The first is one of my favourite portraits there! I also really like the one of the two boys and their dog, and the sleeping girl and her knitting, also from that time period.
I've always been fascinated with the 18th century, and this tradition always confused the bejeezus out of me. Their justifications (namely: toilet training) are sound enough, I suppose. That article is a great find.
You live in the L.A. area then? I hadn't been to the Huntington Library in a year, and I wanted to take my daughter last Friday -- she loved the gardens (the new Chinese one is so pretty!) and art and TEA omg -- we were so stuffed. I've been going there since I was a little kid, but more often these last couple of years. I want to go back again in May, when the house opens up again and they'll have more artwork on display. Also the roses will be blooming more -- it's the 100th anniversary of the rose garden this year.
Yeah, that shortcoats/breeching thing -- kinda weird. Some of those shortcoats look really frilly, too. 0.o
Yeah! We have membership to the Huntington, actually - I like to go on Fridays when I have no class. The teas are so fun, aren't they? The Christmas one is especially good, but I like going in the Spring when everything is in bloom and the sun shines through the windows.
Some of those shortcoats look really frilly, too. 0.o
No kidding, right? I'd love to hear their reasons for that. I found the point made about it being more difficult to differentiate gender in portraits of young French gentry especially amusing.
I should have bought a membership last Friday -- I knew I was going to return on Wednesday, anyway, and now I want to go back in May. We live about an hour away, though, so it's pretty much an all day outing. More expensive than a LACMA membership, too, which I've had for a couple of years.
When I went with my friends for tea last Wednesday we were seated in the Herb Garden room, in the corner right next to the window -- it was perfect!
Have you seen the Jack Smith exhibit in the Library? Fabulous!! I loved him so much -- always read his column, probably for thirty years.
I found the point made about it being more difficult to differentiate gender in portraits of young French gentry especially amusing.
Oh, those Frenchmen! Things have sure changed. I can't imagine any little boy of my acquaintance wearing something like that, and yet back then it was the usual thing. But I wonder if it was the same with the poorer folks? Not so many pictures of them to be found.
From my research of the time period, breeching was something the poorer people took took earlier simply because they needed the boys to help out with the work.
Also, most "royal" children (and those with rich families) were not "breeched" until they were three or four because their parents didn't have to clean up the mess left in the "coats." I'm sure if Marie Antoinette had to clean her sons' messes, they would have been trained much earlier.
It says they wore shortcoats until they were 7 or 8, and the paintings seem to confirm that. Very strange. But I bet you're right about the poorer classes.
I blame my near minor in theater and costuming on the knowledge of the time period. At the time, I thought it was a waste of my brain power. Now, I am actually using some of that! LOL
My parents belong to a local historical society and in one of their past newsletters there was a story about parents breeching their son at 2 (it was so unusual they had a story in the local paper!) and sent him 5 miles on a horse alone to his grandfather's home. This was in the early 1800s.
This tradition hasn't been gone that long. I have a picture of my great-grandfather as a toddler wearing a frilly dress and curls.
Don't forget that the little boys (as far as I can tell) wore stays as well. It was perceived that women and children needed the extra support. As far as the toilet training, it's much easier for a toddler to lift skirts than try to unbutton breeches, I guess.
Yes, I have pix of my uncles in something that looks like shortcoats.
The stays thing, that was too weird. But no weirder than "foundation garments" all of us wore in the fifties and sixties, I suppose. Fashion is an interesting field of study.
My grandfather wore dresses until he was four or so. Consider that you couldn't just run down to your local Walmart and buy kids clothing in the appropriate gender. Stuff had to last! For many children and even across generations. A woman (or her staff) would sew a first baby's wardrobe before the child arrived, and there was no ultrasound to predict the gender. So baby and young children clothing was fairly gender neutral. And in the absence of snaps, skirts would be far easier deal with when it came to messes. And the mother of a son didn't have to go wistfully googly over cute little girl clothes since all babies wore cute clothes.
Thanks a lot for this topic, that's very interesting! I'm currently updating my link-list, and I have found more articles about children, children clothes and the upbringing of children in the 18th century.
Italian author Guareschi, who was born in 1908, describes in his memories that little boys on the country still wore shortcoats in the beginning of the 20th century. I wonder when that custom changed...
I've been commandeering some of your links for our Black Pearl Tales resource page, to tell you the truth -- lots of great info you have there.
I have a pic of my uncles, born in 1908 and 1910, in shortcoats. I think they would probably have been "breeched" by five or so at least, though, when they started school.
Comments 20
I've always been fascinated with the 18th century, and this tradition always confused the bejeezus out of me. Their justifications (namely: toilet training) are sound enough, I suppose. That article is a great find.
Reply
Yeah, that shortcoats/breeching thing -- kinda weird. Some of those shortcoats look really frilly, too. 0.o
Reply
Some of those shortcoats look really frilly, too. 0.o
No kidding, right? I'd love to hear their reasons for that. I found the point made about it being more difficult to differentiate gender in portraits of young French gentry especially amusing.
Reply
When I went with my friends for tea last Wednesday we were seated in the Herb Garden room, in the corner right next to the window -- it was perfect!
Have you seen the Jack Smith exhibit in the Library? Fabulous!! I loved him so much -- always read his column, probably for thirty years.
I found the point made about it being more difficult to differentiate gender in portraits of young French gentry especially amusing.
Oh, those Frenchmen! Things have sure changed. I can't imagine any little boy of my acquaintance wearing something like that, and yet back then it was the usual thing. But I wonder if it was the same with the poorer folks? Not so many pictures of them to be found.
Reply
Also, most "royal" children (and those with rich families) were not "breeched" until they were three or four because their parents didn't have to clean up the mess left in the "coats." I'm sure if Marie Antoinette had to clean her sons' messes, they would have been trained much earlier.
Reply
Reply
My parents belong to a local historical society and in one of their past newsletters there was a story about parents breeching their son at 2 (it was so unusual they had a story in the local paper!) and sent him 5 miles on a horse alone to his grandfather's home. This was in the early 1800s.
Reply
*boggles*
Reply
Don't forget that the little boys (as far as I can tell) wore stays as well. It was perceived that women and children needed the extra support. As far as the toilet training, it's much easier for a toddler to lift skirts than try to unbutton breeches, I guess.
Reply
The stays thing, that was too weird. But no weirder than "foundation garments" all of us wore in the fifties and sixties, I suppose. Fashion is an interesting field of study.
Reply
Reply
My uncles wore shortcoats when they were little, too -- I have some old pix. Yes, easier during that transitional period of potty training, no doubt.
Interesting stuff, this.
Reply
Reply
Italian author Guareschi, who was born in 1908, describes in his memories that little boys on the country still wore shortcoats in the beginning of the 20th century. I wonder when that custom changed...
Reply
I have a pic of my uncles, born in 1908 and 1910, in shortcoats. I think they would probably have been "breeched" by five or so at least, though, when they started school.
Reply
Leave a comment