Regency Fashion, L.A. Style
TESSA, the Digital Collection of the Los Angeles Public Library, has FASHION PLATES!
Included are many from the likes of Ackerman’s [sic] Repository, British Lady’s Magazine, Columbian Magazine, Englishwoman’s Domestic Magazine and oh so many more. These last two have images from the 1840s and 1860s; slightly earlier is Le Follet Courrier des Salons. Even Godey’s is represented. Averaging 50 images per page, there are 125 pages to display! Even Lady’s Magazine (subject of yesterday’s post) has some ‘contenders’ (though hard to winnow out, given that its very name is part of several other magazine names; note they sometimes search successfully using ladies).
http://tessa.lapl.org/cdm/search/collection/fashion
Once on the website, clicking gets you a description of the plate, and will take you to the online viewer. You can zoom in & out, using the guides near the top; you can also download high-resolution images (bottom of page).
The above is from 1808 (The Lady’s Magazine) and described as,
Morning & ball dresses. The woman on the left wears a yellow tunic over an empire waist white round gown. She also carries a pink shawl and wears a white headband adorned with pink flowers. The woman on the right wears a purple coat trimmed in yellow over a white empire waist round gown with high collar. She also wears a purple turban with yellow plume and carries a large white fur muff adorned with a purple bow.
There is a particularly “pinkish” quality to the paper of the plates that gives them a certain soft charm, since the ladies are sometimes less “winsome” than those of Ackermann or Heideloff.
- NB: see Heideloff in Penelope Byrde’s excellent book JANE AUSTEN FASHION: Fashion and Needlework in the Works of Jane Austen.
- Read about the Ann Frankland Lewis watercolors – then “visit” them at LACMA
A note-to-self project is to collate the plate links at TESSA with the magazines (i.e., Ackermann’s, La Belle Assemblée, and The Lady’s Magazine) from which they came. These at TESSA are by far suprior in the quality of image (and sometimes the books scans don’t even include the plates).
Here’s a sampling, grouped by year (note spellings):
1806 (lots of La Belle Assemblee)
1807 (several from Lady’s Magazine, Ladies’ Museum, others)
1808 (lots of Ladies’ Museum & Lady’s Magazine)
1809 (Ackerman (sic) well represented
1810 (many magazines, including Ladies (sic) Magazine)
1811 (lotta Ackerman)
1812 (includes Ladies (sic) Magazine, Mirror of Fashions)
1813 (lotta La Belle Assemblee)
1814 (ALL La Belle Assemblee)
1815 (several titles)
1816 (ditto)
Lady’s Magazine
The Lady’s Magazine: “Entertaining Companion for the Fair Sex appropriated solely to their amusement”.
If the magazine’s subtitle weren’t so deliciously amusing (200 years later), I’d be rather inclined to feel insulted.
Several blog posts feature the history of the magazine, from the University of Kent. See also this introduction, to the university’s project. The Eighteenth Century Journals website features the index compiled by the University of Kent’s project. At one time, the firm Adam Matthew had microfilm of issues beginning in 1801. Check WorldCat for holdings. My local university evidently carries the reels.
As is only too typical, Google book scans can be good – or crappy. Plates may be present – or missing. To bridge the gap, do check out Catherine Decker’s “Regency Fashion” page. And the National Portrait Gallery (in London) has a nice listing of Lady’s Magazine fashion plates. Here’s another NPG group sorted by “artist” (features a lot from 1805, 1806, 1807).
I had already found some of the volumes – which helped compile this list (I will be updating that page shortly). A concerted search produced a few more of the “missing”. Though am rather “bummed” about not finding ALL of the first series. If you come across them, do let me know!
The Lady’s Magazine
vol. 1 – 1770
vol. 2 – 1771
vol. 3 – 1772
vol. 4 – 1773
vol. 5 – 1774
vol. 6 – 1775
vol. 7 – 1776
vol. 8 – 1777
vol. 9 – 1778
vol. 10 – 1779
vol. 11 – 1780
vol. 12 – 1781
vol. 13 – 1782
vol. 14 – 1783
vol. 15 – 1784
vol. 16 – 1785
vol. 17 – 1786
vol. 18 – 1787
vol. 19 – 1788
vol. 20 – 1789
vol. 21 – 1790 [alternate copy NYPL]
vol. 22 – 1791
vol. 23 – 1792
vol. 24 – 1793
vol. 25 – 1794
vol. 26 – 1795
vol. 27 – 1796
vol. 28 – 1797
vol. 29 – 1798
vol. 30 – 1799
vol. 31 – 1800
vol. 32 – 1801
vol. 33 – 1802 [some fashion plates]
vol. 34 – 1803 [some fashion plates]
vol. 35 – 1804 [some fashion plates]
vol. 38 – 1807 [alternate site Archive.org] [alternate copy]
vol. 39 – 1808 [some fashion plates]
vol. 40 – 1809
vol. 41 – 1810 [see 12 fashion plates @ TESSA]
vol. 42 – 1811
“new series” (1819-1829):
“improved series” (1830-1832)
1830 [may be a different “new & improved” magazine]
Lord Compton’s Sicily
An additional link to the same exhibition and book is available on YouTube, in which the “pages” are flipped in a 10-minute-plus video. The book is Viaggio in Sicilia: Il taccuino di Spencer Compton. My original blog post from 2014 discusses a bit more the actual sketchbook and the art exhibition.
I recently found a link in which each drawing can be examined, for those wishing to spend a bit more time with Lord Compton, on his tour of Sicily. Click the photo, and you will be brought to the site for the Fondazioni Sicilia.
Eastwick Park, Surrey
This is in answer to the comments of “Chaz” on the post “Putting a Face to a Name“; the tidbits seemed just too long for inclusion in a “comment.”
Eastwick Park cropped up a several times in the family letters. What caught Chaz’s eye was their comment about the estate when owned by “Mr. Basilgate” (sic) (whom Chaz writes about, see Prinny’s Taylor).
It wasn’t until I translated a French letter that I realized the part Eastwick played in the young lives of the four Sisters of Erle Stoke Park (which I really need to begin spelling Earl Stoke Park – for that was Joshua Smith’s consistent spelling of his estate). Since that time, I’ve found further letters, all of which wax nostalgic. I have not pinned down when the Smiths lived there, but it would have pre-dated the re-development of Earl Stoke, which began in the later 1780s. The girls were born between the years 1767 to 1774, yet even Emma (the youngest) wrote fond memories about Eastwick.
To see photos of Eastwick, c1904, see the Francis Firth website: Photo 1; Photo 2.
No 2 rather reminds me of Tring Park, Uncle Drummond’s place, before the Rothschilds enlarged it.
And now for the whisperings of the Earl Stoke sisters and their mother:
1 Nov 1796 (Lady Northampton)
“I am obliged to Miss Black [an artist] for her remembrance . . . ; should you write to her remember me to her. I cannot forget the many pleasant days I have spent with her at Eastwick, & the many chearful mornings in George St [their London home] She certainly endeavoured to please her pupils.”
18 June 1801 (Mrs Sarah Smith)
“we spent most part of the Mornings in visiting all the neighbourhood & Eastwick rides”
3 July 1801 (Emma Smith)
“As for seeing Eastwick, my Father went & walked all over it, but we did not; having been over it two or three y:rs ago . . . ; I think I told you Mr. Lawrell has bought it — –. The Country is so pretty on every side of it, that I even now almost regret Surrey.”
29 Sept 1802 (Eliza Chute) [translated from French]
“I made an attempt to see Eastwick again, the scene of my childhood, which seemed to me to be the happiest time of my life, but which I did not consider so then, as the view was spread far and wide over the future, which the imagination was pleased to embellish, and to adorn with its most amusing colors: I would have found much pleasure in traversing the rooms which I remember so well, and which at every step I would have recalled different circumstances, but Mrs. Lawrell was not at home, and I was afraid to ask to see the house, fearing that it might seem impertinent: the outside, however, very much interested me, and it was with regret that I went away; Augusta, who was bolder, entered the house. I met Mrs. Lawrel [sic] at Mr. Sumner’s, she told me that she was very angry that I had not done the same; that there were not many changes, but that they had a good deal of reason, and were quite important, and very judicious, as it seems to me. The park must also be enlarged & the manner of entry totally different; on the other hand, it was quite ugly, nothing but a short avenue leading to the house.”
Free Fronts, Wrappers, Entire Letters
Yesterday afternoon – though a BEAUTIFUL day – became rather frustrating… I tried to find an eBay sale from 2013. Ultimately, I got it because I retained its PAYPAL receipt.
What was the item?
It is what would be called a “free front” – the address panel of a letter, in my case franked by a Gentleman with the name Labouchere. Franked mail was received free of charge to the recipient (who, otherwise, paid the cost of postage).
You can see the edges of the paper, where it was trimmed from the letter’s wrapper (an extra sheet that once “wrapped” or “covered” the actual letter); nothing is written on the backside.
I cared FAR less about the signature than I did for that tangible piece of paper. That it once wended its way to Mapledurham House, and brought news from London, THRILLED me!
But: frustrating, too, that the letter once inside has been destroyed, or lost, or otherwise just-not-included.
Free fronts DO serve a purpose. I generally know who was receiving a letter — the exception being when “man” of the house is addressed, while the contents are written to his wife!
In obtaining a DESTINATION, I might be able to extrapolate a locale for letters I have, but which have no envelope or direction. THAT is certainly information worth having. Sometimes, I can verify where the person was residing, _if_ they were diligent diarists.
And there is always the HOPE that some day maybe envelope AND letter could be reunited!
And resemble it as it once was, when first mailed.
A letter that was franked did not (as mentioned above) carry a COST for the postage. So these were likely to have a sheet of paper, with the direction written on, which certainly could have been written out in advance by the person franking the letter. Jane Austen several times mentions “getting” franks from, among them, William Chute – a Member of Parliament whom she knew.
It was imperative that the MP write the direction, the date (note: Place, month, day, year) and his “signature”.
I find eBay rather frustrating – yesterday for instance, I was searching for SMITH, DEVIZES, FRANK – up popped a plaster mask made from the face of actor Jim Carrey! Not what I was looking for… Then I used the term FRANKED LETTER PRESTAMP and get a “hit” on a letter described as “1819 prestamp completly letter”.
Sellers: Typos do not help!
(8 letters come up with that same verbiage…)
Plus, when I search online, I sooner or latter use the phrase “entire letter” (typically with the quotations marks) – I never thought about “complete letter”.
There is NO standardization. I found a couple useful letters or free front under Collectible – military (not a place I’d look, IF narrowing the category filters).
“EL” is sometimes used to ID an “entire letter”. Does that even search WELL?
One seller describes a letter as “1897” – the image shows a letter from 1840! Same seller has another listed as 1899; the image is from 1828. The reason they are called PRESTAMP: they were mailed before postage stamps. This seller is obviously not targeting dates (maybe they are inventory numbers?), but that means the descriptions are useless…
Dates, names, places would be what I look for. Call it a Free Front, a Wrapper, a Cover, an entire letter, a complete letter, an ALS – autograph letter signed. (ALS – another term one does NOT want to search for online!), I am on the HUNT for more.
If you collect, or known anyone who does, in the coming weeks I will be posting information about those I’m hoping to find MORE letters from and to. Please help, if you can!
Two Teens in the Time of Austen 