Detail

   

Taupe Silk Damask Open Robe (robe à l'Anglaise)
and Matching Petticoat
Unknown maker, Connecticut, originally made in the 1750s
and altered ca. 1780s-early 1790s.
Made of Spitalfields silk damask, London, England, mid 1750s.
Used as a wedding gown.
Possibly worn in the Northwest Territory.
Collection of the Ohio Historical Society, H72111ab.
Reproduced here with their permission

 

Accessorized with:
Ivory Satin Buckle Shoe
Unknown maker and place of origin, 1794.
Worn by Eunice McKellogg as part of a pair of wedding slippers.
Possibly worn in the Northwest Territory or in Ohio.
Collection of the Ohio Historical Society, H5468.
   

Lace Engageantes (sleeve ruffles)
Unknown maker and place of origin, ca. 1775-1790s.
Collection of the Kent State University Museum,
Silverman/Rodgers Collection, 1983.1.1318ab.
   

Reproduction Neck kerchief

 

Within the scope of the exhibition, several garments are used to document the consumption of imported textiles. The earliest gowns made of imported fabrics were two ca. 1780s-early 1790s Spitalfields open robes altered to make use of their precious 1750s British silk fabrics.

From the moment Europeans had set foot on American soil, they began to participate in an international system of trade in which goods such as textiles were transported across the world for consumption. Under British control, the American colonies produced raw materials that were shipped to England, manufactured and sent back in a wide range of goods and prices.(1)  Colonial dependency on textiles was controlled, and laws were passed to limit local production of certain goods to protect the British economy. Linda Baumgarten is adept at pointing out that home production of textiles was not cost-effective from the beginning and that weavers in the British-controlled American colonies between 1673 and 1682 produced "less cloth than was imported in a single shipload."(2)  Even plain linens and the least expensive of cloth called osnaburg that was used for slaves' clothing could usually not be produced domestically for less money than what could be had from abroad. This economic disadvantage did not justify self-sufficiency, even in the period preceding hostilities with Britain:
   

"George Washington compared the cost of imported goods with similar items spun and woven on his plantation in 1768. He concluded that the modest savings in homemade textiles were not enough to defray the expenses of spinning wheels, of hiring a white woman (probably to oversee the work), and of clothing and feeding five female slaves. Americans could not, and, indeed, did not want to, escape participation in the worldwide trade of consumer goods and textiles." (3)

   
Even with the economic advantage resulting from slave labor, self-sufficiency in terms of textile production was thus improbable in the eighteenth century, let alone at the beginning of the next century when advancements in technology further reduced the cost of textiles.(4)  Equally as important, Baumgarten points out that imported goods were relied upon not only because they were more economically advantageous but because Americans wanted to be in style.(5)  Two major features had to be carefully weighed when garments were produced. First, the quality of the cloth and the purchase of cloth in the latest designs were signs of social status. Second, the fit of the garments made with such goods further distinguished their wearer.
   

"Wealthy men and women knew that fine apparel helped solidify and maintain their status. Those with less money recognized that clothes were valuable tools, as well. Having the right clothing helped people meet their aspirations. For the disadvantaged with few garments, a change of clothing could give them more options in life."(6)

   
Transportation to the Ohio frontier increased the price of goods. As such, the cost of the cheapest imported textiles could have made home production more advantageous for some. However, the enormous expenditure of time and money needed to purchase, maintain and protect a flock of sheep in a hostile territory (wolf attacks were numerous in the early years), to plant and grow flax or cotton, and to process these and other make-do raw materials-as well as the cost involved to purchase the equipment, particularly the loom-made earlier settlers seriously weigh the cost of home production versus that of ready-made yarn and textiles.(7)  Prices of imported and locally made textiles varied geographically. This resulted in a wide array of textile production and consumption practices, from entirely self-sufficient production to the purchasing of raw material, yarn, or textiles. Thus, the sentimental vision of the female settler producing all the textiles needed to clothe her family is one that might not be entirely accurate. The notion that imported textiles were of higher quality and that all such goods conveyed status and were only purchased by the wealthy is also erroneous.

____________
(1) Linda Baumgarten, What Clothes Reveal: The Language of Clothing in Colonial and Federal America (Williamsburg, Virginia: The Colonial Williamsburg Foundation in association with Yale University Press, 2002), 76; Florence M. Montgomery, Printed Textile: English and American Cottons and Linens, 1700-1850 (New York: Viking Press, 1970), 36.
(2) Baumgarten, 76. Montgomery also quotes John Baker Holroyd, first Earl of Sheffield, on the state of commerce at the close of the Revolution, that "…whatever they make is at an expence at least three times the amount of what the same article could be imported from Europe." Montgomery, 37.
(3) Baumgarten, 78.
(4) Montgomery writes that "as early as 1765, 90,616 yards were imported; by 1785 the amount had increased to 353,762 yards; and by 1800 to 3,710,471 yards." Montgomery, 46.
(5) Baumgarten, 105.
(6) Ibid., 139.
(7) Adrienne Elizabeth Saint-Pierre, "Clothing and Clothing Textiles in Ohio, Circa 1788 to 1835: A Study Based on Manuscript and Artifact Evidence" (Master's thesis, Wright State University, 1988), 15.

 

Blue Spitalfields Open Robe	Portrait of Mary Kidder Gleason and Bethia Gleason
CLICK ON IMAGES ABOVE FOR VIEWS AND DESCRIPTIONS OF SIMILAR GARMENTS OR REPRESENTATION OF DRESS STYLE IN OHIO COLLECTION