“Regency with a twist,” is how none other than Bridgerton’s Phoebe Dynevor, who plays Daphne Bridgerton in Seasons 1 and 2, describes the costumes in the series. Perhaps she’s thinking of the cotton-candy pinks, lemon yellows and saturated cornflower blues of the costumes when she said this. Or maybe of the women of the ton who go sans bonnet. While it’s true that there are plenty of stylish flourishes that wouldn’t have existed in early-1800s England, these sartorial choices are intentional, and are examples of how the show has put its own spin on Regency clothing.
“Everything is rooted in Regency times, but the volume is turned up,” says Bridgerton’s creator, director and showrunner, Chris Van Dusen. “One example of that is that Bridgerton is a bonnet-free world. Our ladies wear hats, but they don’t wear more traditional bonnets.”
As for Bridgerton’s pastel aesthetics, the inspiration for them was the similarly fanciful and eye-popping Sofia Coppola film Marie Antoinette. Bridgerton’s Season 1 costume designer, Ellen Mirojnick, originated using the color palette, and Season 2 costume designer Sophie Canale pushed the tradition forward.
But aside from those bright sherbet-hued fabrics and the absence of bonnets, there’s plenty that Bridgerton gets right about Regency-era attire. We gave two fashion historians a peek at Season 2, and they shared their thoughts on the costume details that are accurate — or close to it — from a historical perspective.
That said, as one of the experts we tapped pointed out, a TV show or film’s costumes may not call for 100% historical authenticity, because the goal isn’t always to re-create a specific time and place, but rather to create a new universe.
“I don’t necessarily think accurate is always right,” says fashion historian Raissa Bretaña, adjunct instructor at the Fashion Institute of Technology, who teaches a course on the history of costume and fashion in film. “In Bridgerton’s case, I think accurate would be very, very wrong... It’s a show that borders on historical fantasy.”
While still keeping that fantasy intact, it’s also fascinating to learn about which of the show’s costumes are rooted in historical accuracy, and what they signify in the world of Bridgerton. Below, a thread.
The Regency-era dresses’ silhouettes are one of the show’s most accurate aspects.
“It’s a tough silhouette,” Bretaña says. “And one that is not necessarily universally flattering, with that really, really high waistline right under the bust, and that really columnar skirt. A lot of costume designers historically have shied away from getting that silhouette right. So I am pleased to see that they have fully committed to it.”
Those hiked-up bosoms? Yes, they really were a thing back then.
“It actually was quite dramatic during that period,” Bretaña says. “That was just the fashionable silhouette of the period. We are coming out of the 18th century, which was very, very bosom-forward. And in this early 19th century, we see a great simplification of dress. However, that bustline — it was all about perfecting that bustline.”
But you’d probably have to wait until a nighttime ball to see that much skin.
“The bosom is very, very on display in this show,” Bretaña says. “In reality, that only would’ve happened during a very specific time of day for specific activities. You would not have seen that much chest in your day-to-day life. It was actually required that you cover your chest during the day. And it was only for the most formal evening events that you would see those really low-cut necklines... In the background [of one outdoor scene], you do see the extras wearing the proper neck fillers, these tuckers to cover their chest.”
Kate Sharma’s half corset is actually pretty accurate.
“[For] these very upper-class ladies, the corset of the time, or ‘stays,’ was quite short,” says fashion historian Sara Idacavage, a researcher in the Department of Textiles, Merchandising and Interiors at the University of Georgia. “It wasn’t the kind of corset that we imagine today, that goes down to the hips, and it gives you that tiny waistline. This was sort of like a crop-top length. And that went along with the high empire waist. So they kind of held everything in and sort of up.”
“When I [saw Kate’s stays], I was like, ‘Oh, I recognize that. That is very real,’ ” she says. “But at the same time, it is very inaccurate to see that being worn over bare skin. It’s just not meant to touch the skin. It wouldn’t necessarily be so comfortable, but because things are not being washed as easily, there’s going to be a chemise [underneath], like a slip — or it almost looks like what we think of a nightgown, like a white tent dress, a loose-fitting dress. That would go under the stays for reasons of comfort, for reasons of hygiene, for reasons of modesty.”
The men’s costumes rival the women’s from a historical perspective.
“I really love the little watch fobs that everybody has,” Bretaña says, “because that is a very pointed Regency-era detail. So the individual components do check out. You do have a shirt and a waistcoat and your tailcoat. The trousers are all dark in these [Season 2] images. The trousers would’ve been very light-colored and a lot, lot tighter than what we see in these images, but...again, the silhouette is generally reminiscent of Regency-era clothing.”
“The guys are way, way, way more accurate,” Idacavage says. “For the most part, the silhouette, the colors, everything... [This season is] so much closer to what would have been worn. And that’s all just this idea of, post–French Revolution, what fashion historians called the Great Male Renunciation, which is just a term to mean that men’s fashion gets a lot more somber and simple, and it hasn’t really changed that much since. Yes, maybe the jackets are cut high, and they have tails, and maybe they have these high boots and these cravats wrapped around their neck, but it’s not too much different than what a man today would wear to work. It’s still like a suit...Occasionally it looks like they put a man in a waistcoat, which is like a vest that might be a bit more colorful or embellished.”
The watch fobs aren’t the only men’s accessory this season got right.
“[The watch fob] was definitely traditional, and it was a status symbol — but yes, it really is something that was thought to complete the look,” Bretaña says. “One reason why it’s so recognizable is because we don’t necessarily see the other components, which [are] the top hat and the walking stick, in some of these images [of the leads]. But actually, in the trailer, there were quite a few top hats on the men, the tall ones.”
Even though Bridgerton is a “bonnet-free world,” the use of parasols is on point.
“You do see a couple parasols in the promenading scenes,” Bretaña says. “I mean, the reason for the bonnet, especially — bonnet and parasol — is all about protecting the skin. It was all about trying to retain that pale complexion, when, during this period, that was considered to be fashionable.”
Some Regency-era dresses would have been colorful IRL — just not quite as vivid as the ones in Bridgerton.
“Colors were generally muted during this period,” Bretaña says. “A lot of those day dresses were actually just white. And that’s kind of the look of the period, very neoclassical, going back to ancient Greece and Rome — these flowing white gowns. You would get pinks and purples, but they would be rather subdued. And those really rich, hot tones wouldn’t even be chemically possible until the second half of the 19th century.”
“We know that at this time period, based on fashion plates and the few extant garments that museums have, that there were extremely colorful garments that were out there,” Idacavage says. “White was still the most predominant trend for clothing, but colorful clothing, like the candy hues...the purples and the pinks and the yellows and the green, those were achievable, just not to the far-reaching extent that the show plays with the color palette. So, yeah, I have definitely seen fashion plates from the 1810s where it’s, like, bright, bright pink and bright, bright yellow.”
“However, in reality, those colors would look a lot more muted than they would in the fashion plates, because dyes are either made from minerals, plants or animals,” she continues. “So, there’s only so much you can do. Then, once you do make something like a beautiful, vibrant pink, maintaining that would be very, very difficult... For the most part, they did not try to wash the clothes. They might do little spot-checking here and there. Maybe once the garment was soiled to an extent, or grown out of, or out of fashion, then someone like Lady Bridgerton, Lady Featherington [or] whoever would give their garment to one of their workers, who might sell it on the secondhand market. And then it might be in the possession of someone from a lower socioeconomic class, and then maybe that person would trade it, and then maybe that person would sell it for rags. So it is really remarkable that any clothing exists from that time period, because it made up such a huge part of anybody’s income. So why would you hold on to it when you could go get money for it and pass it on?”
Brightly colored cloth accessories, though? Definitely doable in the Regency era.
“I do think that, in some ways, it’s important to recognize that colorful fashion could have been possible and that people were really accepting that,” Idacavage says. “But, at the same time, it’s more about just how much color there is, because maybe they would have a white dress on with a little pink jacket or a yellow scarf.”
The women’s updos are appropriate for the time period.
“I do see that most of the characters have their hair up, which would be expected of a woman who was out in society — ‘out’ being of marriageable age — and they have had their court presentation,” Bretaña says. “Generally speaking, with period film and television shows, hair and makeup are going to be the first thing to go when it comes to historical accuracy, because you need the actors to look appealing and attractive to your contemporary audience.”
“The hair — aside from Queen Charlotte — is pretty similar [to the Regency era], especially for women who have come of age. They would have their hair up in light curls,” Idacavage says. “So I think that they’re sticking to that pretty well.”
“As fashion historians, we tend to notice what is wrong before we notice what is right,” she says. “But, at the same time, with a show like Bridgerton, the appeal is that it’s not real. It’s a fantasy. And that nothing is supposed to closely resemble real life. It’s supposed to take you away and put you into this spectacle of textiles and colors and hair and beauty and everything.”
