|
We have several Qmerican family portraits from the 1830s. As photography did not exist, they are mostly from fashionable, prosperous city families. We di bot see rural families which were still the bulk of the population, Nor do se see frontier families which were still east of the Mississippi Fiver. Many for some reason just include the children. We see quite a number of large families. There woukd gave probably been more large fmilies if the availabke imah=gescincluded more farm families. Boys had short hair and girls long hair, sometimes curled, but we see boys with longish hair and girls with short hair. More important than length was the placement of the part. Younger boys wore dresses that looked just like their sisters, although some mother changed colors. We do not yet see boy-styled dresses, although we do see plaid dresses. Panteletts were still widely worn. The pantalettes were often a little fancier for the girls. Some jackets were done rather like tunics. They tended to be longer than what became standard styles later in the century. Best were very popular and often highly decirative and contrasting with the jackets. Long pants were still firky standeard, even for younger boys. It should be stressed that a family that could afford a studio mportait was well to do. So what we see here are if not the elite of scoety at least families living in comfortanle circumstances.
This Peckhan portrait is the children of Oliver Adams. The four Adams children are painted in their home in the Bolton area. The children are left to right: Joseph Sawyer (1828-31); Frances Anne (1824-38); Laura Ann (1826-97); and John Quincy (1830-37). Their father Oliver Adams was from Petersham . Their mother was Zilpah Sawyer (Peckham's sister-in-law) of Bolton. Joseph and Frances share a red ball. The children all wear very similar dresses done in bright colors., The dresses are low-cut top, baloon sleeves, high waists, and long skirts, almost covering their pantalettes. There are decorative colored bands near the ankle hem of the skirt. The major difference is color, yellow for the girls and red for the boys. Note tha rather than white pantalettes, the children wear pantalettes marching the color of their dresses. We suspect they were probably done in the same material. The boys have short hair with side parts, although it is a bit difficult to tell in te case of Joseph. The girls have long uncurled hair wihbsharo center parts. The family details (births and death dates) were provided on the back ofthe portrait, including the previous two Olivers, who were painted posthumously by Peckham. This painting includes a post-mortem depiction of Joseph, whose death occasioned his Uncle Robert painying the portrait. The children stand to the right of a window and a dark nail-studded trunk with the in initials "O" (liver) "A" (dams) and to the left of a brown cradle.
Here we have a family portarit with a definitive date. It was painted by Anbrose Andrews, a skilled itinerant portraitist. He captured the children of Nathan Starr in their Middletown, Connecticut home. Andrews has advanced beyond the naive stage. Look at how he handles light. The chikdren's faces are beautifully done. He did not paint the standard portait view of the family arranged facing the artist. Rather he painted a lively intimate view of the children. They are playing playing an early form of indoor badminton called 'battledore and shuttlecock'. They are pictured in a sparsely furnished Greek Revival parlor, more like a playroom, with doors open to a patio offering a panoramic view of the Connecticut River. Notice the sailboats. We don't see any steamboats like the ones plying the Mississippi. The boys are wearing long pants suits. The older boy has a short jacket and vest donr in different colors. The vest is a bright yellow. The younger boy looks to be wearing a button-on suit--his partnof the portrait ios unclear.. They have identucal white collar blouses. The youngest boy wears a light blue dress styled like the white dresses his sisters are wearing -- low necklines, high waists, and and puff sleeves. The younger girl has a blue satin sash. All the children have short hair. The oldest girl has a short side curl. The youngest child, Edward, holds a hoop in his right hand and a gaming stick in his left, pointed heavenward. He died (1835). His death may be why the parents had a portrait painted.
Here we have a well known naive family portrait in a standard pose of everyone facing the artist. As we approach mid-century we see thev quality of naive painting improving. The portrait has been used as a book cover. We have, however, been unanle to identify to identify the family or the artist. Nor can we find the date. It looks to us like the 1830s, perhaps the late-30s. The early-40s is a possibility. Hopefully readers will know more. There is a suggestion that the boy had died and painted as if he was still alive. The chidren stand out because of the very drab background, Both girls and boys (including the baby) have short hair. The basic difference is the part. Only thr oldest girl has long hair -- done in ringlets. The girls aee wearing long, brightly colored dresses with white pantalettes. The boy wears a suite with a short jacket, vest, and long pants. Notice that nothing matches. He also has a blouse with long pointed collar.
Here we have aniother well known naive portrait, but we can find no information as to the family or the artist. We post these unknown images in part to neglect any insights tha readers can offer. We suspect it was painted in the 1830s, although the 40s is a definite a possibility. The younger boy's plaid dress suggests the 40s, but overall the fashions it seens to us or more indicative of the 30s. The children look to be about 2-10 years old. The older boy wears a blue tunic and white long pants or pantalettes. It is not easy to differentiate. The girls wear long dresses with low necklines. The older girl has a dress with a defined waistline. The younger girl's dress has an undefined waistline. Note the older girl's ear loop ringlet. We do not know what to make of the footwear. The props are interesting, including a straw hat, popgun, pin wheel, book with a fullm,page illustration, and doll.
We know nothing about the Slater family except that they lived in Western Massachusetts. The three children in the fmily were painted by a naive artist, probably Joseph Goodhue Chandler. It is not a signed work, ut attruibuted to to him. It is also not dated, but it is believed to have been painted about 1835. The children are about 8 years old. The baby wears a bonnet and white dress. The two boys both wear brown outfits, one a dress and the other some kind of long pants suit which we can't make out very well. Usually naive artists depict garments very well. In this case vbecause of the way the children are posed, we can not make out just what the garments were.
American portratists Oliver Tarbell Eddy (1799-1868) is known for the 13 (perhaps more) portraits that he painted of the prosperous William Rankin family. Rankin was a hat manufacturer. An even more well known artist, Rembrant Peaple, painted a portrait of the father. A good example of the Eddy portraits is one done of the younger Rankin children about 1838 (figure 1). Eddy work in New Jersey at a time before the invention of photography. This portrait ws commissioned to commemorate the death of Matilda ?the younger daughter who died in 1838. This probably explais the storm clouds painted in the window. Also included is a geranium, a flower symbolising mourning. Her older sister holds a handkerchief, perhaps meant wipe away tears. The boys both wear black suits. Black was very popular in the early Victoriam period. The younger boy wears a suit jacket that looks rather like a tunic. Notice the very broad collar that extend to the shoulders rather than pointing down. These collars are very different than the often very small collars popular at mid-century. The boys both have short hair, although the oldest boy has hair down to his ears. The girls both war desses with low necklines. Notice the half sleeves with a puff at the elbows. The dress colors are muted. Notice the older girl has shoes matching her dress. We don't know what kind of hats/caps the boys wore, but notice the fancy bonnet that one of the girls wore on the table. This was presumbably included because their father made hats. Both girls have center parts.
This portait of the Joseph Moore family was painted by Erastus Salisbury Field about 1839. Field was a largely self-taught naive/fok artist which despite excelent redering, shows markedly in this image. Field had worked for more than a decade as a successful intenerit artist in western Massachusetts and the Connecticut River Valley (late-1820s-30s).He returned to Ware, Massachusetts, to help manage the family farm. His father's health was declining. Across the street lived Joseph Moore and his family. Moore persued a fascinatgiung career co=mbibation. He was a itinerate dentist in the summer when it was possibke to easilt travel. At the time the raileoads were still only beginning to devrelop. But then transfiormed intgo a hatter during the the winter months. The resulting Moore family portrait was immense. Field painted Moore and his wife, Almira Gallond Moore, early life-size. They are seated in highly decorated Hitchcock chairs and surrounded by four children who look to be about 3-14 years old. Their two sons surround their father at the right. And their recently orphaned niece and nephew at left. As was commonly for the naive aertists, and Field was one of the best, meticulously depicted many clothing details such as Mrs. Moore’s ornate lace collar. Everyone is dressed in back and white. Some of the ante-bellum portraits shows colorfully dressed children. We are not sure yet what the chronological pattern of color was. Field’s handling of perspective mars the image, especially the failure foreshorten the oatterned caropet which is very dustracting.
One of the important early American portratists was Oliver Tarbell Eddy (1799-1868). A lot of his work was done in New Jersey, especially Newark during the 1830s. Thus they are an important source of information about clothing and families in the period just before the invention of photography. Eddy was a portraitist and he did both individual and family group portraits. We note the older Alling children. Their father was Stephen Ball Alling (1808-61). He was a partner in the prosperous New Jersey jewelry firm of Alling, Hall, and Dodd, and Jane H. Weir (1811-89). The children from left to to right are Stephen Ball (1835-39), Mary Wilder (1836-??), Cornelia Meigs (1833-??), and Emma (1831-??). The apparent ages of the children date the work to around 1839. Stephen is the only boy. The children are all dressed alike in low-cut dresses. Notice the half sleeves with the puff at the elbows. The children all wear similar pntlettes, white socks, and blaclk slippers. The only differences that we note is that Stephen's dress is a dark color and his hem is shorter. The props are interesting. The hammar confirms that he is a boy. Given the age of the children, the portraot was painted about 1839. Note the lack of interaction between the subjects. This probably means that the children pose individually. Stephen may have alredy passed away.
This beautiful naive family portait is unatributed and unidentified (figure 1). There is no clue as to where they lived. We see a mother and father and their three children. The man in the center must be an uncle or other adult as he has brown eyes. Everyone else has blue eyer. Naive artists often do not get ages right, but the garment are depicted to a tee. We suspect the ages range here is from 5 to 13 yeas based primarily on biology. (Sibings are unlikely to be cloiser together thn 1 1/2 years.) The two boys are probably not as close in age as suggested by the artist. The younger boy wears a green patterned dress dress with a ruffled collar. The older boy wears a suit with a short collat-buttoned jacket and striped pants. The girl wears a white dress with a low neckline, puffed sleeves and pink sash. The portrait is not obvviously dated. One art historin suggests 1825, but there is a '39' notation in the book. That may mot be a date, but it likekly is. Click here to see the notation.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to the Main U.S. 19th century family page]
[Return to the Main U.S. family page]
[About Us]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Cloth and textiles]
[Garments]
[Countries]
[Topics]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Search]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]
