Clothing – Quiet Valley Living Historical Farm

Widow’s Weeds: The Clothing Style of Surviving Spouses

Kat M — Mon, 31 Jul 2017 23:58:21 +0000

It’s great when visitors are interested enough in history to ask questions that lead to amazing discussions with interpreters. This summer, we’ve had a lot of great questions that have helped expand our understanding of life during the 1800s. This week’s question was about “Widow’s Weeds” during the mid-to-late 1800s.

“Widow’s Weeds” is an 18th century term for the black crepe fabric widows would often wear while mourning their loved ones. It comes from the Old English word “waed”, meaning “garment”. Prior to the Victorian period, it was considered customary to mourn lost loved ones but the Victorians took it to a whole other level. They developed and encouraged certain rules of behavior that were particularly focused on widows. It was customary for a widow to go into what was called full mourning for a year. During this time she was to wear a veil (the widow’s weeds) over her face, she was not permitted to attend social functions, or generally be seen out in public. Then, for another half-year up to a year she was in half-mourning and was permitted to attend some social occasions and could start adding more texture to her black wardrobe. During her last six months of mourning, the widow could start adding more color to her clothes including white, gray and light purples. The Met in New York had a great display about mourning fashion.

After her period of mourning ended, women were expected to remarry-particularly if they were young and had inherited money. A widow was somewhat socially dangerous; she no longer had a male protector (either father or husband) and as a widow could own property, this could give her a level of freedom unknown to her peers as she would be able to engage with men with a slightly more equal standing in society. A widow could gain some power without losing her reputation. This side was often seen in political cartoons through the 1800s.

Men had it a bit easier. If they were a ‘junior’, they couldn’t drop the junior from their name until their father was buried. Men’s mourning clothes were not that different from their regular daywear. A widower was generally expected to be in mourning for about 6 months to a year for his wife.

Mourning was very expensive. Like today’s wedding shops, the 19th century saw mourning parlors where people could go and buy anything they needed. Going into mourning could bankrupt a family. Oftentimes, frugal family members would just overdye their clothes to make them black. A method often used by individuals of limited disposable income was to wear a special armband. Nevertheless, proper society considered these socially inappropriate for anyone not in uniform.

World War I really saw the end of the strict Victorian standards. With so many people dying during the Great War, it was just impractical to keep the strict traditions. And the 1920s saw the transformation of the widow’s black dress into the little black dress. Today, while many people still wear black to funerals, it is not always necessary. It’s considered more appropriate for people to look well-appointed and to honor the memory of the person.

Now you know a little bit more about life during the 1800s. This blog is written by Katherine Muller, Executive Director of Quiet Valley Living Historical Farm. It is intended to help visitors explore and learn about life on the farm throughout history and as Katherine explores and learns more about the farm too.

What is the History of Consumer Sewing Machines?

Kat M — Wed, 21 Jun 2017 16:17:34 +0000

From time to time, historic interpreters hear a question they haven’t been asked before. When I receive a question I’ve never considered, I always find myself saying, “That’s a great question,” as a way to stall while I consider the answer. This series is about some of those great questions.

Yesterday while learning the presentation for the New (1890s) Kitchen, one of the visitors asked about the sewing machine in the corner. “When did people start having sewing machines in their homes?” Great questions but neither the interpreter or myself knew for sure. Here is a little bit about personal sewing machines.

The first machine that used a needle and shuttle to sew cloth was invented in 1790 for working leather and canvas. Due to poor marketing it wasn’t widely known. The first United States patent for a sewing machine was given to Walter Hunt in 1832. (He would go on to invent the safety pin in 1849.)

In France, Bathelemy Thimonnier had invented a sewing machine and had a factory with 80 machines to sew uniforms for the French Army.

By the 1850s sewing machines had developed many of the functions we are familiar with today such as sewing forward, backwards, up, and down. The cloth at this point was generally held vertical across the machine. (Many earlier versions had you hold the cloth horizontally across the machine.) In 1851 Isaac Merritt Singer added a foot to the sewing machine to help hold fabric in place while working. The 1850s saw a series of patent wars rage their way through courts across the country between major inventors and company owners.

Isaac Merritt Singer and Edward Clark played a big role in bringing the sewing machine into homes across the country. In the 1850s sewing machines cost about $125 (the average family’s income was $500 a year). Singer and Clark allowed people to purchase a sewing machine in monthly installments of $3 or $5.

By the late 1860s sewing machines were becoming much more reasonably priced. Sophie Best of Minnesota wrote to her parents, “It is wonderful what progress civilization makes! My head is filled with those pretty sewing machines that are being bought by so many families and are so delightful to have! Some people have been able to get these little fairies for between $10 and $60. The stitches they make are so strong, so pretty, and so easy to make.”

Sewing machines were rather controversial for a time. Women and men generally spent a lot of time sewing by hand. It could take up to 14 hours to sew a man’s dress shirt by hand. With a machine that time could be cut down to just 1 or 2 hours. But what would people do with all this new free time? A common belief throughout history was “idle hands do the devil’s work.” People could get into trouble without work to do. Many people became unemployed because of the sewing machine for a time. There were factories where people used to hand sew clothing. With the sewing machine you needed less people to produce the same amount. So until the factory could buy enough machines for all the workers, people were laid off. There was also a fear that women wouldn’t be able to learn a complex machine like a sewing machine.

Many of the sewing machine manufacturing companies hired women to demonstrate the machines at fairs and in store fronts and women were highlighted in advertising. Many people who owned sewing machines took in mending or custom work and thus earned money and filled leisure time with projects. Generally if someone has some down time, they fill it with something.

Keeping Costumes Historically Accurate for the 19th Century

Kat M — Tue, 30 May 2017 07:02:00 +0000

This weekend, I spent a good while struggling with pleating a petticoat (the skirt part of an early 1800s working outfit). It got me thinking about the role clothing plays in living history. It helps create the scene, inform visitors and volunteers/staff alike (there is a stiff learning curve when you first wear a historically accurate outfit). It is important that the clothing is perceived as historically accurate. This can be a challenge meeting modern expectations with historic realities. When conducting research on clothing, there are a number of sources we can use including surviving examples, art work or printed material, and reproductions.

Around the world, there are some amazing collections of clothing such as the Kyoto Costume Institute or more recently the garments put on display from a 1600s shipwreck. Examples of clothing generally survive either because they were important (owned by a famous person or a treasured family member) or just by luck. The latter is particularly true with archaeological examples such as the dress preserved on the shipwreck or items preserved in bogs. Their owners did not expect that they would be preserved for future study. Many times ordinary clothes were remade several times over. A great source of information when it comes to fabric selections are actually quilts because oftentimes they contain parts of old clothing.

Items that are saved for “propriety” are often saved because they reflect the lives of famous or important people. Often these people were wealthier members of societies such as kings and queens, or nowadays, famous musicians or movie stars. These examples are often the easiest ones to find. But while we all dream of having that fancy dress, the high fashion of the land generally doesn’t reflect the simple life of someone living on a farm.

While a fair amount of artwork is generally portraiture of rich people, enough artists also painted ordinary folk. (Unless Sturm und Drang is a popular technique, which tends to emphasize great scenery elements over people.) One really good example for the late 1700s to the early 1800s is the paintings of John Lewis Krimmel. Based out of Philadelphia, he often painted people from all walks of life. Another great resource are fashion plates. Fashion plates were usually produced to advertise clothing, kind of like a catalog today. But again, these often show off high fashion but can lend themselves well for inspiration. Sometimes diaries and journals can offer insight into clothing. Sophie DuPont: A young lady in America: Sketches, Diaries, and Letters offers great insight into the early 1800s. While from a wealthier family, she sketches a lot of everyday things.

Reproductions are a good source of inspiration for recreating historic outfits as well. But you must be careful with your sources. It really helps to look at other museums and see what they have been up to. (But, this can also lead to continuations of historic myths). There are some really amazing reenactors and groups that make historic costumes. A big part of making a historically accurate outfit is the material. Reproductions are really good guiding fabric selection and how easy/difficult it is to work.

It is generally a good idea to draw inspiration from all of the sources, historical examples, artwork, and reproductions. I also like to keep in mind what the clothing needs to do. (I need to be able to run while wearing this to chase sheep, cows, children, run from snakes, etc., bend and lift while wearing this bodice, climb a fence and not show off non-time period underpinnings. etc.)