There are only a handful of days left for former President Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris to sway undecided voters. However, since the United States has never elected a woman as president, Harris must do more than the requisites of defending her policy record and explaining her plans for governing. She has the ongoing pressure of establishing herself aesthetically as a female authority figure whom voters can accept and support as their Commander-in-Chief.
One element of projecting such an image is clothing choices. At times, Harris’ choices of attire make historical references to the dressing practices of America’s founders in the late 18th and early 19th centuries. By signaling a connection to these figures, Harris is aligning her campaign to the founding principles that undergird American politics.
Repeatedly on the campaign trail, Vice President Kamala Harris has worn modern versions of a cravat—a decorative form of cloth around the neck that can be arranged like a small bow or neck tie or that is tucked into a shirt or blouse. Although some women in the mid-to-late 20th century included the bow form of this neckline in their professional attire, all versions of the cravat invoke historical military and political traditions of male leadership and authority.
Read More: The Reintroduction of Kamala Harris
In the 17th century, Croatian soldiers who fought in France’s army during the reign of Louis XIV wore cravats as part of their uniform, ostensibly for both warmth and décor. Yet, by the 18th century, cravats transitioned from military utility into an expression of personal style. French and English male elites included them in their formal dress wear, and 18th century “macaronis,” a group of Englishmen infamous for their fastidious grooming and flashy clothing choices, wore elaborate forms of cravats as fashion statements.
Monarchs also wore cravats. In 1761, in celebration of his coronation, England’s King George III was depicted in a portrait by Allan Ramsay with an elaborate cravat bow, probably made out of an expensive fabric such as silk. Within 100 years, the cravat transitioned from a symbol of duty and utility into a sign of wealth and opulence.
In the North American colonies, the cravat took on new meanings. In 1776, as the Continental Congress prepared to declare independence from England, it commissioned a portrait of General George Washington wearing a military uniform with an accompanying cravat. Washington’s modest cravat with a “rise and fall” collar, possibly made of wool and tucked into the coat of his uniform, contrasts with that of King George III.
Like the coronation portrait of King George III, Washington’s celebratory portrait was created for political propaganda. In both paintings, each leader stands at a slight asymmetrical angle known as a contrapposto pose. In 18th century portraits of European and American leaders, a contrapposto pose was a way of exhibiting calm and confidence about one’s authority. In 1776, as Americans circulated copies of both The Declaration of Independence and Washington’s portrait that mimicked George III’s contrapposto pose, they were using Washington’s image as a symbolic gesture of their real attempts to replace the monarchical leadership of the king with a new type of government.
While constructing the American republic, the founding generation employed an array of aesthetic tools—for example art, architecture, and clothing—in addition to their well-documented writings and speeches, as forms of messaging about the American principle of government gaining its authority from its citizenry.
Read More: It’s Not Just This Year’s Met Gala Theme. All Art Is About the Passage of Time
In the 1760s, as part of the revolutionary movement, Americans began rejecting imports of fabrics from England in favor of wearing “homespun” garments made of more modestly priced fabrics such as wool, and in 1774 most members of the Continental Congress agreed to stop importing British goods. Also during the revolutionary era, elites in favor of revolting against the English hired the artist Charles W. Peale to create their portraits and to incorporate in them well-known political symbols that denounced tyranny and championed classical ideals of representative forms of government.
And yet the cravat persisted, and took on new meanings. Peale, who served as an officer under Washington during the revolution, painted several miniature portraits for soldiers who wanted to emulate Washington aesthetically and ideologically. At Valley Forge alone, Peale painted 32 miniature portraits of soldiers wearing their uniforms. And after the American Revolution, public spaces often displayed portraits of celebrated national leaders—many times in military uniform with cravat.
The military uniform commissioned by Washington during the Revolutionary War became an ongoing visual symbol of the revolution’s rejection of monarchical authority in favor of America’s burgeoning republic. U.S. military officers wore a similar version of the uniform, including the cravat, up until the Civil War. Although the appearance of the cravat continued to evolve over time, its continued use provided a sense of visual continuity to the founding principles of the nation’s origins.
When Vice President Kamala Harris wears a version of a cravat, she is tapping into this long history. For example, on Aug. 23, Harris accepted the Democratic nomination for president wearing a blue suit with a cravat-like necktie, and affirmed her commitment to representative government. She also wore cravat-inspired necklines during the Sept. 10 presidential debate against former President Donald Trump and at the September 11th Memorial Ceremony at the World Trade Center. As in the portraits of 18th and 19th century American military leaders, Harris’ restrained, cravat-inspired attire touted the legitimacy of America’s democratic republic, the United States’ representative form of government.
As Vice President Harris continues working to convince voters of her commitment to “the people,” her attire is an aesthetic reminder of her promise.
Camille Davis is writing a book called Visual Prestige: The Role of Portraits in Shaping the Nascent Identity of American Leadership. She is a two-time former fellow of the Winterthur Museum, Garden and Library in Delaware, and she served as the inaugural H. Ross Perot, Sr. Postdoc Fellow at the SMU Center for Presidential History.
Made by History takes readers beyond the headlines with articles written and edited by professional historians. Learn more about Made by History at TIME here. Opinions expressed do not necessarily reflect the views of TIME editors.
