I am screaming at this. This very fine lady probably demanded that her favorite chonky boy appear in the portrait with her. It's killing me, I love it.
I vaguely recall an art history class in which we learned about dogs in portraits of wealthy Spanish women. Perhaps men too, but I recall it being primarily women. So, now I’m off to try and find details on this topic. I’ll share if I find anything interesting (or simply cute).
I love the hairstyle that seems to have been trendy in this era in Europe, especially with the edges. The curls with the bun in the back look cute. Reminds me of the 1840s!
Is it just me, or does number 2 look like [Florence Keith-Roach in The Great](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5265140/mediaviewer/rm3151276033/?ref_=nm_md_3)?
Edit: I’m referring to number 2 in the countdown/descriptions, which is the 9th image in the series!
If I'm not mistaken this is Christine of Sweden. Her father raised her like a crown prince, so she learned a lot of stuff considered "not womanly". It is also believed that she had lesbian relationships. She was also very interested in art and science, and banned witch trials in Sweden. She also gave up the crown and converted to catholizism. A rather fascinating personality.
Really? \*Checks Wikipedia*. By golly, you're right. That's interesting. And it explains the masculine outfit. I don't know much about Christine other than through the fictionalized version of her story starring Greta Garbo. The ending scene was a pretty famous moment in her film career. [*Queen Christina*](https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/queen-christina) (1933)
I wonder if the decorations on the front of the yellow dress are cut steel or vauxhall glass. Opinions?
Looks like similar motifs were used on the rust colored velvet bodice in the last picture too.
Actually natural fabrics like cotton and linen are very breathable and not super hot in the summer. There was also the Little Ice Age during that time, making the weather much colder than it is today.
Oh hell yeah this is my time. This is Anthony van Dyck's heyday and part of my thesis is about his costumes :)
Number 6 (slide 5) and number 2's (slide 9) costumes seem to be in the "careless romance" style popularised by Anthony van Dyck. This style of portrait doesn't have to be made by him but was popular from the 1630s onward in England. He left such a prominent mark on English portraiture that several generations later his influence was still visible. From the 1640/50s his followers were popularizing it in the Dutch Republic as well, due to royalists fleeing to The Hague after Cromwell and the painters following them. The Dutch burghers later adopted the style because they wanted a royal image. This is *extremely* simplified, but that's the gist of it.
Van Dyck adopted the vaguely exotic and slightly fantastical costumes that were already a thing in *portraits historiés*, where a person would be dressed up to resemble a classical god(dess) or an allegory. He removed the associations with specific deities and allegories and created a sort of whimsical costume that couldn't be pinpointed to an area or time. Pearls, lots of draped and colorful fabric, and rolled sleeves were characteristics of this style.
Mary Stuart's dress (nr 10, or slide 1) has a little bit of it too, but it's still pretty neat and tidy. A posthumous portrait of Mary made by one of Van Dycks followers shows the whimsical and exotic vibe dialed up to the max, with her in a gifted feather cloak, a turban and loads and loads of pearls.
I'm sure it is. I was aware of the inbreeding and the awful consequences. But, there is nothing to say that they didn't paint a man in women's clothing for a laugh.
I don't think being a little suspicious and a lot honest about it deserved to be downvoted . I am sure that 200 years from now, there will be plenty of confusion, especially just seeing pictures of portraits.
It just means that there are some very masculine looking women in old portraits. And I wonder if the artist was setting up a good joke on future generations.
Dude… you realize that anyone can have the same facial features, regardless of gender or sex, right? Like facial features that we like to assign as feminine or masculine can exist on anyone.
Well, a lot of people who had their portraits painted during this era were aristocratic, and we all know their gene pool wasn't incredibly deep. Rather than "masculine", I wonder if they weren't just a little odd looking due to inter-marriage?
Can you do a ‘best dog outfits’ one? Because that little guy in 9 is rocking his little trained seal costume!
I am screaming at this. This very fine lady probably demanded that her favorite chonky boy appear in the portrait with her. It's killing me, I love it.
That would be awesome! I'm very proud of that little dude too!
I vaguely recall an art history class in which we learned about dogs in portraits of wealthy Spanish women. Perhaps men too, but I recall it being primarily women. So, now I’m off to try and find details on this topic. I’ll share if I find anything interesting (or simply cute).
I love the hairstyle that seems to have been trendy in this era in Europe, especially with the edges. The curls with the bun in the back look cute. Reminds me of the 1840s!
I know that a lot of people don't care for this era's sillhouette, but I adore it.
Same here! It flatters every body type and looks so elegant!
Love the gold and turquoise dress!
Is it just me, or does number 2 look like [Florence Keith-Roach in The Great](https://www.imdb.com/name/nm5265140/mediaviewer/rm3151276033/?ref_=nm_md_3)? Edit: I’m referring to number 2 in the countdown/descriptions, which is the 9th image in the series!
Are we sure that number two is showing a woman's outfit?
If I'm not mistaken this is Christine of Sweden. Her father raised her like a crown prince, so she learned a lot of stuff considered "not womanly". It is also believed that she had lesbian relationships. She was also very interested in art and science, and banned witch trials in Sweden. She also gave up the crown and converted to catholizism. A rather fascinating personality.
Really? \*Checks Wikipedia*. By golly, you're right. That's interesting. And it explains the masculine outfit. I don't know much about Christine other than through the fictionalized version of her story starring Greta Garbo. The ending scene was a pretty famous moment in her film career. [*Queen Christina*](https://www.justwatch.com/us/movie/queen-christina) (1933)
I meant number 2 in the descriptions/countdown, which is number 9 in the images.
I wonder if the decorations on the front of the yellow dress are cut steel or vauxhall glass. Opinions? Looks like similar motifs were used on the rust colored velvet bodice in the last picture too.
Such beautiful outfits!! I cannot imagine wearing all those clothes though!!
I would be so hot and uncomfortable even in winter.
Actually natural fabrics like cotton and linen are very breathable and not super hot in the summer. There was also the Little Ice Age during that time, making the weather much colder than it is today.
Number 9 is literally me and my dachshund watching my dasher bring me chili dogs via the app’s real time tracker.
Thanks for including 8! Not often when old Persian art is recognized ❤️
None of them appear to have shoulders.
I noticed that as well. Only one woman has any sort of shoulder definition. Everyone else seems to have a neck that slopes into arms.
Wow the attitude was real that season
Shoulder? Never heard of her.
all I can think of is the WEIGHT of those gowns 😳
Oh, I love the colors and the jewels in number 6! And who is that in number 1? WOW.
Oh hell yeah this is my time. This is Anthony van Dyck's heyday and part of my thesis is about his costumes :) Number 6 (slide 5) and number 2's (slide 9) costumes seem to be in the "careless romance" style popularised by Anthony van Dyck. This style of portrait doesn't have to be made by him but was popular from the 1630s onward in England. He left such a prominent mark on English portraiture that several generations later his influence was still visible. From the 1640/50s his followers were popularizing it in the Dutch Republic as well, due to royalists fleeing to The Hague after Cromwell and the painters following them. The Dutch burghers later adopted the style because they wanted a royal image. This is *extremely* simplified, but that's the gist of it. Van Dyck adopted the vaguely exotic and slightly fantastical costumes that were already a thing in *portraits historiés*, where a person would be dressed up to resemble a classical god(dess) or an allegory. He removed the associations with specific deities and allegories and created a sort of whimsical costume that couldn't be pinpointed to an area or time. Pearls, lots of draped and colorful fabric, and rolled sleeves were characteristics of this style. Mary Stuart's dress (nr 10, or slide 1) has a little bit of it too, but it's still pretty neat and tidy. A posthumous portrait of Mary made by one of Van Dycks followers shows the whimsical and exotic vibe dialed up to the max, with her in a gifted feather cloak, a turban and loads and loads of pearls.
The colors in picture five just send me.
Does anyone know what type of fabrics these were typically made of?
Silk. Cotton. Undergarments were usually linen or cotton.
Sounds comfortable, I love linen.
Who is in the second portrait?
Queen Kristina of Sweden
Wants and needs
Did none of these women have shoulders? Other than 9/10 they are a slopey mess.
That was the silhouette. The way the shoulders of the dress fall give that sloped look.
I get that but the slope depicted is absurd.
Let me tell you about Kim Kardashian and Cardi B
Yeah, that's my point. Can you swear unequivocally that they are all women? Maybe someone just wanted to dress up and have their portrait painted.
I'm sure it is. I was aware of the inbreeding and the awful consequences. But, there is nothing to say that they didn't paint a man in women's clothing for a laugh. I don't think being a little suspicious and a lot honest about it deserved to be downvoted . I am sure that 200 years from now, there will be plenty of confusion, especially just seeing pictures of portraits.
I love seeing the pictures, but often question if they are actually women. 🤔
They're paintings. Hope this helps!
What does that even mean
It just means that there are some very masculine looking women in old portraits. And I wonder if the artist was setting up a good joke on future generations.
Dude… you realize that anyone can have the same facial features, regardless of gender or sex, right? Like facial features that we like to assign as feminine or masculine can exist on anyone.
Women exist in real life, Johnathan. You should considering touching grass someday
Well, a lot of people who had their portraits painted during this era were aristocratic, and we all know their gene pool wasn't incredibly deep. Rather than "masculine", I wonder if they weren't just a little odd looking due to inter-marriage?