Figure 1.--This American child was from Quincy, Illinois. The image is undated, but we would estimate the 1870s. The child is not identified, but looks to be a boy. We do not know what color this dress was. There is somocking on the dress in addition ti three rows of decorative flounces (we are un sure about the term) at the hem. He wears striped long stockings which may have had sone colors matching the color of the dress. Note the bangs hair styling. We are guessing that the bangs are a partial bowl cut. Also notice the necklace that the child is wearing.

We believe that American mothers followed the same basic chronlogy of outfitting boys in dresses as was the case in Europe, especially Britain. This was the common pattern for severl centuries in Europe, although we are unsure just how this payed out in colonial America. We have more information on the 19th century, especially beginning with the mid-19th centiry as photography expanded the numerical availability of images. American boys for much of the 19th century wore dresses as was the fashion in Europe. The styles worn were quite similar to the styles worn by their sisters in the 18th and much of the 19th century. This began to change in the late 19th century when plainer styled boy dresses began to appear. This was an exremely common fashion throughout the 19th century which only began to change after the turn of the 20th century. Boys still wore dresses at the turn of the 20th century, but the popularity of this convention rapidly declined. Boys wearing dresses was much less common by the 1910s. One of the last ads we have noted offering dresses for boys was in the Best & Co. 1918 catalog which offered a variety of summer dresses for todlers. The reason that mothers stopped dressing their sons in dresses is not all together understood, but must have been essentially the same in America and Europe as the same changes were taking place in European countries as it occurred in America.

The 17th Century

The 18th Century

We believe that American mothers followed the same basic chronology of outfitting boys in dresses as was the case in Europe, especially Britain. This was the common pattern for several centuries in Europe, although we are unsure just how this played out in colonial America. We know that clothing styles were set in Europe, primarily Britain aznd France. Fashions would have come largely Britain, but French fashions influenced British fashions--especially dresses and other women's dresses. This would have been the styles worn in the towns and cities. There were, however, not very many cities. Most Americans lived on farms in rural areas. And practical farm clothes did not equate with European fashions. Affluence is an interesting question. Americans compared to Europeans were relatively well off. When measured in practical terms like diet and land ownership, ASmericans were bettr off than English people. Income disparities were not as great as in England. But this meant that there were fewer people that had the wealth to give great attention to fashion. We have portraits painted of affluent residents of the major cities and we see essentially European-styled dresses. What we do not yet know is how the great masjority of boys were dressed who lived on farms or small towns in rural America.

The 19th Century

We have more information on the 19th century, especially beginning with the mid-19th centiry as photography expanded the numerical availability of images. American boys for much of the 19th century wore dresses as was the fashion in Europe. The styles worn were quite similar to the styles worn by their sisters in the 18th and the early- and mid-19th century. This began to change in the late-19th century when plainer styled boy dresses began to appear. The actual styles chosen, however, were largely up to the mothers fashion sence. Some mothers dressed even dressed all the children alike. An example here is an unidentified family. The age of breeching varied from family to family. One factor here was social class. We see boys wearing plainer styles. A good example is Arthur N. Taylor, probably photographed in the 1880s. This was an exremely common fashion throughout the 19th century, although the popularity of the convetion appears to have been declining in the late 1890s. The precise time-line still needs to be worked out.

The 20th Century

Boys still wore dresses at the turn of the 20th century, but the popularity of this convention rapidly declined. We are unsure just why popular conventions began changing at this time and why it changed so rapidly. We still see boys wearing dresses in the 1900s, especially the early 1900s, but much less so than in the 1890s. They also tended to be younger boys. A good example is Lincoln Muenks about 1905 who looks to be wearing a plaid dress. Another exanole is Harold Howes in 1903. Boys wearing dresses was much less common by the 1910s. One of the last ads we have noted offering dresses for boys was in the Best & Co. 1918 catalog which offered a variety of summer dresses for todlers. The reason that mothers stopped dressing their sons in dresses is not all together understood, but must have been essentially the same in America and Europe as the same changes were taking place in European countries as it occurred in America.

Created: December 22, 2002
Last updated: 5:44 AM 7/12/2010