Figure 1.-- Here we have an English cabinet card portrait of an unidentified child about 4 years old. The short hair suggests that he as a boy., but some girls had shiort hair. He wears a knitted tam with a jaunty pom. And he has an elaborate mullti-tiered dress. All the white makes it difficult to make out the details This teared styling was a popular dress style in the 1870s. There seems to be a simple collar, possibly a Peter Pan collar. There seems to be large lace collar added on, repeated at the cuffs. The dress is very complicated, there are vertical features in the bodice.

We have found some images of children wearing dress that look like boys in the photographic record. As the images are not identified, we can only speculate as to gender. Youngr boys from a wide range of backgrounds commonly wore dresses. As it was so common, many of the children in the available photographs are often not identified. Thus figuring out gender is often a difficult exercize. Conventions concerning outfitting boys in dresses and breeching varied wideky from family to family. Some older boys wore dresses. Most of these boys were from well-to-do families. There are gender indictiors that can be used. They are ghelpful, but often not definitive. Just as boys sometimes wore dresses, many girls had short hair. Readers are welcome to offer any assessments they might have about these images.

Evaluations

There are some matters to keep in mind when assessing these images. Hair styling tends to ne a very imprtant factor to our modern eye. It is possible that the children in these images are boys, but by the 1870s boys wearing such decorative dresses were uncommon and most boy by age 7 had already been breeched. We think the more likely explanation is that the child was a girl wih short hair. While long hair was the nost popular style for girls, there are many examples of girls with short hair. We are not entirely sure what enduced mothers to choose shorthair. There may have been medical issues. Are some mothers for unknown reasons may have preferred the styles. This we are unsure about. We do note short hasir styles in the early-19th century, but long styles were more common. There were a few short fads. Ar mid-century some women embraced dress reform. We also suspect tht as a mnatter of practicality, Short hair was more common among girls than adult women. Another difference was wearing hair loose (meaning not styled) was something acceptable for girls, but not not respectable women.

Individual Images

We have found quite a few images where the children are not identified and we asre not entirely sure about the gender. Some we think we can makee reasonavle assessments as go genddr. Others we are just not sure about. We welcome any insights that raders may have on these images. .

Image 1

This cabinet card portrait shows two unidentified children from Stockport (figure 1). They look to be about 5-8 years of age. All we know about the portrait is that it was taken at the A. Hulme studio. They wear identical dark velvet dresses with starburst lace collars and colored sashes. Both have dark long stockings and high-top shoes. The portrait is undated, but we would guess was made about 1880. The children look like boys as do their hair cuts, but that is all we have to go on as to gender. The older child could be a girl with a short haot cut.. But iit sure looks like a boy. nly there is no way to know for sure.

Image 2

This CDV portrait shows an unidentified chils wearing a dress witha large lace collar. The portrait is undated, but looks rather like the 1880s to us. We thought the child might be a boy because of how short it is cut and combed in the front. It looks very boyish to us. The flower basket, hwever, is a girlish prop so we think it is more likely that the child is a girl. The studio was J. Harrison Goldie in Swansea, a coastal city in Wales.

Image 3

This is another CDV portait with no date or subject identification. CDVs persisted in England and other Eurooeans countries linger than in America. We would guess this portatit was taken in the late-1870s or early-80s, but we are not at all sure. We are sure that it was not taken in the 1860s or early-70s. At firstvglance the child looks like girl and some girls had short hair like this. The child looks to be about 6 years old. It was beconing less common for boys this age to wear dresses. As the hair was done in bangs we can not see the part which often provides gender information. What makes this portrait esoecually interesting are the books. Generally speaking, books meam a boy. At the time, education neyond raeading was primarily for boys. The generally feeling in th19th century was that too much education was not good for girls, it harmed her marital prospects. Men wanted acconplished, not ediucated womem. The books on the table suggest either the child is a boy or a girl with very progressive views on educating girls.

Image 4

This English studio portarait shows an unidentified, bur prosperous looking family with mother and father and what looks like four girls, about 4-16 years of age. Mother and the two of the giels wear dresses with all kinds of vessels. We wonder about the youngest child. Notice that unlike the older children, this child does not have a center hair part. And notice the attentioin given to thise center oarts--they are perfect. And notice how the younger child has a vert different dress. Now we have no way of knowing. The child cetainly looks to our modern eye like a girl. It is important to note that a center hair part as the most relaible gender indicator in these old photiographs. We suspect that this child may be a boy. And here it is important roi recall that boys this age at the tgime often wore dresses and/por had long hair. The portrait is undated, but the rounded corners of the CDV and studio setting suggest the 1870s. The studio was photographer Frank Dore in Bradford and Huddersfield in northern England.

Image 5

This CDV portrait shows an unidentified child. CDVs for some reason continued to be important in England long after they has largely disappeared in America. There is a wide scalloped collar with neclace-like embriodery. There is a sash like waisllinr and flounced -- very popular in the 19th cennuty. The portrait is undated, but looks rathe like the early-1880s to us, but we are not sure. The 1870s is also possible. We thought the child might be a boy because of how short his hair is cut, even around the ears. It was not uncommon for girls to have short hair, but usually not this short. The child has bangs but the hair at the crown seems unusual. The child ceratinly looks like a boy. The flower basket, hwever, is a girlish prop so we think it is more likely that the child is a girl. This is tentative assessment, but we have mot yet noted a child identified as a boy with a flower basket. We are fairlyn sure about this with Ameruicvan boys. Our English archive, however, is more limited so we are not yet sure about this. Of course there is not real way of telling. Th child lso has darl long stockings and high-top button shoes. The photographer is J. Brooks in Todmorden. This is a market town in the Upper Calder Valley in Calderdale, West Yorkshire, north-east of Manchester.

Image 6

We are fairly sure this unidentified London child is a boy, but have noithing to go on other than his face and short hair. And both as we have discussed can be misleading. Even so, they can not be dismissed. The CDV porrtai probably dates to the 1880s. Unfortunatly there are no props which can often give us helpful clues. But this child is just seated obidently in a chair with his hands folded. He looks to be about 4 years old to us. He has a straw hat with a medium brim. There is some kind of decorative element, but not elaborate like the hats girls often wore. His hat covers his hair, so all we see is around the ears ana bit of the front, posibly bangs. There is a modest lace collar and sleeve cuffs. The dress seems to button at the front, but the buttons may be just decorative elements. There are vertical decorative elements on the bodice repeated at the cuffs and as horizonal elements on the extensive skort flkounces. The child also has decorative pantalettes and long stockingss. The Studio was Taylor & Bastain in Kentishtown, a north London neighnorhood that has nothing to with Kent. Kentishtown was on the main road north from London. The most notable resident was Karl Marx. His wife was vey pleased with the home he found there. Apparently they previously lived in dives. Isn't it interesting that in capitalist countries, authors are allowed to right about Coimmunism, but in Communisyt countries writing freely about Capitalism can get you shot or intrned in a slave labor camp.

Image 7

Here we have an English cabinet card portrait of an unidentified child about 4 years old. The short hair suggests that he as a boy., but some girls had shiort hair. He wears a knitted tam with a jaunty pom. And he has an elaborate mullti-tiered dress. All the white makes it difficult to make out the details This teared styling was a popular dress style in the 1870s. There seems to be a simple collar, possibly a Peter Pan collar. There seems to be large lace collar added on, repeated at the cuffs. The dress is very complicated, there are vertical features in the bodice. The skirt has ribbons, pleats and tiered formations. The side bows probably lead to a large back bow. There is no identification on the back of the card. The white long stiockings are also helping in dating, widely worn in ghe 12860s abnd to some extent in the 1870s. We initially thought that this was an older boy, but in studying the portrait more we believe that he was clearly a pre-school child. And some boys this age were wearing dresses in the 1870s. If it had been an older child, we would have tend to think the child must be a girl. We see fewer boys, however, wearing such fancy dresseses. So this definitely could have been a boy. And he does look like a boy. The studio was Sarony in Scarborough.

Created: 2:24 AM 4/5/2013
Last updated: 12:00 AM 6/24/2023