Figure 1.--A HBC reader has provided this image to us. As with many tin types, there is no accompanying information as to who the child is and when the the portrait was taken. Our contributor thought perhaps the 1860s. Possibly, but we would tend to guess the early 1870s. We are unsure as to even if the child is a boy or girl. Image courtesy of the RG collection.

A HBC reader has provided this image to us. As with many tin types, there is no accompanying information as to who the child is and when the the portrait was taken. Our contributor thought perhaps the 1860s. Possibly, but we would tend to guess the early 1870s. We are unsure as to even if the child is a boy or girl. I might guess a girl, in part because of that hair band which I haven't noted on a boy before. I notice there is no part in the hair, but am unsure of the gender connotations. The big question I have here is what are the gender connotations to wearing a jacket and waistcoats with buttons. That looks boyish to me. It clearly is not a dress, but a kind of skirted suit. But looks at the flounces on the skirt, that looks girlish.

Tin Types

Tintypes became enormously popular in the United States during the Civil War and the 75 or so years following, they were used to depict every aspect of American life. The most typical 19th century tintype was of course still the studio portrait. Tintypes were easier to make than Daguerreotypes or Ambrotypes, and the customer did not have to return for prints as with negative/positive processes. It was not the first instant process, but it was certainly the one more people could afford. Being easier to make and less expensive opened the door for a new type of photographer. As with many tin types, there is no accompanying information as to who the child is and when the the portrait was taken. It was not possible to write on the back of a tintype.

Chronology

As with many tin types, there is no accompanying information as to who the child is and when the the portrait was taken. Our contributor thought perhaps the 1860s. Possibly, but we would tend to guess the early 1870s. The large collar is one reason that we suspect that this portrait may have been taken in the early 1870s rather than the 1860s. Collars tended to bve rather small in the 1860s.

The Child

We have no idea who this child is. We are not even sure as to even if the child is a boy or girl. I might guess a girl, in part because of that hair band which I haven't noted on a boy before. I notice there is no part in the hair, but am unsure of the gender connotations. The big question I have here is what are the gender connotations to wearing a jacket and waistcoats with buttons. That looks boyish to me. It clearly is not a dress, but a kind of skirted suit. But looks at the flounces on the skirt, that looks girlish.

Harry Danniel

We note a California boy in the 1860s with a similar outfit. Unfortunately, we know that the boy who wore this skirted suit was Harry Danniel, but we know nothing more definitively about him. He apparently was born in the late 1850s. He either was born or raised in San Diego, although we are not positive about this.

Boys' Dresses

Boys in the early 19th century wore dresses essentially the same as his sisters. In a large family, a young boy would have probably worn hand me downs from his older sisters. By mid-century, boys were still wearing dresses, but attempts began creating styles that were destinctly boyish. Here the boy wears a jacket and button waistcoat in an outfit that is skirted, but not a dress. The military styling is also decidely boyish. We also note from the description that this was a three-piece suit with knickers, another boyish feature. This is not to say that boys did not also wear actual dresses, they did. The photogfraphic record suggests, however, that by the 1870s these skirted dress alterantives were increasingly common for boys.

Kilt Suit

The outfit looks like an early kilt suit. There is clearly an attempt to differentiate this outfit from a dress. This style of jacket was commonly worn by younger boys in the 1860s-80s, often with a waistcoat as seen here. The jacket might be worn wiyh both skirts or trousers. In this case there is no attempt to make the matching skirt look like a kilt. Subsequent klilt suits were often made in plaid material or muted checks of some kind of a material that might also be used for a boys kneepants suit.

Outfit

This outfit bears some resembalnces to an early kilt suit. It has a cut-away jacket and vest (waistcoat). There is, however, no military styling. Nor are there any concessins to kilt styling for the skirt. The material is not a plaid, even a dark muted plaid, nor or there any pleats. There are however some rather feminine details, such as tghe ruffles at the cuffs and floubces on the skirt. These feminine details do not mrean that the garment could not have been worn by a boy. But they do rather complicate our assessment.

Pantalettes

This child wore rather long pantalettes with the outfit.

Hair Style

The child's hair is combed back. This is rather a girlish style and less common, but not unknown for boys. We are not sure what to make of the hair band. We have not noted these bands on boys. The child has a small colofred hair bow. This look like the kind of small bows younger boys wore un their hair, but large hair bows had not yet become fashionable for girls. Thus the hair bow does not help us in assessing gender.

Created: November 11, 2003
Last updated: November 11, 2003