Figure 1.-- |
|
Here we list underwear garments by basic categories. This will help readers interested in a specific type of garment, but who are
unfamiliar with the various specific terms. The basic categories are:
undershirts, undepants, one-piece suits, seasonal garments, and support garments.
The two principal styles of modern undershirts are singlets (sleevelass) and "t"-shirts with a varikety of neck styles. The most common are crew-neck t-shirts, but there are also "V"-neck styles. We note that some boys always wore t-shirts under collared shirts and other boys rarely did so. At this time we do not have information on the national, regional, chromolgical, and soicial class factors involved.
Boxers are a modern style of underwear oants. Boxer shorts derived their name because they from bocxing trunks, because both were short pants style underwear, elasticied at the waist like boxing trunks. We are not sure just when they first appeared or when the term "boxer" was first used. We do note them in the 1930s. Haines marketed a similar style of underpants in 1930 (figure 1) which they called shorts. I am not sure if they were elasticized like boxers. Some boys wore boxers, but they were more common with men. Boys more commonly wore briefs. We note more boys beginning to wear boxers in the 1990s.
Briefs are a style of underwear pants. Cotton briefs began replacing union suits for boys in America during the mid 1930s but didn’t really catch on as the dominant style until about 1940. I am not sure what inspired this new type of underwear, but assume it was the fact that boys were wearing short pants cur shjorter than the kneepants and short pants of the early 20th century. Munsingwear issued a catalog in 1940 (See HBC page) showing the various styles. All briefs had an elastic waist band and various types of fly-front closure. They were tight-fitting and button-free. The later became known as “tighty-whities” by boys who thought that “boxer shorts” were more sophisticated. But they have continued as the dominant style of boys’ underwear until the present time. Briefs were also referred to as "jockey shorts" in America and "Y-fronts" in Britain.
Little boys in the early 19th Century often wore pantalettes like their sisters. Some boys wore them with skeleton suits and the lace of the pantalettes were visible at the ankles of their long trousers. Pantalettes became more important as dresses got shorter as it was considered in appropriate until mid-century for even children to
have bare legs. Gradually the length of pantalettes were shrtened and they were worn only slightly longer than the dress. Pantalettes became less common in the 1870s, but were worn by some boys into the 1890s.
One-piece underwear began to appear in the late 19th century. The principal one-piece underwear garment was the union sxuit which combined both undershirt and pants. This was known as a combination suit in Britain. American children worn both union suits and combination suits. The term combination suit had a different meaning than in Britain. The American combination suit was a child's union suit which combined the union suit with support devices to hold up pants and or hosiery.
Both boys and girls wore many styles of combination suits. Combination suits came equipped with numerous buttons for button-on styled clothing and for holding up the long stockings that were still commonly worn. Girls had bloomer or romper styled underwear while boys, excet for the youngest, wore stright legged underwear. Many styles for boys and girls were checked. There were several styles of combination suits. They were called combination sits because they combined both underm shirts and under pants. Wards also calls them "waist suits", "union suits", and "romper togs". A 1923 Montgomery Wards mail order catalog shows the varied styles of combination suits available for boys and girls in 1923. I am not sure at tis time if there were actual differences between a combinatin suit and a union suit or if they were just different terms for the same garment. A HBC reader writes, "I think the combination suit was very specific. It combined the union suit with a hose supporter or waist supporter that we saw earlier. In 1915 Stewart's catalogue there is a reference to a combination suit but it is called an "alheneeds" it was for younger boys as listed in the site. Notice it was also for summer when the extra layer of a waist to hold up stockings would be very hot!"
The union suit is a close-fitting underwear garment. The term union refers to the fact that a union suit involves the combination of both a shirt and pants (drawers) in a one piece suit. The garment commonly included a drop seat. This term began to be used in the 1890s. The term union suit was commonly used for adults. The children's version was a waist suit or a waist-union suit. Women also wore union suits. So did girls. But they were associated mainly with men because more men than women wore them. With boys and girls, I'm not sure. I think waist union suits were equally popular for
boys and girls because of the waist feature. Union suits for children were essentially combination suits. But union suits without the reinforcement straps were mainly a boy's garment.
We have found some one-piece garments that we are unfamiliar with, but perhaps they were not underwear. We are not entirely sure. Perhaps readers will have an insight here to assist us. One example here what looks like a kind of bib-front underpants.
Much of the complication in assessing children's underwear is the many different types of underwear garments designed to support other garments. Here the principal purpose was to support pants and hosiery. Some garments combined these two functions. Men normally wore suspenders and belts to hold up theifr triusers. This was less common forf children so garments were devised spedcuifically for children to hold up their pants or skirts. There was also garments to hold up the lonf stockings which were commonly worn through the 1930s.
Seasonal underwear garments are generally seen in terms od winterunderwear. This is a bit complicated by thed fact that in a good part of the United States and northern Europe, cold weather last about half the yedar. Of course seasonal underwear logically just refer to differences between winter and summer underwear and would overlap the basic categories already listed.
Winter underwear are virtually unknown to most boys today. Perhaps boys in Canada or American boys on the Northern Plains oe Scandinavian and Russian boys wear them. But for the most part they are no longer common. This is largely because modern homes and schools are so well heated. This was not the case in the 19th and early 20th cebntury. It was then very common for boys and girls to wear long underwear.
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to the Main underwear garment page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossaries]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]