Figure 1.--We have a major problem in assessing dresses worn by boys in that so many of the old photgraphs available are not identified. Thus we have no way of knowing if the child photographed is a boy or girl. Here we are not at all sure. All we know about this child for sure is that the portrait was taken in New York, probaly in the 1880s.

We have a major problem in assessing dresses worn by boys in that so many of the old photgraphs available are not identified. Thus we have no way of knowing if the child photographed is a boy or girl. This really complicates our ability to understand the trends. Many of the portraits provide clues that are useful in making educated guesses. Props can be helpful, but are not definitive. Hair styles are also helpful, but some boys had long hair and some girlds short hair.Other photographs have no clues what so ever. We are left to assess the faces which is problematic at best.

Figure 1 (New York)

We have a major problem in assessing dresses worn by boys in that so many of the old photgraphs available are not identified. Thus we have no way of knowing if the child photographed is a boy or girl. Here we are not at all sure. All we know about this child for sure is that the portrait was taken in New York, probably New York City. We would date it to the 1880s

Figure 2 (Springfield, Ohio)

This is another unidentified portrait. All that is know is that the portrait was taken in Springfield, O. The O probaly stands for Ohio. We would estimate it was taken in the 1880s. The child looks to be about 10-11 years old and is wearing a dress with a full skirt. There is fancy velvet wotk at the shoulders. The age of the child suggests a girl. The face looks a little boyish anf the child has short hair. The hair is much shorter than that of most girls, but the the hair ciut without a part does not look quite right for a boy. Perhaps readers have some insights.

Created: 1:35 AM 6/18/2007
Last updated: 2:29 AM 9/13/2007