Overview

---

Aprons have been worn by both men and women for practical purposes since the Middle Ages; however, they only became a fashionable article of women's clothing in the 1500s. Therefore, functioning as both a utilitarian and a decorative garment, the apron was worn by members of both the lower and upper echelons of eighteenth-century society. It was worn at the front of the body, thereby serving as a marker of one’s social class; different styles and materials signified a certain rank within society. Furthermore, although it was only women who wore aprons as a fashionable accessory for everyday wear in the eighteenth century, both men and women alike wore the garment for particular practical occupations. Aprons varied in length and design throughout the 1700s but, despite its diversity, the garment remained a key element of both utilitarian and fashionable attire. Therefore, the depiction of aprons was prevalent in both eighteenth-century art and literature. Finally, although the apron initially appears to serve a simple, protective function, the garment actually had certain less innocent connotations in its artistic and literary representations throughout the century. 

 

 

Definition

---

According to the Oxford English Dictionary definition, an apron is:

 

• "An article of dress, originally of linen, but now also of stuff, leather, or other material, worn in front of the body, to protect the clothes from dirt or injury, or simply as a covering." 

 

Furthermore, an Explanatory Note in Frances Burney's Evelina provides a definition specific to the eighteenth century:

 

• "aprons were part of all but full evening dress, and ranged from working garments to 'dress aprons of silk with rich embroidery in coloured silks and silver thread and foil or finely embroidered and lace-trimmed muslin'" (p.423)

 

Both definitions combined indicate that an apron is a garment that is worn at the front of the body and was worn in the eighteenth century both as a practical garment and a fashionable accessory. Thus, an apron could be plain and simple or it could be highly decorated and colourfully embroidered, depending on the purpose required.

 

 

Styles and Materials

---

Aprons were pieces of fabric worn at the front of the body over the top of a man or woman’s clothing in order to cover and protect the material. For women, they were generally attached via a drawstring tied at the back or were gathered directly into a waistband, whereas for men, the apron was usually tucked into a belt. Aprons ranged from working garments to highly elaborate, decorative accessories; therefore, they were an indicator of social class in a society where dress reflected rank. 

 

Utilitarian Purposes:

Functional aprons worn for utilitarian, practical purposes both indoors and outdoors were mainly worn by lower-class members of society (for example, a maid), but also by female commoners performing domestic work in the household. These aprons were made out of cheap, workaday fabrics, such as linsey-woolsey (strong, coarse fabric), check (cotton or linen fabric), and linen. Low-class women would wear plain, undecorated aprons, short to medium length, and mostly made out of coarse linen or check, both of which could be readily and frequently washed (Styles 43). Maids and other female domestic employees often wore white aprons made out of linen or cotton, the colour and style of which became a visual signifier of low-class, functional attire. Female commoners would often own both a coarse apron and a check apron, wearing the coarse one over the check one when performing their domestic duties (Buck 154). For these purposes, the apron was multifunctional: not only did it protect women’s clothing, but also it could be used as a towel, a napkin, a method of carrying items, and even an equivalent of the modern oven glove in terms of handling hot cooking pots.

 

The following video demonstrates the typical attire that a female commoner would wear in the eighteenth century. The woman wears a rather long, plain apron, which would be used for the utilitarian purposes mentioned above (apron at 4:57 of the video):

 

Video 1: "Eighteenth Century Clothing at Claude Moore Colonial Farm"

 

 

Who made them? 

The women who could afford it would purchase these types of functional aprons from a tailor, whereas those who could not would either make their own or, if they were working in a household, they would perhaps inherit from their mistresses (an example of inheriting clothing from a mistress is witnessed in Samuel Richardson's Pamela, 1740). However, generally, servants and domestic workers would be expected to make their own accessories (including aprons). 

 

It was predominantly female workers who wore these types of aprons in the eighteenth century; however, men of certain professions also wore aprons made out of particular materials. For example, the following extract from the play, The Dispensary: An Interlude, illustrates Doctor Wax entering "dressed like a shoemaker, with a leather apron, and black stockings" (p.14): 

 

Figure 1: Three Coxworld scholars. The Dispensary: An Interlude (1780)

 

In this play, 'Doctor' Wax is not a doctor at all; he is "only a shoemaker" (p.15), posing as a doctor in order to make more money than would be earned in the former occupation. This highlights the fact that a shoemaker was a profession for the lower ranks of eighteenth-century society, meaning the leather apron was a signifier of a lower-class tradesman. The leather apron was robust and slightly heat resistant; thus, it was a good material for the professions performed by tradesmen, such as shoemakers and blacksmiths. It was also an appropriate garment for handicraftsmen, for example woodcutters:

 

Figure 2: John Yeatherd, The Wood Cutter (1795)

 

The sturdy, durable material was ideal for this outdoor profession, protecting his clothes from any wear and tear as well as himself from injury. Woodcutters were low-class, manual labourers working with their hands; therefore, once again, the leather apron served as a visual signifier of a lower-class occupation. 

 

Fashionable Purposes:

The apron established itself as an accessory of fashionable elite dress in the first half of the eighteenth century, in spite of its original plebeian associations (Styles 94). The upper echelons of society, and those who could afford it, would wear decorative, embroidered aprons as a staple fashion accessory in both everyday wear and on particular occasions. Indeed, aprons became one of various important accessories required to complete a lady’s outfit and sustain a decent adult female appearance, alongside stockings and handkerchiefs (Styles 219). As it was worn at the front of the body, the apron was highly visible and thus a way to show off one’s clothing and fashionable attire.

 

Who made them?

As opposed to the less affluent lower-class women who had to make their own clothing, wealthy upper-class ladies and those of the commoners who could afford it usually left the making of clothes to tailors and mantua-makers (women's dressmakers) (Buck 180). However, sewing/needlework was a domestic occupation for women of all classes in the eighteenth century, although it was seen as more of a hobby or polite craft for upper-class ladies. In particular, aprons were just the right, convenient size and shape to embroider by hand with delicacy (Brooke 108). Embroidery designs could be copied from existing work or bought from professional ‘pattern-drawers’ and then circulated amongst friends. Furthermore, designs for embroidering clothing such as aprons were often included in publications during the eighteenth century, for example The Lady’s Magazine, in which patterns were published from 1770 onwards (Buck 182). For example, this print was included in The Lady’s Magazine from 1796:

 

Figure 3: "A New Pattern for a Gown or Apron" The Lady's Magazine (1796)

 

The materials used to make fashionable, decorative aprons during the eighteenth century were fine fabrics, including lawn (silky untextured fabric), muslin (lightweight cotton cloth), gauze (thin fabric), cambric and silk, the latter being of the highest quality. The eighteenth century saw the introduction of Indian fabrics - cotton textiles - into England, and these soon transformed from rare, exotic materials into daily attire. This led to many vivid printed garments and stylised floral patterns, which were used to embroider aprons, as seen in the print pattern above (Riello and McNeil 210). 

 

The style of aprons changed throughout the eighteenth century with regards to size, length, material and design. 

Beginning of the Century (ca.1700-1730):

At this time, long aprons were in vogue, made of satin or other rich silks, but also muslin or silken gauze. These aprons were either plain or edged with lace, and they were worn in order to cover up the opening at the front of open robes and the petticoat (Bradfield 115), as illustrated in the following image: 

 

Figure 4: Nancy Bradfield. [No title] 

 

Mid-Century (ca.1730-1760):

Short aprons became fashionable, made of silk and richly embroidered in coloured silks (Bradfield 121). It was at this time that aprons transformed from being merely an addition to women’s skirts to eventually becoming the most decorative part of it (Brooke 106). During the 1740s/50s, the materials used to make women’s skirts and gowns were either embroidered or printed all over; however, the expected method of utilising a plain material and/or colour for the apron (e.g. white) in contrast to the decorative skirts and gowns was not adopted because it immediately gave the impression of serving a utilitarian, practical purpose, which was not its function (Brooke 106-108). This evokes the ideology of class distinction, with the fashionable elite wanting to be distinguished from lower-class women who would wear plain aprons for functional as opposed to decorative purposes. This is reminiscent of the infamous attack by Richard 'Beau' Nash on the Duchess of Queensberry's white apron at a Bath Assembly. In Oliver Goldsmith's biography of Nash, The Life of Richard Nash, Esq, Goldsmith recounts this incident (p.37):

 

Figure 5: Oliver Goldsmith. The Life of Richard Nash, Esq (1762)

 

This incident emphasises how white aprons were disdained in fashionable society and viewed as a signifier of low class, as Goldsmith notes that Nash claimed "none but Abigails appeared in white aprons" (an 'Abigail' was a lady's maid). This is the reason why there are so many examples from this period of the eighteenth century of aprons made from checked or striped material, or with very fine and elaborate silk embroideries. Their purpose was so fundamentally ornamental and decorative that, a lot of the time, the aprons were actually sewn on to women’s skirts at the time they were being made (Brooke 108). The following is an example of a short, highly elaborate, embroidered silk apron:

 

Figure 6: “Apron” (ca.1700-1750) 

 

However, towards the end of the eighteenth century, the white apron was reclaimed by the fashionable elite of women in society. Despite the fact that it was still primarily associated with low-class maids and domestic workers, Englishwomen from the upper ranks of society were wearing white aprons for everyday dress over colourful petticoats. Indeed, by 1769, even Queen Charlotte was wearing a white apron in this manner (Styles 95).

 

End of the Century (ca.1760-1800):

By the end of the century, the style of aprons appeared to come full circle; whilst short, elegantly embroidered aprons remained fashionable during the 1760s, longer aprons came back into fashion towards the end of the century. During the 1770s, long aprons were made from embroidered muslin or ribbon-trimmed gauze, but from the 1780s onwards, they were a lot plainer in design (Bradfield 127). The following image exemplifies the fashionably long, plain aprons that were typical of very late eighteenth century: 

 

Figure 7: (Unknown). “A Lady of Chic” (ca.1800) 

 

Thus, the decorative apron varied in style throughout the century, whilst the functional, practical apron had less variety and remained more static. Nevertheless, overall, aprons were a staple accessory during the eighteenth century, both for utilitarian and fashionable purposes alike. 

 

 

Representation in Art

---

The representation of aprons in eighteenth-century art is prevalent, due to the fact that it was a multifunctional and diverse garment that was worn by many men and essentially all women in English society. Interestingly, the apron is illustrated in varying ways, ranging from the expected depictions of an innocent, protective garment, to the potentially unexpected portrayals riddled with sexually suggestive insinuations.

 

The following image is an example of a utilitarian apron being represented as a simple garment serving a simple purpose:

 

Figure 8: Henry Walton. Plucking the Turkey (1776)

 

In the painting, a cook-maid is seen plucking a turkey in preparation for dinner. She clearly wears working garments, including a blue checked apron serving the functional purpose of protecting her clothes. Here, the apron, which is very plain and presumably made out of coarse linen, is purely connected with the domestic work of a low-class woman; thus, the garment is associated with innocence and practicality.

 

A similar representation is seen in the next image:

 

Figure 9: James Gillray. The Fashionable Mamma, or, the Convenience of Modern Dress (1796) 

 

In this satirical print by Gillray, the satire is directed towards the fashionable mother on the left rather than the nursing maid on the right, with the humour arising from the fact that slits have been worked into the lady’s embroidered dress in order for her baby to suckle, as well as from the literal act of the lady breastfeeding her own baby, rather than allowing a wet nurse to perform this function, as was usual at the time. The nursemaid is wearing traditional working garments, including a white apron. She is dressed well for her station, which was important for some mistresses who felt that a well-dressed servant was a reflection of her own fashionable status (Buck 110). The nurse's white apron is a symbol of purity, and the fact that she holds the baby for its mother to feed gives it further connotations of domestic comfort, protection, security, warmth and innocence. 

 

However, when comparing the next two images, a different interpretation of the apron arises:

 

       Figure 10: Dorothy Hall. [No title] (ca.1780s-1800)                     Figure 11: P Stampa (publisher). Flora, Goddess of Flowers (1800)

 

In both prints, there is a young woman in the centre of the image facing left, carrying flowers in her apron. The women are able to lift up their apron and carry items in it, without any indecent exposure to themselves as the garment is an extra accessory on top of their gowns. Whilst both images appear very similar, they actually have very different connotations. In both prints, the woman is immersed in nature, alluding to a state of innocence as natural surroundings were, and still are, often used to represent an innocent space removed from corruption and vice. However, each woman carries flowers, which were often used in connection with women to symbolise their fragility and delicacy, but also their sexuality. On the one hand, in Figure 10, the flowers appear to suggest a lack or absence of female sexuality, or rather sexual innocence and potentially virginity, which was the ideal state for a young, unmarried woman in the eighteenth century. Thus, the fact she carries these flowers in her apron enhances the link between aprons and innocence. On the other hand, in Figure 11, the goddess Flora is illustrated to be smelling a rose. In Roman mythology, Flora was the goddess of flowers and springtime, and therefore a symbol of nature. Furthermore, she was also one of the fertility goddesses, associating her with sex, pregnancy and childbirth. Thus, the presence of flowers in this image suggests a presence of female sexuality rather than sexual innocence: the fact that her forearms and part of her chest are exposed, and the act of her smelling the rose, heighten her connection with these symbols of sexuality, meaning the flowers in her apron establish a link between aprons and sexuality, despite the innocent, naturalistic surroundings.

 

This link between aprons and female sexuality also appears in other images from the eighteenth century, including the following:

 

Figure 12: Anonymous. [No title] (ca.1760s-1780s)

 

In this print, the woman appears to be a young oyster seller who looks directly at the viewer whilst being embraced by a man. He has one hand around her shoulder and the other on her apron, the corner of which he pulls up, whilst she seems to draw away from him slightly. In this image, the apron becomes a sexualised garment: whilst the primary function of an apron in practical terms is to be a protective garment, it can also be seen as a protective garment in sexual terms here. The woman's apron seems to be just another layer of clothing that the man has to peel away before he reaches the woman's body, rendering his slight lifting of her apron and the visibility of a large proportion of her bosom very sexually suggestive representations in this context. 

 

This notion is similarly depicted in James Gillray's satirical print:

 

Figure 13: James Gillray. Sandwich-Carrots! (1796)

 

In this image, a caricatured version of the son of the 4th Earl of Sandwich (1743-1814), who was known as “Jemmy Twitcher”, is seen leering at a young saleswoman pushing a wheelbarrow of carrots on the corner of a street in London. He is depicted as ‘twitching’ at her blue and white checked apron, and she looks over her shoulder at the older man with a neutral expression of neither anger nor fear. Again, the apron becomes a highly sexualised garment, particularly when one notes that the apron is worn at the front of a woman's body, essentially acting as another layer that conceals a woman's sexual organs. The style of her apron is reminiscent of that in Figure 8 (Plucking the Turkey), signifying that she, too, is a low-class female worker. It is interesting to note that in both this print and the print above, the leering men are targeting saleswomen, i.e. women of lower class. There are no depictions of upper-class ladies being targeted in this way, thus showcasing that female workers from the lower ranks of eighteenth-century society were more likely to be victims of (probably unwanted) male sexual advances than upper-class ladies. Therefore, the aprons in these images are connected with sexuality and indecency.

 

In this final image, the ultimate assertion of female sexuality is, ironically, embodied in the representation of a white apron:

 

Figure 14: Carington Bowles (publisher). A St Giles's Beauty (1784)

 

In this image, a prostitute smiles directly at the viewer, sitting comfortably with one arm up on the back of her chair and the other leaning on the table. There are various sexual connotations, including the way in which she holds one end of her kerchief, deliberately exposing her breast, and the fact that her bed is in full view to her left, suggesting her occupation. The torn bed-curtains, the holes in the floor and ceiling, and the broken windowpanes all contribute to the portrayal of her shabby lodgings, emphasising that she is an extremely low-class member of society, as well as giving the impression of a shattered and fractious innocence. Thus, her clean white apron, an archetypal symbol of purity, virtue, cleanliness and protection, is highly ironic due to her profession as a prostitute and her sexually provocative posture in the image. Her attempt to mask this lack of innocence with a pure white apron is perhaps reflected in the bunch of flowers placed inside her chamber pot – in both cases, she is trying to make something unclean appear beautiful. This portrayal of an apron is exceedingly far removed from the initial image of domestic purity depicted in Figure 8 (Plucking the Turkey), demonstrating how the apron was represented in various different ways in eighteenth-century art, including numerous indecent insinuations that perhaps would not be initially expected.

 

 

Aprons and Theft

---

The theft of clothing was one of the most frequently prosecuted offences in eighteenth-century criminal courts (Styles 327). During the century, aprons were not only stolen, but were also used in the act of theft themselves. As mentioned previously, one function of the apron was to carry items - this was also the case in the act of theft. A person wearing an apron could lift the garment up, conceal stolen items inside, and carry them off undetected (if they were discreet enough). 

 

Aprons were frequently stolen; when this occurred, they were often listed as stolen in newspapers amongst other articles of clothing, such as in the following examples:

 

Figure 15: "Classified Ads." Daily Courant (1 Feb. 1726)

 

 

Figure 16: "News." London Gazette (12 Jul. 1720)

 

In Figure 15, a green silk apron is listed as stolen. As previously mentioned, silk was a very valuable material of high quality in the eighteenth century, meaning this particular apron would be very desirable for a thief. In Figure 16, three different types of apron are listed as stolen: "1 clear plain long Muslin Apron, with a large Darn in the Bottom", "1 Short India Muslin Apron with Crimson Flowers" and "1 long Muslin Apron flourished with a border of fine open Work, the middle flourished with Sprigs of true Darning and Spotted, and a Small looped Edging round it". This demonstrates the extreme amount of detail incorporated in the advertising of lost items of clothing, specifically aprons here, especially because these aprons are valuable, fashionable garments as they are decorative and embroidered. However, it was not just decorative aprons that were stolen. In a case that appeared before the courtroom at the Old Bailey in September 1751, a woman named Martha Jackson was accused of stealing a silk handkerchief, "one leather apron" and a silver watch (Old Bailey Proceedings Online); thus, utilitarian aprons were also targeted by thieves. Nevertheless, the vast majority of stolen aprons were not made from leather but predominantly from linen and check (Styles 43), highlighting the fact that it was mostly women's rather than men's aprons that were stolen in the eighteenth century. 

 

Throughout the 1700s, there were numerous court cases at the Old Bailey in which both men and women used aprons as an instrument of crime to steal goods. The following list comprises just a few examples of these countless instances:

 

• 3 Sep. 1707 - Mary Paul entered the home of John Combes in an attempt to steal eighteen Pewter Plates whilst he and his family ate dinner upstairs. She took the plates from a shelf, "put them into her Apron, in order to carry them off, but was discovered with the Goods upon her" (Old Bailey Proceedings Online) 
• 27 Apr. 1715 - Mary Dowland was found guilty of stealing goods from Peter Anderson, including a riding-hood. His wife claimed "she saw the Prisoner with a Bundle in the Entry, and following her, found the Goods in her Apron" (Old Bailey Proceedings Online)
• 12 Oct. 1715 - Elizabeth Moore was found guilty of stealing a gown, a petticoat and other goods from the house of William Mably. His daughter said that "the Woman was come down Stairs, with her Apron full of Goods; upon which, [her mother] pursu'd her, and took her with the Goods in her Apron" (Old Bailey Proceedings Online)
• 28 Aug. 1723 - Richard Wynne, Henry Thomas and Samuel Gibbons were accused of stealing a silver tankard from the house of Charles Tovey. In the end, Gibbons confessed that “he himself took the Tankard, and carried it away in his Apron” (Old Bailey Proceedings Online)
• 4 Dec. 1751 - Mary Riley was caught stealing clothing from James Highton. He saw her leave his house "with a bundle in her apron", and whilst pursuing her, she "dropped the things" she had been carrying (Old Bailey Proceedings Online)

 

These examples indicate that the simple garment could be exploited in order to conceal stolen goods. In the majority of these cases, it was a woman committing the theft, which corresponds with the fact that it was predominantly women who wore aprons for everyday wear in the eighteenth century. However, men also used aprons to steal goods, and the fact that it was only men from the lower echelons of society that wore aprons (i.e. tradesmen) suggests that their motive would have most likely been to sell the stolen goods for money. It is ironic that aprons were both stolen and also used to commit theft. This gave aprons a certain element of criminality and vice, once again associating the apron with connotations that are less innocent than the initial protection and purity the garment evokes.

 

 

Aprons in Eighteenth-Century Literature

---

As clothing was a key signifier of a person's identity and their place within society, a lot of eighteenth-century literature was concerned with fashion and using clothing for symbolic, metaphorical or ironic purposes. In particular, references to aprons within certain literary texts from the eighteenth century represent themes of domesticity and domestic work, gender and sexuality, and finally satire, with subtle or overt class commentaries running through many of them. 

 

Domesticity and Domestic Work

 

Evelina (1778):

 

After Madame Duval has introduced Evelina to the Branghton family, the two young Miss Branghtons start assessing her clothing:

 

• "the young ladies began, very freely, to examine my dress, and to interrogate me concerning it. 'This apron's your own work, I suppose, Miss? but these sprigs a'n't in fashion now. Pray, if it is not impertinent, what might you give a yard for this lutestring?—Do you make your own caps, Miss?—' and many other questions equally interesting and well-bred." (Burney 71) 

 

In this scene, Evelina portrays the Miss Branghtons to be scrutinising her clothing a little too "freely". As mentioned previously, sewing/needlework was a domestic occupation performed by essentially all women in the eighteenth century, and it demonstrated a sense of sophistication and refinement for upper-class ladies in particular. Here, the two young ladies insinuate that Evelina's embroidery of "sprigs" (stems bearing leaves or flowers) on her apron is no longer fashionable, and they also rudely enquire into the cost of the material. Thus, a dichotomy is set up between her elegant, naturalistic embroidery and their vulgar, artificial obsession with fashion and monetary value being the chief signifiers of worth, which corresponds with the way in which Evelina is depicted in the novel as superior to the Miss Branghtons in every respect. 

 

Gulliver's Travels (1726):

 

During Gulliver's voyage to Brobdingnag in Part Two of Gulliver's Travels, an incident occurs when Gulliver, the farmer and his family are at the table: 

 

• "When Dinner was almost done, the Nurse came in with a Child of a Year old in her Arms; who immediately spied me, and began a Squall [...] to get me for a Play-Thing. The Mother out of pure Indulgence took me up, and put me towards the Child, who presently seized me by the Middle, and got my Head in his Mouth, where I roared so loud that the Urchin was frighted, and let me drop; and I should infallibly have broken my Neck, if the Mother had not held her Apron under me." (Swift 82)

 

Here, the apron is worn by the figure of the mother, thus associating the garment in this context with domesticity and protection. It is the apron itself that the mother uses to save Gulliver from falling and injuring himself, thus being utilised in a tender and maternal way. Whilst the image of a baby or child is usually a quintessential symbol of innocence and purity, this is not actually the case in this scene, as the child is almost the direct cause of great harm for Gulliver. Instead, it is the apron that becomes the pure, innocent manifestation of domesticity and preservation. 

 

"A Description of a City Shower" (1710):

 

The following painting by Edward Penny illustrates a particular scene from Jonathan Swift's satire "A Description of a City Shower":

 

Figure 17: Edward Penny. A Scene Taken from Swift's "A Description of a City Shower” (1764)

 

The painting depicts the following lines from Swift's satirical poem:

 

Such is that sprinkling which some careless Quean

Flirts on you from her Mop, but not so clean

You fly, invoke the Gods; then turning, stop

To rail; she singing, still whirls on her mop.

(Swift 19-22)

 

In the painting, a well-dressed London housemaid is shaking her dripping mop on the pavement and showering a male passer-by in the process. She wears a bright white apron, the purpose of which is functional as she is cleaning outdoors. It is ironic that in a poem all about dirt, dirty people and dirty places, the painting portrays this housemaid standing out from the background in her spotless, white apron, as well as white cap and stockings. It can be interpreted that the painting has sanitised the poem in some respects. The poem appears disdainful of modern urban life, and the rain is represented as purging the city and washing all the filth away. In the painting, the housemaid is aligned with the rain and is a symbol of cleanliness and decontamination because she uses a mop and bucket with water in. Therefore, although the woman is not necessarily admired in the poem (she is referred to as “careless”), she is admired in the painting, and this representation reiterates the link between the white apron and purity. 

 

 

Gender and Sexuality

 

Pamela (1740):

 

One night when Pamela is imprisoned at Mr. B-'s Lincolnshire estate, she and Mrs Jewkes go to bed and Mr. B- disguises himself as the maid Nan, waiting for an attempt to seduce and rape Pamela. Pamela initially believes him to be Nan, but narrates in retrospection:

 

• "We lock'd both Doors, and saw poor Nan, as I thought, (for Oh! it was my abominable Master, as you shall hear by-and-by) sitting fast asleep, in an Elbow-Chair, in a dark Corner of the Room, with her Apron thrown over her Head and Neck." (Richardson 199)

 

Figure 18: Joseph Highmore. VII: Pamela in the Bedroom with Mrs Jewkes and Mr B. (1743-4)

 

The above illustration emphasises the notion of disguise in this scene, with Mr. B- waiting in the corner, half concealed by a white apron, before he takes the opportunity to pounce on Pamela once she is in bed with Mrs. Jewkes. It is paradoxical that Pamela's master is of a much higher class than she, yet infiltrates the room in which she sleeps by disguising himself as a low-class maid. In this way, the illustration also accentuates the idea of the potential danger hidden beneath an innocent exterior. Pamela states: "For the future, I will always mistrust most when Appearances look fairest" (198). Clearly, for Pamela, a maid's white apron signified comfort, protection and innocence, but in this context, it turns out to conceal characteristics that are the complete antithesis of this. 

 

Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure (1748):

 

Fanny witnesses Mr. H's affair with her maid:

 

• "After he had done, his dearee gets up, drops her petticoats down, and smooths her apron and handkerchief. Mr. H- look'd a little silly, and taking out some money, gave it her, with an air indifferent enough, biding her be a good girl, and say nothing." (Cleland 68)

 

In this scene, the apron becomes associated with an illicit sexual encounter. The fact that the maid's apron and handkerchief have become crumpled highlights the notion that her appearance has the potential to betray what has just passed. Furthermore, as aprons could be seen to signify purity, the fact that the maid's apron is creased reflects that her virtue has been marred or compromised. Therefore, the way in which she smoothes out her apron and handkerchief emphasises her desire to conceal this sexual encounter and its implications. 

 

"The Rush-Bearing: A Poem" (1784):

 

In Ebenezer Hunt's "The Rush-Bearing: A Poem", a white apron is romanticised as part of a woman's beautiful attire (p.30):

 

Figure 19: Ebenezer Hunt. "The Rush-Bearing: a Poem" (1784)

 

In this poem, the male speaker is describing a young woman named Chloe. He describes her beauty and her clothing, including her “whiten’d Apron”. Owing to the fact that a white apron had connotations of innocence and purity, the garment in this context becomes associated with a woman's modesty. Indeed, the emphasis throughout this extract is on the “Snowy whiteness” of her appearance: he claims her hands are whiter than “the Milky Rose” and that her white apron is as “dazzling as the Light”, all of which are naturalistic comparisons and thus emphasising that a woman’s modesty is natural and pure. Therefore, this poem exemplifies the way in which a woman's virtue was praised and valued in eighteenth-century literature. However, the fact that this woman is desirable because of her virtue means that a woman’s purity is being sexualised within the male gaze here. The male speaker says: “No Prudent Swain, will stand the Conq’ring fight.” In pastoral poetry such as this, a ‘swain’ is a country gallant or lover, meaning that Chloe is portrayed as a woman that no rustic lover would be able to resist. Therefore, her white apron becomes a contradictory symbol of sexualised innocence. 

 

 

A Satirical Saying

 

The notion of being 'tied to someone's apron strings' signifies a person that is strongly influenced and controlled by someone. In the eighteenth century, this saying was particularly gendered, referring to a man that was under the control of a woman, especially his mother or wife. Despite its satirical implications, this saying gives the apron an element of power, particularly so in the context of the eighteenth century in terms of a woman exerting control over a man in what was a highly patriarchal society. The following extract from the play A Widow and No Widow, written by Richard Paul Jodrell and set in London, exemplifies this satirical saying (p.19):

 

Figure 20: Richard Paul Jodrell. A Widow and No Widow, a Dramatic Piece of Three Acts and in Prose (1780)

 

In this extract, the character Macfable reveals that he has become intimate with a very rich widow, Mrs. Sharp. The character Spurious then tells him of the supposedly devious nature of widows, warning him to beware them because they have picked up wily “arts” (tricks) from their marriage to a previous husband and will play them upon their next spouse. However, Macfable declares that he will not be swayed by her ploys, asserting: “What are her airts to me? Do ye thenk that, after I am married, I am to be tied to her apron-strings? No, no [...]” Using the metaphor of being tied to her apron strings, Macfable assures Spurious that he would not allow himself to be controlled by Mrs. Sharp once they were married. Therefore, Macfable denies her any power over him and consequently refutes the element of control attributed to the image of the apron in the context of this saying, despite its initial potential to be representative of female power. 

 

 

Annotated Bibliography

---

Primary Sources:

 

Burney, Frances. Evelina. Ed. Edward A. Bloom. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.

• The Explanatory Notes in this edition provided an extremely helpful definition of 'aprons' specific to the eighteenth century, and the actual mention of aprons in the text illustrated a good example of how the garments were hand embroidered by women.

 

Cleland, John. Memoirs of a Woman of Pleasure. Oxford; New New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.

• The encounter quoted from this text provided a good example of the way in which aprons could be associated with female sexuality and indecency in eighteenth-century literature, in contrast to the stereotypical connotations of domestic innocence and purity.

 

Goldsmith, Oliver. The Life of Richard Nash, Esq; Late Master of the Ceremonies at Bath. Extracted principally from his original papers. London, 1762. Web. Historical Texts. 16 Mar. 2017. 

• The extract from this source regarding Nash's attack on the Duchess of Queensberry's white apron was crucial in tracing the development of people's perception of and attitude towards white aprons during the eighteenth century, particularly in terms of class distinction.

 

Hunt, Ebenezer. "The Rush-Bearing: a Poem." Huddersfield: Brook, 1784. Web. Historical Texts. 11 Jan. 2017.

• The passage taken from this poem was really helpful in analysing the way in which the purity and innocence of a white apron could then become romanticised and sexualised within the male gaze. Here, it was not one or the other - it was a contradictory combination of the two connotations.

 

Jodrell, Richard Paul. A Widow and No Widow, a Dramatic Piece of Three Acts and in Prose. London, 1780. Web. Historical Texts. 11 Jan. 2017.

• The extract included from this play gave an interesting insight into the usage of the satirical saying 'tied to someone's apron strings' within a literary text. It is interesting to note that Macfable's tone is almost ridiculing the idea of being under the control of a woman, highlighting how this saying reversed eighteenth-century gender norms and was almost seen as a form of emasculation for some men.  

 

Old Bailey Proceedings Online. <www.oldbaileyonline.org>. 12 Mar. 2017.

• This was an invaluable and seemingly endless source of criminal cases involving men and women committing theft with the use of their aprons. 

 

Richardson, Samuel. Pamela. Ed. Thomas Keymer and Alice Wakely. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2008. Print.

• The incident quoted from this novel, coupled with the illustration of the scene, contributed to demonstrating how the innocent exterior of the apron could be exploited for vulgar, indecent purposes, revealing the danger explored throughout Pamela of exteriority not being reflective of interiority.  

 

Swift, Jonathan. "A Description of a City Shower." Eighteenth-Century Poetry: An Anthology. Ed. David Fairer and Christine Gerrard. Oxford: Blackwell, 2004. p.74-76. Print.

• The image illustrating the specific four lines quoted from this satirical poem enforced the idea of a white apron symbolising cleanliness and purity, and contributed to developing the interpretation that the image sanitises the poem. Also, it was interesting to note the different representation of the housemaid in the poem and the illustration (represented more positively in the latter).

 

---. Gulliver's Travels. Oxford; New York: Oxford University Press, 2005. Print. 

• The extract cited from this relatively long narrative contributed to the portrayal of aprons as innocent garments associated with domesticity, protection and female tenderness, being directly connected to the figure of the mother.

 

Three Coxworld scholars. The Dispensary: An Interlude. York, 1780. Web. Historical Texts. 5 Feb. 2017.

• The scene taken from this play was useful in exemplifying an instance of a man wearing an apron in an eighteenth-century literary text, and it was particularly interesting to discover that his costume became reflective of a lower-class occupation when compared with him posing as a doctor.

 

17th-18th Century Burney Collection Newspapers:

• A really helpful database that listed numerous cases of lost or stolen aprons, and the two cases I cited were particularly useful in analysing the class and gender implications of these thefts.

 

"Classified Ads." Daily Courant. London, 1 Feb. 1726. Web. 17^th-18^th Century Burney Collection Newspapers. 12 Mar. 2017.

 

"News." London Gazette. London, 12 Jul. 1720. Web. 17^th-18^th Century Burney Collection Newspapers. 12 Mar. 2017.

 

 

Secondary:

 

"apron, n.1." Oxford English Dictionary Online. Oxford University Press, December 2016. Web. 18 Dec. 2016. 

• A helpful, initial definition of an apron which guided me to further research on the purposes of aprons and what materials different aprons were made from for different functions.

 

Bradfield, Nancy. Historical Costumes of England: From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century. London: G. G. Harrap & Co. Ltd., 1970. Print.

• A comprehensive book about clothing in England, including a very detailed section on the eighteenth century. It incorporated a really useful timeline with images and descriptions tracing how eighteenth-century fashion changed via the reign of each monarch, with a lot of detail about the evolution of the decorative apron.  

 

Brooke, Iris. Western European Costume: Seventeenth to Mid-Nineteenth Century, And its Relation to the Theatre. London; Toronto [etc.]: G. G. Harrap & Co. Ltd., 1939. Print. 

• A helpful source describing the style of decorative, fashionable aprons as the eighteenth century developed. 

 

Buck, Anne. Dress in Eighteenth-Century England. London: B. T. Batsford Ltd., 1979. Print. 

• A really detailed and well-researched source about clothing specific to the eighteenth century, which provided helpful information on the various purposes of aprons, the different styles and materials utilised, and the class implications of this. 

 

Riello, Giorgio, and Peter McNeil, eds. The Fashion History Reader: Global Perspectives. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon; New York: Routledge, 2010. Print. 

• A useful source explaining the influence of Asian fabrics on apron designs in eighteenth-century England. 

 

Styles, John. The Dress of the People: Everyday Fashion in Eighteenth-Century England. New Haven: Yale University Press, 2007. Print.

• A very informative and detailed source about the style, usage and perception of aprons in eighteenth-century England, and covering various aspects such as class and gender. It also included many helpful extracts and images from eighteenth-century writers and artists.

 

 

Images:

 

Figure 1: Three Coxworld scholars. The Dispensary: An Interlude (1780). Web. Historical Texts. 5 Feb. 2017.

 

Figure 2: John Yeatherd. The Wood Cutter (1795). London. Mezzotint. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3373740&partId=1&searchText=apron&images=true&from=ad&fromDate=1700&to=ad&toDate=1800&page=4> 1 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 3: "A New Pattern For a Gown or Apron." The Lady's Magazine (1796). Kent University website. Web. <https://www.kent.ac.uk/english/ladys-magazine/patterns/index.html> 15 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 4: Nancy Bradfield. [No title]. London. Historical Costumes of England: From the Eleventh to the Twentieth Century (1970). Print.

 

Figure 5: Oliver Goldsmith. The Life of Richard Nash, Esq; Late Master of the Ceremonies at Bath. Extracted principally from his original papers (1762). Web. Historical Texts. 16 Mar. 2017. 

 

Figure 6: “Apron” (ca.1700-1750). Photograph. Victoria and Albert Museum. Web. <http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O362167/apron/> 16 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 7: (Unknown). “A Lady of Chic” (ca.1800). London. Victoria and Albert Museum. Web. <http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O1171060/eddison-collection-album-kean-edmund/> 16 Mar. 2017.  

 

Figure 8: Henry Walton. Plucking the Turkey (1776). London. Oil paint on canvas. Tate Britain Gallery. Web. <http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/walton-plucking-the-turkey-n02870> 28 Feb. 2017. 

 

Figure 9: James Gillray. The Fashionable Mamma, or, the Convenience of Modern Dress (1796). London. Hand-coloured etching. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishBritishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1540655&partId=1&searchText=fashion&images=true&from=ad&fromDate=1795&to=ad&toDate=1798&page=1> 14 Mar. 2017. 

 

Figure 10: Dorothy Hall. [No title] (ca.1780s-1800). Print on paper. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3291681&partId=1&searchText=apron&images=true&from=ad&fromDate=1700&to=ad&toDate=1800&page=1> 1 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 11: P Stampa (publisher). Flora, Goddess of Flowers (1800). London. Mezzotint. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3345734&partId=1&searchText=apron&images=true&from=ad&fromDate=1700&to=ad&toDate=1800&page=1> 1 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 12: Anonymous. [No title] (ca.1760s-1780s). Mezzotint. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=3351079&partId=1&searchText=apron&images=true&from=ad&fromDate=1700&to=ad&toDate=1800&page=4> 1 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 13: James Gillray. Sandwich-Carrots! (1796). London. Hand-coloured etching. Victoria and Albert Museum. Web. <http://collections.vam.ac.uk/item/O556065/sandwich-carrots-print-gillray-james/> 12 Mar. 2017. 

 

Figure 14: Carington Bowles (publisher). A St Giles’s Beauty (1784). London. Mezzotint. The British Museum. Web. <http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details.aspx?objectId=1638754&partId=1> 15 Mar. 2017.  

 

Figure 15: "Classified Ads." Daily Courant (1 Feb. 1726). Web. 17^th-18^th Century Burney Collection Newspapers. 12 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 16: "News." London Gazette (12 Jul. 1720). Web. 17^th-18^th Century Burney Collection Newspapers. 12 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 17: Edward Penny. A Scene Taken from Swift's "A Description of a City Shower” (1764). Oil paint on canvas. Museum of London. Web. <http://www.museumoflondonprints.com/image/138263/edward-penny-a-city-shower-18th-century> 13 Mar. 2017.

 

Figure 18: Joseph Highmore. VII: Pamela in the Bedroom with Mrs Jewkes and Mr B. (1743-4). Oil paint on canvas. Tate Britain Gallery. Web. <http://www.tate.org.uk/art/artworks/highmore-vii-pamela-in-the-bedroom-with-mrs-jewkes-and-mr-b-n03574> 5 Jan. 2017.

 

Figure 19: Ebenezer Hunt. The Rush-Bearing: a Poem (1784). Web. Historical Texts. 11 Jan. 2017.

 

Figure 20: Richard Paul Jodrell. A Widow and No Widow, a Dramatic Piece of Three Acts and in Prose (1780). Web. Historical Texts. 11 Jan. 2017.

 

 

Videos:

 

Video 1: Claude Moore Colonial Farm. "Eighteenth Century Clothing at Claude Moore Colonial Farm." Online video clip. 26 Feb. 2009. YouTube. 8 Mar. 2017.