100 Years of British Royal Fashion | Glamour 

I agree. By wearing that dress; Diana said to Charles "Up yours, jackass!"

Ikr

It’s really not

Not really.

i highly disagree. the worst era and worst woman alive😊😊

Sora Sora I honestly don't see it.

And then there was her wedding dress... bloody awful

@@katiebayliss9887 YOu have to distinguish between nomarl fashion and royal fashion it is not the same! Dianas was praised for a good symbiose between these two.

kidaria if royal fashion is the boring stuff the queen and Kate wear, I prefer the look of “peasants”.

@@sazzieb1 that was decades ago duh

Non-existent

congrats im ur 1000th like

They’re Um Basically making the shoulders not have much of a slope but don’t do anything else I’m grasping for straws here 😂😅

They tried their best

Its honestly kinda visible in the picture but i cant see crap on the model, but its just an representation, so its fine i guess

Lol

lol ikr

Ah, you know the pain too

Who cares

@@saxarlasamatar2516 I do?..

they said that in the video.

Neon green

@@MrMusickey lol no

@@iris3865 its a bright color tho. But not exactly cloth color that the queen would wear.

@@youreasimp7573a queen can’t really were neon...

That dress screamed "F*** you, Charles!" Love it!

She looked so hot!

Really looking forward to seeing this next season in The Crown, since they'll be introducing Princess Di in the latter episodes of S3.

LoveLife do u know what is iconic? Every Freddie Mercury outfit

That dress was so elegant and classy. I’d wish that they’d still be selling dresses like that today

(with facts we didn't even bother to google)

@@lucia5227 Haha

is that..bad..? i mean, sure, takes out some of the creativity, but im far happier they did this rather than showing real pictures of the era and a model with a completely inaccurate look

@@theamydim I would definitely prefer for them to be accurate, so, I don't really mind, but you've got to admit, they were recreated

I know right

Her fashion is timeless like her sisters!

Not much of a fashion icon.

So did i

Particularly her First time Trousers.

Actually the woman in the 60s reference picture was Princess Margaret, they just didn't credit her. And she was much more fashionable than her in the 60s, so I'm not surprised...

Camilla Nyberg their cheapos

I was thinking the same

I know, right?!

Yeah, that really bothered me too. :(

Look at the model's face, even _she_ looks embarrassed by the choice...

but including wallis”nazifuxker” simpson in when they weren’t married until after edward abdicated

Princess Anne is quite underrated

Couldn't agree more. Princess Anne has been seen wearing the same outfits decades apart, something I think many people can't appreciate. They also missed Sophie, the Countess of Wessex (now Duchess of Edinburgh) and Princesses Beatrice and Eugenie and Lady Louise.

It does

Lmao i can't unsee that now

fr!

Truee cause her real dress had more effort

WDYM??

Right!!

Unearned titles shouldn't exist. Mrs. Elizabeth Windsor is her name

@@KateeAngel huh 👁👄👁

@@KateeAngel bruh, just stay quiet

@@KateeAngel what

Princess Margaret is shown as the 1960s and when she was young was definitely fashionable, but Princess Anne has never been considered stylish (shown as the 1970s). In fact, she's probably the one in the family least bothered about fashion and is known for keeping clothes for decades to rewear. Even when it comes to Royal weddings she rarely wears something new. She's ultimately practical when it comes to clothes, but not fashionable. She's kept her hair the same all her adult life. She was truly beautiful on her wedding day though when she married Mark Phillips and glowed as every bride should.

@@wilmaknickersfit Fair enough on Princess Anne. They still dissed Princess Margaret, though!

@@margaretyates3925 I agree! I thought they could have made so much more effort to show Margaret's style. Until Diana came along Margaret was the best dressed.

Princess Margaret’s style was and will always be better than the Queen’s. I’m not saying the queen has the worst or excellent style, however adequate. If the US had Marilyn Monroe & Audrey Hepburn as a fashion icon during their times, the UK had Princess Margaret

@@tristangeneral4839 Margaret actually wore Dior's New Look...instead of having it replicated by dull British designers.

Yeah they should have showed examples of both

Leanne G at least the outfits were accurate... as apposed to they’re previous vids which tried to get away with inspired outfits

Yasss

yeah, that's the problem with almost all of those 100 years of... videos. They'll rarely consistent.

Plus adding Diana's scandalous little black dress. So what's that, "how people dressed in the decade" or "what captured most attention in the decade"?

Hahahahahahahahaha

Yuck

HAHAHAH

ngl sometimes i like umbridge-- (minus her torturing students)

I hate Umbridge with all my life

@African Princess In fact, I didn't say it was invented in France. I said it was invented far before. And then I gave an example. We found something that looked like a choker, made of shells in eastern Africa in -40 000. So I assume it's even older than that.

Interesting that they were called 'dog collars" or "slave collars" in French They really look like that, but prettier when worn with dresses

The scary thing is- "esclave" means slave and "chien" means dog in french.

@@fakename3440 Yes ! But we also know jewelry featuring dogs were gifted as a symbol of loyalty to your loved one, since 14th century, so it gives a context. As for the "slave" thing. It's a really old theme, far before slavery. History is contexts ! :)

HNP her style is boring af

She is gorgeous and refined. Love her style. Keeps to the dress restrictions and adds her own signature pizzazz.

Always like the way she dresses too.

She literally wears the same clothes in different colours

@@ailasomething1209 that's called "having a style", you're welcome.

Her clothes look terribly dated now, but she had the figure to carry them off.

@@alisonbryant5799 well, not really. 70s-80s-90s- fashion is becoming way more popular.

She wears the same styles all the time and only changes the colours. She has two styles of shoes and one style of bag. Been that way for probably at least 30 years now.

BuddyBontheNet so surely they would know what she wears otherwise where’s the research going?

@@frog7195 I'm not sure what you mean?

BuddyBontheNet since she wears the same style of clothing all the time the people, if they did their research, would know what clothes to put her in

it was also awkward that they had the floral skirt, when she exclusively wears monochrome

Ø9 on no ø me no up

Yup. Her beauty was overshadowed the queen herself.

If she was still alive I think Our generation (z) we would hype her like she was a baddass princess

@@saragalliard2532 But Queen Elizabeth, IMHO, always looks frumpy no matter what she wore.

.... They have a name

@@Pharaoh_Tutankhamen who is they? Lmao. There's only it.

@@celineeeey You mean the creepy clown?

@@Pharaoh_Tutankhamen bro wut

@@celineeeey I guess not then...

me too!! my favorites definitely.

I was just about to leave a comment stating that Wallis Simpson was not a royal. But you beat me to it. 🙂

Fr

@@junealyea6761 Haha yeah... not that I meant it in a petty way, but it's not really any indicator of actual royal fashion :P

She was never given the HRH designation, so she was not royal.

I found that odd too. I do think there’s definitely a place for her when talking about fashion trends and influences, but I’d rather see her influence explored in a video about non-royal upper-class or socialite fashion.

Ashleigh Harris yes

It should be her majesty the queen. Officially, her first name isn’t included in her title. Either queen Elizabeth II, (II is pretty important there, cause there was a first) as in, when you’ll mention her in a book, like ‘queen Elizabeth II was also present on that day’ or ‘her majesty the queen is going fishing today’ when you mention her as in, in the present day.

I think the people commenting know more about the royals than Glamour does. :-D

Does it matter? You know who they're talking about and it's not anything official so who cares?

@@Firenzell01 157 people care till now

The videos imply that it was believed she invented the choker, not that she actually did. There's no need to be offended by something so trivial.

It said she is “credited” for inventing it not that she actually did. also, I think it means popularized

@@elamplough1 On the other hand, it is a little offensive that people are credited with creating things they did not actually create. I still agree with you, though.

I felt the same way about the little black dress comment, too.

@@janamonji she really did make it popular tho?? wdym

She’s only in a few of the decades. Did you watch the same video I did?

Queen Elizabeth was crowned in 1953

…

i know right! i think maybe they meant popularized it? i laughed ALOT when they said that. then when and looked at egyptian queens, who also wore chokers lol

Euros will take credit for anything

@@Mai-sx3yf that's xenophobic.

i thought the same thing! she popularized it into western society way back in the late 19th centuries as well mainly to cover up a scar on her neck. but wtv i guess she “invented it”

@@mms2855 why because I’m telling the truth?

Me

Meeeeeee

Thank you! I thought I was the only one who noticed that.

yah its been around since Africa/Egypt but she popularised it as a symbol of rebellious femininity in a time where fenale independence was frowned apon. come on guys its a slightly shorter necklace- why are we grasping at straws for "cultural appropriation"?

archaeology shows it goes back and LOT longer. Cross culturally. Makes sense folks would want to highlight the neckline for literally ever.

Black White been around before that buddy, earliest signs of jewelry dates back to ancient northern europe. White people invented it, then took it with them when they went on conquest.

I think the right way of saying it is that Alexandra popularized it in Britain.

yeah, where's Queen victoria's son? he was the ruler until the 1950's

OMG same I literally love her

Yeeeees

We love our memaw

I thought the same thing, ha ha! Someone should post her a link.

Yes! Mom come review it!

Sean Go and yah know- inaccurate styling/jewelry.

Also notice how the makeup shade of lipstick is inaccurate to the historic time periods. Hot pink lipstick in 1910 didn't even exist.n periods after that. Other shades used in this video are unrealistic to the Era in time. I rather see no lipstick for 1910 vs hot pink. All that effort. N no one in the glam team realized this simple but major mistake. Frustrating how so many ppl who watch this video will have a false impression. Due to the mistakes made. No one did the research needed.

Right? You’d think a company like Glamour with over a million subscribers would know better.

Erin Grz. Just because 500+ people and myself hold certain things to a higher standard doesn’t mean we aren’t “relaxed”.

And those awful fake plastic pearls.

No, she is not. I'm pretty sure no disabled people are going around saying how Queen Alexandra is their hero for covering up a scar. There are hundreds of other disabled icons to look up to who have accomplished far greater things through their own ability than just having the luck to be born into a royal family.

News to me

A lot of royals all over Europe used to have chronic illnesses and disabilities in 18th and 19th century because of insistence to marry royals and they ended up marrying their distant cousins.

George V Queen Alexandria was also deaf. Alexandria was highly popular during her lifetime, she was very active in public life, and her deafness was also fairly well known. Although her father was later the King of Denmark at the time of her birth and throughout her childhood she was just a member of a minor branch of the royal family. Her family lived like minor nobles, while still better then most, was not the high life; she even made her own clothes. She was an incredible interesting, strong, and complex women and what she accomplished should not be dismissed because because she was royal.

George V she meant icon as in we stan 😀

Little Tooth Well she was denied Her Royal Highness status attached to her title. So she definitely was not made royal to her marriage to King Edward VIII.

To be accurate... he was not exiled because of Wallis (though she was not liked by the family at all) but because he was a former monarch and thus could be a threat to the current king, and because he had dubious ties with fascists (which by all accounts is the real reason he was pushed to abdicate- since Edwards hated the idea and actuality of being king, though he loved the perks, he saw Wallis as is ticket out).

M. S. And she never actually loved him, once he abdicated she was kind of forced into the marriage. Although she too loved the trappings, she just didn’t like the royals, her last husband included.

Omg soooo real

Ingrid Dubbel came here to say the same thing.

Thank you! Was gonna put this too

Every time an american gets involved with our royal family, trouble happens

@@edmundprice5276 *smirks* Isn't that the truth? Maybe if you all would relax about Americans getting involved with your royal family, there wouldn't be as much trouble. ;D

She married one (ditto with the Queen Mum, Kate Middleton, and Meghan Markle), so I guess that's what qualifies her. I take issue with her inclusion b/c she and her husband were (to put it mildly) personas non gratas (sp?) with the Royal Family.

Since when has Glamour ever done anything right in these 100 years of fashion videos

You can't do vintage fashion correctly without the correct undergarments, full stop. Without proper support and shaping, outer garments are going to look like crap.

BRO I WAS THINKING THE EXACT SAME THING

its only about royal family, bruh. and korean v line chin is not even a fashion you know people have different face types?

Well sure, the rest were wretched. The inaccuracies in these videos really irritate me. They need a real historian to be on these, it’s so low budget.

Cerys Winchester I agree! At the least that outfit looks royal

Why would she? She’s American.

@@DGsWorldByBigD exactly

@@DGsWorldByBigD yeah but put her on a video about british fashion was a quite dumb

@@DGsWorldByBigD because it was her duty as someone who has a british peer title

So what it it's Hugo Boss - it's still royal fashion and her signature style, that was the point.

Aulia A Wallis Simpson wasn’t even considered a royal

Thank you! It looked like Glamour's shot at the royals.

@@user-mv9tt4st9k Isn't Glamour an American publication?

Well, she wasn't born in royal but she had royal husband.. so literally, she is "royal.. in law.." ?

Aulia A So much for the fashion history you know. Wallis WAS a trendsetter and many fashion designers acknowledged her as such, it's not just their impression. It doesn't matter if you like her or not or what she did, she was highly fashionable and sophisticated (her jewellery collection is especially admired)

I think that would be Princess Margaret!

it's timeless but it's been kind of boring recently. most of what i've been seeing are the same outfits in different colors. i feel like her style changed a ton during covid and she started dressing in solid colored clothing. it's pretty and all but after a while, it feels kind of repetitive.

I was looking for someone to say this or similar. Or what about their moves?? Was non royalty at all. If your are representing a princess or the Queen of England, act like that.

And The 1970s one where Queen Elizabeth 2nd wore Trousers for the first time to Modernise her style.

She’s an American but has nice fashion senses

She looked like an angel on that. Really sad what happened to her after this wedding

Opp Loppppp pppp 0 padabatang batang P pada p

Learning that Princess Diana's wedding dress had a train that was a dizzying twenty-five feet in length left me wondering "How on earth did she not end up having to bunny hop her way down the aisle of St. Paul's Cathedral?"

Nithya Shree exactly

You know that it’s not queen Alexandra’s fault that this video is dumb, do you?

YES!

Maria Theresa Laurent Eh Brits arrived in India in 1612, two hundred years before you are suggesting. That may change the outcome if you consider Europeans generally wearing chokers in the 18th century

Some british lady came to india then the indians started wearing it to, in fact the indians copied

Rule Britannia?

It’s Rule Britannia played on an electric guitar

Thanks !!

We all do..she was an angel.

We all miss the princess.

Lady Di was fantastic! The only really noble soul in the royal family in 80-s....

We ALL do.....😢🌹

I often wonder what she would be doing now if she were still here.

they made it look like modern people should wear short skirts, dresses etc. i agree with you.

It's like they totally ignore the effect Hollywood and films have on fashion.

It was actually Coco Chanel

2:25 lemon hair :]

N my favorite definitely is Kate Middleton 😃😃😃