the famous “Marie Antoinette dress” at the Royal Ontario Museum in Toronto, Canada.
It is labelled “attributed to Rose Bertin.” (Antoinettophiles you know why she’s a bfd, right?) They probably couldn’t find enough documentation to prove it belonged to Marie Antoinette for a museum’s standards. That makes sense to me as well, because I’d always read the Queen’s clothes were ransacked by the blood-thirsty mobs. (It’s so cliché but the French Revolution was one of those pivotal cases where “blood thirsty” became synonymous with “mob”.)
If it is hers, they certainly got it out in wonderful shape. The ivory silk bodice looks strangely unadorned compared to the detailed embroidery on the skirt and train. The skirt has also been altered to fit over a 19th century crinoline underskirt, implying that the dress had another wearer between M@ and the mannequin in Ontario.
They always tell you that “people were shorter back then” but whenever I see old-timey clothing I am still struck by the shape of the person suggested by the silhouette. Were people proportioned differently back then too? Or were the clothes cut differently? And why do the same people who were shorter back then look so tall in paintings? Were trees shorter too?
- Trivia ‘Toinette # 10: Antoinette and her sister Charlotte were “dead ringers” (tiarasandtrianon.wordpress.com)