Need help dating antique garment

[persephone60]

So, I have a 19th century garment that I'm pretty sure is pre-1890s, but since I don't specialize in antique clothing, I'm not 100% sure on dating--I'd love to narrow down the decade more precisely. Pretty sure the fabric is wool and that the buttons are newer than the dress (they might be celluloid?).

Let me know your thoughts! Thank you!

 

[Katarzyna]

In my opinion: the sleeves and shoulders makes me think 1850s. You can see on various daguerreotypes of women back from the day, the women's shoulders were very dropped and almost going down like here. Its a type of a dress I would often see on daguerreotypes. I'm going to take a look through my books on daguerreotypes, to find something similar.

 

[Katarzyna]

some examples of 1850s and 1860s dresses from daguerreotypes and tintypes. mostly 1850s

 

[Rue_de_la_Paix]

Perhaps this is a costume piece.

 

[The Vintage Merchant]

Perhaps this is a costume piece.

that was my first thought, too.

 

[persephone60]

If it's a costume piece, any thoughts on dating? The piece definitely is not new (it's older, and even though I don't specialize in antique pieces, I handle mostly 1940s pieces and earlier for my shop). I also unbuttoned the bodice and found some rust spots on the inside that maybe indicated there were other fasteners, but I'm only finding the rust spots on the inside and not the exterior (which is confusing me). I've included some additional interior shots (of stitching, fabric, trim, the interior rust spots, and some fabric loops I found at the base of the bodice lining).

 

[Midge]

Those rust spots are interesting... like something else was there before that has since been removed.

Where exactly are those fabric loops on the inside - at the waist?

 

[retro ruth]

I'm no expert in such things, but I wouldn't expect a costume piece to have hand finished button holes, and there appear to be some hand sewn seams too

I also wondered though... it's in such good condition, you have ask the question whether it's as old as the style suggests.

The lace at the neck looks very clumsily sewn, so perhaps that is a later addition.

I'm also not sure whether a dress buttoning all the way through to the hem would be expected for this era? That strikes me as surprising, but I don't know much about such early fashions.

 

[persephone60]

Midge, the rust spots were interesting to me too. The fabric loops are in the waist area. The bodice part of the dress is lined in the cream muslin fabric, and the loops are where that lining ends.

Ruth, the button holes are hand-finished, which felt like an older finishing detail to me too. I'm just confused by the buttons, which feel newer than the rest of the dress. I also think the lace at the neckline could have also been added later. As for buttoning to the hem, I'm also not an expert in antique fashions, so I'm not sure what's typical. I've never had any mid-19th century pieces before, but it's in comparable condition to some other late-19th century pieces I have handled. The fabric does have flaws--a vertical tear caused by fabric age and some staining (that's hard to see because of fabric color).

 

[Linn]

Thank you so much for sharing this piece. I am absolutely not an expert on older garments, but I agree that it is unlikely that it would be hand-sewn if it were a costume. I "think" the rust spots are from earlier buttons or fasteners - with metal shanks or parts. You mentioned that you thought the buttons had been changed. Are there any rust spots in the lining of the skirt part?

If this dress is mid-19C. it could have been modified - perhaps a few times. Maybe the buttons all the way down the front is a modification. Are the buttons all functional?

I don't know where you are from or where you found this - to me, it has a more "country" feel than City .

 

[persephone60]

Linn, the rust spots also made me think there were earlier metal fasteners. There aren't any rust spots on the skirt, but the skirt is also not lined. The buttons are all functional.

I'm in a city in CA, but I bought it at a flea market, so it could have been found in a more rural area.

 

[Rue_de_la_Paix]

Guess I still think this is a costume piece. Having some hand stitching mixed in with machine stitches does not mean it could not be a costume. Can you show the inner construction of the bodice area? It really seems (for lack of a better term) "under constructed" for a period early to mid Victorian garment. Where is the boning, if any?

Also, if it were period antique, it would not be a street dress, but what was referred to as a wrapper. Wrappers were 1 piece garments, looser fitting and with ties or buttons. A street dress of the time would be in 2 pieces, an upper bodice and separate skirt. And even the wrappers of the time would not generally have buttons all the way down, though it is possible.

It just looks like a costume to me, maybe made from some older parts, but not sure on that either.

 

[persephone60]

Barbara, here are some more pics. You're right about it being "underconstructed"--there isn't any boning (I've included interior bodice shots). Given the fact that the interior bodice lining might have had different (metal) fasteners, do you think it could have been a wrapper that was redone with the buttons? Or are there details that are missing that a wrapper would have had?

I know this garment has details that don't fit together (which is partly why I posted). But this really does feel like antique fabric to me, and I really do think it was originally some kind of an antique garment despite the details that don't fit.

 

[Vinclothes]

I know this is a strange question, but does the fabric smell and feel old?
Marian

 

[persephone60]

Marian, it's not a strange question. I have a really awful sense of smell, but the fabric *definitely* feels old (and I'm saying this as a vintage dealer who's been handling vintage for over a decade and who primarily sells pre-1950s clothing). That's why I think it's an antique garment

 

[Katarzyna]

What about the milkmaid photo I've posted? The dress is very simple in construction.

 

[retro ruth]

What about the milkmaid photo I've posted? The dress is very simple in construction.

I also wondered, that presumably people who live simpler and poorer lives, have more simply constructed clothes. But again, I don't know much about such things. This dress doesn't look like a 'work' dress in the way that the one in your photo does. The trim is relatively fancy (though we don't know if it is original to the dress, I guess)

I also looked at all your photos, and some others, to see if I could see one that buttoned all the way through, but I couldn't see buttons in the skirts.

It's a mystery!

 

[Midge]

My thought was as well that the fact that it was buttoned through pointed to some kind of at home garment.

 

[Katarzyna]

I also wondered, that presumably people who live simpler and poorer lives, have more simply constructed clothes. But again, I don't know much about such things. This dress doesn't look like a 'work' dress in the way that the one in your photo does. The trim is relatively fancy (though we don't know if it is original to the dress, I guess)

I also looked at all your photos, and some others, to see if I could see one that buttoned all the way through, but I couldn't see buttons in the skirts.

It's a mystery!

ah yes! the buttons. you're right.

 

[Katarzyna]

I guess the only way to know for sure is to do carbon dating :D