LHMP #523 Castle 1983 Eros and Liberty at the English Masquerade

This article looks at the culture of public masquerade entertainments in 18th century England (primarily London), especially in how they promoted and supported an atmosphere of sexual liberty. This reputation of masquerades is solidly documented in social commentary and fiction of the time, such as the works of Pope, Hogarth, Fielding, and others.

Public masquerades were open to anyone who paid the entrance fee and thus were attended by people of a wide variety of social classes. This, combined with the effects of costume and masks to conceal the identity (including concealing the gender) of the attendees made them an ideal setting for assignations, casual hook-ups, and comedies of errors. Popular costumes included historic dress, “exotic” foreign costume, especially Turkish outfits, religious costumes, outfits depicting various working-class occupations, and theatrical characters such as Harlequin. In addition to dancing, gaming, and social mingling, they offered food and drink. They were typically held at night, in an elaborately decorated space, and lasted until morning.

Masquerades were the targets of moralistic pamphlets, as well as the cautionary writings of advice manuals and popular fiction. Like many “vices” they were attacked as being a foreign import, echoing the famous carnivals of Mediterranean regions. Both their threat and their appeal derived from a sort of “institutionalized disorder” in which social norms and barriers were cast aside and social hierarchies of class and gender could be inverted.

Within the sexual realm, masquerades offered the opportunity not only for cross-dressing, but for engaging in non-normative liaisons under the fiction displayed by the costumes. At the same time, the theatrical and performative nature of the events provided cover and excuse for sexual liberties. Anti-masquerade literature hinted obliquely at the presence of (male) homosexual encounters, alongside heterosexual liaisons.

Public masquerades were inspired by several roots—Continental carnival traditions, as well as local English festival traditions. [Note: The article doesn’t directly discuss the tradition of court masques as an inspiration for the use of character costumes, but I have to think it was another strand.] They became popular in the 1710s, initially sponsored in private venues by socially prominent figures, but then as more commercial productions in public venues also used for dramatic performance. In the 1720s and 1730s, the weekly masquerades held at the Haymarket had attendance between 700-1000 people.

There was a brief dip in the fashion in mid-century, then a return to popularity in the 1760s and 1770s. In addition to the regular ticketed masquerades, even larger outdoor events were sometimes held for special occasions. After the 1780s, the popularity of masquerades began to wane with a general shift to social conservatism in the wake of the French Revolution, although occasional ones were held during the Regency era. But by the early 19th century, the public masked assembly had functionally disappeared as an institution. (Though private masked/costumed events continued to be part of English society.)

For women, the masquerade offered both opportunity and danger. Anonymity and the conventions of the event gave women the freedom to mingle and to initiate interactions with strangers. This freedom was also available regardless of rank, and anti-masquerade literature railed against the social leveling as well as the licentiousness. The crowds could also include thieves, card sharps, highwaymen, and sex workers, all taking advantage of both the anonymity and distracted targets. But in particular, women had a freedom unavailable in their ordinary lives to attend as free agents, without chaperones or concern for their reputations as long as they remained masked. (Though conversely, a woman known to attend masquerades was assumed to have damaged her reputation, regardless of her actual actions.) This was a key factor in criticism of masquerades. In an era when “good” women were expected not to make a spectacle of themselves, masquerades were all about becoming part of the spectacle. Masquerade costumes could be extremely revealing (for both women and men). And both women and men regularly took on cross-gender costumes.

The hazards were just as real as the benefits. Aside from the usual hazards of unsanctioned sexual liaisons for women, masquerade anonymity (and the assumption that you knew what you were getting into) offered little redress in cases of sexual assault or abduction, or even simply the consequences of mistaken identity.

The article discusses references to homosexual encounters at masquerades, but if one can read through the euphemistic language, the concern was for male homosexuality (this was also the era in which “molly clubs” emerged, also featuring cross-dressing). Concerns about cross-dressing women are generally framed as being about rebellion against “women’s place,” although Henry Fielding’s anti-masquerade writings can also be linked to his work The Female Husband, in which female cross-dressing leads to sex between women.

The article speculates on the extent to which the experience of cross-gender exploration at masquerades might have contributed to the feminist movement of the later 18th century, as well as to what extent reactions against masquerade licentiousness provoked the reactionary turn to repressive gender roles in the 19th century.