|
We begin to see see suits as we now know them in the 1840s. As far as we can tell this was a substantial change from the 1830s, although this is a little difficult to tell. Photography was invented in France (1839). Thus we have relatively few images to work with in the 1830s, but in the 1840s we have Daguerreotype portraits. The number is limited, but far more than in the 30s. We see both collar-buttoning suits, primarily military-style jackets, and lapel jacket suits cut shorter than the frock jackets. We are not yet sure about cut-away jackets. Another suit issue is the convention of matching jackets and pants. The idea of suits is today commonly taken to mean matching items. But in the 1840s we see many boys wearing suit-like jackets with differently colored vests and pants. We are not sure why this was son common. We are not sure that it was an actual fashionable statement. There may be other factors involved. Suits for boys were not as common in the 1840s and 50s as they were by the 1860s Civil War period. We see many boys in the studio portraits of the day wearing just print blouses and button-on long trousers. While as in the later 19th century boys are more commonly wearing suits of some kind, including kilt suits, when they are dressed up for portraits. A substantial part of the 1840s portraits we see show boys, especially younger boys, in just blouses and not suits. We think economics was a factor here. Boys were increasingly better dressed as the American economy steadily expanded at mid-century. That is not to say that boys never wore suits. We see a range of different suits, only most boys were not wearing them. And it is likely that if they are not wearing a suit for a studio portrait, they probably did not have a suit. The suits are notable for quite a range of different jackets. The boy here wears a long jacket (figure 1). The suit pants were more standard. American boys at the time wore long pants.
We begin to see see suits as we now know them in the 1840s. As far as we can tell this was a substantial change from the 1830s, although this is a little difficult to tell. Photography was invented in France (1839). Thus we have relatively few images to work with in the 1830s, but in the 1840s we have Daguerreotype portraits. The number of images are limited, but far more than in the 30s.
Suits consisted of three different items. This long-lasting convention seems to first appear in the 1840s. The two major items were the jacket and pants. The third item was the vest. We note several varied jacket styles American boys were wearing in the 1840s. We see both collar-buttoning suits, primarily military-style jackets, and lapel jacket suits cut shorter than the frock jackets. We are not yet sure about cut-away jackets, primarily because we are unable to reliably destinuish between 1840s and 50s Dags. Another suit issue is the convention of matching jackets and pants. The suits are notable for quite a range of different jackets. The vests were optional. but very common. Most of the styling was focused on the jackets. There were several distinctive styles. Vests often had lapels which if you you look closely you can see in the vests that the boys here are wearing (figure 1). Vests were commonly cut shorter than modern vests. They were usually as a fashion statement done in a different pattern meant to contrast with the jacket.
The idea of suits is today commonly taken to mean matching items. This was not always the case. We see matching suits like the ones the boys here were wearing (figure 1). We also see boys wearing suit items that did not match. And this was not just the vests, but the pants as well. And in the 1840s we see many boys wearing suit-like jackets with contrasting vests and pants. We are not sure why this was so common. We note that earlier with skeleton suits there were both matching pants and contrasting pants. Both color and varied patterns were used to turn these garments into contrasting items. Dometimes brught colors were used forbthe vests and old patterns were used for the pants. Stripes were popular. We are not sure that it was an actual fashionable statement. There may be other factors involved. The contrasting device seems especially popular in the 1840s. The non-matching suits were not just for boys. We aklso see men earinb them, but almost always younger men. With adults there was a degree of informality assdociated with the non-matching suits.
Suits for boys were not as common in the 1840s and 50s as they were by the 1860s Civil War period. We see many boys in the studio portraits of the day wearing just print blouses and button-on long trousers. While as in the later 19th century boys are more commonly wearing suits of some kind, including kilt suits, when they are dressed up for portraits. A substantial part of the 1840s portraits we see show boys, especially younger boys, in just blouses and not suits. We think economics was a factor here. Boys were increasingly better dressed as the American economy steadily expanded at mid-century. That is not to say that boys never wore suits. We see a range of different suits, only most younger boys were not wearing them. And it is likely that if they are not wearing a suit for a studio portrait, they probably did not have a suit.
Navigate Related HBC Pages:
[Rounded crown hats]
[Cut-away jackets ]
[Shirts]
[Button-on shirts]
[Long pants]
Navigate the Boys' Historical Clothing Web Site:
[Return to the Main U.S. 1840s suit page]
[Return to the Main U.S. 19th century cronology page]
[Introduction]
[Activities]
[Biographies]
[Chronology]
[Clothing styles]
[Countries]
[Bibliographies]
[Contributions]
[FAQs]
[Glossary]
[Images]
[Links]
[Registration]
[Tools]
[Boys' Clothing Home]
