Figure 1.--Here we see a boy photobraphed from the Louis Hess studio on Cobleskill, New York probably in the early 1870s. Its a little difficult to tell if he is wearing a dress or a two-piece kilt suit

Almost all boys at age 1 wore dresses in the 19th century. There seems to have been a variety of reasons for this. Convenience in toilet training may have been a factor. There were a range of other issues such has how childhood was viewed and the the strong convention that the care of younger children was the mother's responsibility. This seems to be the class accross social classes and throughout the country. We do not see pants and trousers being made in sizes for 1 year olds. The photographic record confirms this. We note dresses that look something like kilt suits. We are not sure if they were one or two piece outfits, but we do not note kikt suits being offered for 1 year olds. Nor do we notice tunic suits beung offered for boys this young. And we do not see portraits of boys 1 year old wearing pants. All the portraits we have found show really young boys wearing dresses. We note Illinois brothers 1-3 year old wearing dresses. We also notice Minnesota brothers about 1-3 years old wearing dresses with lace collars in 1888. After the turn-of-the 20th century we see fewer boys wearing dresses. Even so, it was still common to see 1 year olds wearing dresses. As far as we know boys and girls wore the same style dresses in the early 19th century, but we seem to detect some boys with plainer dresses agter mid-century. There were defunite boy styles by the late-19th century, but not all mothers chose the plainer boy styles.

Created: 10:57 PM 9/27/2007
Last updated: 10:58 PM 9/27/2007