Self Portrait in a straw hat c1787

Seeing as I seem to be drawn to the French 1790s styles I decided to go the whole hog and  look at one of the best known French portraitists of the period. This was meant to be a record of making an illustration but again the research has taken over......
 Louise Elisabeth Vigee LeBrun was a popular society artist, born  in Paris, 1755, (married Lebrun 1776, died 30 March 1842), daughter to a  portraitist.  She  had begun painting portraits professionally in her teens and  was well enough known to be invited to Versailles to paint Marie Antoinette in 1778. This was so well received that over the next 6 years she made many portraits of the Queen and her family.
She was living and working Paris during the beginning of the Revolution, but fled to Italy with her daughter.
 She was listed as a counter revolutionary and could not return, so travelled to the courts in Austria and Russia, supporting herself and daughter by her painting. When permitted she returned to France  and continued to work, although never as popular as earlier. For details of her life, picture galleries and memoirs, try http://www.batguano.com/vigee.html

Marie Antoinette, 1783

 

The style of her work is rococo, theatrical, flamboyant, light. There is often an invisible breeze lifting ribbons, moving lace and the whole is full of curving lines and implied movement. Compare with the hard eyed studies from Ingres or David, her work has a charm and intimacy. David was the artist of the revolutionaries, being involved in all sorts of ways, even designing  new egalitarian dress for the new era ( never caught on). Vigee LeBrun is always associated with the old regime, especially Marie Antoinette, not wise in 1790s France.  She painted the infamous portrait of Marie Antoinette in her chemise de la Reine that caused such an uproar when exhibited in Paris. ( considered an insult to moral decency, a mockery by a wasteful figurehead - the queen in her underwear!) The Fashion Historian's blog on this is well worth a read - http://www.thefashionhistorian.com/2012/03/chemise-la-reine.html

Looking at the catalogue of her paintings from this time the transition of ideas from the formalised regime to the newer, less rigid ideas of society are apparent. Poses and attitudes relax, clothing changes - look at the two portraits of Marie Antoinette- so do the settings. In 1779 the background is  full of heavy grandeur, of luxury, in 1783 it is roses, still full of symbolism, but without the weight, she is presented as a single individual not as a representative of the ruling class.
 

Vigee LeBrun's memoirs are full of anecdotes of her wealthy clientele, and  names  and events familiar to anyone who has studied the era or even watched the "Scarlet Pimpernel".

 

Of her  impressions of the Queen -

"It was in the year 1779 that I painted the Queen for the first time; she was then in the heyday of her youth and beauty. Marie Antoinette was tall and admirably built, being somewhat stout, but not excessively so. Her arms were superb, her hands small and perfectly formed, and her feet charming....To any one who has not seen the Queen it is difficult to get an idea of all the graces and all the nobility combined in her person. Her features were not regular; she had inherited that long and narrow oval peculiar to the Austrian nation. Her eyes were not large; in colour they were almost blue, and they were at the same time merry and kind. Her nose was slender and pretty, and her mouth not too large, though her lips were rather thick. But the most remarkable thing about her face was the splendour of her complexion. I never have seen one so brilliant, and brilliant is the word, for her skin was so transparent that it bore no umber in the painting. Neither could I render the real effect of it as I wished. I had no colours to paint such freshness, such delicate tints, which were hers alone, and which I had never seen in any other woman." 

 

No wonder she was asked to do many formal and informal portraits of the Queen and the royal family.

Of the Revolution, only 10 years later -the account of the Terror is without sentiment but conveys the growing tensions and fears, some direct some more insidious. I regret not being able to read them in the original

 

 

self portrait 1791

"At the same time I refused to paint Mlle. de Laborde (afterward Duchess de Noailles)....but it was no longer a question of success or money – it was only a question of saving one's head. I had my carriage loaded, and my passport ready, so that I might leave next day with my daughter and her governess, when a crowd of national guardsmen burst into my room with their muskets. Most of them were drunk and shabby, and had terrible faces. A few of them came up to me and told me in the coarsest language that I must not go, but that I must remain. I answered that since everybody had been called upon to enjoy his liberty, I intended to make use of mine. They would barely listen to me, and kept on repeating, "You will not go, citizeness; you will not go!" Finally they went away. I was plunged into a state of cruel anxiety when I saw two of them return. But they did not frighten me, although they belonged to the gang, so quickly did I recognise that they wished me no harm. "Madame," said one of them, "we are your neighbours, and we have come to advise you to leave, and as soon as possible. You cannot live here; you are changed so much that we feel sorry for you. But do not go in your carriage: go in the stage-coach; it is much safer." I thanked them with all my heart, and followed their good advice..."

 

 The Memoirs of Madame Vigée LeBrun
Translated by Lionel Strachey 1903

 

There is so much in these memoirs, the description of Mme Du Barry  and  her execution, of the horrors, but also of the societies in several major cities in Europe. Her account of  Napoleonic Paris is scanty, with  rather sniffy anecdotes about painting the Emperor's sister and visiting her painting of the royal family painting at Versailles -  the return of the Bourbons seemed to be much more to her taste.

Her work is very skilful but also very mannered, there seems to be a set list of poses, backgrounds and expressions, but Vigee LeBrun was a breaker of rules in her time, opening the mouth in a smile caused an uproar, yet this doesn't come across today. The research has helped to clarify and give insight, but the over riding impression I have is of her, she comes across as a bold and dynamic personality.



sketch to blocking face and tone on jacket

adding colour and building the background

My research was for a purpose - I set out to copy something of the style and pose to illustrate Gwen's new 1790 French jacket.
The self portrait above was painted  soon after the flight from Paris in 1791. She is sat at an easel poised mid painting, possibly this is the one where "No sooner had I arrived at Rome than I did a portrait of myself for the Florence gallery. I painted myself palette in hand before a canvas on which I was tracing a figure of the Queen in white crayon. "  (It does look more like a paintbrush though). She did not miss a trick, reminding a new clientele of her status as well as perhaps a tribute to Marie Antoinette whose execution she had heard of during her own escape. Vigee LeBrun is partly turned towards us, with a half smile, looking directly at the viewer. The clothing is sombre and formal but there is still that quality of movement, of  something about to be said.  These images show the evolution of my study based on the self portrait. Just to make life awkward it is in pastel...

 

 The major difficulties were trying to keep the lightness in the skin tone and working the details. I am clumsy when blending and tend to rubout the good bit while leaving the problem part behind.

balancing and adding tone and detail. close up - really should work larger.

 

Finished article - although there are still areas I would like to improve -  really must work larger or buy thinner pastels and create more pointed blending tools - rag and cottonbuds just won't do!





 

 

 

 

 

KCI French Revolution Jacket 1790

7.30 Sunday morning -  am sat having breakfast on the back doorstep. Bees are up and busy, birds have been yelling at each other for hours and all is right in my little space, for a while. The jacket is done, finished, complete. Mistimed the start today, it was an hour earlier than I thought when I got up - 6.20! On a Sunday!  So that extra time has been very useful - found some old cover buttons to dismantle and re-use on the tail pleats and then bullied the seam allowance of the bottom of the armholes into some kind of credible finish. It is now washed and dripping gently into the sink. Coffee does taste better with a clear conscience.

It began with the book - big, heavy, lots of lovely photos, BIG  photos and shiny paper.  It says "Fashion" in very big letters on the front and is a tour of the Kyoto Costume Institute collection. There is a double page dedicated to this jacket. While I didn't exactly like it,  I always stopped here.  The notes from the book and KCI website credit it as a French  jacket, red striped silk brocade, dated 1790, so during the French Revolution. The style is quite simple, masculine even, double breasted with the over large metal buttons and collar.  The ideas of the cleaner lines, of a simpler aesthetic and nature over the artificial, had been emerging since the middle of the century, think of the chemise de la Reine or the practicality of the redingote from England,  a sign of the social and cultural  upheavals.   Fashion choices became very important as the politics got dangerous; this idea of the short jacket and skirt  was seen as an egalitarian costume - ostentation was not wise  during the Terror, and clothing was a very direct way of stating allegiances and outlook. We still use clothing in the same way, groups tend to dress in similar ways, we differentiate instinctively between those who are like us and those who are  different. 
Note the red, white and blue schemes and touches in the fashion plates - wearing the tricolor was considered a good thing and stripes too were  more classless and  patriotic.

  My usual goddess was not smiling – there was no Janet Arnold  dissection of a similar jacket in the Patterns of History. I was on my own. 

The choice of fabric for the original would have been an essential part of the garment, stripes were patriotic, worn by all, and showed support for the Revolution. I had 1/2 metre of delicate girly stripe cotton fabric, in green with roses (more 1950s really) – shall we  claim it symbolises the green revolution? (unfortunately not recycled).  The lining is quite heavy off white cotton, a scrounged off- cut of unknown parentage. So, my  expectations for this jacket, a fairly close copy – but want to be more determined about stitching processes and finishing. MUST not dodge doing the 18thC sleeves. Will do the odd banana shape sleeves.

 The bodice -I  borrowed from the French Revolution escape dress  for back shapes  but  reduced the flirtiness of the peplum to make it more masculine in cut. The fronts are extended wide to allow for the overlap  and shoulders pieces will be added later. 

 All began well – did the 4 layered ladderstitch for the main seams so the whole garment was being constructed in one go.  Tried not to make them quite so tight  but it still gave a stiff finish, felt a little like scar tissue!


Then the sleeves - First the strap which completes the armhole.  The lining was cut and attached first over the shoulder, raw edges folded in, ready to go. The sleeves themselves are in 2 parts, with seams at the front and back. I made these with the  linings separate and  assembled them and the cuff detail before sewing to the bottom curve of the armhole. This part was meant to be finished like a French seam for strength and  with the raw edges encased, but in the expectation of having to undo and reposition  I left them to neaten later. Oops. 

   Then the upper part of the sleeve was tacked in place to the shoulder strap.  I still had the collar to add into the neck edge of the  sandwich. so the  top fabric  was stitched on later. A lot of stitching in a small area but very effective, and it  is neat and robust. ( Photo is of the shoulder turned inside out, spot the raw underarm section!)
 

The collar - painful. I haven't found any back views of the jacket so I borrowed from this, also at the KCI dated 1780/90.  It is very masculine, like a caped driving coat. The original jacket's collar looked to be a single thickness and rolled down to drape. It flared over the shoulders so I imagined it not sitting flat but continuing to flare at the back like the grey one's capes.

Cutting it was easier than expected I didn't manage a pinked scalloped edge but a feeble cry on facebook resulted in the loan of Janette's pinking rotary cutter - excellent new toy, zoomed round those shapes no problem! Attaching took  longer. I really needed to think ahead, the plan was to slot the collar between lining and top fabric, but the seam stitching had secured them together. Un picking, muttering and repairing, but the collar was on. I guess a canny person would have left the top inch unsewn on the back seams.

After this it was all finishing,- the top shoulder straps, buttonholes, buttons, hemming., but....
Buttonholes - been avoiding them for years.

 

It began with the Purple Caterpillar of Horror, proper thread, proper stitch, proper mess. I did try welts but the inside was a sight, Then the yellow attempt and finally the unbleached millipede. Practice did improve matters and the end results are not too shaming.

Buttons - Bought these an age ago, liked the quirkiness, but never found just the right place for them. This probably isn't it, but they were the right size and number, tonally they matched and it was 10pm. When next in town I may trawl for a more 'period' choice - but you can be sure that they will have to fit those same buttonholes.
As for the mini cover buttons - used no gadgets so went together easily and made a nice finishing touch to the back.

Being me, of course, there are areas to be improved on, solutions to be pondered and developed further but this is actually something I feel quite proud of at the moment. It does what it sets out to do;  a copy of  the KCI jacket. It was never going to be the bees knees, the back is a best guess compromise and so are the inside details. But it has gone together remarkably well - I must have learnt something over the winter!

Hit List -Sleeves-  practice the sleeve setting technique - it went together fine but the sleeve linings behave like teenagers, excessive enthusiasm followed by strops and that 'so make me' attitude. I will advise myself to be more vigilant and baste lining and outer together more firmly and retrim if necessary before putting in. I must also be more careful about keeping the seam allowances even.
Seam stitching technique - the tightly stitched seam looks lovely from the inside but the looser stitched ones work better from the outside. Need to get the stitch size and tension right and then stick to it. (I may need to find a film with no exciting bits in to watch as I sew.)

Button Stash - needs organising so that hours are not wasted looking for that elusive last match. It might help if buttons are returned to the tin but they are adventurous little things and keep turning up in little colonies in odd drawers and boxes.

 BUT (big but) at last I have made something that is as smart inside as it is outside!


Coffee has gone cold, moment of oneness is past - blackbirds are squabbling - might even have to do some housework. Later....










KCI- jacket page -http://www.kci.or.jp/archives/digital_archives/detail_34_e.html 
FASHION - A History from the 18th to the 20th Century. Vol 1 p102/3      Taschen

interesting reading - http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlearts/2013/10/15/fashion-the-french-revolution-and-a-masculinity-in-continual-crisis/

http://locutus.ucr.edu/~cathy/mg.html  - Journal de la Mode et du Gout
Caroline Weber - Queen of Fashion, what Marie Antoinette wore to the Revolution

Hogarth, Gwen and the Bedgown

When is a bedgown not a bed gown? When it is a bedgown of course! Shortgown or "Manteau de Lit", or occasionally a casaquin or caraco  ( still haven't sorted out the names of things).

1741 Hogarth painting of Elizabeth Betts. Just what is she wearing? It looks to be a silk crossover gown, simple straight neckline, odd creases at the shoulder and worn over a chemise. The sleeves are folded back, unlined, showing the lace on the chemise cuffs. I posted this in a couple of facebook groups and the consensus was either a deshabille garment, an old robe a la francaise being used for lounging-around-at-home, or a length of fabric draped on her by the artist.  

We went for the deshabille option. What a mistake! Life would have been so much easier if the artist drapery came out on top!

 

 

So research.... in trying to find deshabille examples I came across the bedgown, such a general term that all sorts of garments, functions and fabrics came into range, and the crossover was one of the fastening options.

Both from Phillip Mercier

The definitions I have found agree that it is an informal loose coat/bodice very simply made out of one block of fabric. Diderot describes them as a "kind of short clothing which the women wear to the bed, and which they keep in the morning in the fashions of 'deshabille'. "  This was the posher version, silk, fine cotton or linen, often lined and pretty. (What I would know as a dressing gown?)

Just to confuse me, the name was also being used for the common practical work clothing of most women, the shortgowns. These are everywhere in the images showing the working classes - the print after J Collett has the old hag in one.  I guess the same structure of garment was used but made from hard wearing fabric, even wool for warmth. These were not so pretty, often crossed at the front and held in place by tying the apron over the top as in the Sandby sketch.

This seems to be a very versatile garment, adaptable enough not to be out of place in any company; it could be worn by all, made of any fabric, plain or embellished, work wear or for casual home wear. The extant ones labelled “bedgown” seem to be a motley lot, some are more complex, some have drawstring waists and the neckline appears to be personal choice. The problem may be that the name started as a description of the function and then broadened to cover any similar garment.

 

 

Like all the best things the design is logical and economical and adaptable enough to be long lived – think maybe of 18^th century denims or tee-shirts? The KCI cites the influence  of imported of Japanese kimonos. These had been in demand as men's wear but were in short supply so other sources were found – like the banyan from India, popular in England.   Made from one length of fabric folded and cut into a 'T', with a centre front cut for the opening. There are no set in sleeves, and only the minimum of seams and fuss.

 

  There are several patterns, modern interpretations and original versions, available. Most have the fabric folded at the shoulderline and the basic shapes cut out of the front and back together, some show it folded side to side as well so the complete garment was cut in one go- half the measuring and quick. The shape was modified with pleats at the back and hip, or flaring skirts, with some having underarm gussets as well. Necklines could be left as the single cut or shaped as desired, and the off cuts used to extend the sleeve or as a cuff.

I even tried imagining the next part of the painting  as if it was a bedgown -  seems feasible. (why does she look so worried?)

 

Now being utterly frustrated and made cross eyed by the circular and warm fuzzy nature of the research, it was time to make....

 

 

My starting point will be instructions and illustrations from the classic document - Garsault's L'art du tailleur, published in  1769. ( the whole book is online courtesy of Bunka Gakuen Library.)  I followed it as fig 10- the cutting outline, fig 7 - the cut fabric,  fig 8 - the inside back showing centre pleat and side pleats in place, fig 9 - the front assembled, fig 11 - creating the collar and 12 shows the completed coat.

 

 

Fortunately, having tried to read a little of the original I found a real life line -  it does everything I wanted to, does it clearly and with pictures! and it's called " Making a Bedgown".

    

 

http://www.marquise.de/en/1700/howto/frauen/18mdelit.shtml .

 

  She has set out her interpretation alongside a translation of Garsault, phew indeed. Mine will be based on his description but not try to follow it exactly. Even the initial layout is a slight variation, he begins with his shoulder fold above half way – cuts the front opening up beyond the half way point to the back of the neck opening,  then re folds on the half way mark to cut the sleeve and bodice shapes. I cheated - marked halfway up the fabric length and then simply cut the opening to 2 or 3 centimetres beyond it, did the back neck cut and then folded.

The image shows the shapes drawn up on a scrap of fabric- not exactly a 'muslin' but it was a trial piece to check proportions and placement.  Red is for cutting, blue is the shoulder fold, yellow the back and side neck cuts.

Construction was very straightforward – a back box pleat from neck to waist - would allow for ease and arm movement ( if Gwen moved, or had arms) – one line of stitching. The neck had to be widened again to allow for this and the extra cuts back to the shoulder line were made then.

The most evil part was next – gussets under the armpits- Garsault calls the wedges?- I have lived most of my life in blissful ignorance of these things but no more. What was worse I wrestled them into submission and then decided to undo and reduce in size. To try to develop some empathy they are now called Horace (been reading Pratchett again).

 

There is one in there somewhere - the new game of spot the Horace.

 

I left the full width of the fabric on the skirt to make the hip pleats, so having sewn the skirt seams then folded the excess into double box pleats and sewed them in place. Fairly standard practice.  The front edge was folded back on itself to make a false robing ( G says pleats) and a small section added across the back of the neck to complete the shawl collar. The offcuts from under the sleeve were pieced and added to extend the sleeve.

 

  Hemmed it and it is done!  At its most simple this is a very easy and quick sew. Nothing fancy at all, and it gives a robust, useful  short robe. No exceptional skills or precise fitting were required so no wonder that it was so popular as workwear. The cutting layout is so straightforward and economical it would appeal to anyone on a budget. But....  Then added cuffs. Then played with fastenings, and removed them again. Then thought about aprons. Then set up a la Hogarth.                                            Why does finishing take as long as starting? It should all be downhill by now.

 

The gown feels quite alien in a way. Everything else has had to be fitted – even the sack backed pet en l'air had a tightly laced bodice lining underneath. I think mine is just a bit too long (stand Gwen on a box was the first response to that one). The fabric mix is a bit off – they are both from the pillowcase stash- but actually work very well together in black and white, hence the pencil study ( a la Ingres). 

 

  In most of the photos it is pinned or belted - and does look a bit like maternity wear, so when trying to match Hogarth's   I pinned some ties at the waist and pulled hard. Surprisingly the pulls and creases are very alike.

 

 

Key questions of the week – what was a bedgown ?   and could this have been the garment in the Hogarth painting?

 

Well I could hazard an answer to the first one but with all the usual quibbles about there being no single definitive answer that covers all eras, countries, functions.

 

As for the second -1741- were these around then? Garsault published in 1769 so they must predate then. One site said not before the 1760s, and a couple of the American ones point out how difficult it is to date or attribute accurately. These were not the kind of garments that were preserved or documented extensively. I like the practical evidence though - the pulls at the waist are horizontal and follow the same pattern as in the painting without any tweaking.

The honest answer to the second question will have to be – maybe.

 Hogarth - BBC paintings-  http://www.bbc.co.uk/arts/yourpaintings/

 http://www.marquise.de/en/1700/howto/frauen/18mdelit.shtml

http://digital.bunka.ac.jp/kichosho/file/No.225/225-0000-048.jpg

The French Revolution Dress of 1793

The finished Revolution Dress

This has been an interesting make, not just for the sewing. It has  gone in several directions so apologies for the epic saga of a post. As you can see it is not an accurate copy of the original but  apart from the proportions of the peplum, the fabric, the sleeves, the fastenings, and being adjusted to fit Gwen, it is fairly (vaguely)faithful. Well at least the skirt is. The real dress also  had history and a fascinating back story to go with it, I doubt that Gwen will ever be asked to flee from a revolution as Mrs Seymour did. She sounds like an enterprising woman but without much luck in her husbands. I have tried to find out more about her and her husband as part of the general background research but with mixed success.  The story, some sources and attempts at translation are at the bottom of this post.

The  NSCT pack went into detail about the condition of the dress, and the context of second hand clothing, its sock, as well as the history. The dress has been reworked and modified so often that there seem to be layers of stitching done in different threads and styles. It must have been an elegant garment once upon a time judging by the quality of the fabric, probably at least 3 incarnations ago. In some ways mine has done the reverse- it has been modified but often going back in time  for ideas as well as forward.


  Unfortunately the  instructions  have only really come together now that my version's made. This has been happening a lot, understanding is achieved after the event, one day I  look forward to knowing exactly what I am doing before starting...... Some things were not possible at this scale so the fine details of construction won't bear looking at. Right at the start the cut of the sleeve had too be altered to fit on the fabric and  the method of  insertion is wrong. It should not have been done as one piece but have been attached at the bottom and then the shoulder 'strap' sewn in place - ( http://americanduchess.blogspot.co.uk/2011/06/setting-18th-century-sleeves-18th.html explains it better than I can  ). The tiny tails on the original bodice also proved a nightmare - the seam allowances were bigger than the tail itself so it grew to a manageable size.  Surprises were the lack of boning, this is a soft garment, not tightly fitted or excessively shaped. There are no fastenings, it was pinned closed to the stays worn underneath, ( mine has hooks and eyes for convenience). And as for the stitching - the back seams were meant to be like the cat's whiskers diagram below, I tried it and opted for the 'not quite right whipped seam' stitch (last post) and have since decided that neither were the best option for this - the stiffest part of the whole garment were these seams - it could stand up on them! Maybe my stitching is too small and dense (first time ever...) so instead of being a time/labour saver - several redone-redone seams later it is back to where it started. I've left the sleeve seam as the whipped seam as evidence of the attempt. I don't understand the logic of this technique - why leave the ridges? why not just fold open at the seam line? The lining could still be slipstitched on to enclose the raw edges..... ummm

 The skirt did go according to plan, It has a simple pleated front with a drawstring sewn into the side seam, running through a channel around the back of the  waist to tie at  centre back. The skirt is longer  at the back than the front, (really the front is lifted at the waist) to allow for the bumroll.  Although not as exaggerated  as in the illustration below the difference between hip and waist  gives Gwen  the illusion of a more slender torso. The fabric design has also worked well for this modified version- the bold asymmetric pattern may well have swallowed the more delicate detail of the original. Some of these dramatic Georgian styles lend themselves to this, they balance tailored shapes with volume to create contrast in the silhouette. I still have a couple of mad designs left to play with - might be interesting to see how a more restrained classic Regency look works. Mind you with the development of roller printing by the 1820s some of their own fabric choices were fairly challenging.  Not bad for a pillowcase though. ( am getting urges to make self covered buttons for the front, a couple on the back seams on the waist perhaps, at the cuff?)

 

This was billed as  "A Dress of the Revolution" but is a separate bodice and skirt.

It does feel odd calling this a dress, dresses are one piece garments - top and bottom together. Apparently not always. When matching bodice and skirt  together they equal a dress.
 What it would be when the top was mixed and matched  with another skirt?  The bodice followed the same kind of construction lines as a caraco made last year - what is the defining difference between them? Or could they be interchangeable?

 

And as for the illustration - have had some fun with this - took ideas from a different style of fashion plate - June 1790,  Journal de la Mode et du Goût, ou amusemens du salon et de la toilette, and painted it  to match the Victorian bustle dress illustration. The concept is good but  did rather overexaggerate the mannered pose and face (she doesn't really look that evil first hand).
Then the Liotard Chocolate Girl,  as promised last week- with cupcake. This photograph hasn't translated very well as the pencil work is quite light and delicate. It may require another try, but the stance and the dress have worked out very nicely ( she does look a tad grumpy though).
 

                              __________________________________________________

The Seymour's story - The bare bones  - Henry Seymour married his second wife, Louise Therese  de la Martelliere, the widow of the Count of Panthou in 1775. The marriage had problems ( Mme du Barry) but in the early 1790s they had to flee to England and had their French estates seized. In escaping from Paris Louise Therese disguised herself in this dress  which had belonged to the wife of the boatman who helped them to flee.

There is a discrepancy over her name  which confused me -Louise Therese  de la Martelliere or Anne Louise Therese -the wandering 'Anne' !-  but what is clear is that the marriage, naughtiness with Mme du Barry,  and flight to England all took place. I am still not certain if they left France together or if Henry was already in England, was the marriage was on again or still off by then?    It is quite amusing finding the three of them listed on dating websites but I haven't found any portraits (only Mme du Barry), images of their houses, or  references to Mrs S. after the dress episode.  Mrs Seymour died in 1821 (or 1824)  and the dress and story were kept in the family then loaned to Castle Howard for exhibition in 1992.


Sources-

NSCT fact sheet- (gist of)
Mrs Seymour  was born  as  Louise Therese de la Martelliere. Her first husband was M. le duc de Panthou. She married Henry Seymour esq and lived  in Prunay. Husband Number 2 strayed, unable to resist the infamous Mme du Barry, a neighbour, and the couple separated early in the 1780s. In 1793 Louise fled Paris in 1793, acquiring the dress as a disguise on the way. It has been kept by the family ever since.

Dictionnaire de la noblesse ... de France

 By François Alexandre Aubert de la Chenaye Desbois

"  Louise la Martelliere, né le 31 Mai 1741, mariée, i. le 19 Septembre 1763 Guillaume de Panthou,  Chevalier, Seigneur, Patron d Elcots, Saint Frefnay, &c. ( fils aîné de Gaspard 8c de Françoife de Croifilles) Capitaine au Régiment de Piémont, Infanterie, mort le 29 Août 1768, age de 76 ans, fans postériré d une ancienne Noblefle de Normandie connue des l'an 1070. Elle a épousé, 2, le 5 Octobre 1775  Henri Seymour en Angleterre, de la branche cadette des Ducs de Sommerset  & alliée à la maison de France & d 'Angleterre " 

My very rough translation is that she was born 31 May 1741.
1. Married de Panthou  19th September 1763 (  army man, old noble family) who died 29th August 1768, aged 76.( huge age difference!)
 2.  Married  Henry Seymour 5th October 1775 ( younger branch of the family of the Duke of Somerset?)


Henry Seymour was much easier to find - on Wikipedia!
        

"Henry Seymour (21 October 1729 – 14 April 1807), a British politician.
Seymour was the eldest son of Francis Seymour, of Sherborne, Dorset. He was educated at New College. In January 1746/7, he inherited the estate of East Knoyle from his uncle, William.^[1]
In 1753, Seymour married Lady Caroline Cowper (d. 1773), daughter of William Clavering-Cowper, 2nd Earl Cowper, by whom he had two daughters:

• Caroline Seymour (31 January 1755 – 20 March 1821), married in September 1775 William Danby, of Swinton Park (b. 9 July 1752)
• Georgiana Amelia Seymour (31 Dec 1756 – ?), married on 27 September 1794 Félicité Jean Louis de Durfort, Comte de Deyme (4 March 1752 – 10 Mar 1801)

He inherited an estate at Sherborne, Dorset upon the death of his father in December 1761, and also owned estates at Redland Court, Gloucestershire, and Northbrook, Devonshire. After his father's death, he entered politics,^[1] obtaining the office of Groom of the Bedchamber on 16 February 1763 and being returned as Member of Parliament for Totnes in a by-election that year. On 17 January 1765, he resigned his office as Groom of the Bedchamber.^[2] In 1768, he was returned for Huntingdon. After buying an estate at Norton, Worcestershire, he was returned as a Whig for Evesham in 1774, but did not stand in 1780. He is only known to have addressed the House once, in 1776, supporting Fox's motion to inquire into the mismanagement of the American war.^[1]

On 5 October 1775, after the death of his first wife in 1773, he married the widow Anne Louise Thérèse, Comtesse de Panthou. By this marriage he had one son:

• Henry Seymour (1776–1849)

Seymour and his wife moved to Paris in 1778, and he soon after bought an estate at Prunay. Around 1779 or 1780, Seymour became the lover of Madame du Barry. He separated from his second wife in early 1781.^[1]
The French Revolution led him to flee France in August 1792, and he lost most of his property in that country through confiscation. He spent the rest of his life in retirement at Knoyle.^[1] Seymour is often stated to have died in 1805, but his monument in Exeter Cathedral dates from 1807.^[3] By this time, he had disposed of his estates at Sherborne, Redland, and Norton, leaving Knoyle and Northbrook to his son Henry.^"



 Knoyle - East Knoyle, small village 15 miles from Salisbury, Wiltshire. Better known as the birthplace of Sir Christopher Wren. Also interesting to note, Henry was resident in France while being MP for Evesham.... Seems a rather sketchy career- goes through several estates, (sub leasing Knoyle - bought by son after 1843)- probably most famous as one of Mme du Barry's many lovers (adore the notion of her being banished to a nunnery - so mediaeval!).