# Aris Kafantogias

250 KLAS NYBERG

Orrelius, Magnus. 1797. *Köpmans- och material-lexicon, innehållande beskrifning på alla handels-waror, til deras hemort,beskaffenhet, tilwerkning, brukbarhet och försälgning, samt derjämte upräknade på swenska, latin, tyska, fransyska, äfwen ibland på engelska och* 

Persson, Christer. 1993. *Stockholms klädesmanufakturer 1816-1846*. Diss. Stockholm

Quiding, Nils H. 1865. *Svenskt allmänt författningsregister för tiden från år 1522 till och med* 

Randall, Adrian. 1991. *Before the Luddites. Custom, community and machinery in the English* 

Riello, Giorgio, and Roy Tirthankar. 2009. ed. *How India clothed the world. The world of South Asian textiles, 1500-1850,* Leiden: Brill (Global economic history series, 4). Riello, Giorgio, and Ulinka Rublack, ed. 2019. *The right to dress. Sumptuary laws in a global perspective, 1200-1800*. Cambridge, New York: Cambridge University Press. Roche, Daniel. (1994) 1996. *The culture of clothing. Dress and fashion in the ancien regime*,

Schön, Lennart 1979. *Från hantverk till fabriksindustri. Svensk textiltillverkning 1820-*

Siebenhüner, Kim, John Jordan, and Gabi Schopf. ed. 2019. *Cotton in context. Manufacturing, marketing, and consuming textiles in the German-speaking world (1500-*

Stavenow-Hidemark, Elisabet. ed. 1990. *1700-tals textil. Anders Berchs samling i Nordiska museet* [18th century textiles. The Anders Berch Collection at the

Stavenow-Hidemark, Elisabet, and Klas Nyberg 2015. *Från kläde till silkesflor. Textilprover från 1700-talets svenska fabriker*. Stockholm: Kulturhistoriska

Styles, John. 2007. *The dress of the people. Everyday fashion in eighteenth-century England,*

Synnerberg, Lars, Nilsson. 1815. *Svenskt waru-lexicon uti sammandrag ur de mest bekanta* 

Trentmann, Frank, ed. 2012. *The Oxford handbook of the history of consumption*. Oxford:

Utterström, Gustaf. 1957. *Jordbrukets arbetare. Levnadsvillkor och arbetsliv på landsbygden från frihetstiden till mitten av 1800-talet*. Vol. 2. (Diss. Stockholms Högskola)

Van der Wee, Herman. 2003. "The Western European woollen industries, 1500- 1800." In *The Cambridge history of western textiles*, ed*.* David T. Jenkins. Vol. 1, 397-

Westerlund, Lars. 1988. *Provincialschäfrarna i Sverige åren 1739-66*. (Åbo akademi,

Wilhelmsen, Leif, J. ed. 1954. *Norsk tekstilordbok, med oversettelser til engelsk og tysk.*

Wilhelmsen, Leif, J. 1943. *English textile nomenclature*. Bergen: J. D. Beyer.

*författares arbeten, rörande handeln.* Vols. 1-2. Göteborg: Sam. Norberg.

*woollen industry, 1776-1809*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

*Preliminär textilteknisk ordlista*. 1957. Stockholm: Textilrådet.

*holländska*. Stockholm.

*1870. Diss. Lund: Univ.* 

Bokförlaget.

*år 1862…* Stockholm: Norstedt.

Cambridge: Cabridge University Press.

*1900)*. Wien-Köln-Weimar: Böhlau Verlag.

New Haven: Yale University Press.

Oxford University Press.

diss.) Åbo: Åbo akademi.

Stockholm: Tiden.

Nordiska museet], Stockholm: Nordiska museet.

472. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bergen: Norsk tekstil teknisk forbund.

Univ.

*The catalyst of change? The appearance of Viennese female servants and its relation to fashion in the period 1760-1823*

# **1. Introduction: Fashion and consumption in Europe in the eighteenth century and the case of Vienna**

In his monumental work Fernand Braudel considered fashion an integral element in European material life and made several important arguments about its development and function as a historical phenomenon (Braudel 1981, 1:315-33). Several of his assertions have been questioned by subsequent historical research (Lemire 2016, 10-4). However, his argument that in the eighteenth century the pace of fashion accelerated, and that fashion did not hinge on quantity and extravagance anymore, rather it depended on the ability to change and adapt to the accelerated rate of change, has been elaborated further in recent studies.

Many researchers have acknowledged the integral role of fashion in the crucial changes in consumption in eighteenth-century Europe. Maxine Berg argued that the principal criterion for consumption, especially for novel consumer goods (not just clothing), in the period was not price or quality, but fashion, which referred not only to individual goods, but mainly to lifestyles and that fashion affected the consumption choices of all social strata (Berg 2005, 247-48; 256-57). Similarly, Frank Trentmann in his analysis of consumption culture in the eighteenth century, placed novelty, variety, speed of change, the prevalence of visible and immediate forms of consumption, and the availability of goods to a considerably broader consumer base among several important characteristics of consumption. He described a dynamic and innovative consumption regime at the core of which was individual choice and in which fashion emerged as an industry that drove demand (Trentmann 2016, 53-77). Observed within the broader discussion on the development of consumption in Europe in the early modern period, and particularly the theories concerning the increased ability of a greater part of the European population to acquire goods through the market, to exercise choice and to consume in an accelerated pace, fashion was placed at the core of Neil McKendrick's concept of the «consumer revolution» and Jan de Vries' theory of the «industrious revolution» (McKendrick, Brewer, and Plumb 1982, 27-9; 94-9; De Vries 2008, 126).

The establishment of fashion as an integral part of European consumption in the eighteenth century was a complex process, which involved producers, consumers, intermediaries and institutions. It followed several important

Aris Kafantogias, *The catalyst of change. The clothing of the Viennese servants and their relation to fashion in the period 1760-1823*, pp. 251-289, © 2022 Author(s), CC BY 4.0 International, DOI 10.36253/978-88-5518-565-3.15

FUP Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (DOI 10.36253/fup\_best\_practice)

through these and other publications (North 2004, 32-33; Styles 2017, 51-3).

would settle for locally produced goods.

In the second half of the eighteenth century the Habsburg Empire followed a policy of protectionism in order to strengthen and improve local manufacture in a wide range of industries. The state attempted to localize the production of fashionable, especially luxury, products, such as mirrors, silk fabrics or porcelain. It gave incentives to foreign producers of specialized fashionable goods, such as pocket watches and umbrellas, or specialized technology, such as innovative dyeing techniques for cotton yarn or special silk looms for the weaving of specific flower patterns from Lyon, to bring their production in Vienna. This policy influenced the development of the Viennese textile industry greatly. In the period under examination, despite certain periods of crisis, substantial growth in the textile industry, particularly in the production of cotton and silk fabrics can be observed. A great variety in all main fabrics was produced in the Habsburg Empire. In the case of the silk industry in particular, the state abolished antiquated quality controls that obstructed the industry's capacity to keep up with fashion change. Restrictions in the sale of products, especially of bigger manufactures were also abolished. Guild restrictions were eliminated for specific sectors of commercial activity in the city, which were reformed towards a more liberal, market-oriented system (Chaloupek, Eigner, and Wagner 1991, 1:52-65, 70-88; Sandgruber 2005, 179-84; Buxbaum 1986, 177-79; Katsiardi-Hering 2003, 99-133). These measures contributed to the expansion of the domestic market, especially the retail trade of textiles and the stimulation of consumer demand in Austria (Sandgruber 1982, 386). The development of local manufacture presupposed a receptive audience, familiar with the latest European fashion trends and their nuances, who could exercise choice and, if they were unable to buy the products imported from London or Paris,

A critical development for the establishment of Viennese fashion was the publication of the first Viennese fashion magazine, the «Wiener Modenzeitung» (later « Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur Theater und Mode»), in 1816. In accordance with other fashion magazines in Europe at the time this was a high-cost publication, as it included a short segment with a colored engraving once every week advertising the creations of Viennese fashion, but, in contrast to other such endeavors, it was also high-intensity publication, as issues were gradually published more times in a week. The magazine's popularity indicates not only the existence of a substantial audience for fashion news in the period, but also the eagerness of the Viennese producers to present their works to the public (Kaut 1970, 48-53; Styles 2017, 53). As with other fashion magazines in the German regions, the Viennese fashion magazine promoted local producers and locally produced goods by contrasting them with popular French and English creations. It was critical of French and English influences on Viennese dress, advocated the emancipation of fashion in the German regions and engaged in debates over the need for a German costume («Tracht») (WMZ, 4.1.1816, 25.4.1816). This debate was also undertaken in other German periodicals such as the «Journal des Luxus und der Moden» (North 2004, 27-33). These periodicals in the German regions contributed greatly to the creation of fashionable consumers among the middle strata in the period, who could read fashion news and consume French and English fashion indirectly

developments such as the abolition of sumptuary legislation and the changing attitudes towards luxury and consumption, the establishment of the practice of annual or seasonal fashion cycles, the changing urban landscapes, which became more suited to the needs and desires of a greater part of the population, the evolving marketing techniques, and the regular circulation of news from the leading European fashion centers to a wider public in many regions of the continent. In the second half of the eighteenth century, the Viennese were familiar with the latest fashions from the dominant fashion centers Paris and London through a variety of sources, such as almanacks, pocket books or calendars, albeit with a certain delay. These works were published in great numbers in the period and addressed mainly women. According to contemporary commentators, fashion change in Vienna was generally slower than in Paris and the latest Parisian fashion was taken on in Vienna several months after its introduction. Moreover, it was not adopted with the same pace or in the same way across the social spectrum. In general, the slower rate of adoption of the latest fashions in the German territories was remarked in German fashion magazines in the period (Buxbaum 1986, 43-4; Kaut 1970, 35-42; Purdy 2003, 229; Pezzl 1787a, 4:587-91). Nevertheless, these works contributed to the cultivation of fashion consciousness in a greater part of the Viennese population and set off a process of appropriation, which resulted in the creation of a separate Viennese direction in the following period, as in such a process the individuals transform the appropriated objects and, as a result, mold their specific local sartorial context (Samida, Eggert, and Hahn 2014, 101-3; Hahn 2014, 101-6). The emancipation of Viennese fashion should be placed in the first decades of the nineteenth century, especially in the years after the Vienna Congress (1814-1815), which stimulated the production of clothes due to the great number of guests that needed a variety of garments for different occasions. This was depicted in the great increase in the number of tailors in the city in the first half of the nineteenth century (Sandgruber 1982, 301-2; Kaut 1970, 62-6). During the congress, Vienna and Viennese dress became fashionable. Furthermore, the guests influenced the local tailors and were influenced by the local production in return.

As Viennese fashion became progressively independent from French and English examples, it set the tone for the whole Austrian Empire (wealthy individuals in the different lands of the empire ordered fashionable clothes and other fashionable items from Vienna (Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur Theater und Mode (WMZ), 20.12.1817)). Viennese fashion was characterized by high quality materials, fine craftmanship, attention to detail, balance of extremes, avoidance of exaggeration and strong connection to local production and forms. As a product of its time, Viennese fashion moved away from aristocratic and towards bourgeois models (Buxbaum 1986, 25; Kaut 1970, 44; Springschitz 1949, 9). In the first half of the nineteenth century the seasonal Viennese fashion cycle commenced in the first of May in the public space of «Prater», which was accessible to all city residents and in which the new fashion was presented. However, in a court city like Vienna there were many public spaces, where, according to time of the day, fashionable dress was on display either by the bourgeoisie or by the nobility (Kaut 1970, 78; Buxbaum 1986, 45).

developments such as the abolition of sumptuary legislation and the changing attitudes towards luxury and consumption, the establishment of the practice of annual or seasonal fashion cycles, the changing urban landscapes, which became more suited to the needs and desires of a greater part of the population, the evolving marketing techniques, and the regular circulation of news from the leading European fashion centers to a wider public in many regions of the continent. In the second half of the eighteenth century, the Viennese were familiar with the latest fashions from the dominant fashion centers Paris and London through a variety of sources, such as almanacks, pocket books or calendars, albeit with a certain delay. These works were published in great numbers in the period and addressed mainly women. According to contemporary commentators, fashion change in Vienna was generally slower than in Paris and the latest Parisian fashion was taken on in Vienna several months after its introduction. Moreover, it was not adopted with the same pace or in the same way across the social spectrum. In general, the slower rate of adoption of the latest fashions in the German territories was remarked in German fashion magazines in the period (Buxbaum 1986, 43-4; Kaut 1970, 35-42; Purdy 2003, 229; Pezzl 1787a, 4:587-91). Nevertheless, these works contributed to the cultivation of fashion consciousness in a greater part of the Viennese population and set off a process of appropriation, which resulted in the creation of a separate Viennese direction in the following period, as in such a process the individuals transform the appropriated objects and, as a result, mold their specific local sartorial context (Samida, Eggert, and Hahn 2014, 101-3; Hahn 2014, 101-6). The emancipation of Viennese fashion should be placed in the first decades of the nineteenth century, especially in the years after the Vienna Congress (1814-1815), which stimulated the production of clothes due to the great number of guests that needed a variety of garments for different occasions. This was depicted in the great increase in the number of tailors in the city in the first half of the nineteenth century (Sandgruber 1982, 301-2; Kaut 1970, 62-6). During the congress, Vienna and Viennese dress became fashionable. Furthermore, the guests influenced the

local tailors and were influenced by the local production in return.

1970, 78; Buxbaum 1986, 45).

As Viennese fashion became progressively independent from French and English examples, it set the tone for the whole Austrian Empire (wealthy individuals in the different lands of the empire ordered fashionable clothes and other fashionable items from Vienna (Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur Theater und Mode (WMZ), 20.12.1817)). Viennese fashion was characterized by high quality materials, fine craftmanship, attention to detail, balance of extremes, avoidance of exaggeration and strong connection to local production and forms. As a product of its time, Viennese fashion moved away from aristocratic and towards bourgeois models (Buxbaum 1986, 25; Kaut 1970, 44; Springschitz 1949, 9). In the first half of the nineteenth century the seasonal Viennese fashion cycle commenced in the first of May in the public space of «Prater», which was accessible to all city residents and in which the new fashion was presented. However, in a court city like Vienna there were many public spaces, where, according to time of the day, fashionable dress was on display either by the bourgeoisie or by the nobility (Kaut

A critical development for the establishment of Viennese fashion was the publication of the first Viennese fashion magazine, the «Wiener Modenzeitung» (later « Wiener Zeitschrift für Kunst, Literatur Theater und Mode»), in 1816. In accordance with other fashion magazines in Europe at the time this was a high-cost publication, as it included a short segment with a colored engraving once every week advertising the creations of Viennese fashion, but, in contrast to other such endeavors, it was also high-intensity publication, as issues were gradually published more times in a week. The magazine's popularity indicates not only the existence of a substantial audience for fashion news in the period, but also the eagerness of the Viennese producers to present their works to the public (Kaut 1970, 48-53; Styles 2017, 53). As with other fashion magazines in the German regions, the Viennese fashion magazine promoted local producers and locally produced goods by contrasting them with popular French and English creations. It was critical of French and English influences on Viennese dress, advocated the emancipation of fashion in the German regions and engaged in debates over the need for a German costume («Tracht») (WMZ, 4.1.1816, 25.4.1816). This debate was also undertaken in other German periodicals such as the «Journal des Luxus und der Moden» (North 2004, 27-33). These periodicals in the German regions contributed greatly to the creation of fashionable consumers among the middle strata in the period, who could read fashion news and consume French and English fashion indirectly through these and other publications (North 2004, 32-33; Styles 2017, 51-3).

In the second half of the eighteenth century the Habsburg Empire followed a policy of protectionism in order to strengthen and improve local manufacture in a wide range of industries. The state attempted to localize the production of fashionable, especially luxury, products, such as mirrors, silk fabrics or porcelain. It gave incentives to foreign producers of specialized fashionable goods, such as pocket watches and umbrellas, or specialized technology, such as innovative dyeing techniques for cotton yarn or special silk looms for the weaving of specific flower patterns from Lyon, to bring their production in Vienna. This policy influenced the development of the Viennese textile industry greatly. In the period under examination, despite certain periods of crisis, substantial growth in the textile industry, particularly in the production of cotton and silk fabrics can be observed. A great variety in all main fabrics was produced in the Habsburg Empire. In the case of the silk industry in particular, the state abolished antiquated quality controls that obstructed the industry's capacity to keep up with fashion change. Restrictions in the sale of products, especially of bigger manufactures were also abolished. Guild restrictions were eliminated for specific sectors of commercial activity in the city, which were reformed towards a more liberal, market-oriented system (Chaloupek, Eigner, and Wagner 1991, 1:52-65, 70-88; Sandgruber 2005, 179-84; Buxbaum 1986, 177-79; Katsiardi-Hering 2003, 99-133). These measures contributed to the expansion of the domestic market, especially the retail trade of textiles and the stimulation of consumer demand in Austria (Sandgruber 1982, 386). The development of local manufacture presupposed a receptive audience, familiar with the latest European fashion trends and their nuances, who could exercise choice and, if they were unable to buy the products imported from London or Paris, would settle for locally produced goods.

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 255

twentieth-century notions of fashion as a system of production, marketing and consumption, which did not exist in previous periods (Riello and Parthasarathi 2009, 146). However, in the essay the relation of female consumption of clothes and accessories with fashion is examined in the specific period, in which fashion in Vienna, did not simply refer to foreign or novel goods, but to an emerging industry that strived to unshackle itself from foreign influence and construct its own local production sources, marketing apparatus and consumer base. The study places the focus on the consumption of female domestic servants and compares the number, value, quality, condition and particular features of their clothes to the rest of the Viennese female middle-class population. It examines their role in trickle-down or trickle-across processes and investigates the material basis of arguments about their function as trendsetters in the consumption of broader parts of the population in

**2. The Viennese probate inventories and the population under examination** 

The relation between fashion and consumption in Vienna is examined in the present essay through the analysis of a sample of one hundred fifty (150) female probate inventories in the period 1760-1823. The inventories are gathered approximately in twenty-year intervals. Thirty cases come from the 1760s, forty cases come from the years 1783-1784, forty cases come from 1803 and, finally, forty cases come from 1823. Probate inventories document a person's belongings at the time of death. As a result, they tend to depict the estate of older people, for who fashion relevance might not have been among their principal reasons for consumption or even for keeping certain items (Shammas 1990, 19; Reith 2015, 29). Though, as Amanda Vickery has argued, mature women did not renounce, but instead negotiated fashion as they aged and decided to adopt, retain or reject certain features of prevalent fashion later in their lives according to multiple factors such as status, economic situation or socially appropriate appearance. Furthermore, older working women could also increase their expenditure on clothes, if they did not need to support their children anymore (Vickery 2013, 871-5; 883-4).2 This sample is not designed to depict the short-term fashion changes within one or two annual cycles. However, it can show broader shifts in the consumption of clothes and, consequently, in the character and form of Viennese fashion. Furthermore, female consumption of clothes can be observed separately, as the inventories referred to

It has been postulated that in this period demographic and economic growth contributed to the creation of a rather broad and diverse stratum of an early bourgeoisie in Vienna, which included not only factory owners or bankers, but also innkeepers and master artisans (Mittenzwei 1998, 21). This sample is constructed to represent the lower end of this emerging group, as well as the groups directly below them in the social scale, namely the middle and lower-middle strata of the Viennese population within a wealth spectrum of 10-10,000 Gulden as active total wealth at

2 According to information on the age of death in the inventories in 1823. The average age of

death of non-servants was fifty-five years, while that of servants forty-five years.

the period.

specific individuals rather than households.

Fashion was also influenced by broader shifts in the material culture of early modern European dress. A shift towards lighter, more colorful and patterned fabrics, as well as the dissemination of textiles, which employed new techniques, such as knitting, lacemaking, printing, or dyestuffs coming from the New World characterized the early modern period (Styles 2019, 35). These changes affected all main fibers of European dress, though certain fabrics such as silk or cotton had increased importance in the development of fashionable dress and appearance (Lemire and Riello 2008). Fabrics became cheaper, less durable and more fashionsensitive. Early modern consumers were in position to acquire a wider array of garments made from a greater variety of fabrics, which had to be renewed at an increased pace. Variety and novelty were becoming desirable qualities in fabrics and this demand was covered through accelerated pace of change in patterns and colors, as well as imitation and product innovation with the proliferation of new mixed fabrics (Styles 2019, 36-9). Johann Pezzl, an author and prominent commentator on life in Vienna at the end of the eighteenth and the start of the nineteenth century remarked that women in the 1780s dressed in a lighter and more natural manner. Fabrics were not so heavy, expensive or durable as in the past, and, due to their lightness and low price, they were changed more often and replaced with new ones. The result was a more diverse, clean and fresh appearance (Pezzl 1787b, 1:77-8).

At the end of the eighteenth century, it was taste, rather than wealth, luxury, and, consequently, social position that provided the foundation for fashion. Taste referred to broader non-aristocratic social strata and was associated with commercialization, accessibility, the public domain, knowledge and the role of female consumer behavior (North 2004; 2008, 169-71; Jones 1994, 958-60). The urban middle strata and particularly female consumers constituted key groups in the investigation of the influence of fashion on consumption. Both de Vries and McKendrick have stressed the importance of women as consumers in their arguments, especially working women in the lower social strata, who possessed their own income and consumption capability, and brought new desires and tastes in the consumption decisions of a household.1 McKendrick also identified a social subgroup with particular importance for the dissemination of fashionable consumption, namely domestic servants, who, especially in a capital city like London, could constitute a link between the consumption habits of higher and lower social strata (McKendrick, Brewer, and Plumb 1982, 21-4; De Vries 1993, 117-9; 1994, 261-2). Daniel Roche made a similar argument for a trickle-down process of diffusion in eighteenth-century Paris, in which servants' dress constituted a crucial intermediate stage (Roche 1987, 160-80). The present essay concerns the case study of Vienna in the period 1760-1823 and investigates the relation of the consumption of clothes of a broad part of the Viennese middle strata with fashion. Riello and Parthasarathi have proposed the term «fashionability» for the investigation of this relation in order to separate it from

<sup>1</sup> This assertion has also been disputed concerning its applicability outside north-western Europe (Ogilvie 2010, 312–19). An overview of different approaches of historical investigation to the relation of women with fashion in eighteenth-century France in (Jones 2013).

1787b, 1:77-8).

Fashion was also influenced by broader shifts in the material culture of early modern European dress. A shift towards lighter, more colorful and patterned fabrics, as well as the dissemination of textiles, which employed new techniques, such as knitting, lacemaking, printing, or dyestuffs coming from the New World characterized the early modern period (Styles 2019, 35). These changes affected all main fibers of European dress, though certain fabrics such as silk or cotton had increased importance in the development of fashionable dress and appearance (Lemire and Riello 2008). Fabrics became cheaper, less durable and more fashionsensitive. Early modern consumers were in position to acquire a wider array of garments made from a greater variety of fabrics, which had to be renewed at an increased pace. Variety and novelty were becoming desirable qualities in fabrics and this demand was covered through accelerated pace of change in patterns and colors, as well as imitation and product innovation with the proliferation of new mixed fabrics (Styles 2019, 36-9). Johann Pezzl, an author and prominent commentator on life in Vienna at the end of the eighteenth and the start of the nineteenth century remarked that women in the 1780s dressed in a lighter and more natural manner. Fabrics were not so heavy, expensive or durable as in the past, and, due to their lightness and low price, they were changed more often and replaced with new ones. The result was a more diverse, clean and fresh appearance (Pezzl

At the end of the eighteenth century, it was taste, rather than wealth, luxury, and, consequently, social position that provided the foundation for fashion. Taste referred to broader non-aristocratic social strata and was associated with commercialization, accessibility, the public domain, knowledge and the role of female consumer behavior (North 2004; 2008, 169-71; Jones 1994, 958-60). The urban middle strata and particularly female consumers constituted key groups in the investigation of the influence of fashion on consumption. Both de Vries and McKendrick have stressed the importance of women as consumers in their arguments, especially working women in the lower social strata, who possessed their own income and consumption capability, and brought new desires and tastes in the consumption decisions of a household.1 McKendrick also identified a social subgroup with particular importance for the dissemination of fashionable consumption, namely domestic servants, who, especially in a capital city like London, could constitute a link between the consumption habits of higher and lower social strata (McKendrick, Brewer, and Plumb 1982, 21-4; De Vries 1993, 117-9; 1994, 261-2). Daniel Roche made a similar argument for a trickle-down process of diffusion in eighteenth-century Paris, in which servants' dress constituted a crucial intermediate stage (Roche 1987, 160-80). The present essay concerns the case study of Vienna in the period 1760-1823 and investigates the relation of the consumption of clothes of a broad part of the Viennese middle strata with fashion. Riello and Parthasarathi have proposed the term «fashionability» for the investigation of this relation in order to separate it from

1 This assertion has also been disputed concerning its applicability outside north-western Europe (Ogilvie 2010, 312–19). An overview of different approaches of historical investigation to the relation

of women with fashion in eighteenth-century France in (Jones 2013).

twentieth-century notions of fashion as a system of production, marketing and consumption, which did not exist in previous periods (Riello and Parthasarathi 2009, 146). However, in the essay the relation of female consumption of clothes and accessories with fashion is examined in the specific period, in which fashion in Vienna, did not simply refer to foreign or novel goods, but to an emerging industry that strived to unshackle itself from foreign influence and construct its own local production sources, marketing apparatus and consumer base. The study places the focus on the consumption of female domestic servants and compares the number, value, quality, condition and particular features of their clothes to the rest of the Viennese female middle-class population. It examines their role in trickle-down or trickle-across processes and investigates the material basis of arguments about their function as trendsetters in the consumption of broader parts of the population in the period.

### **2. The Viennese probate inventories and the population under examination**

The relation between fashion and consumption in Vienna is examined in the present essay through the analysis of a sample of one hundred fifty (150) female probate inventories in the period 1760-1823. The inventories are gathered approximately in twenty-year intervals. Thirty cases come from the 1760s, forty cases come from the years 1783-1784, forty cases come from 1803 and, finally, forty cases come from 1823. Probate inventories document a person's belongings at the time of death. As a result, they tend to depict the estate of older people, for who fashion relevance might not have been among their principal reasons for consumption or even for keeping certain items (Shammas 1990, 19; Reith 2015, 29). Though, as Amanda Vickery has argued, mature women did not renounce, but instead negotiated fashion as they aged and decided to adopt, retain or reject certain features of prevalent fashion later in their lives according to multiple factors such as status, economic situation or socially appropriate appearance. Furthermore, older working women could also increase their expenditure on clothes, if they did not need to support their children anymore (Vickery 2013, 871-5; 883-4).2 This sample is not designed to depict the short-term fashion changes within one or two annual cycles. However, it can show broader shifts in the consumption of clothes and, consequently, in the character and form of Viennese fashion. Furthermore, female consumption of clothes can be observed separately, as the inventories referred to specific individuals rather than households.

It has been postulated that in this period demographic and economic growth contributed to the creation of a rather broad and diverse stratum of an early bourgeoisie in Vienna, which included not only factory owners or bankers, but also innkeepers and master artisans (Mittenzwei 1998, 21). This sample is constructed to represent the lower end of this emerging group, as well as the groups directly below them in the social scale, namely the middle and lower-middle strata of the Viennese population within a wealth spectrum of 10-10,000 Gulden as active total wealth at

<sup>2</sup> According to information on the age of death in the inventories in 1823. The average age of death of non-servants was fifty-five years, while that of servants forty-five years.

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 257

in the inventories and not only with the valuation of the articles.

In the 1780s, domestic servants in Vienna were at the forefront of the discourse on fashion and consumption. Female servants were a prominent subject of a great number of brochures, pamphlets and satirical works, which gained significant readership in the period, and were employed in order to make statements on female consumption and fashion (Kauffmann 1994, 178-82). An intense debate was sparked in 1781, by an essay on Viennese female servants «Über die Stubenmädchen in Wien», which criticized their appearance and, subsequently, their morality (Rautenstrauch 1781).4 The appearance of the «Stubenmädchen» was

3 Servants' inventories are distributed relatively evenly in the period under examination. Female aristocratic servants in the 1760s constitute a problematic field as there is only one case in the sample, as until 1783 servants in Vienna belonged to the jurisdiction of their employers, and the nobles did not belong to the jurisdiction of the city authorities (Hochedlinger 2001, 310). There is also only one

4 The «Stubenmädchen» could be defined as female domestic servants in households of different, usually higher and aristocratic social strata, who performed a variety of duties, such as cleaning or

**3. Viennese fashion and the role of servants** 

case of female working aristocratic servants in 1823.

Servants' inventories constitute a significant part of the sample of female inventories, namely forty-one cases (27.3%), twenty-two cases of common and nineteen cases of aristocratic servants. Most servants were single and almost all working women (twenty-six cases) were also single. This should be associated with indications that female servants in the period remained until an older age, perhaps also all their lives, in domestic service (Eder 1995, 44-5; 64). In the analysis, cases are divided in: «non-servants», «non-servants adj. (5,000-10,000 Fl.)», «non-servants adj. (10-100 Fl.)», «aristocratic and common servants» and a subgroup «aristocratic and common working servants».3 Table 1 shows that the fortune of common servants at the time of death was in all instances lower than that of the general population as depicted in the sample, as well as that of non-servants (except from the poorest part of the group), and, in certain periods it was significantly lower. On the contrary, in most periods, though with some notable exceptions, the mean total wealth of aristocratic servants was higher than that of all but the wealthiest group of non-servants, which indicates that this was generally a wealthier, but also a more diverse group. For both groups of servants, the mean value of their material possessions, namely movable goods including production goods, was almost always lower than that of non-servants. Even the value of movable goods of the poorer group of non-servants was greater than that of common servants. In all periods, aristocratic servants had more fortune at the time of death and the value of their material possessions was higher than that of common servants. All servants in the sample were tenants. In most cases of common servants, their employers provided their accommodation, and, as can be seen in many inventories of people who employed servants, the most expensive and valuable pieces of furniture, such as beds, were also provided by the employers. Therefore, the lower value of their movable goods should be at least partially associated with the kind of items found

the time of death. It incudes at one end of the spectrum milkmaids, wives of journeymen or wage laborers, who owned just one dress, and at the other wives or daughters of merchants, master craftsmen or higher public employees, who, apart from several different dresses, owned a house and could also employ servants.

# **2.1 Servants as part of the Viennese population**

The servants constituted a diverse population group, which is difficult to encompass in a historical analysis. Raffaella Sarti proposed an approach to the definition of servants in early modern Europe, which is also adopted in the present essay:

In pre-industrial Europe, in fact, domestic service, though (also) an employment, was not a specific job, but rather a *type of relationship* that could exist between people of very different social class, geographic origins, training, income, duties, sex, age, and marital and legal statuses. A servant was defined as such because he or she had a master, not because he or she carried out a specific task. In this sense, the ministers of princes and kings, as well as farm servants, could be considered servants. Being a servant was thus a condition rather than a profession. This was not an absolute condition: servants could in turn be masters, just as sons can also be fathers (Sarti 2005, 408).

This definition is particularly suitable in the present essay. Vienna was a capital city and the residence of the imperial Court. Moreover, a significant number of noble families also resided in Vienna. Consequently, there was a great number of court and aristocratic servants, who differed greatly in wealth and station from other types of domestic servants. So, the servants examined in the present essay are divided in two main categories: common servants and aristocratic servants (coded in the tables as «low» and «high» respectively). The group of aristocratic servants in the sample was very diverse, as great Houses employed many servants with elaborate hierarchies and great differences in status between them (Maurer 1995, 178-9). This group encompassed individuals in different ranks, who performed a wide range of tasks, namely personal servants («Kammerjungfer») or the wives and daughters of secretaries, estate administrators, but also cooks and lower-ranked servants. The group of the common servants, except from few cases of administrators of households, was more homogenous regarding both the social status of its members and their occupations, as they were mostly cooks or they were simply mentioned as servants. Many female servants in the sample were working women. They were not wives or daughters of male servants and their occupation is clearly denoted in the inventories irrespective of their marital status or the occupation of their husbands. This categorization makes the investigation of the role of servants either as trendsetters, or as key cogs in trickle-down processes, more complex and layered, as the crucial differences, between different types of servants, and particularly working women, can also be taken into consideration.

the time of death. It incudes at one end of the spectrum milkmaids, wives of journeymen or wage laborers, who owned just one dress, and at the other wives or daughters of merchants, master craftsmen or higher public employees, who, apart from several different dresses, owned a house and could also employ servants.

The servants constituted a diverse population group, which is difficult to encompass in a historical analysis. Raffaella Sarti proposed an approach to the definition of servants in early modern Europe, which is also adopted in the present

In pre-industrial Europe, in fact, domestic service, though (also) an employment, was not a specific job, but rather a *type of relationship* that could exist between people of very different social class, geographic origins, training, income, duties, sex, age, and marital and legal statuses. A servant was defined as such because he or she had a master, not because he or she carried out a specific task. In this sense, the ministers of princes and kings, as well as farm servants, could be considered servants. Being a servant was thus a condition rather than a profession. This was not an absolute condition: servants could in turn be masters, just as sons can also be fathers (Sarti

This definition is particularly suitable in the present essay. Vienna was a capital city and the residence of the imperial Court. Moreover, a significant number of noble families also resided in Vienna. Consequently, there was a great number of court and aristocratic servants, who differed greatly in wealth and station from other types of domestic servants. So, the servants examined in the present essay are divided in two main categories: common servants and aristocratic servants (coded in the tables as «low» and «high» respectively). The group of aristocratic servants in the sample was very diverse, as great Houses employed many servants with elaborate hierarchies and great differences in status between them (Maurer 1995, 178-9). This group encompassed individuals in different ranks, who performed a wide range of tasks, namely personal servants («Kammerjungfer») or the wives and daughters of secretaries, estate administrators, but also cooks and lower-ranked servants. The group of the common servants, except from few cases of administrators of households, was more homogenous regarding both the social status of its members and their occupations, as they were mostly cooks or they were simply mentioned as servants. Many female servants in the sample were working women. They were not wives or daughters of male servants and their occupation is clearly denoted in the inventories irrespective of their marital status or the occupation of their husbands. This categorization makes the investigation of the role of servants either as trendsetters, or as key cogs in trickle-down processes, more complex and layered, as the crucial differences, between different types of servants, and particularly working women, can also be taken into consideration.

**2.1 Servants as part of the Viennese population** 

essay:

2005, 408).

Servants' inventories constitute a significant part of the sample of female inventories, namely forty-one cases (27.3%), twenty-two cases of common and nineteen cases of aristocratic servants. Most servants were single and almost all working women (twenty-six cases) were also single. This should be associated with indications that female servants in the period remained until an older age, perhaps also all their lives, in domestic service (Eder 1995, 44-5; 64). In the analysis, cases are divided in: «non-servants», «non-servants adj. (5,000-10,000 Fl.)», «non-servants adj. (10-100 Fl.)», «aristocratic and common servants» and a subgroup «aristocratic and common working servants».3 Table 1 shows that the fortune of common servants at the time of death was in all instances lower than that of the general population as depicted in the sample, as well as that of non-servants (except from the poorest part of the group), and, in certain periods it was significantly lower. On the contrary, in most periods, though with some notable exceptions, the mean total wealth of aristocratic servants was higher than that of all but the wealthiest group of non-servants, which indicates that this was generally a wealthier, but also a more diverse group. For both groups of servants, the mean value of their material possessions, namely movable goods including production goods, was almost always lower than that of non-servants. Even the value of movable goods of the poorer group of non-servants was greater than that of common servants. In all periods, aristocratic servants had more fortune at the time of death and the value of their material possessions was higher than that of common servants. All servants in the sample were tenants. In most cases of common servants, their employers provided their accommodation, and, as can be seen in many inventories of people who employed servants, the most expensive and valuable pieces of furniture, such as beds, were also provided by the employers. Therefore, the lower value of their movable goods should be at least partially associated with the kind of items found in the inventories and not only with the valuation of the articles.

# **3. Viennese fashion and the role of servants**

In the 1780s, domestic servants in Vienna were at the forefront of the discourse on fashion and consumption. Female servants were a prominent subject of a great number of brochures, pamphlets and satirical works, which gained significant readership in the period, and were employed in order to make statements on female consumption and fashion (Kauffmann 1994, 178-82). An intense debate was sparked in 1781, by an essay on Viennese female servants «Über die Stubenmädchen in Wien», which criticized their appearance and, subsequently, their morality (Rautenstrauch 1781).4 The appearance of the «Stubenmädchen» was

<sup>3</sup> Servants' inventories are distributed relatively evenly in the period under examination. Female aristocratic servants in the 1760s constitute a problematic field as there is only one case in the sample, as until 1783 servants in Vienna belonged to the jurisdiction of their employers, and the nobles did not belong to the jurisdiction of the city authorities (Hochedlinger 2001, 310). There is also only one case of female working aristocratic servants in 1823.

<sup>4</sup> The «Stubenmädchen» could be defined as female domestic servants in households of different, usually higher and aristocratic social strata, who performed a variety of duties, such as cleaning or

Fig. 1. **Johann Christian Brand: «Stubenmädchen: Zeichnungen nach dem gemeinen Volke besonders Der Kaufruf in Wien»: «Stubenmädgen./Servante», Wien 1775. This is an image with the dress of the «Stubenmädchen», which sparked the debate over their appearance** 

Copyright: Wien Museum.

**4. The wardrobes of servants and non-servants in Vienna: Number and** 

In this discussion, female domestic servants were ascribed the role of fashionable consumers and trendsetters, who even rivaled the dress of their employers. The role of trendsetters in a society presupposes the capability for consumption and regular change of clothes and accessories, knowledge of the latest fashion trends and access to producers of fashionable products. In the period, this role was normally reserved for the elites, even though exceptions to this norm, such as the intrusion of elements of traditional dress, clothing articles popular in the

**value of clothes and accessories and their relation to fashion** 

characterized by cleanliness and naturalness, in contrast to the artificiality of the look of women in the higher social strata. Their dress, which was compared to that of their employers, was associated with their questionable morals as it attracted men from various ages and stations. They were accused of seducing men in order to be able to afford opulent dress and of generating the need for such opulence in other women. They were portrayed as a moral hazard, which could only be impeded through strict restrictions on their dress (Rautenstrauch 1781).

The same arguments about women, and particularly single working women were used at the time in literary descriptions and in medical topographies (Pezzl 1787a, 4:511-13; Strohmayr 1813, 108). Viennese satirical texts in brochures and magazines at the end of the eighteenth century also followed similar critical approaches to fashion and contemporary dress (Kauffmann 1994, 101, 247-8; 276- 7; Richter 1917; 1918). Female servants were also a popular theme in many literary genres in the period (Gugitz 1902, 148-9). Some works, critical of fashion, even advocated for the reenactment of sumptuary legislation in the Austrian Empire. Criticism of the consumption of the lower strata, and particularly female consumption, was a common argument in the last sumptuary laws in Austria, which were enacted more than a century earlier (Codicis Austriaci ordine alphabetico compilati pars prima, 2:153-9). However, strict directives regarding clothing according to social status were already since the 1760s practically and theoretically rendered obsolete due to economic, social and political reasons, such as the growing textile industry and retail trade (Sandgruber 1982, 297-9; G. Hampel 1962, 64-9; L. Hampel 1974, 16-7). These issues were debated intensely in the public sphere and the discussion continued at the start of the nineteenth century, as can been seen in an article on coquetry in the Viennese fashion magazine. An important argument in the article was that women had the right and the capability to choose the means, with which to make themselves attractive to men according to their own sense of self-love and moral compass and not by moral or legal directives. This constituted a clear objection to the aforementioned arguments and, simultaneously, a definite statement about female agency in consumption and appearance. The author, who used a pen name, signed as a «defender of women» («Vertheidiger der Frauen») (WMZ, 1.2.1816). The use of female servants in order to make statements on appearance and morality and the implicit associations of these arguments, were familiar to the audience and constituted part of the broader discussions on consumption and luxury in eighteenth-century Europe. Participants in the debates on luxury often made arguments against female consumption based on moral grounds. Similarly, in German-speaking regions the critique on luxury also centered around moral and social arguments (Berg and Eger 2003, 21-22; Lemire 2000, 397- 9; Wirtz 1996, 167-70, 172-3).

setting the table, except from cooking (Oekonomische Encyklopädie Oder Allgemeines System Der Staats- Stadt- Haus- Und Landwirthschaft (hereafter just Oekonomische Encyklopädie), «Stubenmädchen»). In this debate the «Stubenmädchen» were treated as a separate category of servants than cooks (Gugitz 1902, 142, 145).

characterized by cleanliness and naturalness, in contrast to the artificiality of the look of women in the higher social strata. Their dress, which was compared to that of their employers, was associated with their questionable morals as it attracted men from various ages and stations. They were accused of seducing men in order to be able to afford opulent dress and of generating the need for such opulence in other women. They were portrayed as a moral hazard, which could only be impeded

The same arguments about women, and particularly single working women were used at the time in literary descriptions and in medical topographies (Pezzl 1787a, 4:511-13; Strohmayr 1813, 108). Viennese satirical texts in brochures and magazines at the end of the eighteenth century also followed similar critical approaches to fashion and contemporary dress (Kauffmann 1994, 101, 247-8; 276- 7; Richter 1917; 1918). Female servants were also a popular theme in many literary genres in the period (Gugitz 1902, 148-9). Some works, critical of fashion, even advocated for the reenactment of sumptuary legislation in the Austrian Empire. Criticism of the consumption of the lower strata, and particularly female consumption, was a common argument in the last sumptuary laws in Austria, which were enacted more than a century earlier (Codicis Austriaci ordine alphabetico compilati pars prima, 2:153-9). However, strict directives regarding clothing according to social status were already since the 1760s practically and theoretically rendered obsolete due to economic, social and political reasons, such as the growing textile industry and retail trade (Sandgruber 1982, 297-9; G. Hampel 1962, 64-9; L. Hampel 1974, 16-7). These issues were debated intensely in the public sphere and the discussion continued at the start of the nineteenth century, as can been seen in an article on coquetry in the Viennese fashion magazine. An important argument in the article was that women had the right and the capability to choose the means, with which to make themselves attractive to men according to their own sense of self-love and moral compass and not by moral or legal directives. This constituted a clear objection to the aforementioned arguments and, simultaneously, a definite statement about female agency in consumption and appearance. The author, who used a pen name, signed as a «defender of women» («Vertheidiger der Frauen») (WMZ, 1.2.1816). The use of female servants in order to make statements on appearance and morality and the implicit associations of these arguments, were familiar to the audience and constituted part of the broader discussions on consumption and luxury in eighteenth-century Europe. Participants in the debates on luxury often made arguments against female consumption based on moral grounds. Similarly, in German-speaking regions the critique on luxury also centered around moral and social arguments (Berg and Eger 2003, 21-22; Lemire 2000, 397-

setting the table, except from cooking (Oekonomische Encyklopädie Oder Allgemeines System Der Staats- Stadt- Haus- Und Landwirthschaft (hereafter just Oekonomische Encyklopädie), «Stubenmädchen»). In this debate the «Stubenmädchen» were treated as a separate category of

through strict restrictions on their dress (Rautenstrauch 1781).

9; Wirtz 1996, 167-70, 172-3).

servants than cooks (Gugitz 1902, 142, 145).

Fig. 1. **Johann Christian Brand: «Stubenmädchen: Zeichnungen nach dem gemeinen Volke besonders Der Kaufruf in Wien»: «Stubenmädgen./Servante», Wien 1775. This is an image with the dress of the «Stubenmädchen», which sparked the debate over their appearance** 

Copyright: Wien Museum.

# **4. The wardrobes of servants and non-servants in Vienna: Number and value of clothes and accessories and their relation to fashion**

In this discussion, female domestic servants were ascribed the role of fashionable consumers and trendsetters, who even rivaled the dress of their employers. The role of trendsetters in a society presupposes the capability for consumption and regular change of clothes and accessories, knowledge of the latest fashion trends and access to producers of fashionable products. In the period, this role was normally reserved for the elites, even though exceptions to this norm, such as the intrusion of elements of traditional dress, clothing articles popular in the

clear in the case of working aristocratic servants in 1783/84. Even in 1823, a relatively poorer group in relation to non-servants owned a greater number of clothes and accessories and devoted a percentage of material wealth to clothes comparable to the previous periods. The value of their clothes was lower, though this should be associated more with the drop in the value of clothing in the last

Female common servants (working or not) were a much poorer group in all periods. Almost all common servants in the sample were working women. In many cases, clothes made up most of their total and material wealth at the time of death. So, the percentage of these items in their material wealth was much higher than aristocratic servants or non-servants. It was also greater than that of even the poorest group of non-servants. The mean number of their garments was lower in the first two periods and then slightly higher in the last two compared to nonservants. In almost all periods the mean number of items was also comparable to even the wealthiest part of the population and in the nineteenth century it was much higher than the poorest part. However, the mean value of these items was in all periods significantly lower than that of non-servants, in some cases even lower than that of the poorest group. This is an indication that common servants favored quantity over quality, perhaps because most were working women, whose clothes

There was also a significant gap in the mean number and value of clothes between aristocratic and common servants in all periods. Aristocratic servants possessed especially in the eighteenth century three times as many clothes and accessories, and their value was also three times higher, though in the last periods this discrepancy was relatively reduced. The difference in annual income between these two groups should also be taken into consideration. Contemporary commentators estimated the annual wage of the «Stubenmädchen», who were employed by higher social strata, in the 1780s between 25-40 Gulden (Pezzl 1787a, 4:511). Though, as is indicated in the inventories, aristocratic servants' yearly wages in the period could reach much higher.5 The annual cost of clothing an artisan's family in the 1760s was estimated at 80 Gulden, while the cost for clothing of a person in the 1790s was estimated between 23-42 Gulden. For higher social strata the cost was estimated much higher (Sandgruber 1982, 317-8; Stöger 2014, 212).

For a better interpretation of the numbers provided in table 2 an examination of the specific categories of garments of the different groups is required. Table 3 shows the mean number of female outer garments in the different groups. Certain items in female appearance, such as bodices, corsets and stays remained relatively stable, though in different relations, throughout the period and across all groups. They served not only aesthetic, but also practical functions. They formed and constricted the silhouette to different degrees. Their fabrics were rarely mentioned

5 Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv (WStLA), Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2:

period in general.

worn down faster.

**4.1 Fashionable clothes** 

Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 113-1783/84.

lower strata or certain professions in fashionable clothing (trickle-up processes) called this assertion into question. However, even viewed in a trickle-down process, broader fashion trends are adopted (or rejected), interpreted and materialized differently in different social strata, and new styles are also formulated differently in a process, in which different groups assume the role of trendsetters or tastemakers. Similarly, fashion as a category of social distinction, which differentiates between persons or groups as 'in-fashion' or 'out-of-fashion', should be viewed with caution in terms of its meaningfulness in different contexts due to the different pathways and timelines of this process (Sassatelli 2007, 70; Prinz 2003, 208-9; Vickery 1993, 289-91; Lemire 2000, 401-2). Therefore, the analysis of the role of fashion in the dress of the Viennese middle strata should not be based merely on established notions of social distinction embedded in a process of emulation and subsequently imitation of a person's social superiors, the basis of which was Georg Simmel's seminal work (Barnard 2014, 17-8; Simmel 1904, 133-40). A trickle-down process does not presuppose neither imitative behavior nor emulative motives, and social distinction is not necessarily directed upwards (Campbell 1993, 40-1; Trentmann 2012, 9-10). It should not be assumed that Viennese fashion, and consequently fashionable consumption, had a single point of origin at the top of society, from which all changes derived in a repetitive cycle of imitation. Furthermore, the presence of foreign fashion trends in Viennese dress suggests the active role of these strata in this process of appropriation. So, it should be demonstrated how fashionable consumption functioned as a process of reception, interpretation and adoption of fashion trends in different levels within these middle-class population and the specific historical context, and which groups could perform the role of trendsetters. This can be demonstrated in the analysis of their wardrobes.

Table 2 depicts the mean number and value of clothes and accessories of female servants and non-servants in the sample, as well as their percentage in their total and material wealth. The mean number of clothes and accessories of aristocratic servants (working or not) was in all but the last period much higher than the respective number for non-servants. The same was true for the mean value of their garments. Only the wealthiest group possessed a comparable number of clothes and accessories in the last two periods, the value of which surpassed that of aristocratic servants. The percentage of total, but particularly of material wealth of female aristocratic servants, which was devoted to clothes and accessories, was in most instances greater on average than that of non-servants (due to the great differences in wealth, there are extreme differences between the percentages in the wealthiest and poorest part of the population). This was not surprising for an overall poorer group like working aristocratic servants. However, apart from the wealthiest part of the population in the sample, female aristocratic servants were in the first three periods a wealthier group than non-servants and the percentage of their material wealth devoted to clothing was even comparable to the poorest part of the population in certain instances. As mentioned above, their material wealth might not have included certain valuable items, but in this group relatively expensive furniture were not rare in their inventories. It is evident that this group could and did invest heavily on their appearance compared to non-servants, and they also prioritized their dress in relation to other possessions. This is particularly

lower strata or certain professions in fashionable clothing (trickle-up processes) called this assertion into question. However, even viewed in a trickle-down process, broader fashion trends are adopted (or rejected), interpreted and materialized differently in different social strata, and new styles are also formulated differently in a process, in which different groups assume the role of trendsetters or tastemakers. Similarly, fashion as a category of social distinction, which differentiates between persons or groups as 'in-fashion' or 'out-of-fashion', should be viewed with caution in terms of its meaningfulness in different contexts due to the different pathways and timelines of this process (Sassatelli 2007, 70; Prinz 2003, 208-9; Vickery 1993, 289-91; Lemire 2000, 401-2). Therefore, the analysis of the role of fashion in the dress of the Viennese middle strata should not be based merely on established notions of social distinction embedded in a process of emulation and subsequently imitation of a person's social superiors, the basis of which was Georg Simmel's seminal work (Barnard 2014, 17-8; Simmel 1904, 133-40). A trickle-down process does not presuppose neither imitative behavior nor emulative motives, and social distinction is not necessarily directed upwards (Campbell 1993, 40-1; Trentmann 2012, 9-10). It should not be assumed that Viennese fashion, and consequently fashionable consumption, had a single point of origin at the top of society, from which all changes derived in a repetitive cycle of imitation. Furthermore, the presence of foreign fashion trends in Viennese dress suggests the active role of these strata in this process of appropriation. So, it should be demonstrated how fashionable consumption functioned as a process of reception, interpretation and adoption of fashion trends in different levels within these middle-class population and the specific historical context, and which groups could perform the role of

trendsetters. This can be demonstrated in the analysis of their wardrobes.

Table 2 depicts the mean number and value of clothes and accessories of female servants and non-servants in the sample, as well as their percentage in their total and material wealth. The mean number of clothes and accessories of aristocratic servants (working or not) was in all but the last period much higher than the respective number for non-servants. The same was true for the mean value of their garments. Only the wealthiest group possessed a comparable number of clothes and accessories in the last two periods, the value of which surpassed that of aristocratic servants. The percentage of total, but particularly of material wealth of female aristocratic servants, which was devoted to clothes and accessories, was in most instances greater on average than that of non-servants (due to the great differences in wealth, there are extreme differences between the percentages in the wealthiest and poorest part of the population). This was not surprising for an overall poorer group like working aristocratic servants. However, apart from the wealthiest part of the population in the sample, female aristocratic servants were in the first three periods a wealthier group than non-servants and the percentage of their material wealth devoted to clothing was even comparable to the poorest part of the population in certain instances. As mentioned above, their material wealth might not have included certain valuable items, but in this group relatively expensive furniture were not rare in their inventories. It is evident that this group could and did invest heavily on their appearance compared to non-servants, and they also prioritized their dress in relation to other possessions. This is particularly clear in the case of working aristocratic servants in 1783/84. Even in 1823, a relatively poorer group in relation to non-servants owned a greater number of clothes and accessories and devoted a percentage of material wealth to clothes comparable to the previous periods. The value of their clothes was lower, though this should be associated more with the drop in the value of clothing in the last period in general.

Female common servants (working or not) were a much poorer group in all periods. Almost all common servants in the sample were working women. In many cases, clothes made up most of their total and material wealth at the time of death. So, the percentage of these items in their material wealth was much higher than aristocratic servants or non-servants. It was also greater than that of even the poorest group of non-servants. The mean number of their garments was lower in the first two periods and then slightly higher in the last two compared to nonservants. In almost all periods the mean number of items was also comparable to even the wealthiest part of the population and in the nineteenth century it was much higher than the poorest part. However, the mean value of these items was in all periods significantly lower than that of non-servants, in some cases even lower than that of the poorest group. This is an indication that common servants favored quantity over quality, perhaps because most were working women, whose clothes worn down faster.

There was also a significant gap in the mean number and value of clothes between aristocratic and common servants in all periods. Aristocratic servants possessed especially in the eighteenth century three times as many clothes and accessories, and their value was also three times higher, though in the last periods this discrepancy was relatively reduced. The difference in annual income between these two groups should also be taken into consideration. Contemporary commentators estimated the annual wage of the «Stubenmädchen», who were employed by higher social strata, in the 1780s between 25-40 Gulden (Pezzl 1787a, 4:511). Though, as is indicated in the inventories, aristocratic servants' yearly wages in the period could reach much higher.5 The annual cost of clothing an artisan's family in the 1760s was estimated at 80 Gulden, while the cost for clothing of a person in the 1790s was estimated between 23-42 Gulden. For higher social strata the cost was estimated much higher (Sandgruber 1982, 317-8; Stöger 2014, 212).

### **4.1 Fashionable clothes**

For a better interpretation of the numbers provided in table 2 an examination of the specific categories of garments of the different groups is required. Table 3 shows the mean number of female outer garments in the different groups. Certain items in female appearance, such as bodices, corsets and stays remained relatively stable, though in different relations, throughout the period and across all groups. They served not only aesthetic, but also practical functions. They formed and constricted the silhouette to different degrees. Their fabrics were rarely mentioned

<sup>5</sup> Wiener Stadt- und Landesarchiv (WStLA), Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 113-1783/84.

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 263

between one and two overgowns in the last two periods, fewer than even the poorer group of non-servants. They never seem to have adopted these items to the same degree as gowns and their appearance remained in the previous form of dress, as is evident from the number of skirts, corsets and stays in their inventories.

In order to better assess the relation of these items to developments in fashion in the period, it is important to examine their descriptions in the inventories. In table 4 the mean number of certain types of dresses and jackets in all groups is presented. Casual bourgeois female dress was progressively simplified in Vienna in the eighteenth century. A looser-fitting dress found in the Viennese inventories in the 1760s was the «Contouche» («robe à la française»), which was initially used only as dressing gown, but was steadily inserted into female public appearance as a dress worn in promenades and then also in church. This type of dress, which originated in France in the first half of the eighteenth century, had different forms depending on its cut and structure, if it had a waistline or if it was open («adrienne») or closed («French sack») in the front (Meyers Großes Konversationslexikon, «Contouche») (Buxbaum 1986, 38-9; Nienholdt 1961, 114-6). The «Contouche» appeared in the inventories of aristocratic servants and non-servants in this period, though not in comparable numbers. Another type of garment, which almost all groups owned in the first period was the «bedgown». These were looser shorter garments, cheaper than the full-length gowns and were popular among (mainly) poorer women in England in the second half of the eighteenth century (Styles 2007, 38). Since the 1760s the volume of the hips was steadily reduced to a small artificially billowed back part, the «cul de Paris» or «cul postiche» (Nienholdt 1961, 121). Panniers were gradually confined to the formal dress of higher social strata and the nobility. This is also reflected in the sample, in which only five such items in total are recorded. The middle strata, who are represented in the sample, gradually abandoned these items and adopted a less elaborate silhouette and simpler forms of outer garments. Johann Pezzl, who criticized panniers intensely and advocated for a more natural female silhouette, remarked that the higher social strata had stopped using them

and that panniers had disappeared in 1787 (Pezzl 1787b, 1:79-80).

In 1783/84, the «Contouche» was found in greater numbers in the inventories of common servants, than in those of the other groups. Similar types of dresses like the «Adrienne» or the «Sack» were also found in the inventories in the eighteenth century, though not in great numbers. The lower mean number of the «Contousche» in the inventories of non-servants and aristocratic servants should be attributed to the popularity of another type of dress in the period, the «Commode», which was an informal female morning dress (Reclams Mode und Kostümlexikon, «Commode», 155). The term «Commode» is not easy to interpret. It has been postulated that the «Commode» in Vienna at the time described the «cul de Paris», which billowed the skirt at the back and was part of the dress of working women (Buxbaum 1986, 39). According to fashion magazines in the 1790s, the term described a type of comfortable casual dress («Chemise») that could be easily worn over night attire (Journal für Fabrik, Manufaktur, Handlung und Mode, October 1794). In the inventories this item described probably a type of gown that was characterized by the billowed back. Its place and its description in the lists hinted at a more valuable item, the fabric and color of which was often described. This is an

in the lists, so it is difficult to ascertain whether they were worn as outer or undergarments (Deneke 1965, 17-8). Similarly, skirts and petticoats were fashionable garments, however they also performed practical functions. They were worn in layers to keep the body warm and they were interchangeable to a degree (Klier 1950, 123). All groups possessed multiple skirts and petticoats in comparable numbers. An important item, which constituted a particular element of Viennese fashion in the nineteenth century was the short shirt («Schmißl/Chemisette»). This garment was supposedly introduced to Viennese fashion by the servants, and is considered to have moved up the social scale (Springschitz 1949, 18). An indication of this process might be the presence of this item in the inventories of aristocratic servants in 1803 and, in 1823, its appearance in inventories of non-servants, particularly in those of the wealthiest group, who owned most such items on average. The short shirt was also found in the inventories of common servants, who owned almost one short shirt on average.

In the analysis of female outer garments, the emphasis should be placed on gowns, jackets, one-piece dresses and overgowns, as it was these items that made up the core elements of fashionable dress in the period. Jackets and short cloaks were found in the inventories of non-servants, but they were mainly worn by aristocratic servants, who possessed multiple such items on average. An exception constituted the poorer non-servants, who owned a comparable number of jackets to aristocratic servants in 1783/84, perhaps as a shorter substitute for gowns. Gowns were prominent in all groups in the eighteenth century. Aristocratic servants, and particularly working women owned between nine and twelve on average, while common servants and non-servants owned between one and (about) six on average. There was a significant difference in ownership between the wealthier and poorer groups of non-servants, but neither group approached the number of gowns of aristocratic servants. Rather, the mean number of gowns in the wealthier group was comparable to that of common servants. The main structural difference in women's appearance in the period was the gradual adoption after the turn of the century of the one-piece dress, the chemise, in place of the dress comprised of a skirt or petticoat, gown and stays. The chemise was a form of one-piece dress with a higher waist, which became popular initially in France in the 1770s. This dress slimmed down the female silhouette, while hooped skirts and tight stays were removed from the female appearance, which conformed to prevalent ideals of simplicity and aesthetic harmony between dress and body at the end of the eighteenth century. This was also due to the warnings against the damaging effects of the tight corset in the period. The overgown was worn over this dress and resembled its cut (Ribeiro 2002, 227; North 2008, 52-55; Zander-Seidel 2002, 59-62; Junker and Stille 1988, 38-43; Strohmayr 1813, 107-8). Aristocratic servants were the first to make the move towards the one-piece dress in greater numbers as they owned approximately four on average. Non-servants in all groups also transitioned but evidently slower. Apart from the wealthier group, the mean number of one-piece dresses between aristocratic servants and nonservants was comparable in 1823. However, aristocratic servants possessed a greater number of overgowns, with which they could differentiate their appearance. Common servants owned on average approximately one one-piece dress and

in the lists, so it is difficult to ascertain whether they were worn as outer or undergarments (Deneke 1965, 17-8). Similarly, skirts and petticoats were fashionable garments, however they also performed practical functions. They were worn in layers to keep the body warm and they were interchangeable to a degree (Klier 1950, 123). All groups possessed multiple skirts and petticoats in comparable numbers. An important item, which constituted a particular element of Viennese fashion in the nineteenth century was the short shirt («Schmißl/Chemisette»). This garment was supposedly introduced to Viennese fashion by the servants, and is considered to have moved up the social scale (Springschitz 1949, 18). An indication of this process might be the presence of this item in the inventories of aristocratic servants in 1803 and, in 1823, its appearance in inventories of non-servants, particularly in those of the wealthiest group, who owned most such items on average. The short shirt was also found in the inventories of common servants,

In the analysis of female outer garments, the emphasis should be placed on gowns, jackets, one-piece dresses and overgowns, as it was these items that made up the core elements of fashionable dress in the period. Jackets and short cloaks were found in the inventories of non-servants, but they were mainly worn by aristocratic servants, who possessed multiple such items on average. An exception constituted the poorer non-servants, who owned a comparable number of jackets to aristocratic servants in 1783/84, perhaps as a shorter substitute for gowns. Gowns were prominent in all groups in the eighteenth century. Aristocratic servants, and particularly working women owned between nine and twelve on average, while common servants and non-servants owned between one and (about) six on average. There was a significant difference in ownership between the wealthier and poorer groups of non-servants, but neither group approached the number of gowns of aristocratic servants. Rather, the mean number of gowns in the wealthier group was comparable to that of common servants. The main structural difference in women's appearance in the period was the gradual adoption after the turn of the century of the one-piece dress, the chemise, in place of the dress comprised of a skirt or petticoat, gown and stays. The chemise was a form of one-piece dress with a higher waist, which became popular initially in France in the 1770s. This dress slimmed down the female silhouette, while hooped skirts and tight stays were removed from the female appearance, which conformed to prevalent ideals of simplicity and aesthetic harmony between dress and body at the end of the eighteenth century. This was also due to the warnings against the damaging effects of the tight corset in the period. The overgown was worn over this dress and resembled its cut (Ribeiro 2002, 227; North 2008, 52-55; Zander-Seidel 2002, 59-62; Junker and Stille 1988, 38-43; Strohmayr 1813, 107-8). Aristocratic servants were the first to make the move towards the one-piece dress in greater numbers as they owned approximately four on average. Non-servants in all groups also transitioned but evidently slower. Apart from the wealthier group, the mean number of one-piece dresses between aristocratic servants and nonservants was comparable in 1823. However, aristocratic servants possessed a greater number of overgowns, with which they could differentiate their appearance. Common servants owned on average approximately one one-piece dress and

who owned almost one short shirt on average.

between one and two overgowns in the last two periods, fewer than even the poorer group of non-servants. They never seem to have adopted these items to the same degree as gowns and their appearance remained in the previous form of dress, as is evident from the number of skirts, corsets and stays in their inventories.

In order to better assess the relation of these items to developments in fashion in the period, it is important to examine their descriptions in the inventories. In table 4 the mean number of certain types of dresses and jackets in all groups is presented. Casual bourgeois female dress was progressively simplified in Vienna in the eighteenth century. A looser-fitting dress found in the Viennese inventories in the 1760s was the «Contouche» («robe à la française»), which was initially used only as dressing gown, but was steadily inserted into female public appearance as a dress worn in promenades and then also in church. This type of dress, which originated in France in the first half of the eighteenth century, had different forms depending on its cut and structure, if it had a waistline or if it was open («adrienne») or closed («French sack») in the front (Meyers Großes Konversationslexikon, «Contouche») (Buxbaum 1986, 38-9; Nienholdt 1961, 114-6). The «Contouche» appeared in the inventories of aristocratic servants and non-servants in this period, though not in comparable numbers. Another type of garment, which almost all groups owned in the first period was the «bedgown». These were looser shorter garments, cheaper than the full-length gowns and were popular among (mainly) poorer women in England in the second half of the eighteenth century (Styles 2007, 38). Since the 1760s the volume of the hips was steadily reduced to a small artificially billowed back part, the «cul de Paris» or «cul postiche» (Nienholdt 1961, 121). Panniers were gradually confined to the formal dress of higher social strata and the nobility. This is also reflected in the sample, in which only five such items in total are recorded. The middle strata, who are represented in the sample, gradually abandoned these items and adopted a less elaborate silhouette and simpler forms of outer garments. Johann Pezzl, who criticized panniers intensely and advocated for a more natural female silhouette, remarked that the higher social strata had stopped using them and that panniers had disappeared in 1787 (Pezzl 1787b, 1:79-80).

In 1783/84, the «Contouche» was found in greater numbers in the inventories of common servants, than in those of the other groups. Similar types of dresses like the «Adrienne» or the «Sack» were also found in the inventories in the eighteenth century, though not in great numbers. The lower mean number of the «Contousche» in the inventories of non-servants and aristocratic servants should be attributed to the popularity of another type of dress in the period, the «Commode», which was an informal female morning dress (Reclams Mode und Kostümlexikon, «Commode», 155). The term «Commode» is not easy to interpret. It has been postulated that the «Commode» in Vienna at the time described the «cul de Paris», which billowed the skirt at the back and was part of the dress of working women (Buxbaum 1986, 39). According to fashion magazines in the 1790s, the term described a type of comfortable casual dress («Chemise») that could be easily worn over night attire (Journal für Fabrik, Manufaktur, Handlung und Mode, October 1794). In the inventories this item described probably a type of gown that was characterized by the billowed back. Its place and its description in the lists hinted at a more valuable item, the fabric and color of which was often described. This is an

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 265

only exception the wealthiest group in 1783/84. Female common servants lagged evidently behind, as did the poorer group of non-servants in most instances.

the inventories.

The third observation concerns the mean number of the individual pieces in the different groups. The mean number of the basic items that comprised the appearance is important because it denotes the capacity for combination, differentiation and change, which constitutes a fundamental prerequisite for fashionable appearance and, consequently, for the ability to play the role of trendsetters in a society. In the eighteenth century, common servants owned a comparable number of gowns with the wealthier group of non-servants, though there were crucial differences in their type and fashion relevance. However, aristocratic servants, particularly working women, certainly possessed the greatest mean number of gowns in the first two periods, and then in the next two, the greatest mean number of one-piece dresses and overgowns (combined). This was the group with the greatest capacity to change and combine different pieces of clothing. The mean number of their outer garments was in most instances greater than even that of the wealthiest part of this middle stratum. However, the discrepancy was not so stark in the nineteenth century and the fact that these numbers were comparable suggests that the wardrobes of aristocratic servants could be not compared to that of their employers and it is doubtful if they could approach that of the higher bourgeoisie. These strata possessed regular changes of morning and evening dress, particularly during the congress, when they had clothes specifically made for balls and other festivities (Springschitz 1949, 55; Karner 2014, 211). This is also evident by the absence of dresses described as formal or festive in

Another important aspect of fashionable clothing in the period was the material of the garments. Clothes were not only fashionable because of their cut or the silhouette, in which they formed the body, but also because of their material, pattern and decoration. The fabrics of women's outer garments in the period were generally diverse. Diagram 1 depicts the percentage of each fabric in the descriptions of female outer garments in 1823 (in the cases, in which the fabric was mentioned). The description of the material was crucial in the appraisal and, consequently, the sale of a garment, so the appraisers used terminology in the descriptions, which corresponded to the essential consumer knowledge in the secondary market. The greater variety of fabrics in the market and the accelerated pace of fashion change had made such a degree of product knowledge about the type and quality of fabrics essential for early modern consumers (Jordan and Schopf 2017, 228-9). However, it is not always clear in these descriptions, from which fiber these fabrics were made. Therefore, in order to infer their composition, the descriptions in the inventories are juxtaposed with the analysis of the fibers in pattern books of textile producers in the Austrian Empire in the collection of the Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna («Museum für angewandte Kunst»). The diagram shows that the most popular fabrics in women's outer garments in all groups were cambric, percale and silk, while taffeta was particularly common in the wealthier group of non-servants. Percale («Perkal») and cambric («Kammertuch»)

indication that it was not just worn under skirts or petticoats but was an item that was displayed, and so its features contributed to its valuation. The «Commode» should be associated with the «robe à l'anglaise», to which this silhouette with the «cul de Paris» conformed, and which was considered a semiformal or informal type of dress usually of lighter-weight fabrics worn by middle-income women (Ribeiro 2002, 116; Pietsch 2017, 85). This type of gown was more common in the inventories of aristocratic servants in 1783/84 and in the following period in those of non-servants, while it was never popular among the common servants. It was also an item that was mainly confined in the wealthier group of non-servants, who owned three such gowns on average in 1783/84, and almost the same number in 1803.

Additional items worth mentioning are the «Nelson» in 1803 in the inventories of aristocratic servants, and the «Spencer» in 1823. The «Nelson» was evidently a type of overcoat (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Überrock»). It was a fashionable garment at the turn of the century named after admiral Nelson, who visited Vienna in 1800 and was considered a popular figure due to his victories against the French (Pohl and Botstiber 1927, 3:162-63). Its presence in the inventories reveals that aristocratic servants followed the latest fashion trends very closely. The «Spencer» as an item of female dress in the period was a close-fitting jacket with long sleeves that reached just above the waist and originated in England (Reclams Mode und Kostümlexikon, «Spenzer»). All groups owned at least one spencer, as it was accessible even to the poorer group perhaps due to its shorter length. Common servants also owned more than two on average. The presence of these items in the lists reveals not only the influence of English fashion on Viennese dress, but also the appeal of England in contemporary Viennese culture, which was already observable in Vienna since the last decades of the eighteenth century (Pezzl 1787a, 4:579-80).

Apart from the broader fashion changes depicted in the analysis of the outer garments of the Viennese, three important observations should be made. First, foreign influences are evident in the appearance of this group. According to German periodicals, Vienna in the 1780s looked mainly to France in matters of fashion, and the impact of local trends was limited (North 2008, 54). However, the evidence from the inventories indicates that influences came from both leading fashion centers of the period, Paris and London. Apart from a few exceptions, like the short shirt, elements of a distinct Viennese fashion are indeed difficult to pinpoint. However, this is also an issue of the less detailed description of outer garments in the last period, when the particular forms of the Viennese fashion were established.

The second observation concerns the speed and degree of adoption of new trends in the different groups. Throughout the period, female aristocratic servants (especially working servants in 1783/84) adopted the latest trends to a greater extent than other groups, as they possessed more, and in certain instances significantly more, pieces of the fashionable garments in the periods, in which they initially appeared. Female non-servants also followed the latest trends, though not to the same degree regarding the mean number of fashionable garments with the

indication that it was not just worn under skirts or petticoats but was an item that was displayed, and so its features contributed to its valuation. The «Commode» should be associated with the «robe à l'anglaise», to which this silhouette with the «cul de Paris» conformed, and which was considered a semiformal or informal type of dress usually of lighter-weight fabrics worn by middle-income women (Ribeiro 2002, 116; Pietsch 2017, 85). This type of gown was more common in the inventories of aristocratic servants in 1783/84 and in the following period in those of non-servants, while it was never popular among the common servants. It was also an item that was mainly confined in the wealthier group of non-servants, who owned three such gowns on average in 1783/84, and almost the same number in

Additional items worth mentioning are the «Nelson» in 1803 in the inventories of aristocratic servants, and the «Spencer» in 1823. The «Nelson» was evidently a type of overcoat (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Überrock»). It was a fashionable garment at the turn of the century named after admiral Nelson, who visited Vienna in 1800 and was considered a popular figure due to his victories against the French (Pohl and Botstiber 1927, 3:162-63). Its presence in the inventories reveals that aristocratic servants followed the latest fashion trends very closely. The «Spencer» as an item of female dress in the period was a close-fitting jacket with long sleeves that reached just above the waist and originated in England (Reclams Mode und Kostümlexikon, «Spenzer»). All groups owned at least one spencer, as it was accessible even to the poorer group perhaps due to its shorter length. Common servants also owned more than two on average. The presence of these items in the lists reveals not only the influence of English fashion on Viennese dress, but also the appeal of England in contemporary Viennese culture, which was already observable in Vienna since the last decades of the eighteenth century (Pezzl 1787a,

Apart from the broader fashion changes depicted in the analysis of the outer garments of the Viennese, three important observations should be made. First, foreign influences are evident in the appearance of this group. According to German periodicals, Vienna in the 1780s looked mainly to France in matters of fashion, and the impact of local trends was limited (North 2008, 54). However, the evidence from the inventories indicates that influences came from both leading fashion centers of the period, Paris and London. Apart from a few exceptions, like the short shirt, elements of a distinct Viennese fashion are indeed difficult to pinpoint. However, this is also an issue of the less detailed description of outer garments in the last period, when the particular forms of the Viennese fashion were

The second observation concerns the speed and degree of adoption of new trends in the different groups. Throughout the period, female aristocratic servants (especially working servants in 1783/84) adopted the latest trends to a greater extent than other groups, as they possessed more, and in certain instances significantly more, pieces of the fashionable garments in the periods, in which they initially appeared. Female non-servants also followed the latest trends, though not to the same degree regarding the mean number of fashionable garments with the

1803.

4:579-80).

established.

only exception the wealthiest group in 1783/84. Female common servants lagged evidently behind, as did the poorer group of non-servants in most instances.

The third observation concerns the mean number of the individual pieces in the different groups. The mean number of the basic items that comprised the appearance is important because it denotes the capacity for combination, differentiation and change, which constitutes a fundamental prerequisite for fashionable appearance and, consequently, for the ability to play the role of trendsetters in a society. In the eighteenth century, common servants owned a comparable number of gowns with the wealthier group of non-servants, though there were crucial differences in their type and fashion relevance. However, aristocratic servants, particularly working women, certainly possessed the greatest mean number of gowns in the first two periods, and then in the next two, the greatest mean number of one-piece dresses and overgowns (combined). This was the group with the greatest capacity to change and combine different pieces of clothing. The mean number of their outer garments was in most instances greater than even that of the wealthiest part of this middle stratum. However, the discrepancy was not so stark in the nineteenth century and the fact that these numbers were comparable suggests that the wardrobes of aristocratic servants could be not compared to that of their employers and it is doubtful if they could approach that of the higher bourgeoisie. These strata possessed regular changes of morning and evening dress, particularly during the congress, when they had clothes specifically made for balls and other festivities (Springschitz 1949, 55; Karner 2014, 211). This is also evident by the absence of dresses described as formal or festive in the inventories.

Another important aspect of fashionable clothing in the period was the material of the garments. Clothes were not only fashionable because of their cut or the silhouette, in which they formed the body, but also because of their material, pattern and decoration. The fabrics of women's outer garments in the period were generally diverse. Diagram 1 depicts the percentage of each fabric in the descriptions of female outer garments in 1823 (in the cases, in which the fabric was mentioned). The description of the material was crucial in the appraisal and, consequently, the sale of a garment, so the appraisers used terminology in the descriptions, which corresponded to the essential consumer knowledge in the secondary market. The greater variety of fabrics in the market and the accelerated pace of fashion change had made such a degree of product knowledge about the type and quality of fabrics essential for early modern consumers (Jordan and Schopf 2017, 228-9). However, it is not always clear in these descriptions, from which fiber these fabrics were made. Therefore, in order to infer their composition, the descriptions in the inventories are juxtaposed with the analysis of the fibers in pattern books of textile producers in the Austrian Empire in the collection of the Museum of Applied Arts in Vienna («Museum für angewandte Kunst»). The diagram shows that the most popular fabrics in women's outer garments in all groups were cambric, percale and silk, while taffeta was particularly common in the wealthier group of non-servants. Percale («Perkal») and cambric («Kammertuch»)

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 267

though the fabrics in the inventories of all groups did not include some of the most fashionable fabrics in the period, there were certain important points of convergence between the descriptions in the lists and in the engravings, namely in the presence of percale, taffeta and cambric. It is also mentioned in the magazine that the small number of engravings published could not encompass the number and variety of fabrics in women's dress, just the most prevalent ones. These were divided in fashionable silk and cotton fabrics. In 1817, apart from monochrome silk fabrics, thin-striped marceline and moire gros de Naples were also popular. Concerning cotton fabrics, white cambric with stripe- or square-woven small cords and printed calico with small printed patterns or squared stripes were the most popular, while muslin with woven colored small flowers and broad edging was a novelty that was often used in the summer season (WMZ, 20.8.1817). Therefore, it can be ascertained that women in the sample followed fashion and that the absence of certain popular fabrics in 1822 and 1823 from the lists should rather be

The descriptions in the engravings also point to a final aspect of dress that played a significant role in fashionable appearance: the patterns and decorations of clothes. Fashionable garments in the period were distinguished not only by their elaborate patterns, but also by their decorations. Printed and painted cotton fabrics made decorative patterning accessible to broader strata, intensified the dynamic of fashion, and spread fashion consciousness among the European population. Furthermore, decorations, such as trimmings and ribbons that could make clothes appear more fashionable proliferated, and cheaper varieties were also accessible to the lower strata of the population (Lemire and Riello 2008, 906-7; Styles 2019, 41). In Vienna, the introduction of cylinder printing in the period resulted in greater production of printed cottons (Karner 2014, 204). However, as diagram 2 shows patterns and decorations in female outer garments were not found in great numbers in the Viennese inventories.7 Overall, the descriptions of patterns and decorations were relatively rudimentary compared to those of fabrics. Throughout the period, only in the clothes of aristocratic servants, particularly working women, can different patterns in adequate numbers be observed. Needlework, stripe patterns, flower patterns or chiné patterns characterized even a small part of their outer garments, as at least half of the working aristocratic servants possessed minimum one adorned garment. The greater mean number of such items in their inventories could also be a direct consequence of the appraisers' need to differentiate between garments in cases, in which multiple items of the same fabric were listed. In the clothes of common servants only few items with wool linings, dotted and stripe patterns can be observed. Non-servants also owned fewer such garments, and, while the wealthier group mainly conformed to the most popular trends, needlework and stripe patterns were almost the only patterns in the outer garments

7 The mean numbers in the diagram concern the whole period and are multiplied by ten in order

attributed to the nature of the source.

of the poorer group.

to be better illustrated.

described in all cases cotton fabrics in the pattern books.6 Cotton's appeal and great fashion relevance was associated with the variety of fabrics produced by this fiber (Riello and Parthasarathi 2009, 146-7). In Max Heiden's textile lexicon percale is mentioned as: «fine, plain-woven cotton fabrics originally from the East Indies, which are denser than muslin, almost the same as cambrics, which is why they are often called that» (Handwörterbuch der Textilkunde aller Zeiten und Völker, «Perkal»). However, it should not be assumed that the descriptions of percale and cambric in the lists referred to the same fabric.

Even though cotton fabrics were more common in the descriptions of female outer garments in the lists, silk never went out of fashion in Vienna in the period. As mentioned above, cotton, but mainly silk manufacture constituted significant branches of protoindustrial production in Vienna and the surrounding area and both were essential fabrics in Viennese fashion. An analysis of the fabrics of outer garments presented in the engravings in the Viennese fashion magazine in 1822 and 1823 reveals the popularity of cotton and silk. Clothes were made and decorated with multiple different fabrics, but in this analysis only the base fabric of a dress is considered. The most common fabrics of fashionable outer garments according to their percentage in the engravings were organdy (11.8%), percale (7.8%), barège (6.9%), taffeta (5.9%) and merino (5.9%). Other notable fabrics were crêpe (4.9%), crepon (a fabric similar to crêpe) (3.9%), batiste or cambric (4.9%), gros de Naples (3.9%), atlas, muslin, musselinette and gauze barège (each 2.9%) (WMZ, 3.1.1822- 25.12.1823). Apart from silk, the most common fabric of outer garments of nonservants in 1823 was cambric, followed by percale and taffeta. These three fabrics made up more that forty percent of all descriptions. This relation changed in the different wealth groups, as in the wealthier group taffeta was prevalent, while in the poorer group percale was the most common fabric. Other notable fabrics, which were mentioned much less, were atlas, muslin and dimity. Cambric was the most common description in inventories of aristocratic servants followed by silk and percale. The more prominent presence of silk and taffeta in the inventories of aristocratic servants and the wealthier group of non-servants is not surprising as these fabrics were associated with wealth, while cotton fabrics were more accessible. The presence of silk in the inventories of aristocratic servants should also be associated with the material of the clothes of their employers, who could hand down pieces of clothing to their servants. Cambric, percale and silk were also the main fabrics found in the inventories of common servants, while linen was also mentioned.

It should be noted that, even though the inventories of non-servants included the greatest variety, possibly as a result of their greater number, similar main fabrics appeared in the inventories of all groups. This suggests a certain degree of uniformity in fabrics, which should be attributed to prevalent fashions. Even

<sup>6</sup> The search in the database was for the period 1760-1825 and the terms searched were «Kammertuch» and «Perkal»/«Percal». There are one hundred four samples of cambric and nine samples of percale in the database in the period 1808-1825. Museum für angewandte Kunst in Wien (MAK) Sammlung Textilien und Teppiche:

https://sammlung.mak.at/sammlung\_online?&q=string\_administration\_name\_de-DE:%22Textilien%20und%20Teppiche%22 (2021-11-12).

described in all cases cotton fabrics in the pattern books.6 Cotton's appeal and great fashion relevance was associated with the variety of fabrics produced by this fiber (Riello and Parthasarathi 2009, 146-7). In Max Heiden's textile lexicon percale is mentioned as: «fine, plain-woven cotton fabrics originally from the East Indies, which are denser than muslin, almost the same as cambrics, which is why they are often called that» (Handwörterbuch der Textilkunde aller Zeiten und Völker, «Perkal»). However, it should not be assumed that the descriptions of percale and

Even though cotton fabrics were more common in the descriptions of female outer garments in the lists, silk never went out of fashion in Vienna in the period. As mentioned above, cotton, but mainly silk manufacture constituted significant branches of protoindustrial production in Vienna and the surrounding area and both were essential fabrics in Viennese fashion. An analysis of the fabrics of outer garments presented in the engravings in the Viennese fashion magazine in 1822 and 1823 reveals the popularity of cotton and silk. Clothes were made and decorated with multiple different fabrics, but in this analysis only the base fabric of a dress is considered. The most common fabrics of fashionable outer garments according to their percentage in the engravings were organdy (11.8%), percale (7.8%), barège (6.9%), taffeta (5.9%) and merino (5.9%). Other notable fabrics were crêpe (4.9%), crepon (a fabric similar to crêpe) (3.9%), batiste or cambric (4.9%), gros de Naples (3.9%), atlas, muslin, musselinette and gauze barège (each 2.9%) (WMZ, 3.1.1822- 25.12.1823). Apart from silk, the most common fabric of outer garments of nonservants in 1823 was cambric, followed by percale and taffeta. These three fabrics made up more that forty percent of all descriptions. This relation changed in the different wealth groups, as in the wealthier group taffeta was prevalent, while in the poorer group percale was the most common fabric. Other notable fabrics, which were mentioned much less, were atlas, muslin and dimity. Cambric was the most common description in inventories of aristocratic servants followed by silk and percale. The more prominent presence of silk and taffeta in the inventories of aristocratic servants and the wealthier group of non-servants is not surprising as these fabrics were associated with wealth, while cotton fabrics were more accessible. The presence of silk in the inventories of aristocratic servants should also be associated with the material of the clothes of their employers, who could hand down pieces of clothing to their servants. Cambric, percale and silk were also the main fabrics found in the inventories of common servants, while linen was also

It should be noted that, even though the inventories of non-servants included the greatest variety, possibly as a result of their greater number, similar main fabrics appeared in the inventories of all groups. This suggests a certain degree of uniformity in fabrics, which should be attributed to prevalent fashions. Even

6 The search in the database was for the period 1760-1825 and the terms searched were «Kammertuch» and «Perkal»/«Percal». There are one hundred four samples of cambric and nine samples of percale in the database in the period 1808-1825. Museum für angewandte Kunst in Wien

https://sammlung.mak.at/sammlung\_online?&q=string\_administration\_name\_de-

cambric in the lists referred to the same fabric.

mentioned.

(MAK) Sammlung Textilien und Teppiche:

DE:%22Textilien%20und%20Teppiche%22 (2021-11-12).

though the fabrics in the inventories of all groups did not include some of the most fashionable fabrics in the period, there were certain important points of convergence between the descriptions in the lists and in the engravings, namely in the presence of percale, taffeta and cambric. It is also mentioned in the magazine that the small number of engravings published could not encompass the number and variety of fabrics in women's dress, just the most prevalent ones. These were divided in fashionable silk and cotton fabrics. In 1817, apart from monochrome silk fabrics, thin-striped marceline and moire gros de Naples were also popular. Concerning cotton fabrics, white cambric with stripe- or square-woven small cords and printed calico with small printed patterns or squared stripes were the most popular, while muslin with woven colored small flowers and broad edging was a novelty that was often used in the summer season (WMZ, 20.8.1817). Therefore, it can be ascertained that women in the sample followed fashion and that the absence of certain popular fabrics in 1822 and 1823 from the lists should rather be attributed to the nature of the source.

The descriptions in the engravings also point to a final aspect of dress that played a significant role in fashionable appearance: the patterns and decorations of clothes. Fashionable garments in the period were distinguished not only by their elaborate patterns, but also by their decorations. Printed and painted cotton fabrics made decorative patterning accessible to broader strata, intensified the dynamic of fashion, and spread fashion consciousness among the European population. Furthermore, decorations, such as trimmings and ribbons that could make clothes appear more fashionable proliferated, and cheaper varieties were also accessible to the lower strata of the population (Lemire and Riello 2008, 906-7; Styles 2019, 41). In Vienna, the introduction of cylinder printing in the period resulted in greater production of printed cottons (Karner 2014, 204). However, as diagram 2 shows patterns and decorations in female outer garments were not found in great numbers in the Viennese inventories.7 Overall, the descriptions of patterns and decorations were relatively rudimentary compared to those of fabrics. Throughout the period, only in the clothes of aristocratic servants, particularly working women, can different patterns in adequate numbers be observed. Needlework, stripe patterns, flower patterns or chiné patterns characterized even a small part of their outer garments, as at least half of the working aristocratic servants possessed minimum one adorned garment. The greater mean number of such items in their inventories could also be a direct consequence of the appraisers' need to differentiate between garments in cases, in which multiple items of the same fabric were listed. In the clothes of common servants only few items with wool linings, dotted and stripe patterns can be observed. Non-servants also owned fewer such garments, and, while the wealthier group mainly conformed to the most popular trends, needlework and stripe patterns were almost the only patterns in the outer garments of the poorer group.

<sup>7</sup> The mean numbers in the diagram concern the whole period and are multiplied by ten in order to be better illustrated.

found in the inventories of this stratum.

Gloves were an essential part of dress for aristocratic servants, who possessed more of these items on average than the other groups in the eighteenth century and particularly in the second period, in which working aristocratic servants possessed more than ten times more pairs of gloves than all other groups. In the nineteenth century, the possession of gloves constituted an obvious difference between the dress of the wealthier and the poorer group of non-servants, as well as between common and aristocratic servants. Perhaps also due to the different nature of their work. However, the material of these items was seldom mentioned. All groups possessed comparable numbers of scarfs and shawls, though in the nineteenth century these accessories as well as collars constituted items more relevant for the dress of the wealthiest group of non-servants. These items, together with gloves, became more relevant with the adoption of the one-piece dress, as the arms, neck and shoulders were in many cases left uncovered due to the cut of the dress, though it is not clear to what extent this was also done by neckerchiefs. Shawls appeared in the inventories in 1823. They were popular in Vienna at the start of the nineteenth century, as an article on cashmere shawls, which were imported in the Habsburg Empire from Central Asia, in the Viennese fashion magazine revealed (WMZ, 29.2.1816). However, such shawls constituted luxury items and were not

A very important aspect of these accessories was their decoration, which is displayed for all groups in Diagram 3.8 Aristocratic servants in the period owned more than one adorned item (mainly neckerchief) on average. Working aristocratic servants also owned more knitted items or accessories decorated with embroidery and different kinds of lace than other groups. However, the most interesting finding in this diagram is the significant presence of items in the inventories of common servants, and to a much lesser extent in the poorer group of nonservants, adorned with gold thread or gold lace. These items were almost exclusively bonnets and they were found in their inventories in the first three periods. Bonnets adorned with gold lace or gold thread were one of the first products of Viennese fashion and were popular until 1815 among broader strata of the population. The thread and lace for these products was also made in Vienna. However, for most, they were expensive items that could be obtained only once (Kaut 1970, 21-2). Furthermore, the distinction between gold lace or gold thread and «leonische Spitzen», namely lace made from gold- or silver-plated cooper, which was produced in Vienna in the period was also made in the descriptions (Chaloupek, Eigner, and Wagner 1991, 1:72-3, 80). These adorned accessories that were found in the inventories of common servants could be one of the primary reasons that triggered the discussion on servants' appearance in Vienna and initiated the questions about how they were obtained by these women. However, for working women, especially domestic servants, these accessories were not just a touch of luxury in their appearance. They could constitute a valuable tool in their attempt to keep up a relatively youthful appearance, which could perhaps enable

them to find work and ensure their economic survival (Vickery 2013, 884).

concern the whole period and are multiplied by ten in order to be better illustrated.

8 As with the patterns and decorations of outer garments the mean numbers in the diagram

# **4.2 Fashionable accessories**

In the works that criticized female consumption in Vienna in the period, apart from the fashionable cut and expensive fabrics of their garments, the dress of the «Stubenmädchen», was considered opulent because of their accessories (Rautenstrauch 1781, 9-10). As with clothes, items such as ribbons, lace, bonnets or handkerchiefs could often attract critical comments (Vickery 2013, 880). Certain items mentioned in these descriptions like the Bohemian bonnets («böhmische Hauben») did not appear in the inventories, though other fashionable bonnets, such as Viennese bonnets or «Schlepphauben» were mentioned. These Viennese bonnets, which were popular among the middle strata, were made of gold or silver thread and they also had gold or silver lace (Buxbaum 1986, 37). As with outer garments, an examination of the number of accessories in the inventories could provide information on the ability of the different groups to differentiate their appearance by changing and combining these items.

Table 5 demonstrates the mean number of accessories in the different groups throughout the period. With few exceptions, the mean number of bonnets is comparable in all groups throughout the period and only subtle differences in ownership can be observed. The mean numbers suggest that almost across the sample women possessed at least two, and in most instances at least three such items on average. This was necessary for such accessories that could come in different styles. Bonnets were fashionable garments in the period, as their illustration in multiple occasions in the engravings of the Viennese fashion magazine indicates. Even though the fabric of these items was rarely mentioned in the lists, silk bonnets could be found both in the inventories of common servants, as well as in those of the poorer group of non-servants. Though fashion changes in bonnets did not concern mainly their material, but their style and decoration.

All groups owned a great number of neckerchiefs and handkerchiefs in all periods and these served both practical and aesthetic functions. Their form and function could be interchangeable as they were described mostly together in the inventories. The material of these items was denoted in the inventories almost exclusively in the first two periods and among the main fabrics were canvas and linen, which hinted at the more practical function of these items. However, there were some notable exceptions. Neckerchiefs and handkerchiefs were not just used to blow the nose, wipe the sweat, or even carry around money or tobacco, they also added color to the appearance or displayed expensive fabrics and refined embroidery. They also displayed cleanliness as the most common color of these items in all groups was white and the whiteness of the garments was the indication of cleanliness in the period (Roche 1994, 178-80; Styles 2007, 78-79). In the 1760s non-servants owned approximately two muslin neckerchiefs on average, but almost none in the following period, and, even though the wealthier group owned almost three, the poorer group also owned one on average. On the contrary, aristocratic working servants owned approximately three such items in 1783/84, but none in the previous period. Common working servants also owned between one and two on average in 1783/84.

In the works that criticized female consumption in Vienna in the period, apart from the fashionable cut and expensive fabrics of their garments, the dress of the «Stubenmädchen», was considered opulent because of their accessories (Rautenstrauch 1781, 9-10). As with clothes, items such as ribbons, lace, bonnets or handkerchiefs could often attract critical comments (Vickery 2013, 880). Certain items mentioned in these descriptions like the Bohemian bonnets («böhmische Hauben») did not appear in the inventories, though other fashionable bonnets, such as Viennese bonnets or «Schlepphauben» were mentioned. These Viennese bonnets, which were popular among the middle strata, were made of gold or silver thread and they also had gold or silver lace (Buxbaum 1986, 37). As with outer garments, an examination of the number of accessories in the inventories could provide information on the ability of the different groups to differentiate their

Table 5 demonstrates the mean number of accessories in the different groups throughout the period. With few exceptions, the mean number of bonnets is comparable in all groups throughout the period and only subtle differences in ownership can be observed. The mean numbers suggest that almost across the sample women possessed at least two, and in most instances at least three such items on average. This was necessary for such accessories that could come in different styles. Bonnets were fashionable garments in the period, as their illustration in multiple occasions in the engravings of the Viennese fashion magazine indicates. Even though the fabric of these items was rarely mentioned in the lists, silk bonnets could be found both in the inventories of common servants, as well as in those of the poorer group of non-servants. Though fashion changes in bonnets did not concern mainly their material, but their style and decoration.

All groups owned a great number of neckerchiefs and handkerchiefs in all periods and these served both practical and aesthetic functions. Their form and function could be interchangeable as they were described mostly together in the inventories. The material of these items was denoted in the inventories almost exclusively in the first two periods and among the main fabrics were canvas and linen, which hinted at the more practical function of these items. However, there were some notable exceptions. Neckerchiefs and handkerchiefs were not just used to blow the nose, wipe the sweat, or even carry around money or tobacco, they also added color to the appearance or displayed expensive fabrics and refined embroidery. They also displayed cleanliness as the most common color of these items in all groups was white and the whiteness of the garments was the indication of cleanliness in the period (Roche 1994, 178-80; Styles 2007, 78-79). In the 1760s non-servants owned approximately two muslin neckerchiefs on average, but almost none in the following period, and, even though the wealthier group owned almost three, the poorer group also owned one on average. On the contrary, aristocratic working servants owned approximately three such items in 1783/84, but none in the previous period. Common working servants also owned between one and two

**4.2 Fashionable accessories** 

on average in 1783/84.

appearance by changing and combining these items.

Gloves were an essential part of dress for aristocratic servants, who possessed more of these items on average than the other groups in the eighteenth century and particularly in the second period, in which working aristocratic servants possessed more than ten times more pairs of gloves than all other groups. In the nineteenth century, the possession of gloves constituted an obvious difference between the dress of the wealthier and the poorer group of non-servants, as well as between common and aristocratic servants. Perhaps also due to the different nature of their work. However, the material of these items was seldom mentioned. All groups possessed comparable numbers of scarfs and shawls, though in the nineteenth century these accessories as well as collars constituted items more relevant for the dress of the wealthiest group of non-servants. These items, together with gloves, became more relevant with the adoption of the one-piece dress, as the arms, neck and shoulders were in many cases left uncovered due to the cut of the dress, though it is not clear to what extent this was also done by neckerchiefs. Shawls appeared in the inventories in 1823. They were popular in Vienna at the start of the nineteenth century, as an article on cashmere shawls, which were imported in the Habsburg Empire from Central Asia, in the Viennese fashion magazine revealed (WMZ, 29.2.1816). However, such shawls constituted luxury items and were not found in the inventories of this stratum.

A very important aspect of these accessories was their decoration, which is displayed for all groups in Diagram 3.8 Aristocratic servants in the period owned more than one adorned item (mainly neckerchief) on average. Working aristocratic servants also owned more knitted items or accessories decorated with embroidery and different kinds of lace than other groups. However, the most interesting finding in this diagram is the significant presence of items in the inventories of common servants, and to a much lesser extent in the poorer group of nonservants, adorned with gold thread or gold lace. These items were almost exclusively bonnets and they were found in their inventories in the first three periods. Bonnets adorned with gold lace or gold thread were one of the first products of Viennese fashion and were popular until 1815 among broader strata of the population. The thread and lace for these products was also made in Vienna. However, for most, they were expensive items that could be obtained only once (Kaut 1970, 21-2). Furthermore, the distinction between gold lace or gold thread and «leonische Spitzen», namely lace made from gold- or silver-plated cooper, which was produced in Vienna in the period was also made in the descriptions (Chaloupek, Eigner, and Wagner 1991, 1:72-3, 80). These adorned accessories that were found in the inventories of common servants could be one of the primary reasons that triggered the discussion on servants' appearance in Vienna and initiated the questions about how they were obtained by these women. However, for working women, especially domestic servants, these accessories were not just a touch of luxury in their appearance. They could constitute a valuable tool in their attempt to keep up a relatively youthful appearance, which could perhaps enable them to find work and ensure their economic survival (Vickery 2013, 884).

<sup>8</sup> As with the patterns and decorations of outer garments the mean numbers in the diagram concern the whole period and are multiplied by ten in order to be better illustrated.

relevance of an item (Jordan and Schopf 2017, 234). In this case, it was a combination of all these factors, as English products at the time were considered not only fashionable, but also of great quality (North 2008, 48-50). Katharina Hoffinger owned just two adorned bonnets with lace decoration. However, an important item in her inventory was a Florentine straw hat. Straw hats were one of the characteristic products of Viennese fashion and were featured prominently as a very fashion-sensitive item in the Viennese seasonal fashion cycle in the first half of the nineteenth century. Even though the straw hats were made in Vienna, the straw (and perhaps also the inspiration) was imported from Venice, Florence or Switzerland. As a result, straw hats made from imported straw were very expensive and not accessible to broader strata, who wore straw hats of inferior quality produced by local raw materials. In the sample only two straw hats were mentioned in the inventories of a common servant and a widow of a publican in 1783/84. However, no additional description for these items was provided.12 The period of great popularity and fashion relevance of Viennese straw hats was the period 1830- 1848 (Kaut 1970, 78-81). Therefore, this item might have been a precursor to this fashion. Finally, the most precious items in the wardrobe of Katharina Hoffinger were two real shawls («2 echte Schawls»), which were valued together at 120 Gulden. These were probably the aforementioned imported cashmere shawls, as their value indicated their status as luxury items fashionable among the higher social

It becomes evident from the analysis of this inventory, that aristocratic servants, who were placed near the top of society could possess a great number of garments, as well as items of great quality and value. As the comparison with the inventories in the sample showed, the wardrobe of Katharina Hoffinger could only be compared to those of other aristocratic servants in terms of number, quality and value of items. Though not in terms of fashion relevance of individual garments, as certain fashionable imported items did not appear in the inventories in the sample. A final parameter that influenced fashionable clothing and can be deduced from the

inventories, is the condition of the clothes of the Viennese.

12 WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 22-1783/84, 687-1783/84.

strata.

# **4.3 The inventory of a court servant**

An example that can demonstrate the apex of servants' wardrobes is the inventory of Katharina Hoffinger, who died in 1823 and was the widow of a doctor and the «Kammerfrau» of the empress, namely the chambermaid of the highest rank that served the empress directly (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Kammerfrau»). Her fortune at the time of death was 10,276 Gulden and 16 Kreuzer and her material wealth was 1,529 Gulden and 36 Kreuzer. Apart from her clothes and accessories, her material wealth comprised of jewelry and precious items of gold and silver, which amounted to 832 Gulden and of domestic textiles and furniture valued at 318 Gulden and 48 Kreuzer. In total, her wardrobe consisted of two hundred eighty-seven clothes and accessories valued at 378 Gulden and 48 Kreuzer.9 Their value made up 3.7% of her total wealth and 24.8% of her material wealth. She possessed fifteen dresses made of expensive and fashionable materials such as silk, muslin and percale, as well as many cloaks and overgowns made of silk, merino and poplin, all fashionable fabrics in the period according to the engravings in the fashion magazine. The total value of these outer garments was 130 Gulden and the most valuable individual piece was a fur overgown («Pelzüberrock») valued at 14 Gulden. Among these items was a white silk dress with tail («weiß seidenes Schlepp Kleid») valued at 8 Gulden. This was probably a formal dress for special occasions, as this type of dress did not appear in the inventories in the sample. The only case in the sample with comparable number and value of clothes and accessories is Johanna Weyerin, who was also an aristocratic servant at the imperial Court. She was a «Mundköchin», namely the person responsible for the meal of the emperor (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Mundkoch»). Even though both her total and material wealth at the time of death was much smaller, she owned two hundred sixty-nine items valued at 293 Gulden and 15 Kreuzer. The value of her dresses and jackets, which she bequeathed to her daughter, was higher than that of Katharina Hoffinger, as they were worth 200 Gulden in total. The most valuable garment was a blue fur dress made of atlas («blau atlasenes Pelzkleid»), which was valued at 36 Gulden.10 However, Katharina Hoffinger owned more and more valuable undergarments and accessories. She owned items such as neckerchiefs and pairs of stockings in the dozens, one hundred thirty-two items, more than the highest mark in female inventories in the sample, one hundred eighteen old handkerchiefs, neckerchiefs and pairs of stockings, which belonged to the widow of an aristocratic servant.11

Katharina Hoffinger also owned several imported fashionable items, which were not found in the inventories in the sample. She possessed two dresses made of English linen, and two English shawls. Reference to the origin of the fabrics or the items was rare in the inventories. It could be assumed that such references were also linked to the appraisal of the items and were used to refer to the particular form or cut of a garment, to denote the superior quality, or to signal the fashion

<sup>9</sup> WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 1187-1823.

<sup>10</sup> WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 267-1783/84.

<sup>11</sup> WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 499-1823.

An example that can demonstrate the apex of servants' wardrobes is the inventory of Katharina Hoffinger, who died in 1823 and was the widow of a doctor and the «Kammerfrau» of the empress, namely the chambermaid of the highest rank that served the empress directly (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Kammerfrau»). Her fortune at the time of death was 10,276 Gulden and 16 Kreuzer and her material wealth was 1,529 Gulden and 36 Kreuzer. Apart from her clothes and accessories, her material wealth comprised of jewelry and precious items of gold and silver, which amounted to 832 Gulden and of domestic textiles and furniture valued at 318 Gulden and 48 Kreuzer. In total, her wardrobe consisted of two hundred eighty-seven clothes and accessories valued at 378 Gulden and 48 Kreuzer.9 Their value made up 3.7% of her total wealth and 24.8% of her material wealth. She possessed fifteen dresses made of expensive and fashionable materials such as silk, muslin and percale, as well as many cloaks and overgowns made of silk, merino and poplin, all fashionable fabrics in the period according to the engravings in the fashion magazine. The total value of these outer garments was 130 Gulden and the most valuable individual piece was a fur overgown («Pelzüberrock») valued at 14 Gulden. Among these items was a white silk dress with tail («weiß seidenes Schlepp Kleid») valued at 8 Gulden. This was probably a formal dress for special occasions, as this type of dress did not appear in the inventories in the sample. The only case in the sample with comparable number and value of clothes and accessories is Johanna Weyerin, who was also an aristocratic servant at the imperial Court. She was a «Mundköchin», namely the person responsible for the meal of the emperor (Oekonomische Encyklopädie, «Mundkoch»). Even though both her total and material wealth at the time of death was much smaller, she owned two hundred sixty-nine items valued at 293 Gulden and 15 Kreuzer. The value of her dresses and jackets, which she bequeathed to her daughter, was higher than that of Katharina Hoffinger, as they were worth 200 Gulden in total. The most valuable garment was a blue fur dress made of atlas («blau atlasenes Pelzkleid»), which was valued at 36 Gulden.10 However, Katharina Hoffinger owned more and more valuable undergarments and accessories. She owned items such as neckerchiefs and pairs of stockings in the dozens, one hundred thirty-two items, more than the highest mark in female inventories in the sample, one hundred eighteen old handkerchiefs, neckerchiefs and pairs of

stockings, which belonged to the widow of an aristocratic servant.11

9 WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 1187-1823.

10 WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 267-1783/84. 11 WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 499-1823.

Katharina Hoffinger also owned several imported fashionable items, which were not found in the inventories in the sample. She possessed two dresses made of English linen, and two English shawls. Reference to the origin of the fabrics or the items was rare in the inventories. It could be assumed that such references were also linked to the appraisal of the items and were used to refer to the particular form or cut of a garment, to denote the superior quality, or to signal the fashion

**4.3 The inventory of a court servant** 

relevance of an item (Jordan and Schopf 2017, 234). In this case, it was a combination of all these factors, as English products at the time were considered not only fashionable, but also of great quality (North 2008, 48-50). Katharina Hoffinger owned just two adorned bonnets with lace decoration. However, an important item in her inventory was a Florentine straw hat. Straw hats were one of the characteristic products of Viennese fashion and were featured prominently as a very fashion-sensitive item in the Viennese seasonal fashion cycle in the first half of the nineteenth century. Even though the straw hats were made in Vienna, the straw (and perhaps also the inspiration) was imported from Venice, Florence or Switzerland. As a result, straw hats made from imported straw were very expensive and not accessible to broader strata, who wore straw hats of inferior quality produced by local raw materials. In the sample only two straw hats were mentioned in the inventories of a common servant and a widow of a publican in 1783/84. However, no additional description for these items was provided.12 The period of great popularity and fashion relevance of Viennese straw hats was the period 1830- 1848 (Kaut 1970, 78-81). Therefore, this item might have been a precursor to this fashion. Finally, the most precious items in the wardrobe of Katharina Hoffinger were two real shawls («2 echte Schawls»), which were valued together at 120 Gulden. These were probably the aforementioned imported cashmere shawls, as their value indicated their status as luxury items fashionable among the higher social strata.

It becomes evident from the analysis of this inventory, that aristocratic servants, who were placed near the top of society could possess a great number of garments, as well as items of great quality and value. As the comparison with the inventories in the sample showed, the wardrobe of Katharina Hoffinger could only be compared to those of other aristocratic servants in terms of number, quality and value of items. Though not in terms of fashion relevance of individual garments, as certain fashionable imported items did not appear in the inventories in the sample. A final parameter that influenced fashionable clothing and can be deduced from the inventories, is the condition of the clothes of the Viennese.

<sup>12</sup> WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 22-1783/84, 687-1783/84.

(«abgetragen/abgenutzt»). Even though the meaning of these terms is not fully explained, it would be safe to assume that the descriptions of condition were also linked to the appraisal of the items and denoted the diminishing value of the clothes

Table 6 displays the mean number of principal outer garments in female inventories with a description of condition. Common servants generally possessed more clothes described as worn out on average in all but the second period. Conversely, clothes described as old or worn out were rarely found in the inventories of aristocratic servants except from the second and fourth periods. Moreover, the increased presence of worn out clothes in the inventories of working women constitutes a further indication that, due to their work, their clothes were more likely to be worn out. In general, non-servants owned progressively fewer garments described as old on average. This trend is mostly evident in the wealthier group. Apart from the first period, this group owned the lowest number of old clothes across the sample. On the contrary, the poorer group owned in all instances the highest or second highest mean number of old clothes. Even though the terms «old» and «worn out» could be interpreted similarly, they are not identical. The possession of worn out clothes indicates intense use, perhaps due to insufficient changes of these garments, inability to maintain the clothes or a slower pace of renewal. However, old clothing could mean that the garments were old-fashioned, patched up, handed down or even purchased in the secondary market, not necessarily that they were overused, not maintained or not renewed at an appropriate pace. Despite the uncertainty in the meanings of the descriptions, the table certainly shows that wealthier women, in contrast to the poorer group or common servants, were progressively able to acquire clothes, whose value did not drop, and they could be resold and reused. They had more changes of

The presence of old clothes in the inventories of servants could also be attributed to the practice of employers to hand down clothes to their domestic servants. Even though this cannot be shown for aristocratic servants in the present essay, there were many inventories of employers of servants, in which certain items were listed as «legirt», as bequests to their servants. These items were mostly clothes, but also domestic textiles or pieces of furniture, such as beds. This could also be a form of payment for servants, if the employer could not pay them in any other way. This form of involuntary consumption constituted a common way for the lower strata to acquire clothes that were beyond their means (Styles 2007, 247-55). This was also a practice followed amongst servants, as the case of Maria Johanna Kreyerin, the widow of an aristocratic servant of higher rank in 1783 indicates. She employed a female servant, Magdalena Fritzin, to whom she bequeathed a bedstead, a palliasse, a woolen mattress, a duvet, three pillows, a green blanket made of stuff, two bedsheets, three old cotton gowns («Contouche»), six old coarse shifts, four coarse aprons and four pairs of stockings. In total, these items amounted to 13 Gulden and 30 Kreuzer, approximately 13% of the value of her material possessions. However, the servant did not receive any of her most valuable outer garments, such as a light brown gown («Contouche») made from gros de Tours with petticoat of moire silk valued at 8 Gulden, or a brown gown («Sack») again made of gros de Tours valued at 6 Gul-

(Overton et al. 2004, 115; Beaurdy 2003, 44-6).

outer garments and they could maintain or renew their clothes.

Fig. 2. **Georg Emanuel Opitz: «Wiener Szenen und Volksbeschäftigungen», Blatt 34: «Le Coureur avec une fille de Chambre, et une Blanchisseuse de Vienne./Ein Läufer mit einem Stubenmädchen, und einer Wäscherinn in Wien», Wien 1804-1812. This image provides a stark contrast between the dress of the «Stubenmädchen» (woman on the left) and a launderer (woman on the right)** 

Copyright: Wien Museum.

# **5. The condition of clothes**

The examination of the condition of clothes in the Viennese inventories could provide information on the ability of the different groups to renew their dress and follow the latest fashion trends. Appraisers did not provide detailed descriptions of condition in the lists regarding the fashion relevance of the items. There is only one entry in the inventory of Maria Grabawitschin (without profession) in 1764, in which four old «Contouche» were also described as «old-fashioned» without any further specification.13 The most common terms in the descriptions of condition of female outer garments were: old («alt»), ordinary («ordinari») and worn out

<sup>13</sup> WStLA, Alte Ziviljustiz, A2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 170-80.

Fig. 2. **Georg Emanuel Opitz: «Wiener Szenen und Volksbeschäftigungen», Blatt 34: «Le Coureur avec une fille de Chambre, et une Blanchisseuse de Vienne./Ein Läufer mit einem Stubenmädchen, und einer Wäscherinn in Wien», Wien 1804-1812. This image provides a stark contrast between the dress of the «Stubenmädchen» (woman on the left) and a launderer (woman on the right)** 

Copyright: Wien Museum.

13 WStLA, Alte Ziviljustiz, A2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen: 170-80.

The examination of the condition of clothes in the Viennese inventories could provide information on the ability of the different groups to renew their dress and follow the latest fashion trends. Appraisers did not provide detailed descriptions of condition in the lists regarding the fashion relevance of the items. There is only one entry in the inventory of Maria Grabawitschin (without profession) in 1764, in which four old «Contouche» were also described as «old-fashioned» without any further specification.13 The most common terms in the descriptions of condition of female outer garments were: old («alt»), ordinary («ordinari») and worn out

**5. The condition of clothes** 

(«abgetragen/abgenutzt»). Even though the meaning of these terms is not fully explained, it would be safe to assume that the descriptions of condition were also linked to the appraisal of the items and denoted the diminishing value of the clothes (Overton et al. 2004, 115; Beaurdy 2003, 44-6).

Table 6 displays the mean number of principal outer garments in female inventories with a description of condition. Common servants generally possessed more clothes described as worn out on average in all but the second period. Conversely, clothes described as old or worn out were rarely found in the inventories of aristocratic servants except from the second and fourth periods. Moreover, the increased presence of worn out clothes in the inventories of working women constitutes a further indication that, due to their work, their clothes were more likely to be worn out. In general, non-servants owned progressively fewer garments described as old on average. This trend is mostly evident in the wealthier group. Apart from the first period, this group owned the lowest number of old clothes across the sample. On the contrary, the poorer group owned in all instances the highest or second highest mean number of old clothes. Even though the terms «old» and «worn out» could be interpreted similarly, they are not identical. The possession of worn out clothes indicates intense use, perhaps due to insufficient changes of these garments, inability to maintain the clothes or a slower pace of renewal. However, old clothing could mean that the garments were old-fashioned, patched up, handed down or even purchased in the secondary market, not necessarily that they were overused, not maintained or not renewed at an appropriate pace. Despite the uncertainty in the meanings of the descriptions, the table certainly shows that wealthier women, in contrast to the poorer group or common servants, were progressively able to acquire clothes, whose value did not drop, and they could be resold and reused. They had more changes of outer garments and they could maintain or renew their clothes.

The presence of old clothes in the inventories of servants could also be attributed to the practice of employers to hand down clothes to their domestic servants. Even though this cannot be shown for aristocratic servants in the present essay, there were many inventories of employers of servants, in which certain items were listed as «legirt», as bequests to their servants. These items were mostly clothes, but also domestic textiles or pieces of furniture, such as beds. This could also be a form of payment for servants, if the employer could not pay them in any other way. This form of involuntary consumption constituted a common way for the lower strata to acquire clothes that were beyond their means (Styles 2007, 247-55). This was also a practice followed amongst servants, as the case of Maria Johanna Kreyerin, the widow of an aristocratic servant of higher rank in 1783 indicates. She employed a female servant, Magdalena Fritzin, to whom she bequeathed a bedstead, a palliasse, a woolen mattress, a duvet, three pillows, a green blanket made of stuff, two bedsheets, three old cotton gowns («Contouche»), six old coarse shifts, four coarse aprons and four pairs of stockings. In total, these items amounted to 13 Gulden and 30 Kreuzer, approximately 13% of the value of her material possessions. However, the servant did not receive any of her most valuable outer garments, such as a light brown gown («Contouche») made from gros de Tours with petticoat of moire silk valued at 8 Gulden, or a brown gown («Sack») again made of gros de Tours valued at 6 Gul-

clothes more. Furthermore, the examination of specific examples from this group and the possession of certain valuable, imported items such as shawls showed that their dress was greatly influenced by the consumption of the elites. Therefore, if a trickle-down process concerning the prevalent fashion is assumed, it was this group that could constitute the crucial link between the dress of the elites and the middle

Finally, female consumption, and particularly the appearance of female domestic servants, was also an object of intense discussion in the Viennese society in the period. The analysis revealed that, regarding the wardrobes of common servants, there was little material evidence, on which this criticism could be based. Female common servants might have possessed certain fashionable dresses and accessories especially in the eighteenth century, such as multiple gowns or bonnets decorated with gold thread or gold lace that could instigate such comments, and they certainly devoted a great percentage of their total and material wealth in their appearance, but their wardrobes were smaller in size than those of their employers, the value of their garments much lower, the condition of their clothes was generally poorer, and they were also slower to adopt the latest trends. Even though greater in size, the value of their wardrobes was comparable to that of the poorest part of the population in the sample. Therefore, the notion that common servants urged middle-class women towards opulence or that they were imitated by their employers did not have merit. Rather, it was the dress of aristocratic servants in the second half of the eighteenth century that could have instigated this discussion, even though their wardrobes could certainly not approach those of the aristocracy. Non-servants and common servants in this Viennese middle-class population were fashion conscious and their dress adapted to notions of common and relevant. In general, the appearance of the Viennese middleclass women was rather homogenous in its basic principles. Concerning the relation of this stratum with the prevalent fashion, it was the group closest to the elites that set the tone. However, through the demonstration of the nuances of fashionable consumption in this broad Viennese middle stratum, it was shown that Viennese women did not necessarily need to look upwards and aspire to the elites in a process of emulation and imitation, rather they could formulate their taste and clothing consumption by looking across within this stratum, by interacting with their constantly changing material environment and the increasing availability of goods, by listening in on the contemporary debate on fashion in Vienna, or by receiving and processing information from leading European fashion centers and appropriating foreign fashionable dress. Finally, they could look to the agents and media of the emerging Viennese

strata, and mainly function as trendsetters for this middle-class population.

fashion industry, which their consumption choices also shaped.

den.14 So, it should not be assumed that the value of servants' dress was greatly determined by the dress of their employers regarding the practice of handing down clothes (clothes that were not bequeathed, but were perhaps given to servants to wear temporarily, were not recorded in their inventories, as they were not part of their property). Finally, the presence of ordinary garments in the inventories of nonservants and common servants could constitute an indication that they developed a certain degree of homogeneity in the style and material of their clothes, which might have conformed to certain fashionable norms, but their garments did not have features that would make them stand out and bring additional value to their potential resale.

### **6. Conclusions**

The present essay investigated the female consumption of clothes and accessories of the middle and lower-middle strata of the Viennese population in the period 1760- 1823, and the relation of their wardrobes to fashion. This was a period, in which fashion started to play a very significant role in clothing consumption and female consumers in these middle strata were at the core of this shift. It was perceptible in the analysis of their probate inventories that the Viennese female consumers followed fashion. The garments and fabrics of their dress conformed to popular trends in the period, and comprised a rather homogenous ensemble, which denoted that consumption of clothes was done according to general fashion directives. The inventories depicted not only the structural changes of female dress, such as the adoption of the one-piece dress, but also specific fashion changes, like the introduction of different types of gowns. French and English fashion shaped to a considerable degree the appearance of Viennese women in the period, as garments such as the «Contouche» were found in every wardrobe. However, the process of emancipation and gradual emergence of Viennese fashion can also be observed through the popularity of certain garments, such as the «Chemisette», or accessories, like Viennese bonnets which constituted specific products of Viennese fashion and were embedded in the Viennese fashion cycle. Furthermore, the influence of Viennese fashion can be detected in the fabrics of their dress, which conformed to a significant degree with the directives of the Viennese fashion magazine.

The essay also focused on aristocratic and common servants, a big part of which were working women, and compared their wardrobes to those of the wealthiest and poorest non-servants in the sample. The servants' role in the dissemination of fashionable dress within this middle-class population was an important object of investigation in the study. Female aristocratic servants, and particularly working women, invested greatly in their appearance, and their wardrobes could only be compared to those of their peers. Not only were the number and value of their garments greater than that of the other groups, particularly in the eighteenth century, they adopted the new fashionable garments to a greater extent and were also the first to move on. They possessed several distinct fashionable items and they also decorated their

<sup>14</sup> WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 42-1783/84.

den.14 So, it should not be assumed that the value of servants' dress was greatly determined by the dress of their employers regarding the practice of handing down clothes (clothes that were not bequeathed, but were perhaps given to servants to wear temporarily, were not recorded in their inventories, as they were not part of their property). Finally, the presence of ordinary garments in the inventories of nonservants and common servants could constitute an indication that they developed a certain degree of homogeneity in the style and material of their clothes, which might have conformed to certain fashionable norms, but their garments did not have features that would make them stand out and bring additional value to their potential

The present essay investigated the female consumption of clothes and accessories of the middle and lower-middle strata of the Viennese population in the period 1760- 1823, and the relation of their wardrobes to fashion. This was a period, in which fashion started to play a very significant role in clothing consumption and female consumers in these middle strata were at the core of this shift. It was perceptible in the analysis of their probate inventories that the Viennese female consumers followed fashion. The garments and fabrics of their dress conformed to popular trends in the period, and comprised a rather homogenous ensemble, which denoted that consumption of clothes was done according to general fashion directives. The inventories depicted not only the structural changes of female dress, such as the adoption of the one-piece dress, but also specific fashion changes, like the introduction of different types of gowns. French and English fashion shaped to a considerable degree the appearance of Viennese women in the period, as garments such as the «Contouche» were found in every wardrobe. However, the process of emancipation and gradual emergence of Viennese fashion can also be observed through the popularity of certain garments, such as the «Chemisette», or accessories, like Viennese bonnets which constituted specific products of Viennese fashion and were embedded in the Viennese fashion cycle. Furthermore, the influence of Viennese fashion can be detected in the fabrics of their dress, which conformed to a significant degree with the

The essay also focused on aristocratic and common servants, a big part of which were working women, and compared their wardrobes to those of the wealthiest and poorest non-servants in the sample. The servants' role in the dissemination of fashionable dress within this middle-class population was an important object of investigation in the study. Female aristocratic servants, and particularly working women, invested greatly in their appearance, and their wardrobes could only be compared to those of their peers. Not only were the number and value of their garments greater than that of the other groups, particularly in the eighteenth century, they adopted the new fashionable garments to a greater extent and were also the first to move on. They possessed several distinct fashionable items and they also decorated their

resale.

**6. Conclusions** 

directives of the Viennese fashion magazine.

14 WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2: 42-1783/84.

clothes more. Furthermore, the examination of specific examples from this group and the possession of certain valuable, imported items such as shawls showed that their dress was greatly influenced by the consumption of the elites. Therefore, if a trickle-down process concerning the prevalent fashion is assumed, it was this group that could constitute the crucial link between the dress of the elites and the middle strata, and mainly function as trendsetters for this middle-class population.

Finally, female consumption, and particularly the appearance of female domestic servants, was also an object of intense discussion in the Viennese society in the period. The analysis revealed that, regarding the wardrobes of common servants, there was little material evidence, on which this criticism could be based. Female common servants might have possessed certain fashionable dresses and accessories especially in the eighteenth century, such as multiple gowns or bonnets decorated with gold thread or gold lace that could instigate such comments, and they certainly devoted a great percentage of their total and material wealth in their appearance, but their wardrobes were smaller in size than those of their employers, the value of their garments much lower, the condition of their clothes was generally poorer, and they were also slower to adopt the latest trends. Even though greater in size, the value of their wardrobes was comparable to that of the poorest part of the population in the sample. Therefore, the notion that common servants urged middle-class women towards opulence or that they were imitated by their employers did not have merit. Rather, it was the dress of aristocratic servants in the second half of the eighteenth century that could have instigated this discussion, even though their wardrobes could certainly not approach those of the aristocracy. Non-servants and common servants in this Viennese middle-class population were fashion conscious and their dress adapted to notions of common and relevant. In general, the appearance of the Viennese middleclass women was rather homogenous in its basic principles. Concerning the relation of this stratum with the prevalent fashion, it was the group closest to the elites that set the tone. However, through the demonstration of the nuances of fashionable consumption in this broad Viennese middle stratum, it was shown that Viennese women did not necessarily need to look upwards and aspire to the elites in a process of emulation and imitation, rather they could formulate their taste and clothing consumption by looking across within this stratum, by interacting with their constantly changing material environment and the increasing availability of goods, by listening in on the contemporary debate on fashion in Vienna, or by receiving and processing information from leading European fashion centers and appropriating foreign fashionable dress. Finally, they could look to the agents and media of the emerging Viennese fashion industry, which their consumption choices also shaped.

Tab. 2. **The mean number and value of clothes and accessories of female servants and non-servants and their percentage in total and material wealth** 

> **Female nonservants adj. (5,000- 10,000 Fl.)**

**Female nonservants adj. (10- 100 Fl.)** 

37.3 37.0 37.3 27.0 65.0 32.3 65.0 36.0

40.3 39.7 42.7 16.4 101.0 29.3 101.0 34.3

2.7 2.7 0.6 25.9 3.5 2.3 3.5 8.6

24.6 23.3 8.1 39.9 20.3 71.8 20.3 72

71.5 60.8 54.8 51.7 132.0 43.0 172 43.0

66.2 62.0 62.4 25.7 109.4 21.3 157.0 21.3

3.9 3.4 0.9 40.5 5.3 19.1 14 19.1

24.5 20.2 10.0 42.9 42.9 64.9 54.7 64.9

77.4 71.6 103.3 40.6 100.9 74.4 - 79.8

67.7 70.3 134.3 31.4 99.4 36.3 - 39.6

4.2 4.1 1.6 42.6 3.3 11.2 - 11.1

17.2 12.6 6.0 47.7 38 66.3 - 73.9

64.1 60.4 81.8 42.9 84.5 71.2 52.0 71.2

27.8 29.9 48.4 20.8 28.8 13.8 7.0 13.8

1.8 1.6 0.7 39.0 6 5.6 70 5.6

15.7 13.8 6.0 53.6 38.1 82.1 100 82.1

**Female servants**  **Female servants working** 

high low high Low

**Female**

**Female nonservants**

**Year** 

**1760s** 

**1783/84** 

**1803** 

**1823** 

**Average number** 

**Average value in Fl.**

**Percentage in total wealth (%)** 

**Percentage in material wealth (%)** 

**Average number** 

**Average value in Fl.**

**Percentage in total wealth (%)** 

**Percentage in material wealth (%)** 

**Average number** 

**Average value in Fl.**

**Percentage in total wealth (%)** 

**Percentage in material wealth (%)** 

**Average number** 

**Average value in Fl.**

**Percentage in total wealth (%)** 

**Percentage in material wealth (%)** 

#### **Appendix: Tables and diagrams**


### Tab. 1. **Female servants and non-servants in the sample: Mean active total wealth and mean material wealth15**

<sup>15</sup> All the data in the tables and diagrams come from the Viennese inventories (WStLA, Alte Ziviljustiz, A2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen; WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen). All the money values in gulden (Fl.) mentioned in the tables and the text are converted in «Conventionsmünze», even though values of clothing in the inventories of the year 1823 are mostly in «Wiener Währung», which was introduced after the state bankruptcy in 1811. At the time, the Wiener Währung had an exchange rate to the Conventionsmünze of 2.5:1 (Rumpler 2005, 123–24).

Tab. 1. **Female servants and non-servants in the sample: Mean active total wealth and mean material wealth15**

**1760s 1783/84 1803 1823** 

163.7 1499.6 270.0 1685.2 393.0 1632.5 177.3 1570.7

170.0 1477.2 306.3 1812.1 558.1 1725.2 216.3 1925.1

527.0 6735.3 622.8 6844.2 2223.3 8535.0 809.6 6621.2

41.2 63.4 60.0 63.6 65.9 73.7 38.8 53.3

**high** 498.0 2867.0 255.0 2058.7 261.6 2994.9 75.5 476.8 **low** 40.8 1298.0 32.8 111.3 54.8 325.8 16.8 248.4

**high** 498.0 2867.0 287.3 1120.5 7.0 10.0 **low** 47.7 400.3 32.8 111.3 53.6 358.5 16.8 248.4

15 All the data in the tables and diagrams come from the Viennese inventories (WStLA, Alte Ziviljustiz, A2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen; WStLA, Zivilgericht, A2, Faszikel 2: Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen). All the money values in gulden (Fl.) mentioned in the tables and the text are converted in «Conventionsmünze», even though values of clothing in the inventories of the year 1823 are mostly in «Wiener Währung», which was introduced after the state bankruptcy in 1811. At the time, the Wiener Währung had an exchange rate to the Conventionsmünze of 2.5:1 (Rumpler

**mean material wealth in Fl.** 

**mean wealth in Fl.** 

**mean material wealth in Fl.** 

**mean wealth in Fl.** 

**mean wealth in Fl.** 

**Appendix: Tables and diagrams** 

**mean material wealth in Fl.** 

**mean wealth in Fl.** 

**mean material wealth in Fl.** 

**Year** 

**Female** 

**Female** 

**Female** 

**nonservants** 

**nonservants** 

**adj.** 

**Fl.)** 

**nonservants** 

**(5,000-**

**10,000** 

**Female** 

**adj. (10-**

**100 Fl.)** 

**Female** 

**servants** 

**Female** 

**servants** 

**working** 

2005, 123–24).


#### Tab. 2. **The mean number and value of clothes and accessories of female servants and non-servants and their percentage in total and material wealth**

**1823**

**Year** 

**1760s** 

**1783/84** 

one-piece dress

**Types of gowns and jackets** 

commode gown

polonaise gown

**Female nonservants** 

gown 0.3

**Female nonservants adj. (5,000- 10,000 Fl.)** 

fur gown 0.3

sack 0.1 0.3 0.5

mantelet 0.2 2 2

adrienne 0.7 1

gown 0.3 0.1 1.9 3.3 mantelet 0.5 0.4 0.3 2 2 fur gown 0.1 0.3

THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 279

fur 0.1

Tab. 4. **Mean number of different types of gowns and jackets of female servants and non-servants** 

> **Female nonservants adj. (10- 100 Fl.)**

contouche 1.4 1.3 0.6 7 0.5 7 0.7

bedgown 1 1 0.4 2 1 2 1.3

commode 1.2 3 0.7 3.3 0.5 4.5 0.5

contouche 1.2 1.6 0.1 2.3 3.5 2.3 3.5

0.4 0.3 0.5

0.1 0.1 0.1 0.3

skirt 5.1 6.7 3.9 6.4 5.4 6 stays 0.5 1 0.1 0.1 1.7 1.9

bodice 0.1 1 0.8 4 0.8 cloak 0.4 0.6 0.3 0.3 0.2 0.2 corset 1.4 0.4 2 0.5 1.6 1.6

gown 0.7 1.6 0.6 0.6

overgown 3.1 2.4 2.8 7.3 1.8 1.8 petticoat 2.4 5.2 2.1 2.8 1.8 6 1.8 short shirt 0.5 1.4 0.1 0.8 0.8 skirt 1.6 1.2 1.9 1 4.2 4.2 spencer 0.6 1.2 0.9 1.5 2.6 3 2.6 stays 0.2 0.4 0.5 0.4 0.4

2.1 3.6 1.4 1.8 0.8 0.8

**Female high servants**  **Female low servants**  **Working high servants** 

**Working low servants** 


#### Tab. 3. **Mean number of principal outer garments of female servants and nonservants**

Tab. 3. **Mean number of principal outer garments of female servants and nonservants** 

> **Female nonservants adj. (10- 100 Fl.)**

cloak 0.1 corset 0.1 0.3 0.1 1 1

short cloak 0.2 2 2

cloak 0.2 0.4 0.7 0.8

full dress 0.9 0.2 0.1 0.6 0.3

jacket 0.9 1.4 1.6 2.8

short cloak 0.5 0.4 0.3 2 2

fur 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.1

short shirt 0.1

overcoat 0.3

bodice 0.3 0.3 0.6 0.8 1

fur 0.3 1 0.1 0.5 0.7 gown 2.8 2.7 1 9 2.3 9 2 petticoat 2.4 4 1.9 2.8 3

skirt 1.2 2.2 3 2.3 3 3 stays 0.8 0.8 1 0.8 1 1

corset 0.9 0.4 1.6 1.1 1 1.5 1

fur 0.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 1 0.8 1 gown 4.4 5.6 1.7 9.3 4 12.3 4

petticoat 2.2 4.2 1.9 2.7 1 2 1

skirt 2.9 2 2.3 5.9 2.3 9.3 2.3 stays 0.7 1.8 0.3 1.6 1.5 2.5 1.5

bodice 1 0.7 1 0.6 0.7 0.8 cloak 0.2 1.1 0.1 0.1 corset 1 1.7 3.4 5.3 5.8 full dress 0.6 1.7 0.1 1.6 0.1 0.1

gown 3.6 4.7 1.4 0.6 1 1

overgown 1.2 2 0.4 1 0.8 0.8

1.7 1.7 2 4.3 1 0.9

**Female high servants**  **Female low servants**  **Working high servants** 

**Working low servants** 

**Year**

**1760s**

**1783/84**

**1803**

one-piece dress

**Garments** 

**Female nonservants**  **Female nonservants adj. (5,000- 10,000 Fl.)**

bodice 0.1 0.2 0.3


### Tab. 4. **Mean number of different types of gowns and jackets of female servants and non-servants**


bonnet 3.9 2.4 3.9 4.6 3.5 4.3 3.5

gloves (pair) 1 0.1 7.9 0.5 12.3 0.5 handkerchief 2.1 1.4 1.1 7.1 0.5 9.3 0.5 hat 0.3 0.3

neckerchief 4.9 7.6 6.7 8.6 4 13 4

bonnet 4 6.7 2.9 3.6 5.4 5.5 gloves (pair) 1.4 3.3 0.9 2.7 1.1 1.3

hat 0.4 1 0.4 0.3 neckerchief 0.4 0.4 6.4 0.9 1

scarf 0.7 1.3 0.6 0.2 0.1

bonnet 3 5.4 2.4 2 2.4 1 2.4 collar 0.5 2 0.2 0.2 gloves (pair) 1.1 2.2 0.8 1.3 0.4 2 0.4 handkerchief 0.4 1.8 1.8

neckerchief 2 0.2 2.4 0.8 3.2 3 3.2

scarf 0.5 0.2 0.4 0.4 shawl 1.2 1.6 0.6 1 1 1

scarf 0.1 0.2 0.6 0.8

4.4 2.8 1.7 8.6 4 8.5 4

11.6 14.7 6.4 16.9 10.4 11.3

12.4 22.6 8 23 7.2 7.2

scarf 0.2 0.1

headband 0.2

neckerchief and handkerchief

neckerchief and handkerchief

neckerchief and handkerchief

collar 0.1 0.1

handkerchief 0.1 0.3 3.1

hat 1.6 2.8 1.3 1.8

**1783/84** 

**1803** 

**1823** 


#### Tab. 5. **Mean number of accessories (headwear, gloves, neckwear) of female servants and non-servants**


jacket 0.9 1.4 1.6 2.8 jacket gown 0.9 1 0.6 0.4 0.3

commode 2.6 2.7 0.6 0.4 0.4 0.5

fourreau 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.4

chemise 1.7 1.7 2 4.3 1 0.9

fourreau 0.1 0.6 0.4 0.4 gown 0.4 1 0.2 0.2 chemise 2.1 3.6 1.4 1.8 0.8 0.8 spencer 0.6 1.2 0.9 1.5 2.6 3 2.6

Tab. 5. **Mean number of accessories (headwear, gloves, neckwear) of female servants and non-servants** 

> **Female nonservants adj. (10- 100 Fl.)**

bonnet 3.6 3.3 2.8 7 3.8 7 4.3 gloves (pair) 1 0.3 1 0.3 handkerchief 1.7 1 1.1 2 1.8 2 1.3

neckerchief 3.9 4.3 3.4 7 2 7 2.7

**Female high servants** **Female low servants**  **Working high servants** 

**Working low servants** 

**Female nonservants adj. (5,000- 10,000 Fl.)** 

0.3 0.7 0.3 0.1 0.1

0.1

0.4 1 0.1

nelson 0.3

gown 0.1 0.1

fur gown 0.3

0.2

**Articles Female** 

morning cap 0.2

neckerchief and handkerchief **nonservants** 

0.1

sack 0.1

bedgown 0.1

0.2

volante gown

commode gown

commode fur

> contouch e

commod e

**1803** 

**1823** 

**Year** 

**1760s** 


Graph. 1. **The presence of different fabrics in the principal outer garments of female servants and non-servants in 1823** 

Graph 2. **Mean number of patterns and decorations in the principal outer garments of female servants and non-servants, 1760-1823 (10=1)** 


#### Tab. 6. **The condition of principal outer garments of female servants and nonservants**

Tab. 6. **The condition of principal outer garments of female servants and nonservants** 

> **Female nonservants adj. (10- 100 Fl.)**

**Female high servants** 

bad 0.4 0.4 1.3 1 old 2.8 4.3 1.4 1 3.3 1 3.7 ordinary 0.3 0.3 worn out 0.3 1.5 1.7

bad 0.2 0.5 old 1.9 1.6 2.3 2.9 0.8 3.8 1.8

old 1.1 1.1 2.2 2.4 ordinary 0.1 0.7 0.3 1 1.1 ripped 0.2 0.3

old 0.9 0.4 2.5 1.8 1.2 1.2 ordinary 2.2 1.8 0.3 4 4 worn out 2.3 2.8 9 2.8

**Female low servants** **Working high servants** 

**Working low servants** 

**Year** 

**1760s** 

**1783/84** 

**1803** 

**1823** 

**Condition**

**Female nonservants** 

ripped 0.1 0.3 worn out 0.5 1 0.3

**Female nonservants adj. (5,000- 10,000 Fl.)** 

Graph. 1. **The presence of different fabrics in the principal outer garments of female servants and non-servants in 1823** 

Graph 2. **Mean number of patterns and decorations in the principal outer garments of female servants and non-servants, 1760-1823 (10=1)** 

Campbell, Colin. 1993. "Understanding traditional and modern patterns of consumption in eighteenth-century England: a character-action approach." In *Consumption and the world of goods*, ed. John Brewer, and Roy Porter, 40-57.

Chaloupek, Günther, Peter Eigner, and Michael Wagner. 1991. *Wien Wirtschaftsgeschichte 1740-1938: Teil 1: Industrie*. Vol. 1. Wien: Jugend und Volk

De Vries, Jan. 1993. "Between purchasing power and the world of goods. Understanding the household economy in early modern Europe." In *Consumption and the world of goods*, ed. John Brewer, and Roy Porter, 85-132.

De Vries, Jan. 1994. "The Industrial Revolution and the Industrious Revolution."

De Vries, Jan. 2008. *The Industrious Revolution. Consumer behavior and the household* 

Deneke, Berward. 1965. "Zu zwei Schnürmieder des 18. Jahrhunderts." *Waffen- und* 

Eder, Franz X. 1995. "Gesindedienst und geschlechterspezifische Arbeitsorganisation in Salzburger Haushalten des 17. Und 18. Jahrhunderts." In *Gesinde im 18. Jahrhundert*, ed. Gotthardt Frühsorge, Rainer Gruenter, and Beatrix Freifrau Wolff Metternich, 12:41-68. Studien zum achtzehnten Jahrhundert. Hamburg:

Gugitz, Gustav. 1902. "Die Wiener Stubenmädchenlitteratur von 1781: Ein Beitrag zur Josephinischen Broschüren- und zur Dienstbotenlitteratur." *Zeitschrift für* 

Hahn, Hans Peter. 2014. *Materielle Kultur: Eine Einführung*. 2nd rev. ed. Berlin:

Hampel, Gertraud. 1962. *Beiträge zur Geschichte der Kleiderordnungen mit besonderer Berücksichtigung Österreichs*. Wien: Verlag des wissenschaftlichen Antiquariats H.

Hampel, Lucie. 1974. "Einige Kleiderordnungen der Zeit 1724 bis 1796 in Österreich." In *Wien zur Zeit von Franz Anton Maulbertch: 34. Sonderausstellung des Historischen Museums der Stadt Wien*, 16-17. Wien: Eigenverlag der Museen der

Heiden, Max. 1904. *Handwörterbuch der Textilkunde aller Zeiten und Völker*. Stuttgart:

Hochedlinger, Michael. 2001. "Archivarischer Vandalismus? Zur Überlieferungsgeschichte frühneuzeitlicher Testamente und Verlassenschaftsabhandlungen in

Jones, Jennifer M. 1994. "Repackaging Rousseau. Femininity and fashion in Old

Jones, Jennifer M. 2013. "Gender and eighteenth-century fashion." In *The Handbook of Fashion Studies*, ed. Sandy Black, Amy De la Haye, Joanne Entwistle, Agnès Rocamora, Regina A. Root, and Helen Thomas, 121-36. London-New York:

*economy, 1650 to the present*. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

London: Routledge.

Verlagsgesellschaft.

London: Routledge.

*Kostümkunde* 24, 1: 14-23.

Felix Meiner Verlag.

Geyer.

Enke.

Stadt Wien.

Bloomsbury.

*Bücherfreunde* 6, 1: 137-50.

Dietrich Reimer Verlag.

Österreich." *Archivalische Zeitschrift* 84, 1: 289-364.

Regime France." *French Historical Studies* 18, 4: 939-67.

*The Journal of Economic History* 54, 2: 249-70.

Graph. 3. **Mean number of decorations in the accessories (headwear, gloves, neckwear) of female servants and non-servants, 1760-1823 (10=1)** 

# **BIBLIOGRAPHY**


Graph. 3. **Mean number of decorations in the accessories (headwear, gloves, neckwear) of female servants and non-servants, 1760-1823 (10=1)** 

Barnard, Malcolm. 2014. *Fashion theory. An introduction*. London-New York:

Beaurdy, Mary C. 2003. "Words for things. Linguistic analysis of probate inventories." In *Documentary archaeology in the New World*, ed. Mary C. Beaurdy, 43-

Berg, Maxine. 2005. *Luxury and pleasure in eighteenth-century Britain*. Oxford: Oxford

Berg, Maxine, and Elisabeth Eger. 2003. "The rise and fall of the luxury debates." In *Luxury in the eighteenth-century. Debates, desires and delectable goods*, ed. Maxine

Braudel, Fernand. 1981. *Civilization and capitalism, 15th-18th century. The structures of everyday life. The limits of the possible*. Translated by Siân Reynolds. Vol. 1. London:

Buxbaum, Gerda. 1986. *Mode aus Wien, 1815-1938*. Salzburg-Wien: Residenz Verlag.

Berg, and Elisabeth Eger, 7-27. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan.

50. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

**BIBLIOGRAPHY** 

University Press.

Routledge.

Collins.


THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 287

North, Michael. 2004. "Kultur und Konsum - Luxus und Geschmack um 1800." In *Geschichte des Konsums: Erträge der 20. Arbeitstagung der Gesellschaft für Sozial- und Wirtschaftsgeschichte 23.-26. April 2003 in Greifswald*, ed. Rolf Walter, 17-33.

North, Michael. 2008. *'Material Delight and the Joy of Living': Cultural Consumption in the Age of Enlightenment in Germany*. Translated by Pamela Selwyn. Farnham: Ashgate

Ogilvie, Sheilagh. 2010. "Consumption, social capital and the 'Industrious Revolution' in early modern Germany." *The Journal of Economic History* 70, 2: 287-

Overton, Mark, Jane Whittle, Darron Dean, and Andrew Hann. 2004. *Production and consumption in English households, 1600-1750*. London-New York: Routledge.

Pietsch, Johannes. 2017. "A robe à l'anglaise retroussé." In *Fashioning the Early Modern. Dress, textiles, and innovation in Europe, 1500-1800*, ed. Evelyn Welch, 83-

Pohl, Carl Ferdinand, and Hugo Botstiber. 1927. *Joseph Haydn*. Vol. 3. Leipzig:

Prinz, Michael. 2003. "Aufbruch in den Überfluss? Die englische "Konsumrevolution" des 18. Jahrhunderts im Lichte der neueren Forschung." In *Der lange Weg in den Überfluss: Anfänge und Entwicklung der Konsumgesellschaft seit* 

Rautenstrauch, Johann. 1781. *Über die Stubenmädchen in Wien. O tempora! O mores!*

Reith, Reinhold. 2015. *Das Verlassenschaftsinventar des Salzburger Tuch- und Seidenhändlers Franz Anton Spängler von 1784*. Salzburg: Stadtarchiv und Statistik

Ribeiro, Aileen. 2002. *Dress in eighteenth-century Europe 1715-1789*. New Haven-

Richter, Josef. 1917. *Die Eipeldauer Briefe, 1785-1797*, ed. Eugen Paunel. Vol. 1.

Richter, Josef. 1918. *Die Eipeldauer Briefe, 1799-1813*, ed. Eugen Paunel. Vol. 2.

Riello, Giorgio, and Prasannan Parthasarathi, eds. 2009. *The spinning world. A global* 

Roche, Daniel. 1987. *The people of Paris. An essay in popular culture in the 18th century*. Translated by Marie Evans and Gwynne Lewis. New York: Berg Publishers

Roche, Daniel. 1994. *The culture of clothing. Dress and fashion in the "Ancien Régime."*

*history of cotton textiles, 1200-1850*. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Translated by Jean Birrell. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

*der Vormoderne*, ed. Michael Prinz, 191-217. Paderborn-Wien: Schöningh. Purdy, Daniel. 2003. "Modejournale und die Entstehung des bürgerlichen Konsums im 18. Jahrhundert." In *Der lange Weg in den Überfluss: Anfänge und Entwicklung der Konsumgesellschaft seit der Vormoderne*, ed. Michael Prinz, 219-30. Paderborn-Wien:

Pezzl, Johann. 1787a. *Skizze von Wien*. Vol. 1. Wien-Leipzig: Krauß. Pezzl, Johann. 1787b. *Skizze von Wien*. Vol. 4. Wien-Leipzig: Krauß.

Stuttgart: Franz Steiner Verlag.

86. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Publishing Limited.

Breitkopf & Härtel.

Schöningh.

Salzburg.

Limited.

Vienna: Sebastian Hartl.

London: Yale University Press.

München: Georg Müller.

München: Georg Müller.

325.


Jordan, John, and Gabi Schopf. 2017. "Fictive descriptions? Words, textiles, and inventories in early modern Switzerland." In *Inventories of textiles - textiles in inventories. Studies on late medieval and early modern material culture*, ed. Thomas Ertl,

Junker, Almut, and Eva Stille. 1988. *Geschichte der Unterwäsche, 1700-1960*. Frankfurt

Karner, Regina. 2014. "Zylinder, Frack und Kreuzbandschuhe: Mode der Zeitwende." In *Der Wiener Kongress: Die Erfindung Europas*, ed. Thomas Just, Wolfang Maderthaner, and Helene Maimann, 202-17. Wien: Carl Gerold's Sohn

Katsiardi-Hering, Olga. 2003. *Artisans and cotton-yarn dying methods. From Thessaly to Central Europe (18th to the beginning of the 19th century)*. Athens-Ampelakia:

Kauffmann, Kai. 1994. *«Es ist nur ein Wien!» Stadtbeschreibungen von Wien 1700 bis 1873: Geschichte eines literarischen Genres der Wiener Publizistik*. Wien-Köln-Weimar:

Kaut, Hubert. 1970. *Modeblätter aus Wien: Mode und Tracht von 1770 bis 1914*. Wien-

Klier, Karl M. 1950. "Die Bekleidung unbekannter Toter in Wien in der ersten Hälfte des 19. Jahrhunderts: II. Frauen." *Österreichische Zeitschrift für Volkskunde* 4,

Krünitz, Johann Georg. *Oekonomische Encyklopädie Oder Allgemeines System Der Staats-*

Lemire, Beverly. 2000. "Second-hand beaux and 'red-armed belles'. Conflict and the creation of fashions in England, c.1660-1800." *Continuity and Change* 15, 3: 391-

Lemire, Beverly. 2016. "Introduction: fashion and the practice of history: a political legacy." In *The force of fashion in politics and society. Global perspectives from early modern to contemporary times*, ed. Beverly Lemire, 1-18. London-New York: Routledge. Lemire, Beverly, and Giorgio Riello. 2008. "East & West. Textiles and fashion in

Loschek, Ingrid. 1999. *Reclams Mode- und Kostümlexikon*. Stuttgart: Philip Reclam.

Maurer, Michael. 1995. "Dienstmädchen in adligen und bürgerlichen Hauhalten." In *Gesinde im 18. Jahrhundert*, ed. Gotthardt Frühsorge, Rainer Gruenter, and Beatrix Freifrau Wolff Metternich, 12:161-87. Hamburg: Felix Meiner Verlag

McKendrick, Neil, John Brewer, and J. H. Plumb. 1982. *The birth of a consumer society. The commercialization of eighteenth-century England*. London: Europa Publications

Mittenzwei, Ingrid. 1998. *Zwischen Gestern und Morgen: Wiens frühe Bourgeoisie an der* 

Nienholdt, Eva. 1961. *Kostümkunde*. Braunschweig: Klinkhardt & Biermann.

Böhlau (Literatur in der Geschichte, Geschichte in der Literatur 29).

*Stadt- Haus- Und Landwirthschaft*. http://www.kruenitz1.uni-trier.de/.

early modern Europe." *Journal of Social History* 41, 4: 887-916.

*Meyers Großes Konversationslexikon* (6th edition, 1905-1909).

*Wende vom 18. zum 19. Jahrhundert*. Wien: Böhlau.

https://www.woerterbuchnetz.de/Meyers.

(Studien zum achtzehnten Jahrhundert).

and Barbara Karl, 219-38. Wien: Vienna University Press.

am Main: Historisches Museum Frankfurt.

Verlagsbuchhandlung KG.

München: Jugend und Volk.

Herodotus.

3-4: 118-35.

417.

Limited.


THE APPEARANCE OF VIENNESE FEMALE SERVANTS 289

Wirtz, Rainer. 1996. "Kontroversen über den Luxus im ausgehenden 18. Jahrhundert." *Jahrbuch für Wirtschaftsgeschichte / Economic History Yearbook* 37, 1:

Zander-Seidel, Jutta. 2002. *Kleiderwechsel: Frauen-, Männer- und Kinderkleidung des 18. Bis 20. Jahrhunderts*. Nürnberg: Verlag des Germanischen Nationalmuseums.

165-76.


Rumpler, Helmut. 2005. *Eine Chance für Mitteleuropa: Bürgerliche Emanzipation und* 

Samida, Stefanie, Manfred K. H. Eggert, and Hans Peter Hahn, ed. 2014. *Handbuch Materielle Kultur: Bedeutungen, Konzepte, Disziplinen*. Stuttgart Weimar: Verlag J. B.

Sandgruber, Roman. 1982. *Die Anfänge der Konsumgesellschaft: Konsumverbrauch, Lebensstandard und Alltagskultur in Österreich im 18. und 19. Jahrhundert*. Wien:

Sandgruber, Roman. 2005. *Ökonomie und Politik: Österreichische Wirtschaftsgeschichte vom* 

Sarti, Raffaella. 2005. "The true servant. Self-definition of male domestics in an Italian city (Bologna, 17th-19th centuries)." *The History of the Family* 10, 4: 407-33. Sassatelli, Roberta. 2007. *Consumer culture. History, theory and politics*. London: Sage

Shammas, Carole. 1990. *The pre-industrial consumer in England and America*. Oxford:

Springschitz, Leopoldine. 1949. *Wiener Mode im Wandel der Zeit: Ein Beitrag zur* 

Stöger, Georg. 2014. "Urban markets for used textiles. Examples from eighteenthcentury Central Europe." In *Selling textiles in the long eighteenth century. Comparative perspectives from Western Europe*, ed. Jon Stobart, and Bruno Blondé, 210-25.

Strohmayr, Franz. 1813. *Versuch einer physisch-medicinischen Topographie von der landesfürstlichen Kreisstadt St. Pölten in Niederösterreich*. Wien-St. Pölten: Aloys Doll. Styles, John. 2007. *The dress of the people: Everyday fashion in eighteenth-century England*.

Styles, John. 2017. "Fashion and innovation in Early Modern Europe." In *Fashioning the early modern. Dress, textiles, and innovation in Europe, 1500-1800*, ed. Evelyn

Styles, John. 2019. "Fibres, fashion and marketing. Textile innovation in Early Modern Europe." In *Cotton in context. Manufacturing, marketing, and consuming textiles in the German-speaking world (1500-1900)*, ed. Kim Siebenhüner, John Jordan, and Gabi Schopf, 4:35-60. Wien-Köln-Weimar: Böhlau Verlag (Ding,

Trentmann, Frank. 2012. "Introduction." In *The Oxford handbook of the history of consumption*, ed. Frank Trentmann. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Trentmann, Frank. 2016. *Empire of things. How we became a world of consumers from the* 

Vickery, Amanda. 1993. "Women and the world of goods. A Lancashire consumer and her possessions, 1751-81." In *Consumption and the world of goods*, ed. John

Vickery, Amanda. 2013. "Mutton dressed as lamb? Fashioning age in Georgian

Simmel, Georg. 1904. "Fashion." *The International Quarterly* 10: 130-55.

*Staatsverfall in der Habsburgermonarchie*. Wien: Ueberreuter.

Verlag für Geschichte und Politik.

*Mittelalter bis zur Gegenwart*. Vienna: Ueberreuter.

*Kulturgeschichte Alt-Wiens*. Wien: Wiener Verlag.

New Haven-London: Yale University Press.

Welch, 33-55. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

*fifteenth century to the twenty-first*. London: Allen Lane.

England." *Journal of British Studies* 52, 4: 858-86.

Brewer, and Roy Porter, 274-301. London: Routledge.

Metzler.

Publications.

Clarendon Press.

London: Palgrave Macmillan.

Materialität, Geschichte).

