Regency Wedding Gowns

Each time I write a Regency romance novel, I strive to achieve the highest possible accuracy, but, alas! I'm not perfect. Still, it's an on-going mission that I hope helps immerse my readers into the magical world of Regency England. Recently, I delved into Regency wedding customs.

Unlike wedding gowns of today, Regency English fashion didn't have an actual classification of a "wedding gown." Brides simply selected an evening gown that they wanted to be their wedding gown. Because white was stylish, Regency wedding gowns were usually white but often had adornment or stripes in other colors. It was not worn once and then put away, either. Ladies often wore their wedding gowns again throughout their first year or so of marriage to formal events. Sometimes, they had it done over again in the newest fashions and wore it again for years.

Here is a picture of a wedding gown circa 1816, courtesy of Candice Hern, fellow Regency enthusiast and author extraordinaire. It's a close-in shot of a print from Ackermann's Repository of Arts, June 1816.

Here's the description of the print from the magazine:

"A frock of striped French gauze over a white satin slip; the bottom of the frock is superbly trimmed with a deep flounce of Brussels lace, which is surmounted by a single tuck of byas white satin, and a wreath of roses; above the roses are two tucks of byas white satin. We refer our readers to our print for the form of the body and sleeve: it is singularly novel and tasteful, but we are forbidden either to describe it, or to mention the materials of which it is composed. The hair is dressed low at the sides, and parted so as to entirely display the forehead: it is ornamented with an elegant aigrette of pearls in front, and a sprig of French roses placed nearly at the back of the head. Necklace, earrings and breacelets of pearl. White kid gloves, and white satin slippers.

We have to thank Mrs. Gill, of Cork-street, Burlington Gardens, for both our dresses this month; and we must observe, that the one we have just described, is a wedding-dress which she has recently finished for a young lady of high distinction."

I think that last line explains why they were forbidden from describing it in detail.

I find it interesting that the wedding gown is slightly off the shoulder. Starting in 1816 a many of ball gowns featured sleeves slightly off the shoulder. Even a court dress in 1816 has off-the-shoulder sleeves. (http://www.candicehern.com/collections/06/court_dresses.htm - scroll down to Figure 8 to see it - click on the thumbnail to see a larger image)
Fashion pages in the 1816 issues of La Belle Assemblée (which has the most comprehensive fashion commentary of any of the ladies' magazines), I don't find any discussion of the dropped sleeve, even in the issues where an off-the-shoulder ball dress is featured in the accompanying print. But in November 1815, the commentary does mention that "the charming display of bosoms and shoulders" continues for dinner and evening dress. "Mrs. Bell has indeed ingeniously contrived the fronts of her dresses in such a manner as to display the neck and shoulders without shewing the bosom."

So apparently sleeves began to slip down the shoulders at least as early as late 1815. And here I'd thought that was a Victorian style. Silly me.

So the next time you read a Regency romance novel with a wedding, you can be "in the know" about the heroine's wedding gown.