|
Long or full-length stockings were still worn by American children, both boys and girls, in the inter-War era, buth the populrity was declining. Long stockings were commonly worn by American children in the early 1920s. We continue to commonly see them in the 1920s, although they were becoming more seasonal. Long stockings rapidly declined in popularity during the 1930s, especially after the mid-30s. They were, however, still worn although were declining in popularity throughout the 30s and even into the early-40s. They were no longer widely worn by boys of a wide age range, we mostly see younger boys wearing them. The boys that continued to wear them tended to be younger boys 10-years old and under.
We are not precisely sure how many boys wore long stockings in the inter-war era, but we have begun to acquire some information. A fctor here was age. Long stockings were more common with younger boys. Most boys wore long stockings in the 1900s and 1910s. Knee socks began to appear in the 1910s, but long stockings were much more common. They were still very common in the early-1920s. A good example is Raymond Uferte who wore long stockings withbhis Norfolk knickers suite in 1921. We believe this continued to be the case through the mid-1920s. We begin to see more boys wearing knee socks with their knickers by the mid-1920s. This included both knicker suits and olin knickers. This shift is very obvious because the knee sicks were commonly done in loud patterns. Available images of boys by the 1930s almost always show boys weraing knee socks with their knickers and short pants, although knicker suits were by this time declining in popularity. Ankle socks begin to appear more commonly in the 1930s and were quite common by the early 1940s.
Long stockings were still commonly worn by both boys and girls in the inter-War era. We note long stovkings in bth the photographic record and in the popular mail order catalogs of the day. This was especily the case in the 1920s. We see many children wearing them, although usage was clearly becomig seasonal. We see far fewer boys wearing them in the summer. They were also commonly worn for forml occassions. We still see long stockingsin the 30s, but not as commonly.
The photographic record provides a great deal about long stockings during the inter-War years. We note quite a few boys wearing long stockings in the 1920s. This seems to have declined during the 1930s, especilly after te md-30s. By this time we note relatively few boys appear to be wearing long stockings in available pohotographs. HBC has noted some, but realtively few images of American boys in 40s wearing long stockings with short pants. HBC has, however, note a few instances:
Formal wear: French Canadian boys were wearing long stockings for with formal First Communion wear as late as the early 1950s. We also see American children dressing up with long stickings. It was common in both the 19th and 20th centuries. The fact that most boys wore knee pants andknickers somewhat complicates the issue, but it is usualy possible to tell the difference between long stockings and kee socks. Almost all Ameican boys wofre loin stockings when dressing up in the late 19h and early 20th centuries. This becomes somewhat more complicated after Wirld War I. We still, however, see many example. A good example is an unidentified family in the late-1920s. For especially formal occassions, black long tockings were worn. We remember seein Teddy Kennedy being dressed in a short pants suit with long stockings, I think about 1939. His father was the U.S. Ambassador to England and the family had travelled to Rome for an audience with the Pope.
School wear: Some available photographs show that some boys were wearing short pants with long stockings to school. They were usually the younger boys. Boys can often be seen wearing varying styles such as shorts and knickers with both long stockings and kneesocks. See another school scene.
Catalog companies, on the other hand, suggest that they were still being worn. Just about all of the major clothing catalogs right through the mid-40's sold at least some small selection of boys stockings which is strong evidence that they were being bought and worn. Clothing catalogs, unlike fashion magazines, would not continue to carry and advertise clothing that no one was buying. I think that perhaps long stockings were being bought for cold weather wear, probably nore for girls than boys, but they were advertised for boys wear. The advertisements always showed the boys wearing long stockings with short pants. I'm not sure if boys actually dressed this way or if they were worn as cold weather gear and that the stockings were just better shown in the illustrations with a boy wearing short pants. Obviously the stockings would not be visible if the model was wearing heavy winter long pants. The ads appeared, however, in Spring as well as Winter catalogs--suggesting that they may have been worn with short poants. Other than these catalog advertisements. The 1941 advertisement quote below do stress that they are made extra long to be worn with the "shorter clothing" of the 1940s.
|
We do not have not hard evidence about how popular long stockings were. Here there may be differences among the children and the maothers. Fathers may not have been greatly involved. We do have considerable photographic evidence as to how widely they were worn. This is, however, not the same as popularity. Another interesgting tool in assessing popularity is period advertising. Manufacturers of stocking supporters bgan to take on issues beyond strength and durability. They adress comfort and restrictiness and the idea that long stockings and stocking supportetr were more for girls. They railed against the idea of panty waists. This suggests to us that boys were beginning to complain to mothers. And the advertisers were trying their best to convince mothers that their products were comfortable, not-restricrive, and not girlish. As late as the early-20th century. long stockings were still the accepted style. Boys had worn them for decades. The rapidity with which they were replaced by knee socks during the 1920s suggest to us that they were not very popular with boys. Short pants became popular with younger boys after World War I in the 1920s. We suspect that little boys who began wearing short pants with socks during the summer in the 1920s, were not to happy about swithching to long-stockings when they began wearing knickers and started school. Some may not have seen the point if it. Modsty with was a factor in the 19th century was no longr a concern in the 20th century, especially after World War I. And after all many boys went barefoot and did not wear any hoiery during the summer in both the 19th and early-20th century. And by the 1920s knee socks were available and more boys were wearing long pants. Long pants in particular were becomong increasingly popular by the late-1930s. Few boys wearing long pants wore long stocvkings. But other factors may have been involved. Boys in particular don't like complicatiins with clothing. And putting on sticking supporters and fastening long stockings were a serious vomplication. Surely most boys would have found that the hose supporters that you had to wear with them very restrictive and uncomfortable. HBC believes that long stockings may have been more popular with mothers than their sons, or even daughters. During the inter-war period, boys stockings worn by fewer and fewer boys, especially by the late-30s. But for those mothers that chose them for their sons, and there were many, stockings as an option were certainly an acceptable norm in boys attire.
There were major changes in long stockings during the inter-war years. The common color of the stockings changed from black to lighter colors. The length of long stockings also changed significantly in the inter-war years. The weight of the stockings alo changed. The long stockings commonly worn by boys in the early 20th century, including the ealy 1920s tended to be very bulky and not very well fitted. This began to change significantly in the 1920s and much more form fitted less bulky long stockings began to be worn. Colors also changed. Black had been the primary color in the 1920s, but beige and other brown shades became increasingly common in the 1930s. Long stockings were still very common in the 920s, but the popularity declined sharpy during the 1930s. And we note older boys wearing them less commonly.
Sears offered three types of long stockings in their Spring 1941 catalog. The fact that there were three types suggests there was still a substantial market for stockings.
Their long wear, their good looks, their low price have made them favorite itenms for over 25 years. [HBC note: This means they were first offered about 1915. Before that wool stockings may have been more common.] Soft and easy streaching. They're fine ribbed of combed cotton, the quality famous for softness and strength. Great for the chubby legged or long legged because they are longer than the average stockings. Plain seamless feet. Extra reonforcement in the heels and toes. Colors: Black, Brown-tone, Dark tan, Medium tan. Sizes: The size range is from 6 to 10 in half size intervals. Cost $0.14.
Ther's a soft sheen to these, a silk-like luster that makes an instant hit wityh the young folks. The rayon just's on the surface; it's knit over smooth long-wearingbmercerized cotton. These stockings live up to their reputation for wear! $-ply mercerized cotton heels and toes--more wear there! These stockings are extra long, are finely ribbed knit to keep their elacticity. Flat knit feet. Colors: Dark tan, Light tan, Medium tan or white. Sizes: The size range is from 6 to 10 in half size intervals. Cost $0.24.
Mercerized cotton stockings look so much smmother and finer than ordinary cottons, come in such rich colors, and wear so very long. They are finely ribbed and knit extra long fot today's short clothes. Active children need heels and toes knit of 4-ply yarns like ghese. Buy Pilgrom stockings and get more value! Extra value in these of mercerized cotton. Colors: Brown stone, Medium tan, Dark tan or white. Sizes: The size range is from 6 to 10 in half size intervals. Cost $0.22.
|
There was for many years no indidication whatsoever of any gender conotation for long stockings. The advertising suggested that they were being offered as equally suitable for a boy or girl. The advertising text and images stressed that they were made for active children--indicating that they were suitable for boys. Also of note is that advertisements for boys stockings during this period offered exactly the same styles for boys and girls. Long stockings were truly a uni-gender item. We see both family anf group photographs with the boys and girls wearing long stockings. A good example is an unidentified family in the late-1920s. While the advertising did not change, the photographic record suggests that many boys stopped wearung them in the 1930s. Several factors were at play. Many boys still bwore knickers in the 1930s, but they mostly shifted to knee socks. and more boys were wearing long pants. Younger boys might war short pants, but shots wre beginning tobe seen as casual summer wear and worn with socks. Boys never much card for long stockings, especially as they had o war stocking supporters. Any with long pants and knee socks, even mothers began to see all the bother as not so imprtant any more. Girls were a little different in that their mothers ore similar garments and with skirts, the long stockings helped to keep warm. Modesty and formality were also factors.
The colors of long stockings worn by boys changed during the inter-war period. Boys in the early 1920s would commonly wear black or very dark colored long stockings. For dress occasions someboys might even wear long white stockings. Black and especially white long stockings became less common for boys during the 1920s. The colors offered in the 1930s and early 1940s are notable for the lack of color. None of the bright colors that children wore as tights in the 1960s had yet appeared. Almost all of the available colorsd are neutral tones, nostly varying shades of brown. The stockings were available in tan, brownstone, and to a lesser extent black and white. The colors boys usually wore in the 1930s and eraly 40's were most often various shades of brown, tan or beige, though black and sometimes off white, but rarely white.
Long stockings in the inter-war era were available in a number of fabrics and fabric blends. The primary material was cotton. Wool stockings were much more common in the eraly 1900s, but wool blends were still available in the 1920s and 30s. Long stockings were primarily availale in cotton, although one style has cotton with rayon outside. Mercerized cotton is used in some of the stockings. Mercerized cotton is cotton yarn or fabric treated with caustic alkali under tension, increasing strength, luster, and afinity for dyes. The process is named for its inventor, J. Mercer, who was an English calico manufacturer. He patented the process in 1850. The most common material that was used for boys stockings by the late 1930s was was known as "mercerized cotton" which was usually described in catalog adds as being reasonably durable and with care should stand up reasonably well to regular play activities.
For more formal "dress" occasions however, a more expensive "rayon"
covered mercerized cotton style was also sold for boys that outwardly
appeared somewhat silky or shiny ..thereby attempting to emulate the
look of silk. These being more expensive and less durable, were
usually reserved for more formal dress wear occasions. Starting in early 1942 many stocking advertisements began to state that most U.S. production of rayon and silk resources were being diverted to
the war effort until further notice. Rayon and silk was needed in particular for parachutes. As the Japanese cut off America from the major supplier of silkn (China), rayon was badky needed. During the next 4 years (1942-45), both women and children reverted back to having only cotton based stocking products available. Had World War II not had this diversionary effect, it would have more than likely led to more in the way of rayon/silk dress stocking options for boys.
Long stockings were worn for several reasons. There were arange of both practical anf dashionable reasons for wearing long stockings rather than knee socks and ankle socks. Long stockings in the late 19th and early 20th century appear to have been worn in part for propriety, except for very young children, bare legs were considered inappropriate. This was no longer true by the 1920s, especially by the late-20s. Here age was a fctor. What was seen as proper for young children was different teeenagers. Also they were worn for warmth in the less well heated homes of the period. appear to have primarily been worn for warmth. This appears to have change somewhat in the inter-war era. Certainly wearing them for warmth was still a factor. An HBC contributor reports that "Boys stockings during the 1930s and 40's were styled for wear during the cooler autum, winter and spring months." This was especially true as boys in the 1930s and 40s were wearing short pants quite a bit shorter than the knee pants and short pants worn in thr 1910s and 20s. A formal dressy look was another factor that long stockings were worn. The advertising text most commonly stress the durability of long stockings. Less common are references to dress wear with formal garments. HBC believes, however, that long stockings were worn for dressing up. Images at some formal events do show boys in black or white long stockings, although this had become less common by the 1930s. We see mostly long stockings in the 1920s, but mostly knee socks in the 30s. Some catalog adds did refer to long stockings for dress wear. Long stockings were least commonly worn for play, although the advertising text in stressing comfort and resisance to rough wear would seem to be stressing their sutability as play clothes. Also the clothing ads sometimes pictured boys in stockings wearing "T" shirts, also stressing their suitability as play clothes.
Long stockings in the late 19th and early 20th century appear to have been worn in part for propriety, except for very young children, bare legs were considered inappropriate. This was no longer true by the 1920s, especially by the late-20s. Here age was a fctor. What was seen as proper for young children was different teeenagers. Here the values of propriety varies from familiy to family. Different families accepting the new attitudes toward modesty and propiery more quickly than others. And the propiety varies as to the citcumstances, such as play, school, parties,church, and for all occasions. Mothrs believed that propiety was especially important for very formal occasions like weddings and first communion..
Also they were worn for warmth in the less well heated homes of the period. appear to have primarily been worn for warmth. This appears to have change somewhat in the inter-war era. Certainly wearing them for warmth was still a factor. An HBC contributor reports that "Boys stockings during the 1930s and 40's were styled for wear during the cooler autum, winter and spring months." This was especially true as boys in the 1930s and 40s were wearing short pants quite a bit shorter than the knee pants and short pants worn in thr 1910s and 20s. HBC believes that this was especially true for boys who wore short pants all year round. Some parents viewed short pants as the appropriate dress for boys, regardless of the season. Other parents inreasing saw shorts as summer wear, but in the 1920s and 30s some others dressed boys in shorts year round. It was these mothers that were most likely to choose long stockings for their boys.
|
A formal dressy look was another factor that long stockings were worn. The advertising text most commonly stress the durability of long stockings. Less common are references to dress wear with formal garments. HBC believes, however, that long stockings were worn for dressing up. Images at some formal events do show boys in black or white long stockings, although this had become less common by the 1930s. We see mostly long stockings in the 1920s, but mostly knee socks in the 30s. Some catalog adds did refer to long stockings for dress wear. The dress stockings by the 1930s were a blended cotton fabric with rayon added. These were not bulky like ealier long stockings and with stocking suppoters could look very smart. This was very common in the 20s when long stockings wer very common, but less common in the 30s. For normal suits and occassions like parties and going to church, we mostlt see boys wearing knicker suits with knee socks, comonly with bold patterns. For relly formaal occassions like weddings, first communion, and other important events mothers often wanted boys to look extrenely smart. And as a result chose long stockings, usually meaning black or white stockiungs. Knee socks might fall sown. Held up by stocking supporters, long stockings were held firmly in place and pulled aught to give a smart look without wrinkles. . And often mothers for these formal occassions did not want the bold paerns common with knee socks.
Long stockings were least commonly worn for play, although the advertising text in stressing comfort and resisance to rough wear would seem to be stressing their sutability as play clothes. Also the clothing ads sometimes pictured boys in stockings wearing "T" shirts, also stressing their suitability as play clothes.
They were being worn by younger boys. The sizes offered range from 6 to 10. I'm not ure about the actual measurements, but assume the sizes refer to the child's age. The range of the stocking sizes that were available for boys directly related to the boys shoe size and from this, we can tell that it was common for boys as old as 8 amd 9 years and even older to wear them. The ads clearly show that they were marketed for both boys and girls. This does not, however, mean that thet were purchased equally for both boys and girls. This may well have been the case in the 1920s, we suspect , however, that by the 1940s that many of the purchases were being made for girls. We have, however, little information to conform this. We do note very few images, other than the clothing ads, from the 1940s showing boys wearing them.
One HBC contributor notes, "I didn't know they made these this large. By looking at some of the ads and the drawings, it looks like their stockings went quite high above the knees. I had thought long stockings were just over the knee."
An interesting observation is that during the same period the cut and flared styling for dress wear overcoats for both boys and girls was somewhat the same ..and further, it was more than common that boys would wear their relatively short shorts of the period, and their
stockings under these longer dress coats. If it were not for hair style differences ..it might have been somewhat difficult, in some cases, to separate a boy in his outdoor Sunday best dress clothes from his sister who might also be wearing a similar outer dress coat concealing a shorter dress with similar stockings. This was somewhat the John-John Kennedy look of the mid 1960's ... only the boys during the 40's in many cases were quite a bit older than John John and also wore stockings.
Unlike kneesocks, boys did not often have their long stockings fall down. There were everal ways of keeping stockings from falling down. The latex and button options, however, never became as popular as the more common shoulder garter or garter belt.
The last time I saw stocking supporters advertised was the mid to late 1940s, even so they were quite a wide range of different types of stocking supporters available. Many were clearly targeted for younger children. During this period there was a variety of both over the shoulder and waist style garter belts, that were available--the same style for boys and girls.
Also available besides the traditional gartered stocking options were "latex" rubberized banded tops for boys stockings that were
advertised to "stay up" on their own without the need for garters. This made putting on long stockings much simpler. They were advertised for both boys and girls.
There was also a brand of boys stockings that came with reinforced
button holes in the thigh high hem. These button holed stocking tops
could then be secured to various underwear items or perhaps shirt tails
on to which handy mothers could sew mating buttons.
A style of button-on stiockings appeared for both boys and girls in the late 1930s. This style were in fact very sinilar to tights, but had button closures instead of a simple elatic band. HBC is not sure how popular this style roved, but the rarity of the advertisement suggests that they did not priove to be a commercial success.
Related HBC Pages:
[Return to the Main U.S. stockings chronology page]
[Knee socks]
[White knee socks]
[Long stockings]
[Striped socks]
[White stockings]
[Tights]
Navigate the Historic Boys' Clothing Web Site:
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[Essays]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]
