Figure 1.--This is an unidentified American family, we think in the 1880s. Mother clearly believed in short hair. although the girl at the left seems to have long hair at the back. The lttle boy in the front is wearing a kilt suit. The cholsat the tight certainly looks like a boy with aboyish hair part. It is , however, unlikely that a younger boy would wear a kilt suit and a boy this age would wear a dress. The studio was Bliss in Coudersport, Pennsyvania. This was a small town on the Allegheny River in northern Pennsylvania southeast of Lake Erie.

We have found countless images that we are just not sure about because the names are not noted on the back of the portrait. This was not possible with early photographic processes (Dags and Ambros), although notes could be enclosed in the protective cases--most American portaits had protective cases (1840s-50s). Unfortunanely, few such notes have survived. But with the develoment of the albumen process (CDVs and cabinet cards), names could be esily written on he back (1860s). Most parents did not bother to do this, so we are left to guess about gender based on the image alone. One of the most reliable clues is the hair parts, side parts for boys and center parts for girls. This was a fairly relaiable clue, but hardly infalable. And mamy prtraits are ambiguous. The portrait on the previous page is a good example. We will archive images here and invite readers to try to assess the images. A major problem here is that younger children are often not obviously boyish or girlish in appearance. And in the 19th century boys might have curls and girls might have short hair and not just bobed hair. Some girls had hair cuts that we would today associuate with boys' styles. Further complicating all of this, many younge boys might wear skirted garments, although girls at the time did not wear pants other than pantalettes.

Created: 11:26 PM 11/14/2021
Last updated: 11:26 PM 11/14/2021