1860's Dress Suit Critique

[jruley]

(deleted by original poster)

[Sator]

Firstly, I would not take everything you see as the epitome of style for that period. You clearly see illustrations which demonstrate greater or lesser degrees of taste.

Firstly, shirt sleeve. The 1/2 inch of sleeve rules was introduced by Beau Brummell - way before the 1860s. I come across the odd tailor today who is unfamiliar with the rule. If you look at periods when the sleeves came down to half cover the hands, you will often see that the shirt was made to still show 1/2". It is an old rule of dressing which has often been violated but just because there were some less exacting dressers in the 1860s doesn't mean they should be emulated.

As for the Albert chain, you have showed an illustration of daytime dress. My criticism of the watch chain was in the context of evening full dress. You only exceedingly rarely see period illustrations of men in evening dress with an Albert chain. The reason is that it is considered rude to the host for a guest to sport a watch when in evening full dress. This is why I said, if you are to have this accessory you should have a fob but not the watch, for I have found rare examples in which an Albert chain is shown with evening dress. However, as I said, this is the exception rather than the rule.

I should also mention that it is around this period that dress coats began to be relegated to evening dress. You have shown some curiously anachronistic examples (I believe these are American) of dress coats still being worn as day wear as late as 1863. I think you will find that a year or two later and the dress coat had been entirely relegated to evening full dress. If you are planning to wear the dress coat as day wear in a more 1850s style (together with the gaudy silk waistcoat a la D'Orsay) by all means sport a watch on the fob chain.

As for cuffs I think there may have been a regional variability. The English examples I have seen from the 1860s all have cuffed coat sleeves for both morning and evening full dress. This seems to have been the case through most of the 19th C. I am going off fashion illustrations of course and it is possible that the average man got his tailor to make im a plainer style without cuffs to save on costs.

Next - boots. Boots with elastic side gussets were seen in the late 19th C but from what I have seen they are exceptions rather than the rule. I have even seen button boots with elastic side gussets. When presented with a wide range of choices, all of which are historically correct, one must still choose carefully. Even today excessively square toed or pointy boots look foppish and distasteful.



In this 1896 catalogue you had the whole gammet of choices going from tasteful to monstrous. I know what I would have chosen. And I would not have chosen pointy or square toed button boots which are made to look even busier with the addition of an elasticated side gusset.

I am afraid I am less interested in historical enactment as I am in learning from the past. I would not recreate the dress of an inelegant dresser from the past for the sake of it. Still, it is easily discernable from pictures and descriptions that the likes of D'Orsay were quite magnificently dressed. However, as with most things 99% is rubbish, and the truly elegant exampes are like rare gems.



Even contemporaries thought that the likes of Dickens were mere pale imitators.

[jruley]

(deleted by original poster)

[HappyStroller]

Sator, by cuffs do you mean the ends of the sleeves are folded back, similar to French cuffs?

I'm glad to learn about the 1/2" rule because I was getting confused with some people specifying 1" or some other non-1/2" length. Thanks, Sator.

Also glad to learn the place of a pocket watch in relation to Morning Dress vs. Evening Dress. Once again, thanks, Sator, for the rule, otherwise I would have committed a faux pas while wearing my new Evening Dress next year.

Firstly, I would not take everything you see as the epitome of style for that period. You clearly see illustrations which demonstrate greater or lesser degrees of taste.

Firstly, shirt sleeve. The 1/2 inch of sleeve rules was introduced by Beau Brummell - way before the 1860s. I come across the odd tailor today who is unfamiliar with the rule. If you look at periods when the sleeves came down to half cover the hands, you will often see that the shirt was made to still show 1/2". It is an old rule of dressing which has often been violated but just because there were some less exacting dressers in the 1860s doesn't mean they should be emulated.

As for the Albert chain, you have showed an illustration of daytime dress. My criticism of the watch chain was in the context of evening full dress. You only exceedingly rarely see period illustrations of men in evening dress with an Albert chain. The reason is that it is considered rude to the host for a guest to sport a watch when in evening full dress. This is why I said, if you are to have this accessory you should have a fob but not the watch, for I have found rare examples in which an Albert chain is shown with evening dress. However, as I said, this is the exception rather than the rule.

I should also mention that it is around this period that dress coats began to be relegated to evening dress. You have shown some curiously anachronistic examples (I believe these are American) of dress coats still being worn as day wear as late as 1863. I think you will find that a year or two later and the dress coat had been entirely relegated to evening full dress. If you are planning to wear the dress coat as day wear in a more 1850s style (together with the gaudy silk waistcoat a la D'Orsay) by all means sport a watch on the fob chain.

As for cuffs I think there may have been a regional variability. The English examples I have seen from the 1860s all have cuffed coat sleeves for both morning and evening full dress. This seems to have been the case through most of the 19th C. I am going off fashion illustrations of course and it is possible that the average man got his tailor to make im a plainer style without cuffs to save on costs.

Next - boots. Boots with elastic side gussets were seen in the late 19th C but from what I have seen they are exceptions rather than the rule. I have even seen button boots with elastic side gussets. When presented with a wide range of choices, all of which are historically correct, one must still choose carefully. Even today excessively square toed or pointy boots look foppish and distasteful.



In this 1896 catalogue you had the whole gammet of choices going from tasteful to monstrous. I know what I would have chosen. And I would not have chosen pointy or square toed button boots which are made to look even busier with the addition of an elasticated side gusset.

I am afraid I am less interested in historical enactment as I am in learning from the past. I would not recreate the dress of an inelegant dresser from the past for the sake of it. Still, it is easily discernable from pictures and descriptions that the likes of D'Orsay were quite magnificently dressed. However, as with most things 99% is rubbish, and the truly elegant exampes are like rare gems.



Even contemporaries thought that the likes of Dickens were mere pale imitators.