Fashion on the Ohio Frontier: 1790-1840

Front	Side	Back

Detail (front)	Detail (back)

White Sprigged Muslin Gown
Unknown maker and place of origin, ca. 1802-1807.
Possibly worn in the Northwest Territory or in Ohio.
Collection of the Ohio Historical Society, H21938.

Accessorized with:
Ivory Kid Slip-on Shoes with Bows
Unknown maker and place of origin,
possibly made in Paris, France, in or before 1801.
Inscribed on the sole "worn by Mrs. Oliver Leicester Phelps
[née Betsey Law Sherman] at a ball and reception at the
Tuileries in 1801, Paris, France."
Collection of the Ontario County Historical Society,
Canandaigua, New York, 1978.1003ab.

The new body-conscious mode of dress influenced by neoclassical ideals translated into the adoption of fitted upper and lower body garments for men and fluid white cotton high-waisted gowns for women. The garments were a drastic change from the styles worn in the decades prior to 1790. The new aesthetic reinforced the neoclassical love of Greek and Roman statuary, and the allusion to nudity or to the state of undress was not an easy transition for some. Two early white cotton gowns were presented in the exhibition alongside a non-Ohio piece that together illustrate this state of undress well. While the earliest white cotton gown from the Western Reserve Historical Society is dated ca.1797-1802, the sheer muslin of the ca. 1802-1807 Ohio Historical Society gown is an even stronger witness to this transition and is compared with a sheer muslin gown from ca. 1804-1811 from the collection of the National Society of Colonial Dames of America in Boston. Such items as Heman Ely's buckskin breeches were part of this aesthetic and, far from being frontier garb, were known to have been worn at a ball held for Napoleon in Paris in 1809.

The white cotton gowns reminded many observers of the white linen chemise, or shift, worn as an undergarment in centuries past, and this titillating appearance caused one Boston commentator writing about women's clothes from the period to state: "We have imported the worst of French corruptions, the want of female delicacy. The fair and the innocent have borrowed from the lewd the arts of seduction."(1) Although individuals such as Abigail Adams had experienced conflicts of value upon witnessing the emergence of this new style in London in the 1780s, the notion that Americans adopted foreign fashions in moderation, as Abigail did, was not found to apply to all individuals.(2) Despite the letters between Josephine du Pont and Margaret Manigault and other primary sources that mention ostracism of French styles in New York in 1800, there were still a few individuals who were daring in their adoption of foreign styles.(3) Costume historian Michelle Major writes that American "women who followed the spirit of Neoclassical dress too literally drew attention to themselves and were singled out by name by those in social circle in a way that suggests they were in a minority."(4) It is worth noting that this minority was spread throughout the country. In 1824, Duncan McArthur, stationed in Washington, wrote to his wife in Ohio of his disgust for the seemingly immodest female attire worn there and wrote to his daughter that Washington was the last place in which he would "wish to see a wife, daughter, or female relation."(5) It is not hard to believe that propriety would be a concern for many and that the stylistic change to neoclassicism was a drastic one that could not be accepted by many as it forced an appreciation and display of the human body that had not been part of the previous century's mindset.

Surviving garments also help to reinforce the notion that both sparsely adopted and extremely delicate fashions were present on the frontier. The construction of Chillicothe resident Anne Catherine Spurck's 1817 wedding dress with its extremely low neckline and long sleeves indicate that the audacious styles worn in Europe and on the East Coast were also adopted by some individuals in Ohio. Other garments on display also help us to compare the Spurck gown with garments from this time period. Surviving muslin dresses, such as Mrs. N. G. Pendleton's white cotton dress from ca. 1820-1822 from the CAM, and the portrait of Elizabeth Buchanan Woodbridge representing her in a sheer muslin dress in 1821 are further evidence that delicate neoclassical styles were followed by some individuals on the edge of western civilization. These artifacts corroborate Timothy Flint's comments on his trip to northeast Ohio in 1818:

"In the last hundred and fifty miles which I have traveled, I met with few travelers, but several of these were well dressed and polite men. I have also seen some elegant ladies by the way. Indeed, I have often seen among the inhabitants of the log-houses of America females with dresses composed of the muslins of Britain, the silks of India, and the crapes of China." (6)

Although he did not reveal his sources, author Francis P. Weisenburger also commented in volume three of The History of the State of Ohio that "Even in log cabins there were women who had brought with them to their pioneer homes muslins imported from Britain or silk dresses suitable for festive wear."(7)

____________
(1) The Monthly Anthology & Boston Review, January 1804, 102.
(2) Viola Hopkins Winner, "Abigail Adams and 'The Rage of Fashion,'" Dress 28 (2001): 64.
(3) In a letter to Margaret Manigault dated January 27, 1800, Josephine du Pont writes from New York and indicates that she could not adopt the latest French fashions from Costume Parisien as "prejudice against French fashion would be too heavy against me." See Betty-Bright P. Low, "Of Muslins and Merveilleuses: Excerpts from the Letters of Josephine du Pont and Margaret Manigault," Winterthur Portfolio 9 (1974): 52.
(4) Michelle Major, "American Women and French Fashion," in The Age of Napoleon: Costume from Revolution to Empire 1789-1815, ed. Katell le Bourhis (New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, Harry N. Abrams, Inc., 1989), 232.
(5) Cited in Carl Frederich Wittke, ed., The History of the State of Ohio (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State
Archaeological and Historical Society, 1941), vol. 3, The Passing of the Frontier, 1825-1850, by Francis P. Weisenburger, 131.
(6) Cited in Carl Frederich Wittke, ed., The History of the State of Ohio (Columbus, Ohio: Ohio State
Archaeological and Historical Society, 1942), vol. 2, The Frontier State, 1803-1825, by William Thomas Utter, 402.
(7) Weisenburger, 131.