Last week I showed you a ca. 1908 gown in shimmering beaded black, with just a touch of blue around the neck. Quite a few of you had problems with the touch of blue (clunky fringe), and the oh-so-fashionable for 1908 asymmetrical sash. Despite the universally agreed utter fabulousity of the skirt, those two elements dragged the otherwise sterling sparkle of the dress down slightly to an 8.6 out of 10.
To finish off the year, here is a lady from one of my favourite time-periods in a lavish golden gown:
The dress features the fitted, boned bodice of mid-17th century fashions, which would later become the 18th c. robe de cour bodice. The sleeves look back to the 16th fashion, with strips that form a slashed effect, allowing the fine linen of her shift sleeves to peek through, and fall in ruffles below the short sleeve. A fine ruffle of lace or shift frames the low neckline, which is framed with a twisted scarf of fabric, pinned with a jeweled ornament.
Caspar’s lady pairs her dress with a simple (but, at the time, extremely expensive) pearl necklace, and fashionably curled hair with a bun at the back. There is the suggestion of a glimmer of further pearls or jewels in her hair.
What do you think? The picture of refined luxury, perfect for a slow day at home with a favourite pet, or a 1660s New Year fete? (most countries having adopted Jan 1 as the official New Year in the late 16th c, though England would hold out until 1752, even if most people in England celebrated it in January anyway). Or is a gold dress a little too ostentatious for anything short of a royal ball?
Rate the Dress on a Scale of 1 to 10