|
The Brattleboro Historical Society has a wonderful collection of glass plate photos from the 19th and early 20th centuries. Rural and small town American life is portrayed in a superb collection featuring images from New England. Photographs of the Crown family are part of this collection. The family has four boys and and at least two girls. The photos date from 1899-1918. The boys are Harold, Raymond, Richard, and Paul. I think this is the order of their ages. The photos are dated and in some cases mis-dated. The boys were breeched at different ages. The older boys I think were breeched at about 4-5. The other two boys were older when breeched. A photo of Richard, at I would guess 6-7 years of age, shows him in an elaborate white dress with his rather large girl doll. Several other images taken at 3 or 4 years show him in dresses, curls, and always with a hair bow, playing with his dolly. Judging by the number of photographs of him, I would guess he was his Mother favorite. The dresses the boys wore before being breeched were not boy dresses. They all look like little girls in frilly dresses, curled hair, and hair bows. The boys always wore hair bows in their curls until their hair was cut, which was sometime after they were breeched. Several images show Richard and Paul in tunic suit outfits with ringlet curls and hair bows.
The Crown family was from Brattleboro, Vermont. Brattleboro is a New England river town. It was the location of the first permanent English settlement in Vermont--Fort Dummer (1724). Brattleboro itself was chartered in 1753. The major industry was printing and Battleboo was a printing town since William Fessenden began publishing books in 1805. For more than 100 years Brattleboro was the home of the renowned Estey Organ Company. Wells Fountain, pictured on the Society's logo, stands at the north end of Main Street. The images from the Brattleboro Historical Scciety provide a wonderful view of America in the early 20th century.
The city's history is lovingly preserved by the Brattleboro Historical Society. The society has a wonderful collection of glass plate photos from the 19th and early 20th centuries. Rural and small town American life is portrayed in a superb collection featuring images from New England. Copies of the photographs can be purchased from the museum.
Photographs of the Crown family are part of this collection. At this time we know nothing of he Crown family, bit it looks to be a very affluent family. We would assume that in the early 20th enturythat it was oine of the town's leading family. We wonder if there is any relationdhip to Crown Books.
The portraits of the Crown family date from 1899-1918. They look to be professionally posed portaits. They are all glass plates rather than cabinent cards. I'm not sure why the family portraits were glass plates rather than regular cabinent portraits. A reader writes, " I was quite fascinated with the Brattleboro Historical Society photographic collection, especially with the Crown family. However, I cannot reconcile the dates on the photographs with the children depicted. For example, a photograph of a 2-year child in one photograph is dated 1903 and in another photograph of the same children at the same age, 1919. I have asked the ociety to reassess their dating of the images."
The Crown family had four boys and and at least two girls. The boys are Harold, Raymond, Richard, and Paul. I think this is the order of their ages. The photos are dated
and in some cases mis-dated. I was able to find the birthdays of the Crown boys, with the exception of Paul, from the Social Security records. Paul either died before 1933 or is still living. The ages are as follows: Raymond: March 1900 to October 1976, Richard: May 1902 to Jan 1989, and Harold: April 1899 to March 1982. Paul is the youngest brother and was born around 1909. One of the images in the collection dated 1911 lists him as being 22 months old. This is pretty consistent with the images. Harold and Richard or Harold and Raymond are pictured together but Paul is alone in all of the images, except for one of him with his sisters."
Harold was the oldest brother. He was born April 1899 and died in March 1982. The three older brothers were born fairly close to each other and thus presumably were fairly close. We suspect that they were as a result dressed similarly. Thus as a yoinger boy, Harold was probably dressed much like Richard here (figure 1). A portrait of Harold in 1913 shows him wearing his confirmation suit. He seems to be about 13 or 14 years old. We do know that the
family was Catholic.
Raymond was born in March 1900 and died October 1976.
Richard was born in May 1902 and died January 1989. This is Richard Crown, at I would guess 6-7 years of age. He wears an elaborate white dress with his rather large girl doll. Several other images taken at 3 or 4 years of age show him in dresses, curls, and always with a hair bow, playing with his dolly. Judging by the number of photographs of him, I would guess he was his mother's favorite. Tge BHS dates this portrait to 1914, but there is a descrepancy here between the dates given and the portrait estimate. If Richard was born in 1902 then the photo would be 1908 or 09. We have another photo of Richard showing him a few tears later on an outing in the woods, perhaps looking for mushrooms. The photo is dated 1909 which also may be wrong. Richard looks as though he was about 10 years old. He wears a white sailor-styled blouse (but without
stripes, above-the-knee knickers, and long black stockings. He wears a small English-style peaked cap. Notice the fullness of Richard's sailor blouse. It was probably fastened at the waist by drawstrings and is not tucked into his rather close-fitting knickers.
Paul was the younger brother. He was born several years after the other boys, I think about 1909. Thus he would have been the baby of the family. Paul either died before 1933 or is still living. One of the images in the collection dated 1911 lists him as being 22 months old. This is pretty consistent with the images. Harold and Richard or Harold and Raymond are pictured together but Paul is alone in all of the images, except for one of him with his sisters. This provides some cluses as to ages and family relationshios. We note a portrait of Paul about 1921. He is hunting in thw wood and photographed with a rifle.
The boys were breeched at different ages. The older boys I think were breeched at about 4-5. The other two boys were older when breeched. This relates to a uestion we have asked about breaching. We have generally felt that by the late 19th century as boys were being breached at earlier ages, the youngr children may have been breached earlier that the older children. We speculate that the younger boys seeing thir brothers in trousers would have asked to also wear trousers at an earlier age than their brothers may have asked. This does not seem to have beren the case with the Crown family. HBC does not yet fully understand the conventions of breaching. One question we do not yet have an answer to is if the breeching process may have been over an extended period rather than a single event. Richard may have for a time worn both tunic
suits and dresses depending on his mother's whim or some convention uch as the the formality of the eventor activity.
A photo of Richard, at I would guess 6-7 years of age, shows him in an elaborate white dress with his rather large girl doll (figure 1). White dresses were very popular foir childrn at the time. This was especially the case for boys who had not yet been beached. Several other images taken at 3 or 4 years of age show him in dresses, curls, and always with a hair bow, playing with his dolly. Judging by the number of photographs of him, I would guess he was his mother's favorite. The dresses the boys wore before being breeched were not boy dresses. Little boys were commonly outfitted in dresses duing the 19th century. In the early 19th century, the dresses worn by boys were little different than those wotn by threir sisters. By the late 19th century in Ametrica, kiltsuits or plainly styled boy dresses had become increasingly common. Still this was in many families up to theie mother and it was not unknowm for boys to dressed in frilly dresses and their breaching delayed. This was most common in affluent families. The images here suggest that the Crown family was one uch family and that Mrs. Crown was a very fashionsble woman who delighted in dressing her children in fashionable clothes. It is hard to tell the boys from the girls because of the way that thy wrere ressed. The boys look like little girls in frilly dresses, curled hair, and hair bows. Several images show Richard and Paul in tunic suit outfits. We are not sure if the boys no longerwore dresses once they bgan wering tunic suits or if the tunic suits were more of apractical outfit when formal clothes were not required.
The boys have their hair done in ringlet curls and hair bows for many of the portraits. The boys always wore hair bows in their curls until their hair was cut, which was sometime after they were breeched. Bote the size of the hair bow (figure 1). While we have noted many portraits of boys wearing hair bows, most commonly they were smaller. The placement at the side of the head was common for boys. . I would note that while in dresses the boys did not wear their hair in ringlet curls. Richard during 1912-14 in the tunic suit images does have ringlet curls. In the images of him wearing dresses, his hair is curled but not in ringlets. This rather suggests that his mother considered ringlet curls to be a boys' hairdo. I also find it interesting that Richard is the only one of the boys pictured playing with dolls.
A French reader writes, "The photographic portraits of this family provide a lot of information about clothing and hair styles in the early 20th century, including hair bows,
socquettes, long white sockings, the boys' toys such as dolls, and a bit surprising the " sandalettes ". I have 2-3 French photographs taken in the early 1900s. One sees boys with modern souliers instead of the high-top shoes or boots. Perhaps their mother was copying the English fashion. One often does not see boys from the early 1900s with modern souliers. After World War I (1918), low-cut shoes, includingb strap shoes were the principal shoes worn by boys for most of the year."
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to the Main ordinary bio alpahbetica Cm-Cz page]
[Return to the Main ordinary bio chronological 19th century page ]
[Return to the Main American family page]
[Bangs]
[Long hair]
[Hair bows]
[Caps]
[Collar bows]
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[About Us]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Cloth and textiles]
[Garments]
[Countries]
[Topics]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Search]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]
