Figure 1.--This new-style cabinet card is undated, but the mount suggess the 1900s. We see three siblings about 1/2-6 years of age. The infabn wears a baby dress. The two boys wear classic matching tunic suits, although the striped pattern looks different. There is nothing written on the card and as is common with the new style mounts, no photographer is noted. The photo measures about 6 3/4 x by 5 1/4 inches.

At the beginning of the 1890s, the convention of dressing youngr boys in dresses and other skirtd garments was still very common. This began to change during the decade, expecially by mid-decade. We are not entirely sure why this long-established convention so suddenly began to be abandoned by parents. We believe that the Fauntleroy Craze was a factor. Many mothers appear to have been so enamored with Fauntleroy styling that they decided to breech their sons earlier than might have been the case earlier. As a result, even by the turn-of-the century, we see far fewer boys wearing dressesses and other skirted garments. We also see far fewer boys beyond the ealy toddler years wearing dresses. The same is true of skirts and kilts. The only exception we note is tunics. They suddently became much more popular and were major style for two decades. Many of these boys before the turn-of-the century were boys that would have worn dresses. We see some boys wearing tunics at ages at which they would have been breeched. But the vast majority of boys wore tunics suits at age at whichthey might have worn dresses and other skirted garments like kilt suits before the turn-of-the 20th century. One important point is that while tunics were a skirted garment, they were worn with pants, mostly bloomer knickers and to a lesser extent straigh-leg kneepants. So they were actually boy who had been breeched. Many mothers who might have dressed their boys in dresses during the Victorian era, instead appear to have chosen the related tunic style.

Created: 10:58 PM 6/28/2016
Last updated: 10:58 PM 6/28/2016