This article is copyrighted. Copying, even to your genealogy pages, is prohibited by US and international law. You may "share" it with the URL link because it preserves the author's copyright notice and the source of the article.
All rights reserved. This book or blog article, or any portion thereof may not be reproduced or used in any manner whatsoever without the express written permission of the author except for the use of brief quotations in a book review.
|
Mary Dyer at prayer, a Howard Pyle painting. Pyle was an illustrator in the early 20th century, like Norman Rockwell. |
The few illustrations we have of Mary Dyer, made 250-300 years
after her death, show a plain, slim, ageless woman in very severe clothing, her
hair contained under a starched cap. No one knows what physical characteristics
she had, though several artists have made their own interpretations, including
the 1958 statues in Boston and Philadelphia, and the paintings of Howard
Pyle in the early 20th century.
In mid-17th-century Europe and England, women’s
fashions were all over the board. The country women wore long, full skirts and
kept their shoulders and arms covered in long-sleeved jackets. Middle-class merchants’
wives also wore clothes that covered them, though they tucked their overskirts
above their petticoats. Ladies of the court, and nobility, wore gowns of silk
that were turned back to the elbow, and revealed their bare shoulders and
bosoms, right down to the areola, though for some reason, they covered their
cleavage with a flower or long necklace pendant.
|
Queen Henrietta Maria,
French-princess-turned-English-queen
of Charles I.
Click to enlarge for gorgeous detail.
|
In contrast, Queen Henrietta Maria was Catholic, and
dressed more conservatively than Puritans or Anglicans. She influenced hairstyles, as we learn
from portraits and woodcuts of other women of the day. She had ringlets around her face, and
pulled her hair back with masses of ringlets behind her ears. Many women copied
that style for formal occasions and portrait sittings. Perhaps they wore a hat
or cap at other times.
Mrs. Oliver Cromwell, wife of the
ultra-Puritan Lord Protector of the Realm between the beheading of Charles I
and the restoration of the monarchy, is shown in a portrait wearing an expensive, low-cut
gown—with pearls at her neck and large, pearl earrings. She was considered to be a "plain" (not comely) woman.
|
Lady Elizabeth Bourchier Cromwell, Oliver Cromwell's wife. |
But in colonial New England, three thousand miles away from
corrupt Babylon, men were building the New
Jerusalem, the cultural Zion
which would contain the saints of God. In this time of God's judgment, the saints ought to be dressed soberly.
Jewelry and cosmetics were forbidden in Puritan culture
throughout the 17th century, as something the wicked Jezebel would wear—or the
feared, hated Catholics, who wore crosses or saint medals, which were
interpreted as idols or pagan amulets. (Again, note the relative lack of ornamentation
on the Catholic Queen!)
Mary Winthrop Dudley, daughter and daughter-in-law of
strict, legalistic Massachusetts governors
John Winthrop and Thomas Dudley, wrote letters to friends in England, lamenting the Puritan ban on stylish
clothes in America.
She disliked the harsh frontier life and the dress expectations placed upon
her. She died in 1643, one day before her four-year-old son also died, never having returned
to England
for a visit.
Gold and silver embroidery were banned in 1634 Boston, as was
particularly fancy lace. Women covered their hair with simple caps. At one
point, the religious zealot Gov. John Endecott, along with Rev. Roger Williams who was then a puritan minister, proposed that women wear veils,
but that restriction was discarded by the General Court because the women would have rebelled
against their husbands. (You think??)
|
Anne
Dudley Bradstreet |
Anne
Dudley Bradstreet, America’s
first poetess and daughter of the ultra-conservative Thomas Dudley, wore the
clothing of a virtuous matron of high status, blackest black with plain collar and cuffs.
Who decided what women wore? Men. But who wore lace collars
and cravats and elaborate periwigs for official occasions? Men. They pointed
their beards as King Charles did, and dandified their mustaches, curled their
long hair. Their silk brocade waistcoats (vests) were richly decorated with
embroidery, and their wives (including Mrs. Endecott) employed lace makers to
make collars for them. Colorful ribbon rosettes tied their breeches at the
knee, and tied their shoes.
In 1692, Rev. John Cotton's grandson, Cotton Mather (who
wore a wig like his grandfather and all men of standing in the community), preached and then published a sermon called "Ornaments for
the Daughters of Zion." You can be quite sure that Rev. Mather was not
exactly for ornaments! The sermon
propounded, "If a woman spends more time in dressing than in praying or in
working out her own salvation, her dress is but the snare of her soul." By
Mather’s time, the churches had an attendance very similar to today’s mainline
churches: two-thirds of the members were middle-aged and older women. So
perhaps the audience he intended to reach didn’t get the memo.
|
Rev. John Cotton, with his research books and Bible. |
You may have read Nathaniel Hawthorne’s novel, The Scarlet Letter, in which a woman of Governor Endecott's Salem was forced to wear
a scarlet A for Adulteress. But did you know that in 1634, Robert Cole, “having
been oft punished for drunkenness, was now ordered to wear a red D about his
neck for a year.” There’s no record whether his scarlet letter cured his
alcoholism.
In her presentation of herself and her family, a woman had to tread a narrow course. She
was expected to dress to meet her husband’s social status. A goldsmith’s or
tailor’s wife should enhance her husband’s reputation by showing that her
husband was successful and popular in his trade, but she should never “get
above her station” by dressing like the nobility, even if she could afford it. And
she was expected to show her husband’s (not her) godliness by her manner of
dress and behavior.
Most clothes for everyday work in the home, shop, or garden were
primary-colored, homespun, calico print, or brown, not the severe black and
white that’s been depicted in illustrations of the Pilgrims or the first colonists.
Portraits were expensive, and only depicted the highest-income or
most-influential colonists, who wore black, an expensive, high-status color,
with white collars, cuffs, or shirts, and no jewelry for either gender.
How did Mary Dyer appear to her associates in England and America?
There are no portraits of Mary Dyer made in her lifetime,
and no descriptions of her clothing styles. But because of her status as wife
of a merchant and government official, we may be confident that she was
well-dressed for each occasion, and current in fashions.When she became a Quaker, sometime in the last five to seven years of her life, she probably adopted plainer clothing, but still of high-quality material.
Here is the way Mary was described by observers:
- a
person of no mean [inferior or low-class] extract or parentage
- possessing a piercing
[perceptive, acute] knowledge of many things
- comely
[pleasing in appearance] stature
- comely
countenance [facial appearance]
- wonderful
sweet and pleasant discourse
- fit
for great affairs
- comely, grave [grounded and dignified] woman
- having a husband of great estate
[political/social class, or wealth]
- a mother of children [eight pregnancies, six
living children]
- goodly
personage [distinction, importance]
- one of
a good report [reputation]
- very proper [appropriate, fit, suitable]
- very fair [pretty, comely, lovely, blond, pale] woman
This suggests that Mary dressed carefully and appropriately,
in what men perceived as a modest, Christian way. But it wasn’t her clothing
that defined her. She was noted for her lovely character and demeanor. Surely
that was the sort of thing the apostles envisioned when they counseled women to
let their beauty come from godliness.
I
want women to get in there with the men in humility before God, not primping
before a mirror or chasing the latest fashions but doing something beautiful
for God and becoming beautiful doing it. 1
Timothy 2:9-10
In the end, which is more important—that we know if Mary Dyer
had blond or brown hair, if she had large green eyes, a delicate nose, or full
lips, or that she was admired for the beauty of who she was and how her selfless actions influenced people for centuries to come?
Click
HERE for images of clothing worn in the 1630s through 1650s, during Mary
Dyer’s adulthood.
When I decided on cover art for my biographical novels about the Dyers, I chose details of two Jan Vermeer paintings to depict Mary Dyer reading and writing. Vermeer's paintings were made in the Netherlands during the last few years of Mary's life.
Your comments about fashion are so fascinating! And yes, I feel a little indignant that those men in all their finery and frippery were making the rules on how women should dress!
ReplyDeleteYes, Heather, across most cultures, men have decided for centuries--millennia--how women ought to dress. Most often, it's been for religious reasons, but on a humorous note, now the Western fashions are also set by men, albeit gay men!
ReplyDeleteThe restrictions on jewelry, cosmetics, and accessories are a cultural issue (changes with context), that ultra-conservative religious types have made a moral issue by mis-translating and misusing scriptures for their own purposes of control. It still happens today, in SOME Christian and Muslim sects.
That's why I was so impressed with Mary Dyer's beauty. She was admired for her character, actions--and physical attributes, and those compliments came from conservative men, including one of her greatest critics, John Winthrop. Now THAT must be genius, to have stood out in a positive way, to someone giving her the stink-eye. :)