{"id":59979,"date":"2020-07-14T14:10:56","date_gmt":"2020-07-14T18:10:56","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/blog.genealogybank.com\/?p=59979"},"modified":"2025-02-14T14:17:56","modified_gmt":"2025-02-14T19:17:56","slug":"our-puritan-ancestors-fashion-war-against-womens-hair-styles-and-headdresses","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.genealogybank.com\/blog\/our-puritan-ancestors-fashion-war-against-womens-hair-styles-and-headdresses.html","title":{"rendered":"Our Puritan Ancestors\u2019 Fashion War against Women\u2019s Hair Styles and Headdresses"},"content":{"rendered":"

Introduction:<\/em><\/strong> In this article, Melissa Davenport Berry describes how Puritan fashion laws in the Massachusetts Bay Colony tried to control women\u2019s clothing, hair styles and headdresses \u2013 without much success. <\/em>Melissa is a genealogist who has a website, americana-archives.com<\/a><\/em>, and a Facebook group, New England Family Genealogy and History<\/a><\/em>.<\/em><\/p>\n

Author\u2019s Note:<\/em><\/strong> A few months back, I wrote about how residents in the Massachusetts Bay Colony (1628\u20131691) waged a war in the name of fashion. (See: Our Puritan Ancestors: Mass Bay Residents Waged a Fashion War in the Colony<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Well, they did not stop with apparel: our Puritan ancestors also waged a fashion war against men\u2019s long hair, which I wrote about recently. (See: Our Puritan Ancestors\u2019 Fashion War against Long Hair<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Today we look at the women of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, and the fashion war waged against their hair styles and headdresses.<\/p>\n

Back in the 17th<\/sup> century, head fashion became a hairy scene in the Massachusetts Bay Colony. For the Puritans, strict social order and convention were necessary for survival, and any individual expression and adornment was considered both a sin and a crime. Residents who focused on fancy dress and kinky hairdos were an enemy of the state. The magistrates launched an aggressive campaign on the matter, and several ministers wigged out in sermons using Biblical references to shame their flock for defying the law of God.<\/p>\n

\"Illustration:<\/a>
Illustration: Elizabeth Clarke Freake (Mrs. John Freake) and baby Mary, artist unknown, c. 1673, showing the Puritan ideal of feminine hair style. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

The proper hair attire for women was a neat bun and cap called a cornet or Dutch coif. Any mischievous locks or flirty curls were a sure sign of evil, a \u201cwile of the devil.\u201d This bland style was not cutting it with the ladies. Sermons and court records reveal the community did not take the hair policy very seriously.<\/p>\n

The Vineland Advertiser<\/em> ran an article looking back at the history of the Massachusetts Bay Colony, including fashion laws \u2013 such as this one from 1651.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
Vineland Advertiser (Vineland, New Jersey), 24 April 1875, page 1<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Like the men, Puritan women were targeted for their puffed-up hairdos. However, they were willing to pay a high price for fashion. Several trunks landed in the Massachusetts Bay Colony, supplying all sorts of illegal garb and headdresses, including combs, ribbons, scarfs, and other contraband.<\/p>\n

In 1921, columnist Marguerite Mooers Marshall responded to readers\u2019 complaints about the current \u201cblue laws\u201d \u2013 saying, in effect, that if you think these laws are too strict, you should have seen the fashion laws the Puritans passed in the 17th<\/sup> century!<\/p>\n

Despite these laws, Marshall wrote, women in the Massachusetts Bay Colony persisted in buying and wearing the \u201cinsignia of sin\u201d which included both apparel and hair styles.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
Kalamazoo Gazette (Kalamazoo, Michigan), 5 June 1921, page 27<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Marshall wrote that the Puritan establishment believed that these fashion crimes, namely the \u201ccutting, curling, and immodest laying out of their hair,\u201d practiced by sinful residents caused the rise of Indian attacks and other misfortunes!<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
Kalamazoo Gazette (Kalamazoo, Michigan), 5 June 1921, page 27<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

One of trendsetters of the naughty girl look was the infamous Eleanor \u201cNell\u201d Gwyn (1650-1687), English stage actress and mistress to King Charles II. Many sought to emulate her sensuous hairstyles which she curled, teased, and let wild.<\/p>\n

\"Illustration:<\/a>
Illustration: Nell Gwyn, by Sir Peter Lely. Credit: Wikimedia Commons.<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

A book review of Professor Henry W. Lawrence\u2019s Not Quite Puritans<\/em> noted that Lawrence believed fashion trends that were outlawed by the Puritan fold were toppled by the late 17th century \u2013 but before freedom came, women were made to crop their sultry, sinful styles.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
Springfield Republican (Springfield, Massachusetts), 14 October 1928, page 51<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Lawrence referred to a 1682 court hearing where warrants were issued against several Massachusetts girls for \u201cfolding their hair, frizzing and knots, and for wearing silk scarves.\u201d (If you want to see details of the case, you can read the transcription in the \u201cRecords and Files of the Quarterly Courts of Essex County.\u201d)<\/p>\n

The list of these daring dames included: Martha Gay; Mary Gay; Mary Rogers, daughter of Mr. Samuel Rogers; Mary Browne; Elizabeth Browne; Abigail Metcalf; Elizabeth Perkins, wife of Luke Perkins; Martha Watton, John Webster\u2019s daughter; and Priscilla Carrell, Captain Appleton\u2019s maid. The girls were not arrested, being discharged instead \u2013 no one appeared at the hearing to give evidence against the girls.<\/p>\n

A sermon by Increase Mather in 1683 served up a stern message to these femme fatales, calling them \u201cApes of Fancy.\u201d His disapproving words rang out from the pulpit.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
Boston Recorder (Boston, Massachusetts), 30 March 1843, page 50<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Mather referenced a hair accessory known as a \u201ccommode,\u201d a wire lace frill that kept the hair erect when attached to a smaller cap. Other styles these women were sporting were called \u201cheartbreakers,\u201d which set out the hair like butterfly wings over their ears.<\/p>\n

In their attempts to control every aspect of daily life, the Puritans were concerned with all modes of personal appearance and clothing choice. The success of the Puritan fashion police who tried desperately to conform the lads and lasses of their New Jerusalem can be summed up in this article. It reported an address delivered by the Rev. Thomas Morong on 21 December 1870 for Forefather\u2019s Day in Ipswich, Massachusetts, which was a hotbed for frizzy and frisky hairstyles.<\/p>\n

\"An<\/a>
San Francisco Bulletin (San Francisco, California), 10 June 1871, page Supplement 2<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Explore over 330 years of newspapers and historical records in GenealogyBank. Discover your family story! Start a 7-Day Free Trial<\/a><\/p>\n

Further Reading:<\/strong><\/p>\n