Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

[NoahBriggs]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Thanks, Mr. McWherter! Knowledge - no walls, no barriers, no bull.

Do you think you could provide a photo demonstration on how to roll the cloth into a cravat? I'm having a hard time picturing this, and I'd like to learn that trick to add some character to my clothes as I get older.

[minieball]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Here's a related image to the wonderful leather trim shop one posted in this thread and elsewhere. There were several images done of QM facilities in and around Washington roughly in the spring of 1865. Here's a group of QM workers apparently pulled away from what they were doing to have a group image made. Most are wearing neck clothes of some kind:




Here's the link to the LOC for the .tif file for this image:

http://lcweb2.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?ils:74:./temp/~pp_TnEx::@@@mdb=fsaall,app,brum,detr,swann,look,gottscho,pan,horyd,genthe,var,cai,cd,hh,yan,lomax,ils,prok,brhc,nclc,matpc,iucpub,tgmi,lamb,hec

I just love to explore the details in these images.....

Best to all,

Todd

[David Fox]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

My great grandfather (private, 7th West Virginia Inf.) in every photo I have of him from his thirties into his 9th decade of life, appears in a cravat (early photos) or tie. He was a farmer and stock breeder much of his life. His son wore a necktie about every day of his life. I tend to emulate them as a matter of continuity and respect. Remember: throughout the era what we call "shirts" were considered underwear. And I'd define the difference between a neckerchief and a tie as: the latter was worn outside the shirt, not against the neck itself.

[MickCole]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

My thanks to Ian for starting this thread and for the many great illustrations and photos. I do have one question. While I have a few cravats from vendors who have done their research, I don't have any neckerchiefs. Does anyone know of a source for a period-correct neckerchief?
Thanks,
Mick Cole
37th VA Co. E

[Curt Schmidt]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Hallo!

I might would suggest looking among some of the 18th century makers and venders.
Although, the rolled or folded "triangle" style of kerchief can be easily made from fabrics and the four edges simply hemmed over for a fraction of the cost
(especially the hand sewn ones). And cut to the size desired.

Curt

[NoahBriggs]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Remember: throughout the era what we call "shirts" were considered underwear.

I'm respectfully disagreeing here, not calling names or anything. (This ain't the CW Reenactors forum. We're better than that.) I've always been curious as to the documentation for "shirts are considered underwear". I watch it get bandied about on the fora every once in a while. But based on a lot of the pictures we've been looking at in this very thread it would appear then, if true, that a lot of those QM clerks in the LOC picture don't mind standing around in public in undershirts only.

Also, to me it would not make sense to don a cravat around the collar of "underwear", as opposed to a shirt. I have seen several photo examples of men who have no problems being in shirtsleeves sans vests, or wearing a coat over the shirt, sans vest. And cravats abound - wider poofy ones for the older generation, slimmer ones for the younger generation, up to what appears to be a thin, half-inch ribbon on one fellow's neck.

Can somebody point me in the proper direction for the source that says shirts are considered underwear? Or is that a reenactorism that's crept into our collective knowledge base? :)

[David Fox]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Brother Briggs properly requests documentation for shirts not being considered polite outerwear at the time of The War.
"The shirts worn by men in the 1850's and 1860's fell broadly into three kinds: dress shirts, undershirts, and fireman's shirts....The second kind was the pull-over shirt issued to the soldier and worn widely by the working man. In design it differed little from some styles of dress shirt.... It was actually an undershirt since it was not intended to be worn as an outer garment.... Off duty it was both fashionable and comfortable to unbutton the coat or jacket. This called for a vest." From pp. 67 and 68 of Frederick P. Todd, "American Military Equpage 1851-1872", Vol I, Company of Military Historians, Providence, R.I. (1974)
It's certain men laboured in nothing but a working man's or issue shirt in the 1860s, even though it wasn't proper. It's also certain men come into my court in undershirts in the summer. The first was merely contempt of fashion, one guesses. The latter is contempt of court.

[Ian McWherter]

My thanks to Ian for starting this thread and for the many great illustrations and photos. I do have one question. While I have a few cravats from vendors who have done their research, I don't have any neckerchiefs. Does anyone know of a source for a period-correct neckerchief?
Thanks,
Mick Cole
37th VA Co. E

Sorry, I can't be much help here. I'm not aware of any vendors who carry neckerchiefs in silk, linen or cotton that have the same wonderful border print patterns found on most originals. But, period appropriate ones can still be found at high-end department stores today. A friend of mine purchased a few of these at a Nordstrom department store. They are made from 100% cotton, are of the period size and have a beautiful period border print design on them. They were made in France, he simply had to hand fell the edges. I went there in search of these after I saw his with no luck, they were long gone, and I haven't seen anything like them since.

[Ian McWherter]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Let's try to look at the actual historic record as much as possible. Primary source articles, letters, diaries, photographs, etc. are welcome and would be very useful in elevating this conversation to a higher research level, thanks.

Here's a great Gold Rush Daguerreotype dating 1850-55 from the California State Library:

[Rmhisteach]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Ian and all,

I have enjoyed reading and looking through this thread. An ajacent question is ..... based on the number of common laborers wearing pleated shirts were they less "special " than we often think, like the top hat ????

RM

[Ian McWherter]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Ian and all,

I have enjoyed reading and looking through this thread. An ajacent question is ..... based on the number of common laborers wearing pleated shirts were they less "special " than we often think, like the top hat ????

RM

I've read nothing to indicate that men's shirts with a pleated front were "special" in any way shape or form, they were simply another mass produced shirt style that could be purchased affordably at any clothing or dry goods store (or even made at home). The official "dress" shirt of the Antebellum period was a completely different shirt with frills set into the placket, these were still worn for formal dress occasions into the 1860s, though the frills were considerably toned down by that time.

A couple more Gold Rush Daguerreotypes, these show men with pleated front shirts:

The man in front (who by the way is sporting a great example of an early bowler hat as well as a cravat) and the man just behind him are both wearing pleated front shirts while working their claim. Sorry, it might be kind of hard to make out the shirts in this image, but it was the largest available copy of this image that I could find. The same image is on pg. 154 of Silver & Gold Cased Images of the California Gold Rush, you can see the shirts much more clearly in the book.




Here's a great image of an 1850s blacksmith. What I like most about this image, besides the short crowned top hat and cravat, is the height of his trousers. How many in the living history community wear trousers this high?

[Ian McWherter]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Some more "workin' men" sporting top hats on the job:

Boatmen on the Missouri George Caleb Bingham, 1846.


In a Quandary George Caleb Bingham, 1851.

[Elaine Kessinger]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Is the gent with the "high trousers" actually wearing "overalls without a bib"? We had a discussion last summer on such garments.

[Ian McWherter]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

Is the gent with the "high trousers" actually wearing "overalls without a bib"? We had a discussion last summer on such garments.

I've seen photographs of such garments, but these don't appear to be them at all. They have a fly front, are made from a stripped material and the height of the trousers isn't unusual at all.

The man standing to the right of the lady is most likely wearing a pair of these bib-less overalls:

[NoahBriggs]

Re: Cravats Worn by the Working Class.

From pp. 67 and 68 of Frederick P. Todd, "American Military Equpage 1851-1872", Vol I, Company of Military Historians, Providence, R.I. (1974)

Thank you for providing a source. I am curious to know where the authors got their documentation; ie, what sort of primary source mentions that shirts are considered underwear? In all of the etiquette manuals I have read, I've still not come across any reference to it.

Again, looking at some of the photos and paintings above, fellows seem pretty casual about posing in shirtsleeves, even as clerks, and some of them are in fact wearing coats, but no vests. :)