Old-School Royal Outfits That Wouldn't Fly Today

The British royal family members are no strangers to big fashion moments. From Princess Catherine's stunning wedding gown to Princess Diana's iconic revenge dress, high-ranking individuals in England's most famous family have long made a splash in the style world. But, just because the royals have had an indelible impact on global trends does not mean that their clothing choices always remain fashionable.

Back in the 16th century, Queen Elizabeth I made corsets so popular that even men wore them to shape their figures. Three hundred years later, during the happier days prior to her beloved husband's death, Queen Victoria was known to wear elaborate dresses that fell over a cumbersome bustle. Even Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother enjoyed wearing unusual pieces, including crown-like headbands, during her youth. Indeed, despite royal efforts to maintain a timeless sense of fashion, these public figures have a history of sporting the styles of a particular time.

Because of this, it is only inevitable that many royal outfits from the past would not be considered acceptable today. While some items defy modern styles, others go against 21st century values — such as body positivity or cultural appreciation rather than appropriation. Some old-fashioned royal outfits go against current ideas of gender, and others embrace elements of Britain's past that have fallen under more recent scrutiny. As a result, there are plenty of style choices that have become negative reminders of the country's past.

On February 10, 1840, Queen Victoria and Prince Albert said "I do" in a private ceremony at the Chapel Royal in St James's Palace. And, although there were no video cameras or television specials to document that unique royal wedding, it didn't take long for the world to get wind of Victoria's dress. The queen donned a gown that was meant to uplift local industries, with lace from Honiton and silk from East London. Soon, copycats everywhere began to emulate this special dress by purchasing the same materials. Certain members of the royal family even reused Victoria's lace flounce at their own nuptials as a nod to her style choice. The color of the gown — white — was also unusual at the time, but quickly became the color for brides.

Although certain elements of Victoria's dress have stuck around, the piece itself would look out of place at a modern royal wedding. The ruffled sleeves, for one, are far too large to blend into a modern party. For another, the bodice of the dress was held up by literal bone — an uncomfortable addition that would have cinched the bride's waist and squeezed her ribcage to the point of suffocation. In today's world of body positivity, it would be highly unusual for a bride to subject themselves to a horrible boned bodice. While we do love the materials of Victoria's dress, the actual structure makes us think, "Good riddance!" 

Just two generations after Queen Victoria's reign, a pair of her descendants wore outfits that would surprise many modern eyes. Born to Queen Mary of Teck and King George V, Prince Edward and Prince Albert would be two of the most important monarchs of the 20th century. Edward would go on to become the disgraced King Edward VIII, who abdicated the throne and threw Britain into a constitutional crisis. Albert, meanwhile, would be styled King George VI and inspire the country during the second world war.

Despite the differences in their diverging futures, Edward and Albert would both wear similar outfits during their childhood. As revealed in a photograph of the boys sitting on their mother's lap, they wore white lace dresses with decorative collars. Their outfits appeared to match Mary's dress, which was similarly ruffled.

Perhaps it goes without saying that white dresses have gone out of fashion for young princes. In the 21st century, this style choice is primarily reserved for girls — or, in the case of the royal family, princesses. However, at the time that Edward and Albert were growing up, this outfit was typical of all moneyed babies and toddlers. In fact, it was normal for boys to wear gowns well into early childhood. As author Jo B. Paoletti told the Smithsonian, it was "...a matter of practicality— you dress your baby in white dresses and diapers, [and] white cotton can be bleached." 

When one thinks of Queen Elizabeth, The Queen Mother, the term "girl guides" does not necessarily jump to mind. However, back in 1921, Elizabeth was actually one of the most important girl guides around. Then known as Lady Elizabeth Bowles-Lyon, this young member of the aristocracy actually worked as a Girl Guide District Commissioner, leading the areas of Glamis and Eassie Parish. In this capacity, she collaborated with her future husband's older sister, Princess Mary, who was actually president of the Girl Guides Association at the time. Some experts even believe that Mary and Elizabeth's girl guides days are what led to the eventual match between the Queen Mother and King George VI, who was then known as Prince Albert.

Regardless of any hint of romance, the fact of the matter is that Elizabeth's experience as a girl guide was a very big deal back in the 1920s. She even wore a uniform in the capacity of her role — a button-up shirt, a neck tie, a blazer, and a hat. The strikingly androgynous military style would have been quite revolutionary in its day, but it would hardly be considered appropriate in the 21st century. These days, girl guides wear vibrant red and blue shirts. They even wear zip-up jackets that come with hoodies, exuding a way more casual and comfortable feel. Should Princess Charlotte ever become a girl guide, we doubt that her uniform with be anything like Elizabeth's.

By the time 1926 came rolling around, Elizabeth Bowles-Lyon had married Prince Albert, who would one day become King George VI. Styled Elizabeth, Duchess of York, she had no expectation of ever becoming queen, as Albert's older brother, Prince Edward, was set to inherit the throne. Thus, when she gave birth to a little girl called Princess Elizabeth on April 21 of that year, she had no idea that the child would one day become Queen Elizabeth II. 

Thus, when the elder Elizabeth and her brand-new baby sat for a portrait to celebrate the birth, the image did not even hint at the grand future that lay before the younger Elizabeth. Perhaps, for this reason, the new mother wore an outfit that was very trendy at the time: a flapper dress accessorized with a string of pearls. Even her bob was extremely stylish in the sense that it embraced the rebelliousness of women in that era.

As fashionable as the Duchess of York's outfit was, modern royals certainly wouldn't wear something similar today. What was once a stylish get-up has now become something of a period piece, meaning that it's perceived more as a costume than a form of classic attire. Because of this dynamic, modern royals are largely encouraged to avoid integrating passing trends into their wardrobes. And, even lower-ranking members of the family are expected to dress with dignity, as one never knows how the line of ascension will fall. 

Back in the 1930s, when Queen Elizabeth II was still just a princess, she posed for a formal photograph wearing a ballerina ensemble that would have been considered stylish in the day. Indeed, she wore a dress that appeared to be teeming with tulle. She accessorized it with a crown of flowers and a string of pearls. Although many modern princess costumes may resemble this particular get-up, there are two elements that have placed it firmly out-of-date. Firstly, the enormous, wing-like sleeves are far too large to be fashionable in the 21st century. Secondly, the princess wore fingerless gloves with her outfit — flaunting an accessory that no longer holds the same connotations almost a century later.

When Elizabeth first donned her fingerless gloves all those years ago, she would have been perceived as an elegant little one. Her unique hand wear had been crafted of fine lace and, thus, would have been considered dainty and upper class. During the years that followed, however, the same accessory took on a whole different meaning. Motorcyclists began to sport them — albeit in leather — and 1980s pop stars like Madonna and Billy Idol began to wear fingerless gloves as well. This accessory quickly became associated with rebellion, rather than royalty. For this reason, it's unlikely that you'll ever see Queen Camilla or Princess Catherine wearing anything similar. Even Elizabeth eliminated these pieces from her wardrobe, perhaps due to changing times.

Fingerless gloves were not the only anachronistic fashion decision made by the young Princess Elizabeth before she became Queen Elizabeth II. Back in the day, the future monarch wore a couple of royal outfits that would now be considered inappropriate. Such was the case during Christmas of 1943. To improve palace morale during the second world war, Elizabeth and her younger sister, Princess Margaret, put on a pantomime of the famous tale from "The Thousand and One Nights" — "Aladdin." By then, it was known that Elizabeth was the future queen of England so she naturally played the lead role of Aladdin. She dressed the part, wearing balloon pants and a tunic meant to imitate Middle Eastern garb.

Due to increased cultural awareness in the 21st century, this outfit would not be well-received in 2025. For a member of the British royal family to wear a version of Middle Eastern clothing would now be extremely inappropriate. At best, Elizabeth's attire would be considered cultural appropriation. At worst, it could be viewed as straight-up mockery of a region where the United Kingdom once exercised its imperialistic dominion. Either way, modern royals are expected to understand that the way they approach other cultures can have consequences. Writing for the National Institute of Health, Ashley Wells explained, "Appreciating different cultures and traditions is encouraged with some caution— culture is not a hobby or a collectible item, it is a meaningful part of life, identity, and community."

When Queen Elizabeth II and her family took the throne, her disgraced uncle — King Edward III — took up in Paris' Bois de Boulogne with his wife, Wallis Simpson, Duchess of Windsor. Edward and Wallis were both controversial figures in their own right. Wallis was similar to Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex in that she was an American divorcée who was not readily accepted into the royal fold. Edward, meanwhile, has drawn comparisons with Prince Harry due to his decision to leave royal life and support the woman he loved. These days, those elements aren't quite as controversial as they would have been in the 1930s and 40s. However, Wallis' clothes certainly have not stood the test of time.

To modern eyes, the biggest issue with Wallis' wardrobe would likely be her love of fur coats. One 1937 edition of Vogue even published illustrations of the elaborate fur coats that Wallis purchased on a shopping excursion in Paris. Never one to be outdone, she purchased not one but two. In the 21st century, royals would not be encouraged to wear this material due to the ever-growing opposition to products made of real animal hides. Even the bear fur hats famously worn by the King's Guard have attracted scrutiny from public figures and activist organizations alike. With this in mind, it's unlikely that we will see Princess Catherine pick up a fur coat on futures shopping sprees. 

On November 15, 1977, Princess Anne gave birth to a baby boy named Peter Philips. The royal family held his christening just a few weeks later, and photographs were taken in the Buckingham Palace's music room. On this day, most members of the royal family wore traditionally appropriate dress, with the ladies wearing skirts and the men suits. Even little Peter dressed for the occasion, donning a historic christening gown that had been in his family since the days of Queen Victoria.

One person, however, stood out in the photographs of the event. Anne opted for a groovy 1970s style dress and matching turban. Her outfit would have been considered very hip at the time, thanks to its psychedelic pattern and trendy headwear. Because Anne dressed by the standards of the day, her look did not necessarily age well. Just like Queen Elizabeth II's "Aladdin" pants before her, Anne's turban comes across as a form of cultural appropriation. Turbans have long been worn in many parts of the world as a form of religious garb, and in many regions factors like a turban's color or shape hold very important significance. For a member of the British royal family to wear such a piece in the modern era would come across as culturally insensitive. Because of this, we likely wouldn't see royals wearing similar headwear in 2025.  

Princess Margaret has attended her fair share of wild parties over the years — and inspired a good number of controversies. Because of this, it was perhaps no surprise that she essentially broke a royal rule at the 1981 premiere of the James Bond film "For Your Eyes Only." On this occasion, Margaret wore a red frock with pink and gold accents. While there is nothing essentially wrong with that color scheme, it should be noted that Princess Diana had also planned to attend the same event wearing very similar colors. In fact, the Princess of Wales wore a deep red strappy dress that was decorated with glizty golden sequins. In the photographs of the event, it almost seemed that Margaret was trying to detract attention from Diana. And, in royal circles, that's never a good look.

Interestingly, in the modern day, there are protocols in place to prevent something like this from happening. As Meghan Markle, Duchess of Sussex shared in the Netflix documentary series, "Harry and Meghan" (via ABC), royals are not supposed to wear the same shades as anyone else — and especially not someone who outranks them. "To my understanding ... you also shouldn't be wearing the same color as one of the other more senior members of the family," Meghan shared.

Women in the royal family always wear hats, and Queen Elizabeth II was no exception. Throughout her lifetime, the late monarch was known for her extravagant headwear, donning everything from feather hats to floral caps. Although she was often applauded for her fabulous headgear, the queen did wear a couple of pieces that would no longer be considered appropriate in the modern day. Chief among them: The white helmet hat that she wore on her 1982 tour of the Soloman Islands. While this piece may have matched the periwinkle and white dress that she donned for the occasion, it also carried the heavy connotations of colonialism. Rather than serve any sort of practical purpose, this piece just aggravated awareness of the mistakes that the United Kingdom had made during the height of imperialism.

If a member of the royal family wore something similar in 2025, they would almost certainly face backlash. Such was the case of American first lady, Melania Trump, who wore a pith helmet on a 2018 trip to Kenya. Following her visit, Trump made headlines for her insensitive wardrobe choice. If Queen Camilla or Princess Catherine were to make the same mistake today, they could attract a degree of controversy that would not be good for the future of the monarchy. After all, the entire concept of royal tours has undergone scrutiny in recent years, leading many to question whether or not they have a place in the modern world.