Simply Fitting - Clothing the King
By Ruth A. Symes
Everybody’s talking about the modest – some say rather
old-fashioned - way the Duchess of Cambridge dresses her little ones. But the
public obsession with royal childrens’ wear is not a modern phenomenon. It
probably goes as far back at least as far as the times of Queen Victoria. And Kate’s
sartorial choices for her growing brood are probably actually based on a
well-thought out respect for history and tradition rather than on her own personal
preferences or whims.
 |
| Via Wikimedia commons |
Queen Victoria was all about bringing the monarchy to
the people. After the decadence of previous royals, including her own uncles, the
Queen reignited public devotion through the civic duties that she undertook
with her husband and growing brood of (eventually nine) children. After the launch of the fabulous new man-of-war,
Victoria, at Portsmouth Docks in 1859, The Hampshire Advertiser commented
with a degree of pride that ‘Her Majesty and the Royal children were dressed
very neatly but plainly and presented a somewhat striking contrast to the gay
costumes of many of those around them.’ The
Hampshire Advertiser, Saturday November 19th, 1859).
‘Plain’ apparel for Queen Victoria’s children created
a clear distance between the Royal children and others – the ‘gay’ costumes
around them were a mixture of the extravagant attire of the rich and the tawdry
get-ups of the poor. By contrast, the elegant unfussiness of Victoria’s brood suggested
that they were virtuous, above reproach, and models of Christian austerity. Royal
simplicity was not meant to be meek or ordinary, nor was it a passing phase. Rather
it was a powerful signal to the country. It was also an enduring one. The Greenock Telegraph pointed out some
forty years later (when discussing the all-white outfits of the three of Queen
Victoria’s grandchildren Prince Edward/David, Prince Albert and Princess
Victoria Mary, who were closest to the throne), ‘their little garments are, of
course, made of the finest materials, but the style is simple in the extreme.’
(September, 1898)
 |
Queen
Victoria, Prince Albert and their children,
Credit: Wellcome
Library Gallery, via Wikimedia Commons.
|
Simple clothing for juvenile royals continued to meet with
approval in the Edwardian period – an era otherwise renowned for lavish costume.
In 1905, Pearson’s Weekly commented
approvingly that, ‘The Princess of Wales [Mary of Teck – later wife of George V]
has never followed fashion in the dressing of her children. Absolute simplicity
is maintained in all they wear. As babies the Royal children have always worn
muslin in preference to silk, and when in town, Princess Victoria Mary always
appears at lunch in a cream nun’s-veiling frock, with simple tucks, and devoid
of lace edgings or other adornments. In Scotland, a warm plain blue serge frock
is substituted, with a thick reefer jacket, while for church and visits a plain
white cloth coat and white hat are worn.’ In the same article Mary’s young son ‘David’
(later Edward VIII) was applauded for his self-restraint because, ‘although
anxious to wear an Eton jacket, he has not yet worn any other than Jack Tar
(sailor) suits, or the Stuart Tartan kilt when in Scotland.’ (Pearson’s Weekly, May 11th
1905).
 |
| The children of King George V and Mary of Teck, 1910 By Arthur James Hope Downey (1877-1943) |
As with Queens Victoria and Mary, Kate’s kidswear
tells us something about what Kate (or more probably those that advise her)
want to say about the monarchy. Prince George’s outfits of shorts, knee socks
and patterned jumpers have been described in the press as his ‘standard
uniform’ – to emphasise what it is suggested he is, a public servant in-the-making.
Princess Charlotte, meanwhile, has been spotted in George’s hand-me-downs and
also in outfits that are strikingly similar to each other - her pink dress in
the Queen’s 90th birthday portrait, for example, was similar to one
she was wearing 18 months earlier on a Wales’s family Christmas card.
Kate probably wouldn’t go as far as the practical Princess
Mary of Teck who, when in February 1904 was presented with the fact that her
daughter’s blue silk bridesmaid’s dress had gone missing in the post, stepped
up to the mark and quickly made her own ‘facsimile dress for her daughter to
wear on the morrow.’ Nevertheless, it seems that the public holds Kate in
similar esteem for resisting spending huge amounts of money on items that might
be worn only once - especially at a time of austerity nationwide. Indeed the
press reports that the Duchess frankly owns up to not wanting to cause a
nationwide ‘frenzy’ of shopping for children’s clothing.
So, unlike seven year old Harper Beckham, dubbed a ‘fashionista’
from birth and never seen without a prominent logo gracing her person, George,
Charlotte and soon little Louis Wales too, no doubt, are positioned - at least for now - outside the ephemeral currents
of fashion. Emphatically not the offspring of celebrities or oligarchs - whose
fame and wealth might be here one minute and gone the next - the Wales’
children wear clothes that in both cut and colour hark back to the childhoods
of their father and Uncle Harry, and indeed sometimes much further back than
that.
The fledgling Royals do not wear simple clothes to
blend into the background. The apparent ‘plainness’ is loaded with meaning; a plainness
that is meant to be compared positively with the ‘cooler’ dress of the kids of
celebrities and the sometimes over-precious attire of the sons and daughters of
the aristocracy. The popularity of Wills and Co., depends on their continuing
representation of an enduring set of values – family life, value for money,
lack of vanity, prudence and good workmanship. When the children wear similar
colours to their parents, (the whole family sometimes appears in a delightful
palette of pastel blues or pinks), they project an appealing image of an
old-fashioned British family unit united by blood, cloth and history. This
family, says the clothing, will endure.
As the new Duchess of Sussex contemplates starting –
and dressing - a family of her own, she
might be well advised to take a look at some of the approving mentions of unadorned
princes and princesses in the British press over a century ago. For as one paper put it: ‘Wealthy Americans would deem such wardrobes
as far beneath their notice, their own children being laden down with costly
laces and embroideries. The Duchess of York possibly dresses her three little
ones for a less sum than many rich American mothers spend on one child, but how
much to be preferred is the simplicity and good taste exhibited by her Royal
Highness who usually considers lavish adornment vulgar and out of place when
used for children.’ (The Greenock Telegraph and Clyde Shipping
Gazette of September 29th, 1898).
Meghan you have been warned!
Buy Unearthing Family Tree Mysteries for just £10 plus p + p
Twitter: https://twitter.com/RuthaSymes
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/Searchmyancestry/
For women's history and social history books - competitive prices and a great service - visit:
If you have found this article useful please share with friends, family and fellow family researchers using the share icons below: Twitter, Facebook, Email, Google+ and Pinterest
