Peterson's Magazine Fashion Illustrations, and a Wee Rant

Peterson's Magazine, 1863.  NYPL Digital Gallery.

Walking Dress, Dec. 1864. NYPL Digital Gallery

What I think I like better about these illustrations as opposed to the color fashion plates is that they provide detail for those aspiring to recreate these dresses.  Note how it will attempt to show a beading pattern, or a crochet detail, so that they at least get an idea of how it's supposed to work. 

As a side note, please understand that not every woman during this time period had several different dresses for each activity of the day.  One will often see available to female reenactors all sorts of different patterns (or finished product, though less often) for all sorts of different dresses, and rarely - if ever - is there a distinction made as to *who* would wear these clothes *when*.   And where.

Peterson's Magazine, just like many others of the time, were designed to cater to the middle class.  These women would definitely have more disposable income than say, a farmer's wife or a woman from a small merchant family, but they were not in the upper echelons of society.  Fashion trends tended to be communicated to the upper crust by other means, though magazines still to a certain extent came into the equation.  But we digress.

Keep in mind, many women only had a couple of changes of clothes.  Again we run into financial, social and practical variants, but most women did *not* have a closet full of clothes to choose from.  Some had one for "best" or church and one for everyday, and possibly one for the truly grueling chores around the house or to throw on while the other clothes were being washed.  It is only when a woman's position made it possible to do less manual tasks that you see more expensive, ornamented and "impractical" clothes showing up in their inventories.  One does not scrub the floor in a silk embroidered visiting dress with enormous hoops on, after all.  

Often, rather than completing a dress exactly how it is depicted in an illustration, elements of the style would be implemented instead.  A simpler form of the dress can be created, with less expensive fabric, or less trim and embroidery is used.  An already existing dress can be updated by adjusting the pleating, or the sleeves can be redone.  These are just a couple of examples of how people with fewer means could at least keep up with some of the trends of the time without investing huge amounts of money. 

Just like average women today seldom look exactly like the latest pictures in a modern fashion magazine, the same can be said for women back then.  Pay attention to your impression's financial circumstances and social standing, and your impression will improve by leaps and bounds.  

Quickie: Ladies Playing Croquet

Punch Magazine, Aug. 17, 1861

Quickies: Peterson's Magazine Fashion Illustrations

Peterson's Magazine, Indoor dress with alternate ballgown bodice April 1862. NYPL Digital Gallery.

Peterson's Magazine(?)  January 1865.  NYPL Digital Gallery.

Period Objects: Hoopskirts

Woman's Hoopskirt, ca. 1865.

These are both from the Philadelphia Museum of Art.

Girl's Hoopskirt

From the collection text:  Philadelphia Museum of Art, 1860s: Hoop skirts-graduated hoops of thin but strong and flexible spring steel attached to cloth tapes-are a marvel of nineteenth-century technology. They provided support for the vast feminine skirts of the late 1850s and 1860s but collapsed for storage. As this example shows, hoop skirts were also worn by girls, who dressed like their mothers but with shortened skirts.

Quickies: Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine, November 1864.

Englishwoman's Domestic Magazine, November 1864. A magazine popular in Great Britain, catering to the middling sort.  Somewhat similar to magazines such as Godey's, this publication also had fashion plates and sewing instructions for those who sought to stay in fashion as best they could, but would be making the clothes themselves.  Middle class women also were more likely to possess a sewing machine, which theoretically would cut down on production time.  Having said that, I know of ladies who can still hand sew faster than many can manage with even a modern machine.  After one's done with fiddling with the machine, that is.  Personally, I have a loathe-hate relationship going on with mine.

Period Objects: British Wedding Dress, 1865

Front View

Object Type
The bride's dress was a focal point just as it is today. By 1800 it had become usual for her to wear white or cream. This was a popular colour as it implied purity, cleanliness and social refinement. The wide skirt of dress would have been supported underneath by a cage crinoline. In 1865 cage crinolines protruded out more from behind and were flatter in front in contrast to the bell-shaped crinolines of the 1850s.

People
Queen Victoria helped popularise the fashion for white when she got married in 1840. She set a royal precedent by choosing a simple ivory satin dress which was very much in the fashions of the day. Earlier royal brides had worn white but their dresses were often woven or heavily embroidered with gold or silver.

Social Class
Weddings were one of the most festive social occasions. They gave families the chance to show off their wealth and even less well-off couples would make an effort to dress appropriately. Not everyone, however, wore white. Widows, older brides and the less well-off often preferred more practical coloured gowns. These could then be worn for Sunday best long after the marriage. They would not have looked out of place as wedding dresses in the 19th century were designed in line with the current fashions.

Ownership & Use
This dress, veil and a pair of boots also in the museum's collection (T.43B, C-1947) were worn by Eliza Penelope Bright, nee Clay (the mother of the donor) for her marriage to Joseph Bright at St James's, Piccadilly on 16th February 1865. Wedding dresses are one of the rare types of garment for which the name of the wearer and the date of her marriage are often recorded.

Back View

 Repository


Victoria & Albert Museum, Great Britain

Buckle Your Seatbelts.

I have been remiss, dear readers.  And for that I must apologize.

Well, ok.  Let's be frank here, I've been lazy.  Seduced by the simplicity of posting things in two or three clicks on Facebook, I've let my blog languish in the meantime.  (Yes yes, I know I haven't written a bloody article in a coon's age, we're working on that.) 

But take heart, kind friends!  If you are not privy to the facebook page and have missed out on the images and (at least some of) the articles posted therein, I am about to catch you up. 

That and I was being nagged by the Pinterest crowd because they can't put up the images from Facebook, but we digress.  Again. 

So.  Get in, sit down, and hang on.