Clothing styles 1889- 1900s

Ma-dotcom

Ma-dotcom

A Bonza Little Digger!
I'd like to ask a question on Female clothing- possibly 1899/90. No photo available at this time, I sighted it but it's not mine.
A woman who appears identical to one said to be a relation of mine b. 1876, is seated with 4 children around her.She is wearing a dress which appears to be of lacy fabric, definite lace edging on hem, straight sleeves round neckline.Appears to have a high waistline .Hemline perhaps at top of boots.
This woman appears identical to woman wearing coat of 1895 with muttonchop sleeves.
A child on her lap wearing dress similar to those in 1890. Young girl perhaps 7-9yrs wearing a dress made of 'broderie anglais' fabric hemline in zigzag with 4 large eyelets on each point.As with sleeve.Hem just below knee.A shady white hat with lacy edgeing.
Boy 6-7yrs & another 3-4 yrs both wear knee length pants stockings, boots collared shirt & wide fabric necktie or neckerchief falling from collar area with large white spots.
Older boy if son of woman- my said relation was b.1895.
Do these clothing descriptions ring any bells with anyone? I've been all over the net looking at old fashion sites.

TIA
 
Wendy: I am attempting to upload a photo from 1891 or 1892. The youngest child is my grandmother, age 3 (she was born in 1888). Her father was a wheelwright in Bromley, Kent. It is a somber photo, isn’t it? The child next oldest to my grandmother had recently died. I love this photo not only because it is one of the few I have, but because of the story my Nana told about it. She remembers crossing her fingers (the hand on her father’s leg) because she wanted proof that the photo was actually a reproduction of them in the posed position. Hopefully, knowing the date of this photo can help you with the dating of the photo you describe.
Also, perchance did you get to see the back of the photo you describe? The backs of photos provide important clues for dating a photo. If you do not already reference this site listed below, it has been most valuable to me:
rogerco.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/time/date.htm
Regards,
YeatesNanaAt3.jpg
 
Wendy..if you look at my album there are 2 pictures of my husband's gr. aunts taken in that time frame. Both appear to be their wedding piccys..also one of the younger girls at school which would be around 1902 or 1903.
 
I am finding it hard to imagine what the costumes look like, Wendy, so I hope you can upload the photo! In the meantime here are a few blogs which may give you some clues:

The Library Time Machine blog has some wonderful photos, all from around 1905-7, taken on the streets of Kensington and elsewhere by Edward Linley Sambourne:

http://
rbkclocalstudies.wordpress.com/category/edward-linley-sambourne/

Brett Payne's Photo-Sleuth blog has many dated examples of photos. The photos are tagged with keywords, making it easy to select ones of interest. Here are the ones with the tag 'children', for example:

http://
photo-sleuth.blogspot.co.uk/search/label/children

Jayne Shrimpton's Ask the Photo Expert blog on the Findmypast website has some really good stuff on it. I find it harder to navigate, as the tags are hidden at the bottom of each entry not in a side bar. Here is a selection with the 'fashion in photographs' tag:

http://
blog.findmypast.co.uk/tag/fashion-in-photographs/
 
Yeates said:
Wendy: I am attempting to upload a photo from 1891 or 1892. Hopefully, knowing the date of this photo can help you with the dating of the photo you describe.
Also, perchance did you get to see the back of the photo you describe? The backs of photos provide important clues for dating a photo. If you do not already reference this site listed below, it has been most valuable to me:
rogerco.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk/time/date.htm
Regards,
YeatesView attachment 86
Click to expand...
A lovely photo Yeates thank you, I'm beginning to think the one I refer to may be a little later after all. I spent much time with Roger Vaughan yesterday thank you again. No, I didn't see such it looks like a home-taken photo.(backyard)

Half Hour said:
Wendy..if you look at my album there are 2 pictures of my husband's gr. aunts taken in that time frame. Both appear to be their wedding piccys..also one of the younger girls at school which would be around 1902 or 1903.
Click to expand...
Thanks Sue, they're beautiful, I rather think my lot may have been at a wedding or similar function, very dressy. I missed the child, will go back.

Huncamunca said:
I am finding it hard to imagine what the costumes look like, Wendy, so I hope you can upload the photo! In the meantime here are a few blogs which may give you some clues:
The Library Time Machine blog has some wonderful photos, all from around 1905-7, taken on the streets of Kensington and elsewhere by Edward Linley Sambourne:
Click to expand...

I rather thought that may happen Jane, I had a quick look at two of the sites you mention this morning, 'photo slueth' & Edward Linley, bad move as I over did it yesterday & have now done my eyes a mischief for a while. Thank you for the thoughts, I'm no longer with FMP so will skirt that one.
I've asked permission to post that photo here or at least the clothing to get a better idea.
I found a costume same style as worn by my (supposed) relative in 1895, a double breasted coat with muttonchop sleeves & large buttons, large lapels. She looked about 18, my Lass was born in 1876. Her son was born 1895, so if it''s her in the photo, I picked 1889/90. The three other children may have been of her sister. The boys wearing matching outfits just say Family to me.
If the year is later, perhaps the photo is of her sister & children.

I must take care with this photo as it so closely resembles another Lady, that if relatives saw it they may be upset that I've posted it thinking it their direct ancestor.
Hopefully I'll have permit to post photo today.
 
(1).Sent to me with permit to post.040.JPG

(2).I believe same Lady in earlier years. Has 'Kent' on back.
1895 in Kent.PNG

a fashion website 'pin' has a similar coat dated 1895. 'Yeoldfashiondot Tumbirdotcom'
 

Attachments

  • 1895 in Kent.PNG
    1895 in Kent.PNG
    563.2 KB · Views: 29
A new photo in has shown my Relative wearing apparently same dress at a 'welcome home from War' for her son in 1919. So taken in Toronto.
 
Wendy, I have been trying to find photographs of other children with similar ties, which seem unusually wide. So far all I have come up with is a 1910 photo from New Zealand.

The URL is crazily long. You can find the photo by going to the site below and searching for 31-64056 (the photo's ID number) or for Rainger (the surname of the children).

http://www.
matapihi.org.nz/

The little boy's tie is rather like the ones your mystery boys are wearing, and his sister's dress is not unlike the ones in your photo.

P.S. you can see the FMP blogs without being a subscriber, so have a look there too.
 
I think it is after 1900 maybe even after 1905.
The boys boots have laces rather than buttons. They are in knee length shorts rather than knickerbockers.
The little girl is also in a knee length dress and the big brimmed lacy hats were popular. I think she is wearing shoes with a bar across rather than boots.
The box brownie camera arrived in 1900 making amateur photos taken outside more popular.
The girl's hair looks to be short rather than the long ringlets.

Also, perhaps someone else could give an opinion. The child on the lady's knee has shoes, black ones with a strap across (I think they fastened with a button).
Wendy - Clothing Styles.JPG
But above the shoes are black bands, they look to me rather like the old fashioned calipers or leg braces often worn by children with polio.
 
As regards the photo of the lady with the bicycle.

According to Jayne Shrimpton:
Quote: "By 1893, however, the puffed sleeve was expanding rapidly into the full gigot or leg-o-mutton style, a shape characterised by a wide puff in the upper arm, while the lower arm fitted closely. This sleeve style dominated the decade between 1893 and 1897. Sleeves were at their widest in 1895/1896."

I doubt you could get much wider than those she was wearing. ;)
 
Half Hour said:
We are always a few years behind the times when it comes to fashion over here, Wendy :D
Click to expand...
Perhaps then it was a 'best dress' kept for special occasions Sue, not a lot lf money floating around in those times.

Huncamunca said:
You can find the photo by going to the site below and searching for 31-64056 (the photo's ID number) or for Rainger (the surname of the children).
The little boy's tie is rather like the ones your mystery boys are wearing, and his sister's dress is not unlike the ones in your photo.
Click to expand...
A beautiful photo too, thanks Jane , outfits very similar style. I shall have alook on FMP blog also.

Mutters said:
I think it is after 1900 maybe even after 1905.
The boys boots have laces rather than buttons. They are in knee length shorts rather than knickerbockers.
The little girl is also in a knee length dress and the big brimmed lacy hats were popular. I think she is wearing shoes with a bar across rather than boots.
The box brownie camera arrived in 1900 making amateur photos taken outside more popular.
The girl's hair looks to be short rather than the long ringlets.

Also, perhaps someone else could give an opinion. The child on the lady's knee has shoes, black ones with a strap across (I think they fastened with a button).
View attachment 94
But above the shoes are black bands, they look to me rather like the old fashioned calipers or leg braces often worn by children with polio.
Click to expand...

Wonderful obs Mutley, I knew you'd have them, my eyes had had overfill by time of posting, & I had only my notes from first seeing the photos.
This could put group back in UK, & exclude her own son from photo.
Thank you all for helping out here, I shall need to review all possible children in family known to me to see if any of them fit the bill.
 
I should have said the 'rather than' observations would have been before 1900.

What do you think about the child on her lap? She looks to be about three years old so might have been born early 1900. She is the one that interests me most.

I am sure they are all closely related, they have the same shaped noses. ;)
 
Have been looking out old notes, on possible related children, some have not been followed up completely so I need to visit births/baptisms again for children born (perhaps) later than 1890. This Lady had two Sisters who may be good candidates for presenting children of correct ages. Must go look. Up late today, have not begun my day. thanks Mutters.
 
This morning I added a bit to this thread because it didn't show from the day before. Now it still doesn't show. Is there something I'm missing apart from the green post reply button which I did click on?
 
Ma-dotcom said:
This morning I added a bit to this thread because it didn't show from the day before. Now it still doesn't show. Is there something I'm missing apart from the green post reply button which I did click on?
Click to expand...
It should show, Ma, but is not.

Hover your cursor over your name in the top bar, over on the right. When the drop-down box appears, click on Your Profile Page, then click on Postings. This will show you what you have posted and where. If it is not there, then it did not go through for some reason.
 
Thanks Jan & Doug, shift change I see. I'll repost it.
RE Lady in Group photo, does anyone see a dark underskirt or similar covering her legs down to her shoes? There seems to be a lace edged separation in her dress rather an overdress or pinafore.
Also I have delved into known births of children who might fit the time frame & found these in one family.
Girl b. 1904,boy b.1905, girl b.1906, boy b.1909, boy b. 1911, girl b.1913, girl b. 1915.
Do any 4 of these seem likely to fit those in the group. I also looked for marriages in my known family for era of 1895- 1915. Too many & most didn't have correct display of children.
I'm wondering if it all occurred in Canada after all from c 1913 onward.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top