Bright, Megan
Saiki
FCFA 360 Costume History
4 April 2014
Artifact Analysis: 1850’s Gown
By observing, analyzing, and interpreting evidence, I will take an artifact
from the Beeman Historical Costume collection and identify the date in which it was
worn. To do this, I will first site observations of the dress, then compare them to
prevailing styles of surrounding eras, and finally interpret the data.
The number on the tag is “C1983.040.001.” The name states “Edna Forest,” and
indicates that the garment is from the 1850s. On the bottom left corner of the tag, it
reads “UNKNOWN.” The last bit of information on the tag says “1850.1”. The
silhouette of the form is typical of the modal type of the day. The dress is floor
length, to cover the shoes. Puffy, three-quarter length sleeves give the arm a puffy
look at the top, tapering down to the engageants, and finally to the wrist. The shape
is form fitting in the upper body, giving an elongated hourglass shape.
The dress is made of three fabrics, excluding the engageants. The outer fabric
used is an emerald/teal iridescent silk. The iridescent silk makes the fabric look like
two different colors depending on the point of view. This fabric started to emerge
and become very popular at the time. The fabric feels like it had a finish that made it
more water resistant than most silks. The skirt and bodice lining are made from a
woven fabric, a cotton or linen. The wrinkling of the fabric indicates a linen, but
could also be the effect of 160 years. The inset “bust improver” is made of a different
fabric than the lining but is made of the same fabric as the pocket. This fabric is a
little darker and a little softer.
Two types of sewing occurred in the production of the dress. Perfectly
straight, consistent stitching indicates that machine sewing was used for most of the
dress, including the side seams and longer lines. Machine sewing also stitched down
the gathers, which were probably prepared by hand basting. Hand stitching was
done on several parts of the dress. The engageants are lightly hand-sewn to the
insides of the sleeves. Another hand-sewn part is the hem.
Now I will elaborate on “occurs” or features of the dress. The “bustimprover” is the name of the padding device concealed inside of the dress. It started
to become popular in the 1840s, about 10 years prior to the making of this dress.
The bust improver, like the modern day bra, was used to enhance the amplitude of
the bust. Hooks & eyes are used in the front detailing of the bodice and down the
back to close the garment. Boning is used in the front bodice, just below the bust
improver. This added structure to the silhouette. Pleats go down the dress below the
waistline. Gathers are used in the waistline. One pocket exists in the dress.
Interestingly, the pocket is not accessible from the outside. Engageants were hand
sewn to the inside of the sleeves. These are made of lace. They add a delicate feature
to the dress. The last feature I will mention is space for a hoopskirt. The dressmaker
had to consider how much room the hoopskirt needed when deciding the width.
Alterations must be taken into account when analyzing the dress. Evidence of
alters or repairs are not very noticeable but a few features exist to suggest
otherwise. First of all, the hem was quite possibly shortened. The hem is completely
hand sewn instead of machine sewn and a bias tape was added. More likely, the
owner did not have a sewing machine at this time. Secondly, one single pocket
resides on the inside of the dress and is not accessible from the outside of the
garment. The pocket was likely added after the making of the dress.
Possible functions include daywear, eveningwear, and outerwear. The dress
would make a great day dress because the sleeves are not too short and engageants
make them even longer. On the other hand, the gown could function as a night dress
because of its relatively low neckline. Lastly, the dress would function nicely as an
outerwear garment because the fabric is sleek to the touch and would be more
water resistant than cotton.
The following is a sketch of the garment:
The garment is from the 1850’s. Several features make this evident. The
pagoda sleeves, use of engageants, space for a crinoline underskirt, and use of
iridescent fabric will all be the points of focus when dating the artifact.
The first piece of evidence is the pagoda-style sleeve. Pagoda sleeves were a
popular shape in this time period. Pagoda sleeves open wide, and were reached the
height of their popularity around the 1860’s. This narrows the time span to the
middle of the 19th century. The photo
below is an example of pagoda
sleeves.
The next piece of evidence is the use of engageants, or false undersleeves.
These were a popular feature after the invention of lace. Europeans were said to
have had a “love affair” with lace (Seabastian, 1), using engageants often. The
invention of lace dates back as early as the 15th century (1). In the two centuries
following, the spread of lace grew rapidly. However, we know that the dress could
not have been that old because of the machine stitching. The use of sewing machines
in dress-making did not come about until the late 1700s during the first wave of the
Industrial Revolution. The earliest patent recorded was that of Charles Weisenthal.
However, the patent only describes the needle used, not the rest of the machine. The
second earliest patent belongs to Thomas Saint in 1790 (Bellis, 1). He quite possibly
did not even build a prototype of this invention, but merely patented the idea. These
clues suggest that the artifact had to have been from the 1800s at the earliest. To be
more specific, sewing machines started to become more user-friendly and
commonplace around the 1840’s, bringing our dress to a later time in the 19th
century.
The third feature that makes evident the time period is the width of the skirt.
Room for a hoop skirt or crinoline indicates that this dress was before the 1900s
when silhouettes started to subdue. The silhouette also indicates that the dress must
be from after the 1820’s. During the Directoire Period 1790-1820, dresses did not
feature extravagant silhouettes for the most part. If they did, the fullness would be
in the back, emphasized with the bustle.
pre-1820s (left)
1850’s (upper left)
1860’s (upper right)
(courtesy of Big Stock Photo)
Looking at the image above, our silhouette most accurately matches that of
1850, with the “v” waistline, three-quarter sleeves, pleats, gathers, neckline, and
fullness of the dress. The neckline is not a “bertha neckline” or the wide, off-theshoulder neckline. Instead, the dress covers the shoulders and part of the collar
bone, dating it to the 1850s.
Lastly, we have iridescent silk. Also known as shot silk, this fabric indicates
that the dress had to have been sometime in the 19th century when this textile was
popular. The making of shot silk dates back to as early as the 5th century. However,
shot silk really became popular from the 1830’s onwards, especially in the mid1800s (Cunning, 270). The fabric looks identical to the dress from the photo below
(which was sold online with the title “1840’s Iridescent Silk Blue-Green Ball Gown”).
Several pieces of evidence above helps us determine the method of construction.
Just to review these can be broken down to four parts. One: iridescent silk was a
new feature around the mid 19th century. Two: the use of lace indicates the new
technology. Three: Machine stitching helps date the dress to after the 1840’s.
Finally: the use of a bust-improver also helps date the dress to post-1840.
Baclawski, K. The Guide to Historic Costume (1995.) page 53
Baclawski, K. The Guide to Historic Costume (1995.) page 88
photo of the engageants, hand sewn
From my point of view, the costume expresses messages of self-expression,
fashion forwardness, and elegance. I believe the wearer, Edna Forest, picked the
color because it was almost a forest-green. She probably had pride in her family
name, and therefore wanted to express this pride. The dress is fashion forward
because its use of iridescent silk, low neckline, and other features agree with the
modal type of the period. This tells me that the wearer participated in the fashion.
Instead of wearing a regular silk or linen, she had a special textile that likely
turned heads when she walked into a room. Because there is room for crinoline,
she likely participated in that trend as well. The dress is elegant because it can be
worn during the day, but could also function very well as an evening dress. The
neckline was not too low, but still exposed some skin. Likewise, the sleeves were
not too short, but still exposed part of the arm.
The item relates to the era because it comments on the use of technology.
During the 19th century, lace was very common. This, however, was not something
very new. The novelty of the dress lies in the bust-improver, shot silk, and the use of
machine sewing. Ultimately this dress is a key transition from the old to the new.
The dress gravitates to western fashion, particularly to Europe or North America.
Europe was in love with lace, and North America was quickly adopting sewing
machines as involvement in war demanded clothing to be made faster than ever.
The dress relates to the wearer as a woman embracing femininity, modernism, style,
pride in family, and elegance. The wearer was probably an upper-middle class
woman; she could not get it dirty, and she probably needed assistance to put it on.
Imagine the wardrobe of someone in the 19th century. Although the
garments would be quantitatively less than today’s wardrobe, the quality of each
individual garment surpasses those of today. Each dress took much time and energy,
not just in the production, but also in the wearing of the garment. In each dress,
there is more fabric to carry, more buttons to fasten, etc. To put on the dress would
require the assistance of another person. Supporting undergarments include a
corset if desired, a crinoline or hoopskirt, and possibly drawers.
By studying the dress, I would say that the hair and makeup that
accompanied the look would have been equally elegant. The wearer might have had
a bun and braids like many women of the Victorian age. She would have worn pastel
colors on her face, particularly the cheeks. For shoes, she would have worn low
heels of some sort, made from leather. The photos below illustrate possible
hairstyles and shoes worn with the dress.
c. 1851 retrieved from powerhousemuseum.com
retrieved from Englishmuse.com
To evaluate and critique the form, the artifact is similar to other dresses of
the 1850s. It is constructed using hand and machine sewing, it uses shot silk,
displays the distinctive silhouette of the time, and includes a pocket, bust-improver,
and engageants. The dress would fit seamlessly into the 1850s. In conclusion, I feel
that the dress was very well constructed. I can tell that the dress took much time
and energy to put together. I love the dress as a whole, because it has so much
depth. If I could put one of those on everyday, I would be honored.
Sources
Baclawski, K. 1995. The Guide to Historic Costume. Retrieved from pages 53, 88.
Bellis, M. 2014. History of the Sewing Machine. Retrieved from:
http://inventors.about.com/od/sstartinventions/a/sewing_machine.htm
Big Stock Photo. retrieved from: http://www.bigstockphoto.com/image36786773/stock-vector-1800-1900-fashion-silhouettes
Cumming, V. 2010. The Dictionary of Fashion History. Page 270
Seabastion. 2014. History of Lace Making. Retrieved from:
http://hubpages.com/hub/History-of-Lace-Making
Ebay listing. Retrieved from: http://www.ebay.com/itm/DR481-1840-s-IridescentSilk-Blue-Green-Ball-Gownn-/230973327145?ssPageName=ADME:B:SS:US:3160
Englishmuse.com
Powerhousemuseum.com