Written by Tarnia Riggs
Founder, All Eyes On Me
Originally published October 2026
Victoria and Albert Museum. Groom Wear. Examines historic and contemporary groom clothing in the V&A collection, including James II’s richly embroidered 1673 marriage suit, an embroidered 1848 wedding waistcoat and suits worn at a same-sex civil partnership ceremony in 2006. Victoria and Albert Museum
Groom Wear – Victoria and Albert Museum
Debrett’s. History – Best Man and Ushers. Includes nineteenth-century etiquette material describing Victorian bridegroomsmen, the best man’s responsibility for the groom and the traditional roles performed by ushers and attendants. Debretts
Best Man and Ushers – Debrett’s
Modern Etiquette in Public and Private. 1887. Historical etiquette manual detailing the duties of the Victorian best man and groomsmen, including responsibility for the ring, accompanying the bridegroom and formal wedding dress. Library of Dance
Modern Etiquette in Public and Private – Historical Edition
Modern Manners and Social Forms. Historical etiquette guide describing the best man’s position beside the bridegroom and noting that by the period in which it was published, the best man could sometimes be the groom’s principal male attendant rather than one of a larger group of groomsmen. Digital Collections
Modern Manners and Social Forms – University of California Berkeley Digital Collections
Online Etymology Dictionary. Bridegroom and Groomsman. Provides linguistic history for the words bridegroom, groom and groomsman, including the Old English brydguma and the use of groomsman from the late seventeenth century. Etymology Online
Bridegroom – Etymology
Groomsman – Etymology
The Royal Family. The Bridegroom and Best Man Uniforms. Official account of Prince William and Prince Harry’s military wedding attire at the 2011 Royal Wedding. The Royal Family
Bridegroom and Best Man Uniforms – Royal Wedding 2011
The Royal Family. Bridegroom and Best Man Uniform. Official details of the Blues and Royals frockcoat uniforms worn by Prince Harry and Prince William for the 2018 wedding. The Royal Family
Bridegroom and Best Man Uniform – Royal Wedding 2018
The Royal Family. An Update on Maid of Honour and Bridesmaids, Best Man and Page Boys. Official confirmation of Prince Harry as Prince William’s best man at the 2011 wedding. The Royal Family
Royal Wedding Party – 2011
The Metropolitan Museum of Art. From Queen to Empress: Victorian Dress, 1837–1877. Museum publication on Victorian clothing and social fashion, including wedding clothes and court dress. The Metropolitan Museum of Art
From Queen to Empress – The Met
The groom and his attendants are often treated as the simpler half of the wedding party: choose a suit, arrive on time, stand in the right place, and remember the rings. Historically, however, the groom’s side of the wedding has carried just as much symbolism, etiquette and ceremony as the bride’s.
The groom’s role has changed considerably over time, as has the role of the men — or, increasingly, the people — who stand beside him. Formal Victorian weddings could involve a best man, multiple groomsmen or “bridegroomsmen”, ushers and strict rules governing dress and behaviour. Royal weddings have preserved some of those ceremonial traditions, while contemporary weddings have made them far more flexible.
Today, the groom’s party can be traditional, relaxed, gender-inclusive, highly coordinated or deliberately individual. The best approach is not to reproduce old etiquette for its own sake, but to understand its purpose and choose the parts that still add something meaningful to the day.
The word bridegroom has very old roots. The Old English brydguma combined the word for bride with guma, meaning man. Over time, the second part of the word was reshaped by association with the separate English word groom, which referred to a young man or male attendant. By around the seventeenth century, groom was used as a shortened form for a man about to marry.
The word groomsman appears in English from the late seventeenth century and simply describes an attendant to the groom.
That history matters because it shows the groom’s attendants weren’t originally defined by a single, fixed modern job description. Their purpose evolved alongside wedding customs.
The internet is full of colourful stories claiming that the best man originated as the groom’s strongest swordsman, chosen to help kidnap a reluctant bride or fight off her family. Marriage by capture certainly existed in parts of human history, and later wedding folklore repeatedly connected armed companions with the groom.
However, it is sensible to be cautious about presenting that story as the single direct origin of the modern best man.
Better documented is the development of the best man and groomsmen in British and American wedding etiquette by the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries.
Victorian etiquette guides describe the bridegroom choosing several male friends to act as groomsmen, sometimes matching their number to the bridesmaids. One was distinguished as the best man, who had special responsibility for the groom.
The Victorian best man was expected to accompany the bridegroom, make sure he had the wedding ring, assist with practical arrangements and generally keep things running smoothly. Groomsmen acted as companions and attendants, while ushers helped manage guests.
The details may seem quaint today, but the principle has barely changed. The best man was the person the groom trusted to make sure he did not have to manage everything himself.
In many modern weddings, the best man remains the groom’s closest support person. That may be a brother, friend, cousin, son or another person with an important place in his life. The role no longer needs to be male either. A groom may choose a best woman, best person, sibling or another title that makes sense for the relationship.
The title matters much less than the responsibility. A good best person is someone reliable enough to notice when something needs doing without creating more work for the couple. They may help organise the groom’s party, keep track of timings, carry the rings, coordinate transport, assist guests or give a speech.
The role should not become permission to embarrass the groom, dominate the wedding, or turn the pre-wedding celebration into an ordeal. The best support person should reduce stress rather than create it.
Historically, groomsmen and ushers could be distinct roles.
Groomsmen stood with the groom and formed part of the ceremonial wedding party, while ushers concentrated on welcoming and seating guests. In many modern weddings, the roles overlap, especially when the wedding party is small.
No number of groomsmen is required. The old convention of matching the number of groomsmen to bridesmaids can create visual symmetry, but it is not necessary. If one partner has four close friends and the other has two, there is no reason to recruit extra people simply to balance a photograph.
The same applies to gender. A groom’s attendants don’t have to be men, and a bride’s attendants don’t have to be women. The term wedding party is increasingly useful because it allows couples to organise the people closest to them without forcing every relationship into an inherited gender category.
Wedding fashion history has overwhelmingly preserved and discussed bridal clothing, but grooms have never been irrelevant to the wedding’s visual language.
The Victoria and Albert Museum’s collection includes remarkable examples of historic groom wear. A suit made for the future James II for his 1673 marriage to Mary of Modena was decorated with gold and silver embroidery, while an 1848 wedding waistcoat was embroidered with lilies-of-the-valley and forget-me-nots, flowers associated with love and happiness.
These garments challenge the modern assumption that men’s wedding wear was always plain or secondary.
Historically, male formalwear could be richly decorative, colourful and highly symbolic. The more restrained black, grey, and navy suits associated with modern weddings reflect changing menswear conventions rather than an eternal wedding rule.
Keep that in mind when planning a contemporary groom’s outfit. A groom can look like he is getting married.
The appropriate outfit depends more on the character of the wedding than on an absolute rule.
A traditional morning suit remains appropriate for highly formal daytime weddings and is still associated with British ceremonial dress. It usually consists of a morning coat, waistcoat and striped or formal trousers.
A tuxedo or dinner suit traditionally belongs to evening formalwear and is an obvious choice for a black-tie reception or formal evening wedding.
A well-tailored two-piece or three-piece suit works for an enormous range of ceremonies and can be made more or less formal through fabric, colour, waistcoat, shirt, tie and accessories.
Summer, garden, destination and beach weddings may call for lighter wool, linen blends or less structured tailoring.
Traditional cultural dress may be entirely appropriate and can carry far more meaning than conventional Western suiting.
Military uniform is another long-established ceremonial option. At the 2011 Royal Wedding, Prince William wore the red uniform of Colonel of the Irish Guards, while Prince Harry wore his Blues and Royals uniform as best man. Prince Harry later married Meghan Markle in the Blues and Royals frockcoat, with Prince William wearing the same style as best man.
The real question, then, is not, “What is a groom supposed to wear?”
It is: what level of formality and personal identity does this wedding call for?
Coordination works better than duplication.
The groom should generally be identifiable within his own wedding party, even if the differences are subtle.
That may mean everyone wears the same suit, but the groom has a different waistcoat, boutonnière, tie or pocket square. Alternatively, the groom may wear a different suit colour while the attendants share another tone.
For example, a groom in a navy three-piece suit might have groomsmen in navy two-piece suits. A groom in black tie might wear a distinctive dinner jacket while the others wear black. A groom in a neutral suit might introduce a stronger colour through his tie or boutonnière.
The goal is not to make the groom look unrelated to the group. It is to create a hierarchy.
He is part of the wedding party, but he is not simply another groomsman.
The groom’s party does not need to match the bridesmaids exactly.
In fact, literal matching can sometimes make a wedding look more themed than styled.
It is often more sophisticated to work with complementary colours. If the wedding palette includes burgundy, the groomsmen might wear navy or charcoal suits with burgundy ties, pocket squares or flowers. A sage green wedding might work beautifully with tan, cream, stone or mid-grey menswear. Black-and-white weddings naturally lend themselves to black suiting with restrained accents.
Colour can also appear in socks, cufflinks, jewellery, waistcoats, ties, bow ties, boutonnières or even shoes.
The same principle used elsewhere in styling applies here: repeat the colour without repeating everything.
| Wedding style | Groom | Groomsmen | Accessories |
|---|---|---|---|
| Formal daytime | Morning suit or dark tailored three-piece | Coordinated formal suits | Waistcoat, tie, boutonnière, polished shoes |
| Black tie | Tuxedo or dinner suit | Matching or coordinated tuxedos | Bow tie, cufflinks, pocket square |
| Classic church wedding | Navy, charcoal or black suit | Same colour or slightly simplified version | Tie, boutonnière, watch, cufflinks |
| Garden wedding | Light grey, blue, beige or soft tailoring | Coordinating lighter suits | Floral tie, linen pocket square, lighter shoes |
| Beach or destination | Linen, lightweight wool or relaxed tailoring | Coordinated but less structured outfits | Loafers, open collar if appropriate, minimal accessories |
| Vintage-inspired | Three-piece suit, tweed or heritage tailoring | Coordinated waistcoats or jackets | Pocket watch, tie bar, braces |
| Colourful wedding | Strong suit or waistcoat colour | Neutral or complementary suits | Bold tie, socks, jewellery or boutonnière |
| Minimal contemporary | Clean black, navy, cream or charcoal tailoring | Similar minimalist suits | Simple tie or open collar, discreet jewellery |
| Cultural or traditional | Formal cultural dress | Coordinated traditional or formal clothing | Accessories appropriate to the tradition |
| Inclusive wedding party | Outfit chosen around formality rather than gender | Suits, dresses, jumpsuits or coordinated separates | Shared colour or accessory creates unity |
An inexpensive suit that fits properly will generally look better than an expensive suit that does not.
Trouser length, jacket sleeves, shoulder fit and waist suppression all affect the finished appearance. Wedding photographs magnify poor fit because the same outfit is seen repeatedly from every angle.
If the groom is buying rather than hiring, treat alterations as part of the purchase, not an optional extra.
The same applies to groomsmen, especially when several people have very different body shapes. Matching suits do not have to fit identically. They have to fit each individual properly.
There is no universal answer. Hiring can make sense for a highly formal outfit that is unlikely to be worn again, particularly morning dress or traditional black tie.
Buying may offer better value when the suit can later be worn for work, formal occasions or other weddings.
The decision should also consider the attendants. Requiring groomsmen to buy an unusually coloured or highly specific suit they are unlikely to wear again can become an unnecessary expense.
If the couple wants a very particular look, it is worth discussing costs early rather than surprising the wedding party later.
Shoes can undermine an otherwise beautifully styled groom’s party.
They don’t need to be identical, but they should match the level of formality.
Black leather shoes generally suit black and charcoal formalwear. Brown, tan and oxblood can work beautifully with navy, blue, green and lighter neutral suits.
Whatever you choose, break in new shoes before the wedding.
A wedding day is not the time to discover that beautiful leather shoes become instruments of torture after forty minutes.
Men’s formalwear often uses relatively restrained silhouettes, which means accessories carry more visual weight.
A tie or bow tie changes the outfit’s formality. A pocket square introduces colour. Cufflinks can hold sentimental meaning. A watch may be inherited or given as a wedding gift. A boutonnière can tie the groom directly to the flowers used elsewhere in the ceremony.
Jewellery is increasingly important in groom styling.
Rings, bracelets, chains, lapel pins and earrings can all be incorporated without compromising formality when they suit the wearer.
This is also where All Eyes On Me’s wider philosophy applies particularly well: the goal is not simply to follow a uniform. It is to create a look that still feels like the person wearing it.
The boutonnière remains one of the most recognisable groom accessories.
Traditionally worn through the lapel buttonhole, it may echo flowers from the bridal bouquet or wedding décor.
The groom’s boutonnière can differ slightly from those worn by the groomsmen, adding another subtle visual distinction.
Not every male member of the wedding party needs to wear one. Fathers, grandfathers, witnesses, ushers, and other significant people can be included or not, depending on the couple’s preference.
Contemporary alternatives include lapel pins, floral pocket arrangements and small decorative accessories.
The groom’s side of the wedding deserves just as much organisational attention as the other half.
Allow more time than seems necessary. Suits need steaming. Shirts may need ironing. Someone will misplace a cufflink. A button may come loose. Transport can be late. Photographers usually want preparation images before the ceremony.
The groom shouldn’t be the one solving every problem. This is where a good best person and organised wedding party become invaluable.
The groom’s attendants should know the ceremony time, departure time, venue address, transport arrangement and any responsibilities they have before the wedding day begins.
A group chat created six months earlier is not a substitute for sharing the actual plan with everyone.
If the best man or another attendant is responsible for the wedding rings, clarify exactly who has them and when responsibility transfers.
Do not rely on assumptions.
Whether the rings are carried by the best man, a page boy, a ring bearer, the celebrant, or another member of the wedding party, one person should know they are responsible for them at any given point.
The tradition may be romantic.
Losing the rings is not.
The best man’s speech has become one of the most anticipated — and feared — parts of many wedding receptions.
Humour is welcome. Humiliation is not required.
A good speech can tell a story about the groom, acknowledge the couple and create warmth in the room without exposing private information, past relationships or incidents that embarrass people.
The same applies to speeches given by groomsmen or the groom himself. The wedding is not an audition for stand-up comedy.
If a joke would make one of the people being celebrated genuinely uncomfortable, it doesn’t get better by putting it through a microphone.
Traditionally, the groom’s speech often included thanks to the bride’s family, the wedding party and guests. Modern speeches are much freer.
What matters more is that it sounds personal. The groom may thank the people who helped organise the wedding, acknowledge absent family members, recognise the wedding party and speak directly to his partner.
A short, sincere speech will generally be remembered more fondly than a long one that tries to thank everyone the groom has met since primary school.
The stag night, bucks party or bachelor party should suit the groom.
That sounds obvious, yet it is one of the wedding traditions most likely to be planned around what other people think it should involve.
Not every groom wants a huge night out. The celebration could be a dinner, weekend away, sporting event, whisky tasting, gaming night, concert, barbecue, golf day, spa trip or almost anything else.
The best man or organiser should ask the simplest question first:
What would the groom actually enjoy?
The answer matters more than tradition.
Modern weddings increasingly recognise that close relationships don’t organise themselves neatly by gender.
A groom may want his sister standing beside him. His closest friend may be a woman. A bride may have male attendants. A same-sex couple may divide their wedding party by relationship rather than by conventional sides.
This doesn’t diminish the tradition. The purpose of a wedding party has always been to surround the couple with people who matter.
The labels can change.
The best man may become the best woman, best person, or person of honour. Groomsmen may simply become groom’s attendants or part of the wedding party.
Clothing can be coordinated through colour and level of formality rather than gender. One person might wear a suit, another a dress and another a jumpsuit, yet the group can still look cohesive through fabric, flowers or accessories.
Inclusivity does not require abandoning wedding tradition.
It simply lets tradition fit the people actually taking part.
The groom’s side of wedding fashion has historically received far less attention than bridalwear, but that imbalance is changing.
The V&A’s collection of groom wear makes the point particularly well. Wedding clothing for men has included elaborate seventeenth-century embroidery, romantic nineteenth-century waistcoats, military dress, modern tailoring and suits worn at same-sex civil partnership ceremonies.
There has never been only one correct way for a groom to look. A wedding outfit should respect the occasion, but it should also still look like the person wearing it.
For some grooms, that means flawless black tie. For others, it means a blue velvet jacket, statement jewellery, colourful socks, an embroidered waistcoat, or a relaxed linen suit. Wedding tradition should provide inspiration rather than erase personality.
The most useful advice is ultimately quite simple: organise early, have clothing properly fitted, understand the level of formality, coordinate rather than copy, and choose attendants because you trust them rather than because you are trying to reach a particular number.
Most importantly, remember what the wedding party is actually there to do. The best man and groomsmen are not props for photographs. They are the groom’s people.
Their job is to support him, celebrate the relationship and help make the day easier. That part of the tradition is worth keeping.
The finishing details can turn formalwear into something much more personal. Cufflinks, jewellery, ties, pocket squares, lapel accessories, gloves, and colour accents can all connect the groom and wedding party to the wider style of the celebration.
Explore All Eyes On Me accessories and Colour My World inspiration for ideas on adding colour, individuality and finishing details to your wedding look.
And when you picture the groom’s party standing together:
Will you keep the look traditionally coordinated, give the groom one distinctive detail, or let every member of the wedding party bring some of their own personality to the style?