We have considerable information about the dresses American boys wore during 19th century, especially beginning with the mid-19th centiry as photography expanded the numerical availability of images. American boys during the 19th century wore dresses as was the fashion in Europe. The styles worn were quite similar to the styles worn by their sisters in the 18th and the early and mid-19th century. This began to change in the late 19th century when plainer styled boy dresses began to appear. A good example is an American boy in 1865. The actual styles chosen, however, were largely up to the mothers fashion sence. Some mothers dressed even dressed all the children alike. An example here is an unidentified family. The age of breeching varied from family to family. One factor here was social class. We see boys wearing plainer styles. A good example is Arthur N. Taylor, probably photographed in the 1880s. This was an exremely common fashion throughout the 19th century, although the popularity of the convetion appears to have been declining in the late 1890s. The precise time-line still needs to be worked out.

The 1800s

American boys during the 19th century wore dresses as was the fashion in Europe. The styles worn were quite similar to the styles worn by their sisters in the 18th and the early and mid-19th century.

The 1830s

Our information on American boys wearing dresses in the 1830s is very limited. We know that the convention was for younger boys to wear dresses until breeching. We do not know how prevalent this was or the age conventions. We do not have any photographic evidence. A few Dags were taken in 1839, but we know of no portraits of children.

Figure 5--Here we see an uidentified boy wearing a plaid dress, we think in the 1840s. Notice the low neckline and short sleeves. This is a style his sisters could have worn. There cwere no short sleeve shirts or blouses for boys.

The 1840s

The Daguerreotype reached the United States from Europe almost immeduately after it was launched (1839). For the first time we have a detailed record of the clothes being worn. The 1840s photogfrapjic recird is limited because it took a little time for the photographic industry to develop. Also Daguererrotyopes were the nost expensive of all process because a polished metal plate was needed. As a result, we have many more images, nd very detasiled imges to use in assessing fashion trends than any other previous decade. Thev plasid dress the boy here is wearing is a good example (figure 5). Notce the low neckline. this is astule we have noted in earlier decades. Also notice the plaid material. yhis is something wedo not see earlier. This was astule his sister could worn. Even so, Dags were expensive and as result the number of images are limited in comparison to subsequent decades. A major pronlem is that it is difficult to date Dags. We have found omly a few portraits of American boys wearing dresses during the 1840s. We believe that they did. And we are unsure what there is not more evidence of it in the photographic record. Our limited number of verifiable 1840s Dags may be a factor. Or it is possible that dresses became more common for younger boys later in the decade. We would be interested in any insights on this that readers may have.

Figure 6.--We think this cased portrait was taken un the 1850s. Notice the low neckline of the dress. That is something we see in the early-19th century, but not much after mid-century.

The 1850s

We have considerable information about the dresses American boys wore during 19th century, especially beginning with the mid-19th century as photography expanded the numerical availability of images. We note boys wearing skirted garments, but our initial assessment is that skirts were more common than dresses. In fact based on the photographic record, skirted dresses, but not necessarily dreesses seem more common later in the century. We can not yet confirm this, but the photographic record seems to suggest it. And this is the cae in the 1840s-50s when photographs were mostly Dags abnd Anmbros and more expensive than was to be the case when albumen prints appeared (1860s). This means that we have mostly images from somewhat affluent families. We note children wearing very plain dresses. We think this was very common at the time for both boys and girls. A good example is C. Olin Boyden in 1852. Many dresses for younger children seem to have been made without collars. A good example is an unidentified younger child in the late-19th century. The child is wearing a gingham dress. Unfortunately with many of these portraits, we are not sure about gender. A factor I think was that simple collarless dresses were easy to make. There were no ready made clothes before the Civil War. We are not sure to what extent this was pratical or stylistic. Perhaps a little of both. And families were also not as affluent as after America's industrial development excelerated after the War. More complicated dresses and gender differences were more apparent later in the 19th century. We not only see collarless dress, but desses with low necklines rater like women's dressess. The dressesses for boys and girls were essentially the same. This was basically the style in the first half of the century. After the 1850s this becomes much less common. It is interesting that modesty conventions required that legs should be covered, but that low necklines were acceptable. We do not yet see many of the kilt suits thay began to be popular in the 1860s to any extent. Queen Victoria and Prince Albert in Britain only began dressing the princes in kilts during the 1840s and it took some time for the kilt fashion to be established as an important boys' style. Ameican fashions were still being set in Europe. Britain was important for men and boys and France was important for women and girls. After the 1850s, kilt suits would begin to replace dresses, especially for the older boys before breeching.

Figure 7--Unfortunately most ambrotypes were not dated. Ambrotypes can, however, roughly be dated to the 1850s, especially the mid- and late-1850s. But there were also many taken in the very early 60s before CDVs became well established. This boy's name was Ralph W. Maxwell. He was photographed in August 1861 at Haley's studio in Boston.

The 1860s

Large numbers of photographic images become available for the fist time during the 1860s. The low price of CDVs and cabinent cards using the albumen process meant that they were made in large numbers. Thus we know a great deal about children's clothing. We see younger boys wearing dresses as well as some older boys. Collars seem small. The boy here in 1861 wears a patterened dress with balloned half sleeves (figure 1). A good example is an American boy in 1865 with long sleeves. Defined waists seem common. We note an unidentified family in which all the children wore dresses, including the older boy who looks to be about 10-years old. The tin-type portrait is not datee, but we believe it was taken in the 1860s. We note different dress styles including defined and undefined waists. We note an unidentified New York boy in the 1860s wearing a plain dress with long flounced pantalettes. Given the number of available images, the photographic record becomes increasingly useful in asswessing both styles and prevalence. And here we do not see as many boys wearing dresses as we might have expectd. We seem to find more examples in the 1870s and 80s along wih more other skirted garments like kilt suits. We do find some older boys wearing dresses than we noted in the 1850s, but as discussed above, our archive is still fairkly limited making a valid assessment difficult. This is just a preliminary assessment and we home to speak more definatively as HBC expands. One factir to cinsider is Ameruicans griowing affluence as an industrial economy as cities began to grow which are both factors which may have affected the prevalence if dresses. This is not a subject we have noted in fashion histories. At this time all we have to go on is the photographic record.

Figure 8.--We still notice boys of various ages wearing dresses in the 1870s. The one boy here looks older than most we have noted wearing dresses. Click on the image for a fuller discussion.

The 1870s

Younger boys continued to commonly wear dresses in the 1870s. We think just about all boys as toddlers wore dresses, but the age of breeching varied. Here social class was a factor. We notice boys wearing a wide range of different dress styles. As far as we can tell the dress styles worn by boys and girls were essentially the same. We do not yet have a lot of specific stylist details. We note a range of patterns used for dresses. The children here seemed to be wearing a gingham or checked dress. Color is a more difficult topic because of the black and white photography of the day. We can tell that white dresses were popular for younger children. We are less sure about the colors used. The age of breeching varied, but it was commonly at about 4-5 years of age. There were substantial differences from family to family. Boys also wore other skirted garments like kilt suits. These were skirted garments that girls did not wear. We think that boys wearing kilt suits may also have worn dresses as well. We are not positive about this, but it seems rather plauasible. But we would like to know if boys wre dresses and kilts rather than instead of kilts. We tend to notice slightly older boys wearing kilt suits rather than dresses, but there was considerable variation. Perhaps readers will have some insight here. We notice two Muncie boys, probably in the 1870s, wearing identical white dresses. Some mothers dressed their children in identical or coordinated outfits. Not all parents did this. It varied substantially from family to family. It was, however, a popular convention. White seems to have been a popular choice.This meant that the younger children might all wear identical dresses. Other parents dressed the boys and girls differently.

Figure 9.--

The 1880s

We notice younger boys wearing dresses in the 1880s. Most boys seem to have been breeched by age 5, many a year or 2 earlier. Some boys wore dresses longer, but this was much less common. Some still kept their long hair after breeching, but this varied from family to family. Many boys wore quite long dresses. Hem lengths varied from below the knee to the ankles. I am not sure if this was considerd stylish or justvto provide room for growth. The boy dresses seem plainer than the girl dresses, but this was largely at the discressioin of the mother. Lace collars might be added to the basically plain dresses. Colored bands on the skirt seems to hsave been a popular decoration. We note both white and colored dresses. Unfortunately because of the black and white photography, we have no idea about the colors. American boys commonly wore dresses with long stockings. This diffeeed from Europe where socks were also commonly worn.

Figure 10.--We are not positive but we believe these boys were photographed in the early 1890s, although the 80s is certainly possibe. Both boys wear white dresses, we think with black long stockings. Notice the hat.

The 1890s

We contibue to see younger boys wearing dresses in the 1890d, but not so quite so many and fewer of the somewhat older boys. The actual styles chosen, however, were largely up to the mothers fashion sence. Some mothers dressed even dressed all the children alike. White dresses seem popular. An example here is an unidentified family. The age of breeching varied from family to family. One factor here was social class. We see boys wearing plainer styles. A good example is Arthur N. Taylor, probably photographed in the late-1880s or early-1890s. This was an exremely common fashion throughout the 19th century, although the popularity of the convetion appears to have been declining in the late 1890s. The precise time-line still needs to be worked out. A major factor here is the development of the public school system. By the 1890s the public schools were very well established throughout the United states, includung the Southern states and new Western states. Boys being educated at homw with a narrow rnge of damily and friends might wer dresses, but once in public schools this would be unlikely and we do not notice boys wearing dresses in the many school images we have archived. Even at the end of the century, however, we still see boys wearung dresses. We see fewer of them and mostly very young boys. And the dresses were increasingly plain, but we still see boys wearing dresses. A good example is 3-year old Richard Lancaster Witzleben in 1896. Note his very plain dress.

Created: 5:04 AM 1/14/2007
Last updated: 9:33 PM 11/17/2017