A Brief View Of Men’s Clothing- The Sack Coat

Over the years we have been asked about making men’s clothing. While we are naturally flattered by the prospect of creating more period clothing designs from the late 19th Century, we have had to politely refuse on the grounds that it’s not our main business focus. More importantly, men’s clothing calls for a skill set- primarily tailoring- that is different from those used for women’s clothing. While there is some overlap (Redfern and especially with tailor-mades for women), it’s very much a separate speciality and we would argue that it’s an art form with a rich set of traditions that are not easily mastered. Well tailored clothes are a joy to behold and just the words “Savile Row” sets our hearts racing.

All hyperbole aside, we have chosen to restrict ourselves to the female side of historic clothing simply because if we made both types of clothing, we could not do justice to either. With that said, we would still like to present our views on the men’s side of clothing so from time to time we will be posting articles here covering various topics of men’s clothing and accessories. We would you enjoy our occasional series. 🙂


So, where to begin? Probably the best place to begin is with the sack coat/sack suit which gradually developed into the dominant style for men’s daywear during the late 19th Century, supplanting the earlier frock coat and the derivative morning coat. The sack coat/suit and the frock coat. The sack coat was meant for informal day wear while the frock coat/morning coat were reserved for more formal occasions (although there was often a lot of overlap between the two).

Styles1

The sack suit, or lounge suit as it was termed in Great Britain, originated in France as the sacque coat during the 1840s and took its name from the way it was cut (contrary to popular belief, the sack coat did NOT get its name from its loose fit “like a sack”). In contrast to the more elaborate frock coat whose back was constructed from four basic pieces, the sacque coat was simplified, consisting of two basic pieces. Moreover, the sack coat was designed to fit loosely.

EPSON scanner image

Sack coats usually had three or four button holes and often it was worn buttoned only at the top. In terms of colors and fabrics, wool of various weights was the predominant fabric although linen was often used for lighter weight coats intended for wear in more warmer climates. In terms of colors, they could range from solids to plaids, stripes, and checks. However, towards the end of the 19th Century, the dominant style increasingly were darker, sober colors such as charcoal gray, black, brown, and navy blue. Often they were accompanied by a matching pair of trousers and waistcoat, thus creating the three-piece suit. At the same time, the sack coat and trousers could be in different colors and fabrics. Below are some examples:

To start, here’s an image of an early sack coat from c. 1863 – 1864:

Sack Suit - Early

Sack Suit, c. 1863 – 1864

image002

Three men wearing sack coats, c. 1860s; Image from Joan L. Severa, Dressed for the Photographer: Ordinary Americans and Fashion, 1840-1900, 1995

The second image really shows up just how loose-fitting sack coats were in the 1860s, especially with the coat worn by the man with his back to the camera. This is in contrast to the 1880s, 90s, and early 1900s where the coats (and accompanying trousers) become increasingly more narrowly-fitted and cut closer to the body.

In the next image, we have one from 1870:

WaterfallsAugust1870

The West End Gazette, August 1870

The coat still hangs relatively loose but the trousers are gradually becoming cut more narrow.

6b240ed1262cafce380e8ea797cd11bd

Sack Suit

Sack Suit, British, c. 1875 – 1880

A bit on the loud side, the use of loud fabrics steadily diminished during the late 19th Century. Sack suits could be made from linen as well as wool as with this suit that was intended for wear in warmer weather:

Sack Suit4

Sack Suit, c. 1885 – 1900; McCord Museum (M973.137.4.2)

 

67acfb2bc992f7bf2d46bb64708b8470

Sack Suit2

5d85a31e84b3aab23b71775fd36cf71c

Sack Suit, c. 1895

Sack Suit3

Sack Suit, c. 1911; Los Angeles County Museum of Art

The above picture depicts the ultimate development of the sack suit and it’s easy to see that the modern business suit was not far off in the future.

During the late 19th Century, the sack suit became the standard “uniform” for anyone aspiring to a degree of respectability and especially those involved in business and the professions. In fact, it could be argued that the sack suit was instrumental in democratizing clothing in that it allowed any man to look like someone substantial and respectable. The sack suit was relatively cheap which had been made possible by industrialization and the development of the ready-made garment industry in America and Great Britain.

In conclusion, we would argue that if you are looking for that “one” outfit that accurately symbolizes the 19th Century man, it would have to be the sack suit. While fashion choices were often dictated by social and economic factors, it would be safe to say that the sack suit was the “default” outfit to be worn wherever possible- the sack suit symbolized respectability and social status. Even the laborer, miner, cowboy, and farmer wore sack suits when the occasion demanded and they had the means. In contrast with today’s emphasis on casual wear, dressing up was considered essential to showing one’s better side and more importantly, securing respect from one’s peers. Naturally, the above is a broad generalization but it does go a long way towards capturing the zeitgeist or spirit of the time.



Lily Absinthe Takes A Look At Outerwear By Pingat

Emile Pingat is a bit of an enigma. Although he was recognized along with Worth and Doucet as one of the foremost designers, almost nothing is known about the man (at least in English). Pingat was active between about 1860 when his name first appears an a Parisian trade directory to 1896 when he sold his business. During this time, Pingat was well regarded and his name often appeared in the fashion press and was cited as one of the three foremost couturiers in Paris. Hopefully, more information in regard to Pingat, his life, and his work will be unearthed that will shed more light on this enigmatic designer.


In a previous post, we discussed the designs of Emile Pingat and noted that while he created wide variety of styles, he was especially noted for his outerwear. As with all fashions, specific items can be functional, decorative, or somewhere in between. In Pingat’s case, his designs leaned towards the more decorative and they were meant to add to an outfit’s dramatic impact, as well as provide some protection from the elements, and especially open one’s making an entrance at a public affair.

Although Pingat was active from roughly 1860 through 1896, his most distinctive designs were created during from the mid-1870s through early 1890s. For outerwear, he was noted for being carefully designed and constructed. For our survey, we start with an opera cape made in c. 1882:

Pingat Opera Cape1

Opera Cape, Emile Pingat, c. 1882; Metropolitan Museum of Art (C.I.60.42.13)

Pingat Opera Cloak3

Right Side Profile

Pingat Opera Cloak2

Three Quarter Rear View

Pingat Opera Cloak4

The Label

This opera cape is constructed from a white/ivory silk satin embroidered in a gold and silver floral design and trimmed in fur. This cape was definitely a fashion accessory rather than a functional garment and the light color would certainly have offset the relatively dim gaslight found in public places such as an opera house.

Form something a bit less formal is this “afternoon jacket” from c. 1885 – 1890:

Pingat Afternoon Jacket1

Afternoon Jacket, Emile Pingat, c. 1885 – 1890; Metropolitan Museum of Art (2009.300.76)

Pingat Afternoon Jacket2

Right Side Profile

This jacket is constructed from a combination of a blue/black-colored silk velvet for the sleeves and a plum-colored silk faille or bengaline for the body; interestingly enough, it appears that the fabric might have been cut on the bias. The lower sleeves and body are also decorated with grey-colored leaf appliques and the jacket front and bottom is trimmed with hanging beads. Finally, a grey and gold trim runs along both sides of the jacket front and back. Overall, this is an elegant but understated jacket.

Most capes of the 1880s were designed to cover the upper body and were cut so as to allow for the bustle but below is one that is full length and sleeveless:

Pingat Evening Cape

Evening Cape, Emile Pingat, c. 1885 – 1889; Metropolitan Museum of Art (2009.300.140)

Pingat Evening Cape2

Front View, Closed

50.72.14_back 0004

Rear View

The outer cape is made from a royal blue-colored silk velvet trimmed with fur. The lining is quilted and made from what appears to be a blue and magenta/red silk faille. The large scale plaid pattern of the lining seems to be incongruous when viewed against the bright royal blue velvet- one wold expect something a bit more muted. As with the afternoon jacket above, the primary decoration are elaborate floral lace appliques in gray and trimmed with beadwork. The gray fur trim and appliques act as a contrast to the bright, jewel-tone royal blue velvet.

Moving into the 1890s, we see a design scheme similar to the above afternoon jacket in this evening jacket made in 1893:

Pingat 1

Pingat, Evening Jacket, 1893; Metropolitan Museum of Art (2009.300.139)

Pingat 3

The above jacket is made of two parts arranged to give the appearance of two garments being worn. The underpart is an composed of multi-colored/metallic embroidery, beading, and piping arranged in a Persian inspired design. The center front and the cuffs are trimmed in gray feathers. The overpart is constructed of black velvet and the silhouette is reminiscent of renaissance era schaube coat.

The above are only some samples of Pingat’s work but they do give a pretty good idea of the styles that were out there during the 1880s and on into the early 1890s. Outerwear is one element that is often overlooked by those recreating historical fashions but hopefully the above examples will service as a source of inspiration.



Close Up – The Early 1890s

Lately, we’ve been bombarding you with fashion plates of the early 1890s along with our commentary so today we’re going to take a slight break and try to present some detailed images of actual dresses. Some of these have appeared in previous posts, others are new to the blog. It’s very easy to get lost in the details while losing sight of the overall picture- it’s sort of like the old expression about seeing the forest from the trees. Some key elements to look for when classifying garments as to style and time frame are:

  • Silhouette- What basic shape is the garment or dress (since that is mostly what we are dealing with)? The easiest characteristic to look for is the bustle- is there one? Maybe a vestigial one? Does it have a sharp, shelf-like appearance or is it softer?
  • Skirt- Is it straight or does it have a train? Many formal dresses has some sort of a train, usually extending out from the bottom of the dress (for example the “fan train” or “mermaid tail” commonly found with Mid-Bustle dress designs). Is there just one skirt or a combination over and underskirt?
  • Bodice- Is there just a single bodice or is it a combination of an outer bodice/jacket and an under bodice/vest? Are the sleeve caps extended or blend in with the bodice body? The leg-of-mutton sleeve is an extreme case of this and reaches its height during the 1895 – 1897 time frame (although there were always exceptions).
  • Fabrics- What is the basic fashion fabric? Wool? Silk? Cotton? Some sort of a combination? Woolens were very common for day dresses and especially those meant to be more “practical” such as with the house dress. Cashmere was (and still is) a better grade of wool and of course, silk was used for more finer dresses for wear in public or for some sort of social event. China silk, dupioni, shantung, taffeta, faille, and bengaline were some of the more popular choices for silk fabrics. Brocades and velvets were also employed although often only as contract fabrics. There was a wide variety of yardage used and one could easily write a book on it.
  • Trims- What sort of trim is there? Knife-pleated fabric along the hemline? Netting? Embroidery? Buttons? The possibilities are almost endless.

The above is only a very cursory review but those are some of the things to consider, especially if one is designing their own dress or simply classify a dress. Below are some examples of extant garments from the early 1890s that should give a better idea of what to look for:

media

Wedding Dress, 1891; Minnesota Historical Society (9444.10.A,B)

media (1)

Side View

The above was made as a wedding dress and has provenance as such but it also illustrates one of the more typical day dress styles that are characteristic of the period. This dress was obviously meant to worn in public and could have been used for visiting or as a dress to be worn at home to receive visitors; the beadwork gives it a simple elegance. Style-wise, we see that the bodice is acting as a jacket (somewhat) and some sort of shirt-waist or vest was worn underneath (the display mannequin just has some black velvet filler).

Here is another example of a day dress although a bit more elaborate:

CI55.40.1ab_F

Day Dress, c. 1887 – 1891; Metropolitan Museum of Art (C.I.55.40.1a, b, e)

CI55.40.1ab_d

Close-Up

CI55.40.1a_d

This is clearly a much more fancy dress than the first one but it does share the same over-bodice/jacket style. If you look at the top two pictures carefully, you can see that the fashion fabric is a light brown faille or taffeta. The fabric lining the inside of the collar and trimming each side of the bodice appears to be a peach-colored chiffon and it acts as a contrast to better show off the beading.

504083D

Day Dress, c. 1891, attributed to Mme. Lambele de St. Omer, No.30 E. 21st St, New York; Smith College Clothing Collection (1985.5.4ab)

504084D

Above is an ornate visiting or reception dress that utilizes a combination of rust-colored silk faille, rust/gold brocade, and a claret-colored velvet. The brocade overskirt skirt is covered with rust-colored silk tails leading down from the bodice/jacket and underneath is a matching silk underskirt. The bodice is styled as a jacket, suggestive of a bolero with its high sleeve caps and wide lapels/revers. The sleeves are made of velvet and contrast with rust-colored silk on the rest of the jacket/bodice. The vest is also made of a rust-colored silk. Finally, it must be noted that the skirt does have a small bustle made of spring steel.

Besides the classic bolero style effect, we also see the overskirt being topped off with a waistband of the same brocade material giving the appearance of a sash wrapped several times around the waist, giving the effect of an obi found on a kimono. It is interesting that the brocade pattern runs at a 90 degree angle to the pattern on the skirt.

In the above three pictures, we have seen three very different dresses that still share come common style elements. In particular, each dress’s bodice is styled as more of a jacket than a true bodice and it continues a trend that stared in the 1880s and would culminate with the development of “tailormade” suits during the mid to late 1890s. While an under-bodice or vest was usually worn underneath, a shirtwaist could also be used.

Illustration for a pattern from Harper’s Bazar, 1892

Each of the above dresses attempts to utilize color and trim in different ways. The first dress is a mono-colored and uses the leaf-patterned embroidery to provide a contrast. The second dress uses two different colors- a light brown/khaki color as the base combined with peach-colored chiffon accents covered with elaborate beadwork. Finally, with the third dress, we see the use of three different colors (rust, claret, and gold) in three different fabrics to achieve its effect. The third dress is far more ambitious and it succeeds.

We hope that you have enjoyed this little side-trip into the early 1890s. In future posts, we will move our way into the mid-1890s with its signature over-the-top leg-of-mutton sleeves… 🙂



The House Dress – 1878

In the course of our research, we found the term “house dress” to be somewhat confusing in that it is often used interchangeably with “morning dress.” Below, we will attempt to shed some more light on this use of terminology and what it means in practical terms. Enjoy! 🙂


In a previous post, we discussed the etiquette of what dress to wear on what occasion and in particular, the role of the “morning dress” or “house dress.” Specifically, in an article on dress etiquette from the January 1878 issue of Peterson’s Magazine (page 87), the terms “morning dress” and “house dress” are used somewhat interchangeably but they are both talking about the same dress: a relatively simple, unadorned dress that was worn at home and only seen by immediate members of the woman’s family; it was not meant to be worn out or to receive visitors. Later on into the 20th Century, the term “house dress” became applied more exclusively to a dress that one wore for cleaning chores and the like. Below are a few examples from various issues of Peterson’s for 1878:

HOuse Dress 1878_1

Dress With Cuirass Bodice

House Dress 1878_5

Polonaise Cut In Princess Shape

House Dress 1878_3

Princess Line Dress

Each of the above figures demonstrate styles that were characteristic of the Mid-Bustle Era and especially with the cuirass bodice and the princess line dress.  While both of these styles are well-suited for are fairly simple and while they appear to still be elaborate by today’s standards, by Victorian standards these are restrained.

In some instances, ensemble dresses were made that combine the features of the more simple house dress with a more formal dress by means of two interchangeable bodices. Below is an excellent example of this:

39.377a,c_threequarter_front 0002

Day Dress Ensemble With “Home” Bodice, c. 1878 – 1982; Metropolitan Museum of Art (2009.300.87a-c)

39.377a-c_threequarter_front 0002

Ensemble With More Formal Bodice

39.377a,c_back 0002

Rear View With “Home” Bodice

39.377a-b_threequarter_back 0002

Rear View With Formal Bodice

The “house bodice” (for want of a better term) is extremely simple and fairly shapeless as bodices go and fact, it basically looks like a loose coat. This is perfectly suited for working around the house but in terms of style, it is spare except for the paisley-like trim on the rear and sleeve cuffs. The formal bodice is more conventional with a closely shaped cut. Decoration in the form of ruching on the front and fringed gold-colored edging, and knife-pleating on each sleeve cuff.  The dress’ stone gray color is perfectly suited for this dress and it fits perfectly within the bounds of proper etiquette, as least as prescribed by Peterson’s.

Below is yet another example of the loose bodice and skirt combination from that could have easily been utilized as a “house” dress:

1934.493front

Day Dress, 1877; Manchester City Galleries (1934.493)

1934.493side

Right Side Profile (that pocket you see was NOT meant for a parasol but rather a handkerchief)

1934.493side1

Left Side Profile

1934.493back

Rear View

1934.493detail

Trim Detail

Now admittedly we could be reaching in our interpretation in terms of fabric detail but it is still relatively simple in design and style. But more importantly, even it it’s not spot on, it does goes a long way towards illustrating what Peterson’s had in mind when talking about the house dress.

The princess line which was another popular dress style during the late 1870s – early 1880s and below is just one example:

Czech Dress1

Day Dress, c. 1878; National Museum, Prague (H2-193316)

Czech Dress2

Side Profile

Czech Dress4

Three-Quarter Rear Profile

The princess line could be fancy or plain and anywhere in between. The relatively loose fit made it perfect for use as a “house” dress. In some ways, it could be argued that, aside from the tea dress, this was about as casual as Victorian women’s clothing could get. 🙂

The above are just a few illustrations of the house dress and its potential. We hope that you have enjoyed this small detour as we attempt to bring greater clarity to the world of Victorian fashion.

Fashion Observations From 1878 – Part II

To understand fashion, it is important to know when it was appropriate to wear each item. In contrast to today’s casual styles, the Victorian Era was highly formal and how one was judged was largely dependent on one’s appearance. Appearance was also important because it made a statement about one’s social position, and just as important, the position of one’s family. While America prided itself on its seemingly egalitarian society, it was in many ways just as class-bound as Europe with the only major differences being that one’s social position was largely defined by one’s wealth and that social boundaries in America were far more fluid with the possibility of social advancement always within reach.

For fashion, etiquette provides a guide as to what was worn and when and this in turn serves as an aide to the modern reconstructionist or living history. In the past, it has been our observation that while people will go to great lengths to recreate historic clothing, they will wear it to events that are inappropriate for those particular garments. Case in point is where ball gowns or evening dresses are worn during the day and especially in direct sunlight- not only is it incorrect, but it reads poorly (silk satin with its high luster simply does not look good in bright daylight). Conversely, we have seen day dresses, complete with tall hat and parasol, worn indoors at a formal ball. Once again, the effect is poor and spoils the whole occasion.

With that said, let us continue with our exploration of the year 1878…


Today we continue with our survey of fashion etiquette from 1878 as described in the January 1878 issue of Peterson’s Magazine (Page 87). First, the proper color and trim for a dress worn at home is further explained:

In large towns, where calls are so usual from one to four o’clock, the morning-dress, which we have described, is not appropriate after one o’clock: that Is if the lady is “At Home” to any except her intimate friends. Then, a dress, with a demi-train skirt, made of silk, cashmere, or any other material that is preferred, should be worn. In winter, the tint should be rather dark for ordinary occasions; but it may be of some rich color. Plain linen cuffs and collars, with a little lace edging, or embroidery; a locket, suspended around the neck, by a velvet; a bow of bright, or light-colored ribbon; a bow of ribbon In the hair, suitable to be worn with the dress; neatly arranged hair, and well-fitting shoes. If the throat is pretty, a dress cut open at the neck, with a plain frilling, is admissible. A dress of this kind is suitable for a house-dress all day, let the material be what it will; and if the stuff of which the dress is made is not too cheap, the ruffling, etc., etc., may be rather elaborate, otherwise such ruffling would be out of place.

In terms of color and trim, dresses worn at home are to be relatively simple. In terms of color, winter colors are darker although rich color (i.e., a jewel tone) is perfectly acceptable. Peterson’s now proceeds to describe dresses appropriate to other occasions:

For more ceremonious occasions, such as a “Reception,” or a formal “At Home,” the dress should be of lighter tints, brighter colors, and more elaborate in make. It will be quite appropriate to have more trimmings on skirt and waist; and the hair may be a little more showily dressed. A small bouquet of artificial flowers may be worn on the breast, or in the belt: or if the window garden will afford it, a few
geranium leaves, with a cluster of the rich flower, or a rose bud, may be substituted and will be much better. The sleeves, for a ceremonious morning-dress, may, if desired, only reach to the elbow; but in that case the gloves should have four, or five buttons; and for these ceremonious occasions gloves are indispensable. Or the long mitts, which have been introduced within the last year, may take the place of the gloves. A fan will often be found necessary, in the heat and excitement of such a reception; but it should never be of lace in the daytime. All morning-dresses, it must be remembered, should be high at the back and on the shoulders; but, if preferred, they can be cut open, square, or heart-shaped, in front. A good deal of lace may be worn about the neck, or tulle can be crossed over the besom. The neck should not be too open, however; or, if the dress is very dark, a soft, white fichu, or one made of soft, light-blue silk, or crepe, pink, buff, or scarlet, will add very much to the “dressy” look of the costume. Very little jewelry should be worn, even with a “reception-dress;” but more is allowable than with other day-dresses.

In contrast to the normal “morning dress,” more fancy dress was essential for formal occasions such as a reception or if one was was receiving visitors on a formal basis. For these dresses, colors were to be lighter than standard morning dress and more elaborate trims were permissible. Necklines could be lower than for morning dress but within limits and the use of white fichu around the neck for darker colored dresses was recommended. Finally, gloves were an essential fashion accessory and fans were also highly recommended.

Below is an example of what would be a more fancy dress that reflects the above advice.

M2003.76.1.1-3-P1

Day Dress, c. 1878 – 1883; McCord Museum (M2003.76.1.1-3)

M2003.76.1.1-3-P2

Three-Quarter Rear View

M2003.76.1.1-3-P3

Side Profile

By the criteria of Peterson’s Magazine, the above dress is one that would definitely not be a “morning dress” but rather something more suitable for being seen in public. The lighter wine colored silk fashion fabric contrasts nicely with the darker burgundy of the velvet trim around the neckline and the small “apron” swagged across the front.

So what did this mean in practical terms? Basically, it distinguishes between morning dress which was meant to be simple and somewhat utilitarian versus a more elaborate dress, such as a reception dress, in which was meant to be more fancy and a lot less practical. But more importantly, this distinction served to make separation between the private and the public: what was worn in the intimacy of the home was not what one wore publicly and to do otherwise told others that one was of a lesser social status. Image and appearance were everything in the Victorian world.

In considering the role of etiquette, the above is only one example and while these provided a guide to proper presentation and deportment, they were only guidelines and often people modified them to suit their needs. The wide variety of etiquette books and advice public in magazines of the period provides ample proof that people desired this sort of guidance. In the end, etiquette provides a link between fashion and its role in society. We look forward to presenting more of this information in the future.