repuditiisci berum cus, ipissima dolescius commo quis earciliquae officit mosaniat ullitas ium haribus anderum id quiant aut quiducil mi, nitia con enempori dolo quos eaqui consequame repro blaborenit peritat liqui abore cum nus, odi ditatus molupta qui am quatur seque mi, occulla borehen imintis quat laceptat. Xernamus aut omnis sus, voluptaerior sequodi gendisc itateca erovitat.

V&A PublishingVictoria and Albert Museumsouth KensingtonLondon sW7 2RLwww.vam.ac.uk

Aliqui arum as dolum, sunt ipis nestiur? Non repe pellest qui dolupta quasper rorrunt issitas imo totas utem ullor accatus apercia sperrumet estion cus eturereic te laborerum ea consed maio. ut atum volorep edipsa s mossi officienis it lic tem in cus. Antinct otatisse simagnat untiis nimi, el moluptation nulparc hicatqu istrum acessint.

Ignam sus et aut aut aperunt rempor sed quae solorerunt. ficiet quat et acculpa nobis aceptatqui acest, ulles a quis estis il ius num debisquam ratiust, aut dollit alia cullabore natur? Velluptae pa quis re vitemqui ad eos re prae net diciis nobit, tem dolore velenim agnatempores el maxim etur, od qui consequas et eos exersperum repuditiisci berum cus, ipissima dolescius commo quis earciliquae officit mosaniat ullitas ium haribus anderum id quiant aut quiducil mi, nitia con enempori dolo quos eaqui consequame repro blaborenit peritat liqui abore cum nus, odi ditatus molupta qui am quatur seque mi, occulla borehen imintis quat laceptat. Xernamus aut omnis sus, voluptaerior sequodi gendisc itateca erovitat.

5

Style and Satire reveals the close and previously little-studied connections between two printed art forms: graphic social satire and fashion plates. It draws largely on the Victoria and Albert Museum’s holdings, in particular its collection of fashion plates, long recognised by scholars as one of the finest of its kind. These are housed as loose prints in the Word & Image Department and in bound volumes in the National Art Library.

This book is not intended as a chronological survey of either the history of dress or the history of the print – complex subjects, for which a considerable wealth of literature already exists. Nor is it a detailed study of these two classes of print – the fashion plate and the caricature – rather, it is intended as an introduction to the links between the art forms, exploring some of the most important themes connecting works that issued from the two centres of fashion, paris and London. We aim to provide a glimpse of the riches of the V&A’s holdings increase well as increasung the reader’s understanding and enjoyment of these beautiful prints.

Detail from Georges Jacques Gatine (1773–

1824) after horace Vernet (1789–1893)

Merveilleuse: Chapeau de paille d’Italie,

par-dessus à la Chinoise

A u T h o R ’ s N o T E

5

Style and Satire reveals the close and previously little-studied connections between two printed art forms: graphic social satire and fashion plates. It draws largely on the Victoria and Albert Museum’s holdings, in particular its collection of fashion plates, long recognised by scholars as one of the finest of its kind. These are housed as loose prints in the Word & Image Department and in bound volumes in the National Art Library.

This book is not intended as a chronological survey of either the history of dress or the history of the print – complex subjects, for which a considerable wealth of literature already exists. Nor is it a detailed study of these two classes of print – the fashion plate and the caricature – rather, it is intended as an introduction to the links between the art forms, exploring some of the most important themes connecting works that issued from the two centres of fashion, paris and London. We aim to provide a glimpse of the riches of the V&A’s holdings increase well as increasung the reader’s understanding and enjoyment of these beautiful prints.

Detail from Georges Jacques Gatine (1773–

1824) after horace Vernet (1789–1893)

Merveilleuse: Chapeau de paille d’Italie,

par-dessus à la Chinoise

A u T h o R ’ s N o T E

6

Detail from

James Gillray 1757–1815

Les Invisibles

f A s h I o Nf A N T A s I E s

Catherine flood and sarah Grant

6

Detail from

James Gillray 1757–1815

Les Invisibles

f A s h I o Nf A N T A s I E s

Catherine flood and sarah Grant

8 9

Beautifully printed, hand-coloured fashion plates featured in smart magazines between the late

eighteenth century and the 1920s. They communicated trends in fashionable dress and provided viewers with a fantasy of luxury and consumption. over the same period, fashion was a consistent target for satirists who claimed to expose reality through humorously exaggerated visions of extreme styles. While fashion plates sold an ideal, satirical prints gloried in the absurdity of fashion, sometimes betraying darker social and moral anxieties. fashion plates and fashion satires created opposing fantasies of fashion: the refined and the grotesque, the aspirational and the repellent, the ideal and the harsh reality. As this book demonstrates, however, they were two sides of the same coin. Together they helped to foster a culture of fashion – as sharon Marcus points out: ‘fashion depends on quick dissemination in time and extensive distribution in space: a fashion is only one if many people simultaneously learn of it, adopt it and renounce it’.2 In an industrializing age the print market had an important role to play in fulfilling these requirements.

The mechanical print was as essential a tool to early modern life as photographs and digital media are to us today; an urban and commercial phenomenon and, for its time, comparatively democratic. fashion plates and printed fashion caricatures, both of which relied on a detailed observation of current dress and manners, afford significant insights into contemporary social attitudes and promoted a growing self-scrutiny. placing them side by side reveals that they share more than subject matter. Their close correspondence extended to production and distribution: for much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the two genres were a product of the same print market, often executed by the same designers and printmakers, issued by the same publishers and consumed by a shared audience. of the artists and printmakers featured in this book many shifted seamlessly between

the two genres. Wenceslaus hollar (1607–1677), whose elegant prints recording contemporary fashions are often signalled by historians as early forerunners to the fashion plate, also dealt in social satire. The sharp-eyed talents of Robert Dighton were put to good use in fashion-related illustrations and caricatures alike, while both horace Vernet, of Incroyables et merveilleuses fame, and George Barbier, who designed the opulent fashion plates that characterise the graphic arts of the Art Deco, produced caricatures satirising the lives and times of their contemporaries. The two genres frequently borrowed from each other. satirists aped the conventions of fashion plates and even copied figures direct from them. Fashion plate illustrators, in turn, looked to the composition of social satires in order to introduce a sense of ‘lifestyle’ into their plates.

Though the tradition of the caricature in Europe dates back to sixteenth-century Italy, fashion caricatures and the larger body of social satire to which they belong did not emerge in earnest until the eighteenth century when artists fully grasped the rich potential of dress as a comic device. Before this few caricatures dealt in any systematic way with fashion. It was therefore not until the eighteenth century, a period that also witnessed the accelerated growth and diversification of the wardrobe and the increasing commercial development of the fashion industry that the fashion caricature began to be produced in great numbers, caricaturists seizing on the excesses of french fashions, which were adopted throughout the continent and across the Channel. The second half of the century in particular appears to have commanded increasing attention, concurrent with the birth of fashion journalism and a growing philosophical engagement with dress.5 Their principal object may have been to entertain and amuse but a moral undercurrent nevertheless pervades much of these artists’ work. As Aileen Ribeiro has observed, ‘Dress, as an art so closely linked to the body, so revelatory of conscious or unconscious sexuality,

is constantly liable to hostile interpretation’.6 In England these satires were devoured by an appreciative and, for the most part, educated public whose taste and tolerance for a ribald, incisive humour had been cultivated for decades.7 This, what is commonly referred to as the ‘Golden Age’ of caricature, saw the rise of artists now synonymous with this genre: William hogarth (1697–1764); Robert Dighton (c.1752–1814); James Gillray (c. 1756–1815); Thomas Rowlandson (1756–1827), Mary and Matthew Darly (1792–1878) and later William heath (1795–1840). In france the press operated under far stricter controls than their English counterpart, the legacy of measures introduced in the reign of Louis XIV who had been swift to crush the slightest sign of insurrection.8 These regulations continued with moderate success until the revolution, with the result that most eighteenth-century social caricatures of the class that would have enjoyed wide distribution in England were in france probably produced only for private consumption, as was the case with Charles-Germain de saint-Aubin’s (1721–1786) book of hand-drawn caricatures, the Livre de caricatures tant bonnes que mauvaises. As a result many do not survive today. The celebrated exceptions to this rule were were philibert Louis Debucourt’s (1755–1832) The Palais-Royal-gallery’s Walk/Promenade de la gallerie du Palais Royal (1787) and La Promenade Publique (1792) and Louis Le Coeur’s (fl. c. 1784–1825), Promenade du Jardin du Palais Royal (1787), pre-revolutionary social satire of an altogether more subtle and cautious strain than that produced across the Channel.9 printed board games taking fashion as their theme, such as publisher Jean-Baptiste Crépy’s (fl. c. 1753–1790) Le Nouveau Jeu du Costume et des Coeffures des Dames (1778) offered a form of mild chastisement by penalising players who landed on squares illustrating the most extreme fashions.10 The vast majority of french caricatures that did escape the censor’s net were political in subject and produced under the cover of anonymity. It was not until the

opening decades of the nineteenth century that french caricaturists gave full vent to their creative powers, seen in the series of fashion caricatures, Le Suprême Bon Ton; Caricatures Parisiennes and Le Bon Genre.

But if England led the way in humour then france was the undisputed leader in fashion and matters of taste. It was also a major centre for printmaking and book illustration – even hogarth insisted on employing french engravers11, making it the natural birthplace for fashion journalism in the eighteenth century. The fashion plate is believed by historians to have evolved from costume books and plates – prints documenting foreign and regional dress, the earliest of which dates from 1486, Bernard von Breydenbach’s Peregrinationes in terram sanctam, and which became popular throughout Europe in the sixteenth century.12 from these developed isolated, individually-issued plates and portraits en mode – portraits of the nobility, or celebrated thespians and opera singers in which their dress is made the focal point, which began to appear in paris the mid- to late seventeenth century – there was no real equivalent in English print production at this time.13 plates were published in the important french gazette, the Mercure Galant (and continued under the Mercure de France) and in assorted almanachs or as individual suites of prints.14 These can be seen as a direct precursor to the fashion plate, as can the range of prints produced by prominent artists that strayed into depictions of fashionable attire: works by hollar, Daniel Rabel (1578–1637); Jacques Callot (1592–1635); Abraham Bosse (c.1602/1604–1676); Jean-Antoine Watteau (1684–1721) and hubert Gravelot (1699–1733). The pace quickened with the advent of the eighteenth century – the number of fashion-related plates issued in paris for example grew from a modest figure of 102 between 1600-1649 to 1,275 between 1750–1799.15 Jean-Michel Moreau Le Jeune’s (1741–1814) and sigmund freudenberg’s (1745–1801) illustrations for the Monument du Costume, published in

8 9

Beautifully printed, hand-coloured fashion plates featured in smart magazines between the late

eighteenth century and the 1920s. They communicated trends in fashionable dress and provided viewers with a fantasy of luxury and consumption. over the same period, fashion was a consistent target for satirists who claimed to expose reality through humorously exaggerated visions of extreme styles. While fashion plates sold an ideal, satirical prints gloried in the absurdity of fashion, sometimes betraying darker social and moral anxieties. fashion plates and fashion satires created opposing fantasies of fashion: the refined and the grotesque, the aspirational and the repellent, the ideal and the harsh reality. As this book demonstrates, however, they were two sides of the same coin. Together they helped to foster a culture of fashion – as sharon Marcus points out: ‘fashion depends on quick dissemination in time and extensive distribution in space: a fashion is only one if many people simultaneously learn of it, adopt it and renounce it’.2 In an industrializing age the print market had an important role to play in fulfilling these requirements.

The mechanical print was as essential a tool to early modern life as photographs and digital media are to us today; an urban and commercial phenomenon and, for its time, comparatively democratic. fashion plates and printed fashion caricatures, both of which relied on a detailed observation of current dress and manners, afford significant insights into contemporary social attitudes and promoted a growing self-scrutiny. placing them side by side reveals that they share more than subject matter. Their close correspondence extended to production and distribution: for much of the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries the two genres were a product of the same print market, often executed by the same designers and printmakers, issued by the same publishers and consumed by a shared audience. of the artists and printmakers featured in this book many shifted seamlessly between

the two genres. Wenceslaus hollar (1607–1677), whose elegant prints recording contemporary fashions are often signalled by historians as early forerunners to the fashion plate, also dealt in social satire. The sharp-eyed talents of Robert Dighton were put to good use in fashion-related illustrations and caricatures alike, while both horace Vernet, of Incroyables et merveilleuses fame, and George Barbier, who designed the opulent fashion plates that characterise the graphic arts of the Art Deco, produced caricatures satirising the lives and times of their contemporaries. The two genres frequently borrowed from each other. satirists aped the conventions of fashion plates and even copied figures direct from them. Fashion plate illustrators, in turn, looked to the composition of social satires in order to introduce a sense of ‘lifestyle’ into their plates.

Though the tradition of the caricature in Europe dates back to sixteenth-century Italy, fashion caricatures and the larger body of social satire to which they belong did not emerge in earnest until the eighteenth century when artists fully grasped the rich potential of dress as a comic device. Before this few caricatures dealt in any systematic way with fashion. It was therefore not until the eighteenth century, a period that also witnessed the accelerated growth and diversification of the wardrobe and the increasing commercial development of the fashion industry that the fashion caricature began to be produced in great numbers, caricaturists seizing on the excesses of french fashions, which were adopted throughout the continent and across the Channel. The second half of the century in particular appears to have commanded increasing attention, concurrent with the birth of fashion journalism and a growing philosophical engagement with dress.5 Their principal object may have been to entertain and amuse but a moral undercurrent nevertheless pervades much of these artists’ work. As Aileen Ribeiro has observed, ‘Dress, as an art so closely linked to the body, so revelatory of conscious or unconscious sexuality,

is constantly liable to hostile interpretation’.6 In England these satires were devoured by an appreciative and, for the most part, educated public whose taste and tolerance for a ribald, incisive humour had been cultivated for decades.7 This, what is commonly referred to as the ‘Golden Age’ of caricature, saw the rise of artists now synonymous with this genre: William hogarth (1697–1764); Robert Dighton (c.1752–1814); James Gillray (c. 1756–1815); Thomas Rowlandson (1756–1827), Mary and Matthew Darly (1792–1878) and later William heath (1795–1840). In france the press operated under far stricter controls than their English counterpart, the legacy of measures introduced in the reign of Louis XIV who had been swift to crush the slightest sign of insurrection.8 These regulations continued with moderate success until the revolution, with the result that most eighteenth-century social caricatures of the class that would have enjoyed wide distribution in England were in france probably produced only for private consumption, as was the case with Charles-Germain de saint-Aubin’s (1721–1786) book of hand-drawn caricatures, the Livre de caricatures tant bonnes que mauvaises. As a result many do not survive today. The celebrated exceptions to this rule were were philibert Louis Debucourt’s (1755–1832) The Palais-Royal-gallery’s Walk/Promenade de la gallerie du Palais Royal (1787) and La Promenade Publique (1792) and Louis Le Coeur’s (fl. c. 1784–1825), Promenade du Jardin du Palais Royal (1787), pre-revolutionary social satire of an altogether more subtle and cautious strain than that produced across the Channel.9 printed board games taking fashion as their theme, such as publisher Jean-Baptiste Crépy’s (fl. c. 1753–1790) Le Nouveau Jeu du Costume et des Coeffures des Dames (1778) offered a form of mild chastisement by penalising players who landed on squares illustrating the most extreme fashions.10 The vast majority of french caricatures that did escape the censor’s net were political in subject and produced under the cover of anonymity. It was not until the

opening decades of the nineteenth century that french caricaturists gave full vent to their creative powers, seen in the series of fashion caricatures, Le Suprême Bon Ton; Caricatures Parisiennes and Le Bon Genre.

But if England led the way in humour then france was the undisputed leader in fashion and matters of taste. It was also a major centre for printmaking and book illustration – even hogarth insisted on employing french engravers11, making it the natural birthplace for fashion journalism in the eighteenth century. The fashion plate is believed by historians to have evolved from costume books and plates – prints documenting foreign and regional dress, the earliest of which dates from 1486, Bernard von Breydenbach’s Peregrinationes in terram sanctam, and which became popular throughout Europe in the sixteenth century.12 from these developed isolated, individually-issued plates and portraits en mode – portraits of the nobility, or celebrated thespians and opera singers in which their dress is made the focal point, which began to appear in paris the mid- to late seventeenth century – there was no real equivalent in English print production at this time.13 plates were published in the important french gazette, the Mercure Galant (and continued under the Mercure de France) and in assorted almanachs or as individual suites of prints.14 These can be seen as a direct precursor to the fashion plate, as can the range of prints produced by prominent artists that strayed into depictions of fashionable attire: works by hollar, Daniel Rabel (1578–1637); Jacques Callot (1592–1635); Abraham Bosse (c.1602/1604–1676); Jean-Antoine Watteau (1684–1721) and hubert Gravelot (1699–1733). The pace quickened with the advent of the eighteenth century – the number of fashion-related plates issued in paris for example grew from a modest figure of 102 between 1600-1649 to 1,275 between 1750–1799.15 Jean-Michel Moreau Le Jeune’s (1741–1814) and sigmund freudenberg’s (1745–1801) illustrations for the Monument du Costume, published in

10 11

Carl Güttenberg (1743–1790) after

Jean Michel Moreau Le Jeune (1741–1814)

Le Rendez-vous pour Marly

plate from the second suite of prints illustrating

Nicolas-Edme Restif de la Bretonne’s Monument

du Costume Physique et Moral de la fin du

Dix-huitième Siècle. paris, 1778

58.8 x 43.8 cm. Etching.

Museum no. E.471–1972.

Given by Elizabeth Ison and Anne Gregson

in memory of their uncle, Captain h.R. King

three series from 1775–83, and ostensibly a précis of late eighteenth-century society and its dress, were enormously popular in france and England and their genre scene-like arrangement of fashionable figures pursuing decorative activities are an early template of the staged fashion plates that would follow. from about 1760, English ladies’ pocket books, a hybrid of almanac and journal on a reduced scale, designed as their title plainly suggests, to be carried about one’s person, began including one or two small uncoloured fashion plates.16 Various launches of parisian fashion-dedicated periodicals in 1728, 1758 and 1768 were attempted and failed17 and here the English trumped the french with the founding in London of The Lady’s Magazine in 1770, followed some years later in paris by the sumptuously hand-coloured plates of luxury publications the Gallerie des Modes et Costumes français (1778) and the Cabinet des Modes (1785).

The inaugural issue of the latter laid out the details of its distribution and composition: twenty-four issues a year, published at fifteen day intervals, each issue comprised of eight pages of text and three etched fashion plates.18 for this the subscriber paid twenty-one Livres, no mean sum, placing it well beyond the reach of the literate lower middle classes and rendering it primarily the preserve of the wealthy and leisured. The content was prepared by male and female journalists, the latter newly entered upon the scene,19 and unlike most of the fashion periodicals that would follow in the nineteenth century, it catered to both audiences, with fashion plates and articles tailored to both sexes.20 fashions were ‘described in a clear and precise manner’, and the magazine articulated its objective to give the reader ‘an exact and timely knowledge’ of both new garments and accessories whilst casting its net wider to offer advice on a wide range of other luxury goods: furnishings, interiors, carriages, jewellery, metalwork, and ‘generally everything of which fashion offers that is singular, pleasant or interesting’.21

The addition of plates containing designs for said luxury goods underscores the cultivated readership they sought. The content of its articles competed with that of more learned journals.22 These early fashion periodicals with their weighty intellectual aspirations have little in common with the fashion magazines of today, indeed they have no direct modern equivalent, and twenty-first century readers would find the cerebral tone and format wholly unfamiliar. In England, Ackermann’s Repository, which first appeared in 1809 and ran until 1829, declared itself a ‘Repository of Arts, Literature, Commerce, Manufactures, fashions and politics’. Its January 1814 issue contained a biography of Mozart; a description of the pantheon with illustrative plates; an analysis of Napoleonic politics; designs for ‘fashionable furniture’ in the Empire style; needlework patterns; poetry; reports on the London markets, stocks and meteorological journal, and finally plates illustrating ladies’ morning and promenade dresses. similarly, an 1806 issue of La Belle Assemblée, the creation of the enterprising publisher, John Bell, which addressed itself ‘particularly to the Ladies’, included sections on fine arts, politics, poetry and music; ‘biographic sketches of illustrious ladies’, in this issue, Queen Charlotte; needlework patterns; meditative essays in the form of letters to the editor, including one ominously titled the ‘usefulness of an old Woman’, and almost as an afterthought, several examples of London and paris fashions (comprising four pages of a sixty-page journal), with accompanying explanations.23 In Germany friedrich Justin Bertuch’s Journal des Luxus und der Moden, published from 1786-1827, followed a similarly literary format. Among the other influential and lavishly-produced periodicals founded during this period was heideloff’s Gallery of Fashion (1790-1822), which exalted the ‘superior elegance of English taste’, picturing contemporary dress as it was worn by ladies who ‘appear at the routs, the opera, the play-houses, and the concert-rooms; as well as those elegant morning

Nicolaus Wilhelm von heideloff

(c.1761–1837)

Walking Dresses

fashion plate published in the

Gallery of Fashion, London, 1797

hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. 29873.4

10 11

Carl Güttenberg (1743–1790) after

Jean Michel Moreau Le Jeune (1741–1814)

Le Rendez-vous pour Marly

plate from the second suite of prints illustrating

Nicolas-Edme Restif de la Bretonne’s Monument

du Costume Physique et Moral de la fin du

Dix-huitième Siècle. paris, 1778

58.8 x 43.8 cm. Etching.

Museum no. E.471–1972.

Given by Elizabeth Ison and Anne Gregson

in memory of their uncle, Captain h.R. King

three series from 1775–83, and ostensibly a précis of late eighteenth-century society and its dress, were enormously popular in france and England and their genre scene-like arrangement of fashionable figures pursuing decorative activities are an early template of the staged fashion plates that would follow. from about 1760, English ladies’ pocket books, a hybrid of almanac and journal on a reduced scale, designed as their title plainly suggests, to be carried about one’s person, began including one or two small uncoloured fashion plates.16 Various launches of parisian fashion-dedicated periodicals in 1728, 1758 and 1768 were attempted and failed17 and here the English trumped the french with the founding in London of The Lady’s Magazine in 1770, followed some years later in paris by the sumptuously hand-coloured plates of luxury publications the Gallerie des Modes et Costumes français (1778) and the Cabinet des Modes (1785).

The inaugural issue of the latter laid out the details of its distribution and composition: twenty-four issues a year, published at fifteen day intervals, each issue comprised of eight pages of text and three etched fashion plates.18 for this the subscriber paid twenty-one Livres, no mean sum, placing it well beyond the reach of the literate lower middle classes and rendering it primarily the preserve of the wealthy and leisured. The content was prepared by male and female journalists, the latter newly entered upon the scene,19 and unlike most of the fashion periodicals that would follow in the nineteenth century, it catered to both audiences, with fashion plates and articles tailored to both sexes.20 fashions were ‘described in a clear and precise manner’, and the magazine articulated its objective to give the reader ‘an exact and timely knowledge’ of both new garments and accessories whilst casting its net wider to offer advice on a wide range of other luxury goods: furnishings, interiors, carriages, jewellery, metalwork, and ‘generally everything of which fashion offers that is singular, pleasant or interesting’.21

The addition of plates containing designs for said luxury goods underscores the cultivated readership they sought. The content of its articles competed with that of more learned journals.22 These early fashion periodicals with their weighty intellectual aspirations have little in common with the fashion magazines of today, indeed they have no direct modern equivalent, and twenty-first century readers would find the cerebral tone and format wholly unfamiliar. In England, Ackermann’s Repository, which first appeared in 1809 and ran until 1829, declared itself a ‘Repository of Arts, Literature, Commerce, Manufactures, fashions and politics’. Its January 1814 issue contained a biography of Mozart; a description of the pantheon with illustrative plates; an analysis of Napoleonic politics; designs for ‘fashionable furniture’ in the Empire style; needlework patterns; poetry; reports on the London markets, stocks and meteorological journal, and finally plates illustrating ladies’ morning and promenade dresses. similarly, an 1806 issue of La Belle Assemblée, the creation of the enterprising publisher, John Bell, which addressed itself ‘particularly to the Ladies’, included sections on fine arts, politics, poetry and music; ‘biographic sketches of illustrious ladies’, in this issue, Queen Charlotte; needlework patterns; meditative essays in the form of letters to the editor, including one ominously titled the ‘usefulness of an old Woman’, and almost as an afterthought, several examples of London and paris fashions (comprising four pages of a sixty-page journal), with accompanying explanations.23 In Germany friedrich Justin Bertuch’s Journal des Luxus und der Moden, published from 1786-1827, followed a similarly literary format. Among the other influential and lavishly-produced periodicals founded during this period was heideloff’s Gallery of Fashion (1790-1822), which exalted the ‘superior elegance of English taste’, picturing contemporary dress as it was worn by ladies who ‘appear at the routs, the opera, the play-houses, and the concert-rooms; as well as those elegant morning

Nicolaus Wilhelm von heideloff

(c.1761–1837)

Walking Dresses

fashion plate published in the

Gallery of Fashion, London, 1797

hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. 29873.4

16 17

news, published an engraving on the subject of Venus di Milo using the same conceit as punch, but weighted the humour differently. In the Englishwoman’s Domestic Magazine the Venus is shown dressed in a modern gown which the magazine argued clearly showed ‘how inappropriate and inelegant not to say dowdy even a perfectly -elaborated modern costume would look when worn by a lady of ancient Greece’.38 In 1870 the Venus di Milo was widely considered to be one of the most important works of art in existence. In Du Maurier’s drawing she maintains her glory and stares down the modern misses. The English Woman’s Dometic Magazine, however, presents her as irrelevant to the modern age. her elegant pose appears hunched an awkward and it is the statue that distorts the line of the dress. Dressing up the Venus di Milo evoked fashion in a small subversive challenge to a cultural orthodoxy.

satirists, however, burlesqued whatever fashion was before them. In the early nineteenth century when women’s dresses referenced classical drapery and appeared to follow the contours of the body, satirists represented them revealing too much of what nature intended. In a number of satires James Gillray mocked the classicising pretentions of the fashion plates of the day and in this case it was the imperfections of the human body that thwarted the idealised lines of the fashion plates.

fashion plates and periodicals were an important source of support to the luxury trades and later, the couture industry, encouraging consumerism. Eighteenth-century and early-nineteenth-century plates gave specific details of the array of textiles and accessories depicted, the better to equip the consumer. Ackermann’s Repository even included fabric samples.39 Later nineteenth-century plates were often lettered below the image with the names and addresses of couturiers and fashion houses, or small advertisements for other purveyors of fashionable goods.

unknown illustrator

The Association of “Classic” Elegance

with Modern Costume

Illustration in figure Training, or, Art the

handmaid of Nature published by The English

Woman’s Domestic Magazine, 1870

London, 1870.

12 x 18. Wood engraving.

NAL reference: 24.D.31

George Du Maurier (1834–1896)

The Venus of Milo; or girls of two

different periods

Illustration published in Punch, 1870.

London, 1870

[to measure]. Wood engraving.

[Cf has a loose copy of this that can be

photographed]

16 17

news, published an engraving on the subject of Venus di Milo using the same conceit as punch, but weighted the humour differently. In the Englishwoman’s Domestic Magazine the Venus is shown dressed in a modern gown which the magazine argued clearly showed ‘how inappropriate and inelegant not to say dowdy even a perfectly -elaborated modern costume would look when worn by a lady of ancient Greece’.38 In 1870 the Venus di Milo was widely considered to be one of the most important works of art in existence. In Du Maurier’s drawing she maintains her glory and stares down the modern misses. The English Woman’s Dometic Magazine, however, presents her as irrelevant to the modern age. her elegant pose appears hunched an awkward and it is the statue that distorts the line of the dress. Dressing up the Venus di Milo evoked fashion in a small subversive challenge to a cultural orthodoxy.

satirists, however, burlesqued whatever fashion was before them. In the early nineteenth century when women’s dresses referenced classical drapery and appeared to follow the contours of the body, satirists represented them revealing too much of what nature intended. In a number of satires James Gillray mocked the classicising pretentions of the fashion plates of the day and in this case it was the imperfections of the human body that thwarted the idealised lines of the fashion plates.

fashion plates and periodicals were an important source of support to the luxury trades and later, the couture industry, encouraging consumerism. Eighteenth-century and early-nineteenth-century plates gave specific details of the array of textiles and accessories depicted, the better to equip the consumer. Ackermann’s Repository even included fabric samples.39 Later nineteenth-century plates were often lettered below the image with the names and addresses of couturiers and fashion houses, or small advertisements for other purveyors of fashionable goods.

unknown illustrator

The Association of “Classic” Elegance

with Modern Costume

Illustration in figure Training, or, Art the

handmaid of Nature published by The English

Woman’s Domestic Magazine, 1870

London, 1870.

12 x 18. Wood engraving.

NAL reference: 24.D.31

George Du Maurier (1834–1896)

The Venus of Milo; or girls of two

different periods

Illustration published in Punch, 1870.

London, 1870

[to measure]. Wood engraving.

[Cf has a loose copy of this that can be

photographed]

William heath (1795–1840)

La Poule: Quadrille – Evening Fashions

– Dedicated to the HEADS of the Nation

p L A T E s

William heath (1795–1840)

La Poule: Quadrille – Evening Fashions

– Dedicated to the HEADS of the Nation

p L A T E s

30 31

Anonymous

Plate From The 1Ere Suite Des Costumes

François Pour Les Coeffures Depuis 1776

published in the Gallerie de modes et costumes

français by Jacques Esnault and Michel Rapilly,

paris, 1776–1778.

Etching. Museum no. 24923.11.

Matthew Darly (fl. 1750–1778)

The Flower Garden

from the series Darly’s Comic Prints of

Character, Caricatures, Macaronies etc.

published by Matthew Darly

London, 1777.

Etching. Museum no. 24923.11.

The fashionable woman of the 1770s would

have possessed an entire wardrobe of wigs.

hairdressing styles took their cue from

contemporary cultural and political events, as

demonstrated here by the ‘victory cap’. These

towering constructions with their frivolous

names were easy sport for caricaturists –

compare for instance the ‘gallant flowerbed’

style in the lower-right hand corner with the

exhibited caricature.

Darly’s caricature of a woman’s headdress

lampoons the 1770s vogue for increasingly

elaborate hairstyles. This woman’s coiffure,

‘The flower Garden’, with its temple to

Mercury and labouring gardener, may seem

exaggerated, but in paris the duchesse de

Lauzun was noted to have worn a similarly

contrived wig, consisting of a landscape in

30 31

Anonymous

Plate From The 1Ere Suite Des Costumes

François Pour Les Coeffures Depuis 1776

published in the Gallerie de modes et costumes

français by Jacques Esnault and Michel Rapilly,

paris, 1776–1778.

Etching. Museum no. 24923.11.

Matthew Darly (fl. 1750–1778)

The Flower Garden

from the series Darly’s Comic Prints of

Character, Caricatures, Macaronies etc.

published by Matthew Darly

London, 1777.

Etching. Museum no. 24923.11.

The fashionable woman of the 1770s would

have possessed an entire wardrobe of wigs.

hairdressing styles took their cue from

contemporary cultural and political events, as

demonstrated here by the ‘victory cap’. These

towering constructions with their frivolous

names were easy sport for caricaturists –

compare for instance the ‘gallant flowerbed’

style in the lower-right hand corner with the

exhibited caricature.

Darly’s caricature of a woman’s headdress

lampoons the 1770s vogue for increasingly

elaborate hairstyles. This woman’s coiffure,

‘The flower Garden’, with its temple to

Mercury and labouring gardener, may seem

exaggerated, but in paris the duchesse de

Lauzun was noted to have worn a similarly

contrived wig, consisting of a landscape in

32 33

Anonymous

Male Dress 1791

fashion plate published in the Journal

des Luxus und der Moden

Weimar, 1791.

19 x 11 cm. Museum no. 29872:4.

The Journal des Luxus und der Moden was the

first German journal to include fashion plates

and was published from 1786 to 1827, covering

the latest fashions to emerge in france, England,

Germany and even Denmark. Its readers

emanated both from the ranks of the nobility and

the middle classes. here we see a young man

dressed in the English style – an issue published

the same year announced ‘In male clothing

one follows almost universally the taste of

the Englishman’.

32 33

Anonymous

Male Dress 1791

fashion plate published in the Journal

des Luxus und der Moden

Weimar, 1791.

19 x 11 cm. Museum no. 29872:4.

The Journal des Luxus und der Moden was the

first German journal to include fashion plates

and was published from 1786 to 1827, covering

the latest fashions to emerge in france, England,

Germany and even Denmark. Its readers

emanated both from the ranks of the nobility and

the middle classes. here we see a young man

dressed in the English style – an issue published

the same year announced ‘In male clothing

one follows almost universally the taste of

the Englishman’.

34 35

James Gillray (1756–1815)

A Back View of the Cape

Published by Hannah Humphrey (fl. 1778–1822),

London, 25 March 1792.

28 x 22 cm. hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. E.153–1989.

Bequeathed by frank A. Gibson.

Gillray takes blunt aim at the fashion plate

with this caricature – his composition and

tongue-in-cheek title, ‘A Back View of the Cape’,

lifted directly from the template of these prints

– in which figures were frequently portrayed

from behind to show the cut and silhouette of

their garments and the lettered title beneath

identified the dress depicted.

34 35

James Gillray (1756–1815)

A Back View of the Cape

Published by Hannah Humphrey (fl. 1778–1822),

London, 25 March 1792.

28 x 22 cm. hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. E.153–1989.

Bequeathed by frank A. Gibson.

Gillray takes blunt aim at the fashion plate

with this caricature – his composition and

tongue-in-cheek title, ‘A Back View of the Cape’,

lifted directly from the template of these prints

– in which figures were frequently portrayed

from behind to show the cut and silhouette of

their garments and the lettered title beneath

identified the dress depicted.

36 37

James Gillray (1756–1815)

Characters in High Life.

sketched at the New Rooms, opera house

published by hannah humphrey,

London, 20 June 1795.

36 x 27 cm. hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. E.116–1989.

Bequeathed by frank A. Gibson.

Nicolaus von heideloff (c.1761–1837)

Evening dresses

fashion plate from heideloff’s Gallery of

Fashion published by Nicolaus von heideloff,

London, 1 May 1794.

??x?? cm.

hand-coloured etching and aquatint.

National Art Library, RC.R.11–18.

The two figures walking arm-in-arm in this

plate suggest all the conviviality of an evening

occasion. heideloff’s fashion plates excelled at

evoking a mood, usually through the judicious

groupings of figures and sometimes the use

of unusual perspectives and backdrops. Both

women wear headdresses à la Turque, described

in the accompanying text as turbans embellished

with ostrich feathers, pearls and other jewels.

The Duchess of Rutland, doyenne of fashionable

Georgian society and a celebrated beauty,

shown here as she appeared in several portraits

by Joshua Reynolds, escorts her considerably

less poised companion, most likely one of her

daughters, to the opera house in Gillray’s

mischevious caricature. Both women sport the

very latest in fashionable headwear – turbans

ornamented with vertiginous ostrich feathers,

36 37

James Gillray (1756–1815)

Characters in High Life.

sketched at the New Rooms, opera house

published by hannah humphrey,

London, 20 June 1795.

36 x 27 cm. hand-coloured etching.

Museum no. E.116–1989.

Bequeathed by frank A. Gibson.

Nicolaus von heideloff (c.1761–1837)

Evening dresses

fashion plate from heideloff’s Gallery of

Fashion published by Nicolaus von heideloff,

London, 1 May 1794.

??x?? cm.

hand-coloured etching and aquatint.

National Art Library, RC.R.11–18.

The two figures walking arm-in-arm in this

plate suggest all the conviviality of an evening

occasion. heideloff’s fashion plates excelled at

evoking a mood, usually through the judicious

groupings of figures and sometimes the use

of unusual perspectives and backdrops. Both

women wear headdresses à la Turque, described

in the accompanying text as turbans embellished

with ostrich feathers, pearls and other jewels.

The Duchess of Rutland, doyenne of fashionable

Georgian society and a celebrated beauty,

shown here as she appeared in several portraits

by Joshua Reynolds, escorts her considerably

less poised companion, most likely one of her

daughters, to the opera house in Gillray’s

mischevious caricature. Both women sport the

very latest in fashionable headwear – turbans

ornamented with vertiginous ostrich feathers,

38 39

horace Vernet (1789–1893), probably

Capote de Paille Blanche, Costume Négligé

fashion plate from the Journal des Dames et

des Modes, paris, 1807.

??x?? cm. hand-coloured etching. 3rd party

image – photo credit – RMN-Grand palais

(museé des châteaux de Malmaison et de Bois-

préau/ Gérard Blot.

This informal morning ensemble includes

the very latest in fashionable headwear – a

straw bonnet, commonly referred to as a ‘poke’

bonnet or ‘coal-scuttle’, which was thought to

frame the face in a becoming way. The Times

fashion column for November 1807 urged its

readers to incorporate a ‘poke bonnet of basket

willow’ into their morning walking attire.

38 39

horace Vernet (1789–1893), probably

Capote de Paille Blanche, Costume Négligé

fashion plate from the Journal des Dames et

des Modes, paris, 1807.

??x?? cm. hand-coloured etching. 3rd party

image – photo credit – RMN-Grand palais

(museé des châteaux de Malmaison et de Bois-

préau/ Gérard Blot.

This informal morning ensemble includes

the very latest in fashionable headwear – a

straw bonnet, commonly referred to as a ‘poke’

bonnet or ‘coal-scuttle’, which was thought to

frame the face in a becoming way. The Times

fashion column for November 1807 urged its

readers to incorporate a ‘poke bonnet of basket

willow’ into their morning walking attire.

40 41

James Gillray 1757–1815

Les Invisibles

published by hannah humphrey,

paris and London, 1810.

hand-coloured etching.

Given by Major Nicholas Collin and Mr

francis Collin at the request of their mother

Mrs frank Collin. Museum no. E.992–1970.

The french term for the Regency ‘poke’ bonnet

was the ‘invisible’, because the hat’s deep peak

shielded the wearer’s face from view. Gillray

also makes a dig at the fashionable french

types, the ‘incroyables’ and ‘merveilleuses’,

whose outlandish ensembles were seen in

fashion plates of the day. As here, they were

often depicted from behind or with their

faces obscured.

40 41

James Gillray 1757–1815

Les Invisibles

published by hannah humphrey,

paris and London, 1810.

hand-coloured etching.

Given by Major Nicholas Collin and Mr

francis Collin at the request of their mother

Mrs frank Collin. Museum no. E.992–1970.

The french term for the Regency ‘poke’ bonnet

was the ‘invisible’, because the hat’s deep peak

shielded the wearer’s face from view. Gillray

also makes a dig at the fashionable french

types, the ‘incroyables’ and ‘merveilleuses’,

whose outlandish ensembles were seen in

fashion plates of the day. As here, they were

often depicted from behind or with their

faces obscured.

42 43

George Barbier (1882–1932)

Oui!

fashion plate published in Falbalas

& Fanfreluches: Almanach des Modes

Présentes, Passées & Futures, paris, 1922

process engraving and pochoir.

Museum no. C.6694/1

Many illustrations of the 1920s employed

the ‘pochoir’ printing technique. This was a

form of hand stencilling that used luminous

shades of watercolour to capture the fresh,

youthful fashion palette emerging in post-war

Europe. A laborious and therefore expensive

technique, pochoir was used for high-quality

fashion plates.

Ettore Tito (1859–1941)

Qui trop embrasse…

france, about 1925

process engraving and pochoir.

Museum no. E.898–1975

Given by Mr and Mrs urry

Tito spoofs the highly stylised Art Deco fashion

plates of his time, which paired scenes of

improbably elegant couples with ‘enigmatic’

or tantalisingly obscure captions. here the

caption is a spin on the french proverb, ‘he

who embraces/takes on too much, grasps

nothing’.

42 43

George Barbier (1882–1932)

Oui!

fashion plate published in Falbalas

& Fanfreluches: Almanach des Modes

Présentes, Passées & Futures, paris, 1922

process engraving and pochoir.

Museum no. C.6694/1

Many illustrations of the 1920s employed

the ‘pochoir’ printing technique. This was a

form of hand stencilling that used luminous

shades of watercolour to capture the fresh,

youthful fashion palette emerging in post-war

Europe. A laborious and therefore expensive

technique, pochoir was used for high-quality

fashion plates.

Ettore Tito (1859–1941)

Qui trop embrasse…

france, about 1925

process engraving and pochoir.

Museum no. E.898–1975

Given by Mr and Mrs urry

Tito spoofs the highly stylised Art Deco fashion

plates of his time, which paired scenes of

improbably elegant couples with ‘enigmatic’

or tantalisingly obscure captions. here the

caption is a spin on the french proverb, ‘he

who embraces/takes on too much, grasps

nothing’.

50 51

f u R T h E R R E A D I N G

Dilys Blum, Illusion and Reality: Fashion in France 1700–1900: The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, September 10, 1986–January 11, 1987, exh. cat., The Museum of fine Arts, houston, TX (houston, TX 1986)

stella Blum (ed.), Eighteenth-Century French Fashions in Full Colour: 64 Engravings from the ‘Galerie des Modes’, 1778–1787 (New York 1982)

Richard Corson, fashions in hair: The First Five Thousand Years (London 1980)

Valerie Cumming, C.W. Cunnington and p.E. Cunnington, The Dictionary of Fashion History (oxford; New York 2010)

English Caricature, 1620 to the Present: Caricaturists and Satirists – their Art, their Purpose and Influence, exh. cat., Yale Center for British Art, New haven, CT; Library of Congress, Washington D.C., National Gallery of Canada, ottawa; and Victoria and Albert Museum, London (London 1984)

Raymond Gaudriault, La Gravure de mode féminine en france (paris 1983).

Charles harvard Gibbs-smith, The Fashionable Lady in the 19th Century (London 1960)

Madeleine Ginsberg, An Introduction to Fashion Illustration (London 1980)

Avril hart and susan North, Historical Fashion in Detail: The 17th and 18th Centuries (London 1998)

Vyvyan Beresford holland, Hand Coloured Fashion Plates, 1770 to 1889 (London 1955)

Lionel Lambourne, An Introduction to Caricature (London 1983)

James Laver, Amy De La haye and Andrew Tucker, Costume and Fashion: A Concise History (New York 2002)

James Laver, 17th and 18th Century Costume (London 1959)

suzanne Lussier, Art Deco Fashion (Boston 2003)

Constance C. Mcphee and Nadine M. orenstein, Infinite Jest: Caricature and Satire from Leonardo to Levine, exh. cat., Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (New York 2011)

Doris Langley Moore, Fashion through Fashion Plates, 1771–1970 (New York 1971)

J.L. Nevinson, Origin and Early History of the Fashion Plate (Washington, D.C. 1967)

Todd B. Porterfield (ed.), The Efflorescence of Caricature, 1759–1838 (farnham; Burlington, VT 2011)

Adelheid Rasche and Gundula Wolter, Ridikül!: Mode in Der Karikatur, 1600–1900, exh. cat., Der Kunstbibliothek, staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Berlin 2003)

Aileen Ribeiro, Dress and Morality (New York, 1986)

Aileen Ribeiro, The Art of Dress : Fashion in England and France 1750–1820 (New haven 1995)

Julian Robinson, The Golden Age of Style: Art Deco Fashion Illustration (London 1988)

frederic George stephens and Mary Dorothy George, Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires Preserved in The Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, vols 1–12 (London 1870–1954)

phyllis G. Tortora and Robert s. Merkel, Fairchild’s Dictionary of Textiles (New York 1996)

50 51

f u R T h E R R E A D I N G

Dilys Blum, Illusion and Reality: Fashion in France 1700–1900: The Museum of Fine Arts, Houston, September 10, 1986–January 11, 1987, exh. cat., The Museum of fine Arts, houston, TX (houston, TX 1986)

stella Blum (ed.), Eighteenth-Century French Fashions in Full Colour: 64 Engravings from the ‘Galerie des Modes’, 1778–1787 (New York 1982)

Richard Corson, fashions in hair: The First Five Thousand Years (London 1980)

Valerie Cumming, C.W. Cunnington and p.E. Cunnington, The Dictionary of Fashion History (oxford; New York 2010)

English Caricature, 1620 to the Present: Caricaturists and Satirists – their Art, their Purpose and Influence, exh. cat., Yale Center for British Art, New haven, CT; Library of Congress, Washington D.C., National Gallery of Canada, ottawa; and Victoria and Albert Museum, London (London 1984)

Raymond Gaudriault, La Gravure de mode féminine en france (paris 1983).

Charles harvard Gibbs-smith, The Fashionable Lady in the 19th Century (London 1960)

Madeleine Ginsberg, An Introduction to Fashion Illustration (London 1980)

Avril hart and susan North, Historical Fashion in Detail: The 17th and 18th Centuries (London 1998)

Vyvyan Beresford holland, Hand Coloured Fashion Plates, 1770 to 1889 (London 1955)

Lionel Lambourne, An Introduction to Caricature (London 1983)

James Laver, Amy De La haye and Andrew Tucker, Costume and Fashion: A Concise History (New York 2002)

James Laver, 17th and 18th Century Costume (London 1959)

suzanne Lussier, Art Deco Fashion (Boston 2003)

Constance C. Mcphee and Nadine M. orenstein, Infinite Jest: Caricature and Satire from Leonardo to Levine, exh. cat., Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York (New York 2011)

Doris Langley Moore, Fashion through Fashion Plates, 1771–1970 (New York 1971)

J.L. Nevinson, Origin and Early History of the Fashion Plate (Washington, D.C. 1967)

Todd B. Porterfield (ed.), The Efflorescence of Caricature, 1759–1838 (farnham; Burlington, VT 2011)

Adelheid Rasche and Gundula Wolter, Ridikül!: Mode in Der Karikatur, 1600–1900, exh. cat., Der Kunstbibliothek, staatliche Museen zu Berlin (Berlin 2003)

Aileen Ribeiro, Dress and Morality (New York, 1986)

Aileen Ribeiro, The Art of Dress : Fashion in England and France 1750–1820 (New haven 1995)

Julian Robinson, The Golden Age of Style: Art Deco Fashion Illustration (London 1988)

frederic George stephens and Mary Dorothy George, Catalogue of Political and Personal Satires Preserved in The Department of Prints and Drawings in the British Museum, vols 1–12 (London 1870–1954)

phyllis G. Tortora and Robert s. Merkel, Fairchild’s Dictionary of Textiles (New York 1996)