Figure 1.--This unidentified boy wears a dress with a smocked bodice. Notice the use of a different material falling from the shoulders to framer the smocking work on the bodice. The child is not identified, but looks like a boy to us. It was taken by the King studio in Fairfield, Maine. The portrait is not dated, but the mount suggests it was taken some time between 1888-96. We would guess about 1890, in part because of the plain sleeve treatment,

This unidentified boy wears a dress with a smocked bodice. Notice the use of a different material falling from the shoulders to framer the smocking work on the bodice. The child is not identified, but looks like a boy to us. It was taken by the King studio in Fairfield, Maine. The portrait is not dated, but the mount suggests it was taken some time between 1888-96. The mount had serrated (pinked) edges with smooth corners. This helps date the cabinet card. We would guess about 1890, perhaps 1888-89 in part because of the plain sleeve treatment, While we think the child is a boy because of the short hair, as there is no identification, we cannot be sure. A reader writes, "The dress shows style elements asociated with the 1880s and in the late-1880s short hair was popular for girls. So this might as well be a girl." HBC agrees, there is no way to be positive about the gender. A reader writes, "I have been reviewing some of your old pages. The often asked question:- boy or girl? I think there are two indicators that point to this photo being of a boy. First there is a semblence of a hair parting, on the right as we view it. The second is the legs are crossed; the left over the right. This is an unusual posture for a girl." HBC suspects that our reader may be correct as this seems more of a posture for a child wearing pants than a dress. Unfortunately we have not assessed tghe photographic reciord for girls which would be necessaery to confiorm this assessment.

Created: 2:43 AM 6/29/2010
Last updated: 5:39 PM 7/25/2011