Dressed to Rule: 18th-Century Court Attire in the Mactaggart Art Collection.

Lisa Arsenault is a high-school English teacher who is involved in
several ministry campaigns to increase literacy.

A private donation of 734 Chinese paintings and costumes in 2005 to the University of Alberta has ensured that the university will have a prominent role among North American institutions with important collections of Asian art. This is the first publication to catalogue the new collection and assess it in historical and cultural context. It addresses the 18th-century Manchu dynasty court attire portion of the collection.

The Manchu, along with the Mongols and other tribes that harried the northern border of China, were considered barbarians by the Han Chinese. The Manchu defeated the indigenous Ming dynasty in the 17th century and consolidated their power in the 18th century, at which time the Emperor made a conscious decision to promote the ethnic differences between the Manchu and the Han in order to maintain the distinction between the overlord and the conquered. Discrimination extended to matters of attire. Dress was used as an essential tool to promote heritage and legitimacy and confer rank and status. Distinctive Manchu touches such as the “horsehoof” cuffs worn by these horse-borne nomads for generations were officially decreed to be state attire and could be worn only by the upper ranks. Textiles, colours, designs (especially the symbolic and mystical dragon patterns), and accessories were rigorously prescribed.

This coffee-table book is comprised of colour photographs and contemporary illustrations of the robes of the Emperor and his family and officials, with commentary on each plate and short chapters describing the Manchu philosophy of rule and how sartorial regulations reflected it. The illustrations are sumptuous, but the text leaves something to be desired. It is riddled with typos, some so bad as to obscure meaning. The lack of editing gives the impression that the book was rushed into publication. However, typos aside, the text is sometimes unclear and difficult to sort out. Also, I find it strange that a book dedicated to state-enforced clothing legislation never once uses the term sumptuary.