America's Love of Royal Weddings is Nothing New

With our all day TV and messages flying across the Internet we might be inclined to think this interest in the royal wedding is a result of modern communications. But this is far from true. The fact we fought the Revolutionary War to gain freedom from the British Empire appeared to be soon forgotten.

Queen Victoria's wedding in 1840 wasn't just the talk of the town, it was the talk of the western world. "Thousands and thousands of newspapers and periodicals were shared, reaching women in remote new settlements hungering for fineries and romance. Queen Victoria's wedding was the talk."
(from To Love and to Cherish: Brides Remembered)

No wonder we were enchanted with Princess Diana and it is no surprise that all the major networks will be covering Kate's wedding beginning in the wee hours of the morning.

What fun to know we are a part of a long tradition in our fascination with William and Kate's wedding.

Read more about wedding dresses through history in my article The Fabric of Marriage: Wedding Dresses

Dresses With a Bustle - Fashion in the 1870s

It’s always fascinating to look at antique fashion photos taking note of the styles and the details embellishing the garments. These two ladies demonstrate the latest fashion worn in the latter part of the 1870s. The dresses had some fullness overall but the bustle in the back gave the dresses the typical shape of the day. Note that not only is the back of the dress fuller but that added decoration brings attention to that fullness.


You may wonder how the bustled dress stayed in place and draped so well. The illustration to the right shows the cage style that was made with materials like wire or cane. Other bustles consisted of muslin puffs boned to give the shape. Lighter bustles were simply be made of stiffened ruffles.


It’s a special treat to examine an actual dress to see how it was made and to enjoy each detail that makes the dress special. I had the chance to do this when I was visiting antique dealer Mary Babcock. This dress is a wedding dress probably worn in the mid to late 1870s. Although some women wore the white bridal dress made popular by Queen Victoria’s wedding in 1840 many still opted for a dress that could be worn on other occasions as well. Dark colors like seen in this brown dress were in favor. The jacket made the dress even more versatile. This dress is made primarily of solid fabric while monochromatic damask is used to add interest.

To the right and below are some close ups of parts of the dress. You can see how many different elements were used to embellish this dress. Take a careful look and you will see pleats, fringe, ruching, cording and those fascinating fringed circles. It looks as if someone has pulled the threads around the edge to give that look but that seems impossible with the usual weaving grid. It might have been something pre made and bought by the yard but the fabric is the same as the rest of the dress. Might they have sold all the components together including the fabric in pleats, damask, solid, decorative fringe and the fringed circles? Perhaps the cording with the matching fabric was manufactured as well. The dress itself is all hand stitched. Each pictorial button is unique





















The photo below is of the style of bustle that was in fashion in the 1880s It's fun to see the difference.



(fashion plate photos from Wikimedia Commons)

Skirts, the Oldest Article of Clothing

I've been reading about early textiles and clothing in the book "Women's Work: The first 20.000 Years: Women, Cloth, and Society in Early Times" by Elizabeth Wayland Barber.

I found it fascinating that the "string skirt" may well be the earliest form of textile clothing. The evidence is found in carved figures of women wearing decorative skirts made of string. One bone figure of a plump women wearing a apron like skirt had been dated to around 20.000 BC. But there is no way of knowing how much earlier such a garment was worn. The skirts of these figures varied, sometimes a front apron, sometimes back while others went around. As string or rope deteriorates in the elements without these little figures we wouldn't have known about these ancient garments.

The surviving examples of string skirts are dated to around 1500 BC but they seem much like those on the early carved figures. They don't appear to provide for either modesty or warmth. Instead they seem to be for decoration. They may display decorative knotting around the bottom as in the pictured skirt while others are decorated with tubes of bronze at the end of each string. It appears the love of adornment began a very long time ago!

In time weaving was developed to the point where woven clothing was worn. The earliest surviving woven piece dates around 3.000 BC but it was made with advanced weaving techniques so we have to assume weaving had already been done for a very long time. So there was a period when both string garments and woven garments were worn. We know that in time a woven tunic was worn under the skirt perhaps at first for warmth but eventually for modesty as well.

The author give us some perspective on the amazing longevity of a basic skirted outfit. "...the garments --- white tunic belt and oblong tubular overwrap --- remained the basis of the European peasant woman's costume from then until the present. Even the modern business woman who wears a white blouse, woolen skirt and belt to work dresses in a barely changed, later form of Bronze Age European clothing. After all, if it works well, why alter it? Fashionable details may come and go, but the fundamentals of how we clothe our body are remarkably conservative." p68

Casual Fashion at the Lake - 1940

I love this photo of my aunt and mother. The picture was taken around 1940 when my dad was dating my mom. He and his twin brother must have done some urging to get their sister and dad's girlfriend to climb that tree. Just click on the picture above to look at a larger version and you will see they don't seem all that sure about the whole thing. :)

The picture shows casual fashion of the time. They are wearing the square shouldered jackets that were popular and though they are wearing saddle shoes and socks for a walk at the lake they are both wearing skirts. It looks cold and you can see my mom has layered a sweater over her shirt in addition to her jacket. Pants would have been warmer yet their legs are bare. It has me wondering how often women wore slacks at that time. I know they become more common after the United States entered World War II and so many women went to work manufacturing items needed for the war effort.

If you looked at the large version you can see the how sharp the picture is and how artfully the tree has been retouched and the picture shaded to bring out the young women. Susana Fierro-Baig does wonderful work with pictures both old and new. Go to her site, Amazing Photo Transformations, to see more of her work.

Early Shoes: Left or Right?

We all hear how children in the “old days” went barefoot all summer then got mail order shoes for school. But in early America not only children but many adults of little means went barefoot except in cold weather. Around 1825 shoe manufacturing increased and prices dropped to the point that most adults could wear shoes the year round

But don’t assume these shoes were anything like the ones we wear today. In fact if you have ever struggled to teach a child which shoe goes on whcih foot look back to the "good old days". Up until the 1840s there was no such thing as a right and left shoe. Once shoes were worn for a while they would shape into a right or left foot but new shoes were not well fitted took some uncomfortable breaking in.

Toe shape varied from pointed to squared as fashions changed. Shoes could be fancied up like the women’s shoes shown here or they could be quite simple, resembling a simple ballet slipper. Sometimes buckles were in vogue and other times not. But new boots and shoes alike began with this lack of fitting.

(photos from Wikimedia Commons)

From Reform Dress to Bloomers

Today women enjoy the freedom of being able to wear pants on just about any occasion. It wasn’t so when I went to college. The school I was going to in the 1960s didn’t allow women to wear pants until it was zero degrees! That meant it was COLD walking to class much of the winter. Just a few years later the culture changed dramatically and everyone wore jeans to class. Life can be so unfair sometimes!

It was a long struggle before women had this freedom of dress. The National Dress Reform Association was founded in 1856. The outfit they recommended included pants with sturdy boots instead of the usual insubstantial shoes. Sometimes the pants were baggy with a narrow cuff at the ankle. These were popularized by suffragette Amelia Bloomer.

The dress worn over the pants was fashionable for the time other than being shortened to about halfway between the knee and the foot. Attempts were made to make the outfit as feminine as possible including the use of womanly accessories and fabrics.

Yet the press had a heyday with this costume making fun of it and implying these women really wanted to be men. The satiric picture shown above is a great example of this. As a result few women adopted this way of dress and many who did wore the outfit only because they were doing farm work or other labor in which traditional women’s garb was a hindrance.

By the end of the 19th century “bloomers” were acceptable for sports and activities like bicycling. This newer “pants” outfit was derived from the knickerbockers worn by men. The advantage of knickerbockers was that they came just below the knee preventing accidents by those riding the ever more popular bicycle. Women’s bloomers were cut fuller and were worn with a feminine blouse and jacket.

Gradually women began to wear pants for sports and other active pursuits. But it was a long time before they were acceptable for school or work much less for church or going out.

(photos from Wikimedia Commons)

High Waistlines and Low Necklines

When we think of 18th and 19th century women's fashion we envision tightly laced corsets and cumbersome petticoats or hoops. But for a brief time at the end of the 1700s and beginning of the 1800s women enjoyed freedom from these constraints.

Although corsets were worn they were more to ensure erect posture and were less confining than in later years. But the big difference was in the dresses. During this period from about 1790 to 1830 the ideal was based on classic simplicity. You can see the similarity between dresses worn during these years and those on the statues and engravings of ancient Greece. The high, Empire waistline and lightly draped skirts were far more elegant than dresses were in the years before or after.

As you might expect the skirts as short as ankle length, bare arms and in some cases a revealing neckline were considered a bit daring by some folks. But what would you expect from a culture that put its emphasis on youth and beauty? (I'll bet you thought the culture of youth was something new.)

I can't help but think of the popularity of the Empire waist and softly draped skirts in fashion today. I just returned from a lunch with friends and wore such a dress, a short and lightweight version. It was perfect to wear on a day that passed 100 degrees. The formal dress to the left is another example. Note the Grecian elegance.

Amusingly one of the reasons fashion moved back to the full skirts and heavier fabrics is that "classic simplicity" in dress was hurting the textile industry. Political pressure was applied.

(Thanks to sensibility.com for the top graphic)
(find the modern formal dress at Amazon.com)