Figure 1.-- This CDV portrit shows three brothers in Worcester Massachusetts, probably in the 1870s. The photographer was A.F. Daniels. The children are not identifitied, but they certainly look like brothers, but there is no way to be sure. Girls could have short hair cuts, but cuts with the ears so prominent were not very common. The dealer writes, "This listing is for one original Carte De Visite photo of three little boys from Worcester, Mass. Can't you just hear the argument that morning in the house between the mother and these boys, trying to convince them to wear dresses and large straw hats to make a better picture? Too funny." The dealer of course is imposing 21st century sensibilities on the 1870s, but these boys are of an age that you would think they would be begn to object to wearing dresses, even in the 1870s. The two younger boys wear identical dresses with lace collars. There older sibling wears a different dress without a lace collar. Notice the elaborate straw hats. Unlike many period portraits, there are no props. Click on the image for a fuller discussion.

We see some portraits of brothers or children who look like brothers wearing dresses. These are not as common as brother-sister images, but we do see a few. Unfortunately in most cases the children are not identified. And this is a major problem. Often we can tell gender are make a guess with a fair degree of accuracy, but there certainly is no way to be poditive about this. Often but not always brothers wear identical or similar dresses. Almost all of these portraits we have noted are from the 19th century. This is because photogrphy, our principa; soure of information, only appeared in the 19th century (1840s). We are, as a result, not sure how common it was in the early-19th century because photography had not yet been invented. The limited number of paintings we have found suggest that dresses for younger boys were very common. After photography became common place in the 1860s we begin to see quite a number of these images. The primary limitation here is the age of breeching because this was only possible when both boys had not yet been breeched. Twins could be dressed this way. They were not always dressed in identical dresses, but quite a few were. And because families were larger than is now common. Many families might have two boys under about age 5 years. This becomes much less common after the turn of the 20th century, largely because boys were less commonly outfitted in dresses. Boy dresses were often quite simple. Note the relatively simple dresses the boys here are wearing (figure 1). And we see a few images of boys who look to similarly aged brothers and one is breeched and the other is not. Unfortunately in these instances it is not clear what the clothing conventiins were. Here there are no explanations and often not identification. We are left work out the family conventions as best we can by studying the images.

Identity Problem

We see some portraits of brothers or children who look like brothers wearing dresses. These are not as common as brother-sister images, but we do see a few. Unfortunately in most cases the children are not identified. And this is a major problem. Often we can tell gender are make a guess with a fair degree of accuracy, but there certainly is no way to be poditive about this. Often but not always brothers wear identical or similar dresses.

Chronology

The conventiin of oufitting younger boys in dresses did bot begin in the 19th century, but our 17th and 18th century informatiion is very limited. Almost all of these portraits we have noted are from the 19th century. This is because photogrphy, our principa; soure of information, only appeared in the 19th century (1840s). We are, as a result, not sure how common it was in the early-19th century because photography had not yet been invented. The limited number of paintings we have found suggest that dresses for younger boys were very common. After photography became common place in the 1860s we begin to see quite a number of these images.

Ages

The primary limitation here is the age of breeching because this was only possible when both boys had not yet been breeched. Twins could be dressed this way. They were not always dressed in identical dresses, but quite a few were. And because families were larger than is now common. Many families might have two boys under about age 5 years. This becomes much less common after the turn of the 20th century, largely because boys were less commonly outfitted in dresses.

Dress Styles

Boy dresses were often quite simple. Note the relatively simple dresses the boys here are wearing (figure 1).

Mixed Images

Most of the brother images we see with dresses are the older boys wearing pants and the younger unbreeched boys wearing dresses or other skirted garments. We see only a few images of boys who look to similarly aged brothers and one is breeched and the other is not. Such images are not common, but we do see a few. Unfortunately in these instances it is not clear what the clothing conventions were. Here there are no explanations and often not identification. We are left work out the family conventions as best we can by studying the images. Perhaps one of the children is a girl. And boy cousins is another possibility. Perhaps an older boy looks younger. And we are not entirely sure that once a boy was breeched that all his dresses were thrown away. We wonddr if there was a period after a boy was first breeched tht he might still have worn drsses on some occassions for a while. This we are still not sure about. We would be very interested in any insights that readers may have to help us understand on these and related issues.

Created: 11:14 PM 1/19/2009
Last updated: 8:58 AM 6/25/2012