Talk:1650–1700 in Western fashion

message: This 1807 caricature claims to be comparing contemporary styles to those of 1740, but wouldn't you agree that the alleged 1740 outfit actually looks more 17th-century? Churchh 19:36, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Sorry I missed this question entirely! It's an odd-looking dress, but the sack-back is definitely 18th century. - PKM 01:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Question

message: Can anyone find a firm date for :Image:Eleonore of Pfalz Neuburg.jpg?  DShe became empress in 1676 and this certainly looks like 1670s, but I cannot find a museum citation for it. - PKM 01:19, 5 September 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Dating a picture

message: I have the reference for the mantua citation that was requested at home - I will add it.  - PKM 19:24, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Mantua citation request

message: The sentence:
:"With the end of the Thirty Years' War, the fashions of the 1650s and early 1660s imitated the new peaceful and more relaxed feeling in Europe."
Seems to be to be OR (or sourced from a fashion article that is trying to make a generalisation that for a whole continent but the devil is in the detail). The Thirty Years War ended in the 1640s. Britain was under a military dictatorship for much of the 1650s and was nearly continuously at war throughout the period (Among other things this dictatorship banned theatre and Christmas -- "peaceful and more relaxed feeling[s]" is not how most contemporaries would have described the decade. So while Germany and parts of Scandinavia were now at peace that was not Europe wide. The Dutch, Spanish French and [British] Commonwealth were at war for much of the period:
*Franco-Spanish War (1635–1659)
*First Anglo-Dutch War (1652–54)
*Anglo-Spanish War (1654–1660)
So this bland generalisation needs to be removed-- PBS (talk) 11:53, 29 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Agree in principle, except I think I actually have a source for that notion (from back in the days before we were encouraged to cite everything).  It should be rewritten or cited, one or the other.  Let me see if I can find it, and if not I'll change this. - PKM (talk) 01:48, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
replies: text: Just because there is a cited source does not make it correct. Even if a source can be found then as it is quite easily demonstrably false if you want to include it then it should be attributed to the "expert" who made it. -- PBS (talk) 17:59, 31 March 2012 (UTC)
thread_title: A new peaceful and more relaxed feeling in Europe

message: I noticed there seems to be two established styles of dress for gentlemen (I especially note France) in the early 1660s (maybe even in the late 1650s?).  The first style includes petticoat breeches and a very short doublet.  The second style includes a long coat with short sleeves and rhinegraves.  I am defining petticoat breeches as non-collected while rhinegraves as collected.  If there is an overskirt, the rhinegraves are white.  If there is no overksirt, the rhinesgraves match the coat.  Two are from paintings faithfully based on I assume are older tapestries.  Painter Jacques Laumosnier apparently copied these two tapestries decades later.
First, the tapestry/painting of Meeting on the Isle of Pheasants shows a gentleman second from our left, wearing a long blue coat with short sleeves and white rhinegraves.  Over these white rhinegraves is apparently an overskirt.  This overskirt has loops of ribbons that go all around  the bottom of the skirt.  This is in contrast to petticot breeches where the ribbon loops are only worn on each of the outer sides at the bottom.  These same white rhinegraves are worn by King Charles II of England’s coronation portrait by John Michael Wright.  Contrast King Louis XIV’s small amount of ribbon loops versus the aformentioned man in the blue coat.  The potrait of Maximilian Philipp Hieronymus von Bayern-Leuchtenberg in the German translation of this article has a good example of the overksirt fashion.
Second, the tapestry/painting Marriage of Louis XIV to Maria Theresa of Austria shows a gentleman at our far left wearing an elaborate long coat with short sleeves.  He has white gathered rhingraves with an apparent overskirt due to the wide circumferance of ribbon loops.  The painting can be found at the French wikipedia article for Jacques Laumosnier.
Third, an engraving of King Louis XIV visiting the Royal Academy of Sciences.  The engraving can be found at the article: French Academy of Sciences as the third image.  The two gentlemen in the center wear the two styles.  King Louis XIV on our left wears a long coat (maybe a short waistcoat, vest or doublet on under the long coat?), overskirt and rhinegraves.  The gentleman on our right as a short doublet and petticoat breeches.
Fourth, the 1663 painting of The Reception of the Ambassadors of the Thirteen Swiss Cantons from 1663 has a gentleman on our far right in a brown long coat with shortsleeves and matching rhinegraves.  There is no overskirt nor ribbons on the bottom of his breeches.
Fifth, I have seen a painting of a seated Louis XIV in wide white rhinegraves with a long coat and an apparent overskirt.  The painting was said to be from 1665.
Does anyone know the origins or any context why the two different styles were worn?  ElkandAcquerne (talk) 15:58, 4 October 2021 (UTC)
replies: text: I can agree on this statement.  Fashion from 1650-1680 and 1680-c.1720 are different style periods. Alnair93 (talk) 11:30, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Two Different Styles of Dress